HomeMy WebLinkAboutCORRESPONDENCE - 50Ad
� 7
ids CouncilCity Correspondence _
10/3/2017
L
Item No. 50A EMERGENCY ORDINANCE:
AMENDING AND ADDING SECTIONS TO SANTA ANA MUNICIPAL
CODE CHAPTER 10, ARTICLE 10 RE: STORAGE OF PROPERTY, PROHIBITION OF ANIMALS,
VEHICLE ACCESS AND SERVICES IN THE CIVIC CENTER AREA
Date of Name
Representative of
In Favor In opposition
Correspondence
of RA*. of RA*.
1
9/30/2017
Maria Carrillo
SAUSD Teacher and Santa Ana resident
Yes
2
1011/2017
Eric Scandrett
Morrison Park NeighborhoodHoardmember
Yes
3
1011/2017
Christina Dorsa -Smith
Morrison Park Neighborhood Boardmember
Yes
q
1012/2017
Dave Hoen
Santa Ana Resident
Yes
5
1012/2017
Barbara Russell
Santa Ana Resident
Yes
6
1012/2017
Darren Shippen
Santa Ana Resident
Yes
7
1012/2017
Janet Pekarek
Santa Ana Resident
Yes
8
101312017
Patricia Lockhart
Yes
g
101312017
Karina Lagace
Santa Ana Resident
Yes
10
101312017
Phil Bacerra
Yes
11
10/312017
Chris Schmidt
Yes
12
1013/2017
Marla Serna
Yes
13
101312017
Lisa Mills
Santa Ana Resident
Yes
14
101312017
Sally Stanton
Santa Ana Resident
Yes
15
101312017
Emalie Huriaux
CalHEP
Yes
"RA - Recommended Action
Thursday, February 15, 2018 Page 1 of 2
*RA - Recommended Action
Thursday, February 3.5, 2018
In Favor In opposition
of i of i
Yes
Yes
Yes
Page 2 of 2
Date of
Name
Representative of
Correspondence
16
10/3/2017
Markelle Pineda
17
10/312017
Rosie Tingle
Citizen for Animal Shelter, OC
18
1013/2017
Alex Nava Tedoro
Santa Ana Resident
19
10/512017
Cecilia Luna
Santa Ana Resident
20
9126/2017
Craig L. Griffin, President
Law Library Board of Trustees
*RA - Recommended Action
Thursday, February 3.5, 2018
In Favor In opposition
of i of i
Yes
Yes
Yes
Page 2 of 2
Mitre -Ramirez, Norma
From: Maria Carrillo <
Sent: Saturday, September 30, 2017 1:49 PM
To: eComment
Subject: Agenda Item 50A
Hello I am writing on behalf of the homeless situation not just in the Civic Center area but also all over. I am part of the
MPNA , I am a teacher in SAUSD, and a resident of Santa Ana all my life. The conditions are getting worse. I drive
Bristol every morning and every morning I see more and more camp sites of homeless people. There are at least two
homeless living on two bus stops on Bristol. One is permanent on Bristol and Warner! I see this every morning! If we do
not put a stop to this it will just continue and they will be every where. There are several camp sites now on McFadden
and Bristol which should be cited and torn down immediately. There is trash every where as you drive along Bristol ,
furniture left behind, & loitering all along. JUST yesterday I saw the mess of furniture, a bath tub, and lots of trash left
behind by a homeless on Bristol where the Food 4 Less is located -The shut down taqueria location. Its HORRIBLE! I
refused to go to the civic center area and the library because I feel it is a danger to myself and family. I work at Garfield
Elementary (SAUSD) right on 4th and Lacy and every day we see the same issues. Syringes have also been found on
our campus. This is not safe for our students! Camp sites yes camp sites plural are now on 4th and the train tracks
area. Its horrible and should not be tolerated. ITs not SAFE! Camp sites are also on first street near the zoo but I am
sure you are aware of it. PLEASE BE ACTIVE AND HELP WITH THIS SITUATION. WE CAN NOT LET OUR CITY BE
DESTROYED! The police Should have the power to tell these people to leave. This is not allowed. This is not the place
for them to set up camp! When I go to my sisters house in Rancho Santa Margarita you do not see this at all!!!! Why????
Please help us!!
Thank you,
Maria Carrillo
Teacher, Mother & long time resident!
School: 714 972 5300
Mitre -Ramirez, Norma
r
From: Erie Scandrett <
Sent: Sunday, October 1, 2017 9:26 AM
To: eComment
Cc: emscandrett@aol.com
Subject: Regarding Homeless Encampnent in Santa Ana .....................
Dear Mayor and City Council,
I am a member of the Morrison Park Neighborhood Association Board and writing to you as a 34 year Santa Ana
homeowner. I located here because it is the county seat and because this was a beautiful, established, diversified
city..............not a "planned community" like Irvine.
I use the term "was" beautiful because it no longer is and is getting worse every single day.
Homeless Problem..............As long as you allow all these do-gooder organizations to come into our city and supply food,
water and other things to the homeless they will continue to reside on city property. There may not be laws against being
homeless but there are laws against loitering, being a public nuisance and doing illegal drugs on city property and most
certainly defecating in public! WHY ARE YOU NOT HAVING THE POLICE ARREST THESE
PEOPLE???????????????????? If these organizations are so passionate about helping the homeless then make them
transport them to their cities and help them there! I am sick and tired of Santa Ana being the dumping ground for other
cities problems. You can go to any number of cities in Orange County and not one homeless person is in their parks
At a minimum what you are proposing should be adapted but it really does not go far enough. However, baby steps in the
Loss of Trees..............The other major contribLItion you are making to systematically destroy the beauty of our city is
allowing trees to die and not replacing trees that have died or been taken out because of damage caused by storms.
Recently we were told at a public meeting that there is no money to take care of our parks and mow the grass, much less
replace trees. I'm not quite sure how that squares with keeping Santa Ana a beautiful city. Perhaps taking another look at
budget allocations might be worthwhile. We were promised replacement trees for Morrison Park so that our residents did
not have to sit at picnic tables in the hot sun. Never happened. We were promised replacement trees on Memory Lane
when trees died because of lack of water. Never Happened. About time it does, please!
Sincerely,
Eric Scandrett
Mitre -Ramirez, Norma
From: Christina Dorsa -Smith <
Sent: Sunday, October 1, 2017 8:31 PM
To: eComment
Subject: Quality of Life/Safety Threats in the City of Santa Ana
Mayor Pulido and City Council Members,
I am writing this email to let you know of my concerns regarding the current state of our City and my increasing
lack of confidence in what is being done to ensure safety as well as quality of life for our residents. I am on the
Morrison Park Neighborhood Association board and writing to you as a long time Santa Ana
resident/homeowner - 40 years total.
I have been well aware of the reputation that Santa Ana has had and have always been able to defend and
counter most negativity. I have loved living here in the City of Santa Ana and in the Morrison Park
Neighborhood. My ability to support and defend the City has diminished greatly and I now question my
commitment to remaining a resident. I am also sorry to see some wonderful neighbors move out of Santa Ana.
The rights of the 'unsheltered' homeless have been elevated while the rights of other citizens have been put in
jeopardy. Attending meetings at City Hall brings increased concerns of safety. This is also the case of the bike
trails and some parks within the City. I can no longer walk the trails due to safety concerns with homeless
encampments.
I strongly hope that the Homeless Emergency Ordinance Section 10-554 - Unpermitted Services in the Civic
Center - No person, entity, organization or business shall provide food, medical or social services in the Civic
Center without first obtaining the written permission of the City Manager, or their designee, and any
applicable licenses or permits required to provide such services or access to Civic Center property. The purpose
of this section is to ensure that all services are provided in an organized manner by those who have the proper
experience, credentials needed to provide the service and who have submitted a setup and clean-up plan. - is
approved as soon as possible and then possibly extended to any'unsheltered' homeless encampments withing
the City. The negative unintended consequence of the actions of those providing, food, clothing and other
0> — E%A C
The trees in our parks are dying or dead. The head of Parks and Recreation spoke at a meeting recently and
said there was no money to remove or replace trees. There is money; however, in a'liability fund' if someone
gets hurt by a tree falling. So we would rather wait until someone gets hurt than be proactive in taking care of
the trees that are in our parks? Couldn't it also be true that it will be more expensive to replace trees at a later
time? We were also told that the parks are over-whelmed by the current amount of residents that use them. On
top of this, the City is considering the approval of more high-density and low income housing. What effect will
that have on our parks and how will that be handled?
The fact that the current council supported continuing with the termination of the ICE contract without any firm
ideas of a new use of the facility proves that there is no forward thinking, proactive planning or positive
management leaving the City in a budget crisis. Isn't poor management one of the reasons the past City
Manager is no longer our City Manager?
The proposals that have been shared at various meetings may be a step in the right direction, but are not nearly
enough. Action is needed to restore confidence in those that are running the City.
Christina M. Dorsa -Smith
[E- Virus -free. www.avast.com
Mitre -Ramirez, Norma
From: Dave and Darren <
Sent: Monday, October 2, 2017 7:28 PM
To: eComment
Subject: Public Comments - City Council Agenda Item 50A Emergency Ordinance 10/3/2017
Public Comments
Santa Ana City Council Meeting
October 3, 2017
RE: Agenda Item 50A; Emergency Ordinance: AMENDING AND ADDING NEW SECTIONS TO
SANTA ANA MUNICIPAL CODE CHAPTER 10, ARTICLE 10 RELATED TO STORAGE OF PROPERTY,
PROHIBITION OF ANIMALS, VEHICLE ACCESS AND SERVICES IN THE CIVIC CENTER AREA
Dear Councilmembers,
I have two things to say about this ordinance:
• Ordinances mean nothing unless there are teeth behind the ordinance. We have many
ordinances that we don't enforce as a City. Please ensure that Police and Code
Enforcement have the power to enforce the ordinance and that the City is willing to
back up these Officers and go to Court if necessary and mount an effective defense
instead of just rolling over.
• Section 10-554 - Unpermitted Services in the Civic Center. This is the most important
aspect of this Ordinance. Homeless folks will lay their heads where the services are
available. I know from personal experience that there are Churches and other non-profit
Organizations from outside of Santa Ana that come to Santa Ana to feed and provide
services for the homeless. Many of the homeless aren't from Santa Ana. Although the
intentions of these volunteers may be altruistic, their efforts result in growing the
homeless population in Santa Ana. I believe some of these efforts are intentionally
meant to keep the problems in Santa Ana. Careful (and enforced) administration of the
Services these non -profits provide will greatly reduce the problems in the Civic Center.
This emergency ordinance is a good start. I encourage you to approve it and to continue with
additional measures throughout the City.
Sincerely,
Dave Hoen
33 year resident
(
Mitre -Ramirez, Norma
Mayor and City Council Members:
I strongly urge you to pass the Agenda
Item 50A.
Barbara Russell
Santa Ana
Mitre -Ramirez, Norma
From: Dave and Darren <
Sent: Monday, October 2, 2017 8:40 PM
To: eComment
Subject: Public Comments - City Council Meeting Agenda Item 50A; Emergency Ordinance
Public Comments
Santa Ana City Council Meeting
October 3, 2017
RE: Agenda Item 50A; Emergency Ordinance: AMENDING AND ADDING NEW SECTIONS TO
SANTA ANA MUNICIPAL CODE CHAPTER 10, ARTICLE 10 RELATED TO STORAGE OF PROPERTY,
PROHIBITION OF ANIMALS, VEHICLE ACCESS AND SERVICES IN THE CIVIC CENTER AREA
Dear Councilmembers,
First of all, thank you for coming up with a plan to address the rampant homelessness that is
taking over our City.
I belong to a group called Gay Neighbors, Families and Friends of Santa Ana and as such have
been involved in many volunteer activities. Several years ago we participated in a monthly
homeless outreach to feed homeless at Christ Chapel in French Park. It was an eye opening
experience and education. Initially we thought we were providing a "hand -up", but soon
learned we were doing nothing more than enabling continued bad behavior. And it was never
enough. During the same time, we also participated in a downtown beautification project
along Broadway. Planting and caring for plants and cleaning up debris (including feces, drug
paraphernalia, vomit, etc.). Much of our volunteer work was done in the early mornings on
weekends and it was literally like "Night of the Living Dead" with all the "zombie" homeless
people stumbling about. We actually got to know some of them. There was Joe the Vietnam
Vet, the Blanket Brothers, Nancy from New York and Poopie Pants. This was before the bus
terminal opened as a homeless shelter. Now it is even worse! We have a zombie apocalypse
going on in our City.
Just a few short years ago I used to be able to run on the River Trail and would see maybe a
half dozen homeless people. Now the numbers are in the hundreds and the River Trail is
unusable except between 17th and Memory Lane (for now). The recent declaration by the City
of Anaheim and the County will probably mean even more homeless will converge in Santa
Ana. We cannot continue to be the dumping ground for the entire County.
What happens when you feed seagulls at the Beach? They shit on you! Please enact and
enforce this emergency ordinance.
Sincerely,
Darren Shippen
Mitre -Ramirez, Norma
From:
Huizar, Maria
Sent:
Tuesday, October 3, 2017 12:26 PM
To:
eComment
Subject:
FW: City Council Meeting, Tuesday, October 3, 2017
From: Janet Pekarek [
Sent: Tuesday, October 3, 2017 12:03 PM
To: Huizar, Maria <MHuizar@santa-ana.org>
Subject: Re: City Council Meeting, Tuesday, October 3, 2017
I just noticed an error in my email to you.... .
My husband and I have lived in WASHINGTON SQUARE for 50 years, not Washington (the state).
Yes, 50 years at - makes us old folks. (I grew up in Santa Ana.) We've seen
the City changes over the decades. While there have been some good changes, our family and
friends have moved out of SA due to the direction the City has taken. The massive homeless
population is just another horrible issue. Agenda item 50A must pass.
Thank you
From: Huizar, Maria <MHuizar@santa-ana.ora>
Sent: Tuesday, October 3, 2017 9:15 AM
To: 'Janet Pekarek'
Subject: RE: City Council Meeting, Tuesday, October 3, 2017
Ms. Pekarek,
Thank you for taking the time to comment on this item. Your comments will be entered into the record
and distributed to the City Council for their review and consideration.
Maria D. Huizar I Clerk of the Council
Clerk of the Council Office I City of Santa Ana
20 Civic Center Plaza, 8th Floor, Santa Ana, CA 92701
F (714)647-6520 1 mhuizar@santa-ana.org
This e-mail (and attachments, if any) may be subject to the California Public Records Act,
and as such may therefore be subject to public disclosure unless otherwise exempt under the Act.
