HomeMy WebLinkAbout01 - - Additional Documents - 7/18/2017ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS
FOR CC -10
PLACENTIA AVE. MEDIAN
IMPROVEMENTS
A��'��UTU��NAU DOCUMENTS FOR CC -10
From:
To:
Subject:
Red folders
Brenda Green
City Clerk
City of Costa Mesa
714/754-5221
GREEN, BRENDA
Tuesday, July l8,2OI7 1I:14 PM
TRAYb3R, MARIAN
FW: Placentia Avenue Medians
indexnnap.pdf, Project 16-04 BidAbstnnct.pdf
From: SETHURAMAN, R4]4
Sent: Tuesday, July 18 201711:38AM
To: GEN|S,SANDRA «SANDRA.GEN|S@cnstamesaca.gov»
Cc: LETOURNEAU,TAMARA <TAN1ARAlETOUNNEAU @coytanneyaca.guv>;MB|A,BALTAZAR
<8ALT4ZAR.ME]|4@costa mesa cu.gov>;GREEN, 8HENDA^bre nda.green@costammeyuco.gov>
Subject: Placentia Avenue Medians
Mayor Pro Tern Genis,
As per your requests,please find attached a copy of the layout plan for the Placentia Avenue Medians that highlights the
landscaping under each of the additive bid items. Also attached is the bid abstract, Please note that per the Public Works
Contract Code, the award should be based on "base bid" only.
Please let me know if you need anything else.
Rojo Sethuramo
Public Services Director
City mfCosta Mesa
724-754-5343
1
ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS FOR CC -10
INDEX MAP
NOTE:
PER THE PREVIOUS CITY COUNCIL DIRECTION, THE NUMBER OF
TREES WAS REDUCED BY 50% FOR THE MEDIANS IN THE BASE BID.
TD IDANNsr. ESTANCIA HIGH SCHOOL
HIGHSCHOOL EXIT ONLY ENTRANCE PLACENTIA AVENUE - �• ��
ONLY
3o WW
� V
CRY YAM CITY YARD EXIT
ENTRANCE SHEET 4
LEGEND:
3 BASE BID
ALTERNATE ITEMS 1
.,� ALTERNATE ITEMS 2
FUR1R GOfSTRIAN CROSSING / -�
NOTI CONTRACT / ��
/
L i 16.E
2.
i SHEET 7
o `cam
m
9 `11
PLACENTIA AVENUE
IAxkr,d
Cdi: TOLL -FREE,
or � 8H
Or �)
iWD \ORKNG DAYS BEFORE 1D11 OG
GRAPHIC SCALE
740 D � 140 �
1' - 100'
r,9 ON
•.. �..• 300
•• •• O
•.. • • i P: 17
•.• •.• F: (7
v'EEA�6
EERING
LA 814
g
0
REVISIONS
coNrRncroR UC.
DATE OF CONSTRUCTION
BEG. END
BENCHMARK DESIGNED BY: DS DATE
BENCH MARK NO.: SEE SHEET N0. 1 DRAWN BY: DS --
ELEVATION: CHECKED BY' SH --
DESCRIPTION:
RECOMMENDED BY: --
�o�9Tess"�+r�
Ib. 53935 ' -
* EFp.12-31-17 k
`L�<
CITY OF COSTA MESA
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SERVICES / ENGINEERING DIVISION
2 OF 9
NO. DATE DESCRIPTION APP.
MEDIAN IMPROVEMENTS
PLACENTIA AVENUE
INDEX MAP
PLAN
NUMBER
APPROVED BY:
BA515 OF BEARING: SEE SHEET NO. 1
BALTAZAR MEDIA, ACTING drr ENGINEER R.C.E. /50330
DATE ACCEPTED BY CITY COUNCIL
P.C. SEAL
CITY OF COSTA MESA
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SERVICES
PLACENTIA AVENUE MEDIAN IMPROVEMENTS,FEDERAL PROJECT NO. HSIP 5312 (092) AND CITY PROJECT NO. 16-04
BID OPENING DATE: JUNE 20, 2017
1. BEADOR CONSTRUCTION 2. YAKAR 3. LOS ANGELES 4. GRIFFITH COMPANY
ENGINEERING, INC.
BASE BID CITY ESTIMATE CORONA COVINA COVINA BREA
NO.
BID
QUANTITY
DESCRIPTION
UNIT
PRICE
TOTAL
UNIT
PRICE
TOTAL
UNIT
UNIT
UNIT
PRICE
TOTAL
PRICE
TOTAL
PRICE
TOTAL
1
1
LS
Mobilization
$175,000.00
$175.000.00
$80.000.00
$80.000.00
$68.852.65
$50.000.00
$50.000.00
$1.600.00
$202.500.00
$92.280.00
$7.800.00
$141.550.00
$12.065.00
$162.800.00
$58.212.00
$27.000.00
$21.500.00
$34,000.00
$32.430.00
$21.210.00
$113.000.00
$33.000.00
$113.000.00
$33.000.00
$27.500.00
$15.000.00
$2.000.00
$170.100.00
$203.016.00
$9.750.00
$25.650.00
$15.875.00
$109.520.00
$59.535.00
$31.400.00
$25.000.00
$43,500.00
$51.060.00
$21.816.00
$166.080.00
$162.882.00
$6.060.00
$18.750.00
$16.831.14
$16.831.14
$26.000.00
$31.500.00
$13.800.00
$28.904.00
$6,000.00
$160.000.00
$25.000.00
$20.000.00
$12.500.00
$1.850.00
542.00
$15.00
$30.00
$700.00
$18.00
$60.00
$145.00
$20.000.00
$7.500.00
$42,000.00
$305.00
$28.00
$314.00
54.10
$24.00
$15.000.00
$0.40
$0.70
$1.650.00
$880.00
$420.00
$8.50
$5,000.00
$160.000.00
$166.000.00
$166.000.00
$60.000.00
$19.000.00
$6.000.00
54.000.00
$162.000.00
$153.646.20
2
1
LS
Traffic Control
$65,000.00
$65.000.00
$68.852.65
$50.000.00
$50.000.00
$800.00
$75.00
$10.00
$60.00
$3.725.00
$19.00
$55.00
544.00
$13.500.00
$21.500.00
$34,000.00
$235.00
$8.75
$250.00
$3.75
$79.00
$16.500.00
$0.25
$0.75
$1.500.00
$750.00
$370.00
$7.50
$8,000.00
$25.000.00
$60.000.00
3
1
LS
Construct Survev & Monument Preservation
$42,000.00
$42.000.00
$27.500.00
$15.000.00
$20.000.00
$19.000.00
4
1
LS
Slormwater Pollution Prevention lmDlementation
$25,000.00
$25.000.00
$12.500.00
$6.000.00
5
2
EA
Proiecl Information Sians
$1,200.00
$2.400.00
$1.000.00
$63.00
$3.700.00
$2.000.00
6
2.700
CY
Unclassified Excavation/ Removals
$75.00
$202.500.00
$113.400.00
$60.00
7
9.228
LF
Construct Pinned Curb
$20.00
$184.560.00
$22.00
$75.00
$138.420.00
$16.65
8
130
LF
Construct PCC Mountable Curb
$80.00
$10.400.00
$3.900.00
$26.600.00
$11.430.00
$177.600.00
$191.835.00
$40.000.00
$7.500.00
$42,000.00
$42.090.00
$67.872.00
$108.644.00
$111.302.70
$16.65
$2.164.50
9
38
EA
Construct Parkwav Drain No. 1
$3,500.00
$133.000.00
$675.00
$25.00
$1.050.001
$39.900.00
10
635
SF
Construct Pavement Cobbles
$22.00
$13.970.00
$16.001
$10.160.00
11
2.960
CY
Construct Class A TOD Soil
$55.00
$162.800.00
$37.00
$45.00
$48.501
$143.560.00
12
1.323
LF
Construct Utility Sleeves
$60.00
$79.380.00
$100.00
$7.000.00
$132.300.00
$14.000.00
$11.000.00
$35,000.00
$50.370.00
$19.634.40
$81.310.00
$135.735.00
13
2
EA
Construct Hot TaD/Meter Set/Backflow Device
$17,000.00
$34.000.00
$15.700.00
$25.000.00
14
1
LS
Ulilitv Polholina
$30,000.00
$30.000.00
$11.000.00
$35,000.00
15
1
LS
Remove and Install New Signing, Striping and
Pavement Markinas
$45,000.00
$45,000.00
$43,500.00
16A
138
EA
I Boulders
$323.00
$44.574.00
$370.00
$9.00
$365.00
$8.10
16B
2.424
LF
I Root Control Barrier
$16.00
$38.784.00
16C
346
TON
River Rock Cobble
$460.00
$159.160.00
$86.500.00
$480.00
$235.00
$5.00
16D
27.147
SF
Automatic Irriaation Svslem
$5.00
$135.735.00
$101.801.25
$6.00
16E
101
EA
Tree Bubbler
$75.00
$7.575.00
$7.979.00
$60.00
$2.424.00
$100.00
$10.100.00
16F
1
EA
Automatic Irriaation Controller
$25,000.00
$25.000.00
$16.500.00
$18.750.00
$15.000.00
$17.000.00
$17.000.00
16G
27.147
SF
Soil Preparation and Weed Abatement
$0.65
$17.645.55
$6.786.75
$0.62
$10.858.80
$1.40
$38.005.80
16
27.147
SF
3 in. Thick Tree Mulch Laver
$0.85
$23.074.95
$20.360.25
$19.500.00
$31.500.00
$17.020.00
$27.097.50
$0.62
$2.000.00
$19.002.90
$0.45
$12.216.15
$27.300.00
$48.300.00
$20.700.00
161
13
EA
48 in. Box Tree
$1,800.00
$23.400.00
$21.450.00
$2.100.00
16J
42
EA
36 in. Box Tree
$1,200.00
$50.400.00
$750.00
$300.00
$36.960.00
$1.150.00
16K
46
EA
24 in. Box Tree
$400.00
$18.400.00
$19.320.00
$450.00
16L
3.613
EA
1 Gallon Shrub
$10.00
$36.130.00
$8.00
$30.710.50
$14.00
$50.582.00
16M
1
LS
90 +50 Day Plant Establishment Period, Ste 58+75 to
78
$15,000.00
$15,000.00
$8,000.00
$6,000.00
$5,000.00
$5,000.00
$5,000.00
TOTAL BASE BID $1.799.888.50 $1.406.844.40 $1.450.360.28 $1.464.519.90 $1.474.984.05
Page 1 of 6
CITY OF COSTA MESA
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SERVICES
PLACENTIA AVENUE MEDIAN IMPROVEMENTS,FEDERAL PROJECT NO. HSIP 5312 (092) AND CITY PROJECT NO. 16-04
BID OPENING DATE: JUNE 20, 2017
1. BEADOR CONSTRUCTION 2. YAKAR 3. LOS ANGELES q, GRIFFITH COMPANY
ENGINEERING, INC.
NO.
