Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout FULL PACKET_2010-08-16CORRECTED MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA ANA, CALIFORNIA JULY 19, 2010 CLOSED SESSION MEETING CALLED TO ORDER CITY HALL 20 CIVIC CENTER PLAZA, 8T" FLOOR SANTA ANA, CA 5:36 P.M. ATTENDANCE COUNCILMEMBERS Present: MIGUEL PULIDO, Mayor (5:40 p.m.) CLAUDIA ALVAREZ, Mayor Pro Tem P. DAVID BENAVIDES VINCENT F. SARMIENTO SAL TINAJERO ABSENT: CARLOS BUSTAMANTE MICHELE MARTINEZ STAFF Present: DAVID N. REAM, City Manager JOSEPH FLETCHER, City Attorney MARIA D. HUIZAR, Clerk of the Council PUBLIC COMMENTS — None CLOSED SESSION ITEMS 1A CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL --EXISTING LITIGATION pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(a) John Jason vs. the City of Santa Ana Case Nos. 08-4543, 04-3106, 04-3105 (Master), 00-1300 Diamond Environmental Services v. City of Santa Ana Orange County Superior Court Case No. 30-2009-00325274 Richard Jordan v. City of Santa Ana Orange County Superior Court Case No. 30-2009-00125416 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 10A-1 JULY 19, 2010 Jeanette Coleman, Freddie Coleman, Orange County Superior Court Case No.: 30-2008 00112637 CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATOR pursuant to Government Code Section 54957.6 Agency Negotiators: Personnel Services Executive Director, Kathie Gonzalez Employee Organizations: Service Employees International Union (SEIU) Santa Ana Management Association Santa Ana Firemen's Benevolent Association Santa Ana Police Officer's Association Santa Ana Police Management Association Santa Ana Fire Management Association Confidential Association of Santa Ana ADJOURNED CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 6:15 P.M. 2 JULY 19, 2010 REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING CALLED TO ORDER COUNCIL CHAMBER 22 CIVIC CENTER PLAZA SANTA ANA, CA 6:22 P.M. ATTENDANCE COUNCILMEMBERS Present: MIGUEL PULIDO, Mayor CLAUDIA ALVAREZ, Mayor Pro Tem P. DAVID BENAVIDES VINCENT F. SARMIENTO SAL TINAJERO PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE INVOCATION PRESENTATIONS ABSENT: CARLOS BUSTAMANTE MICHELE MARTINEZ STAFF Present: DAVID N. REAM, City Manager JOSEPH FLETCHER, City Attorney MARIA D. HUIZAR, Clerk of the Council Mayor Pulido Roger Aragon, Police Chaplain CERTIFICATE OF TRIBUTE presented by MAYOR PULIDO commemorating the life of Santa Ana Police Officer Amadu Kabia presented to his mother, Felicita Gachukia. CERTIFICATE OF RECOGNITION presented by COUNCILMEMBER BENAVIDES to Robert Flournoy, Love Community Outreach Coordinator, for his efforts in helping to provide food to the neediest individuals and families in our community. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 3 JULY 19, 2010 i NMI CERTIFICATE OF RECOGNITION presented by COUNCILMEMBER BENAVIDES to the American Independence Day Planning Committee for organizing and contributing to the American Independence Day Celebration at the Santa Ana Main Library on July 3, 2010.* MOTION: Revise Minutes of July 19, 2010 as follows: *Councilmembers Tinajero and Sarmiento, Mayor Pro Tem Alvarez, and Mayor Pulido stated for the record that they d9 RGt support sand reGOgnitiGR as views o se me nnmmittee memhern6Rnot refleGtiye of the Gity GO Reil they support the 4th `�..._ __...__ [ IGIIGOCIOG GI the GGQTCOTr of July Celebration, and the hard work by some of the organizing committee, they do not support the views, nor feel recognition should be extended to some members of the committee that hold discriminatory views, made racially offensive remarks at the event, and belong to the Minutemen organization. The views of the committee members described above are not consistent with the standards this Council has used to recognize others in our community. Council instructed City staff to assist in the coordination of event next year. MOTION: Alvarez VOTE: AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: SECOND: Sarmiento Alvarez, Bustamante, Martinez, Pulido, Sarmiento, Tinajero (6) Benavides (1) None (0) None (0) CLOSED SESSION REPORT — See Agenda Item 19A for report. PUBLIC COMMENT • Richard Moser, packet of information presented to Council. • Steve Lemler, raised awareness on resources available to the residents of our community through 2-1-1 phone line. • Art Pedroza and Sean Mill, thanked the majority of the City Council for not supporting recognition of American Independence Day Committee. • Francisco Barragan, suggested the City oversee next year's American Independence Day Celebration to focus event on America's independence and promote unity among groups. • Steve McGuigan, deferred comments to a later time. • Rob Cook — read portions of City's Code of Ethics as it related to respect, courtesy, and participation by members with different views. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 4 JULY 19, 2010 10A-4 • Marva Zvbas, member of the American Independence Day Committee, noted that her personal involvement in Committee was to educate children on history of July 4th CONSENT CALENDAR ITEMS MOTION: Approve staff recommendations with the following modifications on the Consent Calendar Items 10A through 25G: • Excused Councilmembers Bustamante and Martinez from City Council and Community Redevelopment Agency meetings. • Councilmember Benavides pulled Item 25E for separate discussion. MOTION: Sarmiento VOTE: MINUTES 10A AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: SECOND: Alvarez Alvarez, Benavides, Pulido, Sarmiento, Tinajero (5) None (0) None (0) Bustamante, Martinez (2) ADMINISTRATIVE MATTERS MINUTES OF THE CLOSED AND REGULAR MEETING OF JULY 6, 2010 - Clerk of the Council Office MOTION: Approve Minutes. BOARDS / COMMISSIONS / COMMITTEES 13A APPOINTMENT — ENVIRONMENTAL AND TRANSPORTATION ADVISORY COMMITTEE (ETAC) - Clerk of the Council Office MOTION: Appoint Susan Tuchler (Ward 6 resident) to the Environmental and Transportation Advisory Committee nominated by Councilmember Tinajero as the Ward 6 representative for a term expiring December 14, 2010. (replacing C. Gallegos) MISCELLANEOUS ADMINISTRATION CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 5 10A-5 JULY 19, 2010 19A CLOSED SESSION REPORT — City Attorney's Office MOTION: Approve compromise and release settlement agreement in the amount of $78,809. John Jason vs. the City of Santa Ana Case Nos. 08-4543, 04-3106, 04-3105 (Master), 00-1300 19B EXCUSED ABSENCES MOTION: Excuse Councilmembers Bustamante and Martinez. BUDGETARY MATTERS APPROPRIATION ADJUSTMENTS 20A APPROPRIATION ADJUSTMENT ACCEPTING GROWTH MANAGEMENT AREA FUNDS FOR TRAFFIC SIGNAL SYSTEM UPGRADE PROJECT — Public Works Agency MOTION: Approve an appropriation adjustment. (Requires five affirmative votes) APPROPRIATION ADJUSTMENT NO. 2011-05 - Accepting funds in the amount of $40,000 into the Measure M — Street Construction Fund Measure M Competitive account and appropriate same to the Measure M — Street Construction Fund Improvements Other than Buildings Expenditure account. 20B APPROPRIATION ADJUSTMENT FOR THE INSTITUTE FOR MUSEUM AND LIBRARY SERVICES GRANT, LAURA BUSH 21ST CENTURY LIBRARIAN PROGRAM TO FUND THE SEEDS TO TREES PROGRAM — Parks, Recreation & Community Services Agency MOTION: 1. Approve an appropriation adjustment. (Requires five affirmative votes) APPROPRIATION ADJUSTMENT NO. 2011-04 - Recognizing $626,767 in the Federal Grant -Direct revenue account and appropriating same to the Federal Grant -Direct various expenditure accounts. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 6 JULY 19, 2010 2. Authorize the City Manager to take all actions necessary to accept the Federal Institute of Museum and Library Services (IMLS), Laura Bush 21St Century Opportunity Program grant in the amount of $626,767 to fund the Seeds to Trees program. 20C APPROPRIATION ADJUSTMENT — AMENDMENT TO THE AGREEMENT WITH COUNTY OF ORANGE FOR GREEN JOB CORPS GRANT — Community Development Agency MOTION: 1. Approve an appropriation adjustment. (Requires five affirmative votes) APPROPRIATION ADJUSTMENT NO. 2011-012 — Recognizing a $150,000 grant from the County of Orange to provide a summer youth program for 2010 2. Authorize the City Manager and Clerk of the Council to execute an amendment to the Green Job Corps Agreement W7-GJC-10, subject to non -substantive changes approved by the City Manager and City Attorney. AGMT NO. 2010-128 — Execute an amendment between the County of Orange and the City of Santa Ana in the amount of $150,000. AGREEMENTS MOTION: Authorize the City Manager and Clerk of the Council to execute the following agreements, subject to non -substantive changes approved by the City Manager and City Attorney. (Item 25A through 25D) 25A AGMT NO. 2010-129 - GO LOCAL PROGRAM STEP 2 PROGRAM MANAGEMENT (PROJECT NO. 092505) - Execute an amendment with Cindy Krebs Consulting, Inc., in the amount of $36,000, for a total contract amount of $324,000 — Public Works Agency 25B AGMT NO. 2010-130 - CONSULTING SERVICES - With Wesley A. Bosch in an amount of $90,000 for a one-year term — Community Development Agency 25C AGMT NO. 2010-131 - FOUNTAIN MAINTENANCE SERVICES IN THE CIVIC CENTER - Execute a one-year amendment with Deckside Pool Service in an amount not to exceed $58,860 — Parks, Recreation & Community Services Agency CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 7 JULY 19, 2010 10A-7 25D AGMT NO. 2010-132 - PAVEMENT CLEANING SERVICES AT THE CIVIC CENTER AGREEMENT - Execute an amendment with Hydroblast in an amount of $78,140 — Parks, Recreation & Community Services Agency 25E 25F MOTION: 1. AGMT NO. 2010-133 - INSTALLATION OF A STEALTH MONOPOLE SPORTS LIGHTING ANTENNA AND UNDERGROUND EQUIPMENT VAULT AT ADAMS PARK - Execute a lease agreement with T - Mobile West Corporation, subject to non -substantive changes approved by the City Manager and the City Attorney. 2. Approve an appropriation adjustment. (Requires five affirmative votes) APPROPRIATION ADJUSTMENT NO. 2011-02 - Recognizing $38,800 in the Capital Outlay Fund Miscellaneous Recovery account and appropriate same to the Capital Outlay Fund Improvements Other than Buildings Expenditure account. 3. Receive and file Categorical Exemption for Environmental Review No. 2010-27 (Adams Park). MOTION: Benavides VOTE: AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: SECOND: Sarmiento Alvarez, Benavides, Tinajero (5) None (0) None (0) Bustamante, Martinez (2) Pulido, Sarmiento, CELLULAR ANTENNA AT RIVERVIEW PARK — Parks, Recreation & Community Services Agency MOTION: 1. AGMT NO. 2010-134 - INSTALLATION OF A STEALTH MONOPINE ANTENNA AND EQUIPMENT BUILDING AT RIVERVIEW PARK - CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 8 illyx;� JULY 19, 2010 Execute a lease agreement with T -Mobile West Corporation, subject to non -substantive changes approved by the City Manager and the City Attorney. 2. Approve an appropriation adjustment. (Requires five affirmative votes) APPROPRIATION ADJUSTMENT NO. 2011-01 - Recognizing $38,800 in the Capital Outlay Fund Miscellaneous Recovery account and appropriate same to the Capital Outlay Fund Improvements Other than Buildings Expenditure account. 3. Receive and file Categorical Exemption for Environmental Review No. 2010-29 (Riverview Park). 25G CELLULAR ANTENNA AT JEROME PARK — Parks, Recreation & Community Services Agency MOTION: 1. AGMT NO. 2010-135 - INSTALLATION OF A STEALTH MONOPINE ANTENNA AND EQUIPMENT BUILDING AT JEROME PARK — Execute a lease agreement with AT&T Mobility, subject to non - substantive changes approved by the City Manager and the City Attorney. 2. Approve an appropriation adjustment. (Requires five affirmative votes) APPROPRIATION ADJUSTMENT NO. 2011-03 - Recognizing $28,800 in the Capital Outlay Fund Miscellaneous Recovery account and appropriate same to the Capital Outlay Fund Improvements Other than Buildings Expenditure account 3. Receive and file Categorical Exemption for Environmental Review No. 2010-63 (Jerome Park). **END OF CONSENT CALENDAR** BUSINESS CALENDAR RESOLUTIONS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 9 JULY 19, 2010 55A AUTHORIZE APPLICATIONS FOR STATE GRANT FUNDS FOR USED OIL PROGRAMS — Public Works Agency MOTION: Adopt a resolution. RESOLUTION NO. 2010-038 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA ANA AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE PUBLIC WORKS AGENCY TO SUBMIT GRANT APPLICATIONS TO THE DEPARTMENT OF RESOURCES RECYCLING AND RECOVERY FOR THE USED OIL PAYMENT PROGRAM MOTION: Tinajero VOTE: AYES NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: PUBLIC HEARINGS SECOND: Sarmiento Alvarez, Benavides, Pulido, Sarmiento, Tinajero (5) None (0) None (0) Bustamante, Martinez (2) *Councilmember Benavides excused himself from proceedings of Agenda Item 75A due to a conflict of interest (applicant has indicated that the bank, which is Benavides' employer, will be participating in the financing of this project empleyer has a lean with develeper). He did not participate in consideration of this item and left the dais at 7:15 p.m. 75A AMEND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. 2004-01 FOR THE ONE BROADWAY PLAZA OFFICE TOWER - 1109 NORTH BROADWAY - ONE BROADWAY PLAZA, LLC, APPLICANT — Planning and Building Agency Recommended Action approved by the Planning Commission on June 14, 2010 by a 3-2 vote (Acosta and Yrarrazaval opposing, Alderete and Betancourt abstaining). Legal Notice published in the O.C. Reporter on July 9, 2010 and notices mailed on July 8, 2010. The following was presented by Planning and Building Agency Executive Director Jay Trevino: Request of Applicant Modify provisions of development agreement: CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 10 ii[ll_dl�� JULY 19, 2010 1. Allow ownership by joint venture partner(s) 2. Revise timing for payment for neighborhood traffic plans 3. Delete 50 percent pre -lease provision 4. Delete provision prohibiting the ability to request economic assistance 5. Extend deadline to refill excavated foundation Section 4.3 — Assignment Requires applicant to retain a minimum 51 percent ownership interest in project • Request to delete provision • Allows joint venture with financial entity(s) • Applicant will retain daily managerial control • Awkward for cities to attempt to control ownership • Provision is temporary because DA expires in 2011 (with possible extension to 2013) • All other provisions of Section 4.3 to remain Section 5.1.1 — Offsite Mitigation Measures Requires payment of funds for neighborhood traffic plans ($1.2 million) at permit issuance • Neighborhood traffic plans to analyze pre and post project traffic impacts in six neighborhoods • Payment delay will assist in obtaining project financing • Studies to commence 6 months prior to occupancy • Staff recommends funding six months prior to occupancy, or 22 months from permit issuance Section 5.8 — Condition Precedent to Building Permit Issuance Requires 50 percent preleasing of building to "Investment Grade Tenants" • Provision not imposed on any other project in Santa Ana • Has significantly impacted commencement of project • Issues like this best regulated by the private market • Requirement is temporary due to DA expiration Section 5.8.2 — No Redevelopment Subsidy Prohibits the applicant from requesting Redevelopment Agency assistance • Deletion of provision would allow applicant to submit a request for Agency assistance • Agency participation would first require a detailed financial analysis and action by Redevelopment Agency Board Section 5.9 — Historic Structures on the Property Requires excavated areas to be refilled within 90 days after construction of foundation piles • Excavation necessary to construct part of building foundation i.e., the piles • Modification to allow additional 30 days provides more flexibility CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 11 JULY 19, 2010 10A-11 Planning Commission Action Recommended approval of amendments to the development agreement • Modified Section 5.9 (Historic Structures on the Property) to include Orange County Educational Arts Academy to construction notification list The Mayor opened the Public Hearing at 7:25 p.m. The following spoke on the matter: • Hector Madrigal, member of UUNA Local 652 union and Santa Ana resident, supports item as proposed. • Mickey Totten, member of IUOE Local 12, encouraged Council to waive 50% lease requirement (as included in proposed Disposition and Development Agreement) and allow construction to begin. • Alfred Martinez, 3`d generation City resident and representative of the Cement Masons Local 500; opined that project would improve local economy. • Armando Esparza, Santa Ana resident and 2nd generation union worker, supports project. • Sylvia Salenius, stated project would change historic area of City, increase traffic congestion; impact three surrounding schools and neighborhoods; urged Council to keep DDA as is; supports letter by Historic French Park Association (submitted by Jeffrey Dickman). • Connie Major, opined that current DDA protects residents; believes sufficient office vacancies exist throughout the City without having to build large building; Historic Registry suggests that more cost efficient to renovate/restore existing buildings than to build new; Referendum Election 5 years ago - approved in good faith and trust. • Jose Meza, member of Local 652, requested Council adopt project, would bring jobs to the community and revitalize City. • Timothy Morgan, Santa Ana resident and member of Local 636; project would bring jobs and revitalization to the center of the County. • Alfred G. Rodriguez, supports project. • Doug Mangione, represents IBEW 441 with over 2,200 members, supports amendments to One Broadway Plaza - symbol of hope and progress in the City. • Wyatt Ashley, member of Local 433, supports project. • Gil Marrero, active member of community and resident; supports project - will attract new businesses; amendments deemed necessary in light of the economy. • Ben Wells, echoed sentiments expressed earlier; Santa Ana resident; loves City and progress. • Glen Nolte, business manager of Plumbers and Steamfitters Local 582; union institution with over 900 members and 25% unemployment rate; supports actions being considered. • Russ Nicholson, member of Local 200; project would allow workers new opportunities. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 12 JULY 19, 2010 10A-12 • Jim Adams, represents Los Angeles/Orange County Council for Building and Construction Trades; thanked affiliated unions for attending meeting; supports project. • Ralph Flores, member of Local 652 and City resident; City built by unions; believe project will continue tradition. • Daniel Mcrez, member of Local 652; project will set example for other cities. • Hugo Jimenez, member of Local 652 and City resident; supports actions considered by Council. • Michael Prentiss, member of Local 652; supports project and work opportunities. • Jose Luis Tirado, member of Local 652; supports project. • Ernesto Medrano, represents Teamsters Local 952; urged council to amend the development agreement that will bring jobs to the City. • Catherine Cate, correspondence provided for the record earlier; believe that if actions approved would compare us to Los Angeles County that currently has 25% vacancy rate in prominent buildings; hope that other projects by developer have utilized unions. • Lenny Gillis, member of Local 12 and City resident; project to generate needed jobs. • Alex Vega, One Broadway Plaza already approved by voters; union jobs would bring well paid opportunities to City. • Paul Cook -Giles, representative of the Historic French Park Association; read for the record letter received from the Association. • Tom Moxley, President of Los Angeles/Orange County Building Trade Union; urged Council to adopt actions as civic leaders in the past had vision to build Hoover Dam and other such projects. • Kim Payne, opined that actions considered are breach of trust; no public funds to be used; no economic feasibility study; schools to be informed of amendments. • Art Pedroza, amendments reasonable; public funds requested, but denied; OSHA buying venue across the street at half the cost; clause on use of unions already included in agreement; consider including condominiums as part of development. • Irving Chase, 4th generation business owner in the City; supports amendments proposed by developer; project will improve renovation of Downtown Santa Ana, project unanimously approved by Downtown Inc. • Mike Tardiff, opposed to project; Measure A approved by voters in 2005 did not include use of public funds; traffic not mitigated; noted that Planning Commission approved by slim margin of 3-2. • Debbie McEwen, request Council continue to protect neighborhoods. • John Barneich, believe conditions to protect City being reconsidered; 50% occupancy requirement reasonable and should continue; project incompatible with neighboring area; increased traffic; noted that Arco Building in Downtown Los Angeles had empty penthouse floor. • Ben Grabiel, presented copy of Measure A as approved by the voters in 2005; believe any changes should be subject to the vote of the people. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 13 JULY 19, 2010 10A-13 • Steve McGuigan, opined that developer should comply with agreement as approved in 2005; recommends council table matter. • James "Jim" Kendrick, supports project; believe it will revitalize Downtown Santa Ana; request for use of public funds reasonable. • Aldofo Lopez, project will change perception of Santa Ana; City forward thinking with adoption of project of this magnitude. • Molly Doughty, project should maintain original standards and integrity (Class A project). • Rod Cook, opined that economy stopped project, not City; suggested bridge for pedestrian crossings. The Clerk's Office received correspondence from Julie and Gary Humphreys, Steve and Catherine Cate, Jeff Dickman (Historic French Park Association), and Connie Major that was entered into the record. The Public Hearing closed at 8:40 p.m. Council discussion ensued. Public funds not to be used, project to be market -economy driven; Referendum of 2005 considered only rezoning, not Disposition and Development Agreement (DDA); labor agreement requirement included in original DDA; City Council supports local hire and amended motion as such; developer to provide compensation for neighborhood improvements; project will not have any reductions in standards. Mayor Pulido clarified for the record that abstention on project in 2005 was due to his position as board member on the Foreign Community Bank that had loan with developer, but has since been repaid. MOTION: Place ordinance on first reading and authorize publication of title with the following modifications: ORDINANCE NO. NS -2806 - AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA ANA APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF SANTA ANA AND ONE BROADWAY PLAZA, LLC, 1200 N. MAIN, LLC, AND 845 BROADWAY, LLC Retain Section 5.8.2 of the Development Agreement, which will continue to prohibit the applicant from requesting economic assistance from the Redevelopment Agency. 2. Modify section 5.8.1 as follows: a. Rename the section: "Employment and Wage Provisions" b. Add "Santa Ana" and surrounding community prior to "residents" in said section CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 14 JULY 19, 2010 10A-14 c. Add the following language as it pertains to construction and permanent jobs: Owner and/or its contractors must (1) post all available job openings with the Santa Ana Work Center and Cal JOBS (or equivalent job posting system designated by Santa Ana Work Center) within 24 hours of posting of jobs and agree to consider qualified referrals from Santa Ana Work Center for job openings. ii. Owner shall include in its lease agreements with private building tenants the need to post any job openings with the Santa Ana Works Center within 24 hours of posting of jobs and agree to consider referrals from Santa Ana Work Center for qualified candidates for job openings. Further, tenant shall be required to attend, within 30 days of lease signing, an orientation with the Santa Ana Work Center to learn about the services available to each business who locates in the building. Owner shall submit its form lease to City within 180 days of execution of the Amendment (or such other time as required by the Executive Director) as evidence that this language is included in said leases. MOTION: Alvarez SECOND: Tinajero VOTE: AYES: Alvarez, Pulido, Sarmiento, Tinajero (4) NOES: None (0) ABSTAIN: Benavides* (1) ABSENT: Bustamante, Martinez (2) COUNCIL RECESSED TO THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AT 9:15 P.M. COUNCIL RECONVENED AT 9:16 P.M. WITH MAYOR PULIDO, MAYOR PRO TEM ALVAREZ, AND COUNCILMEMBERS BENAVIDES, SARMIENTO, AND TINAJERO PRESENT COMMENTS 90A CITY MANAGER'S COMMENTS — None 90B CITY COUNCILMEMBER COMMENTS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 15 JULY 19, 2010 10A-15 Mayor Pulido announced that meeting would be adjourned in memory of Dr. Cynthia Suzanne Flores, Jeff Stevens, and Santa Ana Police Officer Amadu Kabia ADJOURNED- 9:16 P.M. - The next meeting of the City Council is scheduled for Monday, August 2, 2010 at 5:00 p.m. for the Closed Session Meeting immediately followed by the Regular Business Meeting in the Council Chamber, 22 Civic Center Plaza, Santa Ana, California. In Memory of Dr. Cynthia Suzanne Flores, Jeff Stevens, and Santa Ana Police Officer Amadu Kabia Maria D. Huizar, Clerk of the Council CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 16 JULY 19, 2010 iillym � REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: AUGUST 16, 2010 TITLE: APPOINTMENT OF ALTERNATE BOARD MEMBER FOR THE ORANGE COUNTY -CITY HAZARDOUS MATERIALS EMERGENCY RESPONSE AUTHORITY CITY MANAGER RECOMMENDED ACTION CLERK OF COUNCIL USE ONLY: APPROVED ❑ As Recommended ❑ As Amended ❑ Ordinance on 1St Reading ❑ Ordinance on 2nd Reading ❑ Implementing Resolution ❑ Set Public Hearing For CONTINUED TO FILE NUMBER Approve the appointment of Hazardous Materials Disclosure Inspector Chris Ciraulo as Santa Ana's Alternative Board Member to the Orange County -City Hazardous Materials Emergency Response Authority (OCCHMERA) Board of Directors. DISCUSSION The City of Santa Ana is a Provider Agency within the OCCHMERA, a Joint Powers Authority. As a Provider Agency, the City of Santa Ana has a designated seat on the Board of Directors. Administrative Chief Lori Smith is the City of Santa Ana's representative on the OCCHMERA Board of Directors. The City is required to designate an alternate. Action is required to appoint the Alternate representative for Chief Smith. FISCAL IMPACT There is no impact on the General Fund. David Thomas Acting Fire Chief Fire Department 13A-1 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL COMMITTEE ON PARKS, RECREATION, EDUCATION AND YOUTH APRIL 3, 2008 CALL TO ORDER The meeting convened at 5:35 p.m. in the City Hall, Room 831, 20 Civic Center Plaza, Santa Ana, California. ATTENDANCE Council members Present Michele Martinez (Chair); Vincent Sarmiento, Sal Tinajero Councilmember(s) Absent: None Staff Present: Gerardo Mouet, Executive Director; Joe Straka, Assistant City Attorney; Mike Lopez, Parks Maintenance Superintendent, Jenny Rios, Recreation Superintendent; Alma Flores, Sr. Management Assistant Public Present Alfredo Gomez, Tish Leon, Pedro Magallon, Jose Meza, Jesus Rodriguez, Jorge Rodriguez, Arturo Saucedo, Glen Stroud, Julie Stroud, Edgar Vasquez 1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES • Minutes of January 9, 2008 accepted as presented 2. STADIUM PROGRAMMING Executive Director Gerardo Mouet made a PowerPoint presentation on the Stadium Programming. The Program is in the process of being transitioned from the Parks Services 'Division, to the Recreation Division. Starting January 2009, the groups must be a non-profit or a holder of a business license in order to use any City field. The Parks, Recreation and Community Services Agency is considering recommending that all sport organizations serving youths to do a background check on their coaches, and all sport organizations to have player insurance — all Council Committee members agreed. Council Committee Member Sarmiento suggested that the Stadium Programming be brought back to the PREY Council to give an update on the lottery system, and to share what ideas of improvement the soccer organizations have provided. Discussion ensued. 3. WILLARD INTERMEDIATE SCHOOL JOINT -USE AGREEMENT The Willard Concept was discussed and PREY members did not have concerns. Council Committee members are aware that this Concept will be addressed at the next City-SAUSD PREY Regular Meeting — MINUTES 13B-1 April 3, 2008 Joint policy meeting. It will also be presented at the April 23d Recreation & Parks Board meeting. 4. UPCOMING COUNCIL CONSIDERATIONS Council considerations for April, May and June were discussed. 5. PUBLIC COMMENTS Glen Stroud-COFU Member ❖ At first did not support stadium plan because the Neighborhood Association was not notified of the late item. ❖ Understand that staff did present the issue to the N.A. and received verbal approval — not sufficient — wants written approval. ❖ COFU is important as it protects the Agency — it is an avenue to appeal strikes ❖ Reviewed examples of infractions Pedro Magallon-COFU Member/Adult Soccer Rep ❖ Several years ago SAYSU and SASA were recognized as critical; now they do not have the same importance. ❖ Have been part of the process to make amendments to the policies and procedures but only when it is convenient to the City. ❖ Eleven to fifteen leagues were not in agreement with the lottery system. ❖ Notified Councilmember Sarmiento via letter of the lottery system, but the system was still implemented. ❖ The lottery system does not make sense; some leagues get dates they do not want ❖ Plans of implementing a lottery system should have been brought to the attention of SASA and SAYSU before making any decision - problems could have been avoided. Jorge Rodriguez ❖ His league is negatively impacted by the current Stadium process. Edgar Vasquez ❖ Happy withy what he has but feels it is not fair that Jorge Rodriguez cannot use the Stadium as 100 percent of his members are Santa Ana Residents and he is a registered league ❖ Need a better solution so everyone can use the Stadium Arturo Saucedo ❖ The decisions were not fair; has concerns about the criteria for priority ❖ If they serve Santa Ana kids that should give them priority; should not matter if you are non-profit or not; youth should be the criteria for giving priority. ❖ Some leagues have use of the Stadium and do not really need it. Alfredo Gomez — Azteca Soccer ❖ Did not use same criteria for stadium as for other fields; city has done good job with Centennial — have not had problems; should use same schedule for stadium so that it benefits all users ❖ His kids have Wednesday for the first month but then has to wait a month to use on weekends when he needs it most PREY Regular Meeting — MINUTES 2 1 [4 April 3, 2008 ❖ Lottery results were not balanced Jose Meza ❖ Lottery was a good idea; it works for him ❖ The most important thing about it was that it eliminated the monopoly of the stadium by one individual Jesus Rodriguez ❖ The lottery is important; it is the best way to work with all the leagues and he supports it; ❖ The results give all 9 youth leagues an opportunity to participate on the weekends ❖ Unfortunately, leagues that are not non-profit cannot use the stadium on week days — that is part of the issue ❖ For profit leagues would like to use the stadium on weekdays just like they share on weekends ❖ The 1.5% rule gives less time to smaller leagues; it is equitable and wants to maintain the system 6. COMMITTEE MEMBERS COMMENTS Vince Sarmiento ❖ PREY is not the last "court of appeals - the Rec & Park Board is the last. ❖ Support the lottery system with continuous improvement ❖ Encourages the soccer community to share their ideas to make sure the system is fair. ❖ Suggested the Executive Director working on adjusting the programming where leagues can get specific days and times to use the Stadium. Sal Tinajero ❖ He realized the current lottery system is not perfect, but this is the current system. We should always work together to make things better. Michelle Martinez ❖ Requested a follow-up report to PREY after talking to all the leagues for suggestions; report back on suggestions, progress , problems, obstacles, issues, etc. ❖ Staff administers the Stadium and makes the policies and procedures for this facility. ❖ The Agency should decide how to continuously improve the system. ❖ We cannot allow threats of bringing one -thousand people to Council meetings. 7. STAFF COMMENTS - None at this time ADJOURNED: 7:05 p.m. 4 Gerardo Mouet Executive Director, PRCSA PREY Regular Meeting — MINUTES 3 April 3, 2008 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL COMMITTEE ON PARKS, RECREATION, EDUCATION AND YOUTH November 10, 2009 CALL TO ORDER The meeting convened at 2:13 p.m. in the City Hall, Room 831, 20 Civic Center Plaza, Santa Ana, California. ATTENDANCE Council members Present Michele Martinez (Chair); Vincent Sarmiento, Sal Tinajero Councilmember(s) Absent: None Staff Present: David Ream, City Manager; Gerardo Mouet, Executive Director; Cindy Nelson, Deputy City Manager; Ron Ono, Administrative Services Manager; Jenny Rios, Recreation Superintendent; Jose Perez, Recreation Program Coordinator. Public Present Sean Fitzgerald, Julie Stroud, Ismael Solazar, Angel Orea, Alberto Denas, Alfredo Gomez, David Gonzalez, Leonel Perez, Edgar Vasquez, Perdro Magallon. 1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES • Minutes of April 3, 2008 accepted as presented 2. UPDATE ON CORNER LOT AT McFADDEN & STANDARD Deputy City Manager Cindy Nelson indicated the lot at McFadden and Standard has been secured for temporary use as a play area. Owner agreed the lot can be used for 2 years as an open play area. CDA is looking into raising monies to install a protective fence. The area will remain a dirt area, but can be used as a craft area with benches. A celebration event will be schedule in early December. Council Committee Member Sarmiento would like to recognize the partners in January 2010. Discussion ensued. 3. TOWNSEND PUBLIC AFFAIR -GRANTS FOR PARKS & RECREATION & JOINT USE Sean Fitzgerald, Townsend Public Affairs presented the following possible grant opportunities for Parks and Recreation: o Proposition 84 Competitive Parks Program ■ $5.348 billion dollar measure ■ $183 million available; Application due March 1, 2010 o Nature Educational Facilities Program ■ $100 million Grant PREY Regular Meeting — MINUTES 13B-4 November 10, 2009 • Competitive Grant Program • Application in draft form; Due date not identified o Recreational Trails Program o Safe Route to School Program Joint Use Funding o Funding available in the past o Two bills being proposed by Torlakson ■ SB 35 • Expanding the definition to include career technical building and physical education or outdoor recreational site. • Expands the types of partnerships allowed • Considering 10% to be allowed for equipment. ■ SB 1677 • Would have expanded the definition of joint use • Would have included private entities as partners • Would have allowed school districts to include property as a match • Would have lessen the 25% match o Looking into proposing another educational bond Council Comments: o Need to look into funding that's available for shorter periods of time (5 years) o What projects are staffs currently working with you? o How can we expand Joint Use with the School District? o Need to collaborate with non -profits to program on joint use sites. o Not all kids focus on athletics. Other kids focus on arts, hobbies, etc. that we need to consider. 2:52 pm : Sal Tinajero arrived: • Staff response: o City has 8 Joint Use agreements with the SAUSD o Currently working on Joint Use at Willard Intermediate School o Working with SAUSD in Calif. Endowment Plan that will provide $3 million per year funding stream 4. POP WARNER — NON PROFIT STATUS • David Gonzalez indicated Pop Warner has been here for 35 years and everyone that help with the program are volunteers (no one gets paid). Laura Nunez manages the books for Pop Warner. • Non-profit status was suspended for a short period, but now Memorial Pop Warner is covered under the Pop Warner parent organization. • Per agreement with City, Pop Warner is currently building a storage room adjacent to the concession stand at no cost to the city. • It costs approximate $115 to equip a child to play in Pop Warner. • The initial enrollment fee for a child is $300/child; $275 for the second child; $250 for the third child. • Council Comments: o What parks to Pop Warner Use? PREY Regular Meeting — MINUTES 2 November 10, 2009 13B-5 o Response: Memorial, Adams and Lillie King Parks o What information does Pop Warner provide? o Response: Insurance, Annual Financial Report, Code of Conduct and Valid City Business License. o Follow up on what City can disclose? 5. UPDATE ON CORNER LOT AT MCFADDEN & STANDARD • Continued. 6. UPDATE ON JOINT USE AGREEMENTS • Report indicated eight joint use agreements are in effect with the Santa Ana Unified School District. Agreements identify some type of improvements were made by city on district property in order to obtain approval. District is resistant, due to the wear and tear on their facilities, but the need for athletic fields after school and on weekends and shortage of open park space require both organizations to continue with joint use agreements. 7. UPDATE ON ATHLETIC FIELD USAGE/AND THE USAGE POLICY • Jenny Rios reported staff is currently updating the athletic field usage and the usage policy. The initial policy started in January 2008 with the formation of the Reservation Team and System. Of all the organized sports, soccer presents the most challenge and staff work. In updating the policy, staff has been meeting with the Santa Ana Soccer Association (SASA), Santa Ana Youth Soccer United (SAYSU) and Committee on Field Usage (CoFU). • The policy requires sports organizations to obtain a permit for field usage for specific fields and specific times. Because of the shortage of fields two youth and three adult have permits, but do not have fields. Other issues include the illegal vending of food/beverages by the sports leagues in parks, without agreements. 3:40pm Sal Tinajero excused himself to attend another meeting. 8. REVIEW OF JOINT DISTRICT/CITY POLICY MEETING FORMAT • Continued 9. GODINEZ HOMERUN FENCE • One of the conditions identified in the Godinez High School Joint Use Agreement indicates no fencing in of the school campus. Due to safety concerns the Santa Ana Unified School District is requesting city approval to install a homerun fence around the outfield of the two ball diamonds. • Councilman Sarmiento' indicated this item was discussed at the Joint City/District meeting and asked where we were on any recommendations? • Staff indicated the homerun fence proposal was presented by the district at two neighborhood association meetings. At both meetings former councilmember's voiced strong opposition to the fence. • Sal Tinajero and Vince Sarmiento' indicated we need to move forward to approve the homerun fence due to safety reasons. The proposed plan does PREY Regular Meeting — MINUTES •� November 10, 2009 not completely enclose the area and does provide public access to the joint use areas. 10. PUBLIC COMMENTS Ismael Solazr — Continental Soccer League ❖ Continental has 2000 soccer players waiting to use Santa Ana soccer fields. The league has not used a field under permit, but was able to obtain fields under the lottery system. Angel Orea — Hispanico America ❖ The system is not fair. He owns a business in Santa Ana and should have the right to use Santa Ana fields. The system needs to be revised and wants to be part of the system. Edgar Vasquez - IntraAmericana ❖ Indicated he has been trying to obtain fields in Costa Mesa and Garden Grove, but has been unsuccessful. Alberto Nunez — Orange County Soccer League ❖ Waiting for more than 4 hours for fields. Other leagues are getting more fields and getting bigger. Leonel Perez - United Soccer League ❖ Sixteen years ago we were all participating. Those that remain have followed the rules and other have left. The surcharge was initiated and set aside to fix or install new synthetic turf, but was never used. Pedro Magallon-COFU Member/Adult Soccer Rep ❖ The surcharge funding has not been spent or used to match grant funding. The three leagues already have their blocks, but could not comply with rules. 11. COMMITTEE MEMBERS COMMENTS Vince Sarmiento ❖ Thanked staff in developing a system that we can all work with. Sal Tinajero ❖ Thanked staff and indicated we need to have more meetings on this issue. The process is better than before. ❖ Need to visit the Committee on Field Usage issue. o Mater Dei has one team, but has the same vote as another larger team. o Need to review equal representation for all leagues. Michelle Martinez ❖ Thanked staff and everyone for speaking on this issue. Youth is our number one priority. Need to have common ground, respect and work things out together. ❖ Need to move forward and not reflect on the past. PREY Regular Meeting — MINUTES 4 November 10, 2009 13B-7 12. STAFF COMMENTS - None at this time 13. ITEM FOR NEXT MEETING: • Discussion on Committee on Facility Usage (CoFU) ADJOURNED: 4:43 p.m. Gerardo Mouet Executive Director, PRC A PREY Regular Meeting — MINUTES 5 November 10, 2009 13B-8 SANTA ANA CITY COUNCIL COMMITTEE PUBLIC SAFETY Minutes of Meeting July 27, 2010 CALL TO ORDER The meeting was convened at 5:45 p.m. at Santa Ana Police Department, 60 Civic Center Plaza, 4th Floor. Santa Ana, California. ATTENDANCE Councilmembers present: Claudia Alvarez, and David Benavides. Staff present: Police Chief Paul Walters, Fire Chief Marc Martin, Deputy Chief Carlos Rojas, Deputy City Attorney Theresa Judd, Deputy City Attorney Ryan Hodge, Battalion Chief Dave Thomas, Deputy Fire Chief, Fire Marshal Lori Smith, Cmdr. Ken Gominsky, Sgt. Mark Bell, and Loretta Tafoya, Recording Secretary. Public sign -ins: John Kelly, Irma Macial, Fabiola Soto, Marianne Codiz, and Carl Banningin. SUMMARY OF DISCUSSIONS APPROVAL OF MINUTES Approved Minutes of the March 23, 2010 meeting. DANCE PERMIT REVISION — Chief Walters/C.S.S. Mike McCoy Mike McCoy stated the last revisions to Chapter 11 were done in 1990. Since then, the dynamics of Downtown have changed. Under existing regulation, most Downtown restaurants are prohibited from dancing. The proposed modifications are intended to address those changes. The new dance permit would be a pilot program and a specific geographical area will be designated. It will be a two- year permit and a $500 fee will be assessed on all establishments that obtain a dance permit. Chief Walters suggested each establishment have a card reader to be able to control clientele. Committee Member David Benavides asked if there will be limits. Mike McCoy stated there will be no limits however stated that random inspections will be completed. Committee member David Benavides recommended inspections every 6 months. Committee member Claudia Alvarez requested Dance Ordinance be on next agenda. PEDESTRIAN SAFETY — Chief Walters/Sgt. Mark Bell Sgt. Mark Bell stated since January 1, 2000, there have been 41,383 traffic collisions reported to the Santa Ana Police Department. There were 2,041 collisions involved in a vehicle vs. a pedestrian, 51 collisions of all reported pedestrian collisions resulted in fatalities. The pedestrian was found to be at fault in 33 of 51 cases. Alcohol was present in over 50% of pedestrian fatality cases. The Traffic Section's strategies to reduce collisions are to continue to provide bicycle/roadway safety presentations in local elementary schools; participate in youth education events such as the OC Youth Expo; work with Traffic Engineering to identify areas where roadway safety can be enhanced and continue enforcing pedestrian safety laws. Committee member David Benavides requested that the Traffic Division work with Public Works/Traffic Engineering and Planning and Building to create a task force on pedestrian safety. Council member Claudia Alvarez requested Traffic Safety be on next agenda. 4. UPDATE ON HOT SPOT TASK FORCES Deputy Chief Rojas introduced Ken Gominsky, new Field Operations Commander. Cmdr. Gominsky reviewed the new changes in Field Operations and addressed the actions taken for Townsend Street and Bishop Manor. Field Operations is also working with Crime Analysis to help the officers in the field locating the hot spots with the new Dashboard system. Chief Walters explained this is an on-going challenge due to retiring officers, the lack of resources to replace them, and the reduction of overtime. Cmdr. Gominsky explained how the PSO's, Directed Patrol and "Kids Works" are helping the Police Department with Townsend Street. All canine officers are currently out in the field with patrol to cover the shortage of police officers. Committee member Claudia Alvarez appreciated the officers adjusting their hours to save in overtime. Cmdr. Gominsky is also attending the neighborhood meetings to help keep officers in the field. Committee member David Benavides commented on how Community Based Organizations are a big help and wanted the Police Department to let him know if there is anything he can do to help. FOURTH OF JULY ENFORCEMENT PLAN Fire Chief Martin stated the Fire Department will stick with past enforcement policies since they have been successful. The City has approved to have 78 booths. He stated the Police Department will continue to handle the enforcement. Deputy Chief Rojas stated the Police Department will be working with the Arson Detail and will be activating the EOC. They will also be issuing admin citations. Each citation will be $100, with escalating fees. Committee member Claudia Alvarez commended Fire Chief Martin for his excellent work in organizing the 4th of July enforcement. The representative from TNT spoke and let the Committee know that he appreciated all their support. Committee member David Benavides thanked TNT for their sponsorship for the City celebration. 9. PUBLIC COMMENTS Citizens present spoke regarding the concern in the increase of crime statistics. 10. COMMITTEE MEMBER COMMENTS Committee Member David Benavides thanked the citizens for attending the meeting. Committee members David Benavides and Claudia Alvarez thanked Chief Martin for his leadership and will be missed. 13. ITEMS FOR NEXT MEETING Update on Dance Permit Revision Update on Pedestrian Safety 14. NEXT MEETING DATE - Tuesday, July 27, 5:30 pm, Santa Ana Police Facility, 60 Civic Center Plaza, 4th Floor conference room, Santa Ana, California. ADJOURNMENT — 7:20 P.M. 61� � PAUL M. WALTERS Chief of Police 136210 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: AUGUST 16, 2010 TITLE REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS FOR FIRE HYDRANT MAINTENANCE SERVICES CITY MANAGER RECOMMENDED ACTION CLERK OF COUNCIL USE ONLY: APPROVED ❑ As Recommended ❑ As Amended ❑ Ordinance on 151 Reading ❑ Ordinance on 2nd Reading ❑ Implementing Resolution ❑ Set Public Hearing For_ CONTINUED TO FILE NUMBER Authorize the Public Works Agency to send the attached Request for Proposals to qualified firms to provide maintenance services for the City's public fire hydrants. DISCUSSION The City's water system includes approximately 4,800 public fire hydrants that are used to provide fire protection to the community. To ensure that each hydrant will work correctly when needed, a periodic maintenance program is conducted by Water Resources Division personnel. Standards for the frequency and scope of fire hydrant maintenance are established by the American Water Works Association (AWWA) and the Insurance Services Office (ISO), Inc. AWWA recommends that all hydrants should be inspected at least once a year to ensure satisfactory operation. This is the standard that Santa Ana has historically met. ISO recognizes this as an acceptable level of maintenance. It is one of many factors considered by ISO in continuing to award Santa Ana the highest possible fire suppression rating of Class 1. The Water Resources Division has experienced a reduction in personnel in the last several years. The Water Systems Maintenance Section (the section responsible for fire hydrant maintenance) has been reduced from 17 personnel in 2005 to 11 today. To continue to operate the water utility effectively, adjustments in staff assignments and prioritization of work activities have been implemented. Activities that would occur on a daily basis (e.g. fire hydrant maintenance, water gate valve maintenance, water service replacements, etc.) are being delayed as crews attend to more urgent repair activities (e.g. repair of broken fire hydrants, repair of service leaks, water main breaks, etc.). 19C-1 Request for Proposal for Fire Hydrant Maintenance Services August 16, 2010 Page 2 An internal review of water maintenance activities showed that fire hydrant maintenance could be performed by a contractor. Until this year, maintenance of the City's 4,800 fire hydrants was performed by two Water Services Workers. Should a contract be awarded to perform this work, workers with similar training and certifications will be required. Contracting out this activity will not result in layoffs or reassignments of existing City staff. A one year contract is being considered with a full review to determine if contracting this activity is cost- effective. If contracting out fire hydrant maintenance is not approved, then two additional Water Services Workers will need to be approved and funded in the Water Resources Division budget to resume this activity. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT There is no environmental impact associated with this action. FISCAL IMPACT Funds are available in the Water Systems Maintenance Fund (account no. 06017641-62300). Raul Godinez II Executive Directo Public Works Agency RG/RB Exhibit 1: Request for Proposals APPROVED AS TO FUNDS AND ACCOUNTS: Francisco Gutierrez 9W Executive Director Finance & Management Services Agency 19C-2 REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL CITY OF SANTA ANA FIRE HYDRANT MAINTENANCE SERVICES CITY OF SANTA ANA PUBLIC WORKS AGENCY SANTA AN& CALI FORN IA 92702 PROJECT MANAGER CESAR E. BARRERA, P.E. ACTING PRINCIPAL CIVIL ENGINEER PHONE (714) 647-3387 E-mail: cbarrera@santa-ana.org Proposal Due Date: xxxxxxx, 2010 During the Proposal period, all questions must be in writing and faxed to 714-647-3345, Attention: Cesar Barrera, No later than, xxxxx, at 4:00p.m. Copies of the questions and answers will be provided to all Contractors intending to respond. No verbal responses will be given. CITY OF SANTA ANA FIRE HYDRANT MAINTENANCE SERVICES City of Santa 1netWATater Resources 3 Page 1 of 11 REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL FIRE HYDRANT MAINTENANCE SERVICES GENERAL The City of Santa Ana is soliciting proposals from qualified firms to provide Fire Hydrant Maintenance Services. The City has over 4,800 fire hydrants that are maintained on a yearly basis. A detailed scope of work is outlined in Section E of this RFP. The city will enter into an agreement with the firm to provide Fire Hydrant Maintenance Services. Upon receiving this Request for Proposal (RFP), consultant shall notify the City in writing and faxed to 714-647-3345 (Attention: Cesar E. Barrera) regarding its intent to respond to the RFP. The Consultant must be able to assist the City through this contract to provide the services needed. The consultant shall utilize in-house staff and/or sub -consultants satisfactory to the City to complete the assignments. For specialized work for which the prime consultant will require a sub -contractor, the prime consultant will serve as an administrative liaison between the City and the sub -contractor. The prime consultant mark-up for sub -consultants shall not exceed 15%. The proposal shall be concise, to the point, and sufficient enough to cover all required submittals and exclude any extraneous materials. A cover letter shall summarize key factors and guarantee that key personnel will be committed to perform the required tasks throughout the duration of the contract. PROPOSED SCOPE OF SERVICES A. Terms Upon completing the selection process, the selected consultant will be awarded a one- year contract for a "not to exceed fee" to be determined. B. PROJECT BACKGROUND This request is for Fire Hydrant Maintenance Services for the City of Santa Ana water distribution system. The City of Santa Ana desires to keep the fire hydrant maintenance program as an integral part of our general water asset maintenance program. Fire hydrant maintenance is an essential task and a key element to fire protection. The City of Santa Ana is located in Orange County in Southern California. The City of Santa Ana's water system consists of approximately 475 miles of water mains with 45,000 water service connections, 4,850 hydrants, and 6,000 water distribution valves. The city land area is 27.2 square miles and the population is approximately 350,000 people. CITY OF SANTA ANA FIRE HYDRANT MAINTENANCE SERVICES City of Santa 1191CA�1'ater Resources �} Page 2 of 1 1 To date, the City has aggressively been maintaining all City fire hydrants. All general fire hydrant maintenance and fire hydrant valve maintenance has been done by the City's water maintenance crew. C. PRIME CONSULTANT RESPONSIBILITIES The selected consultant will be required to assume responsibility for all services offered in their proposals. The selected consultant will be the sole point of contact with regard to contractual matters, including payment of any and all charges resulting from the contract agreement. Consultant shall tightly control the quality of the work performed by in-house staff and/or sub -consultants. Incomplete or poor quality of work will not be accepted. Sub -consultant work shall not exceed (15%) of the contract agreement. A list of all sub - consultants shall be submitted as part of the proposal. A detailed list of all the sub - consultant tasks shall be included in the proposal. D. PROJECT MANAGEMENT Meetings The Consultant will be required to attend meetings at the City of Santa Ana facilities. After the project has been awarded, a kick-off meeting will be held. Progress meetings will be held on as needed basis. The Consultant will meet with representatives from the City and hold training workshops at the City offices. During these visits, the consultant will meet with the City of Santa Ana Water Resources personnel to discuss the water system infrastructure, fire hydrant network, INFRAMAP software and security. Progress Reports Prepare and submit a monthly report in electronic format to the project manager/engineer that includes the following: ■ A narrative description of work performed by major task along with a map and spreadsheet to graphically depict the progress and areas of work. The City will provide a computer tablet with INFRAMAP software as a loaner to accomplish the digital field data collection. ■ A table indicating the person -hours and dollars budgeted for each task and the expenditures to date. ■ A summary in percentage of overall project completion and expenditures of time, person -hours, and dollars during the preceding month. • An updated project work schedule depicting current status of the project, including revisions to the schedule, modifications and or impacts to the milestone dates. • A list of issues and/or anticipated problems to be discussed. CITY OF SANTA ANA FIRE HYDRANT MAINTENANCE SERVICES City of Santa l A5ater Resources Page 3 of 1 1 E. SCOPE OF SERVICES In general, the Consultant shall perform fire hydrant maintenance Services for the City of Santa Ana water distribution system. For all fire hydrant maintenance tasks, Consultant shall provide traffic control per the W.A.T.C.H. Manual. Compensation for traffic control shall be included in the unit price per fire hydrant maintenance tasks. Consultant shall perform the following tasks: FIRE HYDRANT REFINISH & MAINTENANCE 1. The City will provide loaner laptops with infraMAP software for data collection and documentation uses by the Consultant. 2. All hydrant operating nut and upper stem areas shall be lubricated with the original equipment manufacturer's recommended lubricant to assist in smooth operation of the hydrant. 3. All nozzle outlets shall be lubricated with Rectorseal© food grade anti -seize & lubricant. 4. Fire hydrant isolation valves shall be closed completely and then opened completely. 5. Isolation valve cans shall be vacuumed clean of debris. 6. Isolation valve lid shall be spray painted blue. 7. Consultant shall record the isolation valve status, number of turns to close, depth of nut, and other operational comments using the infraMAP software. 8. Clear weeds and grass around fire hydrant as necessary. 9. Tighten nozzle caps slightly tighter than hand tight. 10. Fire hydrant shall be flushed until flushing water is clear. 11. Water flushed through hydrants must be de -chlorinated by the diffuser method. 12.All rubber seals shall be replaced as necessary. 13. Fire hydrant shall be pressurized and inspected for leaks. (Note: All fire hydrant weepholes are plugged at the base.) 14. Exterior of hydrant shall be power washed and wire brushed. a. Components shall be power washed at 1,000 to 2,000 PSI to remove loose oxidation, dirt and other contaminants. b. Any area with exposed steel and/or rust present shall be wire brushed. 15.All surfaces shall be smooth, clean, and dry before paint is applied. 16. External hydrant components shall receive a minimum of one (1) coat of O.S.H.A. White paint. 17. Fire hydrant identification numbers shall be stenciled in black paint on the hydrant so that it is visible from the street. 18. Consultant shall inspect and record the hydrant status, barrel type, hydrant manufacturer, barrel size, number of ports, date painted and any operational comments using the infraMAP software. Operational deficiencies found during regular maintenance process may prompt the City of Santa Ana to request repair services. Repairs require written authorization by the City CITY OF SANTA ANA FIRE HYDRANT MAINTENANCE SERVICES City of Santa jr .A6Vater Resources v Page 4 of 11 of Santa Ana, Water Resources Division and must be performed according to City Standard Plans and Specifications. Consultant shall repair fire hydrants using original equipment manufactured parts. Consultant shall supply all parts and components necessary to complete work. UPPER BARREL REPAIRS (As -Needed) 1. Consultant shall replace all necessary parts and components, excluding bonnet assembly. The City of Santa Ana will determine if a fire hydrant needs to be replaced. 2. Disassemble and lubricate entire bonnet area. 3. Replace missing or damaged caps. 4. Consultant shall warranty all repairs for a period of one (1) year and shall cover entire upper barrel assembly. UPPER BARREL REPLACEMENT (As -Needed) 1. Replace entire component (flange, hose nozzle and/or pumper nozzle, and gaskets, missing or deteriorated nuts and bolts, broken traffic flanges and couplings where necessary and as -needed). 2. Replace damaged nozzles (hose or pumper) 3. Re -caulk and/or secure nozzles, as needed 4. Consultant shall warranty all repairs for a period of one (1) year and shall cover entire upper barrel assembly and bonnet. LOWER BARREL REPAIRS (As -Needed) 1. Service or repair shall be performed simultaneously with the upper barrel. 2. Includes replacement of any/all necessary internal components. 3. Lower stem fire hydrant main valve rubber. 4. Fire hydrant brass seat ring. 5. Main drain parts. 6. Consultant shall warranty all repairs for a period of one (1) year and shall cover entire lower and upper barrel assemblies. BONNET REPAIR/REPLACEMENT (As -Needed) 1. Replacement/repair of hold down nuts, operating nuts, oil reservoir, o -ring pressure seals, anti -friction washers, damaged bonnet nuts and bolts as required. 2. Consultant shall warranty all repairs for a period of one (1) year and shall cover entire bonnet assembly. City Responsibilities: 1. City will assign a primary and secondary contact for the fire hydrant maintenance project 2. City will provide the Consultant a hydrant maintenance schedule. 3. City shall provide laptops with infraMAP software for data collection and recording. CITY OF SANTA ANA FIRE HYDRANT MAINTENANCE SERVICES City of Santa19&� A ater Resources Page 5 of 11 F. CERTIFICATION AND EXPERIENCE REQUIREMENTS This project involves the maintenance and replacement of assets of the City's water distribution system. Improper handling and/or lack of knowledge of water distribution systems can result in negative effects on the system that may result in health and safety impacts. The Consultant shall demonstrate that the personnel that will be assigned to this project be, at minimum, certified by the State of California Department of Health Services (CDPH) as a Water Distribution Operator Grade D1. The Consultant's shift supervisor overseeing maintenance operations assigned to this project must be, at minimum, certified by CDPH as a Water Distribution Operator Grade D3. Consultant shall submit copies of the certifications as part of their response to this proposal. Consultant must also demonstrate at least three (3) years of experience performing similar work. Consultant shall provide references that the City may call as part of their proposal. G. COMPENSATION This proposal shall indicate a unit fixed fee for completion of the Fire Hydrant Maintenance Services as outlined in this proposal. The fee shall include the Consultant's personnel including sub consultants, if any, and all direct and indirect expenses to complete the work. Payments shall be made on the basis of work completed as agreed upon by the City. Additional Services, as authorized in writing by the City, will be paid at the unit billing rate. All fees shall be considered full compensation to perform work as outlined in the scope of services and no additional compensation will be allowed therefore. H. TENTATIVE SCHEDULE Issue Request for Proposal (RFP) Submit Notice of Intent Submit Questions to City Submit Proposals to City Evaluation & Consultant Selection Award Contract Begin Work XXXXX, 2010 XXXXX, 2010 XXXXX, 2010 XXXXX, 2010 XXXX — XXXX, 2010 XXXX, 2010 XXXX, 2010 Proposals are due in the office of the Executive Director, Public Works Agency, at 20 Civic Center Plaza, Ross Annex, M-21, 4th Floor, Santa Ana, California, 92701, ATTN: CESAR BARRERA, on or before 4:00 p.m., XXXX, 2010. CITY OF SANTA ANA FIRE HYDRANT MAINTENANCE SERVICES City of Santalslc;ATater Resources Q Page 6of11 ISSUING OFFICE Santa Ana Public Works Agency, Office of the Executive Director, 20 Civic Center Plaza, Ross Annex, 4th Floor, M-21, Santa Ana, California 92701. J. PROPOSAL REJECTION The City reserves the right to reject any or all proposals submitted, and is not liable for any pre -contractual expenses: Pre -contractual expenses are defined as expenses incurred by the offeror in: (a) preparing the proposal in response to this RFP; (b) submitting that proposal to the City; (c) negotiating with the City in any matter related to this proposal; (d) any other expenses incurred by offeror prior to date of award, if any, of the contract. Offeror shall not include any such expenses as part of the price as proposed in response to this RFP. K. ADDENDA Any subsequent changes in the RFP from the date of issuance to the date of submittal will result in an addendum by the issuing office to those parties who have provided the proper notice of interest in responding to the RFP. L. PROPOSAL CONTENT AND SIGNATURE Three (3) copies of the proposal will be required with all copies having been signed by the individual or, if a company, the company official with the power to bind the company in its proposal. The fee schedule, Attachment D (3 copies) and Attachment A shall be sealed in a separate envelope and submitted with the proposal to the City. To be considered, all proposals shall be completely responsive to the RFP. M. ACCEPTANCE OF CONTRACT The contents of the proposal of the successful consultants shall become a contractual obligation if a contract ensues. Failure of a consultant to accept this obligation will result in the cancellation of any award. Any damage accruing to the City as a result of a failure to contract may be recovered from the consultant. A sample agreement is attached for reference (Attachment C). N. PRIME CONSULTANT RESPONSIBILITIES The selected consultant will be required to assume responsibility for all services offered in their proposals. The selected Consultant will be the sole point of contact with regard to contractual matters, including payment of any and all charges resulting from the contracts. O. DISCLOSURE Any information, other than cost and price, which a consultant does not wish to have disclosed, other than for the purpose of evaluation, should have each applicable sheet CITY OF SANTA ANA FIRE HYDRANT MAINTENANCE SERVICES City of Santa1r&I�.�ater Resources Page 7 of 11 or part marked "Confidential" — this data shall not be disclosed or duplicated, used or disclosed in whole or in part for any purpose other than to evaluate the response; provided that: the contract is awarded to this offeror, or as a result of or in connection with the submission of such information, the City shall have the right to duplicate, use or disclose this information to the extent provided in this contract. This restriction will not limit the City the right to use information contained herein if it is obtained from another source. P. DELAYS The City reserves the right to delay scheduled dates if it is to the advantage of the City. Q. RULES FOR PROPOSALS The signer of the proposals must declare in writing that the only person, persons, company or parties interested in the proposal as principals, are named therein; that the proposal is made without collusion with any other person, persons, company, or parties submitting a proposal; that it is in all respects fair and in good faith without collusion or fraud, and that the signer of the proposal has fully authority to bind the principal proposer. R. METHOD OF PAYMENT The consultant, shall submit monthly invoices to the City for the services rendered for that month. The invoice shall include a detailed breakdown of the services, limits, the tasks, the hours, and the unit costs. S. REGULATIONS The selected consultant will be expected to comply with all applicable federal, state and local regulations, building codes, and contract provisions. The ensuing contract shall contain such contractual provisions and conditions necessary to define a sound and complete agreement. T. INFORMATION REQUIRED FROM CONSULTANT Proposals shall be submitted in the format as described below: Organization and Credentials The name, address and telephone number of the person of whom correspondence should be directed and who has authority to negotiate on behalf of the firm. Provide a synopsis of the consultant's qualifications and past experience in Fire Hydrant Maintenance Services. Work Plan Provide a narrative rendition of the technical work plan and procedures required to perform the work as described in the Proposed Scope of Services. The following information must be included as a minimum: CITY OF SANTA ANA FIRE HYDRANT MAINTENANCE SERVICES City of Santa 191:.A" jlV �er Resources '' Page 8 of 1 1 • Show required task • Employee's designation and man-hours to complete each task • Total number of hours to complete the Scope of Work • Provide detailed information and an outline indicating the specific steps in each of the scope of services items of work to insure quality and control. Contractor shall submit a sample set of most recent Fire Hydrant Maintenance Services, including specific tasks and estimate. Staffing The consultant shall identify their Project Manager, and other key personnel to be assigned to the project, their qualifications, representative experience, and their capability to explore and resolve problems. Consultant shall submit copies of their personnel's Water Operator or Water Treatment Certifications issued by the State of California Department of Health Services. Certified operators are required at the time proposals are due, failure to submit proof of certification will result in disqualification. Once the agreement is executed, the contractor's staff shall not be substituted without the prior written approval of the City of Santa Ana. Sub -consultants The Consultant shall identify any sub -consultants it intends to employ in relation to this contract. The Consultant shall identify sub -consultant's qualifications and key personnel. The Consultant shall be held responsible for any and all work performed by the Consultant's sub -consultant. List any sub -consultants the Consultant intends to utilize and the percentage of work each sub -consultant will perform for each of the task. If the Consultant will not utilize a sub -consultant for any portion of this contract, the Consultant shall utilize this heading to make a statement declaring that no sub -consultants will be employed for this contract. References List a minimum of three (3) references from previous or existing projects in fire hydrant maintenance that the City may contact. Fee Schedule (Attachment D) The Consultant shall complete the fee schedule (Attachment D) for the proposed services. Consultant shall provide a table of total dollars and estimated person - hours for the items listed in Attachment D. CITY OF SANTA ANA FIRE HYDRANT MAINTENANCE SERVICES City of Santa 1191C A flter Resources `�' Page 9 of 11 Three (3) copies of the fee schedule (Attachment D) and Attachment A shall be separately bound, sealed and submitted to the City. The fee schedule shall include the following: • Rate per hydrant for hydrant refinishing and maintenance. The City reserves the right to increase or decrease the quantity fire hydrants to be maintained based on the unit prices provided. • Rate per hydrant for upper barrel repairs. These will be performed on an as -needed basis and at the discretion of the City • Rate per hydrant for lower barrel repairs. These will be performed on an as -needed basis and at the discretion of the City • Rate per hydrant for upper barrel replacement. These will be performed on an as -needed basis and at the discretion of the City • Rate per hydrant for bonnet repairs or replacements. These will be performed on an as -needed basis and at the discretion of the City Additional Information and Comments The contents under these headings are left to the discretion of the contractor. Material shall be pertinent to the proposal. U. CRITERIA FOR SELECTION The response to this Request for Fire Hydrant Maintenance Service Agreement should contain documentation of consultants and/or consultant's agency's credentials and expertise in this field. Substantial consideration will be given to contractors with demonstrable and documented experience in similar work. Responses will be evaluated on the basis of the qualifications, abilities, responsiveness of the proposing firms and fee schedules. The responses received will be reviewed by an evaluation committee appointed by the Executive Director of the Public Works Agency. All proposals received will be fully reviewed and rated by the Evaluation Committee. The ultimate Consultant selection will be based upon both technical merit and cost competitiveness. V. THE CITY'S AFFIRMATIVE ACTION PROGRAM The City has an affirmative action program. The purpose of the affirmative action program is to encourage certified minority business enterprises and women business enterprises. All submitting firms must have established affirmative action programs approvable by the City. The attached "Certification of Non -Discrimination by Consultants" shall be completed by each submitting firm and included in the proposal (Attachment A). CITY OF SANTA ANA FIRE HYDRANT MAINTENANCE SERVICES City of Santa 1191*0* _A�er Resources Page 10 of 1 1 W. INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS A certificate of insurance additional insured endorsement is enclosed for your reference (Attachment B). Please refer to the sample agreement for the necessary amounts of general liability, automotive, worker's compensation and professional liability insurance. The appropriate endorsements are also shown within the sample contract agreement (Attachment C). The certificate shall include the City of Santa Ana, its officers and employees as insured or additional insured. CITY OF SANTA ANA FIRE HYDRANT MAINTENANCE SERVICES City of Santa .A er Resources Page i I of 1 I CONTRACTOR AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this day of , 2010 by and between (hereinafter "Contractor"), and the City of Santa Ana, a charter city and municipal corporation organized and existing under the Constitution and laws of the State of California (hereinafter "City"). RECITALS A. The City desires to retain a contractor having special skill and knowledge to provide fire hydrant maintenance services. B. Contractor represents that Contractor is able and willing to provide such services to the City. C. In undertaking the performance of this Agreement, Contractor represents that it is knowledgeable in its field and that any services performed by Contractor under this Agreement will be performed in compliance with such standards as may reasonably be expected from a professional consulting firm in the field. NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual and respective promises, and subject to the terms and conditions hereinafter set forth, the parties agree as follows: 1. SCOPE OF SERVICES Contractor shall on provide fire hydrant maintenance service as set forth in Contractor's Proposal attached hereto as Exhibit A. 2. COMPENSATION a. City agrees to pay, and Contractor agrees to accept as total payment for its services, at the rates and charges set forth in Exhibit B. The total sum to be expended under this Agreement shall not exceed $ during the term of this Agreement. b. Payment by City shall be made within thirty (3 0) days following receipt of proper invoice evidencing work performed, subject to City accounting procedures. Payment need not be made for work which fails to meet the standards of performance set forth in the Recitals which may reasonably be expected by City. 3. TERM This Agreement shall commence on the date first written above and terminate on , unless terminated earlier in accordance with Section 12, below. 