From: Janet Pekarek [mailto:gmapek@live.com]
Sent: Monday, October 2, 2017 11:59 PM
To: eComment <eComment@santa-ana.ore>
Subject: City Council Meeting, Tuesday, October 3, 2017
h
The homeless situation in Santa Ana must be rectified . We need immediate support on Agenda Item
50A.
My husband and I have lived in Washington for 50 years and have witnessed the massive numbers
of homeless continue to come into Santa Ana. We do not feel safe in so many areas of the
City. Even though we live so close to the Civic Center, we avoid that area. We don't feel safe
allowing our granddaughters to go to our library.
Please take whatever steps are needed to clear this terrible, fearful, and embarrassing situation. We
no longer feel safe here.
Thank you,
Robert and Janet Pekarek
Jun
Mitre -Ramirez, Norma
From: Patricia Lockhart <
Sent: Tuesday, October 3, 2017 5:04 AM
To: eComment
Subject: Agenda item 50A
I support removing the homeless from downtown. Provide alternatives and get this city back on track. The homeless is
just an external reminder of internal dis function. Take pride in our city especially in the Civic area. The seat of our city.
It's a huge problem. Those people represent the reality of life. For many it is a struggle keep in mind those people could
be any one of you. Have compassion and logic when you make your decision. Clean up our downtown the proper way.
Sent from my Whone
Patricia Lockhart
Mitre -Ramirez, Norma
From:
karina lagace <
Sent:
Tuesday, October 3, 2017 6:33 AM
To:
eComment
Subject:
Homeless issue
Good morning,
I live on I have moved here from Fountain Valley this Summer and I wished I hadn't.
I wish this city heard his residents, the ones who pay taxes and try to make it a better place.
The riverbed situation allows the city to crumble. Homeless and criminals are everywhere in our neighborhood. They are
disrespectful and dangerous.
You can't go more than one block without seeing them. You can't go more than one week without seeing posts on next
door of crimes or vandalism.
They've given up on their lives and live for free on areas that residents are supposed to enjoy.
Why is Santa Ana allowing this?
Fountain Valley took care of the situation.
I wished I never moved. IT probably take a loss and move out of this city if things don't get better.
Somebody must do something. It's an epidemic.
I have a heart for the homeless, but this population is different.
They are drug addicts, thieves and dangerous.
Please listen to your residents and clean up our city.
Thank you.
Karina Lagace
Mitre -Ramirez, Norma
From: Huizar. Maria
Sent: Tuesday, October 3, 2017 9:13 AM
To: Magallon, Becky <BMagallon@santa-ana.org>
Cc: eComment <eComment@santa-ana.org>
Subject: RE: Item 50A - Emergency Ordinance and Item 22B
Thank you Becky!
From: Magallon, Becky
Sent: Tuesday, October 3, 2017 8:00 AM
To: Huizar, Maria <MHuizar@santa-ana.orq>
Cc: Castro -Cardenas, Julie <JCastro-Cardenas@santa-ana.orq>; Cruz,
Rosa <RFlores@santa-ana.orq>
Subject: FW: Item 50A - Emergency Ordinance and Item 22B
Maria,
Yesenia <YCruz5@santa-ana.org>; Flores,
I'm forwarding an email that the City Council received regarding Items 50A and 22B. Thank you.
Becky Magallon I Secretary to the City Manager
City Manager's Office) bmagallon@santa-ana.orq
714.647.5200 120 Civic Center PlazalSanta Ana, CA 92701
This email and any files or attachments transmitted with it may contain privileged or otherwise confidential
information. If you are not the intended recipient, or believe that you may have received this communication in error,
please advise the sender via reply email and immediately delete the email you received.
From: Phil Bacerra fmailto:ohilbacerra@gmail.coml
Sent: Tuesday, October 03, 2017 7:21 AM
To: City Council; Pulido, Miguel; Sarmiento, Vicente; Martinez, Michele; Solorio, Jose; Benavides, David; Villegas,
Juan; Tinajero, Sal
Subject: RE: Item 50A - Emergency Ordinance and Item 22B
I want to express my support for the emergency ordinance in Item 50A that will amend our City's municipal code in
relation to activities in the Civic Center that is before you this evening.
In addition to adopting the emergency ordinance immediately, I respectfully ask that the City Council direct City staff
to bring locations to you that comply with SB -2 that would be a more suitable location for our homeless brothers and
sisters to sleep and receive necessary services. The Civic Center is not a suitable location.
,4� 08Ce3
In order for the emergency ordinance to succeed, I also ask that the City Council address the conflict between Item
22B on your agenda and subsection 17 of proposed SAW Section 10-551 of the emergency ordinance in Item
50A. Unfortunately, Item 22B is necessary to address the potential health hazards that could arise within this
encampment, but the City Council needs to carefully consider placement of these facilities and how long they are
available near the Civic Center.
I respectfully request that you locate the restrooms and related facilities proposed in Item 22B in or adjacent to the
Courtyard facility on Santa Ana Boulevard.
Sincerely,
Phil Bacerra
10
Mitre -Ramirez, Norma
From: Chris S <chris714oc@gmail.com>
Sent: Tuesday, October 3, 2017 10:44 AM
To: eComment; City Council
Cc: Huizar, Maria; Cortez, Robert; Garcia, Jorge (CMO); Kurtz, Cynthia
Subject: REGARDING: Agenda Item 50A.EMERGENCY ORDINANCE and the Orange County
Needle Exchange Program
Attachments: Aug2.JPG; Aug2b.JPG; Oct19.JPG; Oct19b.JPG; Remove.jpg
Mayor and City Council Members,
I fully support Agenda Item 50A before you tonight and ask that you vote YES.
I would greatly appreciate if you would immediately remove the Orange County Needle Exchange Program
(OCNEP) from operating in the Civic Center. Over the last year, we have seen an increase in used needles being
left around my neighborhood and in the Santa Ana Riverbed. Pies attached of needles found in and around my
neighborhood.
Back in September, 2016, the city of Santa Ana passed an ordinance declaring the Civic Center a Public Health
Crisis and one of the action items was to relocate the OCNEP from the Civic Center yet they are still operating
and passing out needles every Saturday.
From my understanding, there is a clause in the Memorandum of Understanding with OCNEP that allows the
city to give them 30 days notice to stop operating in the Civic Center.
Once again, I ask for your support on Agenda Item 50A and that you vote YES!
Kind regards,
Chris Schmidt
Windsor Village NA
w,
a
n.
20E-5
i
g
g
a
V
Nry.
N
4t
N
N
N
mm
k
u
K
N
K
H
N
0
per.-
p
N
N
N
N
N
N
s
A
a
ja
o
}gyp
lff
hC h w S
p
`pN¢
a
al
O
iz
it
u
a
�
c
�•,.
w
&
;
y 8
B
b a
tE
G
gggg
y c
�
k
a
Z'
a
n a
20E-5
i
Mitre -Ramirez, Norma
From:
M Serna <
Sent:
Tuesday, October 3, 2017 10:59 AM
To:
eComment
Subject:
Homelessness
City officials and council members:
Our city has taken a turn to the worst, I can only tell you from my daily commute to Costa Mesa via Fairview Rd ,the
amount of teenagers and early teens I see daily walking along 17th st. and Fairview and they having to look and half
drunken or high on drugs people and some of them not even half dress. It is just not right to have our kids having to look
at that.
The thing that I fear most is one of these people doing something to the kids as the time changes it will be dark in the
mornings as well in the afternoon. I have spoken to the principals of both Godinez high school and Spurgeon about
increasing security around the schools .
Hopefully we can improve the safety of our children
Thank you
Maria Serra
Sent from my Whore
12
October 3, 2017
Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
20 Civic Center Plaza
Santa Ana, CA 92701
Dear Mayor and City Councilmembers,
I'm writing to support Item 50A — Emergency Ordinance for the Civic Center. As a
long time resident of Santa Ana, I have watched the City provide the most support to the
homeless community with little help from the County and other cities. Only within the
past year, with the homeless encampments along the SA River Trail and highly
concentrated in Anaheim and Orange, have you seen a strong call for action. The City of
Santa Ana has been working on the issue since the early 1990's.
Your efforts to provide 1500+ affordable housing units and build transitional housing are
commendable and compassionate. This number is significant given the very little
developable land remaining in a small geographic area (27 square miles). The three large
homeless residential projects underway are well thought out and should serve the
community:
• The Orchard 2151 East 1St Street 71 units
• Aqua Housing 317 East 171h Street 56 units
• Veterans Village 3312 West 1St Street 75 units
202 Total
When examining the City's other shelters such as the Courtyard, the Armory during
winter months, Wiseplace, Regina House, Joseph House, Emmanuel Residence, San
Miguel Residence and the current Salvation Army hospitality house, total beds available
range from 600 to 800 (when the Armory is open). I believe no other city provides this
much shelter for people in need.
I have studied the homeless issue over the last few months, read the County Homeless
assessment reports, toured The Orchard, the Courtyard, the Plaza of the Flags/civic
center, the Bridges in Anaheim and rode my bike on the SA River Trail. I'm sure you are
aware of these items but sometimes seeing them in print makes the issue clearer.
The Santa Ana Civic Center is significantly impacted. Why?
• Needle exchange program (no other county location)
• Naloxone kit distribution (no other county location)
• Courtyard is an open shelter unlike Bridges in Anaheim. Homeless
individuals are directed to this location by other public agencies
• Well meaning groups from other cities continuously feed, cloth and deliver
goods
0 Central Jail — inmate release.
Mayor and City Councilmembers
Page 2
The last item is significant. I've recently learned that all inmates from the Irvine Musick
Jail and maximum -security inmates from Theo Lacy Jail are transported back to Santa
Ana for release. The County Board of Supervisors negotiated this decision as part of
settlement agreements with the Cities of Irvine and Orange. I don't believe the City of
Santa Ana was contacted about these agreements. This action creates a convenient
homeless venue at the Civic Center.
I raise this issue because one of my friends from Irvine recently told me that all homeless
people are from Santa Ana. When I look at our demographics, we are 77% Latino.
Compare this information with the County Homeless Assessment report findings and the
recent article in the OC Register that state the majority of homeless are white male.
Some of these individuals may have come from the jails, others for our services such as
the needle exchange/naloxone program and probably the most important reason is
because Santa Ana is compassionate and is working to help everyone in need.
Your emergency ordinance will allow the City to continue addressing the issues in the
Civic Center.
One final thought, after watching the last City Council meeting, I agree this is a shared
countywide responsibility. The County's Homeless Assessment Report recommended
the following:
• A minimum of 500 year-round beds (emergency/bridge) is needed to support the
pathway to housing for homeless individuals living on the streets in Orange
County:
1. North: Kraemer Multi -Service Center —200 beds for single adults in 2017
2. Central — Santa Ana — Transit Terminal temporary site at "The
Courtyard," 200 — 300 beds (Santa Ana now has 400+ beds)
3. South County location to be determined
4. Specialized housing options are needed for those undergoing substance
abuse treatment, mental health stabilization and domestic violence, as well
as transitional age youth, and discharge planning beds for those existing
hospitals, jails and foster youth placements.
The County of Orange has worked hard and quickly to open shelters in Santa Ana and
Anaheim. No apparent work has been done to open a shelter in South County. The
County owns a large warehouse (building 317) on the 100 acres near the Great Park in
Mayor and City Councilmembers
Page 3
Irvine. This building could be quickly upgraded similar to what was done at the
Courtyard to house the homeless from the Civic Center and the SA River Trail. The
building is near the large Second Harvest Food Bank warehouse.
The County's recent environmental report studies three alternatives. Two of the
alternatives include a homeless shelter. Alternative Two would provide 675 beds.
Building 317 could be used now as an emergency shelter while they build a permanent
shelter on the south side of the Second Harvest Food Bank warehouse. I have attached
the information for your review. I'm also willing to take you on a tour of the area. If
you are interested, the City Manager has my cell phone number.
Thanks for taking the time to read my letter. I appreciate the work you have done on
helping the homeless. I urge you to work with the Orange County Board of Supervisors
to provide a shelter(s) and other related services in South County for the homeless.
Sincerely,
,Sent via email
Lisa Mills
Resident, West Floral Park
!
}
�.
» I
J E{)\)$.
�-
!
}
�.
5.0 Al ternatives
TABLE 5.2
ALTERNATIVE 1B LAND USE SUMMARY
Land Use
Development Size
Government Office
78,000 square feet
Law Enforcement
61y.0.0.a, uare feet
Emergency Shelter
175 bed 05,000 square feet)
Maintenance and Storage
81,500 square feet
RV/Boat/Vehicle Storage
3,600 square feet
Warehousing
136,000 square feet
Vacant
59.3 acres
Source: KTGY 2016.
Anticipated actions required for the implementation of Alternative 1b would include the
following:
• Runoff Management Plan(s)
• Water Quality Management Plan(s)
• Grading Permits
• Building Permits
• Encroachment Permits
• Acquisition and dedication of rights of entry, easements, and rights-of-way for off-site
improvements
Impact Evaluation
Aesthetics
The proposed development under the No Project/Institutional Entitlements Alternative would
change the visual quality of the southeastern portion of the site, but the northwestern portion
would remain vacant. Short-term construction and infrastructure improvements would have
reduced impacts compared to the proposed Project, as more than half of the site would not be
developed. Under the No Project/ Institutional Entitlements Alternative, long-term changes to
the visual setting would be different than the Project because more of the existing structures
may remain; the proposed warehouse, equipment maintenance, and storage uses would be
concentrated in the southeastern portion of the site; and the alternative's improvements would
be of a lower intensity than the proposed Project. The proposed institutional uses would
somewhat improve the existing condition of the abandoned and dilapidated buildings by
reusing portions of them and incorporating them in the proposed development. Some buildings
and portions of some buildings would remain vacant under this alternative. While the No
Project/ Institutional Entitlements Alternative would improve the quality of a portion of the
site, this alternative would not substantially transform the site and a substantial portion of the
site would remain in its current condition that is inconsistent with the planned uses for the
area. Thus, as the surrounding OCGP and associated neighborhoods develop, the institutional
improvements in existing buildings, the other improvements associated with this alternative,
EL TORO, 100-ACRR PARCEL DEVELOPMENT PLAN
PROGRAM ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
\
«»,{<
))
B
!
y
!
-
.
w w:r
w J
-
:f\\
. \
)\\\(:
®
!§#GA
m - -
d
d
§°!(
Ao
? <�
.
/(§(k)
--
«°
))
B
!
y
!