BID
QUANTITY
DESCRIPTION
UNIT
PRICE
TOTAL
UNIT
UNIT
UNIT
UNIT
PRICE
TOTAL
PRICE
TOTAL
PRICE
TOTAL
PRICE
TOTAL
17A
32
EA
Boulders
$550.00
$17.600.00
$510.00
$8.50
$340.00
$52.00
$82.00
$0.00
$0.50
$1.50
$1.600.00
$850.00
5455.00
$11.00
$4,250.00
$16.320.00
$450.00
$14.400.00
54.680.00
$24.000.00
$25.815.00
$1.300.00
$0.00
$1.721.00
$1.721.00
$2.500.00
94.500.00
$2.450.00
$2.410.00
$3,000.00
$305.00
$28.00
$314.00
$4.10
$24.00
$0.00
$0.40
$0.70
$1.650.00
$880.00
5420.00
$8.50
$5,000.00
$9.760.00
$500.00
$16.000.00
17B
312
LF
Root Control Barrier
$15.00
$4.680.00
$2.652.00
$15.00
$8.736.00
$10.00
$3.120.00
$14.400.00
$25.815.00
$1.300.00
$0.00
$1.721.00
$3.442.00
$3.000.00
$5.000.00
$2.800.00
$2.892.00
$3,000.00
17C
48
TON
River Rock Cobble
$500.00
$24.000.00
$16.320.00
$89.492.00
$500.00
$15.00
$100.00
$0.00
$1.00
$1.00
$2.500.00
$900.00
$350.00
$10.00
$3,000.00
$15.072.00
$300.00
17D
1.721
SF
Automatic Irrication Svstem
$10.00
$17.210.00
$7.056.10
$15.00
17E
13
EA
Tree Bubbler
$95.00
$1.235.00
$1.066.00
$0.00
$312.00
$100.00
17F
0
EA
Automatic Irrication Controller
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$688.40
$1.204.70
$1.650.00
$4.400.00
$2.940.00
$2.048.50
$0.00
$1.00
$2.00
17G
1.721
SF
Soil Preoaration and Weed Abatement
$1.50
$2.581.50
$860.50
$2.581.50
17H
1.721
SF
3 in. Thick Tree Mulch Laver
$1.00
$1.721.00
171
1
EA
48 in. Box Tree
$1,800.00
$1.800.00
$1.600.00
$4.250.00
$3.000.00
$1.000.00
17J
5
EA
36 in. Box Tree
$1,200.00
$6.000.00
17K
7
EA
24 in. Box Tree
$400.00
$2.800.00
$3.185.00
$2.651.00
$400.00
$12.00
17L
241
EA
1 Gallon Shrub
$10.00
$2.410.00
17M
1
LS
90 Day Plant Establishment Period, Sta 58+75 to
78+50
$8,000.00
$8,000.00
$4,250.00
$5,000.00
$3,000.00
vlr.�riu onrvrilo oiv rvv.I aau.usrau aIuo.lz..uu aaa.gar.uu aoa.ao -u aaz.4uu.uu
1. BEADOR CONSTRUCTION 2, YAKAR 3. LOS ANGELES
ENGINEERING, INC. q, GRIFFITH COMPANY
rnanrvn I -A rrnnun once
NO.
BID
QUANTITY
DESCRIPTION
UNIT
PRICE
TOTAL
UNIT
PRICE
UNIT
UNIT
PRICE
UNIT
TOTAL
PRICE
TOTAL
TOTAL
PRICE
TOTAL
18A
28
EA
Boulders
$550.00
$15.400.00
$565.00
$9.00
$330.00
$6.50
$79.00
$0.00
$0.35
$1.10
$1.600.00
$800.00
$390.00
$8.80
$3,750.00
$15.820.00
$450.00
$12.600.00
$9.720.00
$25.000.00
$61.664.00
$2.700.00
$0.00
$5.781.00
$6.397.64
$5.000.00
$5.400.00
$6.650.00
$10.800.00
$3,000.00
$305.00
$28.00
$314.00
54.10
$24.00
$0.00
$0.40
$0.70
$1.650.00
$880.00
5420.00
$8.50
$5,000.00
$8.540.00
$200.00
$5.600.00
54.536.00
$10.000.00
$61.664.00
$2.160.00
$0.00
$7.708.00
$3.854.00
$4.000.00
$6.000.00
$7.600.00
$14.040.00
$6,000.00
18B
648
LF
Root Control Barrier
$15.00
$9.720.00
$5.832.00
$15.00
$18.144.00
$15.700.00
$31.602.80
$648.00
$0.00
$3.083.20
$5.395.60
$3.300.00
$5.280.00
$7.980.00
$9.180.00
$5,000.00
$7.00
$200.00
18C
50
TON
River Rock Cobble
$500.00
$25.000.00
$16.500.00
$500.00
18D
7.708
SF
Automatic Irrication Svslem
$10.00
$77.080.00
$50.102.00
$8.00
$8.00
$80.00
18E
27
EA
Tree Bubbler
$95.00
$2.565.00
$2.133.00
$100.00
18F
0
EA
Automatic Irrication Controller
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$1.00
18G
7.708
SF
Soil Preoaration and Weed Abatement
$1.50
$11.562.00
$2.697.80
$0.75
18H
7.708
SF
3 in. Thick Tree Mulch Laver
$1.001
$7.708.00
$8.478.80
$0.83
$0.50
$2.000.00
181
2
EA
48 in. Box Tree
$1,800.00
$3.600.00
$3.200.00
$2.500.00
181
6
EA
36 in. Box Tree
$1,200.00
$7.200.00
$4.800.00
$900.00
$1.000.00
$400.00
18K
19
EA
24 in. Box Tree
$400.00
$7.600.00
$7.410.00
$350.00
18L
1 1.080
EA
1 Gallon Shrub
$10.00
$10.800.00
$9.504.00
$10.00
$13.00
$6,000.00
18M
1
LS
90 Day Plant Establishment Period, Ste 58+75 to
78+50
$8,000.00
$8,000.00
$3,750.00
$3,000.00
IVIAL ALI I,KNAI t tl V IVV. L 51615.235.1JU 513u.22/.tJu 5164./12.154 51131W.bu 5133.1152.UU
Page 2 of 6
RASE RID
CITY OF COSTA MESA
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SERVICES
PLACENTIA AVENUE MEDIAN IMPROVEMENTS,FEDERAL PROJECT NO. HSIP 5312 (092) AND CITY PROJECT NO. 16-04
BID OPENING DATE: JUNE 20, 2017
5. C.S. LEGACY6. PUB CONSTRUCTION, INC. 7. EBS GENERAL 8. ENVIRONMENTAL
CONSTRUCTION, INC. ENGINEERING CONSTRUCTION
CITY ESTIMATE POMONA DIAMOND BAR CORONA WOODLAND HILLS
NO.
BID
QUANTITY
DESCRIPTION
UNIT
PRICE
TOTAL
UNIT
PRICE
TOTAL
UNIT
UNIT
UNIT
PRICE
TOTAL
PRICE
TOTAL
PRICE
TOTAL
1
1
LS
Mobilization
$0.00
$98.776.00
$98.776.00
$150.000.00
$150.000.00
$100.000.00
$50.000.00
$45.000.00
$3.000.00
$351.000.00
$230.700.00
$9.100.00
$68.400.00
$15.875.00
$266.400.00
$19.845.00
$18.000.00
$17.500.00
$80,000.00
$41.400.00
$12.120.00
$41.520.00
$47.507.25
$5.050.00
$15.000.00
$6.786.75
$17.645.55
$26.000.00
$33.600.00
$14.720.00
$32.517.00
$2,000.00
$10.000.00
$30.000.00
$20.000.00
$5.000.00
$1.500.00
$170.00
$30.00
$35.00
$1.200.00
$15.00
$60.00
$50.00
$5.000.00
$10.000.00
$35,000.00
$400.00
$9.00
$250.00
$6.00
$95.00
$16.000.00
$1.00
$0.70
$2.000.00
$1.200.00
$500.00
$115.60�j
$7,500.00
$10.000.00
$30.000.00
$20.000.00
$5.000.00
$3.000.00
$459.000.00
$276.840.00
$185.000.00
$46.500.00
$185.000.00
546.500.00
$17.600.00
$15.000.00
$10.000.00
$108.000.00
$230.700.00
$3.250.00
$104.500.00
$12.700.00
$219.040.00
$132.300.00
$41.200.00
$10.000.00
$35,740.00
2
1
LS
Traffic Control
$0.00
$20.260.00
$20.260.00
$100.000.00
3
1
LS
Construct Survev & Monument Preservation
$0.00
$21.275.00
$7.821.00
$761.00
$75.84
$16.00
$40.00
$2.257.00
$17.00
$71.00
$35.00
$21.732.00
$23.564.00
$61,466.00
9486.00
$8.50
$214.00
$7.00
$219.00
$14.422.00
$0.57
$0.64
$1.512.00
$691.00
$328.00
$15.00
$21,268.00
$21.275.00
$50.000.00
$17.600.00
$15.000.00
4
1
LS
Stormwater Pollution Prevention Imolementation
$0.00
$7.821.00
$45.000.00
5
2
EA
Proiect Information Sipns
$0.00
$1.522.00
$1.500.00
$5.000.00
$40.00
6
2.700
CY
Unclassified Excavation/ Removals
$0.00
$204.768.00
$130.00
7
9.228
LF
Construct Pinned Curb
$0.00
$147.648.00
$25.00
$25.00
$25.00
8
130
LF
Construct PCC Mountable Curb
$0.00
$5.200.00
$70.00
$4.550.00
$45.600.00
9
38
EA
Construct Parkwav Drain No. 1
$0.00
$85.766.00
$10.795.00
$210.160.00
$46.305.00
$43.464.00
$23.564.00
$61,466.00
$67.068.00
$20.604.00
$74.044.00
$190.029.00
$22.119.00
$14.422.00
$15.473.79
$17.374.08
$19.656.00
$29.022.00
$15.088.00
$54.195.00
$21,268.00
$1.800.00
$25.00
$2.750.00
$20.00
10
635
SF
Construct Pavement Cobbles
$0.00
$9.525.00
11
2.960
CY
Construct Class A Too Soil
$0.00
$90.00
$15.00
$177.600.00
$74.00
12
1.323
LF
Construct Utility Sleeves
$0.00
$66.150.00
$100.00
13
2
EA
Construct Hot Tao/Meter Set/Backflow Device
$0.00
$9.000.00
$17.500.00
$10.000.00
$10.000.00
$35,000.00
$55.200.00
$21.816.00
$86.500.00
$162.882.00
$9.595.00
$16.000.00
$27.147.00
$19.002.90
$26.000.00
$50.400.00
$23.000.00
$54.195.00
$7,500.00
$20.600.00
$10.000.00
14
1
LS
Utilitv Potholing
$0.00
15
1
LS
Remove and Install New Signing, Striping and
Pavement Markings
$0.00
$80,000.00
$35,740.00
16A
138
EA
Boulders
$0.00
$300.00
$5.00
$545.00
$75.210.00
16B
2.424
LF
Root Control Barrer
$0.00
$12.00
$29.088.00
16C
346
TON
River Rock Cobble
$0.00
$120.00
$1.75
$590.00
$204.140.00
16D
27.147
SF
Automatic Initiation Svstem
$0.00
$6.00
$162.882.00
16E
101
EA
Tree Bubbler
$0.00
$50.00
$15.000.00
$70.00
$7.070.00
16F
1
EA
Automatic Initiation Controller
$0.00
$16.500.00
$16.500.00
16G
27.147
SF
Soil Preparation and Weed Abatement
$0.00
$0.25
$0.65
$0.50
$13.573.50
16
27.147
SF
3 in. Thick Tree Mulch Laver
$0.00
$0.40
$10.858.80
161
13
EA
48 in. Box Tree
$0.00
$2.000.00
$800.00
$1.700.00
$735.00
$22.100.00
$30.870.00
$13.800.00
$54.195.00
$5,000.00
16J
42
EA
36 in. Box Tree
$0.00
16K
46
EA
24 in. Box Tree
$0.00
$320.00
$9.00
$2,000.00
$300.00
$15.00
16L
3.613
EA
1 Gallon Shrub
$0.00
16M
1
LS
90 Day Plant Establishment Period, Sta 58+75 to
78+50
$0.00
$5,000.00
TOTAL BASE BID $0.00 $1.549.152.87
Page 3 of 6
$1.720.686.55 $1.721.502.90 $1.816.817.30
ALTERNATE BID NO. 1
CITY OF COSTA MESA
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SERVICES
PLACENTIA AVENUE MEDIAN IMPROVEMENTS,FEDERAL PROJECT NO. HSIP 5312 (092) AND CITY PROJECT NO. 16-04
BID OPENING DATE: JUNE 20, 2017
5. C . LEGACY 6. PUB CONSTRUCTIONINC. 7. EBS GENERAL 8. ENVIRONMENTAL
,
CONSTRUCTION, INC. ENGINEERING CONSTRUCTION
CITY ESTIMATE POMONA DIAMOND BAR CORONA WOODLAND HILLS
NO.