19C-14 4. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR Contractor shall, during the entire term of this Agreement, be construed to be an independent contractor and not an employee of the City. This Agreement is not intended nor shall it be construed to create an employer-employee relationship, a joint venture relationship, or to allow the City to exercise discretion or control over the professional manner in which Contractor performs the services which are the subject matter of this Agreement; however, the services to be provided by Contractor shall be provided in a manner consistent with all applicable standards and regulations governing such services. Contractor shall pay all salaries and wages, employer's social security taxes, unemployment insurance and similar taxes relating to employees and shall be responsible for all applicable withholding taxes. 5. INSURANCE Prior to undertaking performance of work under this Agreement, Contractor shall maintain and shall require its subcontractors, if any, to obtain and maintain insurance as described below: a. Commercial General Liability Insurance. Contractor shall maintain commercial general liability insurance which shall include, but not be limited to protection against claims arising from bodily and personal injury, including death resulting therefrom and damage to property, resulting from any act or occurrence arising out of Contractor's operations in the performance of this Agreement, including, without limitation, acts involving vehicles. The amounts of insurance shall be not less than the following: single limit coverage applying to bodily and personal injury, including death resulting therefrom, and property damage, in the total amount of $1,000,000 per occurrence. Such insurance shall (a) name the City, its officers, employees, agents, volunteers and representatives as additional insured(s); (b) be primary with respect to insurance or self-insurance programs maintained by the City; and (c) contain standard separation of insureds provisions. b. Business automobile liability insurance, or equivalent form, with a combined single limit of not less than $1,000,000 per occurrence. Such insurance shall include coverage for owned, hired and non -owned automobiles. c. Worker's Compensation Insurance. In accordance with the provisions of Section 3300 of the Labor Code, Contractor, if Contractor has any employees, is required to be insured against liability for worker's compensation or to undertake self-insurance. Prior to commencing the performance of the work under this Agreement, Contractor agrees to obtain and maintain any employer's liability insurance with limits not less than $1,000,000 per accident. d. The following requirements apply to the insurance to be provided by Contractor pursuant to this section: (i) Contractor shall maintain all insurance required above in full force and effect for the entire period covered by this Agreement. (ii) Certificates of insurance shall be furnished to the City upon execution of this Agreement and shall be approved in form by the City Attorney. 19C-15 (iii) Certificates and policies shall state that the policies shall not be canceled or reduced in coverage or changed in any other material aspect without thirty (30) days prior written notice to the City. e. If Contractor fails or refuses to produce or maintain the insurance required by this section or fails or refuses to furnish the City with required proof that insurance has been procured and is in force and paid for, the City shall have the right, at the City's election, to forthwith terminate this Agreement. Such termination shall not effect Contractor's right to be paid for its time and materials expended prior to notification of termination. Contractor waives the right to receive compensation and agrees to indemnify the City for any work performed prior to approval of insurance by the City. 6. INDEMNIFICATION Contractor agrees to and shall indemnify and hold harmless the City, its officers, agents, employees, Contractors, special counsel, and representatives from liability for personal injury, damages, just compensation, restitution, judicial or equitable relief arising out of claims for personal injury, including health, and claims for property damage, which may arise from the direct or indirect operations of the Contractor or its contractors, subcontractors, agents, employees, or other persons acting on their behalf which relates to the services described in section 1 of this Agreement. This indemnity and hold harmless agreement applies to all claims for damages, just compensation, restitution, judicial or equitable relief suffered, or alleged to have been suffered, by reason of the events referred to in this Section or by reason of the terms of, or effects, arising from this Agreement. The Contractor further agrees to indemnify, hold harmless, and pay all costs for the defense of the City, including fees and costs for special counsel to be selected by the City, regarding any action by a third party asserting that personal injury, damages, just compensation, restitution, judicial or equitable relief due to personal or property rights arises by reason of the terms of, or effects arising from this Agreement. City may make all reasonable decisions with respect to its representation in any legal proceeding. 7. CONFIDENTIALITY If Contractor receives from the City information which due to the nature of such information is reasonably understood to be confidential and/or proprietary, Contractor agrees that it shall not use or disclose such information except in the performance of this Agreement, and further agrees to exercise the same degree of care it uses to protect its own information of like importance, but in no event less than reasonable care. "Confidential Information" shall include all nonpublic information. Confidential information includes not only written information, but also information transferred orally, visually, electronically, or by other means. Confidential information disclosed to either party by any subsidiary and/or agent of the other party is covered by this Agreement. The foregoing obligations of non-use and nondisclosure shall not apply to any information that (a) has been disclosed in publicly available sources; (b) is, through no fault of the Contractor disclosed in a publicly available source; (c) is in rightful possession of the Contractor without an obligation of confidentiality; (d) is required to be disclosed by operation of law; or (e) is independently developed by the Contractor without reference to information disclosed by the City. 19C-16 8. CONFLICT OF INTEREST CLAUSE Contractor covenants that it presently has no interests and shall not have interests, direct or indirect, which would conflict in any manner with performance of services specified under this Agreement. 9. NOTICE Any notice, tender, demand, delivery, or other communication pursuant to this Agreement shall be in writing and shall be deemed to be properly given if delivered in person or mailed by first class or certified mail, postage prepaid, or sent by telefacsimile or other telegraphic communication in the manner provided in this Section, to the following persons: To City: Public Works Agency — Water Division City of Santa Ana 220 South Daisy Avenue Santa Ana, CA 92703 telefacsimile (714) 647-3378 Attn: Cesar Barrera To Contractor: A party may change its address by giving notice in writing to the other party. Thereafter, any communication shall be addressed and transmitted to the new address. If sent by mail, communication shall be effective or deemed to have been given three (3) days after it has been deposited in the United States mail, duly registered or certified, with postage prepaid, and addressed as set forth above. If sent by telefacsimile, any communication shall be effective or deemed to have been given twenty-four (24) hours after the time set forth on the transmission report issued by the transmitting facsimile machine, addressed as set forth above. For purposes of calculating these time frames, weekends, federal, state, County or City holidays shall be excluded. 10. EXCLUSIVITY AND AMENDMENT This Agreement represents the complete and exclusive statement between the City and Contractor, and supersedes any and all other agreements, oral or written, between the parties. In the event of a conflict between the terms of this Agreement and any attachments hereto, the terms of this Agreement shall prevail. This Agreement may not be modified except by written instrument signed by the City and by an authorized representative of Contractor. The parties agree that any terms or conditions of any purchase order or other instrument that are inconsistent with, or in addition to, the terms and conditions hereof, shall not bind or obligate Contractor nor the City. Each party to this Agreement acknowledges that no representations, inducements, 19C-17 promises or agreements, orally or otherwise, have been made by any party, or anyone acting on behalf of any party, which are not embodied herein. 11. ASSIGNMENT Inasmuch as this Agreement is intended to secure the specialized services of Contractor, Contractor may not assign, transfer, delegate, or subcontract any interest herein without the prior written consent of the City and any such assignment, transfer, delegation or subcontract without the City's prior written consent shall be considered null and void. Nothing in this Agreement shall be construed to limit the City's ability to have any of the services which are the subject to this Agreement performed by City personnel or by other Contractors retained by City. 12. TERMINATION This Agreement may be terminated by the City upon thirty (30) days written notice of termination. In such event, Contractor shall be entitled to receive and the City shall pay Contractor compensation for all services performed by Contractor prior to receipt of such notice of termination, subject to the following conditions: a. As a condition of such payment, the Executive Director may require Contractor to deliver to the City all work product completed as of such date, and in such case such work product shall be the property of the City unless prohibited by law, and Contractor consents to the City's use thereof for such purposes as the City deems appropriate. b. Payment need not be made for work which fails to meet the standard of performance specified in the Recitals of this Agreement. 13. DISCRIMINATION Contractor shall not discriminate because of race, color, creed, religion, sex, marital status, sexual orientation, age, national origin, ancestry, or disability, as defined and prohibited by applicable law, in the recruitment, selection, training, utilization, promotion, termination or other employment related activities. Contractor affirms that it is an equal opportunity employer and shall comply with all applicable federal, state and local laws and regulations. 14. JURISDICTION - VENUE This Agreement has been executed and delivered in the State of California and the validity, interpretation, performance, and enforcement of any of the clauses of this Agreement shall be determined and governed by the laws of the State of California. Both parties further agree that Orange County, California, shall be the venue for any action or proceeding that may be brought or arise out of, in connection with or by reason of this Agreement. 15. PROFESSIONAL LICENSES Contractor shall, throughout the term of this Agreement, maintain all necessary licenses, permits, approvals, waivers, and exemptions necessary for the provision of the services 19C-18 hereunder and required by the laws and regulations of the United States, the State of California, the City of Santa Ana and all other governmental agencies. Contractor shall notify the City immediately and in writing of its inability to obtain or maintain such permits, licenses, approvals, waivers, and exemptions. Said inability shall be cause for termination of this Agreement. 16. MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS a. Each undersigned represents and warrants that its signature hereinbelow has the power, authority and right to bind their respective parties to each of the terms of this Agreement, and shall indemnify City fully, including reasonable costs and attorney's fees, for any injuries or damages to City in the event that such authority or power is not, in fact, held by the signatory or is withdrawn. b. All Exhibits referenced herein and attached hereto shall be incorporated as if fully set forth in the body of this Agreement. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement the date and year first above written. CITY OF SANTA ANA ATTEST: MARIA D. HUIZAR DAVID N. REAM Clerk of the Council City Manager APPROVED AS TO FORM: JOSEPH W. FLETCHER City Attorney CONTRACTOR RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL RAUL GODINEZ II Executive Director Public Works Agency (NAME) (Title) Tax ID# 19C-19 potential impacts created by the use and ensure that the use will not negatively affect the surrounding community. 2. Will the proposed use under the circumstances of the particular case be detrimental to the health, safety or general welfare of persons residing or working in the vicinity? The proposed amendment to allow dancing at the location will not be detrimental to persons residing or working in the area because the use, as conditioned, will not create any negative or adverse impacts. Dancing will occur within the premises and is incidental to the restaurant use. 3. Will the proposed use adversely affect the present economic stability or future economic development of properties surrounding the area? The project site is located within the City Place development and is suitable for the proposed use. The provision of dancing at the Geisha House restaurant will increase the patronage to the restaurant and number of visitors to the development, thereby enhancing the profitability of the business and economic stability of the area. 4. Will the proposed use comply with the regulations and conditions specified in Chapter 41 for such use? As conditioned, the allowance of dancing will be in compliance with all applicable regulations and conditions imposed on a restaurant selling beer, wine and distilled spirits pursuant to Specific Development No. 59 and Chapters 11 and 41 of the Santa Ana Municipal Code. 5. Will the proposed use adversely affect the General Plan or any specific plan of the City? The proposed use will not adversely affect the General Plan. Policy 2.2 of the Land Use Element encourages land uses that accommodate the City's needs for goods and services. A restaurant with ancillary dancing provides an additional amenity to the existing dining service and the residents of Santa Ana. F. In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act, the recommended action is exempt from further review pursuant to Section 15301. This Class 1 exemption allows the licensing of an existing use with no expansion. Categorical Exemption No. 2010-xx will be filed for this project. Section 2. The Zoning Adminstrator of the City of Santa Ana hereby, approves the modifications to Conditional Use Permit No. 2008-32 as conditioned in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and incorporated herein. This decision is based upon the evidence 19C-20 Resolution No. 2010-xx Page 2 of 3 CONTRACTOR AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this day of , 2010 by and between (hereinafter "Contractor"), and the City of Santa Ana, a charter city and municipal corporation organized and existing under the Constitution and laws of the State of California (hereinafter "City"). RECITALS A. The City desires to retain a contractor having special skill and knowledge to provide fire hydrant maintenance services. B. Contractor represents that Contractor is able and willing to provide such services to the City. C. In undertaking the performance of this Agreement, Contractor represents that it is knowledgeable in its field and that any services performed by Contractor under this Agreement will be performed in compliance with such standards as may reasonably be expected from a professional consulting firm in the field. NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual and respective promises, and subject to the terms and conditions hereinafter set forth, the parties agree as follows: 1. SCOPE OF SERVICES Contractor shall on provide fire hydrant maintenance service as set forth in Contractor's Proposal attached hereto as Exhibit A. 2. COMPENSATION a. City agrees to pay, and Contractor agrees to accept as total payment for its services, at the rates and charges set forth in Exhibit B. The total sum to be expended under this Agreement shall not exceed $ during the term of this Agreement. b. Payment by City shall be made within thirty (30) days following receipt of proper invoice evidencing work performed, subject to City accounting procedures. Payment need not be made for work which fails to meet the standards of performance set forth in the Recitals which may reasonably be expected by City. 3. TERM This Agreement shall commence on the date first written above and terminate on , unless terminated earlier in accordance with Section 12, below. 19C-21 4. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR Contractor shall, during the entire term of this Agreement, be construed to be an independent contractor and not an employee of the City. This Agreement is not intended nor shall it be construed to create an employer-employee relationship, a joint venture relationship, or to allow the City to exercise discretion or control over the professional manner in which . Contractor performs the services which are the subject matter of this Agreement; however, the services to be provided by Contractor shall be provided in a manner consistent with all applicable standards and regulations governing such services. Contractor shall pay all salaries and wages, employer's social security taxes, unemployment insurance and similar taxes relating to employees and shall be responsible for all applicable withholding taxes. 5. INSURANCE Prior to undertaking performance of work under this Agreement, Contractor shall maintain and shall require its subcontractors, if any, to obtain and maintain insurance as described below: a. Commercial General Liability Insurance. Contractor shall maintain commercial general liability insurance which shall include, but not be limited to protection against claims arising from bodily and personal injury, including death resulting therefrom and damage to property, resulting from any act or occurrence arising out of Contractor's operations in the performance of this Agreement, including, without limitation, acts involving vehicles. The amounts of insurance shall be not less than the following: single limit coverage applying to bodily and personal injury, including death resulting therefrom, and property damage, in the total amount of $1,000,000 per occurrence. Such insurance shall (a) name the City, its officers, employees, agents, volunteers and representatives as additional insured(s); (b) be primary with respect to insurance or self-insurance programs maintained by the City; and (c) contain standard separation of insureds provisions. b. Business automobile liability insurance, or equivalent form, with a combined single limit of not less than $1,000,000 per occurrence. Such insurance shall include coverage for owned, hired and non -owned automobiles. c. Worker's Compensation Insurance. In accordance with the provisions of Section 3300 of the Labor Code, Contractor, if Contractor has any employees, is required to be insured against liability for worker's compensation or to undertake self-insurance. Prior to commencing the performance of the work under this Agreement, Contractor agrees to obtain and maintain any employer's liability insurance with limits not less than $1,000,000 per accident. d. The following requirements apply to the insurance to be provided by Contractor pursuant to this section: (i) Contractor shall maintain all insurance required above in full force and effect for the entire period covered by this Agreement. (ii) Certificates of insurance shall be fiimished to the City upon execution of this Agreement and shall be approved in form by the City Attorney. 19C-22 (iii) Certificates and policies shall state that the policies shall not be canceled or reduced in coverage or changed in any other material aspect without thirty (30) days prior written notice to the City. e. If Contractor fails or refuses to produce or maintain the insurance required by this section or fails or refuses to furnish the City with required proof that insurance has been procured and is in force and paid for, the City shall have the right, at the City's election, to forthwith terminate this Agreement. Such termination shall not effect Contractor's right to be paid for its time and materials expended prior to notification of termination. Contractor waives the right to receive compensation and agrees to indemnify the City for any work performed prior to approval of insurance by the City. 6. INDEMNIFICATION Contractor agrees to and shall indemnify and hold harmless the City, its officers, agents, employees, Contractors, special counsel, and representatives from liability for personal injury, damages, just compensation, restitution, judicial or equitable relief arising out of claims for personal injury, including health, and claims for property damage, which may arise from the direct or indirect operations of the Contractor or its contractors, subcontractors, agents, employees, or other persons acting on their behalf which relates to the services described in section 1 of this Agreement. This indemnity and hold harmless agreement applies to all claims for damages, just compensation, restitution, judicial or equitable relief suffered, or alleged to have been suffered, by reason of the events referred to in this Section or by reason of the terms of, or effects, arising from this Agreement. The Contractor further agrees to indemnify, hold harmless, and pay all costs for the defense of the City, including fees and costs for special counsel to be selected by the City, regarding any action by a third party asserting that personal injury, damages, just compensation, restitution, judicial or equitable relief due to personal or property rights arises by reason of the terms of, or effects arising from this Agreement. City may make all reasonable decisions with respect to its representation in any legal proceeding. 7. CONFIDENTIALITY If Contractor receives from the City information which due to the nature of such information is reasonably understood to be confidential and/or proprietary, Contractor agrees that it shall not use or disclose such information except in the performance of this Agreement, and further agrees to exercise the same degree of care it uses to protect its own information of like importance, but in no event less than reasonable care. "Confidential Information" shall include all nonpublic information. Confidential information includes not only written information, but also information transferred orally, visually, electronically, or by other means. Confidential information disclosed to either party by any subsidiary and/or agent of the other party is covered by this Agreement. The foregoing obligations of non-use and nondisclosure shall not apply to any information that (a) has been disclosed in publicly available sources; (b) is, through no fault of the Contractor disclosed in a publicly available source; (c) is in rightful possession of the Contractor without an obligation of confidentiality; (d) is required to be disclosed by operation of law; or (e) is independently developed by the Contractor without reference to information disclosed by the City. 19C-23 8. CONFLICT OF INTEREST CLAUSE Contractor covenants that it presently has no interests and shall not have interests, direct or indirect, which would conflict in any manner with performance of services specified under this Agreement. 9. NOTICE Any notice, tender, demand, delivery, or other communication pursuant to this Agreement shall be in writing and shall be deemed to be properly given if delivered in person or mailed by first class or certified mail, postage prepaid, or sent by telefacsimile or other telegraphic communication in the manner provided in this Section, to the following persons: To City: Public Works Agency — Water Division City of Santa Ana 220 South Daisy Avenue Santa Ana, CA 92703 telefacsimile (714) 647-3378 Attn: Cesar Barrera To Contractor: A party may change its address by giving notice in writing to the other party. Thereafter, any communication shall be addressed and transmitted to the new address. If sent by mail, communication shall be effective or deemed to have been given three (3) days after it has been deposited in the United States mail, duly registered or certified, with postage prepaid, and addressed as set forth above. If sent by telefacsimile, any communication shall be effective or deemed to have been given twenty-four (24) hours after the time set forth on the transmission report issued by the transmitting facsimile machine, addressed as set forth above. For purposes of calculating these time frames, weekends, federal, state, County or City holidays shall be excluded. 10. EXCLUSIVITY AND AMENDMENT This Agreement represents the complete and exclusive statement between the City and Contractor, and supersedes any and all other agreements, oral or written, between the parties. In the event of a conflict between the terms of this Agreement and any attachments hereto, the terms of this Agreement shall prevail. This Agreement may not be modified except by written instrument signed by the City and by an authorized representative of Contractor. The parties agree that any terms or conditions of any purchase order or other instrument that are inconsistent with, or in addition to, the terms and conditions hereof, shall not bind or obligate Contractor nor the City. Each party to this Agreement acknowledges that no representations, inducements, 19C-24 promises or agreements, orally or otherwise, have been made by any party, or anyone acting on behalf of any party, which are not embodied herein. 11. ASSIGNMENT Inasmuch as this Agreement is intended to secure the specialized services of Contractor, Contractor may not assign, transfer, delegate, or subcontract any interest herein without the prior written consent of the City and any such assignment, transfer, delegation or subcontract without the City's prior written consent shall be considered null and void. Nothing in this Agreement shall be construed to limit the City's ability to have any of the services which are the subject to this Agreement performed by City personnel or by other Contractors retained by City. 12. TERMINATION This Agreement may be terminated by the City upon thirty (30) days written notice of termination. In such event, Contractor shall be entitled to receive and the City shall pay Contractor compensation for all services performed by Contractor prior to receipt of such notice of termination, subject to the following conditions: a. As a condition of such payment, the Executive Director may require Contractor to deliver to the City all work product completed as of such date, and in such case such work product shall be the property of the City unless prohibited by law, and Contractor consents to the City's use thereof for such purposes as the City deems appropriate. b. Payment need not be made for work which fails to meet the standard of performance specified in the Recitals of this Agreement. 13. DISCRIMINATION Contractor shall not discriminate because of race, color, creed, religion, sex, marital status, sexual orientation, age, national origin, ancestry, or disability, as defined and prohibited by applicable law, in the recruitment, selection, training, utilization, promotion, termination or other employment related activities. Contractor affirms that it is an equal opportunity employer and shall comply with all applicable federal, state and local laws and regulations. 14. JURISDICTION - VENUE This Agreement has been executed and delivered in the State of California and the validity, interpretation, performance, and enforcement of any of the clauses of this Agreement shall be determined and governed by the laws of the State of California. Both parties further agree that Orange County, California, shall be the venue for any action or proceeding that may be brought or arise out of, in connection with or by reason of this Agreement. 15. PROFESSIONAL LICENSES Contractor shall, throughout the term of this Agreement, maintain all necessary licenses, permits, approvals, waivers, and exemptions necessary for the provision of the services 19C-25 hereunder and required by the laws and regulations of the United States, the State of California, the City of Santa Ana and all other governmental agencies. Contractor shall notify the City immediately and in writing of its inability to obtain or maintain such permits, licenses, approvals, waivers, and exemptions. Said inability shall be cause for termination of this Agreement. 16. MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS a. Each undersigned represents and warrants that its signature hereinbelow has the power, authority and right to bind their respective parties to each of the terms of this Agreement, and shall indemnify City fully, including reasonable costs and attorney's fees, for any injuries or damages to City in the event that such authority or power is not, in fact, held by the signatory or is withdrawn. b. All Exhibits referenced herein and attached hereto shall be incorporated as if fully set forth in the body of this Agreement. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement the date and year first above written. ATTEST: MARIA D. HUIZAR Clerk of the Council APPROVED AS TO FORM: JOSEPH W. FLETCHER City Attorney RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL RAUL GODINEZ II Executive Director Public Works Agency CITY OF SANTA ANA DAVID N. REAM City Manager CONTRACTOR (NAME) (Title) Tax ID# 19C-26 MAYOR Miguel A. Pulido MAYOR PRO TEM Claudia C. Alvarez COUNCIL MEMBERS P. David Benavides Carlos Bustamante Michele Martinez Vincent F. Sarmiento Sal Tinajero August 16, 2010 The Honorable Kim Dunning Presiding Judge of the Superior Court 700 Civic Center Drive West Santa Ana, CA 92701 Dear Judge Dunning: � A K, A AIN A CITY MANAGER David N. Ream CITY ATTORNEY Joseph W. Fletcher CLERK OF THE COUNCIL Maria D. Huizar This letter is in response to the 2009-2010 Orange County Grand Jury Report entitled "Santa Ana Street Car Project." The City Council approved the content of this letter and the responses at their August 16, 2010 meeting and directed me to convey them on its behalf. Below are the Mayor's and City Council's responses to Findings F-1 through F-5 and Recommendations R-1 through R-5 as required by the report. POTENTIAL CONFLICT OF INTEREST/BIAS OF A GRAND JURY MEMBER As a preliminary matter, the City Council wishes to raise the issue of potential conflict of interest on the part of one member of the grand jury whose presence and participation may have tainted the entire report. That member has been an active civic participant in Santa Ana for many years. He was serving as a city commissioner at the time this investigation began and was removed from his position by the City Council in October 2009 for reasons unrelated to this investigation or his membership on the Grand Jury. We believe that these along with other facts are sufficient grounds for the subject member to have been required to abstain from any participation in this investigation. Many California grand juries have adopted formal rules and procedures for conducting their investigations and several include standards for abstention. Among the counties that have posted their grand jury procedures on their websites are: Humboldt, Imperial, Mariposa, Mendocino and Modoc Counties. At least two of these counties also rely upon the Grand Jury Resource Manual for California Courts -Model Guide for Civil Grand Jurors -2005 (the "Model Guide"). Under separate cover, the City staff has provided copies of these manuals for your review. All of the guides in one way or another require a grand juror to abstain from participating in or influencing an investigation in which he/she is biased or otherwise has a conflict of interest. The Orange County website does not contain any reference to rules for abstention. The City Attorney 20 CIVIC CENTER PLAZA • P.O. BOX 1988 IgVNI CALIFORNIA 92702 TELEPHONE(714) 647-6900 The Honorable Judge Kim Dunning August 16, 2010 Page 2 was informed by the Orange County Counsel that the Orange County Grand Jury does not have any such formal or published rules or standards. The standard for abstention is best articulated in the Model Guide. In reference to abstention by grand jury members for conflict of interest, it states on page 8: "Because of the grand jury's extraordinary fact-finding powers and the sensitivity of many of its activities, grand jurors must be careful to avoid involvement in areas where an actual or perceived conflict of interest might exist. Avoiding conflicts and the appearance of conflicts is important for several reasons. It protects the integrity of the investigation; it protects the investigation of the grand jury as an institution; and it protects individual grand jurors from civil or criminal penalties." Additionally, the County of Mendocino 2009 Grand Jury Procedures Manual requires all grand jurors to sign a Code of Ethical Conduct. Among the obligations assumed thereunder, each grand juror agrees: "I will disclose to the Foreperson and/or the entire Grand Jury, any potential conflicts of interest I may have or that may exist, either at the beginning of the term, or that may develop during the term of my service on the Grand Jury. When I have a conflict of interest, either real or perceived, I will abstain from investigations, discussions, voting and report writing on such matters. I will abide by any decision of the executive committee in matters concerning whether or not a conflict of interest exists." One of common grounds for abstention by grand jurors is bias. The Model Guide refers to conflict of interest for bias at pages 8 & 9: "In addition to avoiding conflicts of interest, a grand juror must not have an identifiable bias regarding any actions that the grand jury may take. Bias is the prejudgment of essential facts that prevents a member of the grand jury from considering an issue objectively, including publicly expressing support or opposition on a specific matter. Having an educated opinion on an issue should not be considered as having a bias. The same disclosure and recusal that applies to a potential conflict of interest should apply to preexisting bias." The Humboldt County guide also clearly sets standards for abstention and the nexus between bias and abstention on Page 44 as follows: "Members of the grand jury must avoid any appearance of personal bias or possible conflict of interest. Impartiality is an essential part of constructive investigation. Each grand juror should advise the foreperson of any potential conflict of interest or bias. When a grand juror has cause to believe that a matter i P] 5• The Honorable Judge Kim Dunning August 16, 2010 Page 3 to be discussed or voted on would involve a bias, said juror should abstain from both discussing and voting on the matter. Appropriate counsel should be asked if there is any question in this matter." This situation is exacerbated by inconsistent statements and contradictory actions of the grand jury in this matter. In late September 2009, a member of the City Council was interviewed by members of the grand jury. At that time, the councilmember expressed concern about participation by the subject member. In response, the councilmember was told that the subject member would not participate due to his potential conflict of interest. In late October 2009, a city staff member and another councilmember were interviewed by members of the grand jury and the subject member actively questioned the city officials in both interviews. Because of the admonition given to witnesses not to disclose their testimony, the city staff member and second councilmember were neither aware that the other councilmember had already been interviewed nor that the subject member was supposedly recused from the investigation. It is worth noting that this grand jury member was removed from the city commission just days before the city staff member and second councilmember were interviewed. Due to grand jury secrecy, we are not able to determine what further involvement the subject member had in the investigation or whether he sought or obtained advice on his participation. But merely based upon the inconsistent and contradictory actions of the Grand Jury recited in this letter and the standards imposed on grand juries in other counties, the Santa Ana City Council believes that this investigation and report are irreparably tainted by the participation by a member with a potential conflict of interest and potential bias. RESPONSES TO FINDINGS FINDING F-1: Inadequate RFP: Santa Ana political leaders and administrative staff followed inconsistent and inadequate guidelines in developing the Request for Proposal and inadequate documentation in support of their final decision. The original RFP stated the scope of the project but did not include the transit vision of the Mayor and Council. RESPONSE: We disagree wholly with the statement that staff followed inconsistent and inadequate guidelines in developing the Request for Proposal and inadequate documentation in support of their final decision. In fact, the City went beyond its normal procedure by first sending out a Request for Qualifications to pre -qualify firms. Request for Proposals were then sent out to those firms that were pre -qualified to perform the work. We also disagree with the statement that the original RFP scope of the project did not include the Mayor and Council Transit Vision. On page 5 of the RFP, under Background, paragraph 3, the Council and the Mayor's Transit Vision is clearly stated. The Honorable Judge Kim Dunning August 16, 2010 Page 4 FINDING F-2: Recommendations of Expert Panel Ignored: Santa Ana City staff created an expert panel to evaluate the capabilities of the three applicant groups but the findings from this evaluation were ignored in awarding the final contract. The contract was awarded to the lowest - rated bidder with a poorly documented process. RESPONSE: We disagree wholly. The City Council did not ignore the recommendation of the selection panel. Rather, it fully considered the panel's recommendation and instead proposed a hybrid team structure that could have included Parsons Brinkerhoff. Parsons Brinkerhoff (PB) had been recommended and retained previously for Step 1 of this process to prepare an initial needs assessment and transit vision for the City. As such, the City Council was fully aware of the strengths and weaknesses of PB's work product and project approach, which formed the basis for their desire to set this recommendation aside and go with a different firm to lead the team of consultants. As the final decision-making body on this contract, the City Council operated well within its rights. FINDING F-3: Mismanagement of Planning Funds: The process for awarding the Phase II planning funds was mismanaged and compromised by miscommunications and lack of direction between City Council and staff. RESPONSE: We disagree wholly with this finding and believe the title is inaccurate and misleading. While this title implies that there is wholesale mismanagement of the project's funds, the text under this finding limits its criticism to the process for awarding this contract. As stated in our response to findings F.1 and F.2, the City's selection and award process went above and beyond the normal practice by conducting both a RFQ and RFP process. Furthermore, the selection process was more rigorous than usual with the convening of a selection panel by City staff, and further interviews with City Council's Transportation Committee. Given the importance and magnitude of this project, the extra steps and rigor seem appropriate, and it must be pointed out the final fee structure saved significant costs over the PB proposal. Finally, to respond to this finding's inaccurate and misleading title, the project funding is being spent in direct alignment with the intent of Measure M's Project S criteria, and as a further check, there are regular meetings with OCTA, the project sponsor. FINDING F-4: The Project is Behind Schedule: Delays in the contract process put the Santa Ana Street Car Project several months behind its original schedule which could affect future funding. There continue to be problems in meeting critical deadlines. RESPONSE: We disagree wholly with this finding. While it took six months to finalize and negotiate a contract, the project is currently on track to be completed by December 2011 to meet our original schedule. We have not missed any deadlines for funding opportunities. The City is planning to apply for preliminary engineering funding for the 19D-4 The Honorable Judge Kim Dunning August 16, 2010 Page 5 M2 Call for Projects in the fall of 2010, and we are on schedule to meet critical milestone dates for future local and federal funding opportunities. FINDING F-5: Lack of Transparency: Elected City officials violated the intent and specific provisions of their Code of Ethics and Conduct as well as provisions of AB 1234, the Government Transparency and Fair Process Act. City leaders and elected officials failed to provide transparency and public input in the contract award, possibly violating the Brown Act. RESPONSE: We disagree wholly with this finding. In all three cases, the report erroneously relies upon inaccurate and misleading statements of the law. In fact, when the particular standards are evaluated, it is evident that either the law has no application to the facts in the report or the report is totally lacking of evidence to support the conclusion. Further, when reliance upon these resources is stripped from the report, the remainder lacks substance and is reduced to rumor and innuendo. As such, these sections and all references to their content should be stricken from the report. Sections 4.7 through 4.9 of the Report as well as Finding F.5 rely upon three legal resources to support their conclusions: The City of Santa Ana Code of Ethics, AB 1234 (California Government Code Sections 53234-53235.2) and The Ralph M. Brown Act (California Government Code Sections 54950-54960.5) No City Code of Ethics Violation Section 4.7 of the report states that the "... City Council actions in awarding the final . . . agreement to Cordoba Corp. violated the intent of the published Code of Ethics and Conduct." In reaching this conclusion, the Grand Jury cited to non-existent sections of the Code of Ethics. The provisions that the report asserts are contained in the Code of Ethics are, in fact, merely preliminary findings of the City Council as part of the resolution adopting the Ethics Code. They are not part of the Code at all. The Santa Ana Ethics Code, a copy of which is attached to this letter, does not contain any standards or requirements that have any application to the subject matter of the report. No AB1234 Violation Section 4.8 attempts to establish that various aspects of the process violated specific State -imposed standards for transparency in governmental decision-making. The Report completely and materially misrepresents both the intent and the letter of what it describes as AB 1234. Assembly Bill 1234, passed in 2005, primarily deals with standards for compensation and payment of travel expenses for various local officials, and arose from perceived abuses by several special districts in the state. The only portion of AB 1234 that even arguably addresses issues of ethics and transparency are Government Code Sections 53234 - 53235.2 which require local elected officials to receive biennial "ethics" training. Nothing in these sections, however, establish "standards for government officials in the conduct of their duties" as postulated by the report. Specifically nowhere in AB 1234 are found the five bulleted requirements 19D-5 The Honorable Judge Kim Dunning August 16, 2010 Page 6 for conduct or prohibited activities listed in the second paragraph of Section 4.7 of the report. No Brown Act Violation The most egregious misstatement by the Grand Jury in the report is the allegation in Section 4.9 that the City Council engaged in conduct that "possibly" violated the Brown Act. The Ralph M. Brown Act is a set of standards for the conduct of public meetings. At all times, Santa Ana city councils have complied fully with both the letter and intent of the Brown Act and the current City Council and City Manager are fully aware of the Brown Act standards regarding serial meetings and the limits of staff -Council communications. The Report contains absolutely no facts to support the inference that the absence of a noticed meeting of either the Transportation Committee or the City Council between March 16 and April 20 meant that city officials facilitated inappropriate communications among members of the City Council for the purpose of developing a consensus regarding Cordoba, or otherwise. In regard to the speculation in the last paragraph of Section 4.9 about close contacts between the City Manager and members of the City Council during the time in question, we must point out that Section 54952.2(b)(2) of the Brown Act expressly permits "...an employee or official of a local agency.... [to engage] in separate conversations ... outside of a meeting ... with members of a legislative body in order to answer questions or provide information regarding a matter .... if that person does not communicate to members of the legislative body the comments or position of any other member or members of the legislative body." In the face of contrary statutory authority and in the absence of any material evidence, the Report engages in rank speculation when it states: "[w]itnesses interviewed by the Grand Jury revealed that the City Manager's close contact with all of the Council members during this period took place outside public view. The City Council may have come to a consensus on the Cordoba proposal by using the City Manager as an intermediary among all parties." RESPONSES TO RECOMMENDATIONS RECOMMENDATION R-1: The City of Santa Ana should develop specific guidelines in its RFP process, specifying all program requirements used to evaluate applicants, including the scope and vision of the leadership. RESPONSE: The recommendation has been implemented. RFPs issued by the City include a detailed scope of work and identify the key factors to be evaluated in the selection process. These are standard provisions in RFPs. To reinforce this current practice, and to specifically address the Grand Jury's recommendation, the City Council approved a policy at their May 3, 2010 meeting regarding RFPs/RFQs that clearly states P.J 1i, The Honorable Judge Kim Dunning August 16, 2010 Page 7 the requirement to identify project vision, scope and evaluation criteria. It should be noted that the RFP for the Santa Ana Street Car Project was very detailed in its description of the City's vision and expectations for work and schedule relating to the services solicited. Further, the selection criteria was clearly articulated in the RFP. Thus, we concur that RFPs should contain the information noted by the Grand Jury so that all applicants are equally informed at the onset of the process, and expectations are clearly defined. RECOMMENDATION R-2: City Council should give full consideration to the findings of the duly appointed evaluation team and publicly disclose, with justification, at a Council meeting any deviation from the team's recommendation so as not to jeopardize public confidence. RESPONSE: The recommendation has been implemented. It should be noted that the City Council is the final decision making body authorized to approve consultant and project contracts that exceed $25,000 in value. Although an evaluation panel and/or staff may make recommendations, the City Council is the final authority. City staff will continue to work together with the City Council, in the event modifications to the panel or staff recommendation are made, so that the City Council clearly articulate at a public meeting the reasons for making a different selection, if in fact they do so. With regard to this specific project, there were several public meetings during which the selection of the consultant team was discussed. The City Council Transportation Subcommittee held a meeting on March 16, 2009, at which time they interviewed the three RFP finalists. On April 20, 2009, the City Council, at their regularly scheduled public meeting, directed the City Manager to negotiate a hybrid team of qualified consultants and return to the City Council for final approval. During this same meeting, the City Council specifically directed staff to work with Cordoba Corporation, Parsons Brinkerhoff, David Evans and Associates, IBI and URS (all prime or subconsultants who submitted proposals) to undertake Step 2 of the Go Local project. The final outcome was approved at a publicly held and noticed City Council meeting on August 3, 2009 where Cordoba Corporation was given lead status and instructed to work with David Evans, URS, HNTB, and LTK in a hybrid team approach. It should be noted that Cordoba Corporation is receiving less than 37.3% of the total compensation awarded under the approved contract. RECOMMENDATION R-3: The City of Santa Ana should develop guidelines to improve the awarding of contracts to better reflect the expectations of the elected officials and direct professional staff accordingly. RESPONSE: The recommendation has been implemented. As stated in response #1, on May 3, 2010, the City Council modified its policy for the issuance of requests for proposals or qualifications to ensure that the City Council's policy direction is reflected better in the City's RFP processes. All major project and consultant service contracts will first be reviewed and approved by the City Council at a regularly scheduled City 19D-7 The Honorable Judge Kim Dunning August 16, 2010 Page 8 Council meeting. The detailed scope of work for such services, as well as the intended selection process for the contract award will be stated. A copy of the approved City Council agenda item regarding this policy modification is attached. With regard to the Santa Ana Street Car Project, the City Council did acknowledge its vision for the transit project in conjunction with the City of Garden Grove. This action is reflected in the approval of the Cooperative Agreement between the City and OCTA on September 2, 2008. From there, the RFP for the Go Local program consultant was issued. As mentioned previously, the RFP was very detailed and clearly articulated the City's vision for its proposed transit program. RECOMMENDATION R-4: The City of Santa Ana needs to tighten procedures to assure compliance with the expectations and timelines of the agencies that grant funds to the City. RESPONSE: The recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted. The City is extremely aware of and experienced in managing grant funds for various projects. Regular progress payments are provided to grant -funding agencies, such as OCTA. Further, OCTA staff participate in monthly project meetings with city staff and the consultant team undertaking the fixed guideway study. All project -related issues are discussed at these meetings, including schedules, funding, community outreach, etc. Since there have not been any issues with the current grant administration practices, the City will continue with our monthly meetings and prompt compliance with grant milestones. RECOMMENDATION R-5: The City Attorney should conduct a retraining program for the City Council regarding the Ralph M. Brown Act, AB 1234 and the City of Santa Ana Code of Ethics and Conduct by June 1, 2010. The training programs shall be scheduled every two years thereafter including an emphasis on an open and transparent process. RESPONSE: As noted in the response to Finding F.5, we believe that this recommendation is not justified. As such, and for the reasons set forth below, the recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted. The City Council has met the legal requirements for biennial ethics training. The Grand Jury recommendation implies that, in spite of the required legal training, the City Council should receive additional training immediately from the City Attorney. With all due respect, we do not find this recommendation necessary or legally required at this point. iP] bffee� The Honorable Judge Kim Dunning August 16, 2010 Page 9 In providing these comments and responses, the City Council and their members do not waive any legal remedies they may have related to the report and its preparation. Thank you for the opportunity to respond to the Grand Jury's report. lP I Ope-ul The Honorable Judge Kim Dunning August 16, 2010 Page 10 THE CITY OF SANTA ANA CODE OF ETHICS AND CONDUCT ADOPTED JUNE 2, 2008 The people of the City of Santa Ana, at an election held on February 5, 2008, approved an amendment to the City Charter of the City of Santa Ana which states: "The City of Santa Ana shall adopt a Code of Ethics and Conduct for elected officials and members of appointed boards, commissions, and committees to assure public confidence in the integrity of local government elected and appointed officials." Consistent with the vote of the people, the following Code of Ethics and Conduct is hereby adopted by the City of Santa Ana to ensure effective and fair operation of the local government of the City of Santa Ana. I. PREAMBLE It is the intent of this code to achieve fair, ethical, and accountable local government for the City of Santa Ana. The people of Santa Ana expect public officials, both elected and appointed, to comply with both the letter and the spirit of the laws of the State of California, the United States of America, and the Charter, Municipal Code, and established policies of the City of Santa Ana affecting the operations of local government. In addition, public officials are expected to comply with the provisions of this Code of Ethics and Conduct established pursuant to the expressed will of the people. All persons covered by this code will aspire to meet the highest ethical standards in the conduct of their responsibility as an elected or appointed official of the City of Santa Ana. This code addresses various aspects related to the governance of the City of Santa Ana and supplements, but does not supplant other laws and rules that prescribe the legal responsibilities of City officials. These include, but are not limited to, the Federal and State Constitutions, various provisions of the California Government Code (such as the Brown Act and the Political Reform Act), the Labor Code, laws prohibiting discrimination and harassment, and the City of Santa Ana Charter and Municipal Code. Elected and appointed officials are expected to be familiar with these laws to ensure that they exercise their public responsibilities in a proper fashion. This code is not designed to be used as a tool to remove appointed officials, as the City Council retains the right under the Charter and Municipal Code to remove appointed officials in accordance with those provisions. While it is not possible to anticipate and provide a rule of conduct and ethics for all situations that public officials may face, this Code of Ethics and Conduct is designed to provide a framework to guide public officials in their daily duties. II. SCOPE The provisions of this Code of Ethics and Conduct shall apply to the Mayor and members of the City Council, and to all members of the boards, commissions, and committees appointed by the City Council or the Mayor or the Mayor and City Council, including any ad hoc committees. Further, the provisions of this Code of Ethics and Conduct shall only apply to these officials and members acting in their official capacities and in the discharge of their duties. GL']ME The Honorable Judge Kim Dunning August 16, 2010 Page 11 III. CORE VALUES Attitudes, words, and actions should demonstrate, support, and reflect the following qualities and characteristics for the well being of our community. The five core values and expressions that reflect these core values are as follows: INTEGRITY/ HONESTY • 1 am honest with my fellow elected officials, the public and others. • 1 do not promise what I believe to be unrealistic. • 1 am prepared to make unpopular decisions when my sense of the public's best interests requires it. • 1 credit others' contributions to moving our community's interests forward. • I do not knowingly use false or inaccurate information to support my position or views. • 1 safeguard the ability to make independent, objective, fair and impartial judgments by scrupulously avoiding financial and social relationships and transactions that may compromise, or give the appearance of compromising, objectivity, independence, and honesty. RESPONSIBILITY/PROTECTING THE PUBLIC'S INTERESTS • 1 do not accept gifts, services or other special considerations because of my public position. • I excuse myself from participating in decisions when my or my immediate family's financial interests may be affected by my agency's actions. • 1 do not give special treatment or consideration to any individual or group beyond that available to any other individual. • 1 refrain from disclosing confidential information concerning litigation, personnel, property, or other affairs of the City, without proper legal authority, nor use such information to advance my financial or other personal interests. FAIRNESS/ACCOUNTABILITY • 1 promote meaningful public involvement in the agency's decision-making processes. • 1 treat all persons, claims and transactions in a fair and equitable manner; • 1 make decisions based on the merits of the issue. • If I receive substantive information that is relevant to a matter under consideration from sources outside the public decision-making process, I publicly share it with my fellow governing board members and staff. • 1 work to contribute to a strong organization that exemplifies transparency and open communication. RESPECT FOR FELLOW ELECTED OR APPOINTED OFFICIALS, STAFF, AND THE PUBLIC • I treat my fellow officials, staff and the public with patience, courtesy and civility, even when we disagree on what is best for the community. 19D-11 The Honorable Judge Kim Dunning August 16, 2010 Page 12 • 1 work towards consensus building and gain value from diverse opinions. • 1 respect the distinction between the role of office holder and staff; I involve staff in meetings with individuals, those with business before the agency, officials from other agencies and legislators to ensure proper staff support and to keep staff informed • 1 conduct myself in a courteous and respectful manner at all times during the performance of my official City duties. • 1 encourage full participation of all persons and groups; I am aware and observe important celebrations and events which reflect the values of our diverse population. PROPER AND EFFICIENT USE OF PUBLIC RESOURCES • 1 do not use public resources, such as agency staff time, equipment, supplies or facilities, for private gain or personal purposes. • 1 make decisions after prudent consideration of their financial impact, taking into account the long-term financial needs of the agency, especially its financial stability. • 1 demonstrate concern for the proper use of agency assets (such as personnel, time, property, equipment, funds) and follow established procedures. • 1 am a prudent steward of public resources and actively consider the impact of my decisions on the financial and social stability of the City and its residents. IV. IMPLEMENTATION AND ENFORCEMENT City of Santa Ana elected and appointed officials of the various boards, commissions and committees have the primary responsibility to assure that ethical standards are understood and met, and that the public can continue to have full confidence in the integrity of government. This code of ethics will be most effective when the elected and appointed officials are thoroughly familiar with it and embrace its provisions. Upon adoption of this code, all current elected or appointed officials shall be given a copy of the code and asked to affirm in writing that they have received the code, understand its provisions, and pledge to conduct themselves by the code. All new members of the City Council, upon election or reelection, and members of boards, commissions, and committees appointed by the City Council, upon appointment or reappointment, shall be given a copy of the code and are required to affirm in writing they have received the code and understand its provisions, and pledge to conduct themselves by the code. Additionally, all members of the City Council, boards, commissions, and committees, as part of their AB1234 training, shall be provided additional training clarifying the provisions and application of this code. The City Attorney, or his/her designee, shall serve as a resource person to those persons covered by the code to assist them in determination of appropriate actions consistent with the code. A periodic review of the code shall be conducted to ensure that the code is an effective and vital document. This Code of Conduct is intended to be a reflection of the community's values as articulated by the Mayor and City Council as they represent the will of the people of the City of Santa Ana. 19D-12 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: AUGUST 16, 2010 TITLE: ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW FOR FIRST STREET BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PROJECT ITY ANAGER RECOMMENDED ACTION CLERK OF COUNCIL USE ONLY: /, NW06 01 ❑ As Recommended ❑ As Amended ❑ Ordinance on 9' Reading ❑ Ordinance on 2 n Reading ❑ Implementing Resolution ❑ Set Public Hearing For CONTINUED TO FILE NUMBER 1. Approve and adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration Environmental Report No. 2010-108 for the replacement of the First Street Bridge over the Santa Ana River. 2. Approve an appropriation adjustment accepting funds in the amount of $9,147,083 from the California Department of Transportation into the Federal Highway Bridge Replacement Program Fund (account no. 05917002-52001) and appropriating funds to the Select Street Construction Fund (account no. 05917660-66220). DISCUSSION The First Street Bridge over the Santa Ana River currently consists of two lanes in each direction. Adjacent roadway segments have three lanes in each direction. Improvements will include the demolition of the existing bridge and construction of a new bridge to accommodate three lanes in each direction. The proposed project will also enhance public safety by providing sidewalks on the north and south side of the bridge. The City has previously received funding from the Orange County Transportation Authority under the Growth Management Area and Master Plan of Arterial Highway programs for the design, right -of way acquisition and construction phases of the project. Additional funding for the design phase of the project was obtained from Caltrans under the Highway Bridge Rehabilitation and Replacement (HBRR) program. Staff is requesting the appropriation adjustment to recognize HBRR construction funds totaling $9,147,083. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act, a Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared to evaluate potential long-term and short-term environmental impacts associated with the replacement and widening of the First Street Bridge over the Santa Ana River. The Mitigated Negative Declaration determined that with the incorporation of mitigation measures there would be no avoidable adverse environmental impacts associated with implementation of the project. 20A-1 Environmental Review for First Street Bridge Replacement Project August 16, 2010 Page 2 The Mitigated Negative Declaration was circulated for a 20—day review period to the general public, homeowner association groups within the project area, and affected state and local agencies. The review period extended from July 26, 2010 to August 15, 2010. At this time no substantial comments have been raised concerning the project and staff is requesting that the City Council approve and adopt the attached Mitigated Negative Declaration, ER No. 2010-108. FISCAL IMPACT Funds received in the total amount of $9,147,083 will be deposited into the Select Street Construction Fund (accounting unit 05917002-52001) and appropriated into the Select Street Construction Fund (accounting unit 05917660-66220, project no. 061723). Raul Godinez II ! ) Executive Director Public Works Agency RG/ Exhibit: 1. Environmental Report Exhibit: 2. Appropriation Adjustment APPROVED AS TO FUNDS AND ACCOUNTS: Francisco Gutierrez Executive Director Finance & Management Services Agency MAYOR Miguel A. Pulido MAYOR PRO TEM Claudia C. Alvarez COUNCIL MEMBERS P. David Benavides Carlos Bustamante Michele Martinez Vincent F. Sarmiento Sal Tinajero CITY OF SANTA ANA PLANNING & BUILDING AGENCY 20 Civic Center Plaza (M-20) P.O. BOX 1988 • Santa Ana, California 92702 (714) 667-2700 • Fax (714) 973-1461 www.santa-ana.org CITY MANAGER David N. Ream CITY ATTORNEY Joseph W. Fletcher CLERK OF THE COUNCIL Maria D. Huizar NOTICE OF INTENT TO ADOPT A NEGATIVE DECLARATION This is to inform the general public that the City of Santa Ana proposes to adopt a Negative Declaration for the following project: Project Title: First Street Bridge Replacement Project Project Description: The proposed project consists of the following: replacement of the existing bridge at First Street over the Santa Ana River and widening of First Street approximately 300 feet west and east from the bridge in the City of Santa Ana (City). Project Location: First Street in Santa Ana between Fairview Street and Harbor Boulevard. Project Number: 06-1723 Public Review Period: July 26, 2010 to August 15, 2010 Hearing Date: August 16, 2010 Hearing Location: City of Santa Ana Council Chambers 22 Civic Center Plaza Santa Ana, CA 92702 The Negative Declaration and Initial Study as well as all referenced documents will be available for public review at the City of Santa Ana Planning and Building Agency located at 20 Civic Center Plaza, Santa Ana, California. Please submit any comments on the Negative Declaration to the City on or before August 15,2010. Please direct your comments to: Environmental Coordinator, City of Santa Ana, P.O. Box 1988, M-20, Santa Ana, CA, 92702. If you have any questions or would like any additional information, please contact Jason Gabriel at (714) 647-5664. 