TABLE 5.4
ALTERNATIVE 2 LAND USE SUMMARY
Land Use
Government Offices
Development Plan
-IA85,00 square feet
Emergency shelter
675 hed (164,600 square feet)
Equipment Storage
30,000 square feet
Law Enforcement
54,000 square feet
Maintenance
152,000 square feet
Source: KTGY 2016.
0
Anticipated actions required for the implementation of Alternative 2 would include the
following:
• At the County's discretion, a recommendation to the City regarding an appropriate
General Plan Amendment and zoning code Amendment pursuant to the Pre -Annexation
Agreement, as this alternative exceeds the assumptions in the 2003 OCGP Program EIR
• Runoff Management Plan(s)
• Water Quality Management Plan(s)
• Grading Permits
• Building Permits
• Encroachment Permits
• Acquisition and dedication of rights of entry, easements, and rights-of-way for off-site
improvements
Impact Evaluation
Aesthetics
The proposed development under Alternative 2 would change the visual quality of the entire
site, similar to the proposed Project. Short-term construction and infrastructure improvements
would occur within the same general footprint as the proposed Project. While the intensity of
the improvements would be reduced, the long-term changes to the visual setting would be
similar compared to the Project. Under this alternative, buildings would be of varying heights
and sizes. Also, similar to the proposed Project, the impacts would be less than significant. This
alternative would improve visual quality of the site compared to existing conditions because it
would remove the majority of the degraded buildings on site. As with the Project, a
determination of impacts to visual character is relatively subjective. Changes to the visual
quality are expected to be similar compared to the proposed Project because the overall site
would be developed; however, Alternative 2 would not have a 50 -foot -wide linear park
abutting Marine Way.
Proposed development under Alternative 2 would introduce new sources of light and glare that
would increase lighting levels on the entire site similar to the proposed Project. Distance from
existing and planned uses and proposed landscaping would minimize light and glare spillover.
5-32 EL TORO, 100 -ACRE PARCEL DEVELOPMENT PLAN
PROGRAM ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
ACRES II
MODS
W ACRES
J
1T
OVFle BFACE '.
ePOR1S.PgRK.
t65�CRES
1
?fid
oil
91
ExhlhilA
LJ
LOWDERSDI
RESIDENDAL
MODS
VOACRES
Q\
u
lDO
CR
StgCgFS
OPEN SRAM
6GlFMASE
1SROLES
THACM /
RAD
mcm
a
WAY
ROAD
1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
�.� INTRODUCTION
The environmental impact report (EIR) process, as defined by the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA), requires the preparation of an objective, full -disclosure document in order
to (1) inform agency decision makers and the general public of the direct and indirect potentially
significant environmental effects of a proposed action; (2) identify feasible or potentially feasible
mitigation measures to reduce or eliminate potential significant adverse impacts; and
(3) identify and evaluate a reasonable range of alternatives to the proposed project. In
accordance with Section 15168 of the State CEQA Guidelines (California Code of Regulations
(CCR), Title 14, Chapter 3, Sections 15000, et seq.), this Program EIR addresses the potential
environmental impacts associated with the proposed project, as described herein (Project),
through the adoption and implementation of the El Toro, 100 -Acre Parcel Development Plan
("Development Plan" or "Project").
1.2 PROJECT LOCATION
The Project site consists of property that is or will be owned by the County of Orange (County),
located in the City of Irvine (City). The Project site is at the southern edge of the former Marine
Corps Air Station (MCAS) El Toro, east of the interchange of the Interstate (I) 5 and State Route
(SR) 133 in Orange County. The site is bound by the proposed realignment of Marine Way on the
northeast; the Southern California Regional Rail Authority (SCRRA) rail lines and an
approximately 21.3 acre Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) property on the
southwest; a City of Irvine -owned parcel of approximately 1.6 acres on the northwest; and
District 6 of the Great Park Neighborhoods project to the southeast. The Project would
encompass approximately 108 acres, (The exhibits depicting regional location and local vicinity
are provided in Section 3.0, Project Description.) The Project site surrounds the 6.6 -acre Second
Harvest Food Bank warehouse on three sides.
1.3 PROJECT BACKGROUND
In July 1993, the Department of Navy (DON) decided to close MCAS El Toro under the Base
Realignment and Closure Act. Since then, several plans for reuse of the former MCAS El Toro site
were considered by both the County and the City. In March 2002, the plan for the Orange County
Great Park was approved when voters passed Measure W, an initiative which eliminated planned
aviation uses for the MCAS El Toro site and re -designated the unincorporated land in the County
General Plan for park, open space, and other uses.
Following closure of MCAS El Toro, on March 4, 2003, the County, the City, and the Irvine
Redevelopment Agency entered into a tri -party, Property Tax Transfer, and Pre -Annexation
Agreement (Pre -Annexation Agreement) regarding the annexation and reuse of MCAS El Toro.
The parties entered into an agreement to "establish and demonstrate their mutual desire and
commitment to cooperate" on the annexation proceedings and subsequent redevelopment of the
former MCAS EI Toro (Irvine et al, 2003). As part of that agreement, the City agreed to provide
fee ownership to certain lands to the County, including approximately 100 acres of the Project
EL TORO, 100 -ACRE PARCEL DEVELOPMENT PLAN 1-1
PROGRAM ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
Executive Summary
site. The Pre -Annexation Agreement also establishes that the County retains exclusive land use
control over County -owned properties within the farmer MCAS El Toro.
The Project site, which is approximately 108 acres, is encumbered by several public easements
for drainage and utilities. The DoN has released fee title to approximately 60 acres of the
Property, to Heritage Fields, which subsequently turned it over to the City via the Great Park
Agreement executed between Heritage Fields and the City of Irvine. That agreement provided
for transfer of some lands to the City as outlined in an earlier three -party agreement (DoN, City,
and Heritage Fields). The City (with some use restrictions), in turn, has conveyed that property
to the County, as required by the Pre -Annexation Agreement. The remaining portions
(approximately 41.64 acres) of the Property are covered under a "Lease in Furtherance of
Conveyance" or "LIFOC" pending completion of environmental remediation by DoN (further
discussion of the LIFOC is provided in Section 4.7, Hazards and Hazardous Materials). Once the
Property is remediated by the DoN, the DoN will make a Finding of Suitability to Transfer (FOST),
allowing the transfer of the remaining Property, in fee, to Heritage Fields LLC. Subsequently, that
portion of the Property will be transferred to the City, who must then transfer it to the County,
as required by the Pre -Annexation Agreement.
Additionally, pursuant to the Base Closure Community Redevelopment and Homeless Assistance
Act of 1994 (BRAC Law), the Local Redevelopment Authority (LRA) for each closing military base
must make a reasonable effort in its community reuse plan to meet the needs of the local
homeless population. The County has been assigned as the official and federally -recognized LRA
for the reuse planning at MCAS El Toro. In 2003, DoN and the EI Toro Homeless Service Providers
Collaborative coordinated and identified properties on MCAS El Toro for use by the homeless
service providers. The 125,000 -square -foot Warehouse 360 on a 5.2 -acre, surrounded on all
sides by the 100 -acre County -owned parcel, was awarded to the Community Action Partnership
of Orange County (CAPOC) and Families Forward (FF). In 2012, the DoN conveyed Warehouse
360 to the County via Quitclaim Deed and entered into Legally Binding Agreements (LBAs) with
CAPOC and FF. In accordance with the LBAs, the County conveyed Warehouse 360 via Quitclaim
Deed to CAPOC and FF with a requirement that it be used for homeless services within the
allocated timeframe. Should CAPOC and FF determine that Warehouse 360 cannot reasonably
meet the needs of their Program, the property will be conveyed to the County under Section 13
of the Base Closure Agreement. Subsequent to the Board approval of Supplemental Agreements,
CAPOC and FF notified the County that Warehouse 360 is not a suitable option to provide
homeless services, and therefore the property was reconveyed to the County under Section 13
of the Base Closure Agreement, and CAPOC and FF were provided with alternate conveyances to
meet their homeless services, which met the purpose of the McKinney Act.
1.4 PROJECT DESCRIPTION SUMMARY
The following discussion provides an overview of the proposed Project. A more detailed
discussion of the proposed Project and processing requirements is provided in Section 3.4 of this
EIR.
The Project proposes a mixed -used, low -impact development (LID) that maximizes the benefit
derived from proximity to the Irvine train station (Irvine Station) located less than a half mile
from Property and the Orange County Great Park (OCGP).
1-2 EL TORO, 100 -ACRE PARCEL DEVELOPMENT PLAN
PROGRAM ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
Executive Sum
The Development Plan would be used to guide future development on the Project site. The
anticipated mix of uses is summarized in Table 1-1. Recognizing the Project would be
implemented over a period of years, the land use regulations contained in the Development Plan
allow for flexibility in the location, mix, and intensity of uses. As market demands change and as
businesses expand or contract over time, the Development Plan provides for a range of
residential, office, and commercial uses to accommodate potential changes in the residential
market and business environment. The Development Plan is provided in Appendix A.
TABLE 1-1
EL TORO, 100 -ACRE PARCEL DEVELOPMENT PLAN
PROPOSED USES
Land Use
Development Size
Residential
2,103 dwelling units a
Retail
220,000 square feet
Office
1,876,000 square feet
Hotel b
242 rooms
a Live/Work or Shopkeeper units are considered 1 dwelling unit. The work
area within these units do not count toward retail or office square footage.
b Includes up to 20,000 square feet of meeting space. Meeting space does not
count towards the maximum allowable development Identified in this table.
Source: EI Toro, 100 -Acre Parcel Development Plan, 2016
General infrastructure would be provided on-site to support the proposed Project, and would
include streets, storm drain system improvements (including storm water detention and
treatment systems), and utility facilities for domestic water, recycled water, sewer, electrical,
gas, telephone, cable television, and other data communication systems. Off-site improvements
would also be required to serve the proposed Project and would be provided as part of future
development, the details of which are discussed in Section 3.4, Project Processing.
1.5 PROJECT OBJECTIVES
The following objectives have been identified for the proposed Project:
1. Fully utilize this County real estate asset to generate new sources of revenue for the
County and stimulate economic commerce in the City.
2. Enhance the condition of the Project site so it is compatible with and enhances the
viewshed from the Orange County Great Park (OCGP) and the adjacent land uses.
3. Build a project using environmental stewardship and sustainability principles through
measures that promote linkages to transportation and transit networks.
4. Promote sustainability through the development of a mix of commercial, residential, and
visitor -serving uses that are located in close proximity to existing residential and
employment opportunities, public transit, and recreational amenities.
S. Promote brown field development opportunities as a means of decreasing the region's
dependency on the automobile, reducing associated air pollution and greenhouse gas
EL TORO, 100 -ACRE PARCEL DEVELOPMENT PLAN 1-3
PROGRAM ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
Executive Summary
emissions, and preserving natural open space areas by locating the mixed-use
development on a previously developed site in proximity to existing and planned
employment -generating uses, recreational and cultural amenities, residences, transit
service, and along transportation corridors.
6. Develop infill improvements that facilitate mixed- use opportunities that can consume
less land and energy per housing unit and square footage of development, compared to
a conventional suburban development, and therefore result in fewer associated
greenhouse gas emissions.
7. Provide employment -generating uses near or with amenities and services that will
support the work force (e.g., recreation, retail, and housing opportunities).
8. Revitalize the underutilized Project site through implementation of an innovative
development, near transit and compatible uses that will meet the regional demand for
employment, service and residential uses.
9. Promote sustainability by re -purposing and adaptively reusing the existing materials on
the site to the extent feasible.
10. Promote use of alternative modes of travel such as biking trails and walkways that link
residential, parks, retail, and commercial areas.
11. Provide public space within the Project to support community activities.
1.6 PROJECT ALTERNATIVES
Section 15126.6(a) of the State CEQA Guidelines state that "an FIR shall describe a range of
reasonable alternatives to the project, or to the location of the project, which would feasibly
attain most of the basic objectives of the project but would avoid or substantially lessen any of
the significant effects of the project, and evaluate the comparative merits of the alternatives."
Five alternatives have been evaluated. These alternatives are summarized below and discussed
and depicted graphically in Section 5.0, Alternatives, of this EIR.
The alternatives were developed to avoid or minimize impacts associated with implementation
of the proposed Project. Given the nature and scale of the proposed Project, complete avoidance
of significant impacts is not feasible for any alternative even the No Project Alternative. The
summaries of each alternative provided below, identify the significant unavoidable impacts
associated with each alternative. Table 5-1, Compatibility Comparison of Alternatives With
Project Objectives, provides the compatibility comparison of the alternatives against each
Project objective, and Table 5-5, Summary of Potential Impacts, Mitigation Measures, and Level
of Significance, provides a summary of alternative impacts compared to the proposed Project.
Additionally, there is one alternative identified in the Notice of Preparation (NOP) that was
considered but not carried forward. The NOP identified an alternative that proposed the
development on the Second Harvest Food Bank warehouse parcel and the approximately
21 -Acre, Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) -owned parcel located south of the
Project site. This alternative was deemed to be infeasible due to the fact that the Second Harvest
Food Bank as well as the OCTA were not willing to sell their parcels of land to the County of
Orange.
1-4 EL TORO, 100 -ACRE PARCEL DEVELOPMENT PLAN
PROGRAM ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
Executive Summ
1.6.1 ALTERNATIVE 1A - NO PROJECT/NO DEVELOPMENT
ALTERNATIVE
This alternative assumes the site would continue to remain in its current state without
demolition or active uses on-site. The undeveloped portion of the site would stay undeveloped,
and the abandoned and dilapidated structures would remain vacant.
This alternative would avoid potentially significant Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas (GHG)
Emissions, Land Use and Planning (interim), Population and Housing, Recreation (short-term),
and Transportation/Traffic impacts. However, given the existing condition of the site, without
any improvements the site would have a significant Aesthetics and Hydrology and Water Quality
impacts. This alternative would not meet any of the Project objectives. This alternative is more
fully discussed in Section 5.4.1.
1.6.2 ALTERNATIVE 1B - NO PROJECT/ INSTITUTIONAL
ENTITLEMENTS ALTERNATIVE
Alternative 1b, which is a variation of the No Project Alternative, would provide development for
institutional uses on the site, with buildings not exceeding the 436,000 square feet of
institutional uses provided for in the City of Irvine General Plan (Irvine 2015a, 2015b). This level
of development would be consistent with the assumptions in the original 2003 Orange County
Great Park Final Program EIR1. Institutional uses proposed under this alternative include
government office, law enforcement, emergency shelter, maintenance and storage, recreational
vehicle (RV)/boat/vehicle storage, and warehouse uses for homeless providers. This
Alternative would maximize the use of existing structures. This Alternative is discussed in
greater detail in Section 5.4.2.