BID
QUANTITY
DESCRIPTION
UNIT
PRICE
TOTAL
UNIT
UNIT
BAR
UNIT
UNIT
TOTAL
PRICE
TOTAL
PRICE
TOTAL
PRICE
TOTAL
PRICE
17A
32
EA
Boulders
$0.00
$0.00
$486.00
$15.552.00
$300.00
$9.600.00
9420.00
$10.00
$250.00
$10.00
$100.00
$0.00
$1.50
$2.00
$3.000.00
$1.500.00
$500.00
$15.00
$5,000.00
$13.440.00
$3.120.00
$12.000.00
$17.210.00
$1.300.00
$0.00
$2.581.50
$3.442.00
$3.000.00
$7.500.00
$3.500.00
$3.615.00
$565.00
$18.080.00
17B
312
LF
Root Control Barrier
$0.00
$0.00
$8.50
$2.652.00
$5.00
$1.560.00
$5.760.00
$3.011.75
$650.00
$0.00
5430.25
$1.118.65
$2.000.00
54.000.00
$2.240.00
$2.169.00
$2,000.00
$15.00
$4.680.00
17C
48
TON
River Rock Cobble
$214.00
$7.00
$214.00
$0.00
$0.57
$0.64
$1.512.00
$691.00
$328.00
$15.00
$10,635.00
$0.00
$214.00
$10.272.00
$120.00
$440.00
$14.00
$21.120.00
$24.094.00
$910.00
$0.00
$1.721.00
$860.50
$1.450.00
$3.750.00
$2.100.00
$4.820.00
$1,500.00
17D
1.721
SF
Automatic Initiation Svstem
$77.080.00
$0.00
$7.00
$219.00
$0.00
$0.57
$0.64
$1.512.00
$691.00
$328.00
$15.00
$10,635.00
$12.047.00
$1.75
17E
13
EA
Tree Bubbler
$50.00
$0.00
$2.847.00
$50.00
$70.00
$0.00
17F
0
EA
Automatic Initiation Controller
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
17G
1.721
SF
Soil Preparation and Weed Abatement
$0.00
$980.97
$0.25
$1.00
$0.50
17H
1.721
SF
3 in. Thick Tree Mulch Laver
3 in. Thick Tree Mulch Laver
$0.00
$1.101.44
$0.65
171
1
EA
48 in. Box Tree
EA
$0.00
$1.512.00
$2.000.00
$1.450.00
$750.00
17J
5
EA
36 in. Box Tree
$0.00
$3.455.00
$800.00
17K
7
EA
24 in. Box Tree
$725.00
$0.00
$2.296.00
$320.00
$300.00
$20.00
17L
241
EA
1 Gallon Shrub
$9.500.00
$0.00
$3.615.00
$9.00
17M
1
LS
90 Day Plant Establishment Period, Sta 58+75 to
78+50
$16.200.00
$0.00
$10,635.00
$2,000.00
$5,000.00
$1,500.00
TOTAL ALTERNATE BID NO. 1 $0.00 $66.965.41 $34.539.65 $75.708.50 $85.085.50
5. C.S. LEGACY 6. PUB CONSTRUCTION, INC. 7. EBS GENERAL 8. ENVIRONMENTAL
CONSTRUCTION, INC. ENGINEERING CONSTRUCTION
ALTERNATE
NO.
BID NO.
BID
QUANTITY
2
DESCRIPTION
CITY ESTIMATE
UNIT
PRICE
TOTAL
POMONA
UNIT
DIAMOND
UNIT
BAR
CORONA
UNIT
PRICE
WOODLAND
UNIT
HILLS
TOTAL
PRICE
TOTAL
PRICE
TOTAL
TOTAL
PRICE
18A
28
EA
Boulders
$0.00
$486.00
$13.608.00
$300.00
$8.400.00
$3.240.00
$6.000.00
$13.489.00
$1.350.00
$0.00
$1.927.00
$5.010.20
$4.000.00
$4.800.00
$6.080.00
$9.720.00
$2,000.00
$500.00
$10.00
$300.00
$10.00
$100.00
$0.00
$1.50
$2.00
$2.500.00
$1.500.00
$500.00
$15.00
$10,000.00
$14.000.00
$565.00
$15.820.00
$9.720.00
$22.000.00
$53.956.00
$1.890.00
$0.00
$3.854.00
$3.854.00
$3.300.00
$4.350.00
$5.700.00
$16.200.00
$2,000.00
18B
648
LF
Root Control Barrier
$0.00
$8.50
$5.508.00
$5.00
$6.480.00
$15.000.00
$15.00
$440.00
18C
50
TON
River Rock Cobble
$0.00
$214.00
$7.00
$214.00
$0.00
$0.57
$0.64
$1.512.00
$691.00
$328.00
$15.00
$10,635.00
$10.700.00
$120.00
18D
7.708
SF
Automatic Irriaation Svslem
$0.00
$53.956.00
$1.75
$77.080.00
$7.00
18E
27
EA
Tree Bubbler
$0.00
$5.778.00
$50.00
$2.700.00
$70.00
18F
0
EA
Automatic Irriaation Controller
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
18G
7.708
SF
Soil Preparation and Weed Abatement
$0.00
$4.393.56
$0.25
$11.562.00
$0.50
$0.50
18H
7.708
SF
3 in. Thick Tree Mulch Laver
$0.00
$4.933.12
$0.65
$15.416.00
181
2
EA
48 in. Box Tree
$0.00
$3.024.00
$2.000.00
$5.000.00
$1.650.00
18J6
EA
36 in. Box Tree
$0.00
$4.146.00
$800.00
$9.000.00
$725.00
18K
19
EA
24 in. Box Tree
$0.00
$6.232.00
$320.00
$9.500.00
$300.00
18L
1.080
EA
1 Gallon Shrub
$0.00
$16.200.00
$9.00
$16.200.00
$15.00
18M
1
LS
90 Day Plant Establishment Period, Ste 58+75 to
78+50
$0.00
$10,635.00
$2,000.00
$10,000.00
$2,000.00
TOTAL ALTERNATE BID NO. 2 $0.00 $139.113.68
Page 4 of 6
$66.016.20 $191.938.00 $142.644.00
CITY OF COSTA MESA
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SERVICES
PLACENTIA AVENUE MEDIAN IMPROVEMENTS,FEDERAL PROJECT NO. HSIP 5312 (092) AND CITY PROJECT NO. 16-04
BID OPENING DATE: JUNE 20, 2017
9. KASA CONSTRUCTION AVERAGE
GeCC GIn HrvcaTIMerc ('141Nl)
NO.
BID
QUANTITY
DESCRIPTION
UNIT
PRICE
TOTAL
UNIT
UNIT
PRICE
TOTAL
PRICE
TOTAL
1
1
LS
Mobilization
$0.00
$188.000.00
$188.000.00
$127.864.00
$127.864.00
2
1
LS
Traffic Control
$0.00
$15.000.00
$18.000.00
$8.000.00
$1.200.00
$112.00
$18.00
$25.00
$2.500.00
$19.00
$40.00
$75.00
$15.000.00
$4.500.00
$45,000.00
$285.00
$15.00
$1.020.00
$6.00
543.00
$14.000.00
$0.55
$0.60
$2.400.00
$1.200.00
$366.00
$12.00
$5,500.00
$15.000.00
$18.000.00
$8.000.00
$2.400.00
$302.400.00
$166.104.00
$3.250.00
$95.000.00
$12.065.00
$118.400.00
$99.225.00
$30.000.00
$4.500.00
$45,000.00
$39.330.00
$36.360.00
$352.920.00
$162.882.00
$4.343.00
$14.000.00
$14.930.85
$16.288.20
$31.200.00
$50.400.00
$16.836.00
$43.356.00
$5,500.00
$44.290.29
$44.290.29
3
1
LS
Construct Survev & Monument Preservation
$0.00
$27.041.67
$27.041.67
4
1
LS
Stomiwater Pollution Prevention Imolementation
$0.00
$18.257.89
$18.257.89
5
2
EA
Proiect Information Stars
$0.00
$1.734.56
$85.32
$3.469.11
$230.352.00
_ $182.150.47
$5.440.50
_ $70.329.56
$12.276.67
$176.120.00
$89.523.00
$28.340.44
$14.507.11
$45,745.11
$50.462.00
$27.835.60
$133.517.56
$137.544.80
$8.304.44
$15.908.00
$16.710.49
$16.620.00
$24.356.22
$38.061.33
$17.142.67
6
2.700
CY
Unclassified Excavation/ Removals
$0.00
7
9.228
LF
Construct Pinned Curb
$0.00
$19.74
$41.85
8
130
LF
Construct PCC Mountable Curb
$0.001
9
38
EA
Construct Parkwav Drain No. 1
$0.00
$1.850.78
$19.33
$59.50
$67.67
$14.170.22
$14.507.11
$45,745.11
$365.67
$11.48
$385.89
$5.07
10
635
SF
Construct Pavement Cobbles
$0.00
11
2.960
1Cy
Construct Class A Too Soil
$0.00
12
1.323
LF
Construct Utilitv Sleeves
$0.00
13
2
EA
Construct Hot Tao/Meter Set/Backflow Device
$0.00
14
1
LS
Utilitv Potholma
$0.00
15
1
LS
Remove and Install New Signing, Striping and
Pavement Markinas
$0.00
16A
138
EA
Boulders
$0.00
16B
2.424
LF
Root Control Barrer
$0.00
16C
346
TON
River Rock Cobble
$0.00
16D
27.147
SF
Automatic Initiation Svstem
$0.00
16E
101
EA
Tree Bubbler
$0.00
$82.22
$15.908.00
16F
1
EA
Automatic Initiation Controller
$0.00
16G
27.147
SF
Soil Preparation and Weed Abatement
$0.00
$0.62
$0.61
16
27.147
SF
3 in. Thick Tree Mulch Laver
$0.00
161
13
EA
48 in. Box Tree
$0.00
$1.873.56
$906.22
16J
42
EA
36 in. Box Tree
$0.00
16K
46
EA
24 in. Box Tree
$0.00
$372.67
16L
3.613
EA
1 Gallon Shrub
$0.00
$11.56
$41.750.22
16M
1
LS
90 Day Plant Establishment Period, Sta 58+75 to
78+50
$0.00
$7,252.00
$7,252.00
I U I AL 1:3AJt CIU $0.00 $1.895.690.05 $1.611.173.14
Page 5 of 6
CITY OF COSTA MESA
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SERVICES
PLACENTIA AVENUE MEDIAN IMPROVEMENTS,FEDERAL PROJECT NO. HSIP 5312 (092) AND CITY PROJECT NO. 16-04
BID OPENING DATE: JUNE 20, 2017
9. KASA CONSTRUCTION AVERAGE
ALTERNATE BID NO. 1 CITY ESTIMATE CHINO
NO.