411L'�? MAYOR Miguel A. Pulido MAYOR PRO TEM Claudia C. Alvarez COUNCIL MEMBERS P. David Benavides Carlos Bustamante Michele Martinez Vincent F. Sarmiento Sal Tinajero CITY OF SANTA ANA PLANNING & BUILDING AGENCY 20 Civic Center Plaza (M-20) P.O. BOX 1988 . Santa Ana, California 92702 (714) 667-2700 • Fax (714) 973-1461 www.santa-ana.org CITY MANAGER David N. Ream CITY ATTORNEY Joseph W. Fletcher CLERK OF THE COUNCIL Maria D. Huizar MITIGATED NEGATIVE i3ECL RATIION Pursuant to the Procedures of the City of Santa Ana for implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act, the Environmental Evaluator has completed an Initial Study for the project described below: Project Number: 06-1723 Applicant: Santa Ana Public Works Department Project Location / Address: First Street bridge over the Santa Ana River and 300 feet west and east of the existing bridge in Santa Ana between Fairview Street and Harbor Boulevard. Project Title / Description: First Street Bridge Replacement Project And does hereby find: That although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because of revisions to the project and mitigation measures placed on the project, and agreed to by the applicant, reduce each impact to below a level of significance. Signature: J �L' ` Date: —1/2 (oL"Z lJ Title This determination is not final until adopted by the decision-making body or administrative official, and a Notice of Determination is filed. INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION IP 06-1723 FIRST STREET BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PROJECT SANTA ANA, CALIFORNIA Lead Agency: City of Santa Ana 20 Civic Center Plaza Santa Ana, CA 92701 (714)647-5664 LSA July 2010 20A-5 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION JULY 2010 FIRST STREET BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PROJECT CITY OF SANTA ANA TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION.........................................................................................................................1-1 1.1 INTRODUCTION..................................................................................................................1-1 1.2 CEQA PROCESS...................................................................................................................1-1 1.3 FORMAT OF THE IS/MND..................................................................................................1-2 1.4 ANTICIPATED PROJECT APPROVALS............................................................................1-3 1.5 INCORPORATION BY REFERENCE..................................................................................1-4 2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION........................................................................................................... 2-1 2.1 INTRODUCTION..................................................................................................................2-1 2.2 PROJECT LOCATION/SITE CONTEXT.............................................................................2-1 2.3 DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL..............................................................................................2-9 2.4 CONSTRUCTION AND PHASING/STAGING.................................................................2-13 2.5 SOUND BARRIER WALLS................................................................................................2-22 2.6 DISCRETIONARY ACTIONS............................................................................................ 2-22 2.7 RESPONSIBLE AGENCIES AND OTHER APPROVING AGENCIES ...........................2-22 2.8 OTHER REQUIRED APPROVALS....................................................................................2-22 3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST.............................................................................................3-1 4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS SECTION..............................................................................4-1 I. AESTHETICS.................................................................................................................4-1 II. AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES..................................................................................4-3 III. AIR QUALITY................................................................................................................4-3 IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES.......................................................................................4-10 VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS..............................................................................................4-15 VII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS..........................................................4-17 VIII. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY...................................................................4-20 IX. LAND USE AND PLANNING.....................................................................................4-25 X. MINERAL RESOURCES.............................................................................................4-26 XI. NOISE............................................................................................................................4-26 XII. POPULATION AND HOUSING..................................................................................4-33 XIII. PUBLIC SERVICES.....................................................................................................4-34 XIV. RECREATION..............................................................................................................4-36 XV. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC..................................................................................4-37 XVI. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS......................................................................4-42 XVII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE.......................................................4-44 5.0 CONTACTS AND PREPARERS.................................................................................................5-1 6.0 REFERENCES..............................................................................................................................6-1 alMliffle", LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION JULY 2010 FIRST STREET BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PROJECT CITY OF SANTA ANA FIGURES AND TABLES FIGURES Figure1: Project Location...................................................................................................................2-2 Figure 2: Surrounding Land Uses........................................................................................................2-3 Figure 3: First Street Bridge — Downstream Side Looking North ....................................................... 2-4 Figure 4: First Street Bridge, Upstream Side......................................................................................2-5 Figure 5: First Street Bridge, East Approach...................................................................................... 2-6 Figure 6: First Street Bridge, West Approach..................................................................................... 2-7 Figure 7: Existing Bridge Profile & Elevation....................................................................................2-8 Figure8a: Project Plan......................................................................................................................2-10 Figure 8b: Bridge Section Views......................................................................................................2-11 Figure9: Restriping Plans.................................................................................................................2-12 Figure10: Project Phases..................................................................................................................2-14 Figure 11: Bridge Construction/Staging — Stage 1............................................................................2-15 Figure 12: Bridge Construction/Staging — Stage 2............................................................................2-16 Figure13: Typical Section................................................................................................................2-17 Figure 14: Bicycle Trail Detour for Phase 1......................................................................................2-19 Figure 15: Bicycle Trail Detour for Phase 2......................................................................................2-20 Figure 16: Bicycle Trail Detour During Overhead Construction...................................................... 2-21 Figure 17: Modeled Noise Barrier and Receiver Locations..............................................................2-23 TABLES Table 2.1: Responsible Agencies and Other Approving Agencies....................................................2-25 Table 4.1: Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL) Calculations With and Without Project ... 4-28 Table 4.2: Typical Construction Equipment Schedule......................................................................4-32 Table 4.3: First Street Bridge Widening Project Level of Service Summary...................................4-40 ii 20A-7 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION JULY 2010 FIRST STREET BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PROJECT CITY OF SANTA ANA 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 INTRODUCTION This Initial Study (IS) has been prepared to evaluate the potential for environmental impacts associated with the proposed bridge replacement project. The proposed project includes replacement of the existing bridge at First Street over the Santa Ana River and widening of First Street approximately 300 feet west and east from the bridge in the City of Santa Ana (City). The IS is intended to support a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) and has been prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970 (CEQA), as amended (Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq.), the State CEQA Guidelines for implementation of CEQA (California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Section 15000 et seq.). The City is the Lead Agency for the proposed project. The proposed bridge widening will be partially funded with federal Highway Bridge Replacement and Rehabilitation (HBRR) funds, which are administered by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) with local oversight by California Department of Transportation (Caltrans). Therefore, National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) compliance will be also required for authorization of the HBRR funding. Because the proposed project has been identified as a gap closure project, a Categorical Exclusion under NEPA is anticipated for the NEPA compliance. The project is located at the First Street Bridge in the City, between Harbor Boulevard on the west and Fairview Road on the east. 1.2 CEQA PROCESS This brief overview is intended to acquaint the reader with the purpose and process of the IS/MND. This IS/MND will be considered in the decision-making process for project approval. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15200, this IS/MND will serve the following purposes of review: • Sharing expertise • Disclosing agency analyses • Checking for accuracy • Detecting omissions • Discovering public concerns • Soliciting counterproposals This IS/MND has been prepared to address the environmental impacts during planning, construction, and operation of the proposed project. This IS/MND is also intended to inform decision -makers, responsible agencies,' and the general public of any potentially significant environmental impacts and ' CEQA Guidelines Section 15381 defines a Responsible Agency as "a public agency which proposes to carry out or approve a project, for which a Lead Agency is preparing or has prepared 07/25/10 «PADMJ0701\MND\1.O Introduction.doc» qjhlff;7 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION JULY 2010 FIRST STREET BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PROJECT _. CITY OF SANTA ANA the actions taken to reduce the level of impact or the potential for impacts to occur from the proposed project through feasible mitigation measures. IS/MND. This Draft IS/MND is intended to serve as an informational document to be circulated for public review and considered by the City, the public, and public agencies during deliberations on the proposed project. The Draft IS/MND will be circulated for a period of 20 days, as required by Section 15073(a) of the CEQA Guidelines. The project approvals associated with the proposed project are described below. Final IS/MND. The Final IS/MND will include the Draft IS/MND, comments received during the public review of the Draft IS/MND, responses to those comments, and any other information relevant to the decision -makers and administrative record of the proposed project. 1.3 FORMAT OF THE IS/MND Pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines Section 15070(c), this IS/MND contains the information and analysis required by Sections 15063 through 15075. Each of the required elements is covered in one of the chapters described below. Section 1.0: Introduction Section 1.0 contains a discussion of the purpose and intended use of the Draft MND, the CEQA process, anticipated actions, and a brief introduction to the project. Section 2.0: Project Description and Existing Environmental Setting Section 2.0 includes discussion of the project's geographical setting; existing conditions; and the project's characteristics, components, and phasing. Section 3.0: Environmental Analysis Checklist Section 3.0 includes the City of Santa Ana Environmental Analysis (EA) Checklist, which identifies the level of any impacts for 16 environmental topics. Section 4.0: Environmental Analysis, Impacts and Mitigation Measures Section 4.0 includes an analysis of the project's environmental impacts as identified in the EA Checklist. It is organized into topical sections, including: Aesthetics, Agricultural, Air Quality, an EIR or Negative Declaration. For the purposes of CEQA, the term `Responsible Agency' includes all public agencies other than the Lead Agency which have discretionary approval power over the project." 07/25/10 «PADMJ0701\MND\1.0Introduction.doc» 1-2 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. JULY 2010 INITIAL STUDYIMITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION FIRST STREET BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PROJECT CITY OF SANTA ANA Biological Resources, Cultural Resources, Geology and Soils, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, Hydrology and Water Quality, Land Use and Planning, Mineral Resources, Noise, Population and Housing, Public Services, Recreation, Transportation and Traffic, Utilities and Service Systems, Mandatory Findings of Significance. The project impact discussions identify and focus on the potential for direct and indirect significant environmental effects of the proposed project. Also included is a discussion of impacts that are less than significant, as well as no impacts. The discussions of mitigation measures identify and describe feasible measures that could minimize or lessen each potentially significant environmental effect identified in the IS and IS Checklist. Sections 5.0 and 6.0: Contacts/Preparers and References Sections 5.0 and 6.0, respectively, provide the organizations and persons contacted during preparation of the IS/MND, preparers and technical authors, and the references used by both. 1.4 ANTICIPATED PROJECT APPROVALS Proposed City Actions The following actions are contemplated by the City to implement the proposed project. 1. Adoption of the IS/MND. 2. Adoption of a Mitigation Monitoring Program. 3. Consideration of Design and Construction Plans. The project includes design and construction plans to replace northern structure of the bridge and southern structure of the bridge in two phases. The ultimate phase would be widening of First Street to accommodate 6 travel lanes to match the existing travel lanes on First Street east and west of the existing bridge. 4. Additional Permits and Approvals. In addition to Approvals 1 through 3 above, certain permits and other approvals will be required to implement the proposed project. They may include, but are not limited to, the following: ministerial permits/approvals and compliance reviews or inspections, such as National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit compliance review; street work/street improvements; construction funding; approval of construction plans; and South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) Rules 402 and 403. In addition, permits for the jurisdictional waters of the Santa Ana River will include: federal Clean Water Act Sections 404 (permit for fill from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers) and 401 (certification from the Regional Water Quality Control Board) and a Fish and Game Code Section 1602 Streambed Alteration Agreement (from the California Department of Fish and Game). Questions regarding the preparation of this document and City review of the project should be referred to the following person: Mr. Jason Gabriel City of Santa Ana Public Works Department 20 Civic Center Plaza, M-36 PO Box 1988 Santa Ana, CA 92702 (714) 647-5664 07/25/10 «PA\DMJ0701\MND\1.0 Introduction.doc» 1-3 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. JULY 2010 1.5 INCORPORATION BY REFERENCE INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION FIRST STREET BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PROJECT CITY OF SANTA ANA As permitted in Section 15150 of the State CEQA Guidelines, this IS/MND has referenced several other reports. Information from the documents that has been incorporated by reference has been briefly summarized in the appropriate section(s) of this IS/MND, along with a description of how the public may obtain and review these documents. The documents and other sources that have been used in the preparation of this IS/MND are identified in Section 6.0, References. These references can be reviewed, by appointment, at the City Public Works Department identified above. The following were used as source documents in preparing the responses to the IS Checklist in Section 4.0; the reference numbers indicated below have been incorporated into the text. 1. California Division of Land Resource Protection, www.consrv.ca.gov/DLRP/finmp/images/frnmp2002_200.pdf, 2006-08-29. 2. City of Santa Ana General Plan, Noise and Land Use Elements, . 3. California Division of Land Resource Protection, httpJ/www. conservation.ca.gov/cgs/ship/, 2006-08-30. 4. Federal Emergency Management Agency, Flood Insurance Rate Maps www. msc.fema.gov/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/FemaWelcomeView?storeld=10001 &catalogld=10001 Man gld=-1, 2006-08-26. S. Santa Ana River Mainstem Project: Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement, August 1988. 6. U.S. Geological Survey mapping, www.nmviewogc.cr.usgs.gov/viewer.htm , 2006-08-30. 7. South Coast Air Quality Management District, www.agmd.gov/ej/1-4/I-4.html, 2006-08-31. 8. Limited Asbestos Survey Report, I st Street Bridge Santa Ana River Overcrossing, Kleinfelder, 2009. 9. California Department of Fish and Game, www.dfg.ca.gov/lands/er/region5/index.html, 2006-08- 30. 10. California Division of Land Resource Protection, www.consrv.ca.gov/CGS/geologic_resources/mineral_resource_mapping/, 2006-08-30. In addition the following technical studies (prepared for Caltrans) were used in the preparation of this IS/MND and are also incorporated by reference: 11. Draft Water Quality Assessment Report, LSA Associates, Inc., July 2010. 12. Initial Site Assessment, LSA Associates, Inc., July 2010. 13. Draft Historic Resources Survey Report, LSA Associates, Inc., July 2010. 14. Draft Noise Study Report, LSA Associates, Inc., July 2010. 15. Natural Environment Study, LSA Associates, Inc. April 2010. 16. Jurisdictional Delineation, LSA Associates, Inc., April 2010. 17. Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan, AECOM, April 2010. 07/25/10 «PADMJ0701\MND\1.0Introduction.doc» 20A-11 1-4 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION JULY 2010 FIRST STREET BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PROJECT CITY OF SANTA ANA 2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION 2.1 INTRODUCTION The project site is located in the City of Santa Ana (City), Orange County (County), California. The proposed project will be funded in part by the federal Highway Bridge Replacement and Rehabilitation (HBRR) Program. The proposed project will be implemented in two phases. Demolition and construction will occur first on the northern bridge structure, followed by demolition and construction of the southern bridge structure. This will allow the roadway to remain operational during construction by providing one through -lane in each direction. The new bridge will meet California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) seismic design criteria and will add one lane in each direction and a sidewalk on the north and south sides of the bridge. Currently, the bridge on First Street has 4 travel lanes, while approximately 300 feet west and east of the existing bridge, First Street is a six -lane arterial. The proposed project would restripe areas 300 feet east and west of the bridge structure to accommodate an additional travel lane in this area. Upon project completion, First Street would be consistent with the Orange County Master Plan of Arterial Highways (MPAH) and the City of Santa Ana's Circulation Element which show a six -lane facility. 2.2 PROJECT LOCATION/SITE CONTEXT The regional location of the project is in the City of Santa Ana in central Orange County, which is bound on the north by the Cities of Orange and Garden Grove, on the east by the Cities of Tustin and Irvine, on the south by the City of Fountain Valley, and on the west by the City of Westminster. Interstate 5 (I-5) and State Route 22 (SR -22) bound the City on the north, and State Route 405 (SR - 405) bounds the City on the south, as shown in Figure 1. The general location of the project is at the First Street/Santa Ana Bridge located on First Street, between Fairview Street and Harbor Boulevard in the City of Santa Ana. The specific project limits are between Susan Street on the west side and the Iglesia de Cristo church on the east side. The project site is a bridge located within City right-of-way over the Santa Ana River. There are three manufactured housing parks in the project vicinity; to the south-west Quiet Village, to the south-east Continental Mobile Manor, to the north —east Hyde Park Mobile Estates, and to the north-west residential housing. Figure 2 shows the project location in relation to surrounding land uses. Figures 3 through 6 show the existing conditions and setting of the project area. Figure 7 shows the design of the existing bridge. P:\DMJ0701\MND\2.0 Project Description.doc (07/25/10) 2-1 _ 4 T fi }km ■ ii.'-`�_, life wr '3Y I�vC 1 ( ,, • f Anti t! c ,. a AY Y yh Sch AVf;St I , .E , i „ _ ... • . �� w �� S tNI U —am1. is 96 Sf' _.:*_ iJ '� i 3 z iYdi�Pr. 4' �y k}�''.._.,... y1 v `'t ei . '♦` i j. QYt Y4; � t � � •� i i � db 7h+i,.AS .,,. } '».'�'(i,�Ewi'+'' r ! AYE `� Q,.. � i y� :.. � �' ... '�` • @ � y �' ..,,- �.. '2etC _ AwB �.- -amu � � ♦a r I°ra`t� �� __ -- �� 1.u �_ Ad✓§r6 ( _ `.;3.��_ �ii3 p @ WA6Nnr»G T�. r ,r Sr tI Ix '.1> 9' M1sY } te�u•4P . ,.�, _•__ !. .—t _ .._ rrez+R.s dr .r —k ! �F ivt PJ';� rtr ar Iox.,a♦,�tf__ie ���h• �- �� � �vkl - �' �" 's 1 � µ` B5' ,. a a "r` PROJECT a Vts „s ,N.9Xia ' si• ,? AREA �• .7 4 - let ST .-I It It 4. w :. C 3.♦ -.. > ♦ ('.t N✓CLS $'7 � 5 �, !'t ! S+ h ; r N,t P,177 1 FIGURE 1 P. -V, FAI 01000 4000 First Street Bridge Replacement Project FEET SOURCE: USGS 7.5' Quads - Anaheim &Newport Beach, Ca. Project Location I:\DMJ0701\G\Location-USGS.cdr (7/22/10) 411II"l sSAiV" 1 A t.m3a ula _ SSG i. LL 3 ? t ! e TSoo 'l z �'rAy •. y. ntC rA = L ♦ ' Icr n aeul qtr Hiwt • - , Y �t yry EDINGEROAVE a S i • . ara L.a 'ar ,a'r� , . rear iac y _ .s r, 'r.,.a� ;.It .. :�•e "Q'nSfEel.±.r..�-�•r C t;takl:F.�.JLFi'`'- % — door 4 N,t P,177 1 FIGURE 1 P. -V, FAI 01000 4000 First Street Bridge Replacement Project FEET SOURCE: USGS 7.5' Quads - Anaheim &Newport Beach, Ca. Project Location I:\DMJ0701\G\Location-USGS.cdr (7/22/10) 411II"l rr t � �. • >" i 9 F yyy ! f'� T Li mow, a„.a mo7_4 i ;� \lye \$�� � `.•. ��� `! Jd '. �` Ilk I 14 y a fj� E r. ,,,r" 4,11 s a r ,. "! "a,j1►�#~IfF� AMR te.. } `+� { ot 14 s do;r � !„ S , =: sem.. ,�1 _ �+i �` 80 i •�. Phi ^� 3 fit• • � li�x •Y^ ,y I( � . xa � »i - ��'? .' �, �> ' ' �� ; .�5.'. ��—�' �.�- ;�"�"` �.: =" •�;+�by ,. ,�t-w , 1 ! 4k :.j�" �- ��. 20A-15 M U ,fes" z o� a m � m A b AQ a� w s 41LAW1 0 20A-17 ��l_d_E;� � V U W .� � 4 a C7 � a w � N "3 � ,� :�°° °' i Gi, 0 M N n 'O V L Q 3 b v 0 0 9 41 ' U, 0 o C 6 G � a y O � V U U c 0 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. INITIAL. STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION JULY 2010 FIRST STREET BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PROJECT CITY OF SANTA ANA The bridge was originally constructed in 1937 and widened in 1959. A seismic retrofit of the bridge was completed in 2005. The existing bridge consists of two structures, a northern structure (westbound lanes) and a southern structure (eastbound lanes). A sidewalk is on the north side, but does not connect with any existing sidewalk on either approach to the bridge. The bridge deck is approximately 420 feet (ft) in length with a width of approximately 60 ft. The bridge accommodates two traffic lanes in each direction. Approaches to the bridge on the east and west sides are six lanes that transition to four lanes within approximately 300 ft of the bridge on both the east and west approaches. First Street intersects the Santa Ana River Bicycle Trail (Bicycle Trail), which is a Class 1 (off-road, paved) regional Bicycle Trail shown on the Bicycleways Master Plan (Orange County Transportation Authority [OCTA]). The Bicycle Trail is grade separated (below First Street) to allow uninterrupted movement of both facilities and to reduce bicycle/vehicle safety hazards. Access ramps to the Bicycle Trail are located on the east side of the bridge. The Bicycle Trail access ramps are located on both the north and south sides of the eastern bridge abutment. The Bicycle Trail is primarily used for recreation, is owned by the Orange County Flood Control District (OCFD), and is operated and maintained by the Orange County Resources and Development Management Department, Harbors, Beaches and Parks Division. 2.3 DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL The project consists of replacing an existing four -lane bridge to accommodate six lanes and sidewalks. The existing four -lane bridge is the only constraint in the project area for First Street to be built out to its master -planned width of six lanes. Approximately 300 ft east and west of the existing bridge, First Street is a six -lane Major Arterial, as shown on the Orange County Master MPAH and the City's General Plan Circulation Element. The proposed bridge would have the same vertical profile as the existing, but would move the horizontal profile of the roadway centerline by approximately ten feet. The proposed project will be constructed in two phases. Demolition and construction will occur first on the northern bridge structure, followed by demolition and construction of southern bridge structure. This will allow the roadway to remain operational during construction by providing one through -lane in each direction. The new bridge will meet the City's seismic design criteria and will add one lane in each direction and a sidewalk on the north and south sides of the bridge. The proposed project would restripe areas 300 feet east and west of the bridge structure to accommodate an additional travel lane in this area. Refer to Figures 8a, 8b and 9 for the Bridge Plans, Bridge Sections and Restriping Plan. Right -Of -Way Requirements and Access The City has already obtained necessary rights-of-way for the bridge replacement and roadway widening. One easement over the Santa Ana River will need to be obtained by the City. A temporary construction easement will be required. Access to the project will be accomplished through existing access via First Street, the OCFCD maintenance road on the west side of the Santa Ana River, and the Santa Ana River Bicycle Trail on the east side of the Santa Ana River. PADMJ0701\MND\2.0 Project Description.doc (07/25/10) ��l_b L 1� 2-9 20A-21 \ / \ § ( � f § � ƒ 7 k 2 ■ ! ( § § U c. C Z i r 6 4 C �x U L s o +� LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. JULY 2010 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION FIRST STREET BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PROJECT CITY OF SANTA ANA 2.4 CONSTRUCTION AND PHASING/STAGING The existing bridge consists of two separate structures (a north structure and a south structure) that have been improved at different times. In addition, it is crucial for First Street to remain operational during construction, so one through -lane in each direction will remain open during project implementation. Therefore, construction of the new bridge will occur in phases, starting with the northern structure. Figure 10 shows an overview of the construction phasing. Figures 11, and 12 show the section views of the construction phasing. Figure 13 shows the final section of the bridge. Phase 1: Northern Structure. Phase l begins with redirecting all traffic onto the existing two lanes (one lane in each direction) of the southern structure. Phase 1 Demolition. The Phase 1 demolition includes portions of northern structures above bridge -bearing elevation (superstructure) and foundation elements (substructure) such as columns, wall piers, footings, and pile caps. The piles and drilled shafts of the existing bridge will be cut off 1 ft below the channel invert elevation. Phase 1 Construction. Construction includes the placement of the new bridge foundation elements (during dry season) as well as upper portions of the bridge (superstructure), including girders and deck construction in the northern portion of the bridge. The placement of the recommended superstructure type (precast bulb -tee girder with cast -in-place concrete deck) of the bridge is not required to be conducted within the dry season. A new retaining wall will be built in the northeast quadrant of the bridge. Phase 2: Southern Structure. After completion of the new northern portion of the bridge, traffic will be routed onto the new bridge, and the southern portion of the bridge will be closed in order to allow for demolition of the existing southern portion of the bridge pier and superstructure. Phase 2 Demolition. The Phase 2 demolition encompasses the same demolition activities as Phase 1, but they will occur in the southern bridge structure. Therefore, Phase 2 demolition includes portions of the southern structure above bridge -bearing elevation (superstructure) and foundation elements (substructure) such as columns, wall piers, footings, and pile caps. The piles and drilled shafts of the existing bridge will be cut off 1 ft below the channel invert elevation. Phase 2 Construction. Phase 2 construction will encompass activities in the southern portion of the bridge, which will be conducted in the dry season. The construction activities will include placement of the pier and foundation elements followed by the placement of the girders and deck construction. A new retaining wall will be built in the southwest quadrant of the bridge. Depth of excavation in the riverbed will not exceed four feet. The project will be completed with the changing of the roadway approaches to meet the alignment of the new bridge. P:\DMJ0701\NlND\2.0 Project Description.doc (07/25/10) 20A-24 2-13 1 W 0� � E a. a fi d U J O d �i �0 d i f z z o_ a w r 1 O C y� f ..> � P V �x >. W >e� w c a y� ¢ W Z ! O fL. � ut � w z > i o } a 43 n � � i R 20A-25 O W 0� � a a. a fi u U O d �i �0 i �z 8 rol-' ""T ST MUST) 1 1 1 J U t mom STAGE 1 BRIDGE REMOVAL 0 12 24 FEET SOURCE: DMJM HARRIS/AECOM, (2007) 1\DMJ0701\G\Construction-Stage I.cdr (7/23/10) STAGE 1 BRIDGE CONSTRUCTION g11Ad1, FIGURE 11 First Street Bridge Replacement Project Bridge Construction/Staging - Stage I _--_.____JL�_.1L_ J i t u u I I u U STAGE 2 BRIDGE REMOVAL --,( F> sr . j rMT a 9nWW3 Ti - ------ - -- --fi} i �r I' - ----- - - - - '� Li ll 0 12 24 FEET SOURCE: DMJM HARRIS/AECOM, (2007) I:\DM70701 \MConstruction-Stage 2.cdr (7/23/ 10) STAGE 2 BRIDGE CONSTRUCTION 20A-27 FIGURE 12 First Street Bridge Replacement Project Bridge Construction/Staging - Stage 2 M v., d a fi U eo 0 eC! V U LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. JULY 2010 Dry and Wet Season Activities INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION FIRST STREET BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PROJECT CITY OF SANTA ANA All demolition activities and some construction activities will take place only in the dry season (April 15 to October 15 annually) due to seasonal constraints of working in the riverbed. Therefore, construction may take up to two dry seasons to complete the new bridge. Specific construction activities such as demolition of the piers, foundation elements, and upper parts of the bridge will be conducted only during the dry season. Construction activities that encompass replacement and reconstruction of the parts of the bridge above bridge elevation (placing girders, deck construction) may be conducted during the wet season because they will not take place in the riverbed. Bicycle Detour Plans The Santa Ana River Bicycle Trail will not close due to construction. However, detours will be necessary while construction takes place. The bicycle trail detour plans are described below and shown in Figures 14, 15 and 16. Phase 1: Bicycle Detour for Closure of the Trail Access Ramp on North Side of First Street. During Stage 1, when construction of the north side of the bridge occurs, the northside Bicycle Trail access on First Street will be temporarily closed. Therefore, cyclists on the Bicycle Trail exiting and traveling westerly on First Street will have to exit either at McFadden Avenue or Fifth Street, depending on whether they are traveling north or south on the Bicycle Trail. Cyclists exiting onto First Street and traveling easterly will still be able to do so by using the south side Bicycle Trail access. Cyclists wanting to enter the Bicycle Trail from the east will be routed along these same paths to gain access to the Bicycle Trail. Phase 2: Bicycle Detour for Closure of the Trail Access Ramp on South Side of First Street. During Stage 2, when construction of the south side of the bridge occurs, the south side Bicycle Trail access on First Street will be temporarily closed. Therefore, cyclists on the Bicycle Trail exiting and traveling eastbound on First Street will have to use the Fifth Street exit. Cyclists exiting onto First Street and traveling westbound will still be able to do so by using the northside Bicycle Trail access. Cyclists wanting to enter the Bicycle Trail from the west will be routed along these same paths to gain access to the Bicycle Trail. Detour For Overhead Construction Activities. The Bicycle Trail will remain open along the channel during both Phase 1 and Phase 2; however, certain construction activities which would pose a hazard to Bicycle Trail uses such as demolition of the existing bridge and erection of the precast girders for the new bridge will require a temporary detour of the Bicycle Trail. It is expected that each stage will require two separate detours for an estimated duration of one week each for these activities. During these activities, both northbound and southbound cyclists on the Bicycle Trail will have to exit prior to First Street at either McFadden Avenue (northbound) or Fifth Street (southbound) and then re-enter the Bicycle Trail at the next entrance (McFadden Avenue or Fifth Street). PADMJ0701\MND\2.0 Project Description.doc (07/25/10) 2-18 p 114 -- ..-___.._ � : _.. St ,.. +rw qp, _ �§. .:. �. +F s •, f �E.� r'ta: Grp-! ilh,t � •_r cwb , f f6# o' iia At F Vt i S t �Aftja tVol«= r • tw�,ys+ ,� .s y . f+Rar° 9i rn ? .�7 ir7ias�. ! �► � 7111 �j� Illi 4s"s' moll » i°°i .� " F i �- r. �►.r. i'I � k W,; 4•.., �' i ? ! i� tiM�' 4_I' 41 itt+�"1 � �r) t t+ se�.K iii' w ,r `� �, ''' ,Jwvw r...►rwt-`ii �,�p`. _ ^.+ t••xtl4r!lte.♦ �... .•. 8 °tar r.t: '+`!y,. i. y a N � f - ., � � ' �t r ,A t 7 ,,,� r _ � •, ,u a�1ts->+► 4imf,r.'4wtif•1�j� S R yy ` �,7 � "dam' fApxWi�'1Yb"df cy �l"l l 1 f"� 9 x I' ♦ �kx1� .x 1 t IF � ei �i�' 'r; Ave. Pk 44. LEGEND ja } ♦. AAr �� CONSTRUCTION CLOSURE » i [ r�>dyr MASA w 'n� a .q Fifth St p <+�w .'moo M. 4; Ji • e w » » z �c . f , •� rt r .,i •�c �"' o �'..* w tciAi►�.aali � r, �� » iti".st�p+prpi #� sa Q a`,eaaavw, r4 7 tirM �M `kMu4 AVI i=1 .# .: a #ift�w a : ,. ift co t at. . t� � ^4t ! {� Ei11aV" RrryF��i i 1 .,a a♦ ♦ I * r rr. +� ! +G ♦ wi O J141g� " * e» • h �R J a s rt . st; � ti. ;! it � ii .!�'c '�''�''� x # � f$41linr1Wk1VW tow `�r'r yip •< i• w r •- y . a r ,�:. '�... rM ,j � K. - •s iia .. w wA 1A fi. McFadden Ave ! � � �• ra F+� • w y. ��Y L-. �� � w Y� rrt w WG Yt� rF�.� � Y t I w• "......: r • {' '"`d r+R V r 7 •.. 5 � MYa i '.. u� r ,.1L yp'r � .' r,.i �••a ♦..., .» .. wrrurts LEGEND CONSTRUCTION CLOSURE SOUTHBOUND DETOUR ..° t t �rI,"yC^ r A -A MM r NORTHBOUND• r v4 Fifth St MEW !f * j Lf i= ko Fi-rst St x_ k. 40wit z m it,t .` Mvr$aan� t n s ..�=i a t +w".. ri ' s .. i�41+t► x r ""dew* tiij +' NpT*y '♦ rli >lOtix 4 .i Mid i . ii 111 ♦i t i „ 'M o � • 1 �10 0 Y, �� �x ..,� � tit •r+ia !k: �" dr! •. ke ♦r.i:+. ri T1r•!`N+l4uti FIR W, IZ ir ON—06 *y _ ++g arn,'rcu ! to •, •; :! + • + v • —# 't s. +�:,,� w ..._..�._,� _ +M 'v s t"' k � '7 F `, ✓ �. ,• N n 1N� 1 N"iN 4+M�v j1l� N1. ,+ . ., a lk ,} ,. s a. .* •"° s" 3 taw 0 ww « e _.:, « _ r • kt1 r ta•.t,t • tr:+M 1t " ,, a •a. ' r w s'% tdR ti , ,,! a Icfadden Ave.- oi LEGEND �. a • .. ~,wires•{ �. t ` CONSTRUCTION CLOSURE SOUTHBOUND DETOUR l I 14c MASA _ ��� LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION JULY 2010 FIRST STREET BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PROJECT CITY OF SANTA ANA 2.5 SOUND BARRIER WALLS Three sound barrier walls are proposed as part of the proposed project. The location of the proposed sound barrier walls is shown on Figure 17. The sound barrier walls are numbered. Sound barrier wall number 1 (north west quadrant) will be located in place of the existing 5 ft wall which separates the First Street from the apartment complex. The sound barrier wall will be approximately 9-12 ft height and extend 238 ft from the existing entrance on the First Street westerly to the N. Susan Street. Sound barrier wall number 4 along the edge of shoulder on the north east side of the First Street will be 6-14 ft high and will extend 477 ft easterly from Santa Ana River to the existing entrance to the park at First Street. Both sound barriers will be located approximately 4.5 ft from the nearest travel lane. The reason for the sound barrier walls is to protect sensitive land uses from roadway noise. For a full discussion of roadway noise and sound barrier walls, refer to Section XI in Section 4 Environmental Analysis. For sound barrier wall number 2, the City is evaluating an alternative design that follows First Street and then turn north at the end of the bridge abutment and would then be adjacent to the existing wall at the apartment complex along the west side on the upper bank of the Santa Ana River. This bend would occur instead of the wall extending onto the bridge as shown in Figure 17. This area lies within the OCFCD boundaries for the flood control access road. The area is maintained as a dirt and gravel area associated with the flood channel and access. 2.6 DISCRETIONARY ACTIONS Development of the proposed project would require discretionary approvals by the City, the Lead Agency, and Responsible Agencies. The City's discretionary actions include the following: • Advertisement for bids for construction/approval of plans 2.7 RESPONSIBLE AGENCIES AND OTHER APPROVING AGENCIES Table 2.1 shows the Responsible Agencies as defined by Section 15381 of the State CEQA Guidelines, and agencies that have approvals associated with the project. 2.8 OTHER REQUIRED APPROVALS Ministerial permits/approvals would be issued by the City to allow demolition, debris removal, site preparation, and construction. These approvals may include, but are not limited to, the following approvals: • Demolition and Haul Route Permit/Traffic Control Plan • Approval of a Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) P:\DMJ0701\MND\2.0 Project Description.doc (07/25/10) 411,019141 2-22 N U ,,fir OL a, 0.. N w � m 0 QO "Ct �i o> i �L `/ o ►o � N U W r, t � a � �4 d 20A-35 ►. LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. JULY 2010 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION FIRST STREET BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PROJECT CITY OF SANTA ANA Table 2.1: Responsible Agencies and Other Approving Agencies Agency Permitting Action Caltrans The proposed project will be partially funded by federal Highway Bridge Replacement and Rehabilitation (HBRR) funds. HBRR funds are administered by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), with local oversight provided by Caltrans. Because the proposed project is a gap closure project, a Categorical Exclusion under NEPA is anticipated for NEPA corn liance. County of Orange Approval of a flood control channel Right of Entry permit Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE) Section 404 Permits • Nationwide Permit (NWP) No. 14 for linear transportation projects with permanent impacts less than 0.50 ac within the ordinary high water mark (OHWM) of the Santa Ana River. • NWP No. 33 for temporary structures, work, and discharged necessary for construction activities California Department of Fish and Game Section 1602 Permit Streambed Alteration Agreement for the permanent bridge structure over the channel Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board Section 401 Certification Certification of NWP Nos. 14 and 33 PADMJ0701\MND\2.0 Project Description.doc (07/25/10) 411"11911, 2-25 Environmental Checklist CEQA Compliance PLANNING DIVISION Project Title: First Street Bridge Replacement Project II. Project Numbers: III. Lead Agency Name and Address: City of Santa Ana IV. Contact and Phone Number: Jason Gabriel, (714) 647-5664 V. Project Location: First Street at the Santa Ana River, Santa Ana, Orange County, California VI. Project Sponsor's Name and Address: City of Santa Ana Public Works Department VII. General Plan Designation: The project segment is shown as a six -lane major arterial in the City General Plan and the Orange County Master Plan of Arterial Highways (MPAH). VIII. Zoning: N/A IX. Description of Project: A bridge widening at First Street over the Santa Ana River is proposed by the City of Santa Ana (City).The project consists of widening an existing four -lane bridge to accommodate six lanes and sidewalks. The existing four -lane bridge is the only constraint in the project area for First Street to be built out to its master -planned width of six lanes. X. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: Residential, retail and industrial XI. Other agencies whose approval is required. • Caltrans: The proposed project will be partially funded by Federal Highway Bridge Replacement and Rehabilitation (HBRR) funds. HBRR funds are administered by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), with local oversight provided by Caltrans. A Categorical Exclusion for NEPA compliance is anticipated for the proposed project. • OCFCD: County of Orange approval of a flood control channel right of entry permit may also be required for project implementation. • An Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE) Nationwide Permit (NWP) No. 14 for linear transportation projects with permanent impacts less than 0.50 ac within the ordinary high water mark (OHWM) of the Santa Ana River. • An ACOE NWP No. 33 for temporary structures, work, and discharges necessary for construction activities. • A Streambed Alteration Agreement with the California Department of Fish and Game for the permanent bridge structure over the channel • The Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board must certify NWP Nos. 14 and 33. 07/25/10 ,PADMJ0701\MND\3.0 Checklist.doc,, 3-1 20A-37 Environmental Checklist CEQA Compliance Environmental Factors Potentially Affected: The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by that project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact' as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. 0 Aesthetics 0 Agricultural Resources 0 Air Quality 0 Biological Resources O Cultural Resources O Geology and Soils O Hazards and Hazardous Materials 0 Hydrology and Water Quality 0 Land Use and Planning Environmental Determination On the basis of this initial evaluation, I find that: O Mineral Resources 0 Noise 0 Population and Housing O Public Services O Recreation 0 Transportation and Traffic 0 Utilities and Service Systems O Mandatory Findings of Significance A. ❑ The proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. B. ® Although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions to the project have been made by or agreed to by the applicant. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. C. ❑ The proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. D. ❑ Although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR (EIR No. - ) pursuant to applicable standards and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the project, nothing further is required. E. ❑ Pursuant to Section 15164 of the CEQA Guidelines, an EIR (EIR No. - ) has been prepared earlier and only minor technical changes or additions are necessary to make the previous EIR adequate and these changes do not raise important new issues about the significant effects on the environment. An ADDENDUM to the EIR shall be prepared. F. ❑ Pursuant to Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines, an EIR (EIR No. - ) has been prepared earlier; however, subsequent proposed changes in the project and/or new information of substantial importance will cause one 0 ore significant effects no previously discussed. A SUBSEQUENT EIR shall be prepared. Signature Dates _ 5002( AHIPA ( Printea Name 07/25/10-PADW0701\MND\3.0 Checklist.doc- 3-2 411U,11191967 Environmental Checklist CEQA Compliance Evaluation of Environmental Impacts: A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact" answers that are adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question. A "No Impact" answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved (e.g., the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A "No Impact" answer should be explained where it is based on project -specific factors as well as general standards (e.g., the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project -specific screening analysis). II. All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off-site as well as on-site, cumulative as well as project -level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts. III. Once the lead agency has determined that a particular physical impact may occur, then the checklist answers must indicate whether the impact is potentially significant, less than significant with mitigation, or less than significant. "Potentially Significant Impact" is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect may be significant. If there are one or more "Potentially Significant Impact" entries when the determination is made, an EIR is required. IV. "Negative Declaration: Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated" applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact" to a "Less Than Significant Impact." The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level (mitigation measures from "Earlier Analyses," as described in (V) below, may be cross-referenced). V. Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)(D). In this case, a brief discussion should identify the following: a) Earlier Analysis Used. Identify and state where they are available for review. b) Impacts Adequately Addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis. c) Mitigation Measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation Measures Incorporated," describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site-specific conditions for the project. VI. Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources for potential impacts (e.g., general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared or outside document should, where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated. VII. Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached, and other sources used or individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion. 07/23/10 «PADMJ0701\MND\3.0 Checklist.doc. 3-3 Environmental Checklist CEQA Compliance VIII. This is only a suggested form, and lead agencies are free to use different formats; however, lead agencies should normally address the questions from this checklist that are relevant to a project's environmental effects in whatever format is selected. IX. The explanation of each issue should identify: a) the significance criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate each question; and b) the mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less than significance 07/23/10 «PADMJ0701\MND\3.0 Checklist.doc» 41M, A C 3-4 M Environmental Checklist CEQA Compliance Issues & Supporting Information Sources Less Than Significant Potentially with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact I. Aesthetics — Would the project: A. Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? ❑ ❑ ❑ B. Damage scenic resources, including but not limited ❑ ❑ ❑ to, trees, rock outpourings and historic buildings within a state highway? C. Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? ❑ ® ❑ ❑ D. Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? ❑ ❑ ® ❑ II. Agricultural Resources — In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model prepared by the California Department of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agricultural farmland. Would the project: A. Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland or ❑ ❑ ❑ Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland) to non-agricultural use? (The Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program in the California Resources Agency, Department of Conservation, maintains detailed maps of these and other categories of farmland.) B. Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use or a ❑ ❑ ❑ Williamson Contract? C. Involve other changes in the existing environment ❑ ❑ ❑ which, due to their location or nature, could individually or cumulatively result in loss of Farmland, to non-agricultural use? III. Air Quality — Where available, the significant criteria established by the applicable air quality management or pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project: A. Conflict with or obstruct implementation of ❑ ® ❑ ❑ applicable Air Quality Attainment Plan or Congestion Management Plan? B. Violate any stationary source air quality standard or ❑ ® ❑ ❑ contribute to an existing or proposed air quality violation? 07/23/10 «PADMJ0701\MND\3.0 Checklist.doc,, 3-5 20A-41 Environmental Checklist ❑ ® ❑ ❑ CEQA Compliance or through habitat modifications, on any species Issues & Supporting Information Sources Less Than species in local or regional plans, policies or Significant Potentially with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact C. Result in a cumulatively considerable net ❑ ❑ ® ❑ increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non -attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality C. standard (including releasing emission which ❑ ❑ ® ❑ exceeds quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? D. Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant ❑ ❑ ® ❑ concentrations? E. Create objectionable odors affecting a ❑ ❑ ® ❑ substantial number of people? IV Biological Resources — Would the project: A. Have a substantial adverse impact, either directly ❑ ® ❑ ❑ or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive or special status species in local or regional plans, policies or regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services? B. Have a substantial adverse impact on any riparian ❑ ❑ ❑ habitat or natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, and regulations or by the California Department of fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? C. Adversely impact federally protected wetlands ❑ ❑ ® ❑ (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) either individually or in combination with the known or probable impacts of other activities through direct removal, filling hydrological interruption, or other means? D. Conflict with any local policies or ordinances ❑ ❑ ❑ protecting biological resources, such as tree preservation policy or ordinance? 07/23/10 «PADMJ0701\MND\3.0 Checklist.doc» 3-6 Environmental Checklist CEQA Compliance Issues & Supporting Information Sources Less Than significance of a historical resource as defined in Significant Section 15064.5? Potentially with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact V. Cultural Resources — Would the project: A. Cause a substantial adverse change in the E significance of a historical resource as defined in ❑ Section 15064.5? B. Cause a substantial adverse change in the ❑ significance of a unique archaeological resource ❑ pursuant to define Section 15064.5? C. Directly or indirectly disturb or destroy a unique E paleontological resource or site? D. Disturb any human remains, including those E interred outside of formal cemeteries? A. Geology and Soils — Would the project: A. Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: 1. Rupture Of A Known Earthquake Fault, As Delineated On The Most Recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map Issued By The State Geologist For The Area Or Based On Other Substantial Evidence Of A Known Fault? 2 Strong Seismic Ground Shaking? 3. Seismic -Related Ground Failure, Including Liquefaction? 4 Landslides? B. Would the project result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? C. Would the project result in the loss of a unique geologic feature? D. Is the project located on strata or soil that is unstable or that would become unstable as a result of the project and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse? 07/23/10 ,P:\DMJ0701\MND\3.0 Checklist.doc» 20A-43 ❑ ❑ ❑ E ❑ ❑ ❑ E ❑ ❑ E ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ E ❑ ❑ E ❑ ❑ ❑ E ❑ ❑ ❑ E ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ E ❑ E ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ E ❑ ❑ ❑ E 3-7 Environmental Checklist CEQA Compliance Issues & Supporting Information Sources Less Than Significant Potentially with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact E. Where sewers are not available for the disposal of ❑ ❑ ❑ wastewater, is the soil capable of supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems? VII. Hazardous and Hazardous Materials — Would the project: A. Create a significant hazard to the public or the ❑ ® ❑ ❑ environment through the routine transport, use or disposal of hazardous materials? B. Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment thought reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous material into the environment? C. Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substance or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? D. Be located on a site which is located on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 659662.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? E. For a project located within an airport land use plan or where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles where of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? F. For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? G. Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan. H. Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? 07/23/10 «PADMJ0701\MND\3.0 Checklist.doa> �I . ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ® ❑ ® ❑ 3-8 Environmental Checklist CEQA Compliance Issues & Supporting Information Sources Less Than Significant Potentially with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact Vlll Hydrology and Water Quality — Would the project: A. Violate Regional Water Quality Control Board water ❑ ® ❑ ❑ quality standards or waste discharge requirements? B. Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or ❑ ❑ ® ❑ interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (i.e., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? C. Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of ❑ ® ❑ ❑ the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of stream or river, in a manner, which would result in substantial erosion or sitation on or off-site? D. Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of ❑ ❑ ® ❑ the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner, which would result in flooding on or off- site? E. Create or contribute runoff water which would ❑ ® ❑ ❑ exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted run-off? F. Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? ❑ ® ❑ ❑ G. Place housing within a 100 -year floodplain, as ❑ ❑ ❑ mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? H. Place within a 100 -year floodplain structures which ❑ ❑ ® ❑ would impede or redirect flood flows? I. Expose people or structures to a significant risk of ❑ ❑ ® ❑ loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of failure of a levee or dam? J. Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? ❑ ❑ ❑ Potentially Less Than Less Than No 07/23/10 «PADMJ0701\MND\3.0 Checklist.doc- 3-9 20A-45 Environmental Checklist CEQA Compliance Issues & Supporting Information Sources Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact with Impact Mitigation Incorporated IX. Land Use and Planning — Would the project: A. Physically divide an established community? ❑ ❑ ® ❑ B. Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or ❑ ❑ ❑ regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? C. Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation ❑ ❑ ❑ plan or natural community conservation plan? X. Mineral Resources — Would the project: A. Result in the loss of availability of a known ❑ ❑ ❑ mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? Result in the loss of availability of a locally ❑ ❑ ❑ B. important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? XI Noise — Would the project result in: A. Exposure of persons to or generation of noise ❑ ® ❑ ❑ levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? B. Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive ❑ ❑ ® ❑ groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? C. A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise ❑ ❑ ® ❑ levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? D. A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ❑ ® ❑ ❑ ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without project? 07/23/10 «PADMJ0701\MND\3.0 Checklist.doa� 3_10 Environmental M Checklist CEQA Compliance Issues & Supporting Information Sources Less Than Significant Potentially with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact E. For a project located within an airport land use plan ❑ ❑ ❑ or where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? F. For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, ❑ ❑ ❑ would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise level? XII. Population and Housing — Would the project: A. Induce substantial population growth in an area, ❑ ❑ ❑ either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and business) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? B. Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, ❑ ❑ ❑ necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? C. Displace substantial numbers of people, ❑ ❑ ❑ necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? XIII. Public Services A. Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause ❑ ❑ ® ❑ significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service rations, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public service: 1. Fire protection? ❑ ❑ ❑ 2. Police protection? ❑ ❑ ❑ 3. Schools? ❑ ❑ ❑ 4. Parks? ❑ ❑ ❑ 5. Other public facilities? ❑ ❑ ❑ 07/23/10 «PADMJ0701\MND\3.0 Checklist.doc,, 20A-47 3-11 Environmental Checklist CEQA Compliance ❑ ❑ Issues & Supporting Information Sources Less Than Significant Potentially with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact XIV. Recreation A. Would the project increase the use of existing ❑ ❑ ❑ neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? B. Does the project include recreational facilities or ❑ ❑ ® ❑ require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? XV. Transportation /Traffic A. Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in ❑ ❑ ® ❑ relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ration on roads, or congestion at intersections)? B. Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level ❑ ❑ ® ❑ of service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? C. Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including ❑ ❑ ❑ either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? D. Substantially increase hazards to a design feature ❑ ❑ ® ❑ (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? E. Result in inadequate emergency access? ❑ ❑ ® ❑ F. Result in inadequate parking capacity? ❑ ❑ ❑ G. Conflict with adopted policies supporting alternative ❑ ❑ ® ❑ transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? 07/23/10 ,PADMJ0701\MND\3.0 Checklist.doc,, 3-12 Environmental Checklist CEQA Compliance Issues & Supporting Information Sources XVI. Utilities and Service Systems A. Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? B. Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? C. Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? D. Are sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources or are new or expanded entitlements needed? E. Result in the determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? F. Is the project served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? G. Comply with federal, state and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste? XVII. Mandatory Findings of Significance A. Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? 07/23/10 « PADMJ0701 \M ND\3.0 Checklist.doc,, 20A-49 Less Than Significant Potentially with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ® ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ® ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ® ❑ ❑ 3-13 Environmental Checklist CEQA Compliance Issues & Supporting Information Sources Less Than Significant Potentially with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact B. Does the project have impacts that are individually ❑ ❑ ® ❑ limited but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, effects of other current projects and the effects of probable future projects.) C. Does the project have environmental effects which ❑ ® ❑ ❑ will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? 07/23/10 ,P:\DMJ0701\MND\3.0 Checklist.doc» gll_ A ' 3-14 20A-51 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. JULY 2010 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION FIRST STREET BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PROJECT CITY OF SANTA ANA 4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS SECTION This section of the Initial Study (IS) contains the explanation and analysis based on the questions of the City's Environmental Analysis Checklist (refer to Section 3.0). The purpose of the Initial Study (IS) is to provide data and reasoning used to arrive at the appropriate California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) document for the proposed First Street Santa Ana Bridge Replacement and Street Widening Project. I. Aesthetics Would the project: A. Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? No impact. Scenic vistas are typically some distance from a receptor and consist of horizon line views. Although no scenic vistas are located within the project area, the City's General Plan identifies the Santa Ana River as a river of a regional significance because it is an easily distinguished feature in the City's landscape. First Street intersects the Santa Ana River Bicycle Trail (Bicycle Trail), which is a Class 1 (off-road, paved) regional Bicycle Trail shown on the Commuter Bikeways Strategic Plan (CBSP, Orange County Transportation Authority [OCTA]). The Bicycle Trail is grade separated (below First Street) to allow uninterrupted movement of both facilities and to reduce bicycle/vehicle safety hazards. Access ramps to the Bicycle Trail are located on the east side of the bridge. The Bicycle Trail access ramps are located on both the north and south sides of the eastern bridge abutment. The proposed project would temporarily require that the Bicycle Trail be re-routed. This would occur only during construction and would not permanently alter the route or the scenic quality of the trail, or inhibit access to any views that may exist. Because no scenic vistas occur within the project limits or adjacent to the site, no impacts are expected and no mitigation is required. B. Damage scenic resources, including but not limited to, trees, rock outpourings and historic buildings within a state highway? No impact. First Street is not a state highway. There are no aesthetic or visual resources located on the project site or in the surrounding vicinity that have been designated in any City or other agency policy or plan. According to the City of Santa Ana General Plan, First Street is considered a primary street corridor, and the bridge over Santa Ana River is listed in the Caltrans Historic Bridge Inventory as "Category 5" (not eligible for the National Register). The proposed project does not require removal of any rock outcroppings. Several ornamental trees will be removed. These trees are not very mature, thus they do not provide much screening or contribution to the landscaping along First Street. Additionally, none of the properties in the project area are considered historical resources. There are no scenic resources on the project site or in the vicinity; therefore, no damage to scenic resources would occur as a result of project implementation and no mitigation is required. 07/25/10 «PA\DMJ070l\N1ND\4.0 Environmental Analysis.doc» 41ESL 4-1 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION JULY 2010 FIRST STREET BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PROJECT CITY OF SANTA ANA C. Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? Less than significant impact with mitigation. The proposed project will result in some physical changes in the project site. The existing First Street bridge over Santa Ana River will be demolished and replaced with the new structure that conforms to the current building and seismic standards. The proposed bridge would be widened to accommodate two extra lanes and ultimate width of First Street. The new bridge structure will be located in the same vertical position as the existing one (different horizontal), will look similar to the existing bridge, and will be at the same elevation. The slight physical changes will not substantially affect views of the bridge or views from the bridge. As mentioned above, the bridge replacement activities will require removal of several ornamental trees to accommodate the sound barrier walls. The views from the First Street/Santa Ana Bridge are limited to the surrounding built -out environment, Santa Ana River Channel, adjacent residences including manufactured housing parks. Construction activities will temporary affect the views of and on the Santa Ana River. This impact is not considered significant because it will be short-term and cease upon the project completion. Implementation of the proposed project will not adversely affect scenic vistas because the new replacement bridge will look very similar to the existing bridge structure. Therefore, no impacts are anticipated and no mitigation is required. However, the project will involve the construction of three sound barrier walls each exceeding six feet in height. This will introduce a visual change to the roadway corridor. The following mitigation measure is included to ensure that the sound barrier walls will blend in with surrounding elements to reduce the visual intrusion of the walls. Mitigation Measure VIS -1 As part of the final design plans for the sound barrier walls, a neutral earth -tone color palette will be selected to blend in with surrounding area. The color specification will be reviewed and approved by the Santa Ana Public Works Director or designee, and included as part of the bid package for the project. D. Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? Less than significant impact. The proposed project is a bridge replacement and street widening project that would not incorporate substantial new sources of light or glare which would affect day or nighttime views in the area. The sidewalks that will be built as part of the First Street Bridge and First Street Widening will require additional lighting for pedestrians. In the existing condition, sidewalks are not continuous along First Street. The project will include relocated replacement street lights. Due to the project area's high level of development, there are many existing sources of light in the area. Therefore, incorporation of the replacement street lights will not result in significant impact to nighttime views. No mitigation is required. 07/25/10 «PADMJ070l\MND\4.0 Environmental Analysis.doc» 411_*? 