Compared to the Project, this Alternative would have fewer impacts, and would avoid significant
impacts to Air Quality, Land Use and Planning (interim), Population and Housing, and Recreation
(short-term). The significant and unavoidable impacts for Transportation/Traffic would not be
avoided, but would be less when compared to those under the proposed Project. For GHG
Emissions, Alternative 1b would also have significant and unavoidable impacts and those
impacts would be greater than the Project's as Alternative 1b has higher estimated emissions on
a service population basis.
This Alternative would meet three of the Project Objectives outlined above (Objectives 3, 7,
and 9). This Alternative has been deemed environmentally sustainable due to its linkage to
transportation and transit networks (i.e., development in proximity to the Irvine Station).
Additionally, it proposes to adaptively reusing and upgrading most of the existing structures on-
site. This Alternative was able to partially meet the objectives associated with enhancing the
degraded physical condition of the Project site and the objective associated with provide
employment -generating uses with amenities and services that will support the work force. This
Alternative would not meet the remaining seven objectives. Therefore, this Alternative was not
i In May 2003, the City of Irvine certified the Final Program EIR for the Orange County Great Park (OCGP), SCH No.
2002101020, which analyzed the environmental impacts of the development of 3,625 residential units and 6,585,594
million square feet of non-residential development, including Great Park and other non -Great Park Neighborhood uses,
on a portion of the former MCAS El Toro site. Refer to Section 2.4.4 for more detail.
EL TORO, 100 -ACRE PARCEL DEVELOPMENT PLAN 1-5
PROGRAM ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
Executive Sum
identified as the environmentally superior alternative (see Section 1.6.5 for a summary of the
Environmentally Superior Alternative or Section 5.5 for the full discussion.)
1.6.3 ALTERNATIVE 2 - INTENSIFIED INSTITUTI®NAL USES
Alternative 2 would provide development of institutional uses on the site; however, the intensity
of the proposed uses would exceed the 436,000 sf of Institutional uses assumed in the 2003 OCGP
Program EIR for the site. This alternative assumes approximately 2,085,000 square feet of
institutional uses would be developed. Uses would include government offices, emergency
shelters, equipment storage areas, law enforcement facilities, and maintenance areas. This
Alternative is more fully discussed in Section 5.4.3.
Compared to the Project, this Alternative would result in an incremental reduction of impacts
and would avoid significant Population and Housing impacts; however, significant and
unavoidable impacts of the proposed Project related to Air Quality, GHG Emissions, Land Use and
Planning (interim), and Transportation/Traffic would not be avoided. Though this Alternative
would result in incrementally less GHG Emissions, the GHG Emissions impacts for Alternative 2
would remain significant and unavoidable and greater than the Project's due to the lower GHG
Emissions efficiency in the absence of mixed-use, high density land uses.
Of the 11 Project objectives, this alternative is able to fully meet 3 of the Project objectives and
partially meet 5 objectives. This Alternative would enhance the degraded physical condition of
the Project site by providing new development (Objective 2). It would also use sustainable
principals through measures that promote linkage to transportation and transit networks (i.e.,
development in proximity to the Irvine Station) (Objective 3); and it would promote re-
purposing and adaptive reuse of existing materials (Objective 9). There are four objectives that
would be partially met: (1) utilize this County real estate asset to generate new sources of
revenue (Objective 1); (2) promote brown field development opportunities as a means of
decreasing the region's dependency on the automobile by locating the mixed-use development
on a previously developed site (Objective 5); (3) it would provide employment -generating uses
near amenities (Objective 7); (4) revitalize the underutilized Project site through the
implementation of an innovative development, near transit and compatible uses that will meet
the regional demand (Objective 8); and (5) Promote use of alternative modes of travel such as
biking trails and walkways that link residential, parks, retail, and commercial areas (Objective
10). This Alternative would not meet the remaining three objectives. Though this alternative
would eliminate one of the significant impacts identified for the proposed Project and meet or
partially meet the majority of the Project Objectives, it did not meet the Project Objectives as
effectively as either the Proposed Project or Alternative 3. Therefore, this Alternative was not
identified as the environmentally superior alternative.
1-6 EL TORO, 100 -ACRE PARCEL DEVELOPMENT PLAN
PROGRAM ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
Executive Sum
1.6.4 ALTERNATIVE 3 -REDUCED INTENSITY AND REDUCED
DENSITY ALTERNATIVE
Alternative 3 assumes that the County would reduce the number of residential units and the
overall square footage of commercial and mixed -uses that would be built on the site, while still
meeting most of the Project objectives. This alternative would provide 1,998 dwelling units,
1,000,000 square feet of corporate office uses, 200,000 square feet of retail uses, and a 242 -room
hotel. This Alternative is discussed in greater detail in Section 5.4.4.
Compared to the Project, although this Alternative would substantially lessen impacts, it would
not avoid any of the significant unavoidable impacts to Air Quality, Land Use and Planning
(interim), Population and Housing, Recreation (interim), and Transportation/Traffic for the
proposed Project. Impacts would be incrementally reduced because the level of development is
reduced. This Alternative would result in 35,179 Average Daily Trips (ADT) compared to 46,746
ADT under the proposed Project. Additionally, due to reduced population and building square
footage, there would be reduced consumer project volatile organic compound (VOC) and long-
term criteria pollutant emissions, though the impact would remain significant and unavoidable.
This alternative would generate less total GHG Emissions than the Project. However, because it
would have a lower GHG Emissions service population metric compared to the Project, this
alternative would have greater impacts under the applicable SCAQMD efficiency metric based
significance thresholds.
This Alternative would fully meet 10 out of the 11 Project objectives, and is partially consistent
with Objective 1. Under this alternative, employment would increase compared to existing
conditions as a total of 4,576 jobs would be created. However, compared to the proposed Project,
this alternative results in fewer jobs, and therefore, this objective of fully utilizing the County
real estate asset is only partially met. As discussed below, this Alternative has been identified as
the environmentally superior alternative.
1.6.5 ENVIRONMENTALLY SUPERIOR ALTERNATIVE
The No Project/No Development Alternative (Alternative 1a) and the No Project/Institutional
Entitlements Alternative (Alternative 1b) would have the least impacts to the environment.
Alternative 1a would have no significant and unavoidable impacts associated with Air Quality,
GHG Emissions, Land Use and Planning (interim), Population and Housing, Recreation (short-
term), and Transportation/Traffic. However, the beneficial impacts of the proposed Project
associated with provision of additional housing, infrastructure improvements, and
improvements to the existing visual character of the site would not occur, and none of the Project
objectives would be met. Similarly, Alternative 1b would reduce impacts compared to the
proposed Project and avoid significant impacts to Air Quality, Land Use and Planning (interim),
Population and Housing, and Recreation (short-term); the significant and unavoidable impacts
for Transportation/Traffic and GHG Emissions would not be avoided and only two of the Project
objectives would be met. Further, CEQA requires the identification of an environmentally
superior alternative. Section 15126.6(e)(2) of the State CEQA Guidelines states that if the No
Project Alternative is the environmentally superior alternative then the EIR shall also identify an
environmentally superior alternative among the other alternatives.
EL TORO, 100 -ACRE PARCEL DEVELOPMENT PLAN 1-7
PROGRAM ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
Executive Summ
When evaluating the proposed Project compared to Alternative 2, Intensified Institutional Use
and Alternative 3, Reduced Intensity and Reduced Density, both would result in less
environmental impacts than the proposed Project. A key factor in the reduction of impacts is
associated with the number of vehicle trips generated. The vehicle trips not only result in
transportation impacts, they are associated with the generation of additional air emissions,
incremental noise increases, and GHG Emissions. The greater the number of trips, the greater the
level of impacts in these topical areas. Alternative 2 would reduce the overall trip generation by
1,608 ADT but the number of intersections and freeway ramps with direct impacts would be
fairly comparable to the proposed Project. Comparatively, Alternative 3 would further reduce
the trip generation to a total of 35,179 ADT compared to the proposed Project's 46,746 ADT (a
reduction of 11,567 ADT or about a 25 percent reduction in trips generated with Alternative 3
when compared to the proposed Project).
In addition to the greater reduction in environmental impacts, Alternative 3 would'better meet
the objectives compared to Alternative 2. Therefore, when considering the environmental
impacts and the ability to meet the objectives, Alternative 3 is the environmentally superior
alternative.
1.7 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOCUS AND EFFECTS
FOUND NOT TO BE SIGNIFICANT
In accordance with Section 15063 of the State CEQA Guidelines, the County prepared an Initial
Study/ Environmental Checklist (the IS) for the proposed Project and distributed it, along with
the Notice of Preparation (NOP), to responsible and interested agencies, and key interest groups.
The IS/NOP was distributed to 40 agencies and individuals for a 30 -day review period beginning
on November 7, 2014. In addition, notices regarding the availability of the IS/NOP were
distributed to all property owners and occupants of businesses within 500 feet of the Project
site. The IS/NOP was also posted on the County website.
A scoping meeting was held on November 21, 2014, from 1:00 to 3:00 PM at Building 317 on the
Project site. County staff were available to answer any questions about the proposed Project. A
hand-out, providing an overview of the proposed Project, the Project alternatives, and Project
schedule was distributed. Comment cards were available for attendees to submit at the meeting
or mail to County staff. Approximately 20 people attended the scoping meeting (13 people signed
the sign -in sheet).
In response to the comments received, the County provided additional opportunity for input on
the scope of the EIR, and the comment period extended from June 6, 2015 through July 3, 2015.
The extension was noticed in the newspaper and approximately 400 notices were sent to the
adjacent cities and properties. An additional scoping meeting was held on October 23, 2015, with
a comment period that extended from October 9, 2015 through November 7, 2015. A similar
noticing process occurred for this meeting. During these additional scoping periods, seven
additional comments were received. A summary of the issues raised in the IS/NOP comment
letters is provided in Section 2.3 of this EIR. Copies of the IS/NOP, its distribution list, comments
received on the IS/NOP, and the hand-outs made available at the Scoping Meetings are included
in Appendix B of this EIR. A total of 13 comment letters were received during the 30 -day IS/NOP
review period. Two additional comment letters were received after the end of the IS/NOP review
period. During the additional scoping periods, seven additional comments were received.
1-8 EL TORO, 100 -ACRE PARCEL DEVELOPMENT PLAN
PROGRAM ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
Executive
The EIR addresses all potential significant effects identified in the Environmental Checklist, as
well as several topical areas that the County decided to include in the EIR, though the Initial Study
determined there would be no significant Project impacts. The following topical areas are
addressed in this EIR.
• Aesthetics • Land Use and Planning
• Air Quality • Noise
• Biological Resources • Population and Housing
• Cultural Resources • Public Services
• Geology and Soils • Recreation
• Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions • Transportation/Traffic
• Hazards and Hazardous Materials • Utilities and Service Systems
• Hydrology and Water Quality
Section 2.3 provides an overview of the EIR review process and a summary of the issues that will
not receive further evaluation in the EIR.
1.8 AREAS OF CONTROVERSY/ISSUES TO BE RESOLVED
Section 15123(b)(3) of the State CEQA Guidelines requires that an EIR identify issues to be
resolved, including the choice among alternatives and whether or how to mitigate the Project's
significant effects on the environment. With respect to the proposed Project, the major issues to
be resolved by the County, as the Lead Agency, include the following;
A pedestrian bridge is considered as a potential element of the proposed Project,
connecting the Project site to the OCGP across Marine Way (Pedestrian Bridge). However,
the County does not have land use authority over the bridge landing on the north side of
the Marine Way, which is City property. This issue would need to be resolved in close
coordination with the City and OCGP and additional CEQA documentation would be
required, should the concept become a component of the Project. However, there would
be no additional significant effects if the Project is implemented without the Pedestrian
Bridge.
The phased improvements of the Marine Way extension would influence the
implementation of the Project. At this time, a construction schedule for the Marine Way
extension east of Great Park Boulevard West is not available. It should be noted that Great
Park Boulevard West referenced herein and in all EIR exhibits is referred to as GP -1 in all
City documents. The timing of Marine Way improvements would be contingent on issues
such as construction phasing of the adjacent Great Park Neighborhoods and funding
availability. As discussed in Section 4.13, Recreation, delays in the construction of Marine
Way would also potentially delay the construction of the "Park within the Park" concept
presented in the Development Plan. Potential impacts associated with Marine Way have
been addressed in the Orange County Great Park EIR and subsequent Addenda.
During the preparation of this EIR, the City of Irvine has been conducting studies for
Marine Way and the future development of OCGP. As of November 2015, an alignment
for Great Park Boulevard was completed by the City that modifies the location of the
intersection of Great Park Boulevard West and Marine Way. The modified alignment
results in a different location than the one depicted on the exhibits provided in this EIR;
EL TORO, 100 -ACRE PARCEL DEVELOPMENT PLAN 1-9
PROGRAM ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
Executive
however, the alignment for the entire Great Park Boulevard West is yet to be completed
and finalized. The alignment of the said roadway shown on the exhibits in this FIR reflects
the expected intersection location at the time the NOP was issued. At the time of Project
development, minor modifications to the Project would be required to reflect the final
roadway alignment, including, but not limited to, minor modifications to Planning Areas
1 through 13 to reflect the final location of Marine Way. Also, it is anticipated that the
change to the Great Park Boulevard West/Marine Way intersection (if the proposed
November 2015 alignment is implemented) might require the other changes to the
proposed Project access points from Marine Way. It is not anticipated that this should
result in a substantial modification to the findings in this EIR; however, this would be
determined as part of the Level 1, II or III review when development is proposed. It should
be noted, that Development Requirement (DR) TRAN-8 (in Section 4.14.7) requires
individual development projects under the Development Plan that connect with external
roadways be evaluated for consistency with applicable design requirements outlined in
the City of Irvine Transportation Design Procedures or County of Orange equivalency.
This measure would ensure there would be adequate intersection spacing even with the
relocation of the Great Park Boulevard West/Marine Way intersection.
