Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout00 - - Amended Agenda - 3/17/2015AMENDED AGENDA* CITY OF COSTA MESA REGULAR CITY COUNCIL, AND SUCCESSOR AGENCY TO THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY* MEETING *NEW BUSINESS ITEM # 2 HAS BEEN REMOVED FROM THE AGENDA *NOTE: ALL AGENCY AND AUTHORITY MEMBERSHIPS ARE REFLECTED IN THE TITLE "COUNCIL MEMBER." rr'� TUESDAY, MARCH 17, 2015 CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 77 FAIR DRIVE CLOSED SESSION - 5:00 P.M. REGULAR MEETING - 5:45 P.M. A4W STEPHEN M. MENSINGER Mayor ki JAMES M. RIGHEIMER... _ GARY MONAHAN Mayor Pro Tem Council Member. SANDRA GENIS -* KATRINA FOLE Council Member Council Member r. City Attorney - Chief Executive Officer Thomas Duarte Thomas R. Hatch Note regarding agenda -related writings or documents provided to a majority of the City Council after distribution of the City Council agenda packet (GC §54957.5): Any related writings or documents provided to a majority of the City Council after distribution of the City Council Agenda Packets will be made available for public inspection. Binders containing these agenda -related documents are located in the Council Chambers lobby. In addition, such writings and documents may be posted— whenever possible or as part of the agenda — on the city's website at www. costa mesaca.aov Your attendance at this public meeting is valued and appreciated. If you have questions regarding the agenda, public comments or wish to obtain copies of documents please contact the City Clerk office at (714) 754-5225 or e-mail cityclerk costamesaca.gov AGENDA — REGULAR MEETING — March 17, 2015 — PAGE 1 v.2, 03/17/15 WELCOME TO THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING PUBLIC COMMENTS — MATTER NOT LISTED ON THE AGENDA: If you wish to address the City Council on a matter not on the agenda, please complete and submit a yellow speaker card to the City Clerk. Speaker cards may be submitted to the City Clerk during the Public Comment period for non -agenda items, up to 6:40 p.m. or prior to the last speaker, whichever is earlier. Any speakers on non -agenda items not heard prior to 6:40 p.m. will be allowed to speak at the end of the meeting. Members of the public shall only address the City Council one time at any given meeting for non -agenda items. Speakers may only complete one card per person. Each speaker is limited to three minutes. PUBLIC COMMENTS — MATTER LISTED ON THE AGENDA: If you wish to address the City Council on a matter listed on the agenda, please complete and submit a green speaker card to the City Clerk. Speaker cards must be submitted prior to the start of Public Comments on the item. Please identify which item on the agenda you would like to address. Each speaker is limited to three minutes. The speaker cards are located on the table at the entrance to the City Council Chamber. Please take notice that the order of scheduled agenda items may be modified by the Mayor or the City Council during the course of the meeting, so please stay alert. 1. Any written communications, photos, or other material for distribution to the City Council must be submitted to the City Clerk NO LATER THAN 15 MINUTES PRIOR TO THE START OF THE MEETING. Any materials to be displayed on the overhead projector at the Council meeting must be submitted to the City Clerk NO LATER THAN 15 MINUTES PRIOR TO THE START OF THE MEETING. 2. In accordance with Costa Mesa Municipal Code, Sec. 2-64 (1): No person in the audience shall engage in disorderly, disruptive, disturbing, delaying or boisterous conduct. 3. All cell phones and other electronic devices are to be turned off or set to vibrate. Members of the audience are requested to step outside the Council Chambers to conduct a phone conversation. 4. In accordance with City Council Policy 000-11, and among other requirements, any video submitted for display at a public meeting must have been previously reviewed by staff to verify appropriateness for general audiences. A copy of this policy is available at City Hall during normal office hours. 5. Free Wi-Fi is available in the Council Chamber during the meetings. Two networks are available: council1 and counci12. The password for either network is: cmcouncil. In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, please contact the City Clerk at (714) 754-5225. Notification of 48 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to this meeting. [28 CFR 35.102.35.104 ADA Title II]. AGENDA — REGULAR MEETING — March 17, 2015 — PAGE 2 v.2, 03/17/15 CLOSED SESSION — 5:00 P.M. CALL TO ORDER ROLL CALL PUBLIC COMMENTS Members of the public are welcome to address the City Council only on those items on the Closed Session agenda. Each member of the public will be given three minutes to speak. 1. Conference with legal counsel regarding existing litigation: Costa Mesa City Employees Association (CMCEA) v. City of Costa Mesa, a municipal corporation, et al., Orange County Superior Court Case No. 30-2011 00475281, pursuant to California Government Code Section 54956.9(a). The City Council and Successor Agency to the Redevelopment Agency will recess to Conference Room 5A for Closed Session at the conclusion of public comments. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL AND SUCCESSOR AGENCY TO THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY — 5:45 P.M. CALL TO ORDER PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Council Member Genis MOMENT OF SOLEMN EXPRESSION [Per Council Policy 000-12, these presentations are made by community volunteers stating their own views. The City Council disclaims any intent to endorse or sponsor the views of any speaker.] Jonathan Allbaugh, Vanguard University ROLL CALL CITY ATTORNEY CLOSED SESSION REPORT • COIN: Ex Parte Communications pursuant to Municipal Code Section 2-238 (b) ANNOUNCEMENTS: There's always something happening in Costa Mesa! The Mayor will play a video clip of the "Costa Mesa Minute," featuring upcoming events and activities in the community. AGENDA — REGULAR MEETING — March 17, 2015 — PAGE 3 v.2, 03/17/15 PRESENTATIONS: 1. Presentation by Werner Escher from South Coast Plaza PUBLIC COMMENTS — MATTER NOT LISTED ON THE AGENDA: If you wish to address the City Council on a matter not on the agenda, please complete and submit a yellow speaker card to the City Clerk. Speaker cards must be submitted to the City Clerk during the Public Comment period for non -agenda items, up to 6:40 p.m. or prior to the last speaker, whichever is earlier. Any speakers on non -agenda items not heard prior to 6:40 p.m. will be allowed to speak at the end of the meeting. Members of the public shall only address the City Council one time at any given meeting for non -agenda items. Speakers may only complete one card per person. Each speaker is limited to three minutes. The three minute per speaker time limit may be extended for good cause by the Mayor or by a majority vote of City Council. Questions and comments made by public speakers may be addressed by the City Council during Council Comments or by the Chief Executive Officer during the CEO's Report. COUNCIL MEMBERS' REPORTS, COMMENTS, AND SUGGESTIONS 1. Council Member Genis 2. Council Member Monahan 3. Mayor Pro Tem Righeimer 4. Mayor Mensinger 5. Council Member Foley REPORT — CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER (CEO) CONSENT CALENDAR: All matters listed under the Consent Calendar are considered to be routine and will be acted upon in one motion. There will be no separate discussion of these items unless members of the City Council, staff, or the public request specific items to be discussed and/or removed from the Consent Calendar for discussion. AGENDA — REGULAR MEETING — March 17, 2015 — PAGE 4 v.2, 03/17/15 1. PROCEDURAL WAIVER: MOTION TO APPROVE THE READING BY TITLE ONLY OF ALL ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS. SAID ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS THAT APPEAR ON THE PUBLIC AGENDA SHALL BE READ BY TITLE ONLY AND FURTHER READING WAIVED RECOMMENDATION: City Council adopt and approve Ordinances and Resolutions by reading title only, and further reading waived. 2. READING FOLDER a. Claims received by the City Clerk: Dino Bonadonna and John Halbakken. RECOMMENDATION: City Council receive and file. 3. WARRANT RESOLUTION NO. 2532 OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF COSTA MESA, CALIFORNIA, ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS, INCLUDING PAYROLL REGISTER NOS. 15-04 "A" FOR (-$4,547.74) AND 15-05 FOR $2,028,376.04; AND CITY OPERATING EXPENSES FOR $1,550,339.86; AND SPECIFYING THE FUNDS OUT OF WHICH THE SAME ARE TO BE PAID — Finance Department RECOMMENDATION: Approve Warrant Resolution No. 2532, to be read by the title only, and waive further reading. 4. APPROVE A BUDGET ADJUSTMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF $1,500 IN REGARDS TO A DONATION MADE BY THE COSTA MESA COMMUNITY RUN TO THE CITY'S "HAPPY FEET RUNNING CLUB" YOUTH SPORTS PROGRAM — Parks & Community Services Department RECOMMENDATION: City Council authorize a budget adjustment (budget adjustment #15-012) in the amount of $1,500 to accept a donation from the Costa Mesa Community Run for the youth sports program, "Happy Feet Running Club." AGENDA — REGULAR MEETING — March 17, 2015 — PAGE 5 v.2, 03/17/15 5. MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CLOSED SESSION MEETINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL FOR JULY 25, 2012, JULY 31, 2012, OCTOBER 7, 2013 AND NOVEMBER 26, 2013; AND THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL AND SUCCESSOR AGENCY MEETING OF MARCH 3, 2015 — Chief Executive Officer's Department/City Clerk's Office RECOMMENDATION: City Council approve the minutes. 6. RELEASE OF BONDS IN CONNECTION WITH ENCROACHMENT PERMIT NO. PS10-00187 FOR STREET IMPROVEMENTS AND CORNER MONUMENTATION FOR TRACT 17176 LOCATED AT 351 W. BAY STREET, COSTA MESA, CALIFORNIA — Public Services Department/Engineering Division RECOMMENDATION: City Council authorize the release of the Performance and Labor and Material Bonds (Certificate No. 4371998) in the amounts of $18,266.00 each for street improvements and (Certificate No. 4371999) for setting corner monuments in the amount of $2,750.00 to Bayside West, LLC (Developer), 190 Newport Center Drive, Suite 220, Newport Beach, California 92660. 