BID
QUANTITY
DESCRIPTION
UNIT
PRICE
TOTAL
UNIT
UNIT
PRICE
TOTAL
PRICE
TOTAL
17A
32
EA
Boulders
$0.00
$285.00
$15.00
$950.00
$60.00
$40.00
$0.00
$1.50
$1.25
$2.400.00
$1.200.00
$377.00
$12.00
$2,500.00
$9.120.00
$424.56
$13.585.78
17B
312
LF
Root Control Barrier
$0.00
$4.680.00
$12.78
$3.986.67
17C
48
TON
River Rock Cobble
$0.00
$45.600.00
$380.89
$18.282.67
$34.200.09
$1.133.89
$0.00
$1.476.24
$1.958.12
$2.123.56
$4.761.67
$2.683.33
$3.012.50
$4,098.33
17D
1.721
SF
Automatic Initiation Svstem
$0.00
$103.260.00
$19.87
17E
13
EA
Tree Bubbler
$0.00
$520.00
$87.22
17F
0
EA
Automatic Initiation Controller
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
17G
1.721
SF
Soil Preparation and Weed Abatement
$0.00
$2.581.50
$0.86
17H
1.721
SF
3 in. Thick Tree Mulch Laver
$0.00
$2.151.25
$1.14
171
1
EA
48 in. Box Tree
$0.00
$2.400.00
$2.123.56
17J
5
EA
36 in. Box Tree
$0.00
$6.000.00
$952.33
17K
7
EA
24 in. Box Tree
$0.00
$2.639.00
$383.33
17L
241
EA
1 Gallon Shrub
$0.00
$2.892.00
$12.50
17M
1
LS
90 Day Plant Establishment Period, Sta 58+75 to
78+50
71+50 Day Plant Establishment Period, Ste 58+75 to
78
$0.00
$2,500.00
$4,098.33
TOTAL ALTERNATE BID NO. 1 $0.00 $184.343.75 $91.302.83
9. KASA CONSTRUCTION AVERAGE
ALTERNATE BID NO.2 CITY ESTIMATE CHINO
NO.
BID
QUANTITY
DESCRIPTION
UNIT
PRICE
TOTAL
UNIT
UNIT
PRICE
TOTAL
PRICE
TOTAL
18A
28
EA
Boulders
$0.00
$285.00
$15.00
$950.00
$11.00
$43.00
$0.00
$1.00
$0.75
$2.400.00
$1.200.00
$375.00
$12.00
$2,500.00
$7.980.00
$406.22
$11.374.22
18B
648
LF
Root Control Barrer
$0.00
$9.720.00
$12.50
$8.100.00
18C
50
TON
River Rock Cobble
$0.00
$47.500.00
$374.22
$18.711.11
$54.255.76
$2.280.00
$0.00
$5.412.73
$6.568.93
$3.958.22
$5.664.00
$7.141.89
18D
7.708
SF
Automatic Irriaation Svslem
$0.00
$84.788.00
$7.04
18E
27
EA
Tree Bubbler
$0.00
$1.161.00
$84.44
18F
0
EA
Automatic Irriaation Controller
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
18G
7.708
SF
Soil Preparation and Weed Abatement
$0.00
$7.708.00
$0.70
18H
7.708
SF
3 in. Thick Tree Mulch Laver
$0.00
$5.781.00
$0.85
181
2
EA
48 in. Box Tree
$0.00
$4.800.00
$1.979.11
181
6
EA
36 in. Box Tree
$0.00
$7.200.00
$944.00
18K
19
EA
24 in. Box Tree
$0.00
$7.125.00
$375.89
18L
1.080
EA
1 Gallon Shrub
$0.00
$12.960.00
$11.81
$12.756.00
18M
1
LS
71+50 Day Plant Establishment Period, Ste 58+75 to
78
$0.00
$2,500.00
$4,987.22
$4,987.22
TOTAL ALTERNATE BID NO. 2 $0.00 $199.223.00 $141.210.08
Page 6 of 6
ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS
FOR CC -13
ARLINGTON DR.
BIOSWALE
ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS FOR CC -13
Arlington Dr. Bioswale & Dry Weather Diversion Project
o PROJECT LIMITS: Arlington Drive (from Fairview to Newport)
Arlington Dr. Bioswale & Dry Weather Diversion Project
F«
PERIMETER TRAIL PARKWAY
RIOSWALE
BIOSWALE ADJACENT TO ARLINGTON DRIVE
Arlington Dr. Bioswale & Dry Weather Diversion Project
rA KUKUUNu rAIKUKUUNU PARKWAY MULTI-PURPOSE PARKWAY ARLINGTON DRIVE PCC
PERIMETER BIOSWALE TRAIL PARKWAY
BIOSWALE ADJACENT TO FAIRGROUNDS
Fairview Road to Gate 4.5
F-1 IE
ATrACHMFNTI
�sfsaHf..cG rC�xL�Y P'EC ilf'
E' SXO�LYS M1[' :®TN 906]
.Tl u CMCYIE I4ML �.
� Yllq aLLVINC fIP.
ARLINGTON DRIVE PRELIMINARY LANDSCAPE PLAN Itti r;
L'.Ef�CR&GW&B axwn pIYQF COPfIYEiI flF�CIMGuir ICACNILL HIUIIEIYI! rt�un ....wr�.�=
PAG IOF3
N
Gate 5 to Gate 8
AMCMEW 1
iMxcgrz:�(i'tuaWmn
w.ame .•nxc
--
TREES MAEBNIG MIWrIMl90AL M6FER NANi lMFE0.IgL
BWFE'RWIiWI B1 MANi MAlEA1lLL
¢Ras ar:FlP1w. .enw cPww.w. .xl:ne.xmos Rgaoes
wcrJ¢.mmos ;rr
nucPXs u�[uex . a.J.r
m..�
¢Pans.+ Rouon uc.snxx nwP�. sPCYR
cwu Rouwwusxnlr. nm .eoc[
RgiunA 4.cwE• Pxonxl• rR•gm M1JMi CWra wOIMo CO�w ASe
cMw ssur•/ROA1 Z'YL
TIPP..s v+ Plm'o Uv yP. 1wEPJ^V{IS XIO4C•
¢3[XWP9•¢[PIICsq'WSw'S..Mllw H.04gY9
[u6Naxq TRRJ'JR.0 ST+rygNpLO
9%',
PIINPMUu NP xYW V6Y5 qP,
[UJXERu XG➢
IOUNYXSQRxvLAZN 4rvY
a WTCiya VXIp'rygi 69NH
u:XL`!LM• <NLLWS $44 �4T�'IM uNRV
x�g911wu1� RaNIX cxafi
�M�y��
`i1dYCN
• '� pW: Witt RSC feM/n GaYY
StlM'» :EYE �aA.cw Y.y1uy1
ARLINGTON DRIVE PRELIMINARY LANDSCAPE PLAN
0 20;
IXSAM.Sryp&&6 own f OFCO AME L11111111—�
_
PAGE 2OF3
Gate 9 to Newport
ATfA MEW I
ARLINGTON DRIVE PRELIMINARY LANDSCAPE PLAN O 0 f
r:.0 ma. .1 CT'"F AWM swwwwxw llAESIIYQI M/6 �.... —
LLN]SC4F[ egCXIIiCRi6
PAGE 3OF3
ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS
FOR OB -1
LIONS PARK PROJECTS
TRAYLOR, MARIAN
To: . GREEN, BRENDA
Subject: RE: Lions park drainage and Square Footage information
From: SETHURAMAN, RAJA
Sent: Tuesday, July 18, 2017 1:19 PM
To: CITY COUNCIL <CITYCOUNCIL@ci.costa-mesa.ca.us>
Cc: GREEN, BRENDA <brenda.sreen@costamesaca.eov>; HATCH, THOMAS <THOMAS. HATCH @costa mesaca.gov>;
LETOURNEAU, TAMARA <TAMARA.LETOURNEAU @costamesaca.gov>; MEJIA, BALTAZAR
<BALTAZAR. M EJ IA@costa mesaca.aov>
Subject: Lions park drainage and Square Footage information
Mayor and City Council,
As requested by Mayor Pro Tem Genis, the following information is provided for Lions Park projects.
The design team evaluated the recently completed Industrial Way storage and infiltration system in Lions Park and
determined that the new site stormwater run-off was not a part of the original design for the Industrial Way project and
must be accommodated in a new system. The complete drainage system for the Lions Park projects includes the
construction of bioretention facilities, storm drain pipes and an underground storage and infiltration system. The total cost
of these items is approximately $600,000. Drainage Fees are proposed to be used only for the construction of the storm
drain pipes and the underground storage and infiltration system (approximately $350,000) as this has a direct benefit to
the reduction of water flow into the existing storm drain pipes.
We are also providing updated calculations for the open space that is being created with the Lions Park Projects. Please
disregard any previously submitted figures.
Item
Description
Area (S.F.)
1
Total area (1) of Lions Park(Existing)
502,530
2
Total area (1) of Lions Park (Proposed)
505,958
3
Total area (2) now occupied by buildings
53,264
4
Total area (2) proposed to be covered by buildings
42,700
5
Total area (2) now devoted to parking (within the Park boundary)
73,259
6
Total area (2) proposed to be devoted to parking (within the Park
boundary)
55,333
7
Total area (2) now devoted to walkways and other pavement
85,435
8
Total area (2) proposed to be devoted to walkways and other pavement
85,901
9
Total area (2) now devoted to planting of any sort, including grass and
other landscaping
280,320
10
Total area proposed (2) (3) to be devoted to planting of any sort, including
grass and other landscaping
322,024
11
Total area now devoted to contiguous, usable open space (within the
Phase 1 Project Boundary)
50,411
12
Total area proposed to be devoted to contiguous, usable open space
within the Phase 1 Project Boundary)
101,254
1. Lions Park Boundary: Included within the Lions Park property line is the existing Fire Station, Costa Mesa
Historical Society as well as a portion of on -street parking. For the purpose of this area analysis that is intended
to quantify park land and uses within the park, the boundary of Lions Park is defined by the curb line at all
adjoining streets and excludes all on -street parking area that borders the park. The existing Fire Station parcel as
well as the Costa Mesa Historical Society parcel is excluded from the Lions Park area calculation.
Park Area Quantities: "Lions Park Area" includes two categories of use. The first is "BUILDINGS AND
PARKING" which includes ground floor building area and the area of surface parking lots within the Lions Park
Boundary described above. The second category is "PARK WALKS, PROMENADES AND GREEN SPACE" or
space intended for park function and recreation to include landscaped open areas and park pedestrian circulation
such as walkways and paths within the Lions Park Boundary.
3. Proposed with the new project is the addition of 41,704 SF of new "PARK WALKS, PROMENADES AND GREEN
SPACE" or .96 acres of new park area as compared to existing "PARK WALKS, PROMENADES AND GREEN
SPACE" within the Lions Park Boundary.
Thank you.
Raja Sethuraman
Public Services Director
City of Costa Mesa
714-754-5343
From: "GENIS, SANDRA" <SANDRA.GENISgcostamesaca.gov>
Date: July 14, 2017 at 12:15:16 AM GMT+5:30
To: "HATCH, THOMAS" <THOMAS.HATCHna costamesaca.gov>, "SETHURAMAN, RAJA"
<RAJA. SETHURAMANgcostamesaca. gov>
Subject: lions park drainage
It is my understanding that some drainage/flood control funds will be utilized for the Lions Park
project. In recent years we completed a major drainage project at Lions Park. What additional work is
needed? Why wasn't it part of the larger project? What, specifically, will be done to justify use of the
fees? What is the full cost of the drainage related items that are part of the project? What portion will
be funded by use of the fees?