• The Project site is located on the former MCAS El Toro, which had been ]mown to use and
store chemicals and jet fuels. The base is included on the Cortese List compiled pursuant
to Section 65962.5 of the California Government Code. Due to the potential site and
groundwater contamination, approximately 41.64 acres of the Project site has not yet
been found suitable for transfer. Therefore, this portion of the site remains under fee
ownership by the DoN and is subject to a LIFOC between the DoN and Heritage Fields,
with a sublease to the County. Once remediated, the DoN will make a FOST, allowing the
transfer of the remainder of the Property in fee to Heritage Fields LLC. Subsequently, that
portion of the Property would be transferred to the City, and then to the County, as
required by the Pre -Annexation Agreement. The precise timing of the transfer is not
known at this time. Should there be unforeseen delays in the transfer of the property, the
phasing of the Project development may be influenced because the County would not
have fee title to the property. As shown in Exhibit 2-3, the LIFOC area is generally located
southeast of the Bee Canyon Channel and in the southern portion of the Project site. This
delay should not influence the CEQA document.
• The Pre -Annexation Agreement provides for the transfer of a contiguous 100 -Acre parcel
to the County for development. The location of the parcel was identified in the Pre -
Annexation Agreement but the precise boundaries of the parcel had not been established.
The final alignment of Marine Way is required before this can occur because minor
variants in the roadway alignment would result in changes to the size and configuration
of the County property west and southwest of Marine Way. This process, known as the
"true -up" is memorialized in Implementation Agreement #2 between the County and the
City and will be completed once the final Marine Way alignment is established. Minor
changes to the Property boundary are anticipated as part of the true -up process.
Although the alignment west of the Great Park Boulevard West was finalized in
November 2015, as indicated above, the alignment east of the Great Park Boulevard West
is yet to be completed and finalized. It is not anticipated that the true -up process would
result in a substantial modification to the findings in this FIR because the anticipated
property line adjustments would be very minor; however, this would be determined at
the time the final true -up is completed.
1-10 EL TORO, 100 -ACRE PARCEL DEVELOPMENT PLAN
PROGRAM ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
Executive
In conjunction with the preparation of the EIR, additional testing for hazardous materials
was conducted. However, the LIFOC area of the Project site contains portions of
Installation Restoration Program (IRP) Sites 8, 12, and 24 (the Volatile Organic
Compound [VOC] Source Area/Vadose Zone) and is currently inaccessible to the County
for environmental testing/investigation for hazardous materials assessment. Therefore,
no additional testing in the LIFOC area was conducted. As a result, there are some data
gaps regarding environmental conditions in IRP Sites and locations of concern located
within the LIFOC area. The DON is required to sufficiently remediate those areas prior to
release under a FOST so significant hazardous material impacts are not anticipated.
However, Section 4.7, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, includes a mitigation measures
requiring an independent radiological survey for soil, further evaluation of previously
collected data, calculation of cumulative human health risks, and further soil vapor
testing at various locations within the LIFOC area. If warranted by these additional
investigations/evaluations, additional sampling, targeted excavation, confirmation
sampling, and off-site disposal may be performed or remedial actions may be developed
in consultation with appropriate regulatory agencies to confirm concentrations of
hazardous materials are below appropriate regulatory screening levels prior to
construction.
Section 4.7, Hazards and Hazardous Materials identifies and discusses areas within the
Project site where risks are below the threshold levels established for
commercial/industrial uses but may exceed the risk thresholds established for
residential uses. Specifically, these areas include:
o Units 1 and 4 of IRP Site 8 (Planning Areas 12, 13, and 14), which are currently
planned for non-residential land uses;
o Units 1 and 2 of IRP Site 12 (Planning Areas 6, 7, 8, and 19), which include both
residential and non-residential uses; and
o Unit 1 of IRP Site 21 (Planning Area 9); which is currently planned for non-
residential land uses.
The Development Plan allows for future transfer of land use between the various
planning areas. Therefore, even the planning real that are currently shown for mixed-use
or commercial uses may have a residential component. Should the land use at these
locations include residential uses, potential risks may need to be re-evaluated. Mitigation
measures requiring additional testing and potential remediation have been incorporated
into the EIR.
As discussed in Section 4.14, Transportation/Traffic, the Project -related traffic impacts
occur at locations that are outside the County jurisdiction. Therefore, County would be
unable to implement the measures to mitigate or minimize the impacts. A number of the
impacts would be mitigated through County participation in the North Irvine
Transportation Mitigation (NITM) Program. Other mitigation measures require
modification to improvements previously planned for locations in the NITM area that did
not anticipate additional improvements required to reduce the Project's impacts to a
level of less than significant. Inclusion of these improvements in the NITM Program and
inclusion of the County as a NITM member (or alternative fair -share agreement with the
City) would provide a mechanism for the County to mitigate potentially significant
impacts through a fair -share contribution toward the improvements, but implementation
of that measure is not entirely within the control of the County. Additional CEQA
EL TORO, 100 -ACRE PARCEL DEVELOPMENT PLAN 1-11
PROGRAM ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
Executive
documentation would be required for implementation of some of the required
improvements. However, it should be noted, since the improvements are outside of the
County jurisdiction and are not covered by the Pre -Annexation Agreement, agencies
other than the County would reasonably be the lead agency on the roadway
improvements.
• IRWD is obligated to deliver an offsite capital improvement sewer system that would
address sewer discharge from upstream development including, but not limited to, the
proposed Project development area. However, if the capital improvement system
downstream of the County's property has not been constructed to accommodate existing
and approved sewer flows from upstream development, as initially planned and
programmed by IRWD, then IRWD would be responsible for providing an alternative
solution that would serve the proposed Project, as well as any other upstream sewer
flows from tributary developments.
Regarding conveyance of Project storm flows off-site on to other properties within the
Marshburn Watershed, the County would be responsible for finding a solution, which
could include, but not be limited to, the following:
o Modifying site grading and drainage west of Bee Canyon Channel to drain a
portion of the site towards Marine Way and install storm water detention ponds
to discharge into the existing storm drain line in Marine Way
o Modifying site grading and drainage west of Bee Canyon Channel to expand the
area that currently drains into the Bee Canyon Watershed. The Bee Canyon
Watershed and Agua Chinon Watershed have on-site storm drain lines that the
Project area can be connected to.
The potential of any off-site environmental impacts associated with these improvements
would be evaluated when development concept plans are prepared and the engineering
elements are ]mown.
Section 3.4.1 of the Development Plan, Development Equivalency, provides for a transfer
in the type of uses to allow flexibility in the future in response to changing community
and regional needs, and the market conditions over the buildout of the Project. To
accommodate this flexibility while maintaining balance of land uses, proposed land uses
may be transferred to other permitted uses as part of the Level I Review process.
Table 3-2 of the Development Plan identifies how additional intensity in one use may be
increased with the corresponding decrease in another use. The formula is based on the
number of trips generated per land use, which is derived from the 2014 Irvine
Transportation Analysis Model (ITAM), version 12.4. This will be evaluated on a project -
by -project basis and when a transfer of use is proposed. Potential impacts would be
assessed as part of the CEQA review.
• On September 8, 2016, Senate Bill (SB) 32, which amends Section 38566 to the Health
and Safety Code pertaining to the reduction of GHG Emissions, was signed by Governor
Brown. SB 32 implements a goal of Executive Order (EO) B-30-15 by requiring the
California Air Resources Board (CARB) to ensure that statewide greenhouse gas
emissions are reduced to 40 percent below the 1990 level by 2030. At this time, CARB
has not developed the plan to ensure compliance with the GHG Emissions reductions
contemplated by SB 32. Based on available information, this DEIR analyzes the Project's
1-12 EL TORO, 100 -ACRE PARCEL DEVELOPMENT PLAN
PROGRAM ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
Executive
consistency with SB 32 and concludes Project impacts are significant and unavoidable.
However, once CARB adopts a plan identifying the responsibilities for achieving SB 32
compliance, additional requirements may apply to the Project.
1.9 SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS AND MITIGATION
Table 1-2 presents a summary of the potential environmental effects of the Project; measures to
mitigate impacts to the extent feasible; and expected status of effects following implementation
of the mitigation measures. The more detailed evaluation of these issues is presented in
Sections 4.1 through 4.15. The level of significance provided in the 'Project Impact' columns
denotes the level of significance prior to mitigation. There is also an indicator in the column
identified as 'Level of Significance After Mitigation,' which makes a determination if the
mitigation measures would reduce the impact to a level of less than significant. If the text of the
mitigation measure is too lengthy to include in tabular format, it is briefly summarized in the
table and the mitigation measure number is noted. All mitigation measures are listed in their
entirety in the appropriate portion of Section 4.
EL TORO, 100 -ACRE PARCEL DEVELOPMENT PLAN 1-13
PROGRAM ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
Executive
This page intentionally left blank
1-14 EL TORO, 100 -ACRE PARCEL DEVELOPMENT PLAN
PROGRAM ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
I
N O
F
f
v
;;�v vsa 9�moaoN
•yi9
$
VV
u�AiG5�+Q 9rtq��yS.�v
E�
E
cge m.9a
y�E�„e��a3
��E ° dmv=
c9 aqv
e
B�Fviaa g o�`Ev
Hnl ri a,'°., is
a°
w
2
¢ ¢
Z
K C
p O
aS o.a EP
z'2
=.sa Eq c.�$v5�gne
ygnH"Z V
v_�ro
E
04 o-P
3 oymj°y$aE
" c D
:, 's "a �avE=Ero flv my
aib6c
"�+c aE.vuEos"_�
vCv E'�6ovv�=o5v"_"_-c
-
3
3
E
3 v
`o
v
�3
x
r
3E
12o
F
ro
g
y
F3
�3A
� o
o
d6
n
G
6 a f g
$c q Saa =a o ahavy cpa �a, ypV��o>d
sasa o,E=
-LtU�a
nQ�hB „�$0 E�$F£ e.�aafi9 vm
gHim�m5
°E
une<$ £¢Fb°
aE?¢t e
m.:
v
cEHS°�'$ cSaa an G -S v€IiS� d8 v�er�
a
aa,E �$°p e��aaE eo�°�O9 °a�8om ai: AES"
v �8ebgv 3'a$s�� °Ne�99'F
d"
v`oaac .6
$h EmNa°.93° �Zvha .. hv2`e° -a 5 E'v Bc�.
£
£
a a ¢a
ea
a a a
q o q
Eq$C$mrJu a9c]�"c
8oa5cnm=�v oBA�tl��c
°o�F;c°°33;�o a.G
°av�aEv�8aE9y mea �m 3a
n
o.h3v3�ar�"q a Ea
N_8 mo..';a'€e
E
$v$3'�v3s$o
a��'aa
o'B�C�tl
am�amdL'>>dv�a8
�v439
a3a
a��E°'La
aao°'r> _
BvvE3H°
x'o �cEHe3y
v'Pv`£a__°ion
��E"aE'6 �5Lvcy�O OaA 'c�9a
�d =m`e EE'Ev
Em83
°c'3
T
a
8
9
T
6
f7
O
9
o
L
L
}9
ry
a
Pa
C C
v28
v¢
aH
k
e
cv
vat
Emv¢'��
�
.9
E mcy
Cq
r
o
a c
°'
a
_
n
a
a
Soo
NG
= °8
raA�
°!
8 do8
v_.o5g
oCE
t
cv°
`J°Noc `
v
[
6
6
C
G
G
E
£
n
E
G
0
a
e
`G
o-
9
a
F
C F
� N
�o P
"dam
"u r
b8"
ap
z>mw>-
-
v_>
WE
a
6
¢
E
s
�
O
a
c
n
�o
`o
9
O
L
L
F
y
F
U
d
A O
V
'v9i Oma' u5i
a
••
d —
E ov E
�
n d c�_ o84
-us
'a
E�E
v 3a
000�
E5'2
a
Fa AN3��ch a�
E
vo y
e
oE� TE
3�2p
PHto
o E
o
Ec3pQaN
a°$cn .a cao� Ad
n"�n.h
F6
P$3°°sem
n"m''"°,r'�
3no c'a v
3E'aegg°3
yCO�oa
3v�
36v
-
Ga3
m
b
�
3
F
f
�oaV
✓°
ymGF�
qa
FC$aS
�w
9;
m
yr
F
5e
r3Y HaT oa
L�'�$� 8i6 C$
a ➢�.2
a$H
$ Sa saeP$m vE�a
�8 oa83c`c90
c
cG��L?cz5o
9cHa
g Lv �ZavvE
�moc E5vuvo
ovva a'o
%m"'�$,
o
O
9
ro
C
G
C
O
maJ_$ycaas5
_rvtaq'Ec�3
dao°��a mc��9'o�cq
a
m6
2°''c v3"'6ID�3�a
�r$,vcoEH
ESP
s�v v�e
3vvH $ °vEcy�4°a
oda
r.a
'G n
_DoF
�aA
9
nN�w
F
C
°5a
>ao�
O
jj06r
m
o�C
u
a
pv o�C�
C C
�tl0
go'A
�
6
c v
-
Q
-
F
ca5°
an
o '_
"a 6oV Ea°D.�ae"E '�•• °a.
�92oEoa
_,p�ya
`z a Gmoa`�j
D ,sao �i"6o$S°
r c
bu°O"aE9E ym5 :aS Z �
q�-o
�`'
sou na^m
��"„$m. 'gym
a°•^,=9 'Ya �a8a
vSC
u'¢`a i`0����3� 5 �. G�Ev
Z
o
3 EaL
o`m�
n
aEm
aa8�`o�tl
0..
Vit”
?F.
v�
9 259E
�L'`c3g �a
�',
E j�.e"v,.$ac
2i "a
3aa�°gZva PSq
ESq
5a„'53 3 ��'aa
ooheBa
y5,b w�$oatia v,:
e6��
v5�'
OED � m'°ci`oeo
a
i3
ED�ga°,ta
rt �c
$Sgae
a,,6 o£�E2cmn
O
m
o
9
C
O
C
O
E33o°c'`�V3^'
”&on
g3EAEm
o➢ 5 ,°e" E A o u °0 a°
�av93 P!E3-"'nRK
y
qG
95$aaG53o°3r
EEc
�a ooc i$ryc°�}
Do=
a�9
Ea3
c
u
�a0
a5o
_
`o
v�
ASG
°
f
<as
N3'=ap
�3h�3
�o
�a
y�
d
°cH
g°'S"
a°my
t&'�°a
caEv
-2'
�'E E.➢
�v
v'=�0 �.