4-2 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION JULY 2010 FIRST STREET BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PROJECT CITY OF SANTA ANA II. Agricultural Resources A. Would the project convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland) to non-agricultural use? (The Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program in the California Resources Agency, Department of Conservation, maintains detailed maps of these and other categories of farmland.) No impact. The project site does not involve agricultural soils or operations. The surrounding area is urbanized, and there are no agricultural uses in the project vicinity as shown in Figure 2 (refer to Section 2.0). The California Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program maps indicate that No Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance exists either within or adjacent to the project site. The National Resource Conservation Service database classified the entire area including the of First Street/Santa Ana Bridge site as "Urban and built-up."' Therefore, no impact to farmland or agricultural resources will occur, and no mitigation is required. B. Would the project conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use or a Williamson Contract? No impact. As previously stated, the site is completely built out. As there are no agricultural uses on site and no Williamson Act contracts do not apply to the site. Refer to II.a.for further discussion on agricultural lands. No impacts are expected. C. Would the project involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could individually or cumulatively result in loss of Farmland, to non-agricultural use? No impact. There are no farmlands located on the project site. The project area is urban and already built out. The proposed project will not change the urban character of existing land uses on site. Therefore, no conversion of farmlands to nonagricultural uses would occur on site. For additional discussion refer to II a. No impacts are expected. III. Air Quality Would the project: A. Conflict with or obstruct implementation of applicable Air Quality Attainment Plan or Congestion Management Plan? Less than significant with mitigation. According to the Air Quality Technical Report (LSA Associates, Inc., July 2010), historical air quality data show that existing carbon monoxide (CO) levels for the project area and the general vicinity do not exceed either the State or federal California Division of Land Resource Protection, ftp://ftp.consrv.ca.gov/pub/dirp/FMMP/pdf/fmmp2OO4-8l l pdf, 9 August 2007 07/25/10 «PADMJ070l\MND\4.0 Environmental Analysis.doc» 20A-54 4-3 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION JULY 2010 FIRST STREET BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PROJECT CITY OF SANTA ANA ambient air quality standards. The proposed project will help to improve traffic flow and reduce congestion on roadway links in the project vicinity. The project is located in an attainment area for federal CO standards. Using the California Department of Transportation's (Caltrans) Transportation Project -Level Carbon Monoxide Protocol (Protocol), a screening CO hot -spot analysis was conducted to determine whether the proposed project would result in any CO hot spots. It was determined that the proposed project will not result in any exceedances of the 1 -hour or 8 -hour CO standards. The proposed project is within a federal nonattainment area for particulate matter (PM) less than 2.5 in diameter (PM2.5) and particulate matter less than 10 microns in diameter (PMIo) standards. Therefore, per 40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Part 93, analyses are required for conformity purposes. However, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) does not require hot - spot analyses, qualitative or quantitative, for projects that are not listed in Section 93.123(b)(1) as an air quality concern. It was determined through interagency consultation that the proposed project will not contribute to a PM2.5 or PMIo hot spot that will cause or contribute to a violation of the federal PM2.5 or PMIo standards. Compliance with South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) Rules and Regulations during construction will reduce construction -related air quality impacts from fugitive dust emissions and construction equipment emissions. Because the proposed roadway improvement project does not generate new regional vehicular trips, no new regional vehicular emissions would occur. The proposed project may have a beneficial effect in helping to reduce congestion on roadway links in the project vicinity. The project is located in Orange County, which is not among the counties listed as containing serpentine and ultramafic rock. Therefore, the impact from naturally occurring asbestos (NOA) during project construction would be minimal to none. The project is in the 2008 Regional Transportation Plan (RTP), which was found to be conforming by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA)/Federal Transit Administration (FTA) on June 5, 2008. The project is also in the 2008 Regional Transportation Improvement Program (RTIP), which was found to be conforming by the FHWA/FTA on November 17, 2008 (Project ID: ORA120521; Description: Santa Ana — First Street widening [from Susan to Fairview; from 4 to 6 lanes] bridge). Regional PMIo State Implementation Plan (SIP) budget compliance was accounted for during the current approved RTP and RTIP conformity determination. Therefore, the proposed project is in conformance with the SIP. Climate Change While climate change has been a concern since at least 1988, as evidenced by the establishment of the United Nations and World Meteorological Organization's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the efforts devoted to greenhouse gas' (GHG) emissions reduction and climate change research and policy have increased dramatically in recent years. These efforts are primarily concerned with the emissions of GHGs related to human activity that include carbon dioxide (CO2), ' GHGs related to human activity include: CO2, M4, N20, tetrafluoromethane, hexafluoroethane, SF6, HFC -23, HFC -134a*, and HFC -152a*. 07/25/10 ,,PADMJ070l\MND\4.0 Environmental Analysis.doc» 20A-55 4-4 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION JULY 2010 FIRST STREET BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PROJECT CITY OF SANTA ANA methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N20), tetrafluoromethane, hexafluoroethane, sulfur hexafluoride (SF6), HFC -23 (fluoroform), HFC -134a (s, s, s, 2-tetrafluoroethane), and HFC -152a (difluoroethane). In 2002, with the passage of Assembly Bill 1493 (AB 1493), California launched an innovative and proactive approach to dealing with GHG emissions and climate change at the State level. AB 1493 requires the ARB to develop and implement regulations to reduce automobile and light truck GHG emissions. These stricter emissions standards were designed to apply to automobiles and light trucks beginning with the 2009 model year; however, to enact the standards, California needed a waiver from the EPA. The waiver was denied by the EPA in December 2007. (See California v. Environmental Protection Agency, 9th Cir. Jul. 25, 2008, No. 08-70011). On January 26, 2009, it was announced that the EPA will reconsider its decision regarding the denial of California's waiver. On May 18, 2009, President Obama announced the enactment of a 35.5 -mile -per -gallon (mpg) fuel economy standard for automobiles and light-duty trucks, which will take effect in 2012. On June 30, 2009, the EPA granted California the waiver. California is expected to enforce its standards for 2009 to 2011 and then look to the federal government to implement equivalent standards for 2012 to 2016. The granting of the waiver will also allow California to implement even stronger standards in the future. The State is expected to start developing new standards for the post -2016 model years later this year. On June 1, 2005, Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger signed Executive Order (EO) S-3-05. The goal of this EO is to reduce California's GHG emissions to: (1) 2000 levels by 2010, (2) 1990 levels by 2020, and (3) 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050. In 2006, this goal was further reinforced with the passage of Assembly Bill 32 (AB 32), the Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006. AB 32 sets the same overall GHG emissions reduction goals while further mandating that ARB create a plan that includes market mechanisms and implement rules to achieve "real, quantifiable, cost-effective reductions of greenhouse gases." EO S-17-06 further directs State agencies to begin implementing AB 32, including the recommendations made by the State's Climate Action Team. With EO S-01-07, Governor Schwarzenegger set forth the low carbon fuel standard for California. Under this EO, the carbon intensity of California's transportation fuels is to be reduced by at least 10 percent by 2020. Climate change and GHG reduction are also concerns at the federal level; at this time, no legislation or regulations have been enacted specifically addressing GHG emissions reductions and climate change. However, California, in conjunction with several environmental organizations and several other states, sued to force the EPA to regulate GHGs as a pollutant under the CAA (Massachusetts vs. Environmental Protection Agency et al., United States Supreme Court No. 05-1120. 549 U.S. Argued November 29, 2006—Decided April 2, 2007). The court ruled that GHGs do fit within the CAA definition of a pollutant and that the EPA does have the authority to regulate GHGs. Despite the Supreme Court ruling, there are no promulgated federal regulations to date limiting GHG emissions. On December 7, 2009, the Administrator signed two distinct findings regarding GHGs under Section 202(a) of the CAA: • Endangerment Finding: The Administrator finds that the current and projected concentrations of the six key well -mixed GHGs (CO2, CH4, N20, hydrofluorocarbons [HFCs], perfluorocarbons 07/25/10 «PA\DMJ070l\MND\4.0 Environmental Analysis.docu 411_'Imp 4-5 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION JULY 2010 FIRST STREET BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PROJECT CITY OF SANTA ANA [PFCs], and SF6) in the atmosphere threaten the public health and welfare of current and future generations. • Cause or Contribute Finding: The Administrator finds that the combined emissions of these well -mixed GHGs from new motor vehicles and new motor vehicle engines contribute to the GHG pollution that threatens public health and welfare. These findings do not themselves impose any requirements on industry or other entities. However, this action is a prerequisite to finalizing the EPA's proposed GHG emission standards for light-duty vehicles, which EPA proposed in a joint proposal including Caltrans' proposed Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards on September 15, 20091. The City does not have any specific GHG or climate change policies that apply to roadway projects. One of the main strategies to reduce GHG emissions is to make California's transportation system more efficient. The highest levels of carbon dioxide from mobile sources, such as automobiles, occur at stop -and -go speeds (0-25 mph) and speeds over 55 mph. Relieving congestion by enhancing operations and improving travel times in high congestion travel corridors will lead to an overall reduction in GHG emissions. The purpose of the proposed project is to alleviate existing and future traffic congestion along First Street during peak hours. Therefore, the proposed project would reduce the number of vehicle hours traveled (VHT) within the project area. Although the proposed project may result in a net increase in vehicle miles traveled (VMT), the carbon dioxide emissions would be reduced due to the reduction in VHT and the improved traffic flow. The proposed project Mitigation Measures AQ -1, AQ -2, and AQ -4 incorporating energy efficiency would additionally reduce the temporary impacts of GHG emissions. Therefore, it is reasonable to conclude that the project is not cumulatively contributing to GHG emissions and/or global warming based on improved traffic flow on the First Street in comparison to existing conditions. The following mitigation measures will be implemented to reduce green house gas emissions and other air pollutants generated by vehicle and equipment exhaust during the construction phase: Mitigation Measures AQ -1 The construction contractor shall select the construction equipment used on site based on low emission factors and high energy efficiency. The construction contractor shall ensure that construction grading plans include a statement that all construction equipment will be tuned and maintained in accordance with the manufacturer's specifications. AQ -2 The construction contractor shall ensure that construction grading plans include a statement that work crews will shut off equipment when not in use. AQ -3 The construction contractor shall time the construction activities so as not to interfere with peak hour traffic and to minimize obstruction of through traffic lanes adjacent to the site; if necessary, a flagperson shall be retained to maintain safety adjacent to existing roadways. AQ -4 The construction contractor shall support and encourage ridesharing and transit incentives for the construction crew. 1 http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/endangerment.html 07/25/10 «PA\DMJ0701\MND\4.0 Environmental Analysis.doc» 20A-57 n • LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION JULY 2010 FIRST STREET BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PROJECT CITY OF SANTA ANA Therefore, with the implementation of mitigation measures the proposed project would not conflict or obstruct implementation of State GHG policies or directives, AQMP or Congestion Management Program during construction activities. Less than significant impacts are expected with mitigation. B. Violate any stationary source air quality standard or contribute to an existing or proposed air quality violation? Less than significant with mitigation. Implementation of the project will result in some short-term construction impacts that would temporary increase pollutants emission levels. Because the proposed project does not introduce new land use type, operational impacts will be similar to existing project conditions. The proposed project is expected to improve traffic movement in the project vicinity, thereby lowering the total pollutants emitted by motor vehicles in the long-term. The proposed project would not create a substantial Hot spots for CO, PM 2.5 or PM 10 and thus would not constitute CO, PM 10 or PM 2.5 violation. Construction activities will produce combustion emission from various sources such as site grading, utility engines, on-site heavy-duty construction vehicles, equipment hauling materials to and from the site, and motor vehicles transporting the construction crew. Exhaust emissions will vary on a daily basis as the construction activity levels change. SCAQMD Rule 403 for reducing the fugitive dust emissions (PM10), Best Available Control Measure (BACM), Caltrans Standard Specifications of Construction and Mitigation Measures AQ -1 through AQ -4 will be incorporated during construction time, thereby reducing the temporary air quality impacts to less than significant levels. The following are standard conditions that would reduce or minimize air pollutant emissions [particularly fugitive dust (PM10)] associated with construction activities: • The construction contractor shall adhere to the requirements of SCAQMD rules and regulations on cutback and emulsified asphalt paving materials. • To reduce fugitive dust emissions the construction contractor shall adhere to the requirements of SCAQMD Rule 403. The Best Available Control Measures (BACMs) specified in SCAQMD's Rule 403 shall be incorporated into the project construction. With the incorporation of the mitigation measures AQ -1 through AQ -5 the project would not violate or contribute to violation of existing and proposed air quality standards. Less than significant impacts are expected with the incorporation of the mitigation measures. Compliance with the standard measures articulated in mitigation measure AQ -5 would lessen the fugitive dust (PM10) impact during construction. Mitigation Measure AQ -5 Prior to issuance of final plans for bids, the following conditions shall be included as specifications and notes on the plans to ensure implementation. • The construction contractor shall adhere to the requirements of SCAQMD rules and regulations on cutback and emulsified asphalt paving materials. 07/25/10 «P:\DMJ070l\MND\4.0 Environmental Analysis.doc» gll_lf;� 4-7 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. JULY 2010 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION FIRST STREET BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PROJECT CITY OF SANTA ANA • To reduce fugitive dust emissions the construction contractor shall adhere to the requirements of SCAQMD Rule 403. The BACMs specified in SCAQMD's Rule 403 shall be incorporated into the project construction. In addition to the SCAQMD standard conditions to reduce construction emissions, Caltrans Standard Construction Specifications shall be adhered to in order to reduce emissions. Below is a list of Caltrans' standard conditions provided to reduce the emission of fugitive dust. A. All disturbed areas, including storage piles, not being actively utilized for construction purposes shall be effectively stabilized for dust emissions using water, chemical stabilizers/suppressants, or vegetative ground cover. B. All on-site unpaved roads and off-site unpaved access roads shall be effectively stabilized for dust emissions using water or chemical stabilizers/suppressants. C. All land clearing, grubbing, scraping, excavation, land leveling, grading, cut and fill, and demolition activities shall be effectively controlled for fugitive dust emissions by utilizing applications of water or by presoaking. D. When materials are transported off site, all material shall be covered or effectively wetted to limit visible dust emissions, or at least 15.2 centimeters (cm) (6 inches [in]) of freeboard space from the top of the container shall be maintained. E. All operations shall limit or expeditiously remove the accumulation of mud or dirt from adjacent public streets at least once every 24 hours when operations are occurring. The use of dry rotary brushes is expressly prohibited except where preceded or accompanied by sufficient wetting to limit the visible dust emissions. The use of blower devices is expressly forbidden. F. Following the addition of materials to or the removal of materials from the surface of outdoor storage piles, said piles shall be effectively stabilized for fugitive dust emissions utilizing sufficient water or chemical stabilizers/suppressants. G. Traffic speeds on unpaved roads shall be limited to 24 kilometers per hour (kph) (15 mph). H. Sandbags or other erosion control measures shall be installed to prevent silt runoff to public roadways from sites with a slope greater than 1 percent. I. Wheel washers for all exiting trucks shall be installed, or all trucks and equipment shall be washed off before leaving the site. J. Wind breaks shall be installed at windward side(s) of construction areas. K. Excavation and grading activity shall be suspended when winds exceed 32 kph (20 mph). L. Area subject to excavation, grading, and other construction activity shall be limited at any one time. C. Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non -attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emission which exceeds quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? 07/25/10 «PA\DMJ070l\MND\4.0 Environmental Analysis.doc» I 'k' A 4-8 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION JULY 2010 FIRST STREET BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PROJECT CITY OF SANTA ANA Less than significant impact. The following are six criteria pollutants as designated by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA): ozone (03), carbon monoxide (CO), particles (PMIo, PM 2.5), nitrogen dioxide (NO2), sulfur dioxide (SO2), and lead (Pb). The proposed project is located in the South Coast Air Basin which is under attainment for the CO, NO2, SO2, and Pb and is in non -attainment status for PM 2.5 and PM 10, and federal 03 8 -hour standards and state 03 1 -hour. According to the Traffic Analysis Study (LSA, July 2007) the proposed project will help to improve traffic flow and reduce congestion on roadway link in the project vicinity. The proposed project is not expected to generate any additional traffic and the regional traffic trips pattern would remain similar. Therefore, no new long-term regional emissions would result from implementation of the proposed project. However, the proposed project could result in an increase in load concentrations due to vehicle trips being attracted to the improved facility. Localized emissions of CO and PMIo may increase with implementation of the proposed project however, the concentration will not exceed ambient air quality standards. The proposed project would also not create a new, or worsen an existing, PMIo or PM2.5 violation. No exceedance of the SCAQMD criteria pollutant emissions thresholds would be anticipated during construction of the proposed project. Short-term construction activities will comply with SCAQMD Rule 403 regarding reducing fugitive dust emissions (PMIo, listed in mitigation measure AQ -5) and Best Available Control Measures (BALM). Implementation of these standard measures will further reduce short term emissions resulting from use of construction equipment. Therefore, the project will not result in cumulatively considerable net increase of criteria pollutants. The proposed project's contribution to cumulative emissions of criteria pollutants is considered less than significant. D. Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? Less than significant impact. Sensitive receptors include the very young, the elderly, and those suffering from certain respiratory illnesses or disabilities. Common locations of sensitive receptors include schools, daycare centers, parks and recreational areas, medical facilities/hospitals, rest homes, and convalescent care facilities. According to the above definition, sensitive receptors are present in the project vicinity. Four schools are located within the 0.5 mile from the project site: Spurgeon Intermediate and Edward B. Cole Senior Academy north-east of the project site, Lincoln Elementary south-east of the project site, and Garden Grove USD: Russell Elementary School is located south west of the project site. Students attending any of these schools may have respiratory sensitivity to airborne dust during construction. However, the proposed project would not create a substantial source of pollutant concentrations, as it will not create additional traffic. The project is not anticipated to increase the CO levels such that they could have an impact on students. Because of the distant location of the schools to the project site, the pollutants will most likely dissipate before reaching the sensitive receptors. Therefore, the students will not likely be affected by the increase in pollutants emissions on the project site. This is considered a less than significant impact. Refer to Hazards Section VII for an additional discussion on airborne hazardous pollutants. 07/25/10 «PA\DMJ070l\MND\4.0 Environmental Analysis.doc» 4-9 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION JULY 2010 FIRST STREET BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PROJECT CITY OF SANTA ANA E. Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? Less than significant impact. The proposed project will produce odors during the asphalt application during construction. These odors will dissipate very quickly and should not be present within one day of the application. This impact is considered less than significant due to its temporary nature. The operation of the project is not anticipated to result in objectionable odors. The implementation of the project results in the same or similar odor characteristics (fuel exhaust) as existing conditions. Therefore, a less than significant impact is anticipated, and no mitigation is required. IV. Biological Resources Would the project: A. Have a substantial adverse impact, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive or special status species in local or regional plans, policies or regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services? Less than significant impact with mitigation. The First Street Bridge is an urban use with no native habitat. The study area for the proposed project has high density urban development, edged with ornamental vegetation. There is some planted native vegetation (i.e., California encelia [Encelia californica] and brittlebush [E. farinosa]) located in several landscaped areas outside the eastern edge of the Santa Ana River. A Natural Environmental Study (NES) (LSA Associates, Inc. March 2010) was prepared for the proposed project. The study area evaluated in the NES is approximately 1,528 feet (ft) in length by approximately 130 ft in width, inclusive of the approximately 435 ft long existing First Street Bridge. The west end of the study area begins on the east side of the First Street and Susan Street intersection and extends to the east, terminating in line with the east edge of a mobile home park on the north side of First Street. Most of the study area width is the 130 ft area between the existing buildings and residential communities and includes roadside ornamental vegetation, sidewalks, and other urban features; however, a wider section of the study area includes a concrete bike path and ornamental vegetation on the east side of the SAR and is 290 ft in width. The study area is surrounded by high-density commercial and residential development and ornamental vegetation associated with the development. The Santa Ana River is confined within an open concrete channel as it flows south under the Bridge between Harbor Boulevard and Fairview Street. Surface runoff from First Street is directed into the City's existing storm drain system. Vegetation throughout the majority of the study area consists of ruderal and ornamental vegetation, including planted native trees and shrubs (e.g., Bermuda grass [Cynodon dactylon], hottentot fig [Carpobrotus edulis], bougainvillea [Bougainvillea sp.], fruit trees, gum tree [Eucalyptus sp.], pine tree [Pinus sp.], sugar bush, and California encelia [Encelia californica]. Most of the ornamental trees are mature, but limited in cover, with low potential as nesting trees, particularly for raptors. The results of the literature review indicated the potential occurrence of 7 special -status and 28 special-interest plant species, as well as 11 special -status and 31 special-interest animal species. The 07/25/10 «P:\DMJ0701\MND\4.0 Environmental Analysis.doc» 4-10 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. JULY 2010 INITIAL STUDYIMITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION FIRST STREET BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PROJECT CITY OF SANTA ANA project area has suitable habitat and/or is within the elevation or distribution range for only some of these species. A total of one plant and 12 animal species have at least low potential for occurrence and are listed below. • Southern tarplant (Centromadia parryi ssp. australis) • Monarch butterfly (Danaus plexippus) • California legless lizard (Anniella pulchra pulchra) • Burrowing owl (Athene cunicularia) • Coopers' hawk (Accipiter cooperii) • Merlin (Falco columbarius) • Allen's hummingbird (Selasphorus sasin) • California horned lark (Eremophila alpestris actia) • Western yellow bat (Lasiurus xanthinus) • Yuma myotis (Myotis yumansis) • Pallid bat (Antrozous pallidus) • Big free -tailed bat (Nyctinomops macrotis) No special-status/special-interest species (i.e., listed species, species proposed for listing, candidate species, or species of interest) were observed or otherwise detected on site at the time of the site visits. Most potentially occurring species are either not expected or have a low probability of occurrence, but two bird species have low -moderate occurrence probability. Marginally suitable habitat exists within the project limits for foraging and nesting Cooper's hawk (Accipiter cooperii), a California Species of Special Concern species. Similarly, marginally suitable habitat exists within the project limits for foraging and nesting Allen's hummingbird (Selasphorus Basin), a Special Animal. Although these species were not observed during the surveys, it is likely that these species occur occasionally within and near the site. In addition, the bat species may be affected by loss of roosting habitat if bats are found to be day -roosting in the bridge structure. Overall, the project area is highly developed and no signs of special status/special interest animal species were observed. All native nesting birds are protected by the federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA). The proposed project is required to comply with the MBTA which prohibits disturbing or destroying active nests. Project implementation must be accomplished in a manner that avoids impacts to active nests during the breeding season. As documented in Mitigation Measure BIO -1, avoiding impacts can be accomplished through a variety of means, including restricting brush and tree removal, if required, to periods outside the avian nesting season (February 15 through August 15) or through performance of nesting bird surveys prior to clearing when clearing occurs during the nesting season. With implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO -1, potentially significant impacts to nesting birds would be reduced to a level considered less than significant. Mitigation Measure 07/25/10 «PA\DMJ0701\MND\4.0 Environmental Analysis.doe 411i, ff* 4-11 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION JULY 2010 FIRST STREET BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PROJECT CITY OF SANTA ANA BI0-1 All construction activities shall comply with the federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act of 1918 (MBTA). The MBTA governs the taking and killing of migratory birds, their eggs, parts, and nests and prohibits the take of any migratory birds, their eggs, parts, and nests. Compliance with the MBTA shall be accomplished by the following: • Prior to commencement of construction activities (in January or February) installation of a nesting bird/bat exclusionary device shall be installed on the existing bridge structures to preclude birds and bats from nesting or roosting on the structure. • If possible, all vegetation removal activities shall be scheduled from August 16 to February 14, which is outside the typical nesting season. If vegetation is to be cleared during the nesting season (February 15 to August 15), all suitable habitat shall be thoroughly surveyed for the presence of nesting birds by a qualified biologist no more than 7 days prior to clearing, and once weekly during construction to ensure that nesting birds are not present within 100 ft of construction activities. If any active nests are detected, the area shall be flagged and mapped on the construction plans along with a buffer appropriate for the nesting species as determined by the qualified biologist. The buffer area shall be avoided until the nesting cycle is complete or it is determined that the nest has failed. In addition, the biologist will be present on site to monitor the vegetation removal to ensure that any nests not detected during the initial survey are not disturbed. B. Have a substantial adverse impact on any riparian habitat or natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, and regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? No impact. The project area is a developed urban use with little native vegetation. The Santa Ana River is confined within an open concrete channel as it flows south under and perpendicular to the bridge. Surface runoff from First Street is directed into the City's existing storm drain system. The project study area does not contain any riparian habitat, and although several special concern natural communities were identified during the literature search, none were identified within the study area during the field survey. No significant impact to riparian habitat or other sensitive natural communities will result from project implementation, and no mitigation is required. C. Adversely impact federally protected wetlands (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) either individually or in combination with the known or probable impacts of other activities through direct removal, filling hydrological interruption, or other means? Less than significant impact. The Santa Ana River is a tributary to the Pacific Ocean, which is a "traditional navigable water," and within the project area it has been channelized with flat concrete sides and bottom. The mouth of the Santa Ana River is a traditional navigable water and the ACOE will determine whether the Santa Ana River in the project area is a traditional navigable water or a relatively permanent water. The Santa Ana River is perennial and conveys runoff from urban water uses. The SAR headwaters begin in the San Bernardino Mountains, flow into the Prado Basin in San Bernardino and Riverside Counties, and passes west and then south through the Cities of Yorba Linda, Anaheim, Orange, Santa Ana, Fountain Valley, Huntington Beach, Costa Mesa, and Newport Beach, where it flows into the Pacific Ocean. 07/25/10 ,,PA\DMJ0701\MND\4.0 Environmental Analysis.doc» 411"Ifft, 4-12 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION JULY 2010 FIRST STREET BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PROJECT CITY OF SANTA ANA A jurisdictional delineation was prepared to address the Santa Ana River within the study area. The total area of ACOE nonwetland waters of the U.S. within the study area is approximately 1.86 ac. There are no locations in the study area where potential ACOE jurisdictional wetlands occur (i.e., areas that satisfy all three criteria [i.e., soil, hydrology, vegetation] for ACOE jurisdictional wetlands). The area satisfying the ACOE jurisdictional criteria for nonwetland area, (waters of the U.S), is also subject to CDFG jurisdiction. In addition to the ordinary high water mark (OHWM), the width of the concrete banks can also be considered jurisdictional by the CDFG. Within the study area, approximately 2.50 ac of nonriparian (concrete -lined) streambed are under CDFG jurisdiction; however, due to the small area and the nonwetland status of the concrete channel, it is at the discretion of CDFG whether it chooses to take jurisdiction over the project. Construction activities include demolition of four existing bridge piers in the Santa Ana River. These four piers will be replaced with two new piers for the new bridge. The reduction of piers in the Santa Ana River is an overall benefit because it reduces flow impediments in the river. Authorizations required will include the following: (1) An ACOE Nation Wide Permit (NWP) No. 14 for linear transportation projects with permanent impacts less than 0.50 ac within the OHWM of the SAR, (2) An ACOE NWP No. 33 for temporary structures, work, and discharges necessary for construction activities, (3) Compliance with the General Conditions of any NWP, including notification to the ACOE District Engineer with a preconstruction notification (PCN) as early as possible, (4) A Streambed Alteration Notification (SAN) must be filed with CDFG for the permanent bridge structure over the channel, and (5) The Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) needs to certify the use of NWP Nos. 14 and 33 for this project. D. Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as tree preservation policy or ordinance? No impact. The Santa Ana General Plan identifies two locally significant plant species: hibiscus is the official city flower and jacaranda is the official city tree. There are neither hibiscus flowers nor jacaranda trees on the project site. Moreover, the City of Santa Ana has not adopted any plant or tree preservation policy or ordinance concerning those species. Therefore, no impact is anticipated and no mitigation is required. V. CULTURAL RESOURCES Would the project: A. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in Section 15064.5? 07/25/10 <PA\DMJ070l\MND\4.0 Environmental Analysis.doc» 411"M, 4-13 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. INITIAL STUDYIMITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION JULY 2010 FIRST STREET BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PROJECT CITY OF SANTA ANA No impact. The proposed project is a bridge replacement and street widening in an urban and built - out environment. Because the project would not affect any existing structures (the project occurs in existing right-of-way) no historic properties will be affected according to the Historic Property Survey Report (LSA, July 2010). First Street Santa Ana Bridge was initially built in 1937, widened in 1959 and seismically retrofitted in 2005. The existing bridge is listed as Category 5 in the Caltrans Historic Highway Bridge Inventory: Bridge Number 55CO022 and is not eligible for listing on the National Register. The construction activities will be also conducted along First Street with no off-site construction activities or staging. The shoulders of the First Street are highly unlikely to contain significant historical resources within the project limits. The shoulders of the road were previously disturbed, and the soil was graded and compacted. Therefore, minor excavation, grading, and other construction activities that will occur within the street shoulders are not expected to result in the discovery of previously unknown historical resources. Therefore, no impacts to historic resources as defined in Section 15064.5 are anticipated. B. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a unique archaeological resource pursuant to define Section 15064.5? No impact. The proposed project is located in a completely built -out area and construction will occur on previously disturbed lands. The site was previously graded, and covered with concrete or asphalt. In addition, the depth of excavation for the bridge foundations (4 feet maximum) is not expected to exceed the previously prepared soils under the bridge foundation. The widening of First Street will also occur in previously disturbed soils, where no archaeological resources are expected to be found. The proposed project is not anticipated to impact archaeological resources, and no mitigation is required. C. Directly or indirectly disturb or destroy a unique paleontological resource or site? Less than significant impact. The area of the project site is already built out and completely covered with impervious surface (paved). The soils were previously disturbed and compressed, so the sensitivity of the area for paleontological resources is low. The project site may contain unknown subsurface fossil remains below grade or in the alluvium of Santa Ana River. Implementation of the project will require excavation of up to 4 feet and some trenching for the bridge piles, and foundations under the surface in the Santa Ana River Channel. Excavation deeper than 10 feet bgs may result in encounter of Pleistocene sediments (greater then 10,000 -year-old) which are rich in paleontological resources. Since no excavation deeper than 10 ft bgs will occur during the project construction there is very low potential to encounter Pleistocene aged sediments. The First Street widening will occur on both sides of the street and will result in addition of one through lane in each direction. The shoulders of the First Street within the right-of-way were previously disturbed, compacted, and graded and the likelihood of finding known or unknown paleontological resources is low. The construction activities will not likely affect paleontological resources since none of them exist on the site. Therefore, impacts to paleontological resources are not anticipated to occur as a result of the project, and no mitigation is required. D. Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? 07/25/10 «PA\DMJ070l\MND\4.0 Environmental Analysis.doc» 'kil1imp.p 4-14 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION JULY 2010 FIRST STREET BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PROJECT CITY OF SANTA ANA No impact. The site has been previously graded and paved. As discussed in the V a) and V b) the site has been disturbed for many years and no human remains are known or likely to exist on site. However, if any unknown human remains are encountered the work will be halted and County Coroner will be informed about the finding. As a result, no impact is anticipated, and no mitigation is required. VI. Geology and Soils Would the project: A. Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: 1. Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Less than significant impact. As with all of Southern California, the proposed project site will be subject to strong ground motion resulting from earthquakes. According to the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) earthquake database (HAZUS) and the 1999 Index to Fault Zone Maps (State Conservation Service Web site: http://ftp.consrv.ca.gov/pub/dmg/pubs/sp/sp42.pdf), there are no major faults in the City of Santa Ana and no fault or fault Zone crosses the project site. Therefore the proposed project would not result in a significant impact related to rupture of a known earthquake fault as delineated on the most Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone Map, and no mitigation is required. 2. Strong seismic ground shaking? Less than significant impact. The project site, like all of Southern California, is located in an active seismic region. Ground shaking resulting from earthquakes associated with both nearby and more distant faults is likely to occur. Several earthquake fault zones are located in Orange County, including the Newport -Inglewood Fault Zone which trends northwards and is located along the coast line, the Whittier fault zone which trends north east along the Puente Hills, and the Norwalk Fault which trends eastward along the southern edge of the Coyote Hills. Earthquakes on faults located within the 50 miles from the City can cause damage within the City. Depending on their magnitude, earthquakes generated within a 50 -mile radius of a given point are considered noteworthy and could cause minor to moderate damage.' The project site will experience effects of the regional seismic activity; the risk of strong seismic events would remain the same on site with the new bridge and street widening. The project does not propose any additional structures and the potential risk is considered the same or less than the existing risk due to the fact that the new bridge and First Street will conform to current building and seismic 1 Orange County General Plan, Safety Element, p. IX -80. 07/25/10 «P:\DMJ070l\MND\4.0 Environmental Analysis.doa> 4-15 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION JULY 2010 FIRST STREET BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PROJECT CITY OF SANTA ANA standards. Project impacts related to seismic ground shaking would be less than significant and no mitigation is required. 3. Seismic -related ground failure, including liquefaction? Less than significant impact. According to the California Geological Survey Seismic Hazard Zonation Program,' the project area is in a potential liquefaction zone. The City of Santa Ana General Plan also shows that the project site is located in the area of high to very high liquefaction zone. Because the proposed bridge is located over Santa Ana River and extends 300 ft west and east from the bridge the liquefaction potential is a function of the alluvial soil characteristics on site. The bridge construction and First Street widening will be consistent with the City's Building Code and the California Standard Building Code. Therefore, the project construction is not expected to create additional potential liquefaction risk. The potential risk associated with the new bridge construction and street widening may actually decrease the potential for seismic -related failure because the proposed bridge would comply with existing seismic design criteria. Due to compliance with modern building practices, project impacts related to liquefaction would be less than significant and no mitigation is required. 4. Landslides? No impact. According to the California Geological Survey Seismic Hazard Zonation Program, project site is not located in the earthquake induced landslide zone. The site is already developed and the replacement of the bridge and street widening will not create additional structures that could expose people to landslides, mudslides, or elevated erosion on or off site. No impacts are anticipated, and no mitigation is required. B. Would the project result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? Less than significant impact with mitigation. During construction activities, soil would be exposed and there would be an increased potential for soil erosion compared to existing conditions. Construction would occur in an already built -out area, which was previously graded and compacted. Construction activities would result in minor excavation occurring mostly in the channelized Santa Ana River and are not anticipated to expose substantial areas of soil to additional erosion impacts. The disturbed soil area during construction of the proposed project would be approximately 0.33 ac. Erosion impacts would be minimized through implementation of Erosion and Sediment Control Best Management Practices (BMPs). As specified in Mitigation Measure WQ-1, presented later in Section VIII, Hydrology and Water Quality, an Erosion Control Plan would be prepared for the proposed project and would specify the specific BMPs, such as sand bags, to be implemented during construction. The Erosion Control Plan would ensure the implementation and maintenance of BMPs to reduce or eliminate sediment in storm water. With implementation of Erosion and Sediment Control BMPs, as specified in Mitigation Measure WQ-1, impacts related to soil erosion during construction would be reduced to below a level of significance. ' California Division of Land Resource Protection, http://www.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/shzp/, 2007-08-10. 07/25/10 «PADMJ070l\MND\4.0 Environmental Analysis.doc» �� A 0 MR LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION JULY 2010 FIRST STREET BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PROJECT CITY OF SANTA ANA The proposed project would increase the impervious surface area by approximately 0.30 ac compared to the existing roadway facility. Any increase in volume and velocity of runoff would not be substantial and would be conveyed to the existing downstream conveyance channels which are engineered, hardened, and regularly maintained. Project runoff would not be directed to unpaved areas prone to erosion. Therefore, the proposed project would result in less than significant impacts related to soil erosion and the loss of topsoil and no mitigation is required. C. Would the project result in the loss of a unique geologic feature? No impact. The proposed project is located in a built -out area, where no unique geologic features are present. The proposed project would not impact any unique geologic features on the site and no mitigation is required. D. Is the project located on strata or soil that is unstable or that would become unstable as a result of the project and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse? No impact. The site is already built -out and the vicinity of the site is relatively flat and developed with urban uses. Therefore, the proposed project will not result in on -or off-site landslides, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse. No impact is expected and no mitigation is required. E. Where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater, is the soil capable of supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems? No impact. The proposed project does not include the use of septic tanks or alternative methods for disposal of wastewater. The proposed project is a bridge replacement and street widening project; no sewage disposal systems are planned. There would be no project impact related to the disposal of wastewater and no mitigation is required. VII. Hazards and Hazardous Materials Would the project: A. Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use or disposal of hazardous materials? Less than significant impact with mitigation. According to the Initial Site Assessment (LSA, July, 2010) no hazardous materials are associated with the operation of the bridge or roadway. However, lead -containing materials and asbestos -containing materials (AGMs) and polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) may be present in the existing bridge structure and on the First Street. In general, ACMs and lead -containing materials have been documented in the rail shim sheet packing, bearing pads, support piers, and expansion joint material of bridges as well as asphalt and concrete. Short-term impacts related to construction activities consist mostly of fugitive dust emissions and equipment exhaust. 07/25/10 «P:\DMJ0701\MND\4.0 Environmental Analysis.doc» glhlffl'� 4-17 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION JULY 2010 FIRST STREET BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PROJECT CITY OF SANTA ANA The bridge demolition and street widening will generate different pollutant emissions. There is a potential that during the demolition of the bridge, ACMs, could be released into the air. Any activity that involves cutting, grinding, or drilling during demolition could release friable asbestos fibers unless proper precautions are taken. Utility pole -mounted electrical transformers were observed within the project limits. Polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) were used in electrical transformers manufactured between 1929 and 1977. Leaking transformers are considered a potential hazard for PCB. Therefore, surveys will be required prior to relocation of these utilities. First Street and the bridge contain some traffic stripes and pavement -marking materials (i.e., paint, thermoplastic, permanent tape, and temporary tape) which may consist of lead. Yellow paints made prior to 1995 may exceed hazardous waste criteria under Title 22, California Code of Regulations, and may require disposal to a Class I disposal site. Therefore, any yellow traffic striping and pavement -marking material should be tested and removed in accordance with Caltrans Standard Special Provisions (SSP) XE 15-300. Mitigation Measure HM -1 and compliance with current standards will reduce potential impacts related to public and transportation of hazardous materials. All materials containing PCBs, lead based paint, and asbestos will need to be removed, handled, and disposed of in accordance with State and federal laws regulating remediation and disposal of these materials. Mitigation Measures HM -1 through HM -7 will reduce potential impacts to a level below significance. Mitigation Measures HM -1 Prior to bridge demolition and First Street widening testing and removal of any yellow traffic striping and pavement -marking material will be required in accordance with Caltrans Standard Special Provisions (SSP) XE 15-300. HM -2 Prior to relocation of the utility pole -mounted transformers from the project site, transformers should be inspected for leaks. Leaking transformers should be considered a potential for polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB) hazard unless tested and should be handled accordingly. HM -3 Prior to demolition a certified asbestos consultant should conduct asbestos testing of the existing bridge. HM -4 Prior to commencement of any construction activity, AGMs should be removed and disposed of by a licensed and certified asbestos abatement contractor in accordance with Caltrans SSP 5.1-7, "Removal of Asbestos and Hazardous Substances. HM -5 Any demolition or renovation of a structure requires notification and submittal of fees to the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) at least 10 days prior to proceeding with the demolition work (refer to SCAQMD Rule 1403). Failure to do so may result in the City being cited for regulatory noncompliance. Notification would fall under Sections 7-1.01F, Air Pollution Control, and 7-1.04, Permits and Licenses of the Standard Specifications. Contractors will adhere to the requirements of SCAQMD Rule 1403 during renovation/demolition activities. 07/25/10 uP:\DMJ0701\MND\4.0 Environmental Analysis.doe. 4-18 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. INITIAL STUDYIMITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION JULY 2010 FIRST STREET BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PROJECT CITY OF SANTA ANA HM -6 To ensure that utility owners mark the locations of underground transmission lines and facilities, notify the Underground Service Alert of Southern California by calling 1-800-227- 2600 at least two working days prior to subsurface excavation. HM -7 As is the case for any project that proposes excavation, the potential exists for unknown hazardous contamination to be revealed during construction of the proposed First Street Bridge widening improvements. For any previously unknown hazardous waste/material encountered during construction, the procedures outlined in Appendix E, Caltrans Unknown Hazards Procedures for Construction, will be followed. B. Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonable foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous material into the environment? Less than significant impact. The proposed project does not have the potential to create a hazard to the public or environment through upset or accident conditions that may lead to release of hazardous materials. No chemicals will be used in the replacement of the bridge structure and street widening or during the operation of the project that could result in foreseeable release of the hazardous materials. However, the northern and southern bridge structure that will be demolished may contain lead-based construction materials and asbestos, which will be removed and disposed of in accordance with State and federal laws regulating asbestos remediation and disposal. The construction of the additional through lanes on the First Street is not anticipated to create hazards to the public or environment. The street may contain some traffic stripes and pavement -marking materials of the paint, however, they will be tested, removed and disposed of to the Class I disposal site. Mitigation Measures HM -1 through HM -4, and HM -7 will further reduce the potential impact associated with ACMs and lead- based materials that may occur during demolition of the bridge to less than significant levels. C. Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substance or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? Less than significant impact. The operation of the proposed project would not emit or involve handling of hazardous materials or substances because the project is constrained to a bridge replacement and street widening. No hazardous materials are associated with these uses. No existing or proposed schools are located within the one-quarter from the project site. Less than significant impacts are anticipated and the mitigation measures HM -1 through HM -4 will help to further reduce the impacts. D. Be located on a site which is located on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 659662.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? Less than significant impact. The project is located in a built -out area, and previous uses of this site have not involved the use or operation of any hazardous materials. However, according to the ISA (LSA, July 2010) five known releases of hazardous substances occurred within 0.33 mile of the project vicinity, consisting of Leaking Underground Storage Tanks (LUST). Three leaking underground storage tanks (LUSTS) containing gasoline were issued closure letters and therefore, are not considered to pose a concern to the project site. Two other LUSTS affected groundwater and are currently undergoing remediation. According to records obtained from the RWQCB and the 07/25/10 «P:\DMJ0701\MND\4.0 Environmental Analysis.doc» 5 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. INITIAL STUDYIMITI GATE D NEGATIVE DECLARATION JULY 2010 FIRST STREET BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PROJECT CITY OF SANTA ANA GeoTracker database, groundwater impacts at these properties are limited to areas immediately surrounding the release site. Therefore, no significant hazards on or in the vicinity of the project site currently exist that would impact the public or environment. Less than significant impacts are expected and no mitigation is required. E. For a project located within an airport land use plan or where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles where of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? No impact. The proposed project is not located within the airport land use plan or within two miles from the airport. The nearest airport, John Wayne Airport in Santa Ana, is located approximately 5 miles south from the project site. According to the Airport Environs Element of General Plan, the proposed project is also located outside of the Federal Aviation Administration Notification Area. Therefore, no impacts are expected and no mitigation is required. F. For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? No impact. The project is not located within the vicinity of the private airstrip and therefore, will not result in a safety hazards for people residing in the project area. No impact is anticipated and no mitigation is required. G. Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? No impact. The proposed project will not change the access to and from the project site in case of emergency. The proposed project will widen First Street and the bridge over Santa Ana River to the master planned width of 6 lanes. Access to the project will be accomplished through existing access via First Street, the OCFCD maintenance road on the west side of the Santa Ana River, and the Santa Ana River Bicycle Trail on the east side of the Santa Ana. During construction activities one through lane in each direction will remain open. Therefore, the implementation of the proposed project would not interfere with any adopted emergency plan. No mitigation is required. H. Expose people or structure to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? No impact. As shown on Figure 2 of Section 2, the project is located in an urban area and most likely would not be affected by wildland fires because they tend to occur on an urban/rural fringe and in undeveloped natural areas. No impact is anticipated, and no mitigation is required. VIII. Hydrology and Water Quality Would the project: A. Violate Regional Water Quality Control Board water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? 07/25/10 «PA\DMJ070l\MND\4.0 Environmental Analysis.doc» 20A-71 4-20 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. INITIAL STUDYIMITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION JULY 2010 FIRST STREET BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PROJECT CITY OF SANTA ANA Less than significant impact with mitigation. Construction. During construction activities, excavated soil would be exposed, and there would be an increased potential for soil erosion due to rainfall/runoff and wind compared to existing conditions. The disturbed soil area during construction of the project would be approximately 0.33 ac. In addition, chemicals, liquid products, petroleum products (such as paints, solvents, and fuels), and concrete -related waste may be spilled or leaked and have the potential to be transported via storm runoff into receiving waters. Dewatering of groundwater is not anticipated during construction. Construction impacts would be minimized through implementation of Erosion and Sediment Control Best Management Practices (BMPs), as well as BMPs that control other potential construction -related pollutants. As specified in Mitigation Measure WQ-1, an Erosion Control Plan would be prepared for the proposed project and would specify the specific BMPs, such as sand bags, to be implemented during construction. The Erosion Control Plan would ensure the implementation and maintenance of BMPs to reduce or eliminate sediment, pollutants adhering to sediment, and other nonsediment pollutants in storm water as well as non -storm water discharges. Operation. Pollutants of concern during operation of a transportation facility include sediments, trash, petroleum products, metals, and chemicals. Because the project would widen First Street and the First Street Bridge, it would result in a permanent increase of impervious surfaces and a permanent increase in runoff and pollutant loading. The project would increase the impervious surface area by approximately 0.30 ac compared to the existing roadway facility. An increase in impervious area would increase the volume of runoff during a storm, which would more effectively transport pollutants to receiving waters. Proposed conditions would follow the drainage pattern of the existing conditions. Currently there are no Treatment BMPs within the project area, and runoff from the project area is untreated. In order to prevent degradation of receiving water quality with construction of the proposed project, the City would implement Source Control, Site Design, and Treatment Control BMPs, consistent with the Orange County Drainage Area Management Plan (DAMP) and the City's Local Implementation Plan (LIP). Implementation of these BMPs is specified in Mitigation Measure WQ- 2. Proposed Source Control BMPs include common area landscape management, BMP maintenance, storm drain stenciling, and slope protection and energy dissipation. Proposed Site Design BMPs include minimizing impervious areas and connectivity. Proposed Treatment Control BMPs include a biofiltration swale and catch basin inserts. The proposed Treatment Control BMPs would target sediment, heavy metals, organic compounds, trash and debris, oil and grease, and bacteria and viruses. The biofiltration Swale would be located in the southwest portion of the project area, within the landscaped area. The catch basin inserts would be installed in the existing catch basins located on the east side of North Harper Street and West First Street and on the south side of West First Street and North Gunther Place. With incorporation of construction and postconstruction BMPs, as specified in Mitigation Measures WQ-1 and WQ-2, impacts related to waste discharge requirements and water quality standards would be reduced to less than significant levels. 07/25/10 ,TA\DMJ0701\MND\4.0 Environmental Analysis.doc» 1y 4-21 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION JULY 2010 FIRST STREET BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PROJECT CITY OF SANTA ANA Mitigation Measures WQ-1 During final design, the City of Santa Ana shall prepare specifications for an Erosion Control Plan, to be included in the bid package that describes the best management practices (BMPs) to be implemented during construction. The BMPs shall include Erosion and Sediment Control BMPs from the California Stormwater Quality Association's Stormwater Best Management Practice Handbook — Construction. The City of Santa Ana shall ensure that the construction contractor implements and maintains the BMPs identified in the Erosion Control Plan during project construction. WQ-2 During final design, the City of Santa Ana shall prepare a Final Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) that details the Source Control, Site Design, and Treatment Control BMPs to be incorporated into the proposed project. The BMPs shall be consistent with the Orange County Drainage Area Master Plan (DAMP) and City of Santa Ana Local Implementation Plan (LIP) and shall be properly designed, installed, and maintained to target pollutants of concern. The Source Control, Site Design, and Treatment Control BMPs shall include, but not be limited to, common area landscape management, BMP maintenance, storm drain stenciling, slope protection and energy dissipation, minimization of impervious areas and connectivity, a biofiltration swale, and catch basin inserts. B. Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (i.e., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? Less than significant impact. The project does not require use of water from a groundwater well or aquifer; therefore, groundwater supplies would not be affected by the proposed project. Historically, groundwater has been encountered between 5 and 28 ft below ground surface (bgs). Groundwater is not anticipated to be encountered during construction of the proposed project; therefore, groundwater dewatering is not anticipated. The project proposes bridge replacement and street widening. These uses currently exist on the site and do not require provision of potable water. Consequently, the proposed project will also not require an additional provision of potable water. The project would result in an addition of 0.30 ac of impervious area on site due to the street widening and thus reducing the amount of area available for groundwater infiltration. The project site is not considered an important area for groundwater recharge due to its high level of development. Therefore, impacts to groundwater supply are considered less than significant, and no mitigation is required. C. Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of stream or river, in a manner, which would result in substantial erosion or sitation on or off-site? Less than significant with mitigation. As discussed in detail in VII1.A., during construction the project would be required to implement an Erosion Control Plan and implement Erosion and 07/25/10 ,P:\DMJ0701\MND\4.0 Environmental Analysis.doc» 411_x? 4-22 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION JULY 2010 FIRST STREET BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PROJECT CITY OF SANTA ANA Sediment Control BMPs to prevent soil erosion during soil disturbance activities. Implementation of the Erosion and Sediment Control BMPs, as specified in Mitigation Measure WQ-1, would prevent adverse soil erosion and subsequent siltation impacts during construction. Existing runoff from the project site sheet flows into the curb and gutters and then into catch basins. The street widening and bridge replacement would not alter the drainage pattern on or off-site and runoff would continue to follow the same drainage pattern as the existing conditions. The Proposed project would increase the impervious surface area by approximately 0.30 ac compared to the existing roadway facility. Any increase in volume and velocity of runoff from the 0.30 ac increase in impervious surface area would not be substantial and would be conveyed to the existing downstream conveyance channels which are engineered, hardened and regularly maintained. Project runoff would not be directed to unpaved areas prone to erosion. The replacement of the bridge piers and nosing would occur within the Santa Ana River, which is concrete -lined within the project area and not subject to erosion. Therefore, the modifications within the Santa Ana River would not increase erosion. For these reasons, erosion and siltation impacts as a result of changes to existing drainage patterns would be less than significant and no mitigation is required. D. Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner, which would result in flooding on or off-site? Less than significant impact. As discussed above in VIII.C., the proposed project would not alter the existing drainage pattern of the site. The project would increase the impervious surface area by approximately 0.30 ac compared to the existing roadway facility. However, the rate and volume of surface water runoff from the facility would not increase substantially and would not cause flooding in the area. Therefore, impacts related to capacity of the existing stormwater drainage system would be less than significant. E. Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted run-off? Less than significant impact with mitigation. The proposed project would not create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial sources of polluted runoff. The Proposed project would increase the impervious surface area by approximately 0.30 ac compared to the existing roadway facility. This small increase in impervious area is not large enough to exceed the capacity of the existing storm drains. However, an increase in impervious area could result in an increase in pollutant loading to receiving waters. As specified in Mitigation Measure WQ-2, Source Control, Site Design, and Treatment BMPs would be incorporated into the project design to treat pollutants of concern in runoff from the project site prior to discharge to the City storm drain system. Therefore, with implementation of Mitigation Measure WQ-2, impacts related to addition of polluted run-off to the stormwater drainage system would be reduced to less than significant. F. Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? 07/25/10 «TA\DMJ0701\MND\4.0 Environmental Analysis.doc» 20A-74 4-23 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION JULY 2010 FIRST STREET BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PROJECT CITY OF SANTA ANA Less than significant impact with mitigation. Refer to VIILA., above. The site is currently developed; the proposed project does not result in greater water quality impacts other than existing uses. Vehicles using the existing site are already generating some pollutants which settle down on the street surface. The proposed project does not increase traffic volumes and therefore, will not result in substantial increase of the pollutants on site. Due to the high percentage of impervious surfaces already existing on site, no aspect of the proposed project could result in a substantial degradation of water quality because of the small amount of infiltration. No excessive runoff or discharge is anticipated to occur as a result of the project. Less than significant impacts are anticipated with the implementation of Mitigation Measures WQ-1 and WQ-2. G. Place housing within a 100 -year floodplain, as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? No impact. The proposed project does not involve housing development and would not place housing within a 100 -year floodplain. Therefore, no impacts are anticipated and no mitigation is required. H. Place within a 100 -year floodplain structures which would impede or redirect flood flows? Less than significant impact. According to the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) No. 06059CO256J (December 3, 2009), the Santa Ana River 100 - year floodplain within the project area is designated as Zone A, with the 1 percent annual chance flood discharge contained in the channel. The portions of the project area outside of the Santa Ana River are designated as Zone X, which is an area determined to be outside of the 100 -year and 500 - year floodplains. Construction activities would be required within the Santa Ana River 100 -year floodplain in order to replace the bridge piers and nosing. All construction activities in the channel would be conducted during the dry season (April 15 to October 15). Therefore, construction activities associated with replacement of the bridge within the 100 -year floodplain is not expected to impede or redirect flood flows. Four existing bridge piers and nosing, totaling 0.024 ac, would be permanently removed from the Santa Ana River channel and be replaced with two bridge piers and nosings totaling 0.015 ac resulting in a net decrease of 0.009 ac of structures within the 100 -year floodplain. Replacing the bridge piers would result in a minimal decrease in flood flow elevations, which would continue to be contained within the Santa Ana River 100 -year floodplain. Replacement of the bridge piers would not substantially impede or redirect flood flows; therefore impacts related to flood flows would be less than significant. No mitigation is required. L Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of failure of a levee or dam? Less than significant impact. According to the Santa Ana General Plan, Safety Element, Santa Ana River has a normally dry river bed and broad engineered channel banked by high earthen levees. Although the likelihood of significant flood hazard is low, Santa Ana River has a history of 07/25/10 «P:\DMJ0701\MND\4.0 Environmental Analysis.doe. 20A-75 4-24 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION JULY 2010 FIRST STREET BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PROJECT CITY OF SANTA ANA overflowing its banks. Throughout Santa Ana River Basin the potential exists for massive downstream flooding resulting from the failure of the Prado Dam, which is located 24 miles north- east of the project site. If Prado Dam failed while at full capacity the project site would be located within the potential flood inundation area. However, the proposed project would not expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding to a greater extent that under existing project conditions. Therefore, less than significant impact is expected and no mitigation is required. J. Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? No impact. The proposed project is located within a developed urban area and there are no water bodies such as lakes or reservoirs that could generate a seiche large enough to inundate the area. The proposed project is located inland, approximately 9.5 miles from the ocean (USGS mapping), and is not within a tsunami zone.' The project site and surrounding area are relatively flat and there are no hillsides or slope areas adjacent to the site that could generate a mudflow. Therefore, no impact related to seiche, tsunami, or mudflow is anticipated to occur in the project area. No mitigation is required. IX. Land Use and Planning Would the project: A. Physically divide an established community? Less than significant impact. The communities around the project site consist mostly of the manufactured housing parks, and apartment complex buildings that are already physically separated by the existing First Street and bridge over Santa Ana River. The proposed project will not change this configuration of the First Street and bridge. The proposed project will widen the First Street by adding one through travel lane in each direction and replace existing bridge structure. The project will also incorporate continuous pedestrian walk along the First Street and Santa Ana Bridge, thus improving the mobility among the manufactured housing park communities. Because the project will implement a sidewalk, it would provide beneficial effects for the surrounding communities. The bridge replacement will be conducted in two phases in order to reduce impacts to traffic. During northern bridge structure replacement, the traffic will continue to use the southern bridge structure. After completion of the northern bridge structure activities, the southern bridge structure will be replaced, and the traffic will utilize the northern bridge structure. Therefore, First Street will remain open during all construction activities. The construction activities will temporarily obstruct the movement of bicycles on the Santa Ana River Trail and therefore will require implementation of the detouring plan. The plan will reduce the temporary construction impacts allowing the cyclists to use nearby streets during the time of construction. Please refer to Section 2.0 for details regarding the detouring plan. Less than significant impacts are anticipated and no mitigation is required. ' http://nmviewogc.cr.usgs.gov/viewer.htm (USGS mapping), 2007-08-30. 07/25/10 «PA\DMJ070l\MND\4.0 Environmental Analysis.doc 411_Ift, 4-25 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. JULY 2010 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION FIRST STREET BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PROJECT CITY OF SANTA ANA B. Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? No impact. The improvement and enhancement of existing roadways are consistent with the goals and policies identified in the City's General Plan. The proposed project is consistent with the OCTA's Master Plan of Arterial Highways as well as the SCAG anticipated growth in the region. According to the City of Santa Ana General Plan, Land Use Element, First Street is located in a completely built out area and the Santa Ana River Bridge is located in the open space zone. The surrounding land uses encompass low density residential in north-west quadrant, general commercial and low density residential in south-west quadrant, medium density residential and general commercial in south-east quadrant, professional and administrative in north-east quadrant. The proposed project will continue to utilize the bridge and the First Street and would not change the existing land use of the site or conflict with any specific plan or zoning ordinance, or regulations. No impact is anticipated, and no mitigation is required.. C. Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? No impact. The First Street Santa Ana Bridge is located in a developed urban area (City of Santa Ana; Google Maps, accessed August 2007). There are no habitat/natural community conservation plans delineated in the area. Therefore, no impacts are anticipated, and no mitigation is required. X. Mineral Resources Would the project: A. Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? No impact. According to the California Geologic Survey, no known mineral resources or locally important resources exist on site.' The proposed project will not affect this status. Therefore, no impacts are anticipated, and no mitigation is required. B. Result in the loss of availability of a locally -important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan, or other land use plan? No impact. Please refer to the X.A. The City of Santa Ana General Plan states that there are no mineral resources and no mineral extraction activities. Therefore, no impact is expected, and no mitigation is required.. XI. Noise ' http://www.consrv.ca.gov/CGS/geologic_resources/mineral_resource_mapping/ http://www.consrv.ca.gov/CGS/minerals/images/YellowMap.pdf, 2007-08-27 07/25/10 «PADMJ070l\MND\4.0 Environmental Analysis.doc» 20A-77 4-26 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION JULY 2010 FIRST STREET BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PROJECT CITY OF SANTA ANA Would the project result in: A. Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? Less than significant impact with mitigation. Implementation of the proposed project would not result in a noticeable increase in noise levels on site due to the fact that the proposed project does not introduce any new land use type. The project will replace the bridge and widen First Street, and therefore, would not introduce new noise sources. According to the Noise Analysis (LSA Associates, Inc., 2010) the noise levels under the proposed project conditions will be similar to the existing noise levels. A slight increase in noise level is some locations may be expected and therefore, the abatement measures like sound barrier walls will be implemented to reduce noise levels so it will not affect the nearby receptors. Sound barrier walls were necessary only on the north side because the centerline of the roadway would shift to the north and relocate travel lanes closer to residences on the north side of First Street (in the area where there are only two travel lanes in each direction today). Whereas, the curb on the south side remains very close to its existing location and therefore noise levels on the south side would not be substantially affected by the project. Two sound barrier walls are proposed, one in the northwest quadrant and one in the northeast quadrant of the project site, protecting apartment complex and mobile home park from elevated noise levels, accordingly. The locations of these sound barrier walls are shown in Figure 17 in Section 2. Sound barrier wall number 1 (north west quadrant) will be located in place of the existing 5 ft wall which separates the First Street from the apartment complex. The sound barrier wall will be approximately 9-12 ft height and extend 238 ft from the existing entrance on the First Street westerly to the N Susan Street. Sound barrier wall number 4 along the edge of shoulder on the north east side of the First Street will be 6-14 ft high and will extend 477 ft easterly from Santa Ana River to the existing entrance to the park at First Street. The sound barrier walls will be located approximately 12 ft from the nearest travel lane. These two sound barrier walls satisfy noise standards for the Federal Highway Administration Noise Abatement Criteria and the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), so they have been incorporated into the project. In addition, sound barrier wall number 2 would extend from the northwest edge of the bridge abutment and proceed west to the edge of the driveway access to the apartment complex would be required to meet the City's noise standards. This wall would be 10 feet high. This sound barrier wall is also shown in Figure 17 in Section 2.0. Table 4.1 shows the existing and after project noise conditions using a 24-hour noise standard called Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL).1 Table 4.1 shows the existing 2007 measured CNEL levels, future without the project modeled noise levels, and future with project modeled noise levels. The last two columns show the change from the with project and without project future conditions and whether the change triggers abatement under the City's policies. Where there is a 3 dB CNEL increase in the change, abatement is ' CNEL measurements are a weighted average of sound levels throughout a 24-hour period. Different weighting factors apply to day, evening, and nighttime periods. This recognizes that community members are most sensitive to noise in late night hours and are more sensitive during evening hours than in daytime hours. 07/25/10 «PADMJ070l\MND\4.0 Environmental Analysis.doco qll_llff;� 4-27 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. JULY 2010 INITIAL STU DY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION FIRST STREET BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PROJECT CITY OF SANTA ANA Table 4.1: Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL) Calculations With and Without Project 07/25/10 «P:0MJ070l\MNDk1.0 Environmental Analysis.docu 4-28 With Calibration (CNEL) Sound Barrier No. Modeled Receptor Existing (2007) Without Project (2030) Future With Project (2030) Change from Without Project Requires Abatement 1 R-1 70 71 72 1 no 1 R-2 71 72 73 1 no 2 R-3 69 70 72 2 no 2 R-4 67 68 70 2 no 2 R-5 67 67 70 2 no 2 R-6 66 67 70 2 no 2 R-7 66 67 69 2 no 2 R-8 64 65 67 2 no 2 R-9 63 64 67 3 yes 2 R-10 64 65 67 2 no NR R-11 67 68 70 1 no NR R-12 68 69 70 1 no NR R-13 63 63 65 2 no NR R-14 62 63 64 1 no NR R-15 62 63 64 1 no 4 R-16 66 67 70 3 yes 4 R-17 65 66 69 3 yes 4 R-18 62 63 65 3 no 4 R-19 62 62 65 2 no 4 R-20 60 61 63 2 no 4 R-21 55 56 58 2 no 4 R-22 70 70 73 2 no 4 R-23 64 65 67 2 no 4 R-24 56 57 58 2 no 4 R-25 71 72 75 3 nol 4 R-26 52 53 55 2 no NR R-27 58 58 60 1 no NR R-28 58 59 61 2 no NR R-29 57 58 59 2 no NR R-30 54 55 56 2 no NR R-31 64 65 66 2 no 07/25/10 «P:0MJ070l\MNDk1.0 Environmental Analysis.docu 4-28 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. JULY 2010 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION FIRST STREET BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PROJECT CITY OF SANTA ANA 1. No outdoor use area exists at this location. 2. No sensitive receptor is located at this location. Highlight indicates that the Future With Project noise level exceeds 65 CNEL. NR = Not required 07/25/10 «PADMJ070l\MND\4.0 Environmental Analysis.doc» 4-29 With Calibration (CNEL) Sound Barrier No. Modeled Receptor Existing (2007) Without Project (2030) Future With Project (2030) Change from Without Project Requires Abatement NR R-32 53 54 55 2 no NR R-33 66 67 69 2 no NR R-34 64 65 67 2 no NR R-35 67 68 68 1 no NR R-36 63 63 64 1 no NR R-37 71 71 75 3 not NR R-38 60 61 62 1 no NR R-39 49 50 51 1 no NR R-40 68 69 70 1 no 1. No outdoor use area exists at this location. 2. No sensitive receptor is located at this location. Highlight indicates that the Future With Project noise level exceeds 65 CNEL. NR = Not required 07/25/10 «PADMJ070l\MND\4.0 Environmental Analysis.doc» 4-29 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. INITIAL STUDYIMITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION JULY 2010 FIRST STREET BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PROJECT CITY OF SANTA ANA required unless there is no sensitive receptor at that location or there is no outdoor use such as a patio, balcony, or backyard. Calculations have been rounded to the nearest integer in Table 4.1 for ease of expression. Under CEQA, sound barrier walls 2 and 4 are necessary to abate traffic noise with the bridge replacement and road widening. The construction phase of the proposed project will generate short-term construction -related noise that will expose sensitive receptors to some noise levels exceeding City of Santa Ana noise standards. The bridge demolition and pile driving will require use of loud construction equipment and activities, which will take place during the hours allowed by the "City of Santa Ana Noise Ordinance". Loud equipment will be used during the midday to provide quiet hours. Following completion of demolition and street widening, noise associated with the construction will cease. City of Santa Ana Noise Ordinance According to the City of Santa Ana Noise Ordinance Article VI, the City is designated a Zone 1, which means that exterior noise levels during the day (lam -10 pm) should not exceed 55 db, and should not exceed 50 dB during the night (10 pm- 7 am). The City further exempts certain categories of noise (including construction related noise) from this provision. (e) Noise sources associated with construction, repair, remodeling, or grading of any real property, provided said activities do not take place between the hours of 8:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. on weekdays, including Saturday, or any time on Sunday or a federal holiday. All construction activities will be in compliance with the City Noise Ordinance, which limits construction -related noise to the hours of 7:00 a.m.-8:00 p.m. weekdays and Saturdays, with no construction allowed at any time on Sundays or federal holidays. Although the City recognizes that construction noise is a nuisance, it acknowledges that noise is an inevitable part of construction activities, which are temporary and necessary for development. Construction activities are generally short-term, and noise from these activities ceases subsequent to the project build out. The Municipal Code exempts construction noise from the noise ordinance by scheduling construction activities during the least noise -sensitive part of the day. Also, to minimize the construction noise impact for sensitive land adjacent to the project site, construction noise is regulated by Caltrans Standard Specifications, Section 5-1, "Sound Control Requirements," in the Standard Special Provisions. These provisions follow: "Sound control shall conform to the provisions in Section 7-1.01I, Sound Control Requirements, of the Standard Specifications and these special provisions. The noise level from the Contractor's operations, between the hours of 9:00 p.m. and 6:00 a.m., shall not exceed 86 dBA at a distance of 50 feet. This requirement in no way relieves the contractor from responsibility for complying with local ordinances regulating noise level. The noise level requirement shall apply to the equipment on the job or related to the job, including but not limited to trucks, transit mixer or transient equipment that may or may not be owned by the contractor. The use of loud signals shall be avoided in favor of light warnings except those required by safety laws for the protection of personnel. Full compensation for conforming to the requirements of this section shall be considered as included in the prices 07/25/10 «PADMJ0701\MND\4.0 Environmental Analysis.doe. 4-30 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. JULY 2010 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION FIRST STREET BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PROJECT CITY OF SANTA ANA paid for the various contract items of work involved and no additional will be allowed therefor." Implementation of the Mitigation Measure N-1 and compliance with the City Noise Ordinance and Caltrans Standard Specifications will minimize short-term noise impacts to a level below significance. Mitigation Measure N-1 Prior to authorization of final construction plans, the following measures shall be included in the numbered specifications of the plans: a. Sec. 18-314. Special provisions of the Article VI City Municipal Code requires that construction activities be prohibited between the hours of 8:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. on the weekdays and Saturdays, with no construction activities occurring at any time on Sundays or federal holidays. b. Noise -generating construction equipment operated on site shall be equipped with the most modern and effective noise control devices (i.e., mufflers, lagging, and/or motor enclosures). All equipment shall be properly maintained to assure that no additional noise due to worn or improperly maintained parts would be generated. c. Truck deliveries and haul -off shall use approved haul routes that are away from noise - sensitive locations. d. Noisier construction (e.g., demolition, backhoe operations) activities shall be scheduled during the midday, if feasible, so that a quiet period can be provided. e. The contractor shall notify the existing tenants in advance of any and all construction activities. The construction manager's (or representative) telephone number shall also be provided with the notification so that community concerns can be communicated. f. Construction noise should be monitored during high levels of activity to determine compliance with local noise criteria. In the event that the noise criteria is exceeded, the construction activities would be reviewed to determine whether there are reasonable means to further mitigate the construction noise. g. Mechanical equipment used during the operation of the project shall be acoustically engineered, incorporating quite designs, mufflers, enclosures, parapets, etc., so that noise generated by theses operations would not exceed the noise standard at receptor locations. B. Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? Less than significant impact. The proposed project would involve use of equipment or vehicles that could create a substantial groundborne vibration to nearby uses or expose nearby residents to an excessive vibration during demolition activities. These effects are temporary and will cease upon the project completion. The operation of the project will not result in generation of vibration impacts other than impacts that already occur on the site. Therefore, the impacts are considered less than significant, and no mitigation is required. 07/25/10 «PADMJ0701\MND\4.0 Environmental Analysis.doc» 41L'�e* 4-31 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. JULY 2010 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION FIRST STREET BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PROJECT CITY OF SANTA ANA C. A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? Less than significant impact. According to the Noise Analysis (LSA Associates, Inc.) the noise levels under the proposed project conditions will be similar to the existing noise levels. The proposed project does not introduce new land use types and does not generate substantial increase in traffic levels in the project site. Slight increase in noise level may be expected in some locations; 3 sensitive receptor locations were identified along the First Street that will require incorporation of noise abatement measures. Noise levels at these locations approach or exceed 65 dBA CNEL which is the City's noise standard in the General Plan Noise Element. Therefore, three sound barrier walls will be implemented as part of the project (and are described in Section 2.0) to reduce the traffic noise so that it will not affect the nearby receptors. Therefore, with incorporation of these noise abatement measures as part of the project design, less then significant impacts are expected. D. A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without project? Less than significant impact with mitigation. The proposed project will result in a temporary increase in ambient noise levels during construction. The first type of construction noise would be generated by commuting construction crew and the transport of construction equipment and materials to and off site. The second type of construction noise would be generated during demolition of the bridge, excavation, grading and street widening due to the use of loud construction equipment. The site preparation phase, which includes demolition and grading, tends to generate the highest noise levels, because the noisiest construction equipment is earthmoving equipment which includes excavating machinery such as backfillers, bulldozers, front loaders, and compacting equipment such as compactors, scrapers, and graders. Construction of the proposed project is also expected to require the use of water trucks, and pickup trucks. Table 4.2 shows the typical construction equipment schedule during the construction activities. Table 4.2: Typical Construction Equipment Schedule Type of Equipment Range of Maximum Sound Levels Measured (dBA at 50 feet) Suggested Maximum Sound Levels for Analysis (dBA at 50 feet Pile drivers, 12,000 to 18,000 ft-lb/blow 81-96 93 Rock drills 83-99 96 Jackhammers 75-85 82 Pneumatic tools 78-88 85 Pumps 74-84 80 Dozers 77-90 85 Scrapers 83-91 87 Haul trucks 83-94 88 Cranes 79-86 82 Portable generators 71-87 80 Rollers 75-82 80 Tractors 77-82 80 Front-end loaders 77-90 86 Hydraulic backhoes 81-90 86 07/25/10 «PADMJ070l\MND\4.0 Environmental Analysis.doc» 411:191 4-32 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION JULY 2010 FIRST STREET BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PROJECT CITY OF SANTA ANA Type of Equipment Range of Maximum Sound Levels Measured (dBA at 50 feet) Suggested Maximum Sound Levels for Analysis dBA at 50 feet Hydraulic excavators 81-90 86 Graders 79-89 86 Air compressors 76-89 86 Trucks 81-87 86 Source: Noise Control for Buildings and Manufacturing Plants, Bolt, Beranek & Newman (1987). dBA = A -weighted decibels ft-lb/blow= foot-pounds per blow The closest sensitive receptor locations are located approximately 50 ft from the new sound barrier construction areas. These receptor locations may be subject to short-term noise exceeding acceptable levels (91 dBA L.x) generated by construction activities along the project alignment. However, as provided in the X "A" the construction activities will be limited to the allowed hours and with incorporation of Mitigation Measure N-1, noise related impacts will be reduced to less than significant levels. E. For a project located within an airport land use plan or where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? No impact. The proposed project is not located near an airport and would not be affected by any land use or noise regulations associated with an airport because the project site is 8 miles from John Wayne Airport (Thomas Bros Maps, Orange County Street Guide, 2007, p. 828 J-3, p. 829 A-3). No impact is anticipated, and no mitigation is required. I. For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project are to excessive noise levels. No impact. The proposed project is not located near a private airstrip and would not be affected by any land use or noise regulations associated with the operation of a private airstrip (General Plan, Airport Environs Element, 1987). No impact is anticipated, and no mitigation is required. XII. Population and Housing Would the project: A. Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and business) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? No impact. The project is already developed with commercial and residential land uses, as shown on Figure 2 of Section 2.0. The proposed project will not change or add any new land use type on the site. 07/25/10 «P:\DMJ0701\MND\4.0 Environmental Analysis.doc» 411"M:n 4-33 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION JULY 2010 FIRST STREET BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PROJECT CITY OF SANTA ANA The proposed project is not growth inducing because it does not propose any new development, or does not extend the roads or other structures beyond what was already master -planned for the First Street. The proposed project would replace Santa Ana Bridge and widen First Street to its Master Planned width of 6 lanes. Approximately 300 feet east and west from the bridge First Street is a 6 lanes major arterial, whereas the existing bridge accommodates only 4 travel lanes. The proposed bridge over Santa Ana River will accommodate 6 lanes to fit the current capacity of First Street on both sides of the bridge. Therefore, the proposed project is considered a gap closure project, and will not result in direct or indirect growth impacts. No impacts are anticipated and no mitigation is required. B. Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? No impact. The proposed project will not result in displacement of existing housing. The proposed project right-of-way is confined to the First Street and the project will not permanently acquire any new parcels. However, the First Street widening will require utility relocations and may require implementation of temporary construction easements due to addition of one lane in each direction. Upon the completion of the project design, the number of construction easements will be determined. A very small amount of right-of-way may be required off-site for the construction of sound and retaining walls. No residential relocation would occur as a result of the project. Because the project does not displace housing or result in need in provision of additional housing no impacts are expected and no mitigation is required. C. Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? No impact. The proposed project will not lead to displacement of people. The proposed project will not require any temporary or permanent parcel acquisitions and will not lead to relocation of people. The proposed project will require only minor temporary construction easements for construction of the sound wall. However, these easements will not result in displacement impacts. No mitigation is required. XIII. Public Services A. Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service rations, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public service: Less than significant impact. The proposed project will not require provision of additional public services or utilities. However, construction of the bridge and widening of the First Street will result in the relocation of several utility lines: overhead power poles and telephone lines, and water mains. Construction activities will relocate overhead electrical lines owned by SCE and overhead telephone 07/25/10 ,P:\DMJ0701\MND\4.0 Environmental Analysis.doc» 'kil1'k :o 4-34 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. INITIAL STUDYIMITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION JULY 2010 FIRST STREET BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PROJECT CITY OF SANTA ANA lines owned by AT&T which are currently located along the north side of the First Street. After the completion of the improvements on the north side of the project limits the utility lines will be relocated to the proposed sidewalk. The construction activities will also impact water mains. One water main owned by the City is affixed to the deck on the south side of the bridge, on the outside of the exterior girder. After construction of the north side of the bridge, the existing water main will be relocated to the north side of the new bridge, affixed to the deck on the outside of the exterior girder. A 6 -inch reclaimed water main and a 2 -inch electrical conduit run parallel to the Santa Ana River, on the east side and crosses under the bridge. These facilities are utilized for the landscaping within the channel right-of-way and will require relocation as part of the bridge construction. The final relocation plans of these utility lines have not been determined yet, however, two relocation alternatives are taken into consideration: 1. Temporary relocation by affixing the main/conduit to the slope paving during the construction of the abutment, then permanently relocate the main/conduit to the abutment face, at the top of slope paving, once the bridge construction is completed. This will provide full access to the facilities. 2. Permanent relocation by installing the main/conduit in a steel casing behind the abutment, crossing First Street. This will limit the future accessibility to the facilities; however, the relocation could be done in single stage. The construction impacts will be temporary and after relocation of the utilities, there will be no additional impacts are expected. All utility lines relocation will be conducted wit the close coordination with involved agencies/owners, and therefore, less then significant impacts are expected and no mitigation is required. Below is a list of the utilities that could be affected and the parties that the City will coordinate with for access or relocation. Overhead Electrical (Southern California Edison) Overhead Telephone (AT&T) Gas (Southern California Gas) 84 -inch RCP Sewer (Orange County Sanitation District) Fiber Optic (Multiple Owners) Storm Drain (private) Water (City) 6 -inch Reclaimed Water (County of Orange) Fire protection? No impact. The surrounding area is served by the Station Number 8, located just west of the project site at 501 N. Newhope Street. No major changes other than bridge replacement and street widening are anticipated to occur to the current configuration of First Street . Therefore, there is no additional requirement or need for fire protection or emergency services or facilities in the project area. No impact is anticipated, and no mitigation is required. Police protection? 07/25/10 ,<PA\DMJ0701\MND\4.0 Environmental Analysis.doc,, 411:11, 4-35 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION JULY 2010 FIRST STREET BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PROJECT CITY OF SANTA ANA No impact. The surrounding area is served by the City of Santa Ana Westend Substation 1, located just south of the project site at 3750 W. McFadden Avenue. The proposed project will not change the land use type and therefore will not require provision of additional police services. No impact is anticipated, and no mitigation is required. Schools? No impact. The proposed project does not anticipate the provision or need for any education -related services. The proposed project is a bridge replacement and widening of First Street. There is no need for the provision of educational facilities because the project does not propose housing development or student -related faculties. The project will not result in the physical deterioration of any existing school buildings, as its operation does not relate to the provision or need of any educational services. No impact is anticipated, and no mitigation is required. Parks? No impact. There are 3 recreational parks and a golf course located within 1 mile distance from the bridge: Spurgeon Park, Caesar Chavez Campesino Park, Santa Anita Park, and the Willowick golf course. The proposed project would not result in the physical deterioration of park facilities or a need for additional park facilities. The proposed project will replace the bridge over Santa Ana River and widen First Street to accommodate 6 travel lanes. The project does not involve new housing development and therefore will not increase the amount of local residents who will be using local parks or recreational trails. Therefore, the project would not increase the demand for the existing park facilities. No impact is expected, and no mitigation is required. Other public facilities? No impact. The proposed project will widen portions of the First Street in order to match the existing street configuration at the east and west ends of the project limits. There will be no other changes to First Street and the bridge over Santa Ana River. There is no additional need for the provision of public and governmental services or facilities in the project area. No impacts are expected and no mitigation is required. XIV. Recreation A. Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? No impact. The proposed project will not increase the use of or demand for recreational facilities. According to the Santa Ana General Plan, the Santa Ana River is a regional inter -city corridor and a part of the regional open space network. The Santa Ana River Bicycle Trail runs north -south along the east side of the Santa Ana River and underneath the First Street/Santa Ana Bridge. The OCTA CBSP designates the bike trail as Class 1, and extends from the Chino Hills State Park in north Orange County to the mouth of the Santa Ana River in Huntington Beach. 07/25/10 uPA\DMJ070l\MND\4.0 Environmental Analysis.doc» �� A 0�1 4-36 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION JULY 2010 FIRST STREET BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PROJECT CITY OF SANTA ANA Four other recreational facilities including a golf course are located within a 1 -mile radius. The proposed project will not increase the demand and use of the above recreational parks and would not cause substantial physical deterioration of these facilities. The proposed project will not incorporate any new housing that would foster the use of these parks. Cyclists will continue to use the Santa Ana River Trail or other recreational parks, but the project would not cause an increased demand for these recreational uses because road widening does not affect bicycle trail use. During construction, the trail will be temporarily rerouted and a bike detour plan will be implemented to accommodate users of the Santa Ana River Trail. As stated in Section 2.0, the detour plan will reduce the impacts associated with the bridge construction and will help to avoid full bike trail closure. After the completion of construction activities the bicycle traffic will continue to move along Santa Ana River Trail. Therefore, the implementation of the detour plan will result in no impact to recreational facilities and no mitigation is required. B. Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? Less than significant impact. The proposed project is not required to build recreational facilities subject to local or State park standards as these apply to residential uses. Refer to XIV.A for additional discussion. However, the construction activities on the bridge will require temporary bike detour to the nearby streets, Mc Fadden Avenue and Fifth Street. According to the OCTA Commuter Bikeways Strategic Plan (CBSP), the following safety policy applies to all classes of bikeways. 1.12 Bicycle Safety: Separate bicycle and automobile traffic wherever possible, taking into consideration safety, users of the facility, economic factors, and physical feasibility, and by designing only one-way bike lanes, thereby minimizing conflicts at intersections and reducing the hazards of bicyclists traveling against traffic. The detour plan is designed to prevent bicyclists from crossing lanes as they access local streets from the Bicycle Trail. Because the detour will be temporary, the plan will not interfere with the goals set in the City's Recreation Element, the OCTA CBSP and will not have an adverse physical effect on the environment. Construction activities will be temporary and will cease upon the project completion. Therefore, less than significant impacts are anticipated, and no mitigation is required. XV. Transportation/Traffic Would the project: A. Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections)? 07/25/10 «PADMJ070l\MND\4.0 Environmental Analysis.doc» q1h1ff;1;� 4-37 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION JULY 2010 FIRST STREET BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PROJECT CITY OF SANTA ANA Less than significant impact. The proposed project will not result in an increase in the amount of traffic that could load or exceed the capacity of the street system. The objective of the project is to lessen traffic congestion and improve public safety. First Street between Harbor Boulevard and Fairview Street (over the Santa Ana River) is identified as a Major (six -lane) arterial highway in the City's Circulation Element and on the City of Santa Ana Master Plan of Arterial Highways (MPAH). The bridge over the Santa Ana River currently provides two lanes in each direction. Implementation of the MPAH will widen this bridge to accommodate three lanes in each direction. Pedestrian facilities (i.e., sidewalks) will be improved to provide a continuous sidewalk on both the north and south side of the bridge and approaches along this segment. First Street east and west from the bridge will also be widened to accommodate 6 travel lanes in order to match the existing street configuration at the east and west ends of the project limits. The proposed project is not expected to generate any additional traffic and will not result in substantial increase in the number of vehicle trips. The proposed project is expected to improve traffic movement in the project vicinity. According to the Traffic Analysis, (LSA, July 2007), based on the existing traffic counts, the First Street/Santa Ana bridge currently operates at an unsatisfactory Level of Service (LOS) F. The existing traffic volume exceeds the capacity of a four -lane facility. This situation will continue to get worsen over time and the bridge is forecasted to operate at the LOS F in 2030. After implementation of project, the First Street is forecasted to operate at a satisfactory LOS B in 2030 based on its corresponding six -lane daily roadway capacity. Thus, the proposed project will relieve traffic congestion. Table 4.3 presents a summary of traffic LOS in the project area. The intersections located in the vicinity of the bridge (Harbor Boulevard/First Street and Fairview Street/First Street) currently operate at a satisfactory LOS C or better. The proposed project will not affect the satisfactory LOS of these intersections in the study area. With or without the implementation of the proposed project the study area intersections will continue to operate at satisfactory LOS. Less than significant impacts are expected and no mitigation is required. B. Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? Less than significant impact. The County Congestion Management Program (CMP) requires a traffic impact analysis for projects that generate 2,400 average daily trips (ADT). The proposed project will not result in the additional generation of ADT as it does not change the land use type within the project limits. MPAH designates First Street between Harbor Blvd and Fairview Road as a 6 lanes arterial, whereas the existing bridge accommodates only 4 travel lanes. The current levels of service has been already exceeded as the overcrossing operates at the unacceptable LOS F under the ADT analysis. The proposed project will alleviate traffic, and through accommodation of 6 travel lanes will improve the traffic operation of the bridge and First Street. After bridge replacement and widening of First Street, the road is expected to operate at the satisfactory LOS B. 07/25/10 «P:\DMJ0701\MND\4.0 Environmental Analysis.doc» 411 :�'� 4-38 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. JULY 2010 INITIAL STUDYIMITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION FIRST STREET BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PROJECT CITY OF SANTA ANA Construction phase of the project may result in a slight increase in traffic volumes during bridge demolition activities. The existing bridge consists of two separate structures (a north structure and a south structure). While replacement of the north structure, south structure will remain operational, so one through -lane in each direction will remain open at all times. During the replacement of the south structure, north structure will carry the First Street traffic in both directions. Therefore, the proposed project will not produce significant traffic flow changes on the adjacent streets during construction phase. The impacts to the traffic will be temporary and will cease upon the project completion. It is anticipated that in the long term, intersections and roadway segments in the project area would continue to operate at an acceptable LOS. Therefore, the proposed project will not exceed individually or cumulatively, the level of service standards established by the Congestion Management Program. Less than significant impacts are expected and no mitigation is required. 07/25/10 «PADMJ070l\MND\4.0 Environmental Analysis.doc» 4-39 w O U C/� ° g W v Con a �o U b a o y ag O Ca Q M ,x C N O w O O a, 0 ° c o `U 4 � a x 0 o C° a d Cd U Opo OOo �U a c o 0 � O 8 U U •S. y •V U U � .Yr a 'C O o O z 0-4 it ice+ al T�` O� GO M y O U N ° g W v Con a �o U b a o ~ ag Q Q OM M rC > > C N O w O O a, u c o `U 4 � o 0 o C° a OU CNC Cd b4 O0 c a c o 0 � O 8 U U •S. y •V U U � .Yr a o O z 0-4 � O O M y O U N ° g W v Con a �o U b a o ag a y c o M rC > > N O w O O a, u c o `U 4 � o 0 O OU CNC Cd b4 o c o ° O uu O ° O 8 U U •S. y •V U U � .Yr a o "p z 0-4 M y O U N ° g W v Con a �o U b a o a y c o M rC > > N O w O O i -i c o `U 4 � 0 cI C > O v. ti UU OU CNC Cd b4 o c o ° O uu O ° O 8 U U •S. y •V U U aj o "p z 0-4 w v U on a`�i o ❑ r. c a y M rC > > N O w O O i -i c o `U 4 � 0 cI C > O v. ti UU OU CNC ct b4 o cl o ° O uu O U bqw i > (� � U U •S. y •V U U o "p z 0-4 w v U on a`�i o ❑ r. c a y M rC > > N O w O O c U 'r-4 c c o `U 4 � 0 cI C > O v. ti UU OU CNC b4 o cl o ° O uu O U bqw i > (� � U U •S. y •V U U "p z LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. JULY 2010 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION FIRST STREET BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PROJECT CITY OF SANTA ANA C. Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? No impact. The proposed project is a bridge replacement and street widening project and will not alter air traffic patterns. The site is located approximately 8 miles from John Wayne Airport. No impacts are anticipated and no mitigation is required. D. Substantially increase hazards to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? Less than significant impact. The proposed project will replace a bridge over Santa Ana River and widen First Street 300 feet east and west from the bridge. The proposed project will require only minor changes to the roadway profile. The existing bridge deck width is about 80 feet, whereas under the proposed project conditions the bridge will increase by about 30.5 feet to the north and 7.5 feet to the south. The total width at First Street will increase from 53 feet to 80 feet. A new proposed vertical crest curve over the bridge will meet the 45 mph design speed requirements and will be in close relationship to the existing profile. In addition, a new approximately 410 foot long, 4 to 12 -foot high retaining wall will be built in northeast quadrant to address the grade difference resulted from the First Street widening. The proposed project will not change the design of any local intersections. The new bridge will conform to current building standards and would not increase hazards to a design feature. Therefore, less than significant impacts are expected and no mitigation is required. E. Result in inadequate emergency access? Less than significant impact. The proposed project will not result in inadequate emergency access because it will improve operation of First Street. The proposed project is a bridge replacement and a street widening to match up the existing configuration at the east and west ends of the project limits. An approximate 30 foot widening will occur on the north side of the First Street, whereas the widening on the south side of the First Street would be minimal. The widening will not substantially impact the Santa Ana River Access/ Maintenance Road which is located on the project site because safe passage and minimum clearances will be maintained. The access from both sides of First Street to the maintenance road will require construction of new driveway approaches, and will result in minor realignment and asphalt paving to join the existing maintenance road. The widening on the north side may also require the westerly end of the retaining wall in the northeast quadrant to extend northerly along the Manufactoring Housing Park to support the access road and address grade differential in that areas. During the project construction, First Street will remain operational and one travel lane in each direction will be maintained. Therefore, less than significant impacts are expected and no mitigation is required. F. Result in inadequate parking capacity? No impact. The proposed project does not involve expansion of any dwelling units, and therefore, will not result in inadequate parking capacity. The proposed project will replace a bridge over Santa 07/25/10 «P:\DMJ0701\MND\4.0 Environmental Analysis.doc» 41 ' •Y 4-41 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION JULY 2010 FIRST STREET BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PROJECT CITY OF SANTA ANA Ana River and will widen First Street. No existing on -street parking will be removed. The land use types on the project site will not change, and therefore no new parking spaces are required for the proposed project. G. Conflict with adopted policies supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? Less than significant impact. The proposed project is not in conflict with any adopted policies or programs supporting alternative transportation. Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) bus route 64 runs along the First Street from Huntington Beach to Tustin. The nearest bus stops are located at the Harbor Boulevard and First Street intersection to the west of the bridge and the First Street/Raitt Street intersection to the east of the bridge. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not conflict with the existing bus stops locations. OCTA bus route 64 will continue to operate during construction activities on the bridge because one travel lane in each direction will remain open. The CBSP established the Santa Ana River Trail, which provides a trail for bike users along the Santa Ana River from the Chino Hills State Park boundary to the river's mouth in Huntington Beach. The Santa Ana River Bicycle Trail runs north -south along the east side of the Santa Ana River and underneath the First Street/Santa Ana Bridge. The construction phase of the proposed project will temporarily impact the existing bike trail traffic and thus will require rerouting of bicycle traffic onto local streets at various times during construction. The Bicycle Detour Plan, which is described in detail in Section 2.0, has been designed to prevent bicyclists from needing to cross lanes as they access local streets from the bicycle trail. Implementation of the Bicycle Detour Plan will reduce impacts bicyclists to less than significant levels. No mitigation is required. XVI. Utilities and Service Systems Would the project A. Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? No impact. The project will not require the need for additional treatment of wastewater. The proposed project does not involve expansion of any dwelling units. The proposed project is a bridge replacement and street widening project. Due to the nature of the project, no demand for water services is expected. No impacts are anticipated and no mitigation is required. B. Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? No impact. With regard to wastewater, refer to XVI.a. The proposed project does not involve any uses that would increase the demand for water on site. The project does not change the land use type on site. Therefore, no impact to existing water supplies or water supply facilities, or wastewater 07/25/10 ,PA\DMJ070l\MND\4.0 Environmental Analysis.doc» 411,05•:X 4-42 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. JULY 2010 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION FIRST STREET BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PROJECT CITY OF SANTA ANA treatment facilities would occur as a result of the project. No impact is expected, and no mitigation is required. C. Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? Less than significant impact. The proposed project will not involve the need for an additional storm water drainage system. The proposed project would widen the bridge to accommodate two additional lanes. The site under the bridge is channelized and therefore, addition of two lanes will not add new impervious surface to the site. However, the widening of First Street 300 feet east and west will add some impervious surface to the project site. The project would increase the impervious surface area by approximately 0.30 ac compared to the existing roadway facility. However, the rate and volume of surface water runoff from the facility would not increase substantially and would not cause flooding in the area. Therefore, impacts related to capacity of the existing stormwater drainage system would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required.. D. Are sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources or are new or expanded entitlements needed? No impact. The proposed project is a bridge replacement and street widening and does not involve incorporation of any dwelling units. No demand for potable water currently exists on the site. The proposed land use type will be the same as under existing conditions, and therefore would no introduce demand for potable water. Therefore, no impact is expected and no mitigation is required. E. Result in the determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? No impact. There is no release of wastewater on the project site. The proposed project will also not result in the additional release of wastewater. Therefore, no impact is expected, and no mitigation is required. F. Is the project served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? Less than significant impact. The city of Santa Ana is served by the three Orange County sanitary landfills: Olinda Alpha, Frank R. Bowerman, and Prima Deshecha. These landfills currently have the capacity to absorb additional solid waste generated during the demolition of the First Street bridge. The proposed project will comply with Assembly Bill 939 (AB 939), which mandates local jurisdictions to meet numerous diversion goals and thus reduce impacts to landfills. The proposed project will comply with the County Source Reduction Ordinance and will further reduce impacts to landfills by recycling construction materials where feasible. The materials from the demolition will be disposed of at one of the local landfills. Construction and demolition waste is the project's primary solid waste contribution. No additional solid waste is expected to be generated during the construction 07/25/10 ,,PADMJ0701\MND\4.0 Environmental Analysis.doc» 41 ' OVA 4-43 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. INITIAL STUDYIMITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION JULY 2010 FIRST STREET BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PROJECT CITY OF SANTA ANA and operation of the proposed project. This impact is considered less than significant, given its limited nature, and no mitigation is required. G. Comply with federal, state and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste? No impact. The proposed project will be in compliance with State and federal laws related to solid waste. No solid waste will be generated during the operational phase, and demolition activities will comply with the County's Source Reduction Ordinance. No impact is expected, and no mitigation is required. XVII. Mandatory Findings of Significance A. Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below setf- sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? Less than significant impact with mitigation. Based on this analysis, the proposed project will not degrade the quality of the natural environment, significantly impact sensitive biological resources, nor will it destroy archaeological or paleontological resources. There are no known biological, archeological, or paleontological resources on or in the vicinity of the project site and, therefore, the proposed project has no potential to physically interfere with these resources. No sensitive wildlife species, plants, or animal communities are present on site or in the vicinity of the site. However, some marginal suitable habitat exists on the site that may by used by some species. Therefore, incorporation of the minimization measures BIO -1 and BIO -2 will be incorporated prior to construction activities. The proposed project occurs in an urban built -out environment and thus is not anticipated to have the potential to degrade the overall quality of environment. Mitigation Measures BIO -I and BIO -2 will reduce any potentially significant impacts to a level below significance. B. Does the project have impacts that are individually limited but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, effects of other current projects and the effects of probable future projects.) Less than significant impact. The proposed bridge replacement and road widening has a very limited impact area. Project impacts are confined to the project construction limits and are temporary in nature in that they only occur during construction. The only operation impacts requiring mitigation are noise impacts that will be mitigated by the incorporation of sound barrier walls into the project design. All other environmental parameters either return to their existing condition or are improved by the project (e.g. air quality, water quality, flood potential, traffic). These beneficial effects, when considered with other projects in the area do not pose any potential to result in cumulative effects because the project area is not particularly sensitive because it is highly urbanized and the project contributes only nominally to impacts under all environmental parameters. 07/25/10 «P:\DMJ070]\MND\4.0 Environmental Analysis.doc» 'kil "MOR 4-44 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION JULY 2010 FIRST STREET BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PROJECT CITY OF SANTA ANA C. Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? Less than significant impact with mitigation. No adverse environmental impacts are anticipated with implementation of the proposed project. The proposed project is limited to the bridge replacement and widening of First Street to match the existing width of 6 lanes at the east and west end of the project limits. The proposed project will bring First Street into compliance with the Orange County Master Plan of Arterial Highways. All of these activities are anticipated to have a minimal impact on the environment and will occur on an already developed and urbanized site. Although the project is a bridge replacement and street widening, it will not add a significant amount of pollutants to the site. A bridge already exists at the project site, and the addition of two travel lanes to First Street will relieve traffic congestion in the area but will not affect humans to any greater extent. Construction nuisance impacts related to air quality, water quality, and potential hazardous waste emissions will be reduced to a level below significance through the implementation of the identified Mitigation Measures and compliance with City standards. Therefore, all potential project impacts are less than significant with the implementation of the identified Mitigation Measures and the project would not have an adverse direct or indirect effect on human beings. 07/25/10 «P:\DMJ0701\MND\4.0 Environmental Analysis.doc» 41 ' eI, 4-45 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. JULY 2010 INITIAL STUDYIMITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION FIRST STREET BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PROJECT CITY OF SANTA ANA 5.0 CONTACTS AND PREPARERS 5.1 LIST OF CONTACTS 5.1.1 Project Contacts Kosal Krishnan- Project Engineer, AECOM 5.1.2 City of Santa Ana Contacts Jason Gabriel, Project Manager, City of Santa Ana Public Works Department 5.2 LIST OF PREPARERS — LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. Rob McCann— Principal -In -Charge Romi Archer — Environmental Project Manager Agnieszka Napiatek — Environmental and Planning Research Angie Kung — Hazardous Materials Ken Wilhelm — Traffic Keith Lay —Air Quality Nicole West — Water Quality Nicole Dubois — Geology and Soils Jason Lui — Noise Debra Cooper — Graphics Justin Roos — GIS 07/25/10 «P:\DMJ0701\MND\5.0 List ofPreparers.doc,, 5-1 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. JULY 2010 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION FIRST STREET BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PROJECT CITY OF SANTA ANA 6.0 REFERENCES The following references were used in the preparation of the IS/MND for the proposed First Street Bridge Replacement project. California Building Standard Code (2001) California Fish and Game Code, Section 3503.5. CEQA Air Quality Handbook, South Coast Air Quality Management District (1993) City of Santa Ana General Plan 1982 County of Orange Drainage Area Master Plan (2003) County of Orange Master Plan of Arterial Highways (2005) Eagle Aerial (2005) Government Code Section 53090-53091; 40 Ops.Cal.AHy.Gen.243 (1962) Orange County General Plan, Safety Element, p. IX -80 (1989) Santa Ana River Mainstem Project—Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (August 1988) Web sites: California Department of Fish and Game http:// www.dfg.ca.gov/lands/er/region5/index.html, 2007-08-30 California Division of Land Resource Protection http://www.consrv.ca.gov/DLRP/fmmp/images/fmmp2002-200.pdf, 2007-08-29 City of Santa Ana http://www.ci.santa-ana.ca.us/ County of Orange http://www.oc.ca.gov/ Federal Emergency Management Agency, Flood Insurance Rate Maps http://www.msc.fema.gov/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/FemaWelcomeView?storeld=10001 &catalogld= 10001&langld=-1, 2007-08-26 Orange County Drainage Area Master Plan http://www.ocwatersheds.com/stormwater/documents—damp—lip.asp 07/25/10 «PA\DMJ0701\MND\6.0 References.doc- 6-1 qj . •"11;7 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. JULY 2010 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE. DECLARATION FIRST STREET BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PROJECT CITY OF SANTA ANA Orange County Transportation Authority http://www.octa.neU South Coast Air Quality Management District http://www.agmd.gov/ej/I-4/1-4.html, 2007-08-31 United States Geological Survey mapping http://www.nmviewogc.cr.usgs.gov/viewer.htm, 2007-08-30 Technical Reports: Draft Water Quality Assessment Report, LSA Associates, Inc., July 2010. Initial Site Assessment, LSA Associates, Inc., July 2010. Draft Historic Resources Survey Report, LSA Associates, Inc., July 2010. Draft Noise Study Report, LSA Associates, Inc., July 2010. Natural Environment Study, LSA Associates, Inc. April 2010. Jurisdictional Delineation, LSA Associates, Inc., April 2010. Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan, AECOM, April 2010. 07/25/10 «PADMJ0701\MND\6.0 References.doc» 6-2 MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. IN (TIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AUGUST 2010 FIRST STREET BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PROJECT CITY OF SANTA ANA MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM This Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) was formulated based on the findings of the Draft Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) for the proposed First Street Bridge Replacement Project (proposed project). This MMRP is in compliance with Section 15097 of the CEQA Guidelines, which requires that the Lead Agency "adopt a program for monitoring or reporting on the revisions which it has required in the project and the measures it has imposed to mitigate or avoid significant environmental effects." The MMRP lists mitigation measures recommended in the IS/MND and identifies mitigation monitoring requirements. These requirements are provided only for mitigation measures that would reduce or avoid significant impacts of the proposed project. Table A presents the mitigation measures identified for the proposed project. Each mitigation measure is numbered according to the topical section of Section 4 to which it pertains. For example, Mitigation Measure VIS -1 is the first mitigation measure identified in Chapter 4, Section I, Aesthetics. In addition, Standard Conditions pertaining to dust suppression as promulgated by the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) and discussed in section III, have also been incorporated into the monitoring report to ensure their incorporation into final plans. The first column of Table A provides the mitigation measures that were identified in Environmental Analysis Checklist Explanation and Initial Study, Section 4.0 of the IS/MND. The columns entitled "Party Responsible for Implementing Mitigation" and "Implementation Timing" identify the party responsible for carrying out the required actions and the approximate time period over which the actions will be implemented, respectively. The columns entitled "Party Responsible for Monitoring," "Action by Monitor," and "Monitoring Timing" identify the party ultimately responsible for ensuring that the mitigation measure is implemented, the steps for monitoring the action identified in the mitigation measure, and the approximate timeframe for the oversight agency to ensure implementation of the mitigation measure, respectively. 08/09/10 <<P:\DMJ0701\MND\MMRP.doc» 20A-100 C b b •� C O W C O cOC U O O � C •� E o>�� o v �� a cn Y 3 O R O � U O • � cOd p cU3 O R 'O C v 'O a~i O T � CO O O •O �� C O• CII _.� c > N > > cUa a Vo c d OU R _d N bU4 004 bb rn p a µa U pU C 9 4 vcz R c2a6-8, •U s 41 £' E v0i U C •U N — U U R •U N o> c c v o c aai c� to o'c c> 0 cn c = y o °c E R cd c c ❑ c O U O U O y, y. Cti R R R R a,O a 7� C r U O h .O R C v Y O •� � R C C R18, vUi U U a� R 3«" w iL N w o acz b v o b cTi o c a0i aci o w R R = 'b = , °c' v 3 � N s Gc R � � 4 O ID � bC-0 C '" ice•' .Y Y N G• C R y C Y 'O N c4 O ' R C3a) �-y rU. R cc«. ; ' j Q U v0i p 0 N E 4. o V p• o p o .U+ p �, in c ca l 3> R C 1 U -o a o -o o U is CO u.�'S C U v o • N :'O CcL v0i O- v, C R ..�'. C' b C13 46 R ° o c 0 0' tic uo o •> n 3 0 c 3 R 3 as ¢ � aUi aai 4 0 .� ^ U 4 �' 3 U v o o o U v v D c a^ c 3 ❑ o w u o s ORa mdR d .o N Vn•NUi U ca . b U ta cL 03 y O X53ej da°�°�'3 a°a a°mss °c.)° 20A-101 N 0 0. 0 rn 0 0 2zF< <OUz aF'< V 6 0 < OaaF z<az zwz�. Qw0 zwwr O^UF w<a y.Va D ww Zza <Qw wv zFo <a acc�m Z � w o}a OWN F � � « w � F F Z C O c0 F. O O •i O � O Nu• u � .O+ H cCe • L � p.. L=. R U O O O L b Q lu R1 v, C C o ca U N F ca c ci C R� > S F W C vi .� "' v Q .b -O y •�.� aS p � cC U L c •—n L U U U U p„ a c y eoq o. c�a as ca C O •R � � N c y O _ O U O O L L ti O -i U ° U N � c ;a U � � N O U QQ � �.� P. 'D c>3 � Q V ID N •p � 5 vi W G .9 O p d N N Q R O N t0. U O in O •N Ri N -p 73 R O '_' Y T •N N .� = N cNC N Cli N .^d .�.. nR. •� Cq cRC K O O bA c,.,, •> p R.� R m N ,L O Q .� in r"i, c� ai"i O >, cFC 4; WO �. cu..N, U y0 "O O bb •.>-� A � c U N cG ry- a c O' v'^i 'L N i. O- OU p O o 4" .O YVJ � —> CO W O y O N 3 C .p U U N 7 bA U C C N U R ca -0 .G >'., 7 N O U r > •C N ^O cNd .^ "Cl rU. j N U .O U C U .0 C O •b4 cC Q'CIS N M6 N in iG y O U Y O C N U N U �, Q N O U O N M C/] w p> W U U 'ND •� N O N y C N O *� O .L" O N c c� � Q• c � o ❑ U � � ❑ is ._ . � .� ao ^ U � � _. � ' on 3 � � 0 • d d as U q M X z F < <Ouz w a�ya U < O < O ce a<az zw�w Ado aww} O^uF we, aU� zAzx <Aw w U ZFA -<a aUm w z�w � Arn zOF O y n — a aew U — .. F F - -z c 'L O F Lo .0 O t C O •U Q L p L O O p a+ y p a � 0 e dF c E = on O u o L y, CQ p Qy 4. s., bJ) a i 3 o❑ o � '3 � .'4 O C �rn N 'G u G' G a) p' O A G O •O y b "'d .b C v.�" O CO O '4? '� `n 'D O '� `� r.. .O O '� O b0 o ti ._ c 4, •bOA � � o. � O w° C c: o .a: a� ,� ❑ n. s o � 3 -- � � c ti 5 -o ul v ti O n •bq CL r~i� ,L C ti ice. L O s0» m Q w 'in w to C RS U f. C:S Y IOi k CC Z 0- y 4�. ono. -b 3 ¢ o ° i off' ro u "U c o a� 5 '� • ❑ o aoi °' c ° c O ond' o c o = y-0 Y •— o o �:� 71 3 � vi G N 0 Urn• y 0. y .D 0.E N O y 0 cC Y tp. Y cp6 0 0 0. c3 'a X O �zFa aouz aFya �aoa OaaF aaLZ a�Fa zw�w Fmk° aww� O�UF waa aVa ww m a zz aQw v Zw F m as avm �.F.F w z�w O}a z�F oN� � F FZ i— .L c o c ^ N U O O c .o Y o by o ° rUn U •C v •- to F q • d] U � •L, ti y in •2 �., •C U U to CL p W cC r,U C A 4 U iC U in •�.. O C o:a Y � ,• v �d �. c c uu U.� o y 0 oit Cc) v q •C O ai M O v ° c v_ °' ° g n ° ai ami c •� a s o aow m b k ° ° y Cd o .n c cc cc U� U� c 0 C c a y U •" _ bq Lt •� �UO '? O 0 � S o U ° cdw � v v cc � o c cz s: w � Y ° ° v bn c o ' c Y °�o ? c Y d° rn <° a •o " ,.. bq v, ❑ U v C ,n ti R ^C7 w sU, p Y U is CJ Y c>a a° bonbb sva:?O°cod a m•.� o a�°i aoi oc ? a o o O N O s0. 3 b0 ° �, ' > .7 a•.. [ rYi, a'Oi m K> 'o GD b4 ami L M w .� U• O 41 N O L '� Y U >l ° C.) ° ..�, ,D r,w„ Ri '�' U r�-i CO •U I"U 7 O FF R _� °•5 7 C O ❑ p. .O U aNi O in ti .o 'O .� .w.. n O O •to rn �„ rq y .x O Yd C w C c00 >, cC •�,, � cd bA v. Q .r .'0-- O .0 O .b .� 0 ti N '° O y U h •� O= i y i' O = _U G .D •> O .-. N d O C 0. 'F, C >,- N 'O 0. .�' 5 u .n U U F. cC cC u' O N a S ca 3> y a s 3 a Ua a c o F s 7 c OU � U a ��s .� O aac°a • • 417m lin MR, 0 0 0. 0 Cl 0 20A-105 U U U U U U U U •O c ) c c 0 c a o C F'� �.. C O y� � C O o o c •�> o a a 4 0 L U `n p C � cC O vUi G ate.: OU c>C "SE y ti cC ca y y .4:..0 bA � � °0 •� .c c � U o a & � � •x � •c° � � a a. o U ti Z O in cC E b •u •v� ti cOd ¢' b U O ,b „p cC by aj U o U o .c 4 o U C u •`�' i' U U V U CL n U tO' a, U ami a ca U O N 7J 0 b ca c a a c 0 c •C d C O ej OU O C O U O O �y .� Y y .'.' Y N •7 :Y £ '2 E C E o w v 0. 'O c3 o T7 cC o d F f -i 3-i I-• •u C O U U U V L L OF. Clr P. PF, U U U U c U E o 0 0 to Y > 0 3 ° °? N c 4 -x o a p o°n c o o° U c Z ° �' w O ti R 'C >,'C C/] o Y>' v U �'d � ,� � o OT, � •p w. N yam, .� Y � •L cid >> U � O � 6) f, @ N� N i cC � � � .a ID uo G c}O O >> rn J O cd U E> 4- i ;b U b ° 4 0.. p ro -fl a7 U M cC N by >' O •R ..�.. 'O E E+ O O •E >, O O U '.�U. '�❑O :w"cN'3 eLNC U 2C cUd 4s�'. .. UOC •C O O U N cd cc 72 � � 4� N Ij •O ro E •p �' �i r- OU O cd •> N e0 U 'T3 V7 o a .a C ❑ E Y U a� .c o C C o lc�_ N _ .E ao �, a� o 21 on�20 O c 'O .3 Y o o co 7 '� E o a P� Rs ° .0 E: 4 X x U U T AUx 20A-105 all"d11re" r- U U N U GJ U Y it •ri i- "�_ •b 40-I � C y .ro O Q •� G � U rn v v O c m o U _ca y o •� v F hGO fd Cd U U U !'' f.. _ O O 'Y 'G G M O U dj td e) +75 a UrA o. k .O yR a c., C •N aa U bb U 0. °° et c 0 •R O b •C � ❑ O N C cOd O O y 0 y C O y O N U •O YO •O N ra P. b cd U X 0., b cd N cG U 0. b cd ! L C_ y O ca cC d 6a O O v .�.• UO O O sU. U .� U to y C',ami N ^p o c.5_ur-1) ❑ it O G' C N 4-. .L,, ❑ 'D N .� U '� .D N U O L � �" O Fr M •� O O' U •0 V] '� � � ,�E , Q c�C O u Cl) G O O N R > ani o U t� ? = c— u 3 •E c O1 o ° ° d) . T, x ami on ^ O ¢ " C3 O p rn ^O cd: O Q d ti O Q � b N m t cOC X O O C '." O C O w .O• O. = w R OL cOV S IU.. . ca w UcQd o a. 3 Y = a x Tao d .o 0bp aci b Q cC C v, C cG O C W 4. G w0 F, U W vi O cu U. d p mo •O y [C O O E -O O C U C ,O p v £ o N U �' w d p U 3 U .�o� G' U 'O y 7 O •c^y bA R ^. ti U � U amici O �r U R❑ b 'C t1 U p U ❑ o ¢, 6" Q °? cn U � c� ,Y !-. LL s. all"d11re" r- z I < a0Uz aFna vaoa oaaF aaaz u ti Zw�w Fm�p auu} p>UF uaa aVa ww m a Z amu wV ZFm -aa aim �FF w z�w p}a imp zaF Fra aau � F Fz i" C •L C � c tip C t O CIS ca Q E N '� p•' N Cpp L a: 0. •`� R�� � eam r R �•J p � -o y cz ¢'•y 3q � O ai o �y G a N o o U O m U r- C W RW C y y • ¢ U p v U a E, 0 ca = U b j a0i `° tD . p•O Q apt^ yp 7tr- O V Ca c�•.1 ca � � vii Q U U o 5 U Ca a7 N K U ' ❑.� tiC/]UQ C Y 0.Y C bq L � m o w o i o a o a a R p O � a YO U y — •u W U ItO. U cUa Q U d bL L C C y O d cl a� to ca y ya v' y W 'O 'ca O N Q � L d� F'• p � N R U O .� cOa _ U� p a a �� v -o a. .ti cNa w U � m v o 0 0 �°�' '� c� c 6'n � •� b c� 0 oY o o c°'i o F `a o c L L>' O bq �' � O 'U .� R G O � •- U W�� F. [ o v❑ °' U O U o v •� � v aNi o �.. E ca ' U 0.CL w� u 7 .�O-+ cpa cUa G O rn Q ai O N p �O N b p a G 0 'B N y C ' G � f:" O �"' .n ' .fi C N O p o P:.c° c '� b $ awi �' i q o a ou o o❑ N o o0' uoa� G ca U C, 'O o ZO^., O ❑ 00 O :� w ti C O •N t:; c cOa ¢• 'O p 'sp—, V "O O N F OO G •� ca C by U b �, N '� ca O 0. -NRo LL�= U. ¢ o 0 0� A. oacn° �a �..�UcU Y w a m 3Qa W o o °., iCZ a 20A-107 00 g z F < <OUz m^F w< a �aoa OO�F �aaz UU, ..o"O F � O>UF °'F<U ova m z z <QW u ZFO ^e0 CL U0 �^F z 2 W °YF � Orn zOF F Oyu V ^ ^ F -z i^ er, C L C w ' •C 0 C 0 L C O a+ Q � o 41 i O p p w a � 0 C ,O d y � '> a U �I O d CG L O •�' d O d L L R p to 00 A R 'j ."' O O O v' `" O bOA cG OV O •� ,ti 7CL v cUd L. ��❑ x s O 5. 3° cz o o o O p °' O ov o o .v a a o o E o ami ° '^ °> on o a o " c Y O Y' 5 aCQ, 'a..�' 3 3 o o ca -CCL c obp " a o o O �°3 o > a 14 o 0 0 o `akQ ro vto ' aU w to .� R y w w `o y o ccz .� wo "Cl > c> o O w O .? •3 o aoMo a � c cc �, o°'n � `� � a°i � c .a � c � b � c v � c � ❑ > O � .°°° ,� ;? cd 'n � 'D N � � O � Q � J O •O •o � � O O Q � y 'O aai � c� O vo O O O, O oa- �0. cOC Q • O G, Y a¢i s ->p O O� O �bA ..O. n U d r� s a o O 8 z E E F- s z o F ro O t1 O U 3 8 C Cd U N 4--i gjMlffljl;7 bL O b!i O o F. 0 .0 0 .G C O ,V Q y -•C L •O a � 0 s� a 8 � c � u o a 8 d _ L L R O 0.n w C vi cd W O G N> ti E ,u d U U O 'O bA 'C7 ai F. 