Additional Documents
NB -3 Possible moratorium to the
Small Lot Ordinance
TRAYLOR, MARIAN
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Attachments:
Importance:
Mayor and City Council,
HATCH, THOMAS
Thursday, July 13, 2017 5:40 PM
CITY COUNCIL
GREEN, BRENDA; SHELTON, KELLY; CURTIS, BARRY C.; TRAYLOR, MARIAN; DUNN,
MICHAEL; DUARTE, TOM
FW: Number in Pipeline
Residential Project Requiring Planning commission Action[1].docx
High
Attached is a list of 10 projects that are in "The Pipeline" at this point related to small lot development. On the Agenda
for next Tuesday is an item requested by Mayor Pro Genis about the City Council considering directing staff to bring back
a report on approving a possible moratorium as to the small lot ordinance. This additional information will also be
included in your red folders. Thanks.
Tom
From: CURTIS, BARRY C.
Sent: Thursday, July 13, 2017 4:57 PM
To: HATCH, THOMAS <THOMAS.HATCH @costa mesaca.gov>; TREVINO, JAY M. <JAY.TREVINO @costa mesaca.gov>
Subject: RE: Number in Pipeline
There are ten projects in the pipeline. See the attached if you want additional details.
Barry
Barry C Curtis, AICP
Economic & Development Services Director
City of Costa Mesa
77 Fair Drive, Costa Mesa, CA 92626
714.754.5278
From: HATCH, THOMAS
Sent: Thursday, July 13, 2017 4:50 PM
To: CURTIS, BARRY C. <BARRY.CURTIS@costamesaca.gov>; TREVINO, JAY M. <JAY.TREVINO@costamesaca.aov>
Subject: Number in Pipeline
Sandy will likely ask me tomorrow how many projects are in the pipeline that would be governed by the small lot
ordinance? I know you guys already looked at this but I do not have it so please resend. Thanks.
1
Residential Project Requiring Planning Commission Action
Project#
Address
Planner
Status
Description
PM -15-13
1509 Orange Ave
Dan
Dan will speak
Conversion of a 2 -unit condo into 2 -lot small lot subdivision. All existing
with Applicant
improvements are to remain, and no additional improvements are proposed
regarding status
(refer to PA -07-35)
PM -2016-162
227 22nd St.
Dan
Dan will speak
Subdivision of an existing single parcel with two existing dwelling units into two
(PM -16-11)
with Applicant
separate parcels. Parcel 16,300 sq. ft. lot (84' x 75'). Parcel 2 7,575 sq. ft. lot
regarding status
(101'x 75').
PA -16-20 /
752 & 756 W. 19th
Ryan
Minoo has
1. Master Plan for the construction of 5 new live/work units per the 19 West
T-18034
St.
called applicant
Urban Plan.
for status.
2. Tentative Tract Map for five new parcels on a 0.27 acre lot.
PA -17-09 /
134 Santa Isabel
Ryan/
In review
1. Planning Application (Design Review) PA -17-09 for the construction of three,
TPM 2016-172
Ave.
to be
two-story detached single-family residences.
reassigned
2. Tentative Parcel Map 2016-172 for the subdivision of an 11,618 square foot lot
into three separate parcels, per the Small Lot Subdivision Ordinance.
PA -17-13 /
767 W 18th St.
Willy
SCHEDULED
1. Planning Application (Design Review) PA -17-13 for the construction of three,
TPM 2017-122
FOR 7/24 PC
two-story detached single-family residences, each with an attached single -car
MEETING
garage and attached single -car carport. All units propose similar floor plans: 1st
2. Tentative Parcel Map 2017-122 (PM -17-06) for the subdivision of an 9,002.5
square foot lot into three separate parcels, per the Small Lot Subdivision
Ordinance.
PA -17-17 /
33716 th Place
Dan
Incomplete
1. Planning Application (Design Review) PA -17-17 for the construction of two -
TPM 2017-130
Application
unit small lot subdivision development. The front residence will consist of a two-
story, two-bedroom (approximately 2,328 SF) dwelling with attached 2 -car
garage. The rear residence will consist of a two-story, three-bedroom
(approximately 2,343 SF) dwelling with attached 2 -car garage.
2. Tentative Parcel Map 2017-130 for the subdivision of a 10,395 SF lot into two
separate parcels, per the Small Lot Subdivision Ordinance.
PA -17-20
362 La Perle Ln
TBD
New
Design Review for the construction of two new, two-story single family dwelling
units on separate parcels. The corner dwelling proposes 3 bedrooms and 2.5
baths; the dwelling facing La Perle Lane proposes 4 bedrooms and 2.5 baths.
7/14/17
Residential Project Requiring Planning Commission Action
Project#
Address
Planner
Status
Description
PA -17-21
1925 Church St
TBD
New
Design Review for the construction of two, two-story single family dwelling units
on separate lots. Each dwelling will be approximately 2,000 SF homes with 3
bedrooms and 2.5 bathrooms.
PA -17-24
1800 Peninsula PI
TBD
New
Master Plan Amendment for California Seabreeze Master Plan to allow the
following:
1. Build third floor room additions in compliance with Association standard plans.
Floor area of addition may not exceed 50% of the building's footprint.
2. Include a roof -top deck n the third floor to increase private open space.
3. Allow minor encroachments into side and rear building setbacks, if needed, to
construct structural elements on the home's exterior supporting third floor
additions.
4. Build by right in compliance with the proposed "standard plans" and not
require each owner to obtain City variances from building heights or setbacks.
PA -17-25
162 E 18th St
Justin
SCHEDULED
Design Review for previously approved Small Lot Development (PA -14-50 & PM -
FOR 7/24 PC
15-01) which was denied a time extension, with the entitlements expired. The
MEETING
proposed project is to construct a 2 -unit, two-story, detached residential small
lot development on a 6,263 sq. ft. lot.
7/14/17
TRAYLOR, MARIAN
From:
HAUSER, JANET
Sent:
Friday, July 14, 2017 10:26 AM
To:
GREEN, BRENDA; TRAYLOR, MARIAN
Subject:
FW: Small Lot Ordinance
From: treed92627@gmail.com [mailto:treed92627@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, July 13, 2017 4:28 PM
To: CITY COUNCIL <CITYCOUNCIL@ci.costa-mesa.ca.us>
Subject: Small Lot Ordinance
To Whom it May Concern,
It's my understanding that the Small Lot Ordinance is on the docket under item #3 for new business at next Tuesday's
meeting 7/18. As a long time East Side resident I would urge a moratorium be put in place to discuss this further. The
variances that have been put in place to allow multiple units and/or homes to replace a single dwelling exaserbates
the growing density issue. An example is Bella Mesa on Santa Ana at 22M. With 13 units going in, if each unit has
two cars that's an additional 26 cars going up and down Santa Ana and else where. There are plenty of other
examples but it's changing the character of the neighborhood and not for the better.
Please see your way clear to put a hold on these developments until there is an opportunity for additional
community input.
Thanks for your consideration,
Tim Reed
279 East Wilson Street
O - 949-650-5325
M - 949-278-7718
TRAYLOR, MARIAN
Subject: FW: small lots
ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS FOR NB -3
From: HAUSER, JANET
Sent: Friday, July 14, 2017 11:15 AM
To: GREEN, BRENDA <brenda.green@costamesaca.gov>; TRAYLOR, MARIAN <MARIAN.TRAYLOR@costa mesaca.gov>
Subject: FW: small lots
From: Tim Lewis [mailto:zooterincm@aol.com]
Sent: Friday, July 14, 2017 8:05 AM
To: CITY COUNCIL <CITYCOUNCIL@ci.costa-mesa.ca.us>
Subject: small lots
Every day I hear about traffic getting worse. My customers are the heart beat of Costa Mesa. They are not only the
residents but the workers, contractors and business people that use our streets. Like me. Good development is good and
bad development is bad. The SILO is a great idea if all you want to do is make money?
Parking is funny. No matter how much you have, it won't be enough. Parking seems to be self limiting. I see traffic flow
increasing on low flow streets a bigger issue. It is not self limiting, rather self disabling. The flows increase, the issues
increase in a never ending march toward "grid lock". Will West 17th look like the 91 freeway? Yep. I use neighborhood
streets to by-pass Victoria traffic, with trucks and trailers, when needed. Screwing up traffic flows on South Harbor will
increase this issue.
The finishing of the 55 Fwy might be the only way to move all us people like a twice daily tidal flow'?
Thanks
Tim Lewis
Red -E -Rentals
TRAYLOR, MARIAN
Subject: FW: [BULK] 7.18.2017 agenda NB#3
Importance: Low
ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS FOR NB -3
From: GREEN, BRENDA
Sent: Monday, July 17, 2017 8:41 AM
To: TRAYLOR, MARIAN <MARIAN.TRAYLOR@costa mesaca.gov>
Subject: FW: [BULK] 7.18.2017 agenda NB#3
Importance: Low
From: Flo Martin [mailto:floseppi@Bmail.com]
Sent: Friday, July 14, 2017 12:01 PM
To: MANSOOR, ALLAN <ALLAN.MAN SOOR@costa mesaca.eov>; RIGHEIMER, JIM<JIM.RIGHEIMER@costamesaca.eov>;
STEPHENS, JOHN<JOHN.STEPHENS@costamesaca.eov>; FOLEY, KATRINA<KATRINA.FOLEY@costamesaca.sov>; GENIS,
SANDRA <SANDRA.GENIS@costamesaca.Bov>; GREEN, BRENDA <brenda.green@costamesaca.gov>
Subject: [BULK] 7.18.2017 agenda NB#3
Importance: Low
RE: CITY COUNCIL AGENDA 7.18.2017 NEW BUSINESS ITEM #3
I AM 100% IN FAVOR OF ESTABLISHING A MORATORIUM OF THE
CITY'S SMALL LOT ORDINANCE. ALLOW FOR CITY STAFF TO
REVIEW. ALLOW FOR COSTA MESA RESIDENTS TO VOICE THEIR
CONCERNS.
THIS ORDINANCE HAS ALLOWED FOR MULTIPLE INAPPROPRIATE
DEVELOPMENTS IN SINGLE-FAMILY NEIGHBORHOODS. AND, TO ADD
INSULT TO INJURY, MANY OF THE DEVELOPERS OF SAID PROJECTS
(E.G., 440 FAIR DRIVE, WHICH IS THREE SHORT BLOCKS FROM MY
HOME) HAVE ASKED FOR MULTIPLE VARIANCES TO THE ORDINANCE.
LET'S PUT THE SMALL -LOT ORDINANCE TO REST, ONCE AND FOR ALL!
THANK YOU,
111110u/:f XMl0
2442 ANDOVER PLACE, COSTA MESA, CA 92626
949.933.3699
Now is the time...
TRAYLOR, MARIAN
From: SHELTON, KELLY
Sent: Monday, July 17, 2017 10:20 AM
To: GREEN, BRENDA; TRAYLOR, MARIAN
Subject: FW: small lot ordinance
From: Andrea Bell [mailto:andreapb@uci.edu]
Sent: Monday, July 17, 2017 10:12 AM
To: CITY COUNCIL <CITYCOUNCIL@ci.costa-mesa.ca.us>
Subject: small lot ordinance
Dear City Council,
As a longtime resident of the Eastside, I have seen the effects of the Small Lot Ordinance on the community
and feel it is not in the best interest to our area. I have always enjoyed the area because of its' charm and
character; this ordinance is destroying that. The increased housing on these small lots has caused parking to
become a major issue and encroached on longtime residents' privacy as the new homes are stacked so high
and dense, we now have people peering into our yards and homes.
Thank you for supporting the moratorium.