�a
Lis
�v5
H �
e�
�nrq
ee`Aq `uE
gs
'v9
o �oS
B aeLLEN
Q�3o
� m°
'°iSG�"ao
a
°oEq
E E9 "E
5q
..
dq°aE
�&v
�
�oo ati
g2egv
3
=9
� via
Gva
�'�
IDID�ma"�
'a^�EE9v�v
'9assu
y�°n°
Ec R"�Ca
��
5 Zc
E�Saeo£.y �`,
vE�S
gy
°b5
C
aH
Qat cE
g$ m °ra`
A a
a
E vo °
cE
—
g 3 v
o� as
E5�v `O€e
Egm
.�„Haves
s°c cd
Hv3F co
F�nnt 5E
u
'�5
EE �`= aEn
aE
-
a`a9
a
N
m
<�
._n
wE�5 P.E
e
r
5>E
53g
6
E
g
i
e
m
`o
9
O
S'
L
F
tl G
.a
F
E
E
z°
z°
rov
3
3
5„
a
_
3
vv"
�O
Ev�
0
fr
3 c �
oEq
a
v
Ea
o
d
a
v
a
o
°
A
E
G
E
"'°c�
�ocomn93^:
��.L c➢3'E ov r'Aa �o
3v
o_
>E
5a
m
ACa'GnY
-rorov EEo v3v'O�roe�+o�hc
3$e
T
A
Y+�3$'�AE�m
s—
^H
n
ems
-
`?�
aev
e�°
o
Ga
�=x
F°cro
Fx"�8E
F�q
Fa
A O
A
�a
w
F
F
s.n5�5 E -I---- --
u
'Egob 3�A9 am5pc e uu -p°9
8 �'$3 john Eoc oS a �r�?5
povL ` EoPq 8 °5"�`�b9
9a ago
8"o F�ev"oma
m3 �E�v
L
s� 5 �'ea
3�y,"�S
yTga9 Yg�o 6Cg�€eo'�r
°,g gg� AF
v"tea $ oa o 2, 8 as
3' ay.e8 c �o aa�aEd"�a�a"5
ueaoV>a5°
o
m 6ryy Omgruo
Eaa aS ti
NOS
�S°'° 8595p9^0° c°C9 u&�95
o1
4
43 el A
W��aa °
5�
q�5v Y1� ^ �L`a q6p Eo
�
SS`g94ntl5
3 1
Gm°5.V
$ °v"Sg
3 '"$S�a Am°m °1"aa nfi
pa.a3u koa `o XPi a'9N
j
F
V
V
E
E
3z c�y5
h>,a z�g23
cca°g�>
�9x°vop�
T
CuvH�on
a,��v93 n'5 °°'
n
�v°5�3
cTo`�'c Yg�v
L'm
It
d
�v Eag
tA3o�n o5�
�3c
Sa¢eo„'i'So
�a` a
a9aega""`
vsa
ygm oS
iE�.°a Ea ANo
's
o
r
v
c
F
N
r
�
T
y
y
J
T -
FVC
FPm
F
4
G C
u .D
V q
G �
mG
m ¢ �
i°
R
NN s
.3 nr $oT"Na°a"si Envoi-�93Eioc� a'v""GG Qa�nc��°""��J
fi g�� �'n93 A�6E "`m5 efi a9 9o�"sv�"<v$9
2"-04Ae,AIF s`oo
fi 9.@`o n"d a='Pi",, �„ EroEo y5 aq ada3, 9EaO EvS`�cp; ,�y
Dq aci96got o°"� vpv°�'w,E, vaq a iNa'$dz aQs8S-�>
Aye �`9eadv ec„&� 5av c�v���OEy� x °Y�uR ca"S""fi„s
g m $3.E.° d 'a5 E nap, �'•95—fiEe
d
tlau°Ea N
ev_cawa aERc m
Wo,a,oyS dE za a°9,
9 G 60 ; .•� 60 `J w n o of D �'� E �v' N `'j '� s a $ a.'$ Fran au,
q.
fin
ss ��asoaa„E�a� as�A�_�aa loss �A�a��sva�Ecacci8°c
F
� S
AZC
G tlFvEc
n ygE
=fiEaC
o9v _
AES='
°'Scc av9
E
E
rt a
C C
o �
9
O
a -
F
E
E
�ry c
< a.
do
a°a
R6
E
CVd G
W
F
F
f
�
S
aEH
3
o5a
9 64 Is
a
n�<
o��
3
c
aEa�=
a`
c3 eau
x°
$B
a
Be
x
u
�
C
p
C
O
C
p
9
V
�
p
C
C
C
a .�' ���'>,°a `pE�v
cawoCo
SLL oaAFtir°
.d w,5 a 8
a
k3 �.o 9 ��?gyE
aom3�aE�N
3cH Eb�3
aE ¢8�
H6e6
dam
E3 a owi+
�3 a
62 _
3q;
v8s- g°3F
„38r�38o
d„c u,E°3°3F
8aov=
av
a 9.h➢A
=
�a
30
5
3m�3v_404
�?
Fa
L
mFJ ]•r. wy
_
.0�
-2i H
c”
IT
v
N O
d
W' q
G: m
m!L
_
e'd '�'� v 3n aan?Ea �0°
SEE q'E
vE¢�3 v`oaca�v o`a
E,oh n c5,
� Fc�aoNS,`a 5°�oL����o
E
'�° 3 a� n
mgCtS vaaEN�En
,.
a
bd
S
Z •G1S `vQ�`m �3ry
2o
�aa� 80
t5
w
3�a.,
c
_ tai vo
G
U
�v zE,
grm
m
Ev98� :vc
vU
E
�y 3a5 'o b=OE��,'°voa
$T v sN Gm m'a.Hc a -��
P
= 3E. F„cn'^man on E yv c
_"� a—
p Wz$ o m a = a a c 9 e
v
R >>$➢ 8 o E` x m
6 ode d Fra Iaw'�£'?
U N V
P
V V V V
Z
V
�Pc'�s��
r9��ova
eEE9eLov�3 �°v5G e�
N¢oao�'
m3 �E—�0�
Ev9s °'E cv3cvv �a o�
oaaa o�N
Aa°°awa
3 $�, a�a.�a3go„�h $
-
3'a�x
°�c
«a=� G
3 HE
E •.�
SEE'>`A3p
'�g
`et c� 3AEEoE
E
MIN.
E
E�
O
9
L
u
.j.
FV
va
v3
ao
A
`off
C
a
,a
F
OY v.«3
q NO—w.00gF �' Co'u C�u
9.V"OnA�ui
��§�N=i^n J
�y`3°_a,,eyeo
c9a 9..s 3�q eQcy�v„
9o.°aa N9v
F a5�`om 39c
3a
,tir �p aE
mo�9�Eq�v.�Ev a� tl°
n5xoua
G
c.�
��,_a 6Z.E"�
°J`
r °06
cso«°'ro�aBoFeU E�mq
a5u_oa�E
Tr&v,G
iE9b
.EE ena
s$$aQ
8
qg`° Lbvc�
E:
e
8
'_ccc
5 rq"�E°h E
c
o'er
c 3 E3q�"Od�"
cEhcE=5
� ""
=aO«°ogmaa
o.
3°A� vada 3�
6
u
'�i m�eF"g^gy"o�oE���a�c=baa
9a�cgp�CcE
o"°n vvgd_
Qh "c u.« -'a `u Cn=-"9 g➢ q�E
�'-� a"3 �'
uy' R"�cF' a
�y rEEa=a9rP
aEfi �5 goo ma a'°°$co .2„�t��
yveooq �.�
am�x5�vCa�
�ym-a�
e93=mq6 o'^q9
E E�i �a
E9 �o'Uya3 `�"c a
E fiEy i3
gE o v °c
a���aE.3 cc¢„_
EuEgFeaFac�n"._._nja 'vc
a�9 nv`s9
s �i"F`m- SN
x
o
s
O
S
C O
cqa"
°sm�a°�°=-
�PHE
am
v'o�
�v�
aa�yvc”
cs"K�rS
a zs�0..«�roE�=
Ev
Ee3
C.:
E�
e
m
N E
-
m
Is
q
a
E
F
Eo
3E�
yEE
9yyS
Lo�G
FNv
O.A
V N
G�
ma
N
F b
$�o�Ea=c EmE o�N fi'c�q�Y3Foov-�-oaq
rom�;$�_
uJ��v°SE
$�bE a2 L_ aE rE 3arg ,n am
wTE3va
=; >'$ fiEE
Aa E'v
E9 C�
Q.e
c¢EQPe'"Eo
vn� 5g;"E 5v 0.2
r58yo5`°Saa
3
s
F
E
E
�= caaQEs
°°66avc
a.a 9rvFe" c..
.. a.vq
`y "
3a
gma
o°i"v
c°c�3
u a�vro
a
'p° ° -gEgc E4
�c•,�; G�E3c
.�. An �v
"o hf9F5c
c— c��
a�yry
€pEn
ao"Pg$E$ ao
o°�E�a�$_�
y�A
9 Som
o.
cxc E 3LESc 9Y
.. >xEA a
x,�m
n E
Cga 3 a
as r3 a3
E " v� m
S'
3a 5gE
E o3E
�:-a
of
mE'�
C
`o
ro
0
r
F
G C
A p
� A
m
b
ya
a�
i
Eacga"'°ec$
vim_ °9$ �avrcd^5
iF
3
v` °3 crw'e�3o
Eo$3o
q E
a�g�d q9_ 04
E
��$
a � E = c
..� 0
a.5 �9 °`'-"•c E
eE�°a 6g..
E.,� o
^vao Ea a
Z� -
o';�
o c�&m H=`'wgam
°$3 `�E
$d� �
�e
eafiES aNuHem
v'?Va
H
fi6'C9coc3�'oE�a
m ac
SryE pill
a$ S�a" .$
E U
E..�E�
Ev9s aN r
s $" <"—n°E3 �u6
r
c°$'s
o.
E = cE
coadd n,
off a$5
b d$agpooa,a
_
8 c�gZ3E a $
�Esadm6'a
"aE�
$Hd�e� E— €'m
oabo
Wad
'd do
Ea
a3
Sg9 ae'
c. oO as°°.°°'ddS
�'EA
a�?LBFc'i'c'3°�3'ESd cn zr'
9 �aueEaa��a",d ,gC„a"vim
E'y
F¢°E�=
9`m GTk�
9 vo`°m�'o�v$�,v"co
�a "svH9°'kfi�A
5v��a $� z"
`E `i'N$>o�
=�qEa p�! m3aouQa°da
aE
Hv
n
s �
x
A.Fa�soo.
E_
E as c
—
vEC Ea C ;�
c -E3£ E
Ev
8E-n�
a
E9
tl 3
> 3F. a$ba Ed
EgPEEa°=
�"v
E
°Q
Eva' `q3 n3N o
` yahoEN
Eys
s
ao'E o°9 OEEv E°
°n�ES cc
zo
E°S Davc°3F s"v°c
$G°'3v�3F
o 'u'9�
A °'meq
a3o
C
A
k
G
m
O
9
p
L
L
F
VCC
Eo'a
uF
o°n
F
$
Cq
CJ
00
6Sm �. fim
vfi 6�
.�.�q�
MnS
'°'U'i
a�mv
omL'EV
m,o"c�
Eo
gy
�. Em3
m
9roa&E
8a
o=
nt
n,?
c
o
o"g5
n..a
ai
o
tied
��3i
Z
E
E E
5
°a E
4
mu-"8fiF 5 9 q
a
C�°'SE5
E�
pS
5
£ �Sa a E
mEa
fiE fiE2
o
oa
l°
yy
mac
3
3
5
5
G
G
c�gvm vco..S ,`a9�
ES9�aa��npE3
8=33ogm
�'Hoav�a
a
Via°: `dom"3=.E35
=
0
e:5
'o
�cn�3DF o°
da o: v�o5
s
Em'9 pe3a�a��'O3o
av3v�a3G��3�8
3
9
E
P
q
y
T
G
°
9
q
3
v
S3
;
L
F
N
F
O
m
a'
i 3 a h
9 e vv
a
pv n°3
m
F> Fo
C C
w
m
�P
m E
5
s
c3 `sEmiE a"ou
q
3 � cE9z mg 8acgn T'�
�a �o aCc°°�
°o"c xo�N'�,ofi
fia Ck��S
€c
Te�v3a C-
�a
a n`=.Eh
n°3 _9
o'o
�' 9q vdHBn°o5,ca �va q.y 98.��Etl
�` xa u3a
9b�
'y
v2o3
�a"Y+ n
F.
� c°i Jn P% a'A ,.`O•cuq� a5 aa�'ecP°.o GX 'v �a °°�
'u �a �a
c 8 F o3tt
,S
g
F° ¢k F c§e�B h.=E�� 25� Qa 5`0,x„, a
and o2 a3 aj58
=m
mZ.2
gG
3
3
a a
a
v o
a
n3oB° W`fi �'cn3a
�E.�c°EEv�3rrE2
�
ey2vo-'a,a9=
°
°figoC93Eg3aq
a.
�o=gmae��Uy=e
�5av�3v�A mrav
c �3F
ESC av&if ¢aG
x� 7v
`off
`Ta 59
=
mbe
mfg C�
H °
w
„�aA C= nava
9
m
56
g
E�
V
mo
vga
.h
a
aE�''`ya"
v
aF
v
�a� °m az EF
tt"c g'S
bao
V3 E_'E=,E
w
'o °
kg'o
c""
E Wn
ac'S `v�U
�
O
q�m n6N T6 h
o��
o
E fb
a3
"vn
C�Lg
6
av oSW
A.E.5 °MEc
maar
qE9
�c
g$Ev°� Aa
5aO°
8
�o�
&
3 v n
"� `=`m Es
am
o.n
�.
� bury �a 'm"aEe�vs
�q
u�3J
� m��O2
aa'�va��q�3 3
coa�c
C �Em 'E➢�
A _u*E c
. 9.em
o'�`0
3„E $� Qa v �� 3 �� o
=3 �n
�
3
3
3 3
v
o
o v
E
39q w�
tiv419
Gam— -
cvav
tl='E�
.a
y.
aooa
a�'TS
Sa3�
3 a55
cu„�o3vn
°v'$Eea
34a v
�Ea
q$
D�o
�OSv
16
°a
6
O
nob�q
q
C
a
F
rt
vqc
m ;A
T
pja O�
A O
A q
`ob'a
y£
3
.4
y
S¢
F
v
f
�
oT T9Scgo� �v"��_
CE mL, E'c°ag "ya E"3
E9a
'm
F� E�3m �Oa£�v
4
_
cEEo� ���99
rt$
A$ n ° na v?Oa 9o` do 6a�
z z z
v F E
�=cz-
�d
o0E2
W
$ Z�ay-E➢ 3 3. �.L-o,i,"Gi
qo�
�SE '3 e�. E.