'M V L V1 L Q. 0 O U •�, u � ¢ ctl ¢ N by 0 ERRATA FOR THE INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR THE FIRST STREET BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PROJECT AUGUST 10, 2010 Several minor errors in the Initial Study (IS)/Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) were discovered after publication of the document the incorrect text and corrections, shown in str-ike threiigh and underline below. Page 4-9, last paragraph: Less than significant impact. Sensitive receptors include the very young, the elderly, and those suffering from certain respiratory illnesses or disabilities. Common locations of sensitive receptors include schools, daycare centers, parks and recreational areas, medical facilities/hospitals, rest homes, and convalescent care facilities. According to the above definition, sensitive receptors are present in the project vicinity. Four schools are located within the 0.5 mile from the project site: Spurgeon Intermediate and Edward B. Cole Senior Academy north-east of the project site, Lincoln Elementary south-east of the project site, and Garden Grove USD: Russell Elementary School is located south west of the project site. Students attending any of these schools may have respiratory sensitivity to airborne dust during construction. However, the proposed project would not create a substantial source of pollutant concentrations, as it will not create additional traffic. The project is not anticipated to increase the CO levels such that they could have an impact on students. Because of the distant location of the schools to the project site, the pollutants will most likely dissipate before reaching the sensitive receptors. Therefore, the students will not likely be affected by the increase in pollutants emissions on the project site. This is considered a less than significant impact. Refer to Hazards Section VII for an additional discussion on airborne hazardous pollutants. Should read as follows: Less than significant impact. Sensitive receptors include the very young, the elderly, and those suffering from certain respiratory illnesses or disabilities. Common locations of sensitive receptors include schools, daycare centers, parks and recreational areas, medical facilities/hospitals, rest homes, and convalescent care facilities. In addition, residential uses are considered as locations for sensitive receptors. According to the above definitions, sensitive receptors are present in the project vicinity. The project area is surrounded by residential uses. As discussed above in II.A and II.B, the mitigation measures AQ -1 through AQ -5 enumerated in the previous discussion address short-term construction impacts to air quality and also address impacts to residences surrounding the project area. In addition, fl=our schools are located within the 0.5 mile from the project site: Spurgeon Intermediate and Edward B. Cole Senior Academy north-east of the project site, Lincoln Elementary south-east of the project site, and Garden Grove USD: Russell Elementary School is located south west of the project site. Students attending any of these schools may have respiratory sensitivity to airborne dust 08/10/10 (PADMJ0701\MND\Revised ERRATA.doe) during construction. However, the proposed project would not create a substantial source of pollutant concentrations, as it will not create additional traffic. The project is not anticipated to increase the CO levels such that they could have an impact on students. Because of the distant location of the schools to the project site, the pollutants will most likely dissipate before reaching the sensitive receptors. Therefore, the students will not likely be affected by the increase in pollutants emissions on the project site. This is considered a less than significant impact. Refer to Hazards Section VII for an additional discussion on airborne hazardous pollutants. Page 4-26, second paragraph, fourth sentence: The surrounding land uses encompass low density residential in north-west quadrant, general commercial and low density residential in south-west quadrant, medium density residential and general commercial in south-east quadrant, professional and administrative in north-east quadrant. Should read as follows: The surrounding land uses encompass low density residential in north-west quadrant, general commercial and low density residential in south-west quadrant, medium density residential and general commercial in south-east quadrant, medium density residential, professional and administrative in north-east quadrant. Pages 4-27/30, last sentence on page, first sentence on next page: Where there is a 3 dB CNEL increase in the change and the noise level exceeds 65 CNEL, abatement is required unless there is no sensitive receptor at that location or there is no outdoor use such as a patio, balcony, or backyard. Pages 4-28/29, Table 4.1, footnote 1: 1. No outdoor use area exists at this location. Should read as follows: 1. No outdoor use area exists at this location. Outdoor use area as it pertains to residential uses is defined as an area with a presumption of privacy (e.g. backyards). Front yards do not fall under the definition of an outdoor use area. The City of Santa Ana Noise Element defines exterior uses: Exterior areas shall mean: private yards of single family homes. Page 4-33, first paragraph, first sentence: The closest sensitive receptor locations are located approximately 50 ft from the new sound barrier construction areas. Should read as follows: 08/10/10 (PADMJ0701\MND\Revised ERRATA.doc) 20A-111 The closest sensitive receptor locations are located , ppr-exif ..,+el„ within 50 ft from the new sound barrier construction areas. Page 4-33, first paragraph, last sentence: However, as provided in the X "A" the construction activities will be limited to the allowed hours and with incorporation of Mitigation Measure N-1, noise related impacts will be reduced to less than significant levels." Should read as follows: However, as provided in the XI "A" the construction activities will be limited to the allowed hours and with incorporation of Mitigation Measure N- 1, noise related impacts will be reduced to less than significant levels. Page 4-42, third paragraph (XV.G), third sentence: The nearest bus stops are located at the Harbor Boulevard and First Street intersection to the west of the bridge and the First Street/Raiff Street intersection to the east of the bridge. Should read as follows: The nearest bus stops are located at the. Harbor Beide. -d , id First c+.00+ ..nese,.+;,,„ +„ the west „� the > fridge and the First c+fe-t-A R—AW c+..00+ inter-seetion + east of the bridge, serving both the westbound and eastbound directions of First Street. 08/10/10 (PAD W070 RNINMRevised ERRATA. doc) 20A-112 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: AUGUST 16, 2010 CLERK OF COUNCIL USE ONLY: TITLE: APPROVED CONTRACT AWARD FOR RIVERVIEW ❑ As Recommended NEIGHBORHOOD WATER MAIN ❑ As Amended IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT NO. El on 151 Reading [I Ordinance on 2"d Reading 093214) ❑ Implementing Resolution ❑ Set Public Hearing For CONTINUED TO FILE NUMBER CITY MANAGER RECOMMENDED ACTION Award a contract to J. Desigio Construction, Inc., the lowest responsible bidder, in accordance with unit bid prices for the base bid in the estimated amount of $1,598,092 for construction of Riverview Neighborhood Water Main Improvements. 2. Approve a Funding Analysis with a total estimated construction cost of $1,997,500. DISCUSSION This project provides for replacement of deteriorated and undersized water mains in the Riverview Neighborhood (Exhibit 1). The improvements include installation of new water mains, fire hydrants, main gate valves, and water services. Once completed, breaks and leaks associated with the older and deteriorated water mains will be eliminated, and water service capacity and fire protection will be enhanced. The Notice Inviting Bids was advertised on July 7 and 9, 2010, and bids were opened on July 28, 2010. A summary of the bid invitations mailed, the bids received, and the bid results follows. Santa Ana Contractors receiving notices: 7 Contractors requesting bidding documents: 29 Bids received: 16 Bids received from Santa Ana Contractors: 0 23A-1 Contract Award For Riverview Neighborhood Water Main August 16, 2010 Page 2 NAME OF RESPONSIVE BIDDER CITY BID AMOUNT 1. J. Desigio Construction, Inc. Baldwin Park $1,598,092 2. TE Roberts, Inc. Tustin $1,777,670 3. Dominguez General Engineering Rosemead $1,853,797 4. J. A. Salazar La Habra $1,975,002 5. Vido Artukovich & Son So. EI Monte $1,985,411 6. VCI Telcom, Inc. Upland $1,993,706 7. John T. Malloy, Inc. Los Angeles $2,077,210 8. Colich & Sons, L.P. Gardena $2,146,502 9. Sully -Miller Contracting Company Brea $2,160,304 10. L. A. Builders, Inc. Van Nuys $2,194,395 11. Paulus Engineering, Inc. Anaheim $2,231,662 12. Minako America Corp. Gardena $2,337,700 13. General Underground Fire Protection, Inc. Anaheim $2,339,993 14. Blois Construction Inc. Oxnard $2,502,129 15. Mike Bubalo Construction Company, Inc. Baldwin Park $2,928,988 A total of 16 bids were received and all but one were responsive. PacWest Engineering submitted a mathematically unbalanced bid that did not reflect the actual costs to construct the project; therefore, making their bid nonresponsive. The lowest bid was submitted by J. Desigio Construction, Inc., for $1,598,092, which is below the Engineer's estimate of $2,100,000. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act, the proposed project is exempt from future review. Categorical Exemption Environmental Review No. 2010-25 been filed for the project. FISCAL IMPACT The funding analysis shows a total estimated construction cost of $1,997,500 for the project (Exhibit 2). Funds are available in the Water Utility Capital Projects Fund (accounting unit 06617647-66301). APPROVED AS TO FUNDS AND ACCOUNTS: Nxk�&, I I -- Raul o Inez II Francisco Gutierrez, Executive Director' Executive Director Public Works Agen Finance & Management Services Agency RG/ET Exhibit 1: Project Location Map 2: Funding Analysis FUNDING ANALYSIS PROJECT NO. 093214 RIVERVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD WATER MAIN IMPROVEMENTS Construction Contract $1,598,092 Contract Administration $79,900 Inspection and Testing $111,800 Survey Staking $47,899 Contingencies $159,809 TOTAL ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COSTS $1,997500 Exhibit 2 23A-4 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: AUGUST 2, 2010 TITLE: CONTRACT AWARD FOR SR55/ MACARTHUR BOULEVARD RAMPS WIDENING (PROJECT NO. 072503) CITY MANAGER RECOMMENDED ACTION CLERK OF COUNCIL USE ONLY: APPROVED ❑ As Recommended ❑ As Amended ❑ Ordinance on 15` Reading ❑ Ordinance on 2nd Reading ❑ Implementing Resolution ❑ Set Public Hearing For CONTINUED TO 162010 FILE NUMBER 1. Award a contract to Peterson -Chase General Engineering Construction, Inc., the lowest responsible bidder, in accordance with unit bid prices in the estimated amount of $1,126,850.64 for construction of SR-55/MacArthur Boulevard Ramps Widening. 2. Approve a Funding Analysis with a total estimated construction cost of $1,577,000. 3. Direct the City Manager and Clerk of the Council to execute the attached Construction Cooperative Agreement with Caltrans for the State Route 55/MacArthur Boulevard Ramps Widening project. DISCUSSION This project includes widening eastbound MacArthur Boulevard from three to four lanes between Hutton Centre Drive and the northbound State Route 55 on-ramp, and widening the southbound and northbound State Route 55 on -ramps from one to two metered lanes (Exhibit 1). This is a traffic mitigation measure for the MacArthur Place South development. The proposed improvements to the ramps and roadway are necessary to provide additional capacity for the increased traffic volume anticipated in project build -out year 2035. Once completed, these improvements will improve traffic flow on MacArthur Boulevard. Since this project includes work within Caltrans right-of-way, a construction cooperative agreement between the City and Caltrans is required. 23B-1 Contract Award for SR55/MacArthur Blvd. Ramps Widening August 2, 2010 Page 2 The Notice Inviting Bids was advertised on June 4 and 7, 2010, and bids were opened on July 8, 2010. A summary of the bid invitations mailed, the bids received, and the bid results follows. Santa Ana Contractors receiving notices: Contractors requesting bidding documents: Bids received: Bids received from Santa Ana Contractors: NAME OF RESPONSIVE BIDDER 1. Peterson -Chase General Engr. Constr., Inc. 2. Powell Contractors 3. All American Asphalt 4. Beador Construction Company 5. Excel Paving Company 6. Highland Estimate 7. Griffith Company CITY Irvine Fontana Corona Corona Long Beach Orange Santa Fe Springs BID AMOUNT $1,126,850.64 $1,294,997.40 $1,324,838.92 $1,353,300.00 $1,442,962.25 $1,664,764.55 $2,004,487.91 A total of eight bids were received and all but one were responsive. Chumo Construction failed to submit addendum number two that revises the contract bid items, thereby making their bid non- responsive. The lowest bid was submitted by Peterson -Chase General Engineering Construction, Inc., for $1,126,850.64, which is below the Engineer's estimate of $2,036,092. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act, the recommended action is exempt from further review. Categorical Exemption Environmental Review No. 2009-14 was filed for the project. W Contract Award for SR55/MacArthur Blvd. Ramps Widening August 2, 2010 Page 3 FISCAL IMPACT The funding analysis shows a total estimated construction cost of $1,577,000 for the project (Exhibit 2). Funds are available in the Measure M Regional Interchange Program Fund (accounting unit 03217660-66220) and the Transportation System Improvement Area E Fund (accounting unit 03417660-66220). n Raul Godinez II r° Executive Directo ;` Public Works Agency RG/WA Exhibit 1: Project Location Map 2: Funding Analysis APPROVED AS TO FUNDS AND ACCOUNTS: Francisco Gutierrez Executive Director Finance & Management Services Agency 23B-3 MACARTHUR BOULEVARD OFF -RAMP eounBOLINn LOOP ON-Rnrp P� NORTHBOUND LOOP �Q d' �A ON-RAMP PROJECT LIMITS a EXHIBIT 1 tSATA ANA TjTLE:c" COUNCIL STATE ROUTE 55 / MACARTHUR WAAUUGUNST 2D20�10.� BOULEVARD RAMPS WIDENING WORKS AGENCY (PROJECT NO. 072503) FUNDING ANALYSIS PROJECT NO. 072503 SR55/MACARTHUR BLVD. RAMPS WIDENING Construction Contract $1,126,850 Contract Administration $28,979 Inspection and Testing $90,000 Survey Staking $50,000 Contingencies $281,171 TOTAL ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COSTS $1.577.000 Exhibit 2 23B-5 12 -ORA -55-6.8-6.9 EA: OH290 District Agreement 12-0624 COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT This agreement, effective on , is between the State of California, acting through its Department of Transportation, referred to as CALTRANS, and: City of Santa Ana, a body politic and municipal corporation or chartered city of the State of California, referred to as SANTA ANA. RECITALS 1. CALTRANS and SANTA ANA, collectively referred to as PARTNERS, are authorized to enter into a cooperative agreement for improvements within the SHS right of way per Streets and Highways Code sections 114 and/or 130. 2. WORK completed under this agreement contributes toward the ramp improvement at MacArthur Boulevard and State Route 55, referred to as PROJECT. PARTNERS will cooperate to the construction of the project in which STATE will provide IQA and CITY agreed to reimburse STATE for providing source inspection. 4. This agreement is separate from and does not modify or supersede prior Cooperative Agreement No. 12-0568. 5. No PROJECT deliverables have been completed prior to this agreement. 6. The estimated date for COMPLETION OF WORK is June 29, 2012. 7. PARTNERS now define in this agreement the terms and conditions under which they will accomplish WORK. DEFINITIONS CALTRANS STANDARDS — CALTRANS policies and procedures, including, but not limited to, the guidance provided in the Guide to Capital Project Delivery Workplan Standards (previously known as WBS Guide) available at http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/projmgmt/guidance.htm. PACT Version 9.1 3.31.08 1of17 District Agreement 12-0624 CEQA — The California Environmental Quality Act (California Public Resources Code, sections 21000 et seq.) that requires State and local agencies to identify the significant environmental impacts of their actions and to avoid or mitigate those significant impacts, if feasible. COMPLETION OF WORK — All PARTNERS have met all scope, cost, and schedule commitments included in this agreement and have signed a COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT CLOSURE STATEMENT. CONSTRUCTION — The project component that includes the activities involved in the administration, acceptance, and final documentation of a construction contract for PROJECT. COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT CLOSURE STATEMENT — A document signed by PARTNERS that verifies the completion of all scope, cost, and schedule commitments included in this agreement. FHWA — Federal Highway Administration. FHWA STANDARDS — FHWA regulations, policies and procedures, including, but not limited to, the guidance provided at http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/programs.html. FUNDING PARTNER — A partner who commits a defined dollar amount to WORK. FUNDING SUMMARY - The table in which PARTNERS designate funding sources, types of funds, and the project components in which the funds are to be spent. Funds listed on the FUNDING SUMMARY are "not -to -exceed" amounts for each FUNDING PARTNER. HM -1— Hazardous material (including, but not limited to, hazardous waste) that may require removal and disposal pursuant to federal or state law whether it is disturbed by PROJECT or not. HM -2 — Hazardous material (including, but not limited to, hazardous waste) that may require removal and disposal pursuant to federal or state law only if disturbed by PROJECT. HM MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES — Management activities related to either HM -1 or HM -2 including, without limitation, any necessary manifest requirements and disposal facility designations. IMPLEMENTING AGENCY — The partner responsible for managing the scope, cost, and schedule of a project component to ensure the completion of that component. PACT Version 9.1 5-28-09 2 of 17 23B-7 District Agreement 12-0624 IQA — Independent Quality Assurance — Ensuring that IMPLEMENTING AGENCY'S quality assurance activities result in WORK being developed in accordance with the applicable standards and within an established Quality Management Plan. IQA does not include any work necessary to actually develop or deliver WORK or any validation by verifying or rechecking work performed by another partner. PARTNERS — The term that collectively references all of the signatory agencies to this agreement. This term only describes the relationship between these agencies to work together to achieve a mutually beneficial goal. It is not used in the traditional legal sense in which one partner's individual actions legally bind the other partners. PROJECT MANAGEMENT PLAN — A group of documents used to guide a project's execution and control throughout the project's lifecycle. RESIDENT ENGINEER — A civil engineer licensed in the State of California who is responsible for construction contract administration activities. Said engineer shall be independent of the design engineering company and the construction contractor. SCOPE SUMMARY — The table in which PARTNERS designate their commitment to specific scope activities within each project component as outlined by the Guide to Capital Project Delivery Workplan Standards (previously known as WBS Guide) available at http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/projmgmt/guidance.htm. SHS — State Highway System. SPONSOR(S) — The partner that accepts the obligation to secure financial resources to fully fund WORK. This includes any additional funds beyond those committed in this agreement necessary to complete the full scope of WORK defined in this agreement or settle claims. SFM (State Furnished Material) — Any materials or equipment supplied by CALTRANS. WORK — All scope and cost commitments included in this agreement. RESPONSIBILITIES 8. SANTA ANA is SPONSOR for all WORK. 9. SANTA ANA is the only FUNDING PARTNER for this agreement. SANTA ANA's funding commitment is defined in the FUNDING SUMMARY. PACT Version 9.1 5-28-09 3 of 17 23B-8 District Agreement 12-0624 10. SANTA ANA is the CEQA lead agency for PROJECT. 11. CALTRANS is the CEQA responsible agency for the PROJECT. 12. SANTA ANA is IMPLEMENTING AGENCY for CONSTRUCTION. SCOPE Scope: General 13. All WORK will be performed in accordance with federal and California laws, regulations, and standards. All WORK will be performed in accordance with FHWA STANDARDS and CALTRANS STANDARDS. 14. IMPLEMENTING AGENCY for a project component will provide a Quality Management Plan for that component as part of the PROJECT MANAGEMENT PLAN. 15. CALTRANS will provide IQA for the portions of WORK within existing and proposed SHS right of way. CALTRANS retains the right to reject noncompliant WORK, protect public safety, preserve property rights, and ensure that all WORK is in the best interest of the SHS. 16. CALTRANS will provide Source Inspection Service. 17. SANTA ANA may provide IQA for the portions of WORK outside existing and proposed SHS right of way. 18. PARTNERS may, at their own expense, have a representative observe any scope, cost, or schedule commitments performed by another partner. Observation does not constitute authority over those commitments. 19. Each partner will ensure that all of their personnel participating in WORK are appropriately qualified to perform the tasks assigned to them. 20. PARTNERS will invite each other to participate in the selection and retention of any consultants who participate in WORK. 21. PARTNERS will conform to sections 1720 — 1815 of the California Labor Code and all applicable regulations and coverage determinations issued by the Director of Industrial Relations if PROJECT work is done under contract (not completed by a partner's own PACT Version 9.1 5-28-09 4 of 17 23B-9 District Agreement 12-0624 employees) and is governed by the Labor Code's definition of a "public work" (section 1720(a)(1)). PARTNERS will include wage requirements in all contracts for "public work" and will require their contractors and consultants to include prevailing wage requirements in all agreement -funded subcontracts for "public work". 22. IMPLEMENTING AGENCY for each project component included in this agreement will be available to help resolve WORK -related problems generated by that component for the entire duration of PROJECT. 23. CALTRANS will issue, upon proper application, at no cost, the encroachment permits required for WORK within SHS right of way. Contractors and/or agents, and utility owners will not perform WORK without an encroachment permit issued in their name. 24. If unanticipated cultural, archaeological, paleontological, or other protected resources are discovered during WORK, all work in that area will stop until a qualified professional can evaluate the nature and significance of the discovery and a plan is approved for its removal or protection. SANTA ANA will notify CALTRANS within twenty four (24) of any discovery. 25. PARTNERS anticipate that environmental permits, approvals, and applicable agreements are not needed for PROJECT. In the event that environmental permits, approvals, and applicable agreements are needed for PROJECT, PARTNERS will amend this agreement to include completion of those environmental permits, approvals, and applicable agreements. 26. PARTNERS will hold all administrative draft and administrative final reports, studies, materials, and documentation relied upon, produced, created, or utilized for PROJECT in confidence to the extent permitted by law. Where applicable, the provisions of California Government Code section 6254.5(e) will govern the disclosure of such documents in the event that PARTNERS share said documents with each other. PARTNERS will not distribute, release, or share said documents with anyone other than employees, agents, and consultants who require access to complete WORK without the written consent of the partner authorized to release them, unless required or authorized to do so by law. 27. If any partner receives a public records request, pertaining to WORK under this agreement, that partner will notify PARTNERS within five (5) working days of receipt and make PARTNERS aware of any transferred public documents. PARTNERS will consult PACT Version 9.1 5-28-09 5 of 17 23B-10 District Agreement 12-0624 with each other prior to the release of any public documents related to the PROJECT and provided by the other partner. 28. If HM -1 or HM -2 is found during WORK, IMPLEMENTING AGENCY for the project component during which it is found will immediately notify PARTNERS. 29. CALTRANS, independent of PROJECT, is responsible for any HM -1 found within existing SHS right of way. CALTRANS will undertake HM -1 MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES with minimum impact to PROJECT schedule. 30. SANTA ANA, independent of PROJECT, is responsible for any HM -1 found within the Project limits outside existing SHS right of way. SANTA ANA will undertake or cause to be undertaken HM -1 MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES with minimum impacts to PROJECT schedule. 31. If HM -2 is found within PROJECT limits, the public agency responsible for the advertisement, award, and administration (AAA) of the PROJECT construction contract will be responsible for HM -2 MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES. 32. CALTRANS' acquisition or acceptance of title to any property on which any HM -1 or HM -2 is found will proceed in accordance with CALTRANS' policy on such acquisition. 33. PARTNERS will comply with all of the commitments and conditions set forth in the environmental documentation, environmental permits, approvals, and applicable agreements as those commitments and conditions apply to each partner's responsibilities in this agreement. 34. IMPLEMENTING AGENCY for each project component will furnish PARTNERS with only a final scope, cost, and schedule report for WORK completed in that component. 35. Upon COMPLETION OF WORK, ownership and title to all materials and equipment constructed or installed as part of WORK within SHS right of way become the property of CALTRANS. 36. IMPLEMENTING AGENCY for a project component will accept, reject, compromise, settle, or litigate claims of any non -agreement parties hired to do WORK in that component. 37. PARTNERS will confer on any claim that may affect WORK or PARTNERS' liability or responsibility under this agreement in order to retain resolution possibilities for potential future claims. No partner shall prejudice the rights of another partner until after PARTNERS confer on claim. PACT Version 9.1 5-28-09 6 of 17 23B-11 District Agreement 12-0624 38. PARTNERS will maintain and make available to each other all WORK -related documents, including financial data, during the term of this agreement and retain those records for four (4) years from the date of termination or COMPLETION OF WORK, or three (3) years from the date of final federal voucher, whichever is later. 39. PARTNERS have the right to audit each other in accordance with generally accepted governmental audit standards. CALTRANS, the State auditor, FHWA, and SANTA ANA will have access to all WORK -related records of each partner for audit, examination, excerpt, or transaction. The examination of any records will take place in the offices and locations where said records are generated and/or stored and will be accomplished during reasonable hours of operation. The audited partner will review the preliminary audit, findings, and recommendations, and provide written comments within 60 calendar days of receipt. Any audit dispute not resolved by PARTNERS is subject to dispute resolution. Any costs arising out of the dispute resolution process will be paid within 30 calendar days of the final audit or dispute resolution findings. 40. PARTNERS consent to service of process by mailing copies by registered or certified mail, postage prepaid. Such service becomes effective 30 calendar days after mailing. However, nothing in this agreement affects PARTNERS' rights to serve process in any other matter permitted by law. 41. PARTNERS will not incur costs beyond the funding commitments in this agreement. If IMPLEMENTING AGENCY anticipates that funding for WORK will be insufficient to complete WORK, SPONSOR(S) will seek out additional funds and PARTNERS will amend this agreement. 42. If WORK stops for any reason, IMPLEMENTING AGENCY will place all facilities impacted by WORK in a safe and operable condition acceptable to CALTRANS. 43. If WORK stops for any reason, PARTNERS are still obligated to implement all applicable commitments and conditions included in the PROJECT environmental documentation, permits, agreements, or approvals that are in effect at the time that WORK stops, as they apply to each partner's responsibilities in this agreement, in order to keep PROJECT in environmental compliance until WORK resumes. PACT Version 9.1 5-28-09 7 of 17 23B-12 District Agreement 12-0624 44. Each partner accepts responsibility to complete the activities that they selected on the SCOPE SUMMARY. Activities marked with "N/A" on the SCOPE SUMMARY are not included in the scope of this agreement. Scope: CONSTRUCTION 45. SANTA ANA will advertise, open bids, award, and approve the construction contract in accordance with the Public Contract Code and the California Labor Code. SANTA ANA will not advertise the construction contract until CALTRANS completes or accepts the final plans, specifications, and estimate package; CALTRANS approves the Right of Way Certification; and FUNDING PARTNERS fully fund WORK. By accepting responsibility to advertise and award the construction contract, SANTA ANA also accepts responsibility to administer the construction contract. 46. SANTA ANA will provide a RESIDENT ENGINEER and construction support staff who are independent of the design engineering company and construction contractor. 47. PARTNERS will implement changes to the construction contract through contract change orders (CCOs). PARTNERS will review and concur on all CCOs over $50,000. All CCOs affecting public safety or the preservation of property, all design and specification changes, and all major changes as defined in the CALTRANS Construction Manual will be approved by CALTRANS in advance of the CCO work to be performed. 48. If the lowest responsible construction contract bid (plus estimated contingencies, supplemental costs and State Furnished Material costs) is equal to or less than the amount shown on the FUNDING SUMMARY for CONSTRUCTION Capital, the IMPLEMENTING AGENCY may award the contract. If the lowest responsible construction contract bid is greater than the amount shown on the FUNDING SUMMARY for CONSTRUCTION Capital, all PARTNERS must be involved in determining how to proceed. If PARTNERS do not agree in writing on a course of action within 15 working days, this agreement will terminate. 49. SANTA ANA will require the construction contractor to furnish payment and performance bonds naming SANTA ANA as obligee and to carry liability insurance in accordance with CALTRANS specifications. 50. SANTA ANA will submit a written request to CALTRANS for any SFM identified in the PROJECT PS&E package a minimum of 45 days prior to the bid advertisement date for PROJECT construction contract. SANTA ANA will submit a written request to CALTRANS for any additional SFM deemed necessary during PROJECT construction. PACT Version 9.1 5-28-09 8 of 17 23B-13 District Agreement 12-0624 51. Upon receipt of both SFM and full payment of CALTRANS' invoice for estimated SFM costs, CALTRANS will make the SFM available at a CALTRANS-designated location. 52. SANTA ANA will provide maintenance for those portions of the SHS within WORK limits until COMPLETION OF WORK, after which, maintenance will be handled through an existing maintenance agreement. COST Cost: General 53. SPONSOR(S) will secure funds for all WORK including any additional funds beyond the FUNDING PARTNERS' existing commitments in this agreement. Any change to the funding commitments outlined in this agreement requires an amendment to this agreement. 54. The cost of any awards, judgments, or settlements generated by WORK is a WORK cost. 55. CALTRANS, independent of PROJECT, will pay all costs for HM MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES related to HM -1 found within existing SHS right of way. 56. SANTA ANA, independent of PROJECT, will pay, or cause to be paid, all costs for HM MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES related to any HM -1 found within PROJECT limits and outside of existing SHS right of way. 57. HM MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES costs related to HM -2 are CONSTRUCTION SUPPORT and CONSTRUCTION CAPITAL costs. 58. The cost of coordinating, obtaining, complying with, implementing, and if necessary renewing and amending resource agency permits, agreements, and/or approvals is a WORK cost. 59. The cost to comply with and implement the commitments set forth in the environmental documentation is a WORK cost. 60. The cost to ensure that PROJECT remains in environmental compliance is a WORK cost. 61. The cost of any legal challenges to the CEQA environmental process or documentation is a WORK cost. 62. Independent of WORK costs, CALTRANS will fund the cost of its own IQA for WORK done within existing or proposed future SHS right of way. PACT Version 9.1 5-28-09 9 of 17 23B-14 District Agreement 12-0624 63. Independent of WORK costs, SANTA ANA will fund the cost of its own IQA for WORK done outside existing or proposed future SHS right of way. 64. Fines, interest, or penalties levied against any partner will be paid, independent of WORK costs, by the partner whose actions or lack of action caused the levy. That partner will indemnify and defend all other partners. 65. The cost to place PROJECT right of way in a safe and operable condition and meet all environmental commitments is a WORK cost. 66. Because IMPLEMENTING AGENCY is responsible for managing the scope, cost, and schedule of a project component, if there are insufficient funds available in this agreement to place the right of way in a safe and operable condition, the appropriate IMPLEMENTING AGENCY accepts responsibility to fund these activities until such time as PARTNERS amend this agreement. That IMPLEMENTING AGENCY may request reimbursement for these costs during the amendment process. 67. If there are insufficient funds in this agreement to implement applicable commitments and conditions included in the PROJECT environmental documentation, permits, agreements, and/or approvals that are in effect at a time that WORK stops, the partner implementing the commitments or conditions accepts responsibility to fund these activities until such time as PARTNERS amend this agreement. That partner may request reimbursement for these costs during the amendment process. 68. PARTNERS will pay invoices within 30 calendar days of receipt of invoice. 69. FUNDING PARTNERS accept responsibility to provide the funds identified on the FUNDING SUMMARY. 70. SPONSOR(S) accepts responsibility to ensure full funding for the identified scope of work. Cost: CONSTRUCTION Support 71. The cost to maintain the SHS within WORK limits is a WORK cost until COMPLETION OF WORK, after which, the cost of maintenance will be handled through an existing maintenance agreement. 72. Each PARTNER listed below may submit invoices for CONSTRUCTION Support: • CALTRANS may invoice SANTA ANA PACT Version 9.1 5-28-09 10 of 17 23B-15 District Agreement 12-0624 73. PARTNERS will exchange funds for source inspection cost to be invoiced as estimated cost payment. CALTRANS will invoice SANTA ANA for a lump sum (single payment) of $5,000 30 working days prior to the construction contract bid advertisement date. 74. After PARTNERS agree that all Scope activities are complete, CATRANS will submit a final accounting for all WORK costs. Based on the final accounting, PARTNERS will refund or invoice as necessary in order to satisfy the obligation of this agreement. Cost: CONSTRUCTION Capital 75. The cost of all STATE FURNISHED MATERIAL is a CONSTRUCTION capital cost. PARTNERS will exchange funds for SFM cost to be invoiced as estimated cost payment. CALTRANS will invoice SANTA ANA for the actual cost of any STATE -FURNISHED MATERIAL. 76. After PARTNERS agree that all Scope activities are complete, CALTRANS will submit a final accounting for all WORK costs. Based on the final accounting, PARTNERS will refund or invoice as necessary in order to satisfy the obligation of this agreement. SCHEDULE 77. PARTNERS will manage the schedule for WORK through the work plan included in the PROJECT MANAGEMENT PLAN. GENERAL CONDITIONS 78. This agreement will be understood in accordance with and governed by the Constitution and laws of the State of California. This agreement will be enforceable in the State of California. Any legal action arising from this agreement will be filed and maintained in the Superior Court of Orange County. 79. CALTRANS invoices for support costs including all direct and applicable indirect costs. Applicable indirect costs are determined by the type of funds being used to pay for support. State and federal funds are subject the Program Functional Rate. Local funds (Measure money, developer fees, special assessments, etc.) are subject to the Program Functional Rate and the Administration Rate. CALTRANS establishes the Program PACT Version 9.1 5-28-09 11 of 17 23B-16 District Agreement 12-0624 Functional Rate and the Administration Rate annually according to State and Federal regulations. 80. All obligations of CALTRANS under the terms of this agreement are subject to the appropriation of resources by the Legislature, the State Budget Act authority, and the allocation of funds by the California Transportation Commission. 81. Any PARTNER who performs IQA does so for its own benefit, further, that PARTNER cannot be assigned liability due to its IQA activities. 82. Neither SANTA ANA nor any officer or employee thereof is responsible for any injury, damage or liability occurring by reason of anything done or omitted to be done by CALTRANS under or in connection with any work, authority, or jurisdiction conferred upon CALTRANS under this agreement. It is understood and agreed that CALTRANS will fully defend, indemnify, and save harmless SANTA ANA and all of its officers and employees from all claims, suits, or actions of every name, kind, and description brought forth under, but not limited to, tortious, contractual, inverse condemnation, or other theories or assertions of liability occurring by reason of anything done or omitted to be done by CALTRANS under this agreement. 83. Neither CALTRANS nor any officer or employee thereof is responsible for any injury, damage, or liability occurring by reason of anything done or omitted to be done by SANTA ANA under or in connection with any work, authority, or jurisdiction conferred upon SANTA ANA under this agreement. It is understood and agreed that SANTA ANA will fully defend, indemnify, and save harmless CALTRANS and all of its officers and employees from all claims, suits, or actions of every name, kind, and description brought forth under, but not limited to, tortious, contractual, inverse condemnation, or other theories or assertions of liability occurring by reason of anything done or omitted to be done by SANTA ANA under this agreement. 84. This agreement is not intended to create a third party beneficiary or define duties, obligations, or rights in parties not signatory to this agreement. This agreement is not intended to affect the legal liability of PARTNERS by imposing any standard of care for completing WORK different from the standards imposed by law. 85. PARTNERS will not assign or attempt to assign agreement obligations to parties not signatory to this agreement. PACT Version 9.1 5-28-09 12 of 17 23B-17 District Agreement 12-0624 86. Any ambiguity contained in this agreement will not be interpreted against PARTNERS. PARTNERS waive the provisions of California Civil Code section 1654. 87. A waiver of a partner's performance under this agreement will not constitute a continuous waiver of any other provision. An amendment made to any article or section of this agreement does not constitute an amendment to or negate all other articles or sections of this agreement. 88. A delay or omission to exercise a right or power due to a default does not negate the use of that right or power in the future when deemed necessary. 89. If any partner defaults in their agreement obligations, the non -defaulting partner(s) will request in writing that the default be remedied within 30 calendar days. If the defaulting partner fails to do so, the non -defaulting partner(s) may initiate dispute resolution. 90. PARTNERS will first attempt to resolve agreement disputes at the PROJECT team level. If they cannot resolve the dispute themselves, the CALTRANS district director and the executive officer of SANTA ANA will attempt to negotiate a resolution. If no resolution is reached, PARTNERS' legal counsel will initiate mediation. PARTNERS agree to participate in mediation in good faith and will share equally in its costs. Neither the dispute nor the mediation process relieves PARTNERS from full and timely performance of WORK in accordance with the terms of this agreement. However, if any partner stops WORK, the other partner(s) may seek equitable relief to ensure that WORK continues. Except for equitable relief, no partner may file a civil complaint until after mediation, or 45 calendar days after filing the written mediation request, whichever occurs first. Any civil complaints will be filed in the Superior Court of Orange County. The prevailing partner will be entitled to an award of all costs, fees, and expenses, including reasonable attorney fees as a result of litigating a dispute under this agreement or to enforce the provisions of this article including equitable relief. 91. PARTNERS maintain the ability to pursue alternative or additional dispute remedies if a previously selected remedy does not achieve resolution. 92. If any provisions in this agreement are deemed to be, or are in fact, illegal, inoperative, or unenforceable, those provisions do not render any or all other agreement provisions invalid, inoperative, or unenforceable, and those provisions will be automatically severed from this agreement. PACT Version 9.1 5-28-09 13 of 17 District Agreement 12-0624 93. This agreement is intended to be PARTNERS' final expression and supersedes all prior oral understanding or writings pertaining to WORK. 94. If during performance of WORK additional activities or environmental documentation is necessary to keep PROJECT in environmental compliance, PARTNERS will amend this agreement to include completion of those additional tasks. 95. PARTNERS will execute a formal written amendment if there are any changes to the commitments made in this agreement. 96. This agreement will terminate upon COMPLETION OF WORK or upon 30 calendar days' written notification to terminate and acceptance between PARTNERS, whichever occurs first. However, all indemnification, document retention, audit, claims, environmental commitment, legal challenge, and ownership articles will remain in effect until terminated or modified in writing by mutual agreement. 97. The following documents are attached to, and made an express part of this agreement: SCOPE SUMMARY, FUNDING SUMMARY. 98. Signatories may execute this agreement through individual signature pages provided that each signature is an original. This agreement is not fully executed until all original signatures are attached. CONTACT INFORMATION The information provided below indicates the primary contact data for each partner to this agreement. PARTNERS will notify each other in writing of any personnel or location changes. These changes do not require an amendment to this agreement. The primary agreement contact person for CALTRANS is: Bob Bazargan, Project Manager 3347 Michelson Dr., Ste #100 Irvine, California 92612 Office Phone: (949) 724-2100 The primary agreement contact person for SANTA ANA is: Kenny Nguyen, Sr. Civil Engineer 20 Civic Center Plaza, M-36 Santa Ana, California 92701 Office Phone: (714) 647-5632 PACT Version 9.1 5-28-09 14 of 17 23B-19 District Agreement 12-0624 SIGNATURES PARTNERS declare that: 1. Each partner is an authorized legal entity under California state law. 2. Each partner has the authority to enter into this agreement. 3. The people signing this agreement have the authority to do so on behalf of their public agencies. STATE OF CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION :1 JIM BEIL Deputy District Director, Project Delivery CERTIFIED AS TO FUNDS: NEDA SABER District Budget Manager CITY OF SANTA ANA David N. Ream City Manager Attest: Maria D. Huiza City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM AND PROCEDURE Laura Sheedy Assistant Attorney PACT Version 9.1 5-28-09 15 of 17 W- I 12 -ORA -55-6.8-6.9 EA: OH290 District Agreement 12-0624 SCOPE SUMMARY a � so i• `o oo Q' o U) zQ oC v c a w i rn 5 270 Construction Engineering and General Contract Administration X X 10 Construction Staking Package and Control X 15 Construction Stakes X 20 Construction Engineering Work X 25 Construction Contract Administration Work X 30 Contract Item Work Inspection X 35 Construction Material Sampling and Testing X X 05 Materials Sampling and Testing for Quality Assurance X 10 Plant Inspection for Quality Assurance X 15 Independent Assurance Sampling and Testing I X 20 Source Inspection X 40 Safety and Maintenance Reviews X 45 Relief From Maintenance Process X 55 Final Inspection and Acceptance Recommendation X 60 Plant Establishment Administration X 65 Transportation Management Plan Implementation During Construction X 75 Resource Agency Permit Renewal and Extension Requests X 80 Long -Term Environmental Mitigation/Mitigation Monitoring During Construction Contract X 99 Other Construction Engineering and General Contract Administration X 5 285 Contract Change Order Administration X 5 290 Resolve Contract Claims X 5 295 Accept Contract, Prepare Final Construction Estimate, and Final Report X PACT Version 9.1 3.31.08 23B-21 16 of 17 rn0'IT cy) N N (0 00 = O (O O N W C CD E N � N rn ¢ O O O O CD O O O O O OdAl. CD CD CD spun] fe4o34nS Lq � rn I M ER E9 EA O O O OO O O O O }ioddnS NOJ °; m ;°n 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 le4ide3 NO3 v rl N .= M a) C 0 E edAjL pun:j N y 0 ;, CU a� � o 0 z z .Jau:Ped BuIpun j < a a ®:)jnoS Buipun:j o 0 J 0 J REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: AUGUST 16, 2010 TITLE: REJECTION OF BIDS FOR RESIDENTIAL STREET REPAIR PHASE 14 (PROJECT NO.106730) j� CITY MANAGER RECOMMENDED ACTION CLERK OF COUNCIL USE ONLY: APPROVED ❑ As Recommended ❑ As Amended ❑ Ordinance on 15` Reading ❑ Ordinance on 2nd Reading ❑ Implementing Resolution ❑ Set Public Hearing For CONTINUED TO FILE NUMBER Reject all bids for the Residential Street Repair Phase 14 project. DISCUSSION Phase 14 is the final phase of the City's $100 million investment to rebuild neighborhood streets throughout the City. The majority of the work done in this phase will take place in the area north of McFadden Avenue and east of Bristol Street. Segments of local streets located in these neighborhoods have been identified as a high priority for rehabilitation in the City's pavement management system. The pavement is deteriorating due to weather, age and heavy usage. Additionally, some of the adjacent curbs, gutters, sidewalks, cross gutters and curb ramps are in various states of disrepair and require replacement. The Notice Inviting Bids was advertised on July 7 and 9, 2010, and bids were opened on July 28, 2010. A summary of the bid invitations mailed, the bids received, and the bid results follows. Santa Ana Contractors receiving notices: Contractors requesting bidding documents: Bids received: Bids received from Santa Ana Contractors: NAME OF RESPONSIVE BIDDER 1. R.J. Noble Company 2. All American Asphalt 3. Excel Paving Company 4. Hardy & Harper, Inc. 23C-1 12 12 4 CITY Orange Corona Long Beach Santa Ana BID AMOUNT $5,047,312 $5,069,069 $5,179,402 $5,333,000 Contract Award For Residential Street Repair Phase 14 August 16, 2010 Page 2 A total of four bids were received and all were responsive. Since this is the last phase of the Residential Street Repair Program, it became apparent during the bidding period that based on available funding, additional streets can be included in this project. This will significantly increase the scope of the project and the time required to finish it. For this reason, staff recommends a division of the project, including the additional work, into two projects to expedite completion of work. This will also ensure the added work will be done using competitive bid prices (instead of the negotiated prices should the work require a change order). Therefore, staff recommends that all bids be rejected. Following Council action, staff will revise the plans and rebid the work as separate projects. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT There is no environmental impact associated with this action. FISCAL IMPACT There is no fiscal impact associated with this action Raul Godinez II Executive Director Public Works Agency RG/ET 23C-2 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: AUGUST 16, 2010 CLERK OF COUNCIL USE ONLY: TITLE: APPROVED ❑ As Recommended AGREEMENT FOR COMPREHENSIVE ❑ As Amended PHYSICAL EVALUATIONS AND HEALTH El Ordinance on 151 Reading ❑ Ordinance on 2nd Reading SCREENING ❑ Implementing Resolution ❑ Set Public Hearing For_ CITY MANAGER RECOMMENDED ACTION CONTINUED TO FILE NUMBER Authorize the City Manager and Clerk of the Council to execute the attached third amendment to the agreement with Pulmonary Consultants and Primary Care Physicians Medical Group, Inc., subject to non -substantive changes approved by the City Manager and City Attorney, in the amount not to exceed $30,000. DISCUSSION In August 2007 City Council approved an agreement with Pulmonary Consultants and Primary Care Physicians Medical Group, Inc., for annual Hazmat/SWAT physicals. These physicals detect the general health condition of the employee and the increased risk of respiratory and heart disease linked to the exposure of hazardous materials. The Fire and Police departments are requesting amending this agreement by $30,000 for an aggregate amount not to exceed $60,000. FISCAL IMPACT Funds are budgeted in the fiscal year 2010-11 Fire Department, Fire Suppression, Contract Services Professional account, (account no. 01115330-62300, $25,000); and the Police Department, Human Resource Division, Contract Services Professional account (account no. 01114402-62300, $5,000). APPROVED AS TO FUNDS AND ACCOUNTS: David Thomas Francisco Gutierrez Acting Fire Chief Executive Director Fire D�a�tment / � Paul M. Walters Chief of Police Police Department LS Finance & Management Services Agency �- r 25A-1 THIRD AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT THIS THIRD AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT is made and entered into this 1St day of July, 2010, by and between the City of Santa Ana, a charter city and municipal corporation of the State of California ("City") and Pulmonary Consultants & Primary Care Physicians Medical Group, Inc. ("Consultant"). RECITALS: City and Consultant entered into Agreement N-2007-192, dated August 20, 2007, (hereinafter "said Agreement"), by which Consultant has provided SWAT physicals and annual hazardous materials medical examinations for Police and/or Fire Department personnel who handle hazardous materials, pursuant to Title 8, Section 5144 of the CALOSHA Respiratory Protection Regulation. 2. In accordance with the terms and conditions of said Agreement, the parties now wish to extend the term of said Agreement for an additional one-year period and increase compensation to pay for services during the extended term. WHEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual and respective covenants hereinafter contained and made, and subject to all the terms and conditions of said Agreement as hereby amended, the parties do hereby agree as follows: Section 2.a., COMPENSATION, shall be amended to add $30,000 to pay for medical examination services during the 2010-11 fiscal year. 2. Section 3, TERM, shall be amended to extend the term of said Agreement for an additional one-year period, through June 30, 2011. Except as hereinabove modified, the terms and conditions of said Agreement and any amendments thereto remain unchanged and in full force and effect. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, City and Consultant have executed this Third Amendment to Consultant Agreement on the day and year first set forth above. ATTEST: MARIA D. HUIZAR Clerk of the Council Additional signatures on next page CITY OF SANTA ANA DAVID N. REAM City Manager 25A-2 APPROVED AS TO FORM: JOSEPH W. FLETCHER City Attorney By: JOSEPH STRAKA Assistant City Attorney RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL: DAVID THOMAS Acting Fire Chief RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL: PAUL M. WALTERS Chief of Police PULMONARY CONSULTANTS & PRIMARY CARE PHYSICIANS MEDICAL GROUP, INC. CLARE BIGGINS Chief Executive Officer 25A-3 25A-4 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: AUGUST 16, 2010 TITLE: DOWNTOWN SANTA ANA COMMUNITY MANAGEMENT DISTRICT AND BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT ANNUAL REPORTS AND AGREEMENT WITH DOWNTOWN INC. CITY MANAGER RECOMMENDED ACTION CLERK OF COUNCIL USE ONLY: APPROVED ❑ As Recommended ❑ As Amended ❑ Ordinance on Vt Reading ❑ Ordinance on 2nd Reading ❑ Implementing Resolution ❑ Set Public Hearing For_ CONTINUED TO FILE NUMBER Approve the 2010 Downtown Santa Ana Community Management District annual report. 2. Approve the 2010 Downtown Santa Ana Business Improvement District annual report. 3. Direct the City Attorney to prepare and authorize the City Manager and Clerk of the Council to execute an agreement with Downtown Inc., a non-profit corporation, in the amount of $1,294.37 to expend the remaining funds towards the "Clean and Safe" Program benefitting the BID area. COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AND HOUSING COMMISSION ACTION At its Regular Meeting of August 3, 2010, by a vote of 5:0, the Community Redevelopment and Housing Commission recommended that the City Council approve the 2010 Downtown Santa Ana Business Improvement District annual report and authorize the City Manager to execute an agreement with Downtown Inc. DISCUSSION Community Management District On December 15, 2008, the City Council adopted a resolution establishing the Downtown Santa Ana Community Management District (CMD) and the levy of an assessment of the property owners within the District to fund various activities in the Downtown. The CMD plan provided that the initial tax assessment be levied in FY 2009-10 and that the operating term of the CMD be January 1, 2010 to December 31, 2014. 25B-1 CMD and BID Annual Reports and Agreement with Downtown, Inc. August 16, 2010 Page 2 The City entered into a management agreement with Downtown Inc. to run the newly created non- profit organization to oversee the expenditure of the assessments collected during the five-year term of the CMD. The ordinance establishing the Community Management District and the management agreement with Downtown Inc. requires the submission of an annual report to the City Council containing the following information: 1) any changes to the boundaries of the CMD; 2) the improvements and activities to be provided for that upcoming fiscal year; 3) an estimate of the cost of providing the improvements and the activities for that upcoming fiscal year; 4) the method and basis of levying the assessment; 5) the amount of any surplus or deficit revenues to be carried over from a previous fiscal year; and 6) the amount of any contributions to be made from sources other than assessments levied. Downtown Inc. has submitted the 2010 annual report for the Downtown Santa Ana Community Management District (Exhibit 1). Business Improvement District On February 6, 1984, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. NS -1715 pursuant to Section 36500 et seq of the California Streets and Highways Code, creating a Business Improvement District (BID) in Downtown Santa Ana. The BID allows the businesses to assess themselves in order to raise funds for the promotion and improvement of the Downtown area. The report includes the name and boundaries of the BID, the activities and their cost proposed for the coming year, the method and basis of levying and collecting the assessments, and basic financial information covering such things as prior year surplus or deficits and non -assessment revenue. In May of 2009, the City Council approved the 2009 annual report and a Business Improvement District service agreement for $230,000 with Downtown Inc. to facilitate the utilization of carry forward 2007/2008 BID funds to be programmed for marketing, promotion and other activities of benefit to the Downtown Santa Ana Business Improvement District. The 2010 annual report highlights the activities which have been undertaken with the carry forward BID funds from April 2009 through June 2010 (Exhibit 2). At the August 3, 2010, Community Redevelopment and Housing Commission meeting, the Commission reviewed the annual report in the capacity of BID Advisory Board. CMD and BID Annual Reports and Agreement with Downtown, Inc. August 16, 2010 Page 3 Downtown Inc., as the community-based organization for downtown, acted as the contract agency for the BID funds. As of June 30, 2010, a total of $1294.37 of BID funds remain unexpended. A total of $727.97 is held in the City Trust Account and $566.40 is held by Downtown Inc. Downtown Inc. will expend the remaining funds towards the "Clean and Safe" Program, and a contract amendment is needed to allow for its expenditure.. FISCAL IMPACT Funds are available in the Downtown Business Improvement District Trust & Agency Reserve account (no. 09301001-24000). "I " c�f &�a t G�O bOL-Cynthia J. Weon Deputy Cityllanager for Development Services Community Development Agency CJN/NTE/TE/mlr Exhibits: 1. CMD Annual Report 2. BID Annual Report APPROVED AS TO FUNDS AND ACCOUNTS: Francisco Gutierrez �►.r Executive Director Finance & Management Services Agency DOWNTOWN SANTA ANA BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT 20110 ANNUAL REPORT Background The Downtown Santa Ana Business Improvement District (BID) was established in February 1984 by the City Council as a means of providing the Downtown business community with funding for promoting the area, increasing security, enhancing maintenance, and implementing physical improvements. The Community Redevelopment and Housing Commission (CRHC) is the BID Advisory Board. Improvement Area Boundaries The geographic boundaries of the district remain unchanged from the original 1984 area, and they include over 700 retail, service, and professional members. Method and Basis of Levying Assessments • Assessment Formula The formula for the BID tax levy also remains unchanged from the original 1984 ordinance and is based on the category and/or sales volume of the business as follows: The following businesses located within the boundaries of the BID, classified under City Ordinance NO 1690 as Amusement Services, Pawnbrokers, Service Station and Classification A including, but not limited to, Retail Sale of Goods, Hotels and Motels, Theaters and Food Establishments, shall pay an amount equal to one and one-half times their annual business license fee. Businesses classified as Commercial Rental Property, Rental Property, Residential and Rooming House shall pay an amount equal to their annual business license fee. All other businesses, including Professions, Trades, and Services within the boundaries of the proposed Business District, shall pay an amount equal to their annual business license fee. Once the assessment formula is established, it cannot be changed without written notice to all businesses within the boundaries of the proposed BID and a public hearing held by the City. • 2010 Assessment Levy There will be no assessment levied or collected in 2010/2011. EXHIBIT 2 25B-4 Summary of Activities and Improvements All programs and activities completed from April 2009 — June 2010 can be classified in the following broad categories: "Clean and Safe" o Supplemental security for weekend nights o Supplemental maintenance • Events and Promotions o Holiday celebrations o Merchant promotions o Social celebrations o Seasonal events o Arts and music • Publicity, Advertising, Marketing, and Outreach o Newsletters o Website o Visitor guides/maps o General advertising • Physical Amenities o Holiday decorations o Bike racks • Economic Development o Business assistance Budget Plan Downtown Inc. is a new nonprofit corporation composed of downtown stakeholders dedicated to downtown economic revitalization. They led the successful effort to form a Community Management District (CMD), and this group has been designated as the recipient/management organization of the CMD funds. Downtown Inc., as the sole community-based organization for downtown, acted as the contract agency for the BID funds. As of June 30, 2010, a total of $1294.37 of BID funds remains unexpended. A total of $727.97 is held in the City Trust Account and $566.40 is held by Downtown Inc. as the balance of the May 2009 Service Agreement which terminated on June 30, 2010. 25B-5 Budget Summary 2009/10 April 2009 - June 2010 Approved Actual Budget Expenditures REVENUE Prior year operating surplus $230,000 $230,000 TOTAL REVENUE $230,000 $230,000 EXPENDITURES Downtown "Clean and Safe" Program $123,000 $87,225.59 Prior Holiday Obligations (Decorations) $13,000 $16,275.17 Prior Obligation/FFE (Bicycle Racks) $5,000 $4,640.30 Promotions and Marketing $89,000 $121,292.54 TOTAL EXPENDITURES $230,000 $229,433.60 2010 Budget July 2010 — September 30, 2010 REVENUE Remaining Prior Year Unappropriated BID Funds $727.97 Carryover 09/10 Funds (Downtown, Inc.) $566.40 EXPENDITURES Downtown "Clean and Safe" Program $1,294.37 t� 2009-2010 ANNUAL REPORT 2009-2010 ANNUAL REPORT LEADERSHIP ......................................... Downtown Incorporated began the process to improve the vitality of Downtown Santa Ana with the formation of the Community Management District and officially opened our doors August 2009. During our formation, the economy rocked the business world to its roots. Despite the economy and market fluctuations along with changes in the business environment, we will work to strengthen retail and commercial establishments. Although challenged by the market, our property owners continue to reinvest in their businesses. Herb Rose with LaBell Exchange received the coveted Award of Excellence from the Association of Teleservices in a challenging year for his industry. ROIC acquired the Downtown Plaza and have landscaped, modernized and attracted new businesses into their heavily trafficked plaza. Mil Jugos will begin an expansion project later this year to accommodate their increasing popularity. Jugos Acapulco will also be expanding in 2010. City Ventures broke ground for 16 new live/work units. The YOST Theatre, Fiesta Marketplace and the Spurgeon Building are all in varying degrees of upgrades and repositioning. Several projects are planned for 2010 that will continue to change the footprint of downtown. As we look forward, we will continue to focus on our core functions of public safety, maintenance, advocacy, marketing and business support and developing programs and services that benefit the downtown. With all stakeholders working together in partnership, I am confident the successes of Downtown Inc. will continue to grow in 2010. Regards, Bob Stewart. Board President, Downtown Incorporated 2 Downtown Incorporated (DTI) is a private, non-profit organization dedicated to the enhancement and improvement of Santa Ana's central business district. DTI oversees maintenance, safety and revi- talization programs financed by the Community Management District, a property assessment district originally established in 2008 through the legal process to July 2009 as the beginning of operations. The district is roughly bound by Walnut Street to the South, Mortimer Street to the East, Birch Street to the North and Flower Street to the West. The 66 -block district is located within the central busi- ness district C-3, C-3 A (Artist Village) zoning area. Mission Statement The mission of Downtown Incorporated is to facilitate the enhancement of Downtown Santa Ana as a vibrant shopping, entertainment, business and cultural destination for all. MCI ............................................. Dear Downtown Stakeholder, As our first year comes to a close, we recognize this year has been tough for many downtown stakeholders — business and property owners, developers and public partners alike. The realities of the new economy have caused many of us to pause and analyze our priorities and strategies. While the economy has taken a toll, our commitment to our core fundamentals of public safety, advocacy and marketing for Downtown has not wavered. Our clean and safe teams patrol the district seven days a week to provide our stakeholders with public safety and maintenance services. We've also launched our website that includes a social media presence on Facebook, Twitter and real time blogs, to communicate with our downtown patrons and connect with our stakeholders. Our staff remains engaged in providing assistance to our community to include: increased benefits for our Associate Members, co-op advertising and event sponsorship, retail recruitment, expanding our Art and Entertainment district, advocacy with the City of Santa Ana staff and council, strengthen our partnership with the Santa Ana Police Department and code enforcement. If we make good strategic decisions in this down economy, we can maximize opportunities in the next economic cycle. Downtown Santa Ana is not unlike most large American cities. The 1950's retail environment focused on the downtown. The advent of the mall in the early seventies brought a mass exodus of core department stores relocating to large undeveloped areas of the city. Downtown Santa Ana is reinventing itself to accommodate a new market without alienating our established market. Earlier this year, Downtown Inc. held a mini retreat with our Board of Directors to embark on an action plan for the future of the district. We began working with the City of Santa Ana Economic Development, OPIS, Edwardo Figueroa and Francisco Valle to equip our stakeholders as to trends that would benefit their businesses. All experts believe we have the basic ingredients for success. We have a strong local market with adequate retail space inventory and a growing demand for urban experiences. The experts recommend a need for a mix of complementary uses and a focused approach to improving the retail market As we look to the year ahead, there are many opportunities on the horizon. We will continue to inform you of our efforts and we look forward to working with you to create a strong and vibrant Downtown. Sincerely, Vicky Baxter Executive Director Downtown Inc. Public Policy ............................................ While troubled real estate and capital markets and severe local and state government budget deficits presented many challenges our first year, Downtown Incorporated was actively engaged with policy issues affecting Downtown and development projects in and adjacent to the district. Santa Ana Fixed Guideway Project Connecting Garden Grove The Fixed Guideway will provide faster, more reliable public transportation services and choices for residents and commuters and greater mobility in Santa Ana. Our Board of Directors is currently researching several alignment or travel paths in the downtown. The project will encourage more pedestrian -friendly avenues and spur economic development and jobs. A central city location will generate greater economic benefits for the downtown. Working with City Staff and the Mayor, Downtown Inc. is researching best practices to make recommendations on the proposal. Trolley Although Downtown Inc. is not in the transportation business, we definitely believe that providing a trolley in the downtown will benefit our restaurants and retail businesses. Working with the City, Downtown Inc. will begin a pilot program in mid- August to attract people to the downtown. The trolley will initially run from 4:30 PM — 7:30 PM with stops in the downtown to the train depot. This program will build depending upon its success. The goal is to transition to a "lunch express". Proiects Advocated One Broadway Plaza, Jugos Acapulco Expansion, Rehabilitation/Re-positioning of Fiesta Marketplace., YOST Theatre, Station District, RTKL Wayfinding Policy Advocated Dance Ordinance in Arts/Entertainment District, City One -Stop Public Information and Service Center, Proof Back Door, Limited Free Parking (Structure), Parking Meter Grace Period, 2 hours Vendor Truck Parking Enforcement Events Monitored First Saturday Art Walk, Fiestas Pathas, Cinco de Mayo, Noche de Altares on on t WEST END•THEATER t 1 1 1 t 1 i Yr 1 � 7 I 1 Clean + Safe ............................................ Downtown Incorporated's clean and safe programs support the development of downtown office, retail and entertainment uses by maintaining a clean and safe environment. ■ h Clean Streets In August 2009, Downtown Inc- took over the clean streets program from the City of Santa Ana. In January 2010, DTI contracted with ABLE Building Maintenance, a local Santa Ana Company in business for over 40 years. They provide litter maintenance and power washing services in the district. The program operates seven days a week. Pressure washing service is provided between 10:00 PM and 6:00 AM, Tuesday, Thursday and Sunday. A minimum of three linear blocks is done per day. High traffic areas such as-, Main, Broadway and Birch are pressure washed twice per month. Downtown Inc. responds as needed to areas that need more attention or a call to service from one of our stakeholders. Downtown Inc. clean streets team enhances the pedestrian experience by responding to maintenance issues and providing services, including sweeping and pressure washing alleys and sidewalks, removing street and first floor level graffiti, litter, collecting leaves and addressing other surface maintenance control issues. In our first year of service, we have been commended by both consumers and merchants for our diligence and clean downtown. A recent quote from Al Afghani, Arco Gas Station; "Excellent job, immediately done. Thank you". 