Best,
Andrea Bell
TRAYLOR, MARIAN
From: SHELTON, KELLY
Sent: Monday, July 17, 2017 10:21 AM
To: GREEN, BRENDA; TRAYLOR, MARIAN
Subject: FW: Small lot ordinance
From: Mary Spadoni [mailto:maryatsis@aol.com]
Sent: Monday, July 17, 2017 8:38 AM
To: CITY COUNCIL <CITYCOUNCIL@ci.costa-mesa.ca.us>
Subject: Small lot ordinance
As a long time Eastside resident, I have seen and experienced the SLO. LA is on the verge of tossing this
ordinance beause it has been a "giant fail" which has increased the parking problem. This same problem has
come with our city ordinance, the parking is diminished initially because of the design and loss of street
parking, and additinally because of multiple families vehicle needs. The 3,600 sq ft lots with 2,700 sq foot
homes, are not in keep with the character of the Eastside.
There have been numerous complaints over these past three years, it is time for a moratorium. Now..
Best,
Mary Spadoni
Sent from AOL Mobile Mail
Gel the new AOL app: mail.mobileml.com
tashi di.lek
TRAYLOR, MARIAN
From: SHELTON, KELLY
Sent: Monday, July 17, 2017 10:22 AM
To: GREEN, BRENDA; TRAYLOR, MARIAN
Subject: FW: Small Lot Ordinace Moritorium
-----Original Message -----
From: Bob Simonson [mailto:bobsimonson@att.net]
Sent: Monday, July 17, 2017 1:44 AM
To: CITY COUNCIL <CITYCOUNCIL@ci.costa-mesa.ca.us>
Cc: Robin Leffler <wre2lef@sbcglobal.net>
Subject: Small Lot Ordinace Moritorium
Honorable City Council,
I first moved to Costa Mesa after getting out of the Army in 1970. My wife and I purchased our first
home on Broadway in 1976. We still love our first home (and likely our last) today. However we are
both aggravated by the extremely intense development that is infiltrating our neighborhood under
what I consider to be the abuse of Developers utilizing the loopholes created within the Small Lot
Ordinance zoning code.
I know that the SLO only requires a lot size of 3000 square feet. I know that most of the subdivisions
on the East Side of Costa Mesa were established shortly after the end of World War 2 when all of
what we now know as Costa Mesa was under the planning and development control of Orange
County. I also know that the minimum square footage of a lot, back then, for a single family home (by
County standards) was 7200 square feet. It seems obvious to me that the authors of the Small Lot
Ordinance had a single objective in mind and that was to allow Developers to eventually subdivide
every Single Family Lot into two Small Lots, each one of which could accommodate a two story
structure, having ridiculous set back limits, that create a home that can not be "safely" maintained by
the owner.
Enough is enough.
I hope that at least one of "my" Council Members (backed by developers) will find, in their heart, the
need for once, to actually support those of us whom have live here for a very long time. Please
support New Business Item # 3 so the SLO can redefined to best accommodate the interest of both
developers and long time residents of Costa Mesa.
Thanks much, Bob
TRAYLOR, MARIAN
From:
SHELTON, KELLY
Sent:
Monday, July 17, 2017 10:22 AM
To:
GREEN, BRENDA; TRAYLOR, MARIAN
Subject:
FW: Agena item conccrn
From: Judy Lindsay [mailto:judylindsay@hotmail.com]
Sent: Sunday, July 16, 2017 9:00 PM
To: CITY COUNCIL <CITYCOUNCIL@ci.costa-mesa.ca.us>
Subject: Agena item conccrn
New Business 3: Discussion of a Possible Moratorium as to the Small
Lot Ordinance
Please consider a moratorium on this issue, I have viewed lots in my neighborhood
and see more than one large house on lot with no yards, little distance between
houses and front doors opening onto the common driveway. No only
dangerous and no family openness for individual home owners . Thia needs more
careful consideration
Thank you
Judy Lindsay
269 Sierks ST
Costa Mesa, CA 92627
TRAYLOR, MARIAN
Subject: FW: Small Lot Ordinance
From: The Stovers [mailto:calcs1224@gmail.com]
Sent: Sunday, July 16, 2017 7:11 PM
To: CITY COUNCIL <CITYCOUNCIL@ci.costa-mesa.ca.us>
Subject: Small Lot Ordinance
The impact of the small lot ordinance will be disparate neighborhoods.
This is already seen where a city block has a mix of single family lots, R-2 lots and SLOs.
I doubt SLOs have impacted most of the NE sections of the city (Mesa Verde neighborhoods, Halecrest).
Crowding SLO lands by filling them with structures creates parking injustices which need to be addressed. Check out
east side SLOB on Tustin Avenue.
"Where two or three are gathered together... each one will have a car, maybe two!"
Have you tried driving through Corona del Mar lately? Scary. At least our streets are wider.
Overcrowding eventually will lead to slums.
Corinne Stover
Costa Mesa
714-432-7371
TRAYLOR, MARIAN
From: SHELTON, KELLY
Sent: Monday, July 17, 2017 10:23 AM
To: TRAYLOR, MARIAN; GREEN, BRENDA
Subject: FW: Small lot ordinance
-----Original Message -----
From: Diana Olson [mailto:dianalolson1@aol.com]
Sent: Sunday, July 16, 2017 8:32 AM
To: CITY COUNCIL <CITYCOUNCIL@ci.costa-mesa.ca.us>
Subject: Small lot ordinance
Dear City Council Members,
I am writing regarding the discussion on the agenda regarding a possible moratorium on the Small
Lot Ordinance (SLO).
The SLO is perfect for R2 neighborhoods and promotes home ownership instead of rental property.
Please keep the SLO in tact.
Thank you,
Diana Olson
Costa Mesa resident for over 40 years
text -0
Thank you for putting the small lot ordinance on your agenda. Please
vote to place a moratorium on that ordinance that takes away out city
character and profits only the big developers.
Page 1
TRAYLOR, MARIAN
From:
SHELTON, KELLY
Sent:
Monday, July 17, 2017 10:23 AM
To:
GREEN, BRENDA; TRAYLOR, MARIAN
Subject:
FW: Small Lot Ordinance
From: Jay Wong [mailto:ljswong@gmail.com]
Sent: Saturday, July 15, 2017 3:38 AM
To: CITY COUNCIL <CITYCOUNCIL@ci.costa-mesa.ca.us>
Subject: Small Lot Ordinance
Please don't do this to the eastside. Parking issues also create conflicts like no place to put out trash & missed
collection because people park too close to the cans. Weekly nightmare!
Too much traffic, ridiculous parking problems causing calls to CMPD is the tip of the iceberg.
Besides, those vertical homes look like post-modern row houses! Who wants to be hemmed in like that?
Sociologically, rats in a cage come to mind.
Joan Schumann -Levine
Sabot Cove
P.S. I can't wait to move. After 38 years in Newport -Mesa, I feel I've "done my time". I'm retired & looking
elsewhere.
TRAYLOR, MARIAN
From:
SHELTON, KELLY
Sent:
Monday, July 17, 2017 10:23 AM
To:
GREEN, BRENDA; TRAYLOR, MARIAN
Subject:
FW: small lot ordinance
-----Original Message -----
From: Nancy Perkins [mailto:zimzala47@aol.com]
Sent: Friday, July 14, 2017 8:48 PM
To: CITY COUNCIL <CITYCOUNCIL@ci.costa-mesa.ca.us>
Subject: small lot ordinance
I am happy to see the council is revisiting the small lot ordince. It was enacted by a council that was
development and developer heavy. Slid into the zoning without any real choice of the citizens of this
city and probably at a profit to the members of the former CCM. I am sure they thought they were
pulling a big one over on the citizens of Costa Mesa but now there is an opportunity to change this
offensive and expertly negatively crafted ordinance and return to previous zoning codes. I am hoping
that the current council will take a look at this ordinance and realize the folly it is.
Costa Mesa is a sweet little community. It was built with eclectic homes on large lots. Streets had
their own character, most with single story cottages, different but with their own quality of home. This
is the thing that drove people to want to live in Costa Mesa. I guess we can continue to destroy this
feeling by cramming as many living units on lots to cram more people in every square ft but at the
same time destroy Costa Mesa and make it like every other randomly planned community.
People say what is the difference between an R2 with a duplex or two condos and two privately
owned units. Well for one there are so many variances to the SLO.
Setbacks, no land to house ratio, that thrown by the wayside, no yard, Parking that allows for 2
garage spaces and one other space placed in a location that may make it virtually inaccessible.
Nobody uses their garage for parking so each unit my put up to 4 cars on the street. These units
often become multigenerational generating more cars. The difference in an R2 with a duplex. First of
all the parking requirements are much more stringent. For 2 units you must not only provide resident
but guest parking on sight. your also have fire access requirements which are not even touched in
SLO. I know these things because I have an R2 lot which I previously tried to put a second unit on
and couldn't figure out how to meet the parking requirement. Because a lot is occupied by a rental
duplex makes it more a service to the city. 60% of the city are renters and there is a shortage of
rental property so those of us who choose not to subdivide our lots but leave tham intact as rentals
are really choosing to maintain the character of out city rather than go for the money. One argument
for the SLO is that it provides more available affordable housing. Well I don't know who is affording a
1000000 for what is essentially a starter home with no yard, no real place for children and it throws 2
to 3 story units, some with roof decks in the middle of single story properties. There used to be a
consideration for light and privacy of adjoining properties. There used tp be a consideration for a
blending of new building with existing buildings. Has that been thrown to the wayside also because
these SLO make no effort to blend with existing homes.
Why do we have this obsession with continuing to build new properties. The eastside is built out.
and no one considers that the streets are pretty much what they are, there is no way to make them
larger or add new streets,infect currently there are two projects on the eastside to slow traffic because
currently we have people driving 45 on 25 mph streets. Continued building is only gone to make the
1
situation worse. Infrastructure is not able to carry an additional burden either. Another consideration
is our schools which are overcrowded and unable to handle a large influx of children
There is a property on a 19th st between Orange and fullerton that has total 4 units on what was
previously 2 single home lots (these were approved during the hey day of our previous CCM. These
buildings are so close if residents from each house reached out their windows they would literally
touch each other. There is no regard for staggering of windows for privacy. Acces to back units is
through an alley which their garages face. Is this what we want for the future of costa mesa.
It seems to me that it would make more sense to limit the size of the building based on the sized of
the property. In the SLO thay are putting 2 2700 tp 3000 sq ft houses which can mean 6000 sq ft of
building on a 7200 sq ft lot and that doesn't leave much room for driveways let alone plantings and
none for trees. Is this what we want allover town.?
I as a 45 year resident of Costa Mesa with 3 properties I am begging you please reconsider this
ordinance ( since we are the only city in orange county that has it that must say something.) Please
don't damage our little city anymore than it has already been damaged. We don't need overgrowth.
It seems that the concept of more growth means more money but more growth also costs more
money also
z
TRAYLOR, MARIAN
From:
SHELTON, KELLY
Sent:
Monday, July 17, 2017 1:07 PM
To:
GREEN, BRENDA; TRAYLOR, MARIAN
Subject:
FW: SLO
-----Original Message -----
From: Marilou Lundberg [mailto:lundbergmc@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, July 13, 2017 4:19 PM
To: CITY COUNCIL <CITYCOUNCIL@ci.costa-mesa.ca.us>
Subject: SLO
Thank you for putting this in the agenda. It is NOT good for Costa Mesa. Recind it.
Only people who profit from this is builders and realtors. Most livable cities have no SLO. Stay true to
the family nature of Costa Mesa.
Sent from my Phone
TRAYLOR, MARIAN
From:
HAUSER, JANET
Sent:
Monday, July 17, 2017 1:39 PM
To:
GREEN, BRENDA; TRAYLOR, MARIAN
Subject:
FW: No more SLO!