B
�$ E3�GE37 SEv
vwoo;EF�
�x et9,"E
�s
3_5
�t�oavEma
-
c�
4
Hry
aF
u�
� A
p�
O
0
9
O
S
z
o8
9 a
o
s°
c k
k
fn
J
D
�Z
g a_ a
e5a
a We
�c"mZ
s smac as Aar
omaS �.p��Coy°m$a_
8'Sv
�a'o
E
F�
„tip=.ems v ti5nq°a>�U� z
A
s
O
L
Cq
N
C
P
F
�a
r'E
„k
G F
V_ N
pG
dQ
F
F
a
3 �
EE�Ha so
b. E � qv.5
_
�s a A 2 4
�
c
9
a
a
>—ao
J
C
°�Sz'°o
be3c5v➢q
Aa
9S�a
°3 v5
v�Qo$NamE$'V
ozw
o.
Ca'cgGn ceaEa_M
!S ngc
9$30.0 =,Faaoa9'
eb
o
E�E
�wm33Cc=EF7v
v° E: p'Sa
oar
A'Ev
c=�tifiUi°
?EaF
a „i3�=mE c53i-
�v8 °, a3dv°
3
s
s
A
d
O
oy^
E
`u�
L
��v
a9g
aA
aA.�
C O
R.O
V.'
w �
C
8
F
A
ass'
s�88�°vro
E'��
a°
"
ggvE
o9
A
�AT= vov
�°3v-5"
3oaa`
5oa
n5s
a
�
E
'�qa E ��
�E•a
35
Ko
5E�5
aa
e
3"Jc
E mfi °a c
�:J9 Bd
5c8
Eo
n792e
o
wvel ". m6 c gomw
a 6 65�
nt
��
aE
i
7E �
�
E 3
ad
c
��"s owa �'vo3u
dEa4-na,'
oEES
d $53
$p
c'aO
`°h$3o?:
'n
3
'.3��ovo
iia u8d
I'n
va
8 a`wo
a'O
WW'EE
m tl
+
c
Z$
q p
p
O
75
C�Fo�4c
-
3vaa
Eu
aim
T`
$a dna
x
q
k 5
E
o
°e
E
00
D
C F
N D
A
b
�
p
F
F
H q
�F
W�
g
e�
n oP y°..t9
v
y
z
c
D
9
p
c
E
E
o.
rw
0$9vaa "v I "
a�akc�9Fc
����aEu$N^�
�oN�3"e-'°3iaeN
0.
$ayo� � j�
WE "aoD$FO`aLIT
EFx �Fj E '°E
iq'.OF
$o=v�'�Euav
�V
L
;�3�$°c'oov—_
Na3ab
o�su eB
3
Ea°
ac
E',�°�a�o,Ew
vH�cuSv
�'�3SS c"B fi:L°vc
aaE�a.3
��h�a"9�3c$
aEi-
F3m0o
�W6i u'E3o E�i3
3c`.o
3a��
3a5=
T;�N,
a rev
o TLLmp
'$Cv5
6a0v5
aca3v�
3va
3=c0
�v0��
aE„Ea
aGc
aE '"
C F
a
_
a5
.9Se�
Fv
SE
G«
dv
o
6..
e9
Esaa
o
a8A"
r
a�
cE
x v
8 "_
a°
E
C
Z
C
mG r3 mt >`S=»°�°'ay'o .a�3r �y9
v'�'�£ahzv Wch
—ovno
'o
u3z� a5 � a^_
nbs3�`«x'=oEc33v`✓
s°'Z
c ma3£EB«°c«,p9a
B 3E�
5nx
��."circ°38g�c"3
°9qC
G
6
�sya �'cE�s_Eq
., .'^6D3q r o6n CSE
v�$
Gr ..F v` �M' aE
ThXIu-
gi'Eoy
cc, c "oEv
�
aY«u°a FBFamB«G E'aF
F,ioEv�E�$a�"z°j�
1°v�«rta
o '0
0 9
v q Sv o
`ns
5v
$°
vR`m8-
Vis@
•qc
9
.°OC �
.....E
z g ry v
F
avPO
�
� L�E
BiBa�
m
O N
j
c
Z ""-°8�vo 65 tan h
6& gz
8 8v
so E 6$'3 a 9 >ac
ietayEv=e`3€ a
qE no
� �=
9cg OO �$8� 35E �
-Ss:
g^E�a�q_aVgm a
o" 58
s.v
"5oy° g5=8§f'89c8@o
9bc°°g;H°u$oS
gce veC 8,8 �a�e�`"
E�°
ca °'o
°c��t 99ga,v °'h
p
EF
ah'pvpE
ogEE' E��E a �c� �O •C a a'o
c° o.
•. $00
a
\AFS E
� <s°,,.y n$����3
d �
�
a
'a➢a E'�a,a�
y
EF `zE§o 8v $
Pc �a
a z>
C.4v:5
mag wgg 8$v Em�Z�
a`2�tlA3om�33S
�.
F� �a$EoSAo"a° b
�8c oo°'
oa o',Ea
�6'�qa
mE9 gE$ ..-
a; oa
5a
FnE°a
om3bE 3Ev85,5 =
5
H9 NOEo
g; ra9°t 3E
S
3
6
��
a� v�oF38" `5GvE6a
T� d
SEE �oEE E. E
EE
cc
4A NnE
NcoE NE,°rocsE5 iZn£6
E
_E
no
F F
E 8
E S
no<'a
cEh°$v�E�g$
.`.
3N5gEc��'aE�v o
op
�v vFSu^o<'o 60
@gvoE�y ��oUyb"C°n
`oo c$oc v
Aom
mEg
aA m�
co°g
�°� �i�nN SE
=nry
qq�
En� av Wim. do
NTc
aU sa�O
qm
'2�g.m�i
Oj
4.9� �ve
pL•
�o om'Tzo a°Vle
vv r5 v\Y�o� a
o�'a6o9
,<E a, °y
G E
PTO Lm
v" r m � o"a 'vt
rt o
m
8
8
F
f
s
ea
��
eo
m=
a
x*A
�u
o
�
3a
A4 s
_n
c°
a°
�o
a
"E
z°
'E
z°
s v_�d'nry
c°c ry__
aG�=dv'v
S��oUttia
dSc„mSN�
�v N.cs ,nz
oc.
oL St
uU'
m�v2J`Q66
a��s54i
1-2
u_2
aG_
V_
Vu
Vry
�a
SL
ca
{I m_
,vLv
qs
eo
n�a
cvo
°�
c�,a
aEo
co
p E
v
q�w
m�
mEo
vas
$ao
Sr
vet
t
y?"
53LL—
r m"'co
r�
o sem_ a�E
a°�o3
y�
Nuc
au,e
o r"�cm y"o'L°
F"`a �a
�-p
4V N
ui
Ya
_
C
F
L
F
s
CO
O
G
0
�
b
a
h
E
Z
Z
g$E'„5 mz
fl$EEoS�z
a:
eoe�m
da�aMAq
m"�vm5a-
>
So
b9�
A
po
G'oeo
a�G
ma
mC
'�
Ca
Gid
G=
1E°+
Aa
A
ACq
AG
q`°o
__
A.
a°u po
boot
au o'c
.°a.
au
-
\
(
\
(/
\\
\
-
-
\
\ \
19\
\\
\\
5}
en
m o
ma
rN
A
m
p
p
G
I �
a
5
E
Z
2
q9a<
�a
�.
E7 70S�
e�6a
bas rc`�LPiu
}JaO °.moi^_
vdv
aC�
o'�aSsd
m"�a �5 �0.ov
eat
eo
y.
aLL
oob
_o
dw
a�
oa
a
aFo
n°J«
ark
qE
v=q
�'�
Aoo 95
nao
aT
Tq
i�`Tn
N
�a
h A T�
FV�Oj
A� "g
.0 o.LV
Fc
yiao�
Nci
O
aid
Aci
o
f
f
q
CO
O
6
O
A
h
°n
a
E
E
z°
z
.nq
qa
g
°a�e�6'E
po�erta€
a
�aE SNo
Eo
�
m-
�a 9wmr5
tG��r
R
�
a�
q'�
mm
aoq
n3
u:
qry
:s
a
ea
nv
ALL
s
oeo
=ate
cE
o3o
A�
oa'a
..
dGo
'°vJp
AC
9E0'
a5r�
O�
AA�
Aa
9E0
F
a9�
°$
qoa
qT
n
mE
mm6
m Az
50.0
�$
°g.m3
;im
'O �,E"n ?➢E'E
='iA
^�3
=i3s
O i' -•i
w'°�5� a�E�
5�E
e c
n o
`o `u
'v¢ S
'a
8
T"5 3G
nv5 �c` a
of o f
<a L€
=-
nG,E yE e6
r n 0 9 N o $ 0 5 r y v
Fu o . . . . . . . . . . 6`c
O
B
$3 q��Ea Ems`P my9a ry�F e� ou*F,hv
v3
� Hosc Z"'tv Ey '5 vei ri 'a3v`c c�"=''ryEry
6 '°�`noc2Fn w dLm GF'� m9 c$g6o
-
c�v
76a
_ •r y8 o n c F b C' � ii .o
�Ts rvL°h nC.G �L°C 'G aG ,oailP ri
ddg a8'$ di''v5 eZ` d e a °°
p�o3 au ,N�oc a�oq � sgga rq'� � t°qv ea.v.
�FL
F C
A
m
5
15
F
E
aEoc °c
°6frsE
�Ep
"a Sv
E.
�➢ cw a E� 3 ug9 •. E _ .�223.cn
c aBSF �` w—
o.
a"��Ewj ` ora ro c
w`occE�=.E�
&a £sogm a
c
5
'a^�a o 5
"d8
..ct 9
A
d
C
A
E
F E F
N
Z
O O O
C
O
wFj3
$='p°, A3gg54
°m��Ev"➢o.�
ho3
pVoq
Q3-4U3�
Qv3o�aa3C°57
%O5o9S�ao2
F
��vSEc
�n�rn33AN�
w
X058
A
9 °F6°`
E P' w c�EE59vEc
`��`
�EiE"oA
E Devoo
Es di
aL�a
.�.3m
a:N9�aco aao
33u°°cW S�.�Ew3e
'`v° 'qa
a8 "e2>9€
°nE
_
o Ee o=T
c E3E
-
of
Er
° F ' nG��o
4c°
nGon
ti
w
' a
Qo
aq
.rin
<3
� r'qe-a Fq? �=9om
d GoAfi
o9
=9n -W
F3
F`3 tt"R
G C
W' q
G m
O
d
f
fn
J
oaf
y
9� 11
F
0
mi e
ra
g c
�
°c9
�
vAA
a
5
a
E
�
o
K°'E
@_E"Gb°;'
v
S lc
Emu
3L3 a atlS �c Eam @.E h EE �� Ea
90 o�u3a
R's ..
a
v4a E-�
3.u.actiE @..
,,YYfi nF
3m3a�V�5
�G��
33'56F
v�5enc�c amio�EE�S(�3�w���'cm��v3^
E
tc 3 fi. EEEdS— a'°a uvE o3a
@�
dH u_Y3go;o a"cE a��a£E'Z..'o emi c��G2 �`ovaryF
@�'v
E¢i3°..'
u
fnw@a
ogv S
`m35=iE98°csh"u °c
n�3o. E$s�°c 3o�9;AaE5 EF
3
? C
C
�@
v
n
y3
u
$
SP
F
V
m
a
E
E
8 4
m�
�
y3m
y
F W d
F C o
wo
F
d
E
C F
eA
m
s
a
'a
3
Sd
L
O
tl
s
3
$
a
�
T
G
P
�
F
O
S
A
�
5
V
G
pZ
P
v8s'8°E �. 3�o'Ao nEc
3 ��c3a
a3a�v'�¢�vc�
�'E �v„c
ea mvoc��v
A En$vFiCFA9
«cih n'a v0 =955vEv h,�o:E _v.�ym CCC 4Ct�
ay
°EC..S �o
„fiCa`ToaVF
��gT`o a�auE �,s GC;35
v�uw v��6E c'°36
c
z o.Ed'
'xv"o.
y3gav a.��$cc
Eaq�v`o cc''�o,�a8 v
3�Nq'2,9 aga��cc°E9
�.
ac
?�O$c3 cc3 v�g
��nw c33E$3u��=n
ca aF'3
g7,3Eg'aAE>; 0 N'm'u'
�$'F�U'S
6
E3a
�0$°3�Ev �.S�q oE�3veGv$aE¢
a
tlQ'�o'��3v3o
h33'o3
,2 F t
8 E ci 3s99eF3Er�oy v
¢�acaFt3
E -c Fc'Er r�,3EE
$3fl'v E:E A$A .19
�3
�G
�v
oa
5v"
�V
p�
tle
30
ae
s$
ID 9
c
o
b a
yNy
�E
n$aW
N3�
rvE o`
�
ba$aia
of
q��
re"�a
F°xa
f -c Ev
\\
I
\
�
�
\
\
\\\
\
/\\\\
« G
\!
/ \�
"
4/
d\a�
\\/\
_
-
(
.
-b \)
\
wo
\\
\
\
\
/f
�
Executive Sum
1.10 REFERENCES
Irvine, City of. 2015a (current through). City of Irvine General Plan. Irvine, CA: the City.
http: //vvww.cityofirvine. org/community-development/current-general-plan.
2015b (August 15). Memo: General Plan Supplement No. 9. Irvine, CA the City.
https: //alfresco.cityofirvine.org/alfresco/guestD ownload/direct?path=/Company%2 0
H ome/Shared/C D/Planning%20and%2 0 Development/General%2 0 Plan/Supplement%
209%20package.pdf.
Irvine, City of and County of Orange, 2010. Sublease between City of Irvine and County of Orange
for Institutional Parcel within El Toro LIFOC Parcel 3.
Irvine, City of and County of Orange. 2010. Implementation Agreement No. 2 between City of
Irvine, Irvine Redevelopment Agency, and County of Orange.
Irvine, City of, Irvine Redevelopment Agency, and County of Orange (Irvine et al.). 2003 (March
4). Property Tax Transfer and Pre -Annexation Agreement among the City of Irvine, the
Irvine Redevelopment Agency, and the County of Orange, Regarding the Annexation and
Reuse of Former MCAS El Toro.
KTGY. 2016 (September). El Toro, 100 -Acre Parcel Development Plan. Irvine, CA: KTGY.
Orange, County of. 2014a (January 28, meeting date). Agenda Staff Report: Development
Agreement with Lowe Enterprises for Development of El Toro Parcels. Santa Ana, CA: the
County.
2 014b (November). Notice of Prepara tion of a Program Environmental Impact Report and
Notice of Scoping Meeting, El Toro Development Plan, County of Orange. Santa Ana, CA: the
County (Appendix B).