0 Clean + Safe ............................................. Safe Streets Downtown Incorporated is determined to provide a safe atmosphere in our district. American Shield was hired in July, 2009 to provide ambassador/security services. As the first eyes on the street, Downtown Inc. Security Guides equipped with cell phones and two way radios, provide customer service to downtown patrons. Guides are informed about downtown popular attractions and special events that make Downtown Orange County unique. They act as information ambassadors, patrol downtown streets seven days a week, direct and assist visitors, serve as a communication link and report graffiti. They also support law enforcement agencies, merchants and property owners in crime prevention efforts. Security Guides walk and bike the district. In 2010, plans are to purchase an electric utility vehicle clearly marked with our logo and bold letters stating SECURITY to further announce our presence on the street. American Shield has built a relationship with our merchants as we believe it is crucial for businesses to feel supported. As this relationship has grown, there is an overwhelming desire for partnership and cooperation. Downtown Inc. has made a gigantic effort to have our merchants and property owners report crime. In previousyears, merchants did not understand the necessity to report minor offenses typically resolved by the merchants (petty theft, odd behavior, 51/50 conduct, illegal peddlers, drug dealing, homeless trespassing, etc.). Working with SAPD, DTI has informed our community to "make the calf'. All calls are prioritized and recorded. This tracks the criminal activity in downtown and will further assist DTI and SAPID in providing accurate reporting statistics. Indicators for additional service will depend upon this reporting mechanism. Nuisance activity and criminal activity are being defined and reported. Identifying "hot spots" or areas of increased service will make response time less as we work in partnership with American Shield and Santa Ana Police Department. JL few T. 1 �.• Events ............................................. Downtown Santa Ana had many events sponsored by Downtown Inc. in 2009. Two signature events (Cinco de Mayo and Fiestas Patrias) are not sponsored by DTI at this time. Intemational Music Festival This first year event brought culture, music and international cuisine to downtown in partnership with EI Centro Cultural de Mexico, Casa Guanajuato, and Fundacion Yanga Veracruz USA. 50 countries were represented. Holiday Plays at the YOST Theatre In conjunction with the YOST Theatre, Teratro Actores de Santa Ana, Louie Olivos, Jr., and Carter Dewberry & Associates, Downtown Inc. held free matinee plays for children in both Spanish and English during the Christmas Season. The plays were varied from chamber music and narration to "No Christmas for Smiley" with traditional holiday music and a message against violence and gangs. All media outlets were used with press releases and a featured story in the 0 C Register. Downtown Santa Ana - World Cup Headquarters FIFA World Cup - The Restaurant Association (32 downtown restaurants), joined this effort. Businesses televised the games to their patrons with early morning and all day rebroadcasts. 13 participating restaurants were listed on the website. Many businesses participated by contributing prizes from soccer balls to one of a kind soccer rings valued at $350. Media outlets included: Miniondas, Farandula, 0 C Register, 0 C Weekly, Yahoo web banners, flyers and mailings. Posse on Broadway A monthly live music event during summer - Each show featured one-two bands performing live on the Artist Promenade in the early evening, followed by specialty DJ's and music programming in select venues on North Broadway. This music series showcased a broad array of musical genres including independent, alternative, acoustic, instrumental, experimental, surf, pop and jazz. Block Party— Handmade Brigade Marketed by DTI, this event brought a diversity of people to purchase handmade products into downtown. Fiesta Calle Cuatro Concert Series A diverse series of musical experiences (traditional folkloric and multi -cultural) located along our retail corridor on 4th Street. The marketing strategy of this entertainment series is to position Downtown Santa Ana as a summer destination and a place to shop, be entertained, do business and discover arts and culture. By providing different types of musical entertainment and highlighting different venues in the Downtown, all of the local businesses and areas are promoted with new patrons and increased foot traffic. Summer Family Film Festival DTI partnered with the Old Orange County Courthouse A joint effort with the historic Old Courthouse brought families to enjoy a movie and exhibits featuring the California Golden Bear. Face painting and popcorn were provided by DTI along with a historic trolley tour narrated by historian Tim Rush. First Saturday Art Walk In June 2010 the First Saturday Art Walk's governance was taken over by DTI. Staff became responsible for maintaining the integrity of the event as well as order. Ten vendors are screened and must fit the criteria to insure quality - MARKETING & PROMOTIONS ... ®®® ......... ®®® ... ®®.... ®®® ... ®®® ......... Downtown Inc. periodically runs promotions to promote local businesses. Promotions also help display all of the positive change downtown. Some of the promotions sponsored by Downtown Inc. are: Santa Ana Downtown Divas What began as a networking group of women in business has become a dynamic force for change in the downtown. Forty women who agree constitute success and these ladies are inviting more ladies to become involved in the community management district and provide needed feedback on the direction of downtown. Passport to Downtown Downtown Inc. was the primary sponsor for Noche de Altaras, a traditional celebration also known as Day of the Dead in November. DTI participated by having a booth and hosting a "Passport to Downtown Treasure Hunt". Passports were given to participants who received a DOWNTOWN sticker as they visited our downtown stores. The passport were filled with stickers and turned in for prizes. To encourage the public to visit both sides of 4th Street, half the stickers were black and half were white and the requirement was to have both colors to win. Patrons won a full range of prizes purchased at cost from our merchants. Advertising included mail merges, local newspaper ads as well as e-mail blasts. Attendance to Noche de Altares is a downtown Santa Ana tradition that has taken place for the last seven years. In 2009 the event brought well over 9,000 attendees. This event is a true crossover event bringing music, food and culture to an increasingly diverse audience. Holiday Light Proiection Proiect In 2009, Downtown Inc. decided to forsake the traditional and explore new avenues of holiday entertainment. Over 10,000 people braved cold December nights to watch a new concept in light and sound. Animated Light Projection set to music on the historic Spurgeon building. With an original music score synched to Chris Alfaro's computer and over a quarter of a million dollars in rented projection equipment, the downtown district gained new favor with both locals and visitors to produce a truly unique 14 day event. Picked up by both local and L.A. media networks, newcomers enjoyed watching a spectacle of light and sound. Although an illusion, snow falling and collecting on the window ledge can invoke cold chills even when temperatures are far from freezing. Cookies with Santa Downtown Inc. hosted Santa Claus straight from the North Pole on Saturday, December 5th, 12th and 19th from 1100 AM — 3:00 PM to enjoy cookies and candy canes with kids. Parents were asked to show a receipt for $5.00 or more from any downtown business and receive a framed picture with Santa ($20.00 Value). 800 pictures were taken with appreciative parents and even grandparents. Santa was thrilled to hold one of Santa Ana's youngest newcomers (Anna, 21 days old). Valentine's Day Celebration Strolling Mariachi bands serenaded shoppers along with volunteers distributing 500 long stemmed red roses marked February 14th. A featured interview with Teresa from Teresa's Jewelers and the icon of Spanish radio, Teddy Fregoso brought shoppers into the district to buy their "beloved" a gift. 0 C Weekly and the 0 C Register were also used in media buys. Mixers In partnership with our local restaurants and businesses, Downtown Inc. has held a mixer at the historic Santora building and Original Mike's. Both have brought over 150 people and a chance to meet, greet and network. A chance to get to know one another on an informal basis, mixers also produce dollars through deals and agreements as businesses "mix" their goods and services and allow commerce to take place. Downtown Inc. assists in marketing the event via e-mail blast, press release, mailings, and flyers. 12 r► � �; sow � � a Olt .f W AK it Retail ............................................. The dramatic slowing of the national economy in the housing and financial markets in combination with a reduction in consumer confidence have contributed to a significant decrease in overall sales tax revenue over the past year. Maintaining a diverse mix of retail is essential for an active and dynamic downtown. Restaurants, entertainment, and retailers draw evening and weekend activity and support the needs of residents, businesses and promote visitors. There is recognition amongst many of Downtown's retailers and restaurants that they must broaden their customer appeal by redefining what they sell and how they sell it. DTI is assisting these retailers in their revitalization efforts by partnering with OPIS Network and Mi Empresa Exitosa to analyze retail conditions and develop a downtown retail activation strategy. Both organizations have provided workshops for our retail community as they assess their viability in this downturn and reposition themselves for recovery. Also to further understand the market, DTI will house a seminar conducted by Francisco Valle in the fall. Several major mixed-use projects are planned for Downtown that will enhance the economic vitality of the area. Two proposals for Broadway incorporate the historic reuse of the existing building. Chapter One: the modern local, is moving forward along with The Copper Door. These two neighbors will have a kinship as that "neighborhood" bar with a twist. The twist for Chapter One is, its affordable gourmet dining. The Cooper Door will introduce Santa Ana to beers of the world with future surprises and amenities. In addition, Fiesta Marketplace has proposed a comprehensive re -design that will increase the diversity of retail offerings to prepare for the influx of residents and visitors into the Downtown area. The redesign will enhance the shopping and pedestrian experience on the promenade and will help strengthen this traffic -generating corridor toward Main and Broadway. The Yost Theatre, with seating capacity of 500, will draw top name entertainment and will provide a first class dining experience. A lounge, located in the property next to the Yost Theatre, will provide entertainment dining and dancing. Downtown Inc. will work in partnership with the City of Santa Ana to inform our businesses of fagade money as it becomes available. This will further "freshen up" the downtown in anticipation of recovery. III 14 Physical Enhancements ............................................. The City of Santa Ana's past installation of electrical boxes in the planters on 4th Street, allowed for lighting in the trees. Downtown Inc. covered the cost of trimming the trees and contracted with Dekral-ight to have lights strung along tree lined 4th Street. The public and the merchants loved the additional lighting and ambiance so much that DTI continues to maintain them throughout the year. The festive friendly ambiance creates a warm look to the downtown at night and is welcoming. The LED lights are another joint partnership with the City of Santa Ana and Downtown Inc. Future considerations include hanging flower baskets from the streetlights and possible flowers in the planters. Our maintenance team would water and weed the flowers and keep them well groomed. The idea would be to find corporate partners giving them recognition through a name plaque on the light pole. A utility vehicle would be purchased to hold water and tools. The Executive Director sits on the Fagade Committee to better understand the process and availability of funding for downtown applicants. Several projects were funded in 2009 totaling $500,000. In 2010, DTI will work with the city to market this program in our district as funds become available. Downtown Inc. works closely with the City on street lights that are not working or areas that need additional lighting. DTI has alerted property owners to light requirements resulting in increased lighting in alleys and in areas previously dark. To better inform our merchants of signage requirements, Downtown Inc. has hosted meetings with code enforcement and merchants. One of the outcomes has been a brochure from the City outlining details and giving examples of allowed/not allowed signage. To encourage bike enthusiasts to shop, dine and play in the district, bike racks were purchased and installed in several areas in the downtown amounting to over $5,000- One installation was on West 4th across from the Ronald Reagan Federal Building and several locations in the Artists Village. Before the cement was dry, bicycles were parked in the racks. This has alleviated the bikes locked to trees, bollards, benches, signposts or strewed into pedestrian walkways. 1 15 Residential ............................................. Downtown continues to evolve as a vibrant urban destination. This year, City Ventures will finish their Phase 1 Project with four lofts and four Iive/work units. The additional units will fulfill the need for a diverse housing market. New housing brings vibrant energy to the Downtown District, encourages more businesses to invest in the area and creates a sense of community. While the national housing market has experienced a tremendous slow down, efforts to support the development of quality housing projects that activate the central city continues to be a high priority. There are four different floor plans that vary from approximately 1;500 square feet to 2,400 square feet. Early buyers will have the opportunity to create a living environment that suits their lifestyle needs by laying out the rooms. The expected completion date will be the middle to end of November with prices starting in the mid to high $300s. The live/works will occupy the first and second floor and the lofts will primarily be on the third floor. City Ventures is working with Wells Fargo with an interest rate at a 50 year tow. This complex located in the Artist Village allows residents a walkable lifestyle in Downtown Santa Ana. 16 u yy t A There are four different floor plans that vary from approximately 1;500 square feet to 2,400 square feet. Early buyers will have the opportunity to create a living environment that suits their lifestyle needs by laying out the rooms. The expected completion date will be the middle to end of November with prices starting in the mid to high $300s. The live/works will occupy the first and second floor and the lofts will primarily be on the third floor. City Ventures is working with Wells Fargo with an interest rate at a 50 year tow. This complex located in the Artist Village allows residents a walkable lifestyle in Downtown Santa Ana. 16 Associate Membership ............................................ A regular member is a property owner in the 66 block Community Management District. All property owners are encouraged and invited to actively participate in Downtown Inc. Any other person may apply for Associate Membership in Downtown Incorporated by executing and filing with the Secretary of Downtown Incorporated an application for membership and making payment of dues as prescribed from time to time by the Board of Directors. Upon approval by the Board of Directors, the applicant shall become an Associate Member of Downtown Incorporated. Benefits of Associate Membership: Networking opportunities Local government advocacy Credibility Learning opportunities Discounts i Co-op advertising and website link Committee participation DTI's media (bilingual newsletter, flyers and e-mails) Partnership with other organizations DTI began to outreach to downtown businesses with three strategies: (1) Meeting the businesses on a personal level. This consists of visiting every existing business in the downtown district and making a formal introduction. (2) DTI staff became aware of who to contact as well as changes of locations. Staff was then able to maintain an accurate database. (3) DTI began a snail mail and email campaign to acquaint businesses with DTI. Bi -monthly Merchant Meetings are held to inform businesses of upcoming events, opportunities, networking, changes in policy in the district, and exchange ideas. Businesses were very responsive and recognized the opportunity. A total of 55 businesses have joined in 2009. Associate Membership continues to grow and will be a focus for 2010. 17 Financials .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Downtown Incorporated manages a budget of almost $1 million. Downtown Inc. receives its support primarily from property assessments. The management district encompasses 281 parcels equaling 40,000 linear feet of street frontage, 4.3 million sq. ft. of land and 3.1 million sq. ft. of buildings.. DTI's assessment rates are based on flat Parcel fee +Street frontage fee + Land area fee + Building area fee. Full assessment formula on page 21. The district's operating budget allocates 87% of funds to core activities: public safety, maintenance, marketing, physical enhancement while 13% is allocated to administration. The Board of Directors voted at their July 2010 regular board meeting, no changes to the Community Management District boundaries and no increased assessment for 2010/11. 2009-2010 FUND ALLOCATION BY DEPARTMENT M ■ Maintenance & Landscaping ■ Marketing & Promotions ■ Ambassador Program ■ Physical Enhancement IN Administration &. Operations 'Rounded amounts in thousands 18 "As of June 30, 2010. Financial Review pending, prepared by ELLS, CPA's.. E a. - - - - - - - p S. S'a'4p c49 Ob CJ n:R s p p 1O E M.M., n m m E cq IL . . . . . . . . . E a. - - - - - - - - - - a-- - 1O E E cq IL . . . . . . . . . IL . . . . . . . . . w a u c iZ LU I Z 4eJ UO CD W 0 cli mm o > E > xw CD C=� rl-- FW w 00 E a. c 0 7 - - - - - - - - - - a-- - E cq IL . . . . . . . . . c 0 7 19 O E cq 0 Z 0 iZ LU I Z 4eJ CD W 0 cli mm o > E > xw CD FW m o cn0 00 v CD izy 0 -C CIJ 0: F F - QIF- Z 2E LU v it L 00 LZ 0 0 0 L m :i 19 O DEMOGRAPHICS .............................................. Downtown Santa Ana continues to be one of the region's largest employment centers with an estimated employment population of 26,425 with 2,277 establishments. Downtown's population in 2009 totaled 70,928 with 13,627 households_ Per capita income is $10,649 and the average household income is $47,273. The average Central City citizen is 26.5 years old. Source City of Santa Ana Community Development Agency In addition to traditional demographics, industries are increasingly utilizing psychographics as a tool to target potential market segments. Psychographics identify personality characteristics and attitudes that affect a person's lifestyle and purchasing behavior_ In terms of retail, Santa Ana's trade area psychographic characteristics are conducive to a prosperous retail market. Groups such as IN STYLE, OLD and NEWCOMERS, METRO RENTERS, CONNOISSEURS, URBAN CHIC and others with a favorable disposition towards urban retailing have a renewed interest in the district. Santa Ana has an encouraging new mix of "urban trendsetters," those who will set the tone for downtown's retail and restaurant scene, and "followers," those that will follow the lead of the trendsetter. 20 ■ Services is Manufacturing is Administrative ■ Retail Construction is Wholesale ■ Financial ■ Transportation is Agriculture Assessment Formula: Street Frontage Fee + Land Area Fee + Building Area Fee + Parcel Fee 1. Single-family residential uses are set at a rate of 10 cents per square foot of building pad, from one to four units are set at a flat rate of $100 per unit (includes residential condos). 2. Multi -family residential uses of five or more units are set at 25 percent of respective base assessment rates (apartments). 3. Nonprofit- (5010) owned/occupied properties are set at 25 percent of respective base assessment rates. 4. Building areas are capped at a floor area ratio (FAR) of 4.0. 5. Government-ownedloccupied properties will not be assessed and will receive no direct services. 6. Residential uses, regardless of the number of units, that are 100 percent project -based rental assistance programs, for example, senior housing and the like, will not be assessed and will receive no direct services. 7. Mixed-use properties/complexes will generally be assessed based on prorated land -use ratios, using the following guidelines: Commercial/Office Condos — No Residential Uses (multiple owners) a. Building area fee at full building area fee rate (structured parking area excluded). b. Land area fee at full land area fee rate but prorated for each unit based on ratio of unit building area to total building area. c. Frontage fee at full frontage rate but prorated for each unit based on ratio of unit building area to total building area. Mixed -Use Rental: Ground -Floor Commercial and Upper -Floor Residential (single owner) a. Building area fee at full rate for commercial area and 25 percent commercial rate for residential area (structured parking area excluded). b. Land area fee at full land area fee rate. c. Frontage fee at full frontage rate. Mixed -Use Condos: Ground -Floor Commercial and Upper -Floor Residential (multiple owners) a. Building area fee at full rate for commercial pad areas and 10 cents per square foot of building pad area, per residential condo unit (structured parking area excluded). b. Land area fee at full land area fee rate for commercial pad footprint. c. Frontage fee at full frontage rate for commercial units (ground floor direct frontage). d. Live -work condo units where there is a clear and legally defined distinction between work space and living space will be assessed using a combination of a, b, and c above. Street Frontage Fee is calculated by multiplying the linear feet of street frontage of a parcel by the Street Frontage Rate ($6 per linear foot). Land Area Fee is calculated by multiplying the square footage of the parcel by the Land Area Rate (10 cents per square foot) Building Area Fee is calculated by multiplying the square footage of a structure, as derived from its gross exterior dimensions, by the Building Area Rate (15 cents per square foot). Flat Parcel Fee — each individual Assessor's Parcel is assessed the Flat Parcel Rate ($425). Street Frontage Rate Land Area Rate Building Area Rate Flat Parcel Rate $6.00 per linear foot 10¢ per square foot 15¢ per square foot $425 per parcel 21 OPERATIONS ............................................ Administration Downtown Inc. currently employs three full time staff. The Executive Director, Business Manager who is acting Human Resources Director and Membership Outreach Manager. Each of these positions is varied and involves many facets. A part time Administrative Assistant works closely with the business manager to insure quality accounting and record keeping. Due to a mix of contract services and the necessity to be transparent, DTI uses a bid process for most services costing over $5,000. An independent contractor provides consultation in this process along with Information Technology issues such as telephone, computer software/hardware, copy machine, networking, data base and other technologies requiring a specific competence. In November, 2009 Downtown Inc. launched an Intern Volunteer Program designed to assist university students/graduates interested in the public sector field. Each student selects their area of interest from events, retail recruitment, research into municipal codes and enforcement, and issues pertinent to Downtown Inc. The interns have proved to be invaluable and have logged over 500 hours of volunteer time. They have moved the organization forward far beyond what was expected in our first year. The Board of Directors and staff are most grateful for their efforts and accomplishments. Intern Testimonial: In February 1 started as an intern at Downtown Incorporated after finishing my degree in Political Science at UC Berkeley. Since February, I've interned for approximately 200+ hours in addition to participating in events Downtown Inc. has hosted or been affiliated with. 1 mainly work on projects associated with the Art Walk and the Artists Village such as devising a system to permit vendors who wish to operate on the promenade during the First Saturday Art Walk. Each month, I communicate with all vendors, get the information and documents needed in order for them to obtain a permit, and bring them to City Hall. After this process is complete, 1 assign vendors their spaces, give them a set of rules they must comply with, and stay the duration of each art walk to ensure everyone complies and that no unauthorized vendors are present. I also assist the staff with various projects and events as well as write for and help edit the monthly newsletter Downtown Incorporated has provided me with great experience and has allowed me to make this internship truly my own. 1 am not stuck filing papers, but instead get real hands-on experience in local politics, administration, and project management. 1 believe this internship will prove beneficial for me as 1 enter law school in 2011 and will undoubtedly come in handy if I wish to work in local government or for a PBID in the future. Kathryn Podsiadio, U C Berkeley 2009 - - % INV _ s� 22 Directors + Staff .............................................. Board Directors 2009/10 Officers Term Expiration: President: Bob Stewart, Empire Building (2010/11) 4/30/12 Vice Chair: Ryan Chase, Fiesta Marketplace #2 (2010/11) 4/30/12 Treasurer: Ray Rangel, R & R Sportswear (2009/10) 4/30/10 Gil Marrero, Harrah Properties (2010/11) 4/30/11 Secretary: Wendy Bryan, Gonzalez Northgate Markets (2009/10) 4/30/10 Iry Chase, Fiesta Marketplace #1 (2010/11) 4/30/13 Property Owners - Directors Joe Duffy, Phillips Hutton Building 4/30/11 Jon Gothold, DGWB Ventures 4/30/11 Davin Gumm, Pacific Building 4/30/13 Adolfo Lopez, Lopez Properties 4/30/12 Elise Luckham, First American Title 4/30/12 Michael Paxton, Spurgeon Building 4/30/13 Alicia Valdez, Gonzales Northgate Markets 4/30/13 Raul Yanez, Yanez Properties 4/30/11 Neighborhood Representative Property Owner Brian Christenson, Artist Village Lofts 4/30/11 Merchant Representative Business Owner Teresa Saldivar, Teresa's Jewelry 4/30/11 City of Santa Ana Representative Cindy Nelson, Deputy City Manager Ex -Officio Member Staff Vicky Baxter, Executive Director Liset Hernandez, Business Manager Ruth Valle, Member Services/Outreach Norm Baxter, Consultant Phung Mai, Administrative Assistant Kathryn Podsiadlo, Special Projects Intern AndrewTovstein, Retail Recruitment Intern Claudia Lavini, Special Projects Intern Joshua Lee, Research Intern 23 mmil �N r1 F j M■ �� ■ ■ 51, . ■ ■ IL W- mmagm "Ons DPMI � ( Mks w•w Lam c c 0 `o c 7A i4 k OR 1 LEADERSHIP ......................................... Downtown Incorporated began the process to improve the vitality of Downtown Santa Ana with the formation of the Community Management District and officially opened our doors August 2009. During our formation, the economy rocked the business world to its roots. Despite the economy and market fluctuations along with changes in the business environment, we will work to strengthen retail and commercial establishments. Although challenged by the market, our property owners continue to reinvest in their businesses. Herb Rose with LaBell Exchange received the coveted Award of Excellence from the Association of Teleservices in a challenging year for his industry. ROIC acquired the Downtown Plaza and have landscaped, modernized and attracted new businesses into their heavily trafficked plaza. Mil Jugos will begin an expansion project later this year to accommodate their increasing popularity. Jugos Acapulco will also be expanding in 2010. City Ventures broke ground for 16 new live/work units. The YOST Theatre, Fiesta Marketplace and the Spurgeon Building are all in varying degrees of upgrades and repositioning. Several projects are planned for 2010 that will continue to change the footprint of downtown. As we look forward, we will continue to focus on our core functions of public safety, maintenance, advocacy, marketing and business support and developing programs and services that benefit the downtown. With all stakeholders working together in partnership, I am confident the successes of Downtown Inc. will continue to grow in 2010. Regards, Bob Stewart. Board President, Downtown Incorporated 2 Downtown Incorporated (DTI) is a private, non-profit organization dedicated to the enhancement and improvement of Santa Ana's central business district. DTI oversees maintenance, safety and revi- talization programs financed by the Community Management District, a property assessment district originally established in 2008 through the legal process to July 2009 as the beginning of operations. The district is roughly bound by Walnut Street to the South, Mortimer Street to the East, Birch Street to the North and Flower Street to the West. The 66 -block district is located within the central busi- ness district C-3, C-3 A (Artist Village) zoning area. Mission Statement The mission of Downtown Incorporated is to facilitate the enhancement of Downtown Santa Ana as a vibrant shopping, entertainment, business and cultural destination for all. MCI ............................................. Dear Downtown Stakeholder, As our first year comes to a close, we recognize this year has been tough for many downtown stakeholders — business and property owners, developers and public partners alike. The realities of the new economy have caused many of us to pause and analyze our priorities and strategies. While the economy has taken a toll, our commitment to our core fundamentals of public safety, advocacy and marketing for Downtown has not wavered. Our clean and safe teams patrol the district seven days a week to provide our stakeholders with public safety and maintenance services. We've also launched our website that includes a social media presence on Facebook, Twitter and real time blogs, to communicate with our downtown patrons and connect with our stakeholders. Our staff remains engaged in providing assistance to our community to include: increased benefits for our Associate Members, co-op advertising and event sponsorship, retail recruitment, expanding our Art and Entertainment district, advocacy with the City of Santa Ana staff and council, strengthen our partnership with the Santa Ana Police Department and code enforcement. If we make good strategic decisions in this down economy, we can maximize opportunities in the next economic cycle. Downtown Santa Ana is not unlike most large American cities. The 1950's retail environment focused on the downtown. The advent of the mall in the early seventies brought a mass exodus of core department stores relocating to large undeveloped areas of the city. Downtown Santa Ana is reinventing itself to accommodate a new market without alienating our established market. Earlier this year, Downtown Inc. held a mini retreat with our Board of Directors to embark on an action plan for the future of the district. We began working with the City of Santa Ana Economic Development, OPIS, Edwardo Figueroa and Francisco Valle to equip our stakeholders as to trends that would benefit their businesses. All experts believe we have the basic ingredients for success. We have a strong local market with adequate retail space inventory and a growing demand for urban experiences. The experts recommend a need for a mix of complementary uses and a focused approach to improving the retail market As we look to the year ahead, there are many opportunities on the horizon. We will continue to inform you of our efforts and we look forward to working with you to create a strong and vibrant Downtown. Sincerely, Vicky Baxter Executive Director Downtown Inc. Public Policy ............................................ While troubled real estate and capital markets and severe local and state government budget deficits presented many challenges our first year, Downtown Incorporated was actively engaged with policy issues affecting Downtown and development projects in and adjacent to the district. Santa Ana Fixed Guideway Project Connecting Garden Grove The Fixed Guideway will provide faster, more reliable public transportation services and choices for residents and commuters and greater mobility in Santa Ana. Our Board of Directors is currently researching several alignment or travel paths in the downtown. The project will encourage more pedestrian -friendly avenues and spur economic development and jobs. A central city location will generate greater economic benefits for the downtown. Working with City Staff and the Mayor, Downtown Inc. is researching best practices to make recommendations on the proposal. Trolley Although Downtown Inc. is not in the transportation business, we definitely believe that providing a trolley in the downtown will benefit our restaurants and retail businesses. Working with the City, Downtown Inc. will begin a pilot program in mid- August to attract people to the downtown. The trolley will initially run from 4:30 PM — 7:30 PM with stops in the downtown to the train depot. This program will build depending upon its success. The goal is to transition to a "lunch express". Proiects Advocated One Broadway Plaza, Jugos Acapulco Expansion, Rehabilitation/Re-positioning of Fiesta Marketplace., YOST Theatre, Station District, RTKL Wayfinding Policy Advocated Dance Ordinance in Arts/Entertainment District, City One -Stop Public Information and Service Center, Proof Back Door, Limited Free Parking (Structure), Parking Meter Grace Period, 2 hours Vendor Truck Parking Enforcement Events Monitored First Saturday Art Walk, Fiestas Pathas, Cinco de Mayo, Noche de Altares on on t WEST END•THEATER t 1 1 1 t 1 i Yr 1 � 7 I 1 Clean + Safe ............................................ Downtown Incorporated's clean and safe programs support the development of downtown office, retail and entertainment uses by maintaining a clean and safe environment. ■ h Clean Streets In August 2009, Downtown Inc- took over the clean streets program from the City of Santa Ana. In January 2010, DTI contracted with ABLE Building Maintenance, a local Santa Ana Company in business for over 40 years. They provide litter maintenance and power washing services in the district. The program operates seven days a week. Pressure washing service is provided between 10:00 PM and 6:00 AM, Tuesday, Thursday and Sunday. A minimum of three linear blocks is done per day. High traffic areas such as-, Main, Broadway and Birch are pressure washed twice per month. Downtown Inc. responds as needed to areas that need more attention or a call to service from one of our stakeholders. Downtown Inc. clean streets team enhances the pedestrian experience by responding to maintenance issues and providing services, including sweeping and pressure washing alleys and sidewalks, removing street and first floor level graffiti, litter, collecting leaves and addressing other surface maintenance control issues. In our first year of service, we have been commended by both consumers and merchants for our diligence and clean downtown. A recent quote from Al Afghani, Arco Gas Station; "Excellent job, immediately done. Thank you". 0 Clean + Safe ............................................. Safe Streets Downtown Incorporated is determined to provide a safe atmosphere in our district. American Shield was hired in July, 2009 to provide ambassador/security services. As the first eyes on the street, Downtown Inc. Security Guides equipped with cell phones and two way radios, provide customer service to downtown patrons. Guides are informed about downtown popular attractions and special events that make Downtown Orange County unique. They act as information ambassadors, patrol downtown streets seven days a week, direct and assist visitors, serve as a communication link and report graffiti. They also support law enforcement agencies, merchants and property owners in crime prevention efforts. Security Guides walk and bike the district. In 2010, plans are to purchase an electric utility vehicle clearly marked with our logo and bold letters stating SECURITY to further announce our presence on the street. American Shield has built a relationship with our merchants as we believe it is crucial for businesses to feel supported. As this relationship has grown, there is an overwhelming desire for partnership and cooperation. Downtown Inc. has made a gigantic effort to have our merchants and property owners report crime. In previousyears, merchants did not understand the necessity to report minor offenses typically resolved by the merchants (petty theft, odd behavior, 51/50 conduct, illegal peddlers, drug dealing, homeless trespassing, etc.). Working with SAPD, DTI has informed our community to "make the calf'. All calls are prioritized and recorded. This tracks the criminal activity in downtown and will further assist DTI and SAPID in providing accurate reporting statistics. Indicators for additional service will depend upon this reporting mechanism. Nuisance activity and criminal activity are being defined and reported. Identifying "hot spots" or areas of increased service will make response time less as we work in partnership with American Shield and Santa Ana Police Department. JL few T. 1 �.• Events ............................................. Downtown Santa Ana had many events sponsored by Downtown Inc. in 2009. Two signature events (Cinco de Mayo and Fiestas Patrias) are not sponsored by DTI at this time. Intemational Music Festival This first year event brought culture, music and international cuisine to downtown in partnership with EI Centro Cultural de Mexico, Casa Guanajuato, and Fundacion Yanga Veracruz USA. 50 countries were represented. Holiday Plays at the YOST Theatre In conjunction with the YOST Theatre, Teratro Actores de Santa Ana, Louie Olivos, Jr., and Carter Dewberry & Associates, Downtown Inc. held free matinee plays for children in both Spanish and English during the Christmas Season. The plays were varied from chamber music and narration to "No Christmas for Smiley" with traditional holiday music and a message against violence and gangs. All media outlets were used with press releases and a featured story in the 0 C Register. Downtown Santa Ana - World Cup Headquarters FIFA World Cup - The Restaurant Association (32 downtown restaurants), joined this effort. Businesses televised the games to their patrons with early morning and all day rebroadcasts. 13 participating restaurants were listed on the website. Many businesses participated by contributing prizes from soccer balls to one of a kind soccer rings valued at $350. Media outlets included: Miniondas, Farandula, 0 C Register, 0 C Weekly, Yahoo web banners, flyers and mailings. Posse on Broadway A monthly live music event during summer - Each show featured one-two bands performing live on the Artist Promenade in the early evening, followed by specialty DJ's and music programming in select venues on North Broadway. This music series showcased a broad array of musical genres including independent, alternative, acoustic, instrumental, experimental, surf, pop and jazz. Block Party— Handmade Brigade Marketed by DTI, this event brought a diversity of people to purchase handmade products into downtown. Fiesta Calle Cuatro Concert Series A diverse series of musical experiences (traditional folkloric and multi -cultural) located along our retail corridor on 4th Street. The marketing strategy of this entertainment series is to position Downtown Santa Ana as a summer destination and a place to shop, be entertained, do business and discover arts and culture. By providing different types of musical entertainment and highlighting different venues in the Downtown, all of the local businesses and areas are promoted with new patrons and increased foot traffic. Summer Family Film Festival DTI partnered with the Old Orange County Courthouse A joint effort with the historic Old Courthouse brought families to enjoy a movie and exhibits featuring the California Golden Bear. Face painting and popcorn were provided by DTI along with a historic trolley tour narrated by historian Tim Rush. First Saturday Art Walk In June 2010 the First Saturday Art Walk's governance was taken over by DTI. Staff became responsible for maintaining the integrity of the event as well as order. Ten vendors are screened and must fit the criteria to insure quality - MARKETING & PROMOTIONS ... ®®® ......... ®®® ... ®®.... ®®® ... ®®® ......... Downtown Inc. periodically runs promotions to promote local businesses. Promotions also help display all of the positive change downtown. Some of the promotions sponsored by Downtown Inc. are: Santa Ana Downtown Divas What began as a networking group of women in business has become a dynamic force for change in the downtown. Forty women who agree constitute success and these ladies are inviting more ladies to become involved in the community management district and provide needed feedback on the direction of downtown. Passport to Downtown Downtown Inc. was the primary sponsor for Noche de Altaras, a traditional celebration also known as Day of the Dead in November. DTI participated by having a booth and hosting a "Passport to Downtown Treasure Hunt". Passports were given to participants who received a DOWNTOWN sticker as they visited our downtown stores. The passport were filled with stickers and turned in for prizes. To encourage the public to visit both sides of 4th Street, half the stickers were black and half were white and the requirement was to have both colors to win. Patrons won a full range of prizes purchased at cost from our merchants. Advertising included mail merges, local newspaper ads as well as e-mail blasts. Attendance to Noche de Altares is a downtown Santa Ana tradition that has taken place for the last seven years. In 2009 the event brought well over 9,000 attendees. This event is a true crossover event bringing music, food and culture to an increasingly diverse audience. Holiday Light Proiection Proiect In 2009, Downtown Inc. decided to forsake the traditional and explore new avenues of holiday entertainment. Over 10,000 people braved cold December nights to watch a new concept in light and sound. Animated Light Projection set to music on the historic Spurgeon building. With an original music score synched to Chris Alfaro's computer and over a quarter of a million dollars in rented projection equipment, the downtown district gained new favor with both locals and visitors to produce a truly unique 14 day event. Picked up by both local and L.A. media networks, newcomers enjoyed watching a spectacle of light and sound. Although an illusion, snow falling and collecting on the window ledge can invoke cold chills even when temperatures are far from freezing. Cookies with Santa Downtown Inc. hosted Santa Claus straight from the North Pole on Saturday, December 5th, 12th and 19th from 1100 AM — 3:00 PM to enjoy cookies and candy canes with kids. Parents were asked to show a receipt for $5.00 or more from any downtown business and receive a framed picture with Santa ($20.00 Value). 800 pictures were taken with appreciative parents and even grandparents. Santa was thrilled to hold one of Santa Ana's youngest newcomers (Anna, 21 days old). Valentine's Day Celebration Strolling Mariachi bands serenaded shoppers along with volunteers distributing 500 long stemmed red roses marked February 14th. A featured interview with Teresa from Teresa's Jewelers and the icon of Spanish radio, Teddy Fregoso brought shoppers into the district to buy their "beloved" a gift. 0 C Weekly and the 0 C Register were also used in media buys. Mixers In partnership with our local restaurants and businesses, Downtown Inc. has held a mixer at the historic Santora building and Original Mike's. Both have brought over 150 people and a chance to meet, greet and network. A chance to get to know one another on an informal basis, mixers also produce dollars through deals and agreements as businesses "mix" their goods and services and allow commerce to take place. Downtown Inc. assists in marketing the event via e-mail blast, press release, mailings, and flyers. 12 r► � �; sow � � a Olt .f W AK it Retail ............................................. The dramatic slowing of the national economy in the housing and financial markets in combination with a reduction in consumer confidence have contributed to a significant decrease in overall sales tax revenue over the past year. Maintaining a diverse mix of retail is essential for an active and dynamic downtown. Restaurants, entertainment, and retailers draw evening and weekend activity and support the needs of residents, businesses and promote visitors. There is recognition amongst many of Downtown's retailers and restaurants that they must broaden their customer appeal by redefining what they sell and how they sell it. DTI is assisting these retailers in their revitalization efforts by partnering with OPIS Network and Mi Empresa Exitosa to analyze retail conditions and develop a downtown retail activation strategy. Both organizations have provided workshops for our retail community as they assess their viability in this downturn and reposition themselves for recovery. Also to further understand the market, DTI will house a seminar conducted by Francisco Valle in the fall. Several major mixed-use projects are planned for Downtown that will enhance the economic vitality of the area. Two proposals for Broadway incorporate the historic reuse of the existing building. Chapter One: the modern local, is moving forward along with The Copper Door. These two neighbors will have a kinship as that "neighborhood" bar with a twist. The twist for Chapter One is, its affordable gourmet dining. The Cooper Door will introduce Santa Ana to beers of the world with future surprises and amenities. In addition, Fiesta Marketplace has proposed a comprehensive re -design that will increase the diversity of retail offerings to prepare for the influx of residents and visitors into the Downtown area. The redesign will enhance the shopping and pedestrian experience on the promenade and will help strengthen this traffic -generating corridor toward Main and Broadway. The Yost Theatre, with seating capacity of 500, will draw top name entertainment and will provide a first class dining experience. A lounge, located in the property next to the Yost Theatre, will provide entertainment dining and dancing. Downtown Inc. will work in partnership with the City of Santa Ana to inform our businesses of fagade money as it becomes available. This will further "freshen up" the downtown in anticipation of recovery. III 14 Physical Enhancements ............................................. The City of Santa Ana's past installation of electrical boxes in the planters on 4th Street, allowed for lighting in the trees. Downtown Inc. covered the cost of trimming the trees and contracted with Dekral-ight to have lights strung along tree lined 4th Street. The public and the merchants loved the additional lighting and ambiance so much that DTI continues to maintain them throughout the year. The festive friendly ambiance creates a warm look to the downtown at night and is welcoming. The LED lights are another joint partnership with the City of Santa Ana and Downtown Inc. Future considerations include hanging flower baskets from the streetlights and possible flowers in the planters. Our maintenance team would water and weed the flowers and keep them well groomed. The idea would be to find corporate partners giving them recognition through a name plaque on the light pole. A utility vehicle would be purchased to hold water and tools. The Executive Director sits on the Fagade Committee to better understand the process and availability of funding for downtown applicants. Several projects were funded in 2009 totaling $500,000. In 2010, DTI will work with the city to market this program in our district as funds become available. Downtown Inc. works closely with the City on street lights that are not working or areas that need additional lighting. DTI has alerted property owners to light requirements resulting in increased lighting in alleys and in areas previously dark. To better inform our merchants of signage requirements, Downtown Inc. has hosted meetings with code enforcement and merchants. One of the outcomes has been a brochure from the City outlining details and giving examples of allowed/not allowed signage. To encourage bike enthusiasts to shop, dine and play in the district, bike racks were purchased and installed in several areas in the downtown amounting to over $5,000- One installation was on West 4th across from the Ronald Reagan Federal Building and several locations in the Artists Village. Before the cement was dry, bicycles were parked in the racks. This has alleviated the bikes locked to trees, bollards, benches, signposts or strewed into pedestrian walkways. 1 15 Residential ............................................. Downtown continues to evolve as a vibrant urban destination. This year, City Ventures will finish their Phase 1 Project with four lofts and four Iive/work units. The additional units will fulfill the need for a diverse housing market. New housing brings vibrant energy to the Downtown District, encourages more businesses to invest in the area and creates a sense of community. While the national housing market has experienced a tremendous slow down, efforts to support the development of quality housing projects that activate the central city continues to be a high priority. There are four different floor plans that vary from approximately 1;500 square feet to 2,400 square feet. Early buyers will have the opportunity to create a living environment that suits their lifestyle needs by laying out the rooms. The expected completion date will be the middle to end of November with prices starting in the mid to high $300s. The live/works will occupy the first and second floor and the lofts will primarily be on the third floor. City Ventures is working with Wells Fargo with an interest rate at a 50 year tow. This complex located in the Artist Village allows residents a walkable lifestyle in Downtown Santa Ana. 16 u yy t A There are four different floor plans that vary from approximately 1;500 square feet to 2,400 square feet. Early buyers will have the opportunity to create a living environment that suits their lifestyle needs by laying out the rooms. The expected completion date will be the middle to end of November with prices starting in the mid to high $300s. The live/works will occupy the first and second floor and the lofts will primarily be on the third floor. City Ventures is working with Wells Fargo with an interest rate at a 50 year tow. This complex located in the Artist Village allows residents a walkable lifestyle in Downtown Santa Ana. 16 Associate Membership ............................................ A regular member is a property owner in the 66 block Community Management District. All property owners are encouraged and invited to actively participate in Downtown Inc. Any other person may apply for Associate Membership in Downtown Incorporated by executing and filing with the Secretary of Downtown Incorporated an application for membership and making payment of dues as prescribed from time to time by the Board of Directors. Upon approval by the Board of Directors, the applicant shall become an Associate Member of Downtown Incorporated. Benefits of Associate Membership: Networking opportunities Local government advocacy Credibility Learning opportunities Discounts i Co-op advertising and website link Committee participation DTI's media (bilingual newsletter, flyers and e-mails) Partnership with other organizations DTI began to outreach to downtown businesses with three strategies: (1) Meeting the businesses on a personal level. This consists of visiting every existing business in the downtown district and making a formal introduction. (2) DTI staff became aware of who to contact as well as changes of locations. Staff was then able to maintain an accurate database. (3) DTI began a snail mail and email campaign to acquaint businesses with DTI. Bi -monthly Merchant Meetings are held to inform businesses of upcoming events, opportunities, networking, changes in policy in the district, and exchange ideas. Businesses were very responsive and recognized the opportunity. A total of 55 businesses have joined in 2009. Associate Membership continues to grow and will be a focus for 2010. 17 Financials .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Downtown Incorporated manages a budget of almost $1 million. Downtown Inc. receives its support primarily from property assessments. The management district encompasses 281 parcels equaling 40,000 linear feet of street frontage, 4.3 million sq. ft. of land and 3.1 million sq. ft. of buildings.. DTI's assessment rates are based on flat Parcel fee +Street frontage fee + Land area fee + Building area fee. Full assessment formula on page 21. The district's operating budget allocates 87% of funds to core activities: public safety, maintenance, marketing, physical enhancement while 13% is allocated to administration. The Board of Directors voted at their July 2010 regular board meeting, no changes to the Community Management District boundaries and no increased assessment for 2010/11. 2009-2010 FUND ALLOCATION BY DEPARTMENT M ■ Maintenance & Landscaping ■ Marketing & Promotions ■ Ambassador Program ■ Physical Enhancement IN Administration &. Operations 'Rounded amounts in thousands 18 "As of June 30, 2010. Financial Review pending, prepared by ELLS, CPA's.. E a. - - - - - - - p S. S'a'4p c49 Ob CJ n:R s p p 1O E M.M., n m m E cq IL . . . . . . . . . E a. - - - - - - - - - - a-- - 1O E E cq IL . . . . . . . . . IL . . . . . . . . . w a u c iZ LU I Z 4eJ UO CD W 0 cli mm o > E > xw CD C=� rl-- FW w 00 E a. c 0 7 - - - - - - - - - - a-- - E cq IL . . . . . . . . . c 0 7 19 O E cq 0 Z 0 iZ LU I Z 4eJ CD W 0 cli mm o > E > xw CD FW m o cn0 00 v CD izy 0 -C CIJ 0: F F - QIF- Z 2E LU v it L 00 LZ 0 0 0 L m :i 19 O DEMOGRAPHICS .............................................. Downtown Santa Ana continues to be one of the region's largest employment centers with an estimated employment population of 26,425 with 2,277 establishments. Downtown's population in 2009 totaled 70,928 with 13,627 households_ Per capita income is $10,649 and the average household income is $47,273. The average Central City citizen is 26.5 years old. Source City of Santa Ana Community Development Agency In addition to traditional demographics, industries are increasingly utilizing psychographics as a tool to target potential market segments. Psychographics identify personality characteristics and attitudes that affect a person's lifestyle and purchasing behavior_ In terms of retail, Santa Ana's trade area psychographic characteristics are conducive to a prosperous retail market. Groups such as IN STYLE, OLD and NEWCOMERS, METRO RENTERS, CONNOISSEURS, URBAN CHIC and others with a favorable disposition towards urban retailing have a renewed interest in the district. Santa Ana has an encouraging new mix of "urban trendsetters," those who will set the tone for downtown's retail and restaurant scene, and "followers," those that will follow the lead of the trendsetter. 20 ■ Services is Manufacturing is Administrative ■ Retail Construction is Wholesale ■ Financial ■ Transportation is Agriculture Assessment Formula: Street Frontage Fee + Land Area Fee + Building Area Fee + Parcel Fee 1. Single-family residential uses are set at a rate of 10 cents per square foot of building pad, from one to four units are set at a flat rate of $100 per unit (includes residential condos). 2. Multi -family residential uses of five or more units are set at 25 percent of respective base assessment rates (apartments). 3. Nonprofit- (5010) owned/occupied properties are set at 25 percent of respective base assessment rates. 4. Building areas are capped at a floor area ratio (FAR) of 4.0. 5. Government-ownedloccupied properties will not be assessed and will receive no direct services. 6. Residential uses, regardless of the number of units, that are 100 percent project -based rental assistance programs, for example, senior housing and the like, will not be assessed and will receive no direct services. 7. Mixed-use properties/complexes will generally be assessed based on prorated land -use ratios, using the following guidelines: Commercial/Office Condos — No Residential Uses (multiple owners) a. Building area fee at full building area fee rate (structured parking area excluded). b. Land area fee at full land area fee rate but prorated for each unit based on ratio of unit building area to total building area. c. Frontage fee at full frontage rate but prorated for each unit based on ratio of unit building area to total building area. Mixed -Use Rental: Ground -Floor Commercial and Upper -Floor Residential (single owner) a. Building area fee at full rate for commercial area and 25 percent commercial rate for residential area (structured parking area excluded). b. Land area fee at full land area fee rate. c. Frontage fee at full frontage rate. Mixed -Use Condos: Ground -Floor Commercial and Upper -Floor Residential (multiple owners) a. Building area fee at full rate for commercial pad areas and 10 cents per square foot of building pad area, per residential condo unit (structured parking area excluded). b. Land area fee at full land area fee rate for commercial pad footprint. c. Frontage fee at full frontage rate for commercial units (ground floor direct frontage). d. Live -work condo units where there is a clear and legally defined distinction between work space and living space will be assessed using a combination of a, b, and c above. Street Frontage Fee is calculated by multiplying the linear feet of street frontage of a parcel by the Street Frontage Rate ($6 per linear foot). Land Area Fee is calculated by multiplying the square footage of the parcel by the Land Area Rate (10 cents per square foot) Building Area Fee is calculated by multiplying the square footage of a structure, as derived from its gross exterior dimensions, by the Building Area Rate (15 cents per square foot). Flat Parcel Fee — each individual Assessor's Parcel is assessed the Flat Parcel Rate ($425). Street Frontage Rate Land Area Rate Building Area Rate Flat Parcel Rate $6.00 per linear foot 10¢ per square foot 15¢ per square foot $425 per parcel 21 OPERATIONS ............................................ Administration Downtown Inc. currently employs three full time staff. The Executive Director, Business Manager who is acting Human Resources Director and Membership Outreach Manager. Each of these positions is varied and involves many facets. A part time Administrative Assistant works closely with the business manager to insure quality accounting and record keeping. Due to a mix of contract services and the necessity to be transparent, DTI uses a bid process for most services costing over $5,000. An independent contractor provides consultation in this process along with Information Technology issues such as telephone, computer software/hardware, copy machine, networking, data base and other technologies requiring a specific competence. In November, 2009 Downtown Inc. launched an Intern Volunteer Program designed to assist university students/graduates interested in the public sector field. Each student selects their area of interest from events, retail recruitment, research into municipal codes and enforcement, and issues pertinent to Downtown Inc. The interns have proved to be invaluable and have logged over 500 hours of volunteer time. They have moved the organization forward far beyond what was expected in our first year. The Board of Directors and staff are most grateful for their efforts and accomplishments. Intern Testimonial: In February 1 started as an intern at Downtown Incorporated after finishing my degree in Political Science at UC Berkeley. Since February, I've interned for approximately 200+ hours in addition to participating in events Downtown Inc. has hosted or been affiliated with. 1 mainly work on projects associated with the Art Walk and the Artists Village such as devising a system to permit vendors who wish to operate on the promenade during the First Saturday Art Walk. Each month, I communicate with all vendors, get the information and documents needed in order for them to obtain a permit, and bring them to City Hall. After this process is complete, 1 assign vendors their spaces, give them a set of rules they must comply with, and stay the duration of each art walk to ensure everyone complies and that no unauthorized vendors are present. I also assist the staff with various projects and events as well as write for and help edit the monthly newsletter Downtown Incorporated has provided me with great experience and has allowed me to make this internship truly my own. 1 am not stuck filing papers, but instead get real hands-on experience in local politics, administration, and project management. 1 believe this internship will prove beneficial for me as 1 enter law school in 2011 and will undoubtedly come in handy if I wish to work in local government or for a PBID in the future. Kathryn Podsiadio, U C Berkeley 2009 - - % INV _ s� 22 Directors + Staff .............................................. Board Directors 2009/10 Officers Term Expiration: President: Bob Stewart, Empire Building (2010/11) 4/30/12 Vice Chair: Ryan Chase, Fiesta Marketplace #2 (2010/11) 4/30/12 Treasurer: Ray Rangel, R & R Sportswear (2009/10) 4/30/10 Gil Marrero, Harrah Properties (2010/11) 4/30/11 Secretary: Wendy Bryan, Gonzalez Northgate Markets (2009/10) 4/30/10 Iry Chase, Fiesta Marketplace #1 (2010/11) 4/30/13 Property Owners - Directors Joe Duffy, Phillips Hutton Building 4/30/11 Jon Gothold, DGWB Ventures 4/30/11 Davin Gumm, Pacific Building 4/30/13 Adolfo Lopez, Lopez Properties 4/30/12 Elise Luckham, First American Title 4/30/12 Michael Paxton, Spurgeon Building 4/30/13 Alicia Valdez, Gonzales Northgate Markets 4/30/13 Raul Yanez, Yanez Properties 4/30/11 Neighborhood Representative Property Owner Brian Christenson, Artist Village Lofts 4/30/11 Merchant Representative Business Owner Teresa Saldivar, Teresa's Jewelry 4/30/11 City of Santa Ana Representative Cindy Nelson, Deputy City Manager Ex -Officio Member Staff Vicky Baxter, Executive Director Liset Hernandez, Business Manager Ruth Valle, Member Services/Outreach Norm Baxter, Consultant Phung Mai, Administrative Assistant Kathryn Podsiadlo, Special Projects Intern AndrewTovstein, Retail Recruitment Intern Claudia Lavini, Special Projects Intern Joshua Lee, Research Intern 23 mmil �N r1 F j M■ �� ■ ■ 51, . ■ ■ IL W- mmagm "Ons DPMI � ( Mks w•w Lam c c 0 `o c 7A i4 k OR 1 �, ap •r �r 1J� I .3ya 133!115 1SMId .--. i3�$}$ tStll� - - -1 _ - i R �- a T - -yam F-- ^i{ '• u. tl .:t y � 1 POR f: q1Z .N ol IN 71-.+'r-f Tr• j- JrraV ��i11}}.y "� y TM� - mnoA 7333"'1:. '3f9t7R v.ve1NV - tl I - ♦ - LS � � .X �, ."' 33M16 H1JIJ S✓ �''" - —tl r� r. ' ~ Jim U mom Y}fy�lo.Mgl9 v tl1NVS ,T$JZIC Tl Wr o , �""L .1+ ... "'_� ab4t:10 tl31d3J 9�1�1"3�-t �'J WO] tlNtltll XtlSNMOINMOX _- NMOlNM00 s L e A s ee Gs © _E- si _ REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: AUGUST 16, 2010 TITLE: THIRD AMENDMENT FOR NEWPORT WATERSHED COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT WITH COUNTY OF ORANGE CITY MANAGER RECOMMENDED ACTION CLERK OF COUNCIL USE ONLY: APPROVED ❑ As Recommended ❑ As Amended ❑ Ordinance on 1' Reading ❑ Ordinance on 2"d Reading ❑ Implementing Resolution ❑ Set Public Hearing For CONTINUED TO FILE NUMBER Authorize the City Manager and the Clerk of the Council to execute the attached third amendment to the cooperative agreement with the County of Orange to extend the term of the agreement to June 30, 2012 and authorize an annual payment amount of not to exceed $400,000. DISCUSSION On June 16, 2003 the City Council approved a cooperative agreement with the County of Orange for administration of the funding for the Newport Watershed studies. Subsequently an amendment was approved by City Council in 2008 which extended the terms to 2010. In order to continue with this mandated program, a third amendment is necessary to extend the term of the agreement for two additional years, through June 30, 2012 and to authorize payments to the County of Orange for the City's share of the cost. The County of Orange will remain the lead agency and will be the main interface with the Santa Ana Regional Board on any related issues. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT In Accordance with California Environmental Quality Act, the proposed request is not considered a project. No further action is required. FISCAL IMPACT Funds are budgeted in the Federal Clean Water Protection Fund (account no. 05717640-62300). �. ;lel j, Raul Godinez Executive Director Public Works Agency RG/SA APPROVED AS TO FUNDS AND ACCOUNTS: Francisco Gutierrez Executive Director Finance & Management Services Agency Exhibit: 1. Amendment 25C-1 Agreement No. D99 -12E AGREEMENT TO FUND NUTRIENT, FECAL COLIFORM AND TOXICS TOTAL MAXIMUM DAILY LOAD (TMDL) STUDIES IN THE NEWPORT BAY WATERSHED THIRD AMENDMENT AND FULL RESTATEMENT OF AGREEMENT THIS THIRD AMENDMENT, for purposes of identification numbered D99-128, is made and entered into this day of , 2010 , by and between the County of Orange ("COUNTY"), the Orange County Flood Control District ("DISTRICT"), the City of Costa Mesa ("COSTA MESA"), the City of Irvine ("IRVINE"), the City of Laguna Hills ("LAGUNA HILLS"), the City of Laguna Woods ("LAGUNA WOODS"), the City of Lake Forest ("LAKE FOREST"), the City of Newport Beach ("NEWPORT BEACH"), the City of Orange ("ORANGE"), the City of Santa Ana ("SANTA ANA"), the City of Tustin ("TUSTIN"), the Irvine Ranch Water District ("IRWD") and The Irvine Company ("TIC"), and Lennar Homes of California, Inc.