From: Diane Scioli [mailto:diane@piedmontla.com]
Sent: Monday, July 17, 2017 1:29 PM
To: CITY COUNCIL <CITYCOUNCIL@ci.costa-mesa.ca.us>
Subject: No more SLO!
Hi Council members.
I am a homeowner in Costa Mesa and I request that you please issue a issue a moratorium on the SLO developments.
The character of our neighborhoods is being chipped away at by these developments. Our infrastructure is already
taxed by the number of units being built in Costa Mesa.
Thank you
Diane Scioli
1671 Tustin Ave., C-4
Costa Mesa CA 92627
TRAYLOR, MARIAN
Subject: FW: Please enact a moratorium
From: LeeAnn Marienthal[mailto:leeann@ericmarienthal.com]
Sent: Monday, July 17, 2017 1:58 PM
To: CITY COUNCIL <CITYCOUNCIL@ci.costa-mesa.ca.us>
Subject: Please enact a moratorium
Dear Costa Mesa City Council Members,
I've lived in Costa Mesa for 29 years. My husband and I have raised our family here. I rarely write letters to government
officials. It takes a lot to force my hand but I simply have to express my concern about what I'm witnessing around town.
I realize that there is shortage of money in the city coffers and a shortage of housing for people who'd like to live here, as
well as, for the people that work in our beautiful city. As much as I understand this dilemma I also feel that while we
address these issues we must strive to look at the long term impact this has on the citizens who already call Costa Mesa
our home.
I grew up in Canoga Park in the San Fernando Valley in my youth. During that time it was full of orange, walnut groves
and plenty of empty spaces to enjoy. If you go there now you'll find a city full of graffiti, concrete (increased heat) and
traffic. Traffic that adds enormous amounts of time to the day just to do ordinary errands around town. There is a stop light
at every intersection. I never go back because I don't recognize it. It is just too sad to see. I see that short term decisions
for short term money troubles turn a beautiful city into ugly city.
Now, as I sadly watch Costa Mesa embrace the high rise, short term housing developments that are going up everywhere
I'm scared that our beautiful city is on its way becoming the opposite. It appears that whenever there is one lot up for sale
two or more go back into its space. As I try to get to Trader Joes on 17th Street and see the enormous monstrosities
being built (blocking out our sunset views) and being thrown up so quickly it is hard to imagine them lasting more than a
decade. The same thing is happening along Harbor Blvd., Placentia Ave. as well as Newport Blvd. I actually dread
crossing Newport Blvd.. and do everything in my power to avoid it when possible.
I ask you to please consider whether the people that are investing into our community are people actually living in our
community. If they are from our city ask yourselves if this phrase applies "Are we fouling our own nest".
Is it possible to imagine (while making these important decisions for our city) what the long term impact will be
for yourselves as city residents? Is it possible to envision the long term impact your decisions will have on all of us
who voted you in office? We have entrusted you to make decisions that will make our city better, more diverse, more
beautiful, a place where we can be proud to live and worthy to grow old in.
I leave you with this quote:
...whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable. If anything is excellent
or praiseworthy think about such things.
Sincerely,
Lee Ann Marienthal
Lee Ann Marienthal Gardens
327 Ramona Place
Costa Mesa, CA 92627
TRAYLOR, MARIAN
From: HAUSER, JANET
Sent: Friday, July 14, 2017 11:15 AM
To: GREEN, BRENDA; TRAYLOR, MARIAN
Subject: FW: Large homes
Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Flagged
Categories: Red Category
-----Original Message -----
From: Julie Patterson[mailto:juliepatterson007@sbcgloba1.net]
Sent: Thursday, July 13, 2017 9:42 PM
To: CITY COUNCIL <CITYCOUNCIL@ci.costa-mesa.ca.us>
Subject: Large homes
Stop ripping off the East Side Costa Mesa Charm with new over sized homes on small lots in this
neighborhood for the sake of more $$$$$$$====== higher property tax revenue to line the cities
pocket book! There needs to be at least 2 realistic single story homes for every five homes
developed. Please consider this request. It is starting to look like two story track homes here, with
very little imagination. Please reply. Thank You, Julie
t
Building Industry Association of Southern California, Inc.
ORANGE COUNTY CHAPTER BIR
July 18, 2017
Mayor Katrina Foley
City of Costa Mesa
77 Fair Drive
Costa Mesa, CA 92626
Re: Item NB -3: Discussion of a Possible Moratorium as to the Small Lot
Ordinance
Dear Mayor Foley and Councilmembers,
On behalf of our membership, I respectfully request that the City not proceed
with the moratorium under discussion regarding the Small Lot Ordinance.
The Building Industry Association of Southern California, Orange County
Chapter (BIA/OC) is a non-profit trade association with over 1,100 -member
companies employing over 100,000 people affiliated with the home building
industry. The Orange County Chapter represents the largest member base
within BIA Southern California. Our mission is to champion housing as the
foundation of vibrant and sustainable communities.
Per a prior Staff Report, the Small Lot Ordinance provides "more flexible
development standards" and a "maintenance mechanism for underutilized
multi -family residential lots within the densities allowed by the General Plan."
As such, the Small Lot Ordinance offers an intelligent and responsible means of
supporting housing under the city's General Plan. Housing is the foundation
of vibrant and sustainable communities and the Small Lot Ordinance facilitates
that goal.
For these reasons, a moratorium should not be considered at this time. As
always, the BIA remains a resource to the City on important issues that are
related to the wellbeing of our local communities.
Thank you for your time and thoughtful review.
Respectfully,
Steven C. LaMotte
Chapter Executive Officer
PRESIDENT
PHIL BODEM
MERITAGE HOMES
VICE PRESIDENT
MIKE GARTLAN
KB HOME
TREASURER
RICK WOOD
TRI POINTE HOMES
SECRETARY
SUNTI KUMJIM
MBK HOMES
IMMEDIATE PAST PRESIDENT
JIM YATES
RANCHO MISSION VIEJO
TRADE CONTRACTOR V.P.
ALAN BOUDREAU
BOUDREAU PIPELINE
CORPORATION
ASSOCIATE VICE PRESIDENT
MARK HIMMELSTEIN
NEWMEYER & DILLION, LLP
MEMBER -AT -LARGE
LAURA ARCHULETA
JAMBOREE HOUSING
MEMBER -AT -LARGE
SCOTT STARKEY
STARKEY COMMUNICATIONS
EXECUTIVE OFFICER
STEVE LA MOTTE
July 18, 2017
PEOPLE FOR HOUSING
rnnp count
The Honorable Katrina Foley
Mayor, City of Costa Mesa
77 Fair Drive
Costa Mesa, CA 92826
Re- Proposed Repeal of Small Cot Ordinance
Dear Mayor Foley and Honorable C.ouncilmembers,
on behalf of our membership, I would like to respectfully request the City not proceed with the
proposed repeal of the small lot ordinance.
People for Housing — Orange County is a grassroots, non-profit organization comprised of Orange
County residents who are concerned about the current housing shortage in Orange County_ We have
organized to advocate for increased housing production in Orange County communities as one way to
address the affordability crisis currently gripping communities throughout California_
Costa Mew's small lot ordinance makes it possible to provide additional homes in areas where allowed
by the city'., zoning code. These smaller lots offer opportunities to build mid-sized, mid -priced housing,
phis "middle housing" is missing from the housing Stock in many Orange County communities, where
large single farnily homes and luxury rentals are predominate housing options.
The lack of affordable housing in Orange County is a drag on the region's economy_ Many businesses
have left Southern California connnnunities because their employees are unable to find affordable places
to IiVe_ Young adults continue to live with their parents long after they have completed college and
found jobs because they are unable to afford current rents .in the area_ Many of these young adults
leave Grange County for places more affordable, and businesses follow.
It is critical to the future of Orange County that cities do everything possible to provide housing
opportunities that are affordable to young people and working families. Small lot ordinances life the
ane in Costa Mesa offer a valua ble opportunity to provide housing for young people just starting out or
working families who want to remain in Orange County. We respectfully request that you do not
proceed with the proposed repeal_
Thank you for your time and thoughtful review_
Rcspectfully,
Elizabeth Hansbur�
g
too-Fourider and Director
People for Housing— Orange County I P.O. Box 6942 1 Fullerton, CA 92834 wTeopleforHousing_org
Costa Mesa, CA Code of Ordinances --a Page 1 of 4
ARTICLE 2.5. -RESIDENTIAL SMALL LOT SUBDIVISIONS NEW bUSIN£55 ,3
Sec. 13-42.1. -Purpose
The purpose of this article is to regulate development and subdivision of small lots within residential zoning districts and overlay districts where residential and live/work
projects are permitted. The ownership and occupancy of these developments shall be subject to applicable laws for the general health, safety and welfare of the public. This
type of subdivision is intended to provide flexible development standards and to promote a wider range of homeownership of individual lots in multiple -family residential
and overlay zoning districts.
( Ord No 14-04. & 213_ 4-1-14 )
Sec. 13-42.2. - Planning application required.
(a)
Small lot subdivisions are permitted in appropriate residential or urban plan overlay districts, subject to approval of the following planning application as may be
applicable. This requirement is in addition to other permits or certificates required by law.
(I)
All new small lot development projects shall be processed according to the design review procedures contained in section 13-29.
(2)
All small lot development projects require approval of a tentative tract or parcel map as required by law. A tentative tract map or parcel map shall not be required until a
design review has been approved; however, the map may be processed concurrently.
(b)
No person shall construct, sell, lease, convey, maintain or use a lot in a small lot subdivision project within the city without first complying with the provisions ofthis
article.
( Ord. No. 14-04. d 2B_ 4-1-14
Sec. 13-42.3. - Development standards and requirements.
(a)
Applicability. The previsions of this section shall apply to all new residential small lot subdivisions of 15 lots or less in multi -family zones and overlay zones where
residential and live/work development are permitted.
(b)
Development standards. Table 131342 identifies the development standards for small lot subdivision developments. See also article 9 general site improvement standards of
this chapter for additional requirements. Projects shall comply with all applicable standard plans and specifications and adopted city and state codes, as well as the
following provisions:
(1)
The location and orientation of all buildings shall be designed and arranged to preserve natural features by minimizing the disturbance to the natural environment. Natural
features such as trees, groves, waterways, scenic points, historic spots or landmarks, bluffs or slopes shall be delineated on the site plan and considered when planning the
location and orientation of buildings, open spaces, underground services, walks, paved areas, playgrounds, parking areas and finished guide elevations. Pre-existing
development should guide the building setbacks and new development should preserve the existing character of the neighborhood.
(2)
The site design must consider both the design elements of each unit and how these designs will enhance the overall neighborhood character and vitality of the street and
sidewalk. Building setbacks and site planning must relate to surrounding built form, respecting the overall neighborhood character and existing topography. Additionally,
each unit most exhibit a high level of design quality with well -articulated entries and facades, proportionate windows, quality building materials and contextual
landscaping.
(3)
All structures proposed to be constructed within a project shall conform to the following requirements:
Each unit shall be provided with direct pedestrian and vehicular access to a public street, or an alley or a common drive connecting to a public street/alley.
Structures having dwelling units attached side by side shall be composed of no more than four (4) dwelling units.
Structures having dwelling units attached side by side shall include a break in the facade by having an offset in the front building line.
Structure shall be constructed to minimize impact of the proposed development on the light, air and privacy of adjacent properties.