1-51 EL TORO, 100 -ACRE PARCEL DEVELOPMENT PLAN
PROGRAM ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
Executive
This page intentionally left blank
1-52 EL TORO, 100 -ACRE PARCEL DEVELOPMENT PLAN
PROGRAM ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
Norma
From: Sally Stanton <sallystanton@gmail.com>
Sent: Tuesday, October 3, 2017 1:16 PM
To: eComment
Subject: Ordinance homeless
Hello,
I am a resident of Santa Ana for over 30 years and I live at 1143 West Memory Lane. Luckily the homeless
haven't got into my neighborhood too much as I know it can be a real problem especially the stealing. I urge
you to do whatever you can to move them out of the river bed. It's just awful what's happening to the neighbors
in that area as they feel like they can't even leave the house or let their kids play outside. This group is not the
single mother of 2 down on her luck struggling to make ends meet. Its mainly druggies who love the homeless
life and addicted to something. They have a bike ring going on down there too. The parties are crazy nightly
drugs Galore a lot of noise a lot of drugs and drinking and the place is frill on mess. I believe in rights for
everyone but I don't believe that everyone should suffer because of some indigents wanting to party and ruin the
neighborhood. Thank you,
Sally Stanton
Sally Stanton
Mitre -Ramirez, Norma
From: Sally Stanton <sallystanton@gmail.com>
Sent: Tuesday, October 3, 2017 1:22 PM
To: eComment
Subject: Homeless civic center
I live at 1143 w. Memory on. I've lived here for 8years and at another location in Santa Ana for 50 years.
I urge a to take the appropriate steps to move the homeless people from the civic center area.
No one that isn't authorized should be administering medical attention either to these homeless. If we keep on
providing them with porta potties and medical help and food etc hey will only become more of a
problem. Please do the right thing for the tax payers, your constituents.
Sally Stanton
14
Mitre -Ramirez, Norma
From: Emalie Huriaux <
Sent: Tuesday, October 3, 2017 4:11 PM
To: Pulido, Miguel; Sarmiento, Vicente; Martinez, Michele; Solorio, Jose; Benavides, David;
Villegas, Juan; Tinajero, Sal
Cc: eComment; Carol Newark
Subject: Concern regarding potential displacement of social services in the Civic Center area
To the Mayor and Members of the Santa Ana City Council,
I am writing on behalf of the California Hepatitis Alliance (CaIHEP) to express concern about the City Council meeting this
evening and the potential displacement of social services from the Civic Center area, in particular the services provided by
the Orange County Needle Exchange Program (OCNEP).
Founded in 2006, CaIHEP is an alliance of more than 100 organizations dedicated to reducing the scope and
consequences of the hepatitis B and C epidemics in California, which disproportionately affect California's ethnic
communities and the socioeconomically underserved. CaIHEP includes among its membership public health departments,
community-based organizations, clinics and health care agencies, county hepatitis task forces, and others committed to
eliminating viral hepatitis. CaIHEP's work focuses on advocating for sound policies, promoting evidence -based and
culturally competent education, and broadening access to services. Supporting syringe exchange programs (which have a
crucial role in preventing infectious diseases among people who inject drupe, providing resources to address the opioid
overdose crisis, and linking people to health care, drug treatment, and other social services) is consistent with our
mission.
As you may know, OCNEP, is authorized to operate by the California Department of Public Health (CDPH) for a period of
two years (February 11, 2016 through February 11, 2018) at the Santa Ana Civic Center. When OCNEP first discussed
providing services with the City of Santa Ana, it planned to provide them at the Orange County LGBT Center, but
specifically moved them to the Civic Center based on the request from the City of Santa Ana. Displacing this program will
leave people without access to critical lifesaving services.
CaIHEP urges the City Council to ensure that there is no disruption to the services provided by OCNEP. Syringe
exchange services must be provided in an area of the city that will reach people most in need (i.e., people who inject
drugs). Any change to OCNEP's service location must be done through a thoughtful and deliberate process and done with
sufficient lead time so the program can communicate the location change to participants and ensure no one currently
using their services is unable to find them.
If you have any questions or would like more information, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Sincerely,
Emalie Huriaux; MPH
Director of Federal & State Affairs, Project Inform
Chair, California Hepatitis Alliance
Office 415.580.7301 1 Mobile 51V4097041
877 -HELP -4 -HEP (877-435-7443, hepatitis C helpline, )
Mitre -Ramirez, Norma
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
To whom it may concern,
Markelle Pineda <
Tuesday, October 3, 2017 5:24 PM
eComment
Isn't it bad enough they are homeless?!
Why would you ever consider doing this?! We have enough issues with the OCAS being overcrowded, animals
killed Dailey, and you want to take pets from people whom are already down and out and kill them too?! Why
not mandate having them fixed? Us rescues will pay for it! We are the ones malting sure these pets stay healthy
most of the time anyway!
Scenario: Person loses place to live due to unexpected event and has a hard time finding another one due to he
has a pet he refuses to give up on. That pet has shown them love, raised his spirits, he is doing the responsible
thing by NOT dumping that beloved pet, then you come along and tell him he can't have it? This mattes no
sense at all!
Come on! Where is your empathy? Don't you have something bigger and better to do to try to make Orange
County a better place?
With disgust from an OC resident,
Markelle Pineda
Mitre -Ramirez, Norma
From: Rose Tingle <
Sent: Tuesday, October 3, 2017 5:32 PM
To: eComment
Subject: Today's Agenda item 50A
Importance: High
Good Afternoon,
Regarding the banning of pets of the homeless at Civic Center, keep in mind Santa Ana is 2nd only to Anaheim in the amount of
animals received in at the county animal shelter and euthanized.
Animals enrich our lives in so many ways, yet you are considering banning one of the elements whicht would help the homeless. It
would be more productive to focus on the cause in lieu of the effect.
Your representative from Santa Ana on the City Managers Association Animal Care Committee is lacking the knowledge and attitude
to properly monitor and assure the best and progressive care for the animals for your constituents, and this is just another example. 5
Orange County Grand Jury Reports, lawsuits and a negative performance audit on the county animal shelter is sufficient evidence of
this fact.
We are asking you to please not ban the pets of the homeless. This would be a great injustice, not to mention lack of compassion.
Thank you,
Rose Tingle
Citizens for animal shelter, Orange County
Mitre -Ramirez, Norma
From: Alexis Teodoro (SABHQ <alexis.teodoro@sa-bhc.org>
Sent: Tuesday, October 3, 2017 6:05 PM
To: eComment
Subject: Item 50A "Emergency Ordinance" 10/3/17
Attachments: Letter on 50A.doc
Dear City Council of Santa Ana,
Please see attached my letter on item 50A. I have also pasted the contents of letter below:
October 3, 2017
City of Santa Ana
Council Chambers
22 Civic Center Plaza
Santa Ana, CA
Re: Emergency Ordinance Item #50A on 10/03/17 Council Meeting
Dear City Council of Santa Ana,
I am writing this letter as a private citizen because I am concerned that all of you might vote on item 50A
without allowing the current democratic process that exists within the city for adopting ordinances. I have
worked with the city on many policies where we had to obey this process that requires two readings before a
vote. This process is democratic because it properly allows the public to provide timely input.
In addition, I have been informed by advocates who serve the homeless and unhoused population here in
Santa Ana and across Orange County. They brought up to me issues with this ordinance especially around the
enforcement mechanisms within the language that may lead to further criminalization. I would like to remind
the city that a Sanctuary place is for everyone, the immigrant community and those of our community members
that currently do not have the means to obtain permanent housing and as a result are forced to live on the
street where they become more vulnerable and prone to abuse.
As a Santa Ana resident, I too want to see the issue be resolved like you all do. However, without proper input
from the residents, the public, and those most vulnerable and closest to the issue and their allies, is not
democratic and sets a dangerous precedent for current proposed initiatives and future policy making.
Thank you for your leadership on this issue but please allow the currently existing democratic process to be in
motion and set time to speak with the impacted community, their allies and the attorneys that are working
every day to defend the civil rights of the homeless and unhoused community.
Respectfully,
Alexis Nava Teodoro
Alexis Nava Teodoro
Campaign Strategist
Santa Ana Building Healthy Communities
(714)574-6540
alexis.teodoro@sa-bhc.org
721 W 1 St Apt F-102
2017 CBCT _') AM {i' C5 Santa Ana, CA 92701
CITY OF SANTA ANA
CLERK OF COUNCIL
September 20, 2017
Santa Ana City Council
20 Civic Center Plaza
P.O. BOX 1988, M 31
Santa Ana, CA 92701
Dear Councilmember Martinez:
I am a resident of Santa Ana. I would like to talk about a big problem, homelessness in this City. Because
homeless people are asking for money on the corners street, sleeping next to Federal Buildings and
living on the riverbed.
the City should build a homeless shelter, provide training and prepare homeless people to take a job a
job and change their lives and provide classes in Community Centers.
Sincerely,
6&.
Cecilia Luna
County,
ORANGE COUNTY PUBLIC LAW LIBRARY
515 NORTH FLOWER STREET
SANTA ANA, CALIFORNIA 92703-2354
(714) 338-6790 • FAX (714) 338-6814
WWW.00PLL.ORG JUDGE CRAIG L. GRIFFIN, PRESIDENT
rFCJ JUDGE JULIAN W. BAILEY
?0I7 26 AM, il= „/ JUDGE JACKI C. BROWN
MARYRUTH STORER JUDGE WILLIAM CLASPER
DIRECTOR DAVID HESSELTINE, ESQ.
CITY OF Sf5&"M ANA PROFESSOR LINDA KAWAGUCHI
CLERK OF i'Irli JUDGE GLENN R. SALTER
September 22, 2017
TO: The Honorable Board of Supervisors, County of Orange
The Honorable Mayor and Members of the Council, City of Santa Ana
Chair, Orange County Civic Center Authority
As President of the Board of Trustees of the Orange County Public Law Library, I
write to inform you of our Board's concerns about the conditions in the Civic Center and
the impact the actions of some members of the homeless community have had upon
our ability to carry out the Law Library's mission to provide access to legal information
to all residents of the County.
In the period from June 17, 2017 to August 31, 2017, the following incidents
occurred at the Law Library:
• 17 incidents of apparent drug use inside the restrooms (abandoned syringes)
• 9 incidents of serious unsanitary conditions inside the restrooms (blood on walls,
inches of water on the floor, etc.)
2 incidents of public urination on carpet
• 4 exterior window walls broken during closed hours
A screaming man pounded on an interior glass wall, harassed custodian and tried
to hit the security guard; he then challenged a county worker and patron to fight
one on one before eventually leaving the building (while staff was still waiting for
law enforcement to arrive)
s A screaming woman refused to leave the restroom so that it could be cleaned,
was extremely verbally abusive to staff and the guard, spat on the guard and
threatened to hit him
• Multiple instances of urination/defecation in both hardscape and landscaping
around the exterior of the building, creating pedestrian hazards and odor that
entered interior areas of the building
The Law Library is the closest public building to the encampment on the Plaza of
the Flags, and the individuals camping there and elsewhere in the Civic Center cannot
have all their sanitation needs met at the Law Library. Our restrooms are small and
designed per Building Code requirements to provide for the expected normal number of
library visitors using our legal materials, not for the hundreds of individuals camping
September 22, 2017 2
outside. The toilets are often clogged, sometimes by clothes or other solid objects
stuffed into them. The sinks do not accommodate the 10 gallon buckets individuals are
using to have fresh water at the campsite, so the inevitable spills create a slipping
hazard inside the Library building. (It is notable that when one of the glass walls of the
Library was broken into this past month, a security camera captured a number of
homeless walking through the broken glass simply to use the Library's drinking
fountain.) Unsanitary and flooded conditions in the restrooms regularly require the
restrooms be closed to use by the public. Even with restrooms available, there have
been multiple occurrences of individuals urinating and defecating inside the elevator
and hallways of the Law Library building.
The presence of so many homeless people at the Library's doorstep is more than
a mere annoyance; it is a danger to Library staff and patrons. The risk of disease from
feces on the Library carpets and literally scores of hypodermic needles discarded in
various areas of the Library within the past year is not imaginary. San Diego County
recently suffered an outbreak of hepatitis A that killed 16 people, and sickened 421
more. This outbreak occurred primarily within the homeless population, but also
affected a substantial number who associated closely with that community.
Disease is not the only risk faced by library staff and patrons. Combative,
mentally -ill transients routinely challenge library staff, both verbally and physically.
Staff members arriving early in the morning entered the library and found it has been
broken into during the night and left unsecured. Given the safety risks almost daily
encountered over the past two or more years, only sheer luck has prevented serious
harm to staff and patrons.
That luck ran out, however, on July 13, 2017. On that day, a transient was found
in the restroom mixing some type of chemical which created a strong odor that spread
into the adjacent hall and entryway. It took 20 minutes of staff and guard intervention
just to get the person out of the restroom. The odor persisted for days until a hazmat
contractor came to clean the location. Most importantly, the security guard, day porter,
and three staff members suffered adverse physical reactions to the incident, including
burning eyes, breathing difficulties, vision problems, and throat irritation. Two staff
members filed workers' compensation claims as a result of their injuries.
Our Library staff should not have to face daily threats to their physical health just
to perform their jobs. Despite declining revenues, the Library's Board of Trustees voted
last year to hire a security guard. After the harm suffered by staff due to the July
incident, suggestions have been made to hire a second guard, primarily to police the
public restrooms. The cost of doing so, however, would require further cuts to library
services.
September 22, 2017 3
I have lamented that something will only be done about the situation if and
when someone dies or is permanently injured. We should not wait until then. We
request that you take immediate action to promote a healthier, safer environment at
the Civic Center location surrounding the Law Library.
Until a long-term solution can be achieved, we request, at a minimum, the
placement of temporary restrooms, a clean water source, and a cell phone charging
station in the plaza near the Law Library. These simple steps should prove neither
costly nor controversial. But they will greatly reduce the strain now being placed on
Library resources. More important, they will promote the welfare of not only the Library
staff and patrons, but also the campers outside our door.
We understand that many entities are involved in efforts to address this problem,
and we hope they can work together to find a more permanent resolution. But in the
interim, immediate action is necessary to avoid further harm to Library staff and
patrons. If you have questions regarding our request, or need assistance in
implementing this interim solution, please do not hesitate to contact the Law Library
Director, Maryruth Storer at 714.338,6802, mstorer@ocpll.org.
Sincere _
,,,The.H raig L. Griffin
'dent, Law Library Board of Trustees