("LENNAR"). The fourteen entities are hereinafter sometimes jointly referred to as the "PARTIES" and individually as "PARTY". The cities are hereinafter sometimes jointly referred to as the "CITIES". Thirteen entities (all entities except for LENNAR) are sometimes jointly referred to as the "ORIGINAL PARTIES." ra7mT=0 CL m WHEREAS, the California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Santa Ana Region ("REGIONAL BOARD") has adopted Resolution No. 98-9, as amended by Resolution No. 98- 100 amending the Water Quality Control Plan for the Santa Ana River Basin to incorporate a Nutrient TMDL for the Newport Bay/San Diego Creek Watershed on April 17, 1998 and Resolution 99-10 amending the Water Quality Control Plan for the Santa Ana River Basin to incorporate a TMDL for Fecal Coliform in Newport Bay on April 9, 1999 pursuant to the provisions of section 303(d) of the Clean Water Act; and, WHEREAS, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) has established TMDLs for toxic pollutants, San Diego Creek and Newport Bay, California or June 14, 2002, and the REGIONAL BOARD is developing implementation plans for each of the toxic pollutants; and, 1 25C-2 Final version 7/8/201 Agreement No. D99 -12E WHEREAS, the adopted TMDLs contain requirements for studies, monitoring and the development of programs to attain TMDL reduction targets over a multi-year period; and, WHEREAS, the ORIGINAL PARTIES entered into Agreement No. D99-128 on September 18, 2003, referred to hereinafter as "AGREEMENT", to provide funding for the Nutrient, Fecal Coliform and Toxics Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) studies in the Newport Bay Watershed; and, WHEREAS, the PARTIES approved Amendment No. 1 to AGREEMENT on July 5, 2006, which amended Sections 3 (Funding), 4 (Program Budgets and Costs), 5 (Payments), 10 (No Third Party Beneficiaries), and 16 (Notices), and Exhibits A and C in their entirety and added the California Department of Transportation, LENNAR, Tustin Legacy Community Partners, and Orange County Great Park Corporation as AGREEMENT participants; and, WHEREAS, the PARTIES approved Amendment No. 2 to AGREEMENT on March 29, 2008 to extend the term of the AGREEMENT for two (2) years to be consistent with the end of the current phase of the Nitrogen and Selenium Management Program and to recognize prior payments for services made directly by the California Department of Transportation and IRWD, for work plan development and Bay algae studies respectively; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 6 of the AGREEMENT, the AGREEMENT may be amended in writing only with the unanimous written approval of the PARTIES; and, WHEREAS, Tustin Legacy Community Partners has terminated its development agreement for the Tustin Marine Corps Air Station and withdrawn from the AGREEMENT effective June 30, 2010; and, WHEREAS, due to State budget constraints the California Department of Transportation has withdrawn from the AGREEMENT effective June 30, 2010 and will address its discharges independently; and 2 25C-3 Final version 7/8/201 Agreement No. D99 -12E WHEREAS, the Orange County Great Park Corporation has combined as a PARTY with IRVINE effective June 30, 2010; and, WHEREAS, the PARTIES desire to extend the AGREEMENT through June 30, 2012 to provide for the performance of studies, monitoring and the development of programs and long-term funding to attain TMDL reduction targets over a multi-year period; and, WHEREAS, in the event that long-term watershed funding is secured prior to AGREEMENT expiration, the PARTIES intend to further amend the AGREEMENT to incorporate this funding through revised cost share allocations; and, WHEREAS, the PARTIES have revised the cost share allocations as shown in Exhibit A, which shall remain fixed for the duration of the AGREEMENT term; and, WHEREAS, the PARTIES now desire to amend and restate the AGREEMENT in its entirety. NOW THEREFORE: The PARTIES hereto unanimously agree to amend and restate the AGREEMENT in its entirety as follows: Section 1. PURPOSE. This AGREEMENT is entered into for the purpose of funding and performing studies, research, monitoring and the development and implementation of programs related to the adopted TMDLs for nutrients, fecal coliform and toxics in the San Diego Creek and Newport Bay watersheds. Section 2. TERM. The term of this AGREEMENT shall continue until June 30, 2012, unless sooner terminated as provided in Section 8. Section 3. FUNDING COST SHARE ALLOCATIONS. Exhibit A, which is attached to this AGREEMENT and by this reference is made a part hereof, presents the cost share allocations for the PARTIES for the duration of the AGREEMENT. Section 4. PROGRAM SCOPE OF WORK, BUDGET AND COSTS. The COUNTY shall work in concert with all PARTIES to develop a scope of work and a budget for the following fiscal year. The scope of work and budget for the upcoming fiscal year shall be submitted to each of the PARTIES by December 15 of each year. The budget shall contain an explanation of any recommended program changes, an estimate of all planned 3 Final Version 7/8/201 25C-4 Agreement No. D99 -12E expenditures and an estimate of the payment required from each PARTY for the following fiscal year. The PARTIES shall be permitted to review and approve the program scope of work and budget for the forthcoming year, review work products, and provide direction for performance of the scope of work. Criterion for approval of the program scope of work and budget shall be affirmative responses from all PARTIES. The COUNTY and DISTRICT will constitute one approving PARTY. Any PARTY not providing a response by July 15 of each year shall be considered an affirmative response. The COUNTY shall be entitled to charge to the program all costs for direct labor, materials, equipment and outside contract services for costs associated with carrying out the approved scope of work. Recoverable costs will also include an overhead charge. Section 5. PAYMENTS. The COUNTY shall invoice each PARTY for its annual deposit at the beginning (July 1) of each fiscal year. Each PARTY shall pay the deposit within 45 calendar days of the date of the invoice. Each PARTY'S deposit shall be based on its prorated share of the approved annual budget, reduced by the sum of (a) its prorated share of any surplus identified in the prior fiscal year end accounting, and (b) its prorated share of any funding provided for programs in the approved budget from entities not party to this AMENDMENT. Interest earned on the PARTIES' deposits will not be paid to the PARTIES, but will be credited against the PARTIES' share of the program costs. The COUNTY shall notify each of the PARTIES if it appears that costs may exceed the budget approved by the PARTIES in any fiscal year. The COUNTY shall prepare a fiscal year end accounting within 60 calendar days of the end of the fiscal year. If the fiscal year end accounting results in costs (net of interest earnings) exceeding the sum of the deposits, and the COUNTY has notified and obtained approval from the PARTIES of potential cost overruns, the COUNTY shall seek approval of the excess cost from the PARTIES in the form of a revised budget and, upon approval, shall invoice 4 25C-5 Final Version 7/8/201 Agreement No. D99 -12E each PARTY for its prorated share of the excess cost up to the amount of the revised approved budget. Each PARTY shall pay the billing within 45 calendar days of the date of the invoice. If the fiscal year end accounting results in the sum of the deposits exceeding costs (net of interest earnings), the excess deposits will carry forward to reduce the billings for the following year. The fiscal year end accounting results and associated invoices for each PARTY will take into consideration any outside funding provided for programs in the approved budget from entities not party to this AGREEMENT. Upon termination of the program, a final accounting shall be performed by the COUNTY. If costs remaining after the deduction of interest costs exceed the sum of the deposits, the COUNTY shall invoice each PARTY for its prorated share of the deficit. Each PARTY shall pay the invoice within 45 calendar days of the date of the invoice. If the sum of the deposits, including interest, exceeds the costs, the COUNTY shall reimburse to each PARTY its prorated share of the excess, within 45 calendar days of the final accounting. Section 6. AMENDMENT. This AGREEMENT may be amended in writing only with the unanimous written approval of the parties. Section 7. LIABILITY. It is mutually understood and agreed that, merely by the virtue of entering into this AGREEMENT, each PARTY neither relinquishes any rights nor assumes any liabilities for its own actions or the actions of other PARTIES. It is the intent of the PARTIES that the rights and liabilities of each Party shall remain the same, while this AGREEMENT is in force, as it was before this AGREEMENT was made, except as otherwise specifically provided in this agreement. Section 8. TERMINATION. Any PARTY wishing to terminate its participation in this AGREEMENT shall so notify all other PARTIES in writing by March 1 of any year. Such termination shall be effective the following June 30. The terminating PARTY shall be responsible for financial obligations hereunder to the extent incurred in accordance with this agreement by the PARTY prior to the effective date of 4" 25C-6 Final Version 7/8/2011 Agreement No. D99 -12E termination. The balance of the PARTIES may continue in the performance of the terms and conditions of this AGREEMENT on the basis of a revised allocation of cost based on the funding formula in Exhibit A. Section 9. AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS. The obligation of each PARTY is subject to the availability of funds appropriated for this purpose, and nothing herein shall be construed as obligating the PARTIES to expend or as involving the PARTIES in any contract or other obligation for the future payment of money in excess of appropriations authorized by law. Section 10. NO THIRD PARTY BENEFICIARIES. Nothing expressed or mentioned in this AGREEMENT is intended or shall be construed to give any person, other than the PARTIES hereto and any entity in which a PARTY has a legal interest (such as, but not limited to, a limited liability membership interest or a partnership interest), and any permitted successors or assigns of a PARTY, any legal or equitable right, remedy or claim under or in respect of this AGREEMENT or any provisions herein contained. This AGREEMENT and any conditions and provisions hereof is intended to be and is for the sole and exclusive benefit of the PARTIES and the entities in which they have a legal interest and their successors or assigns and for the benefit of no other person, agency or entity. Section 11. REFERENCE TO CALENDAR DAYS. Any reference to the word "day" or "days" herein shall mean calendar day or calendar days, respectively, unless otherwise expressly provided. Section 12. ATTORNEYS FEES. In any action or proceeding brought to enforce or interpret any provision of this AGREEMENT, or where any provision hereof is asserted as a defense, each PARTY shall bear its own attorneys' fees and costs. Section 13. ENTIRE AGREEMENT. This AGREEMENT is intended by the PARTIES as a final expression of their agreement and intended to be a complete and exclusive statement of the agreement and understanding of the PARTIES hereto in respect of the R 25C-7 Final Version 7/8/2011 Agreement No. D99 -12E subject matter contained herein. There are no restrictions, promises, warranties or undertakings, other than those set forth or referred to herein. This AGREEMENT supersedes all prior agreements and understandings between the PARTIES with respect to such matter. Section 14. SEVERABILITY. If any part of this AGREEMENT is held, determined or adjudicated to be illegal, void, or unenforceable by a court of competent jurisdiction, the remainder of this AGREEMENT shall be given effect to the fullest extent reasonably possible. Section 15. SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS. The terms and provisions of this AGREEMENT shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the PARTIES hereto and their successors and assigns. Section 16. NOTICES. All notices required or desired to be given under this AGREEMENT as amended shall be in writing and (a) delivered personally, or (b) sent by certified mail, return receipt requested or (c) sent by telefacsimile communication followed by a mailed copy, to the addresses specified below, provided each PARTY may change the address for notices by giving the other PARTIES at least ten (10) days written notice of the new address. Notices shall be deemed received when actually received in the office of the addressee or when delivery is refused, as shown on the receipt of the U.S. Postal service, or other person making the delivery, except that notices sent by telefacsimile communication shall be deemed received on the first business day following transmission. Director of Public Services City of Costa Mesa P.O. Box 1200 Costa Mesa, CA 92628-1200 Facsimile: (714) 754-5028 Director of Public Works City of Irvine P.O. Box 19578 7 25C-8 Final Version 7/8/201 Irvine, CA 92623-9578 Facsimile: (949) 724-6440 Director of Public Services City of Laguna Hills 24035 E1 Toro Road Laguna Hills, CA 92653 Facsimile: (949) 707-2633 Director of Community Development City of Laguna Woods 24264 E1 Toro Road Laguna Woods CA 92637 Facsimile: (949) 639-0591 Director of Public Works City of Lake Forest 25550 Commercentre Dr. Ste 100 Lake Forest, CA 92630 Facsimile: (949) 461-3511 Director of Public Works City of Newport Beach 3300 Newport Blvd. Newport Beach, CA 92658 Facsimile: (949) 718-1840 Director of Public Works City of Orange 300 E. Chapman Ave Orange, CA 92866 Facsimile: (714) 744-5573 Director of Public Works City of Santa Ana 101 W. 4th St. Santa Ana, CA 92701 Facsimile: (714) 647-5635 Director of Public Works City of Tustin 300 Centennial Way Tustin, CA 92780 Facsimile: (714) 734-8991 Director, OC Public Works County of Orange 300 N. Flower Street Santa Ana, CA 92702-4048 Facsimile: (714) 834-2395 Director, Water Quality Irvine Ranch Water District 3512 Michelson Dr Irvine, CA 92712 Facsimile: (949) 453-1228 1;1 25C-9 Agreement No. D99-12£ Final Version 7/8/201( Agreement No. D99-128 Vice President of Environmental Affairs The Irvine Company 550 Newport Center Newport Beach, CA 92658-8904 Facsimile: (949) 720-2448 Five Point Communities (Lennar) Jim Werkmeister Manager, Environmental Affairs 25 Enterprise, Ste 400 Aliso Viejo, CA 92656 Facsimile: (949) Section 17. STATUS OF ORIGINAL AGREEMENT. Upon approval of this AGREEMENT by all PARTIES, the original agreement of September 18, 2003, as amended on July 5, 2006 and March 29, 2008 will be superseded by this AGREEMENT. Section 18. EXECUTION OF AGREEMENT. This AGREEMENT may be executed in counterpart and the signed counterparts shall constitute a single instrument. Section 19. GOVERNING LAW AND VENUE. This AGREEMENT has been negotiated and executed in the State of California and shall be governed by and construed under the laws of the State of California. In the event of any legal action to enforce or interpret this AGREEMENT, the sole and exclusive venue shall be a court of competent jurisdiction located in Orange County, California, and the PARTIES hereto agree to and do hereby submit to the jurisdiction of such court, notwithstanding Code of Civil Procedure section 394. Furthermore, the PARTIES have specifically agreed, as part of the consideration given and received for entering into this AGREEMENT, to waive any and all rights to request that an action be transferred for trial to another county (under Code of Civil Procedure Section 394 or any other provision of law. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the PARTIES hereto have executed this AGREEMENT the day and year first above written: 9 25C-10 Final Version 7/8/2011 Agreement No. D99 -12E COUNTY OF ORANGE, a political subdivision of the State of California Date: APPROVED AS TO FORM: COUNTY COUNSEL By: Geoffrey K. Hunt, Deputy Date: SIGNED AND CERTIFIED THAT A COPY OF THIS AGREEMENT HAS BEEN DELIVERED TO THE CHAIRMAN OF THE BOARD By: DARLENE J. BLOOM Clerk of the Board of Supervisors of Orange County, California Date: By: Chairman of the Board of Supervisors ORANGE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT a body corporate and politic By: Chairman of the Board of Supervisors 10 25C-11 Final Version 7/8/201 Date: APPROVED AS TO FORM: ATTEST: City Clerk CITY OF COSTA MESA By: Mayor City Attorney of Costa Mesa 11 25C-12 Agreement No. D99-121 Final Version 7/8/2011 Date: APPROVED AS TO FORM: ATTEST: City Clerk CITY OF IRVINE By: Mayor City Attorney of Irvine 12 25C-13 Agreement No. D99 -12E Final Version 7/8/201 Date: APPROVED AS TO FORM: ATTEST: City Clerk CITY OF LAGUNA HILLS By: Mayor City Attorney of Laguna Hills 13 25C-14 Agreement No. D99 -12E Final Version 7/8/201 Date: APPROVED AS TO FORM: ATTEST: City Clerk CITY OF LAGUNA WOODS By: Mayor City Attorney of Laguna Woods 14 25C-15 Agreement No. D99-12£ Final Version 7/8/201 Date: APPROVED AS TO FORM: ATTEST: City Clerk CITY OF LAKE FOREST By: Mayor City Attorney of Lake Forest 15 25C-16 Agreement No. D99 -12f Final Version 7/8/201 Date: APPROVED AS TO FORM: ATTEST: City Clerk CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH By: Mayor Agreement No. D99-12 City Attorney of Newport Beach 16 25C-17 Final Version 7/8/201 Date: APPROVED AS TO FORM: ATTEST: City Clerk CITY OF ORANGE By: Mayor City Attorney of Orange fiWA 25C-18 Agreement No. D99-12£ Final Version 7/8/2011 Date: APPROVED AS TO FORM: ATTEST: City Clerk CITY OF SANTA ANA By: Mayor City Attorney of Santa Ana 18 25C-19 Agreement No. D99 -12E Final Version 7/8/2011 Date: APPROVED AS TO FORM: ATTEST: City Clerk CITY OF TUSTIN By: Mayor City Attorney of Tustin 19 25C-20 Agreement No. D99 -12f Final Version 7/8/201( Date: Date: Agreement No. D99-12 THE IRVINE RANCH WATER DISTRICT By: By: Name• Title: Name: Title: all 25C-21 Final Version 7/8/201 Date: Date: THE IRVINE COMPANY By: Name• Title: By: Name: Title: 21 25C-22 Agreement No. D99-12 Final Version 7/8/201 Agreement No. D99 -12F Lennar Homes of California, a Developer Member of Heritage Fields Limited Liability Company Date: By: Date: By: Name: Title: Name: Title: 22 25C-23 Final Version 7/8/201( Agreement No. D99-12 EXHIBIT A 23 Final Version 7/8/20 25C-24 �z Costa Mesa 4.26% Irvine 24.24% Laguna Hills 0.54% Laguna Woods 0.90% Lake Forest 5.07% Newport Beach 6.47% Orange 0.89% Santa Ana 13.52% Tustin 5.92% County of Orange 3.82% OCFCD 7.29% IRWD 12.15% TIC 12.15% Lennar 2.76% TOTAL 100.00% 23 Final Version 7/8/20 25C-24 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: AUGUST 16, 2010 TITLE: VARIANCE NO. 2010-03 TO INSTALL A NEW FREESTANDING SIGN THAT EXCEEDS THE NUMBER OF SIGNS ALLOWED WITHIN AN INTEGRATED DEVELOPMENT SITE AT 2130 EAST SEVENTEENTH STREET - ICI DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, APPLICANT CITY MANAGER RECOMMENDED ACTION CLERK OF COUNCIL USE ONLY: APPROVED ❑ As Recommended ❑ As Amended ❑ Ordinance on 151 Reading ❑ Ordinance on 2nd Reading ❑ Implementing Resolution ❑ Set Public Hearing For CONTINUED TO FILE NUMBER Receive and file the staff report approving Variance No. 2010-03 as conditioned. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION On July 26, 2010, the Planning Commission adopted a resolution approving Variance No. 2010-03 as conditioned by a vote of 7:0 to allow a freestanding sign that exceeds the total number of signs allowed within an integrated development site at 2130 East Seventeenth Street located in the Community Commercial (C1) zoning district. The Planning Commission made no changes to the recommended conditions of approval outlined in the attached staff report (Exhibit A). FISCAL IMPACT There is no fiscal impact associated with this action. Trevino Executive Director Planning & Building Agency VC:rb vdreports\va10-03.Centrel 7th.oc Exhibit: A. Planning Commission Staff Report 31A-1 REQUEST FOR Planning Commission Action PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING DATE: JULY 26, 2010 TITLE: PUBLIC HEARING — FILED BY ICI DEVELOPMENT COMPANY FOR VARIANCE NO. 2010-03 TO INSTALL A NEW FREESTANDING SIGN THAT EXCEEDS THE NUMBER OF SIGNS ALLOWED WITHIN AN INTEGRATED DEVELOPMENT SITE AT 2130 EAST SEVENTEENTH STREET Prepared by Verny Carvajal Executive Director RECOMMENDED ACTION PLANNING COMMISSION SECRETARY APPROVED ❑ As Recommended ❑ As Amended ❑ Set Public Hearing For DENIED ❑ Applicant's Request ❑ Staff Recommendation CONTINUED TO Z -42A d4 44441 Planning y0 - Adopt a resolution approving Variance No. 2010-03 as conditioned. DISCUSSION Request of Applicant ICI Development Company is requesting approval of a variance from the Santa Ana Municipal Code (SAMC) in order to allow a freestanding sign that exceeds the total number of signs allowed within an integrated development site at 2130 East Seventeenth Street. Property Description The subject site, known as the Centre on Seventeenth, is an 18.42 acre site located on the south west comer of Seventeenth Street and Tustin Avenue. The parcel is bounded by Seventeenth Street and retail uses to the north; Williams Street and office uses to the west; Tustin Street and mixed retail and office to the east; and office with residential uses to the south. The site currently contains community commercial shopping center development with approximately 202,950 square feet of leasable commercial space, including an Albertson's Supermarket, Staples, Petsmart, Ross and Claim Jumper Restaurant. A total of 1,023 parking stalls are provided on site. The property has approximately 1,450 feet of linear frontage along Seventeenth Street, and approximately 640 linear feet along both Tustin Avenue and Williams Street. The zoning designation for this parcel is Community Commercial (Cl) consistent with the General Plan land use designation of General Commercial (GC) for the area (Exhibits 1, 2 and 3). There are five existing freestanding signs on the site which were approved as part of the original development in 1996 (Exhibit 4). EXHIBIT A 4 Variance No. 2010-03 July 26, 2010 Page 2 Proiect DescrlDtion The applicant is requesting a variance from Section 41-862(a) to allow the installation of a new freestanding monument sign at a secondary access point to the shopping center along Tustin Avenue. The sign will be approximately seven feet in height and will include three tenant face panels per side (Exhibit 5). The proposed signs will draw on the materials and form of sculptural artwork and landscaping as part of the existing shopping center and will feature decorative concrete, stone and iron in vertical forms to match the theme and style of the existing development. In addition to this request, the applicant will be increasing the sign face area of an existing freestanding monument sign along Seventeenth Street to 45 square feet as permitted by code (Exhibit 6). This component of the application does not require any discretionary action and is not the subject of the variance request. Analysis of the Issues The Zoning ordinance of the SAMC provides for the regulation of on -premise signs, such as those found at the Centre on Seventeenth. The purpose of regulating signs is to preserve the quality of the visual environment by preventing sign clutter; to ensure that businesses have adequate signage to promote successful commerce; and to provide for public safety by disallowing signs that may distract drivers or impede the use of sidewalks. In this case the applicant is requesting to construct one additional sign in exceedance of the total allowed under SAMC Section 41-862(a) which allows for up to five freestanding signs on integrated development sites, such as the Centre on Seventeenth. The Centre on Seventeenth currently has five freestanding signs which were approved as part of the rehabilitation project in 1996 (Exhibit 4). Previous entitlements approved included: a) 15 -foot high Claim Jumper pole sign on Seventeenth Street b) 20 -foot high gateway entry sign on Seventeenth Street c) 20 -foot high gateway entry sign on Tustin Avenue d) 7 -foot high monument sign for Burger King on Seventeenth Street e) 7 -foot high monument sign for retail tenant on Seventeenth The applicant is proposing to install a sixth freestanding monument sign along a secondary access point to the shopping center along Tustin Avenue (Exhibit 4). The applicant intends to install the new sign approximately 205 feet from the existing gateway sign along Tustin Avenue in order to advertise additional retail tenants. Variance No. 2010-03 July 26, 2010 Page 3 The SAMC also provides for the ability to vary from the design standards contained in the code when there is a condition unique to the size, shape or topography of the site. In this case, there are three features of the subject site that would warrant a variance from the regulation on the allowed number of freestanding signs: the length of the shopping center's street frontage along Tustin Avenue; the overall size of the shopping center site; and the relatively obscured location of the secondary entrance along Tustin Avenue. The following outlines the unique challenges that each of these circumstances creates. The subject site is a large integrated shopping center with very long street frontages. The Tustin Avenue frontage is approximately 590 linear feet and currently has only one freestanding sign along its entire length. By comparison, a standard city block is from between 200 to 300 feet in length. It would not be unusual for there to be several freestanding signs along a single block and still avoid the appearance of sign clutter. The new sign is proposed to be 205 feet away from the existing freestanding sign on this side of the shopping center (Exhibit 7). The long street frontage qualifies as a unique characteristic of the shape of the subject site. In addition, the proposed sign is of high quality construction with a sculptural design unique to the shopping center. Due to its artistic design, the sign itself would add visual interest to the site further reducing the likelihood that the sign would be unsightly. Given this rationale, it is staff's finding that the addition of one new sign in this location would be warranted due to the long street frontages that are a unique characteristic of the shape of the subject property and that the addition of the new sign would not create a detriment to the visual aesthetic of the area. As stated previously, one of the purposes of the sign code is to allow for adequate business identification in order to promote commerce. At 18.42 acres the shopping center site is very large allowing for significant amounts of retail space and associated parking. While some of the buildings are located along the site perimeter and have excellent visibility from the adjacent roadways, many of the tenant spaces are located on the interior of the site and are set back behind the large parking lot creating poor visibility for these tenants from the adjacent roadways. The applicant is requesting the additional sign along Tustin Avenue in order to provide improved tenant identification for key shops located on the interior of the site. The addition of the proposed sign would allow the center to provide for adequate signage to promote commerce. Given this rationale, it is staff's finding that the addition of one new sign in this location is warranted due to the unique characteristic of the size of the property. Finally, the proposed location of the new sign along Tustin Avenue would be immediately adjacent to the secondary entrance to the site (Exhibit 7). The location of this driveway is at the most southerly point of the shopping center and it is obscured by the buildings located just to the north. It is especially difficult for drivers travelling south on Tustin Avenue to see the driveway in time to make the turn in to the center. The situation is further complicated by the location of the only other sign on this side of the center, which is approximately 205 to the north of the driveway. The additional sign will provide for improved identification of the driveway and the tenants inside the center. The addition of the sign in this location is warranted due to the unique characteristic of the location of the property. Variance No. 2010-03 July 26, 2010 Page 4 In summary, staff recommends approval of the additional freestanding sign as it will benefit the community by identifying additional services and products available within the Centre on Seventeenth to motorists and pedestrians traveling along Tustin Avenue. Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve Variance No. 2010-03 as conditioned for a new freestanding monument sign (Exhibits 8 and 9). CEQA Compliance In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act, the recommended action is exempt from further review per Section 15301. This Class 1 exemption allows the permitting of signs for an existing commercial development. Categorical Exemption Environmental Review No. 2009-178 will be filed for this project. Vemy Carvajal Senior Planner VC.jm vOreportsWa I MICentrel7th.pc VinffiTregoso, AICP Principal Planner Al GENERAL AGRICULTURAL -B PARKING MODIFICATION C1 COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL Cl -MD COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL -MUSEUM DISTRICT C2 GENERAL COMMERCIAL C3 CENTRAL BUSINESS C3 -A CENTRAL BUSINESS -ARTISTS' VILLAGE C4 PLANNED SHOPPING CENTER C5 ARTERIAL COMMERCIAL CR COMMERCIAL RESIDENTIAL C -SM SOUTH MAIN STREET COMMERCIAL DISTRICT -F FLOOR AREA RATIO GC GOVERNMENT CENTER Ml LIGHT INDUSTRIAL M2 HEAVY INDUSTRIAL MO MILITARY OPERATIONS O OPEN SPACE -OZ OVERLAY ZONE P PROFESSIONAL PCD PLANNED COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PD PLANNED DEVELOPMENT PRD PLANNED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT RI SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE R2 TWO-FAMILY RESIDENCE R3 MULTIPLE -FAMILY RESIDENCE R4 SUBURBAN APARTMENT RE RESIDENTIAL ESTATE SD SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT SP SPECIFIC PLAN VAR 10-3 CENTRE ON SEVENTEENTH 2130 EAST SEVENTEENTH STREET' - = 500 FEET 1" = 1000 FEET P L A N N I N G A N D B U I L D I N G A G E N C Y VICINITY MAP EXHIBIT 1 Lkl_I�Q� HOSPITAL z CITY OFTUSTIN F N F GC M RCIAL CONDOS C M E IC A L J 0 OM. Z a SEVENTEENTH STREET LU FMMERCI O M M E R C I A Luj L IIS e SIXTEENTH ST.E w� COMMERCIAL cc M. PARKIN LOT WECOMMRC N a ? CONDOMINIUMS J N J_ COMMERCIAL U 3 CON DO MI NI U M S W U COMMERCIAL VAR 10-3 .. CENTRE ON SEVENTEENTH 2130 EAST SEVENTEENTH STREET P L A N N I N G A N Q B U I L Q I N G A G E N C Y LAND USE MAP EXHIBIT 2 I � 00600010 L��LJJ��))ln� ANMdI'ID'J ,rend VJA—OO SPOOIlil�fl�'lil� OW851dIV/O N Q�Q44aEe0QQl�Mus l3H1N�1 sonerain1Vvuna'1sH163ooa H1N�LrBA36 NO 4 _ 3 n N 3 n v N I i s n 1 n Q I IJ I a V � 5 1 psi L fi 3 ss �E� s �o 7lb ! -` gig "FIN 1-4 Ittipift x R Ek 411 roiCtgi f j ggS( i __8'�' iC I .d.• r. — — i! � I As88iA,.a•ERatA� 4� � 8asaaayaygaggagrggaarraa I_ — 11 —. —I s �... ,L � I g gg gg gg gg 19 CF�lFI�FC�4�lFCCP I I i i211111:1w?12t li UIMIIIIIIIIIII14• ii L I li�c( i 1 I 7 i� 9 9 F^•� 'trio l • II, J Ij "III'IIIII III.% i+p� 1 3 321 1 S S W V I-11 I M I VAR 10-3 1 _ EXHIBLT 3 — — O m n O m �33U�S SN V ll�'1iM -v N VAR 10-3 :IJO MN T4 LU w Cl) LL o 0 z a�,Aa Z 0 a Si O a �g z .. 9z A IU12 VAR 10-3 0 2 0 Z W A cy W) It 4 � N N 0 La VAR 10-3 q W z � z Z W F- W Q Q W Y 0 La VAR 10-3 q 4 � u C t Lo c +A C C W C > C W > Vf Q C O 4 C d u VAR 10-3 EXHIBIT 7 Variance No. 2010-03 July 26, 2010 Page 1 of 1 Findings of Fact A. That because of special circumstances applicable to the subject property, including size, shape, topography, location, or surroundings, the strict application of the zoning ordinance is found to deprive the subject property of privileges not otherwise at variance with the intent and purpose of the provisions of this chapter. The Centre on Seventeenth is an 18.42 acre shopping center with over 200,000 square feet of leasable tenant space. Due to the length of the shopping center's street frontage along Tustin Avenue; the overall size of the shopping center site; and the relatively obscured location of the location of the secondary entrance along Tustin Avenue, the installation of additional freestanding signage will allow the Centre on Seventeenth the ability to identify key goods and services available within the interior of the shopping center. Lastly, Policy 1.10 of the City's Land Use Element encourages the location of commercial centers at arterial roadway intersections in commercial districts. The variance will allow the center to remain competitive in a manner that is consistent with other commercial centers located at key gateways along arterial streets in the City. B. That the granting of a variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of one or more substantial property rights. The granting of the variance for secondary signage will allow the tenant the ability to identify additional retail and food establishments within the shopping center. The additional sign is consistent with Policy 2.2 of the Land Use Element that supports commercial uses in adequate amounts to accommodate the City's needs for goods and services. C. That the granting of a variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to surrounding property. The additional freestanding sign will be consistent with the architectural theme and materials found on similar signs within the shopping center. The height and appearance of the sign will blend with established shopping center and will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to surrounding property. The sign will be located outside of required corner site distance triangle and will not interfere with the safety of pedestrians or motorists entering or exiting the site. D. That the granting of a variance will not adversely affect the General Plan of the City. The granting of the variance will not adversely affect the City's General Plan in any way as the land use designation of General Commercial (GC) allows signage in conjunction with retail uses in the land use designation. VAR 10-3 EXHIBIT 8 011 x_13 JULY 26, 2010 PAGE 1 OF 1 Conditions for Aporoval Variance No. 2010-03 is approved subject to compliance, to the reasonable satisfaction of the Planning Manager, with applicable sections of the Santa Ana Municipal Code, the California Administrative Code, the California Building Standards Code and all other applicable regulations. In addition, it shall meet the following conditions of approval: The applicant must comply with each and every condition listed below prior to exercising the rights conferred by this variance. The applicant must remain in compliance with all conditions listed below throughout the life of the variance. Failure to comply with each and every condition may result in the revocation of the variance. A. Planning Division 1. The project shall remain in compliance with Site Plan review DP No. 2009-63. 2. The design of the new freestanding sign is to draw from elements of the landscaping design, existing signs, and project architecture. 3. Should the additional sign be approved, the applicant shall submit a revised sign program for review. 4. Any amendment to this variance must be submitted to the Planning Division for review. At this time, staff will determine if administrative relief is available or if the variance must be amended. 5. The proposed sign will be limited to the location and size as indicated on the approved plan per the attached exhibit. VAR 10-3 EXHIBIT 9 �1 �0►_14 jf:7/26/10 RESOLUTION NO. 2010-07 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SANTA ANA GRANTING VARIANCE NO. 2010-03 TO INSTALL A NEW FREESTANDING SIGN THAT EXCEEDS THE NUMBER OF SIGNS ALLOWED WITHIN AN INTEGRATED DEVELOPMENT SITE AT 2130 EAST SEVENTEENTH STREET. BE IT RESOLVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SANTA ANA AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The Planning Commission of the City of Santa Ana hereby finds, determines and declares as follows: A. Applicant is requesting approval of Variance No. 2010-03 to allow a freestanding sign that exceeds the total number of signs allowed within an integrated development site at 2130 East Seventeenth Street. B. Variance No. 2010-03 came before the Planning Commission on July 26, 2010 for a duly noticed public hearing, which was conducted by the Planning Commission. C. The applicant is requesting a variance from Section 41-862(a) to allow the installation of a new freestanding monument sign at a secondary access point to the shopping center along Tustin Avenue. The sign will be approximately seven feet in height and will include three tenant face panels per side The proposed signs will draw on the materials and form of sculptural artwork and landscaping as part of the existing shopping center and will feature decorative concrete, stone and iron in vertical forms to match the theme and style of the existing development. D. The Planning Commission determines that for Variance No. 2010- 03 the following findings, which must be established pursuant to Santa Ana Municipal Code Section 41-638 in order to grant a variance from the provisions of the Santa Ana Municipal Code, have been established: That because of special circumstances applicable to the subject property, including size, shape, topography, location, or surroundings, the strict application of the zoning ordinance is found to deprive the subject property of privileges not Resolution No. 2010-07 Page 1 of 5 31 A-15 otherwise at variance with the intent and purpose of the provisions of this chapter. The Centre on Seventeenth is an 18.42 acre shopping center with over 200,000 square feet of leasable tenant space. Due to the length of the shopping center's street frontage along Tustin Avenue; the overall size of the shopping center site; and the relatively obscured location of the location of the secondary entrance along Tustin Avenue, the installation of additional freestanding signage will allow the Centre on Seventeenth the ability to identify key goods and services available within the interior of the shopping center. Lastly, Policy 1.10 of the City's Land Use Element encourages the location of commercial centers at arterial roadway intersections in commercial districts. The variance will allow the center to remain competitive in a manner that is consistent with other commercial centers located at key gateways along arterial streets in the City. 2. That the granting of a variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of one or more substantial property rights. The granting of the variance for secondary signage will allow the tenant the ability to identify additional retail and food establishments within the shopping center. The additional sign is consistent with Policy 2.2 of the Land Use Element that supports commercial uses in adequate amounts to accommodate the City's needs for goods and services. 3. That the granting of a variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to surrounding property. The additional freestanding sign will be consistent with the architectural theme and materials found on similar signs within the shopping center. The height and appearance of the sign will blend with established shopping center and will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to surrounding property. The sign will be located outside of required corner site Resolution No. 2010-07 Page 2 of 5 distance triangle and will not interfere with the safety of pedestrians or motorists entering or exiting the site. 4. That the granting of a variance will not adversely affect the General Plan of the City. The granting of the variance will not adversely affect the City's General Plan in any way as the land use designation of General Commercial (GC) allows signage in conjunction with retail uses in the land use designation. Section 2. This project was reviewed in accordance with the Guidelines for the California Environmental Quality Act. The recommendation is exempt from further review pursuant to Section 15311. This Class 11 exemption applies to a project that involves the construction of minor structures accessory to existing commercial buildings including the construction of on -premise signs. Categorical Exemption Environmental Review No. 2006-177 will be filed for this project. Section 3. The Planning Commission of the City of Santa Ana after conducting the public hearing hereby approves Variance No. 20010- 03 as conditioned in Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein. These decisions are based upon the evidence submitted at the above said hearing, which includes but is not limited to: the Request for Planning Commission Action dated July 26, 2010 and exhibits attached thereto and the public testimony all of which are incorporated herein by this reference. ADOPTED this 26th day of July , 2010 by the following vote: AYES: Commissioners: Acosta, Alderete, Betancourt, Gartner Turner Walters. Yrarrazaval (7) NOES: Commissioners: None (0) ABSENT: Commissioners: None (0) ABSTENTIONS: Commissioners: None (0) Resolution No. 2010-07 Page 3of5 31 A-17 Eric Alderete Chairman APPROVED AS TO FORM: Joseph W. Fletcher City Attorney CERTIFICATE OF ATTESTATION AND ORIGINALITY I, Martha Ramirez, Planning Commission Secretary, do hereby attest to and certify the attached Resolution No. 2010-07 to be the original resolution adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Santa Ana on July 26, 2010. Date: Planning Commission Secretary City of Santa Ana ikii_LAW_E:� Resolution No. 2010-07 Page 4 of 5 EXHIBIT A CONDITIONS TO VARIANCE NO. 2010-03 Variance No. 2010-03 is approved subject to compliance, to the reasonable satisfaction of the Planning Manager, with applicable sections of the Santa Ana Municipal Code, the California Administrative Code, the California Building Standards Code and all other applicable regulations. In addition, it shall meet the following conditions of approval: The applicant must comply with each and every condition listed below prior to exercising the rights conferred by this variance. The applicant must remain in compliance with all conditions listed below throughout the life of the variance. Failure to comply with each and every condition may result in the revocation of the variance. The project shall remain in compliance with Site Plan review DP No. 2009-63. 2. The design of the new freestanding sign is to draw from elements of the landscaping design, existing signs, and project architecture. 3. Should the additional sign be approved, the applicant shall submit a revised sign program for review. 4. Any amendment to this variance must be submitted to the Planning Division for review. At this time, staff will determine if administrative relief is available or if the variance must be amended. 5. The proposed sign will be limited to the location and size as indicated on the approved plans. Resolution No. 2010-07 Page 5 of 5 iki iks F.AIMB-11] REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: AUGUST 16, 2010 TITLE: ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 16 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE ESTABLISHING STANDARDS FOR RETENTION OF WORKERS 0"' l' I V'�-e��--� CITY MANAGER RECOMMENDED ACTION CLERK OF COUNCIL USE ONLY: APPROVED ❑ As Recommended ❑ As Amended ❑ Ordinance on 151 Reading ❑ Ordinance on 2n° Reading ❑ Implementing Resolution ❑ Set Public Hearing For_ CONTINUED TO FILE NUMBER Amend Chapter 16 of the Santa Ana Municipal Code establishing standards for the retention of workers during the transition to new ownership or a change in contracted waste collection and handling services. DISCUSSION The City currently has waste collection and handling agreements with Waste Management and with Ware Disposal. Both agreements extend to June, 2018. Recent changes in waste companies following a competitive selection process held in other cities have resulted in the displacement of workers and in the payment of substantially lower wages and benefits by the new companies. With the downturn in the economy, both employees and trash companies with union agreements are concerned with protection for their employees. The proposed ordinance addresses the retention of employees and the payment of wages and benefits in circumstances where a company is under new ownership or a city decides to change waste haulers. There will be no impact to Santa Ana until the City makes a decision on renewing or rebidding its agreements with Waste Management and Ware Disposal. Any such decision would not be submitted to the City Council until the beginning of 2017. FISCAL IMPACT There is no immediate fiscal impact associated with this action. Because of the length of time remaining on the agreements, it is difficult to estimate future fiscal impacts. Raul Godinez II Executive Directorl Public Works Agency RGlrLC Exhibit: 1. Ordinance 5OA-1 JWF (8/12/10) ORDINANCE NO. NS -XXX AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA ANA ADDING SECTIONS 16-40 THROUGH 16-42 TO ARTICLE II OF CHAPTER 16 OF THE SANTA ANA MUNCIPAL CODE RELATED TO SOLID WASTE COLLECTION REGULATIONS. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA ANA DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The City Council of the City of Santa Ana hereby finds, determines and declares as follows: A. The California Legislature, by enactment of the California Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989 ("AB 939") established a solid waste management process that requires cities and other local jurisdictions to implement source reduction, reuse, and recycling as integrated waste management practices. B. AB 939 authorizes and requires local agencies to make adequate provisions for solid waste handling within their jurisdictions. C. The City is obligated to protect the public health and safety of its residents, and must ensure that waste disposal occurs in a manner that protects public health and safety. D. The City Council has determined that the most effective and efficient way to provide integrated waste management services to its residents and to meet its multiple statutory obligations related to waste management is through an agreements with experienced private waste disposal services providers. E. In the event of a change in the contracted waste disposal services provider, or a change in ownership or control of such provider, the retention of experienced waste disposal workers is an important component in assuring the continued safe, efficient and effective delivery of City waste disposal services. F. The purpose of this ordinance is to establish standards to help ensure the retention of experienced workers during the transition to new ownership or change in contracted waste disposal services. Ordinance No. NS -XXX 5OA-2 Page 1 of 6 Section 2. Section 16-40 is added to Chapter 16 of the Santa Ana Municipal Code to read in full as follows: Sec. 16-40. General Application and Definitions (a) Sections 16-40 through 16-42 shall apply to any corporation, company, partnership, trust, estate, association, joint venture or other legal or commercial entity operating within the City that employs workers to perform Waste Disposal Services. (b) "Change in Contract" shall mean any change by the City of any Waste Services Provider with whom the City contracts to provide Waste Disposal Services. (c) "Change in Control" shall mean any sale, assignment, transfer, contribution or other disposition of all or substantially all of the assets or a controlling interest (including by consolidation, merger, or reorganization) of the Incumbent Operator, or any Person who controls such Incumbent Operator, in a Waste Services Provider, to a New Operator. (d) "City" shall mean the City of Santa Ana. (e) "Incumbent Operator" shall mean the Person who owns, controls, and/or . operates a Waste Services Provider prior to a Change in Control or Change in Contract. (f) "New Operator" shall mean the Person who owns, controls and/or operates a Waste Services Provider following a Change in Control or Change in Contract. (g) "Person" shall mean an individual, corporation, partnership, limited partnership, trust, estate, association, joint venture, agency, instrumentality, or any other legal or commercial entity, whether domestic or foreign. (h) "Qualified Displaced Worker" shall mean any person employed by an Incumbent Operator or any subcontractor of a Incumbent Operator of a Waste Services Provider who: (i) is not an "exempt" employee under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA); and, has been employed at the Establishment by the Incumbent Operator or any subcontractor of the Incumbent Operator for at least 30 calendar days prior to the execution of the Transfer Document. (i) "Transfer Document' shall mean the document effecting a Change in Control or Change in Contract. Ordinance No. NS -XXX Page 2 of 6 (j) "Waste Disposal Services" shall mean the collection, transfer, transport, recycling, processing and/or disposal of residential, and commercial, industrial solid waste and solid waste generated at temporary construction and demolition sites under contract to the City through a franchise or other exclusive or non-exclusive agreement. (k) "Waste Services Provider" shall mean any entity identified in Section 16- 40 of this Article and any subcontractor of such an entity providing Waste Disposal Services. Section 3. Section 16-41 is added to Chapter 16 of the Santa Ana Municipal Code to read in full as follows: Sec. 16-41. Employee Retention/Preferential Hiring/Wage Maintenance (a) Within ten (10) days of the execution of a Transfer Document, an Incumbent Operator shall provide to the New Operator and the Executive Director of Public Works a list of all of the employees of the Incumbent Operator of a Waste Services Provider, including each employee's name, last know address, date of hire and job classification at the time of the transfer. The New Operator shall offer employment at an Establishment to all Qualified Displaced Workers. (b) All New Operator work hours performed by a Waste Services Provider must be performed, to the extent feasible, by Qualified Displaced Workers. Nothing herein shall be construed as requiring the New Operator to create additional positions that the New Operator does not need. However, prior to reducing the amount of work hours or positions utilized to perform waste disposal services at an Establishment, a New Operator must obtain written approval from the Executive Director of Public Works. (c) A New Operator shall not discharge any Qualified Displaced Worker, except for cause, for at least one -hundred -eighty (180) days from the effective date of a Transfer Document, or the date on which the New Operator actually begins operating the Waste Services Provider, whichever is later. (d) At the end of such 180 -day period, the New Operator (or subcontractor, where applicable) shall perform a written performance evaluation for each employee retained pursuant to this ordinance. If the employee's performance during such 180 -day period is satisfactory, the New Operator (or subcontractor) shall offer the employee continued employment. (e) In the event that, during the one -hundred -eighty (180) day transition period described in Section 16-42 above, the New Operator determines that fewer positions are needed to deliver and maintain the contracted service, the New Operator shall retain Qualified Displaced Workers by seniority. Seniority shall be determined by reference to the collective bargaining agreement covering the Ordinance No. NS -XXX 5OA-4 Page 3 of 6 Qualified Displaced Workers, if one exists, or, if no such agreement exists, then by reference to the initial hire date with the Incumbent Operator of each Qualified Displaced Worker. Any Qualified Displaced Workers not retained by the New Operator shall be placed on a preferential hiring list and considered by the New Operator for any job openings that may arise. (f) Each New Operator must provide all employees of a Waste Services Provider with wages in an amount and benefits at a value of not less than the greater of those (a) in effect at the point of execution of the Transfer Document or (b) in any collective bargaining agreement, whether effective or expired, between an Incumbent Operator and such employees. For purposes of this Article, "wages and benefits "includes all wages or compensation referenced in the existing collective bargaining agreement including provisions addressing how overtime shall be calculated, employer and employee contributions for medical insurance and retirement benefits, any tool, shoe or uniform allowance, sick leave, vacation time and personal or family leave. Section4. Section 16-42 is added to Chapter 16 of the Santa Ana Municipal Code to read in full as follows: Sec. 16-42. Retaliation and Discrimination Barred; No Waiver of Rights; Enforcement (a) No Incumbent Operator or New Operator shall discharge or otherwise discriminate against anyone for making a complaint, participating in any City proceeding, or using any civil remedy to enforce his or her rights, or for otherwise asserting his or her rights under this ordinance. (b) Any waiver by a Qualified Displaced Worker of any or all of the provisions of this ordinance shall be deemed contrary to public policy and shall be void and unenforceable, except where such waiver occurs in a bona fide collective bargaining agreement. Any attempt by an Incumbent Operator or New Operator to have a waste or recycling worker waive rights given by this ordinance shall constitute a willful violation of this ordinance. (c) In addition to any rights and remedies which an employee might have, under any federal or state statute or regulation or municipal ordinance or regulation or at common law, any employee claiming a violation of this ordinance may bring an action against an Incumbent Operator or New Operator in the Superior Court of the State of California, to enforce the provisions of this ordinance, and may seek liquidated damages, back pay, any other actual damages, reinstatement, injunctive relief, punitive damages, and any other legal or equitable relief, as permitted by law. Violations of this ordinance are declared to irreparably harm the public and covered employees generally. Ordinance No. NS -XXX Page 4 of 6 5OA-5 (d) The terms of this ordinance shall be included, by reference, in all future Waste Disposal Services contracts entered into by the City , and all future Waste Services Providers shall include the terms of this ordinance, by reference, in all contracts or subcontracts which the Waste Services Provider may enter into involving Waster Disposal Services. Section 5. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or portion of this ordinance is 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 ordinance. The City Council of the City of Santa Ana hereby declares that it would have adopted this ordinance and each section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or portion thereof irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, sentences, clauses, phrases, or portions be declared invalid or unconstitutional. ADOPTED this APPROVED AS TO FORM: Joseph W. Fletcher City Attorney AYES: NOES: day of Councilmembers Councilmembers ABSTAIN: Councilmembers NOT PRESENT: Councilmembers , 2010 Miguel A. Pulido Mayor Ordinance No. NS -XXX Page 5 of 6 CERTIFICATE OF ATTESTATION AND ORIGINALITY I, MARIA D. HUIZAR, Clerk of the Council, do hereby attest to and certify that the attached Ordinance No. NS -XXX to be the original ordinance adopted by the City Council of the City of Santa Ana on , and that said ordinance was published in accordance with the Charter of the City of Santa Ana. Date: Ordinance No. NS -XXX Page 6 of 6 Clerk of the Council City of Santa Ana 5OA-7 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: AUGUST 16, 2010 TITLE: RESOLUTION APPROVING RELOCATION PLAN FOR AGENCY ACQUISITIONS IN THE STATION DISTRICT CITY MANAGER RECOMMENDED ACTION CLERK OF COUNCIL USE ONLY: APPROVED ❑ As Recommended ❑ As Amended ❑ Ordinance on 1ST Reading ❑ Ordinance on 2nd Reading ❑ Implementing Resolution ❑ Set Public Hearing For, CONTINUED TO FILE NUMBER Adopt a resolution approving the Relocation Plan for the properties located at 812 E. Santa Ana Blvd., 602-604 E. 5th Street, 607 E. 6th Street, 609 E. 6th Street, 613 E. 6th Street, 615 E. 6th Street, 911 Brown Street, and 409-411 N. Minter. DISCUSSION The Community Redevelopment Agency (Agency) has acquired numerous parcels along the Santa Ana Boulevard corridor for the purpose of improving this critical gateway into the City. The Agency has selected a master developer (Related) for the area and is proceeding with a residential project. The Agency and Related have identified a number of additional parcels whose acquisition would result in a more cohesive site plan. Three occupied parcels located at 609, 613 and 615 E. 6th Street were approved for acquisition and subsequently purchased by the Agency on July 16 and 22, 2010, while the others remain under consideration. All households in these three parcels and, those living in the remaining five parcels to be acquired, will be required to permanently relocate. California law requires that a relocation plan be prepared and followed to ensure these households are relocated to suitable housing and are paid appropriate relocation benefits. The attached relocation plan (Plan) (Exhibit 1) was prepared by Overland, Pacific and Cutler (OPC), the Agency's relocation consultant. The Plan indicates that there are more than adequate replacement housing resources available to the affected households. It also indicates that OPC will work with these households to determine their eligible benefits and to assist them to find suitable replacement housing. The Plan estimates that relocation payments, including a 10 percent contingency, will not exceed $456,000. In accordance with California law, all households residing in the eight parcels received a draft copy of the Plan on July 12, 2010, and were given 30 days to comment. No comments were received. Residents of the recently acquired 6th Street properties received an Informational 90 -Day Vacate Notice on July 30, 2010, that provided them with a general written description of the Agency's 55A-1 Resolution Approving Relocation Plan for Agency Acquisitions in the Station District August 16, 2010 Page 2 relocation program and information about their rights. Relocation law also requires that the legislative body adopt a resolution approving the relocation plan. Following approval of the resolution, the residents in the 6th Street properties will be given 60 days to complete their relocation. If the Agency does acquire them, residents in the other five properties will receive 90 - Day Vacate Notices immediately after acquisition is complete. All residents will be afforded the opportunity to consider leasing or purchasing any of the new units being developed by Related. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act, Environmental Impact Report No. 2006-02 was prepared for the proposed redevelopment, including the demolition of existing structures, of properties owned by the Community Redevelopment Agency of the City of Santa Ana in the Station District. On June 7, 2010, the City Council adopted a resolution certifying the Final Environmental Impact Report, adopted the CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations, and adopted the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the project. No additional CEQA is required for this project. FISCAL IMPACT Funds are available in the Tax Increment Housing Set -Aside account (no. 50718830- 66220/03716601138) in the amount of $456,000. Cy4242zi�2�__ nthia J. Nelson Deputy City Manager for Development Services Community Development Agency CJN/SLB/LF/kg Exhibits: 1. Draft Relocation Plan 2. Resolution APPROVED AS TO FUNDS AND ACCOUNTS: __� N a� Z - ) 1� �L 0 ---a Francisco Gutierrez Executive Director Finance & Management Services Agency 55A-2 EXHIBIT 1 REPLACEMENT HOUSING PLAN Statement of Purpose and Obiective This Replacement Housing Plan is prepared in accordance with California Health and Safety Code Section 33413. The project consists of the demolition of the three single family residential units whose location is shown in Attachment A. These units have various bedroom sizes, and are or were previously occupied by low- and moderate -income households. Therefore they are subject to replacement in accordance with the legal requirements of the California Community Redevelopment Law (Health and Safety Code Section 33413 et seq.). All replacement housing will be provided within four years of commencement of demolition. Before entering into a contract committing the Community Redevelopment Agency of the City of Santa Ana to provide funds for the proposed activity that will result in demolition, the Agency will make public by publication in a newspaper of general circulation the information listed below. Proiect Property Description The location of the project properties is shown in the map attached as Attachment A. Each property is listed by address and number of bedrooms in Attachment B. Pursuant to the California Community Redevelopment Law (Health and Safety Code Section 33413 et seq.) all occupied and vacant occupiable units will be replaced in kind. Replacement Housing Units Attachment B also delineates by number of bedrooms the location where the replacement units are or will be located. Income Level of Replacement Units The replacement dwelling units will be affordable and occupied exclusively by tenants with the same income levels as the persons displaced from the dwelling units that are being removed from the low-, very low- and moderate -income housing market. Therefore, all units will be made affordable to very low-, low- and moderate -income households. Funding Source The Agency and the City of Santa Ana have committed sufficient Tax Increment funds to finance the demolition and the required replacement units. EXHIBIT 1 55A-3 Low/Moderate Income Assurance All agreements related to replacement housing units will contain a covenant guaranteeing units remain available at affordable housing cost to, and occupied by, persons and families of low-income, moderate -income and very low-income households for not less than 55 years for rental units and 45 years for homeownership units, as required by the Health and Safety Code Section 33413. Article 34 Compliance The replacement housing to be provided pursuant to this Replacement Housing Plan does not require the approval of the voters pursuant to Article 34 of the California Constitution, in that all of the replacement housing units fall within exceptions to the definition of "low -rent housing project" in California Health and Safety Code 37001. Availability of Plan In accordance with the Community Redevelopment Law, a copy of this Replacement Housing Plan will be made available for review and comment by other public agencies, and the general public during regular business hours between 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday in the offices of the Housing Department, 20 Civic Center Plaza, 3rd Floor, Community Redevelopment Agency, 20 Civic Center Plaza, 6th Floor, and in the office of the City Clerk, 8th floor, Santa Ana, California. 55A-4 2 cA� Sp,N n� 6TH ST. C ch H m m cn W W >- Z � U 0 a CL O 0 609 E. Sixth Street 0 613, 615 E. Sixth Street Attachment A 55A-5 LIST OF UNITS TO BE REMOVED A.P.N. Address Removal Date Bedrooms Use 398-311-06 609 E. Sixth Street 2010 Two Residential Rental 398-311-07 613 E. Sixth Street 2010 Three Residential Rental - 398 -311-07 615 E. Sixth Street 2010 Two Residential Rental LIST OF PROJECTED REPLACEMENT UNITS APN Replacement Address Parcel Replaced Bedrooms Date Available 109-611-20 821 S. Townsend Street 609 E. 6t Street Two 2010 109-611-01 702 S. Raitt Street 613 E.6t Street Three 2010 109-611-21 817 S. Townsend Street 615 E. 6t Street Two 2009 ATTACHMENT B 8/2/10 les RESOLUTION NO. 2010- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA ANA APPROVING THE RELOCATION PLAN FOR RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY LOCATED AT 812 E. SANTA ANA BLVD., 602-604 E. 5T" STREET, 607 E. 6T" STREET, 609 E. 6T" STREET, 613 E. 6T" STREET, 615 E. 6T" STREET, 911 BROWN STREET, AND 409-411 N. MINTER BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA ANA, AS FOLLOWS: Section 1: The City Council of the City of Santa Ana ("Council") hereby finds, determines and declares as follows: A. The Community Redevelopment Agency ("Agency") has been acquiring parcels along the Santa Ana Boulevard corridor for the purpose of improving this critical gateway into the City. B. The Agency has selected a master developer for the area and is proceeding with the project. The Agency and the master developer have identified several additional parcels whose acquisition could make the project more successful. Should these parcels be acquired, all tenant households would be required to permanently relocate. C. California law requires that a relocation plan be prepared and followed to insure that the affected households are relocated to suitable housing and are paid appropriate relocation benefits. D. Pursuant to California Government Code section 7260, et seq., a public entity is required to adopt a relocation plan, by resolution, whenever it enters into an agreement for acquisition of real property or an agreement for the disposition and development of property which would lead to displacement of people from their homes. E. The relocation plan has been prepared in conformance with applicable provisions of the California Government Code section 7260, et seq., Relocation Guidelines (California Code of Regulations, Title 25, Chapter 6), the federal Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (URA), as well United States Department of Housing and Urban Development regulations. F. The relocation plan is required because of the permanent displacement of the households located at 812 E. Santa Ana Blvd., 602-604 E. 5T" Street, 607 E. 6T" Street, 609 E. 6T" Street, 613 E. 55A-7 Resolution No. 2010- 8/2/10 les 6T" Street, 615 E. 6T" Street, 911 Brown Street, and 409-411 N. Miner. Section 2: In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), Environmental Impact Report No. 2006-02 was prepared for the proposed redevelopment, including the demolition of existing structures, of properties owned by the Agency in the Station District. On June 7, 2010, the City Council adopted a resolution certifying the Final Environmental Impact Report, adopted the CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations, and adopted the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the project. No additional CEQA is required for this project. Section 3: The City Council hereby approves the relocation plan for the residential Property located at the aforementioned addresses, and the establishment of an account in accordance with state mandates for the payment of relocation benefits to the displaced households. Section 4: This Resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption by the City Council, and the Clerk of the Council shall attest to and certify the vote adopting this Resolution. 55A-8 Resolution No. 2010-_ 8/2/10 les ADOPTED this day of , 2010. Miguel Pulido Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: Joseph W. Fletcher, City Attorney By: Lisa E. Storck Assistant City Attorney AYES: Councilmembers: NOES: Councilmembers: ABSTAIN: Councilmembers: NOT PRESENT: Councilmembers: CERTIFICATE OF ATTESTATION AND ORIGINALITY I, MARIA D. HUIZAR, Clerk of the Council, do hereby attest to and certify the attached Resolution No. 2010- to be the original resolution adopted by the City Council of the City of Santa Ana on Date: Clerk of the Council City of Santa Ana Resolution No. 2010- 55A-9 55A-10 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: AUGUST 16, 2010 TITLE: ADOPT RESOLUTIONS AUTHORIZING APPLICATIONS FOR STATE AND FEDERAL PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION GRANTS J/2 CITY MANAGER RECOMMENDED ACTION CLERK OF COUNCIL USE ONLY: APPROVED ❑ As Recommended ❑ As Amended ❑ Ordinance on 15t Reading ❑ Ordinance on 2"d Reading ❑ Implementing Resolution ❑ Set Public Hearing For_ CONTINUED TO FILE NUMBER Adopt a resolution approving the application for grant funds for the Sustainable Communities Planning Grant and Incentives Program under the Safe Drinking Water, Water Quality and Supply, Flood Control, River and Coastal Protection Bond Act of 2006. 2. Adopt a resolution approving the application for grant funds for the Sustainable Communities Regional Planning Grants Program from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, and authorizing the City Manager to execute a Memorandum of Understanding with the Southern California Association of Governments indicating its commitment for in-kind assistance. DISCUSSION It is requested that the City Council authorize the preparation and submission of two grant applications in furtherance of the City's overarching transportation and mobility goals. The grant opportunities relate to one State and one Federal program as follows: Proposition 84 Sustainable Communities Planning Grant and Incentives Program. This grant opportunity arises from the Safe Drinking Water, Water Quality and Supply, Flood Control, River and Coastal Protection Bond Act of 2006. This program aims to support the development and implementation of effective and/or innovative local plans that support the state's AB 32 GHG emission reduction targets and implement SB 375, while creating sustainable communities. 2. Sustainable Communities Regional Planninq Grants (from the U.S. Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2010. This program is administered by the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). It aims to improve regional planning efforts that integrate housing and transportation decisions at the state, regional and local level. 55B-1 Grant Applications August 16, 2010 Page 2 The two grant applications would focus on four areas of enhancing local and regional mobility in Santa Ana, and within the core of Orange County. The four focus areas are: 1. Prepare a Pedestrian Master Plan to focus on pedestrian movement, safety and connection with other modes of travel throughout the community. 2. Prepare an update to the Bikeway Master Plan. 3. Develop Complete Streets policies pursuant to AB 1358. 4. Update the circulation element of the General Plan to consolidate and incorporate these various measures. The deadline for submitting the Prop. 84 is August 23, 2010. The deadline for HUD's Sustainable Communities Regional Planning Grants is August 31, 2010. FISCAL IMPACT There is no fiscal impact associated with these actions. <_ Jay M Trevino Executive Director Planning & Building Agency JMT:rb rb\reports\Grant Applicabons.cc RESOLUTION NO. 2010- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA ANA APPROVING A GRANT APPLICATION FOR A SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITIES REGIONAL PLANNING GRANT UNDER THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE ALL NECESSARY DOCUMENTS IN FURTHERANCE THEREOF. BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA ANA AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The City Council of the City of Santa Ana hereby finds, determines and declares that the Sustainable Communities Regional Planning Grants (from the U.S. Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2010) is administered by the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD, and aims to improve regional planning efforts that integrate housing and transportation decisions at the state, regional and local level. Section 2. The City Council of the City of Santa Ana hereby approves the City's grant application for the Sustainable Communities Regional Planning Grants (from the U.S. Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2010) and authorizes the City Manager to execute all necessary documents related to the Grant Application including actions necessary to accept the Grant if approved. Section 3. This Resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption by the City Council, and the Clerk of the Council shall attest to and certify the vote adopting this Resolution. ADOPTED this day of , 2010. APPROVED AS TO FORM: Joseph W. Fletcher, City Attorney Miguel A. Pulido Mayor 55B-3 Resolution No. 20 -XXX Page -1 of 2 AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: NOT PRESENT: Councilmembers: Councilmembers: Councilmembers: Councilmembers: CERTIFICATION OF ATTESTATION AND ORIGINALITY I, MARIA D. HUIZER, Clerk of Council, do hereby attest to and certify the attached Resolution No. 2010- to be the original resolution adopted by the City Council of the City of Santa Ana on Date: Clerk of Council City of Santa Ana 55B-4 Resolution No. 20 -XXX Page 2 of 2 RESOLUTION NO. 2010- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA ANA APPROVING THE CITY'S GRANT APPLICATION FOR THE CALIFORNIA PROPOSITION 84 (SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITIES PLANNING GRANT AND INCENTIVES PROGRAM UNDER THE SAFE DRINKING WATER, WATER QUALITY AND SUPPLY, FLOOD CONTROL, RIVER AND COASTAL PROTECTION BOND ACT OF 2006) AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE ALL NECESSARY DOCUMENTS IN FURTHERANCE THEREOF. BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA ANA AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The City Council of the City of Santa Ana hereby finds, determines and declares that the California Proposition 84 (Sustainable Communities Planning Grant and Incentives Program under the Safe Drinking Water, Water Quality and Supply, Flood Control, River and Coastal Protection Bond Act of 2006) provides funds to support the development and implementation of effective and/or innovative local plans that further the state's AB 32 GHG emission reduction targets and implement SB 375, while creating sustainable communities. Section 2. The City Council of the City of Santa Ana hereby approves the grant application and authorizes the City Manager to execute all necessary documents related to the Grant Application including actions necessary to accept the Grant if approved. Section 3. This Resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption by the City Council, and the Clerk of the Council shall attest to and certify the vote adopting this Resolution. ADOPTED this day of , 2010. APPROVED AS TO FORM: Joseph W. Fletcher City Attorney Miguel A. Pulido Mayor 55B-5 Resolution No. 20_ -XXX Page 1 of 2 AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: NOT PRESENT Councilmembers: Councilmembers: Councilmembers: Councilmembers: CERTIFICATION OF ATTESTATION AND ORIGINALITY I, MARIA D. HUIZER, Clerk of Council, do hereby attest to and certify the attached Resolution No. 2010- to be the original resolution adopted by the City Council of the City of Santa Ana on Date: Clerk of Council City of Santa Ana 6' Resolution No. 20 -XXX Page -2 of 2