(4)
On-site lighting shall be provided in all parking areas, vehicular access ways, and along major walkways. The lighting shall be directed onto driveways and walkways
within the project and away from dwelling units and adjacent properties, and shall be of a type approved by the development services department.
about:blank 07/18/2017
Costa Mesa, CA Code of Ordinances
Page 2 of 4
(5)
ultimate public or private right of way.
The development shall comply with the provisions of chapter XI, subdivisions, which may include, but are not limited to, land dedication and improvements, such as
drainage improvements and payment of fees.
(6)
No building or structure closer than 10 feet from bluff crest (see section 13-34 bluff -top development).
Outside uncovered and unenclosed storage of boars, trailers, recreational vehicles and other similar vehicles shall be prohibited unless specifically designated areas for the
exclusive storage of such vehicles are set aside on the final master plan and provided for in the covenants, conditions, and restrictions. Where such areas are provided, they
shall be enclosed and screened from
view on a horizontal plane from adjacent areas by a combination of six-foot high opaque fences and permanently maintained
landscaping.
5 feet
TABLE 13-42
10 feet
SMALL LOT SUBDIVISION STANDARDS
STANDARDS
SINGLE-FAMILY UMTS (located on individual dwelling unit lots and excluding townhouses)
Maximum number of stories &
2 stories/27 feet, except as allowed in the Westside Overlay Districts.
building height
Note: Lofts, defined in section 13-6, without exterior access and having only clerestory windows will not be regarded as a story. See
All units shall be provided with a small alcove inside or outside the unit to allow storage of at least three trash carts without encroaching
also Attic discussion below.
into the garage space.
Attics shall not be heated or cooled, nor contain any electrical outlets or operable windows. In zoning districts where the maximum
Attics
number of stories is two stories, attics above second stories shall be an integral part of the second story roolline and not appear as a 3'a
story on any building elevation. Windows in any attic space above the second story shall be incidental and limited to a dormer style.
Maximum density (based on
gross acreage)
Same as underlying zoning district or as specified in an applicable specific plan.
Minimum open space
30% of total lot area. No asphalt shall be permitted for paved areas. Parking and driveways shall consist of decorative concrete, pavers
(development lot)
or other materials as deemed appropriate by the development services director.
Minimum open space (individual 200 square feet with no dimension less than 10 feet.
unit)
Separately owned private property interests or any portion thereof, necessary or desirable for common use, are subject to recordation of
Development lot
an easement for reciprocal access and maintenance. All areas of a development with 5 or more parcels, subject to a reciprocal access
and/or maintenance easement shall be maintained by an association that may be incorporated or unincorporated. The association may be
referred to as a maintenance association.
• Three bedroom or more units (including a den or home office—Two garage spaces and two open parking spaces.
• Two bedrooms or less units (including a denj—One garage space and two open parking.
• No tandem parking is permitted for open or guest Parking spaces.
Parking
For developments with 5 or more units (up to 10 units) where open/guest parking spaces are provided in driveways in front of garages
for exclusive use of that unit, one additional on-site guest parking shall be provided. Two additional open guest -parking shall be
provided for developments with more than 10 units.
• For all small lot developments subject In the provisions of this article, all open parking not located within an individual driveway
shall be unassigned and nonexclusive.
Distance between buildings
No minimum distance required subject to compliance with Building and Fire Code standards.
Driveway width (development
10 -foot minimum, except 16 -foot minimum driveway is required if the driveway serves tenants and/or guest parking for more than one
lot)
dwelling unit Driveway width shall be a maximum of 26 feet for lots less than 50 feet wide and a maximum of 50% for lots greater than
50 feet wide.
Straight -in driveways to garages shall have a minimum length of 19 -feet from the ultimate public or private right of way. No driveways
Driveway length
shall be more than 5 feet in length if parking is not provided in front of garage.
Driveways accessing rear parcels shall be in compliance with the requirements of the Parking Design Standards, minimum separation
between driveways and maximum 50% hardscape requirement.
Mechanical equipment,
ultimate public or private right of way.
excluding antennas and flush-
Roof -top location is prohibited unless completely screened from public rights-of-way and adjacent properties.
mounted solar panels on roofs
No building or structure closer than 10 feet from bluff crest (see section 13-34 bluff -top development).
From
20 feet
Development Lot:
5 feet into required front or rear setback.
Side yard (interior)
5 feet
Rear yard (interior)
10 feet
Automatic roll -up garage doors
10 feet
Side (street side, if applicable) Note: Driveways providing straight -in access from a public street to a garage shall be at least 19 feet long, as measured from the
about:blank 07/18/2017
ultimate public or private right of way.
Rear abutting a publicly
dedicated alley
5 feet; however, garages may be required to set back further to ensure adequate back up distance. Rear yard coverage does not apply.
Bluff top setback
No building or structure closer than 10 feet from bluff crest (see section 13-34 bluff -top development).
Roof or eaves overhang;awning
2 feet 6 inches into required side setback or building separation area.
5 feet into required front or rear setback.
Open, unenclosed stairways.
Not permitted
Chimneys
May extend 2 feet above maximum building height.
Automatic roll -up garage doors
Required
Location of open parking
Guest parking shall be located within a reasonable distance of the unit it serves. Detached garages that are not located within a
reasonable distance to the units they are intended to serve are prohibited.
All units shall be provided with a small alcove inside or outside the unit to allow storage of at least three trash carts without encroaching
Trash storage
into the garage space.
All efforts shall be made to provide on-site trash service. Trash cans shall be stored on-site for trash pick up to the greatest extent
about:blank 07/18/2017
Costa Mesa, CA Code of Ordinances Page 3 of 4
Above -ground pools and spas IProhibited in front yards and subject to 5 -foot side and rear setback from the main structures.
LANDSCAPING
A detailed landscape plan prepared pursuant to chapter VII Landscaping Standards shall be approved by the Planning Division prior to issuance of any building permits.
SIGNS (See chapter VIII).
FENCES AND WALLS
Fences and walls placed between the property line and required setback line for main buildings shall conform to the city's walls, fences, and landscaping standards.
See article 9 general site improvement standards of this chapter for further information.
(c)
Documents required.
(1)
Project approval is subject to submission of complete organizational documents setting forth a plan or manner of permanent care and maintenance of any open spaces,
recreational areas and commonly used areas/facilities. No such documents shall be acceptable until approved by the city attorney as to legal form and effect, and by the
planning division as to suitability for the proposed use of the open areas.
(2)
Prior to entering into a sales agreement for any property within a small lot subdivision, the developer shall disclose general information regarding the property to the future
homebuyers, including but not limited to the following.
a.
The type, thickness, and R -value of the insulation that has been installed in the home.
b.
Any exposed hazards during and atter construction (Lead-based paint, asbestos, etc.).
C,
Uses other than residential in proximity to the project.
d.
Unusual adjacent zoning.
e.
Distance to airport if within two miles.
I
Where soils, filled ground and geologic information is available.
9
Any special costs that will be incurred by the Int buyer as a result of Uro installation of a building foundation or any other construction due to unusual soil/geological
conditions,
h.
If there is fill in excess of two (2) feet.
1.
Schools servicing subdivision and any special conditions.
I
Any unusual flooding conditions.
L
Conditions of approval by the city and any resale restrictions.
Dedications and easements.
in.
Project phasing plan.
n.
CC&Rs.
(3)
about:blank 07/18/2017
Costa Mesa, CA Code of Ordinances
Page 4 of 4
All small lot subdivisions shall file a declaration of covenants to be submitted with the application for approval. The declaration of covenants shall include, but not be
limited to, the following provisions.
The homeowners' association or a maintenance association (as applicable) shall be established prior to the sale of any malls).
Membership in the homeowners or maintenance association shall be mandatory for each owner and any successive owner.
Provisions to restrict parking upon other than approved and developed parking spaces and to require that garages be kept available for resident parking shall be written into
the covenants, conditions and restrictions for each project.
If the development is constructed in increments or phases which require one or more final maps, reciprocal covenants, conditions, and restrictions and reciprocal
management and maintenance agreements shall be established which will cause a merging of increments as they are completed, and embody one homeowners' association
with common areas for the total development.
The declaration of covenants shall contain language or provisions substantially as follows:
"The covenants, conditions and restrictions of this declaration shall run to the City of Costa Mesa insofar as they shall apply to the maintenance of the "common areas" as
herein defined."
"In the event the association or other legally responsible persons) fail to maintain the common area in such manner as to cause same to constitute a public nuisance, the city
may, upon proper notice and hearing, institute summary abatement procedures and impose a lien for the costs of such abatement upon the common area, individual units or
the whole thereof as provided by law."
( Ord No 14-04, 11 2B 4-1-14 ; Ord. No. 15-03 , § 2, 4-21-15)
about:blank 07/18/2017
Project
SMALL LOT ORDINANCE
Address
# of Units
APPROVED PROJECTS
Development
PotentialNumber
Number
PA -14-12
389 Rochester St
2
2
Completed
2014
PA -13-35
2294 Pacific St
5
5
Completed
767 W 18th St
PA -14-15
270 Palmer St
2
2
Completed
2
PA -14-07
1944 Church St
2
3
Under Construction
1925 Church St
PA -14-18
1631-1645 Tustin Ave
11
11
Completed
2
PA -14-05
320 E 18th St
2
2
Under Construction
PA -14-28
119 Cecil PI
2
2
Under Construction
PA -14-26
2661 Orange Ave
5
5
Under Construction
PA -14-04
191, 193, 195, 199 Mesa
Dr
4
4
Completed
2015
PA -14-45
334 E 16th St
2
2
Completed
PA -15-06
1620 Orange Ave
2
2
Under Construction
PA -15-10
2366 Orange Ave
6
6
Completed
PA -15-19
189 Merrill PI
2
2
Under Construction
PA -15-20
355 Rochester St
2
2
Under Construction
PA -15-24
215 Knox PI
2
2
Under Construction
PA -15-28
288 E 15th St
2
2
Under Construction
PA -15-25
527 & 531 Bernard St
10
Under Construction
PA -15-05
2333 Elden Ave
5
5
Under Construction
PA -15-41
261 Mesa Dr
5
Under Construction
PA -15-47
548 Victoria St
5
Approved
2016
PA -15-52
2156 Myran Dr
2
2
Approved
PA -15-45
592 Hamilton St
6
Approved
PA -16-02
522 & 526 Bernard St
10
Under Construction
PA -16-23
127 23rd St
4
4
Approved - In Plan Check
PA -16-29
2053 Tustin Ave
2
2
Approved - In Plan Check
PA -16-47
788 Center St
2
2
Approved - In Plan Check
PA -16-54
166 Rochester St
2
2
Under Construction
PA -16-61
353 E 18th St
4
4
Approved - In Plan Check
2017
PA -16-72
326 E 16th St
2
2
Approved - In Plan Check
PA -16-62
174 Costa Mesa St
2
2
Approved - In Plan Check
PA -17-01
245 Knox PI
2
2
Approved - In Plan Check
PA -16-67
1933 Church St
2
2
Approved
PA -16-68
391 La Perle PI
2
2
Approved - In Plan Check
1
120
120
not built to maximum density
ri density bonus from Urban Plan
PENDING SMALL LOT ORDINANCE PROJECTS
Project
Address
# of Units
Development
Number
Potential
PM -15-13
1509 Orange Ave
2
2
PA -17-09
134 Santa Isabel St
3
3
PA -17-13
767 W 18th St
3
3
PA -17-17
337 16th PI
2
2
PA -17-20
362 La Perle Ln
2
2
PA -17-21
1925 Church St
2
2
PA -17-25
162 E 18th St
2
2
16
16
PENDING & APPROVED TOTAL UNITS 1 136 1 136
Status
Application Incomplete
Application Incomplete
7/24 PC Meeting
Application Incomplete
NEW
NEW
7/24 PC Meeting