7. RELEASE OF BONDS IN CONNECTION WITH ENCROACHMENT PERMIT NO. PS13-00147 FOR STREET IMPROVEMENTS AND CORNER MONUMENTATION FOR TRACT 16990 LOCATED AT 372/378/382 VICTORIA STREET, COSTA MESA, CALIFORNIA — Public Services Department/ Engineering Division RECOMMENDATION: City Council authorize the release of the Performance and Labor and Material Bonds (Certificate No. 0176156) in the amounts of $32,753.00 each for street improvements and (Certificate No. 0176155) for setting corner monuments in the amount of $1,500.00 to Taylor Morrison of California, LLC (Developer), 8105 Irvine Center Drive, Suite 1450, Irvine, California 92618. AGENDA — REGULAR MEETING — March 17, 2015 — PAGE 6 v.2, 03/17/15 8. REFUND OF CASH DEPOSIT IN CONNECTION WITH ENCROACHMENT PERMIT NO. PS13-00230 FOR PARKWAY IMPROVEMENTS AT 421 BERNARD STREET, COSTA MESA, CALIFORNIA — Public Services Department/ Engineering Division RECOMMENDATION: City Council authorize a refund cash deposit in connection with the Encroachment Permit No. PS13-00230 in the amount of $88,185.25 to Behringer Harvard Pacifica, 5510 Morehouse Dr. Suite 200, San Diego CA 92121. 9. FINAL MAP FOR TRACT NO. 17708 LOCATED AT 2075 PLACENTIA AVENUE, COSTA MESA, CALIFORNIA — Public Services Department/ Engineering Division RECOMMENDATION: City Council approve the Final Map for Tract No. 17708 and authorize the signing of the Map by the City Clerk and the City Engineer. 10. BLOOD WITHDRAWAL TESTING SERVICES AGREEMENT — Police Department/Field Operations Division RECOMMENDATION: 1. City Council award a Professional Services Contract to California Forensic Phlebotomy, Inc., 27762 Antonio Parkway, Suite L1-647, Ladera Ranch, CA, for blood withdrawal testing services for a three-year period for an amount not to exceed $91,000 per year; and 2. City Council authorize the Mayor and the City Clerk to execute the Professional Services Agreement; and 3. City Council authorize the Chief Executive Officer to sign for any rate increases or any amount above $91,000 as long as the increase falls within his signing authority. 11. BRENTWOOD PARK, PHASE II, CITY PROJECT NO. 14-17 — Public Services Department/ Engineering Division RECOMMENDATION: City Council reject all bids and re -advertise the project. AGENDA — REGULAR MEETING — March 17, 2015 — PAGE 7 v.2, 03/17/15 12. ENERGY PARTNERSHIP CONTRACT EXTENSIONS BETWEEN SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON AND SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA GAS AND THE CITY OF COSTA MESA FOR 2015 — 2016 — Office of the Chief Executive Officer RECOMMENDATION: 1. City Council approve and authorize the Mayor and City CEO to execute the "Second Amendment" to the Agreement to Jointly Deliver the 2010-2012 Orange County Energy Leader Partnership Program with Southern California Edison Company; and 2. City Council approve and authorize the Mayor and City CEO to execute the "Second Amendment" to the Agreement to Jointly Deliver the 2010-2012 Orange County Energy Leader Partnership Program with Southern California Gas Company and adjacent Orange County cities; and 3. City Council authorize the City CEO to execute any subsequent documents approved as to form by the City Attorney necessary to advance, manage or complete Energy Leader Partnership activities. 13. APPOINTMENT OF CITY NEGOTIATORS FOR THE COSTA MESA CITY EMPLOYEES ASSOCIATION MEET AND CONFER SALARY REOPENER AND AUTHORIZATION TO PROCEED WITH THE FINANCIAL ANALYSIS OF THE MOU PER THE COIN ORDINANCE — Chief Executive Officer's Department RECOMMENDATION: 1. City Council designate Tamara Letourneau, Assistant Chief Executive Officer and Laura Kalty, Partner, Liebert Cassidy Whitmore as the City's representatives in negotiations with the Costa Mesa City Employees Association (CMCEA) as to the salary reopener; and 2. City Council authorize Staff to have the independent fiscal analysis of the current CMCEA Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) completed per the requirements of the COIN Ordinance. 14. AMENDMENT TO JOINT AGREEMENT FOR THE OPERATION, MAINTENANCE AND FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT OF THE ORANGE COUNTY 800 MEGAHERTZ COUNTYWIDE COORDINATED COMMUNICATIONS SYSTEM — Police Department/Support Services Division RECOMMENDATION: City Council approve the terms of the Amendment to the Joint Agreement for the Operation, Maintenance, and Financial Maintenance of the 800 Megahertz Countywide Coordinated Communications System. AGENDA — REGULAR MEETING — March 17, 2015 — PAGE 8 v.2, 03/17/15 ----------------------------------- END OF CONSENT CALENDAR ----------------------------------- PUBLIC HEARINGS — 7:00 p.m. (Resolution No. 05-55): 1. CIVIC OPENNESS IN NEGOTIATIONS (COIN) ORDINANCE SECOND PUBLIC HEARING OF THE APPROVAL AND ADOPTION OF THE SIDE LETTER OF AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF COSTA MESA AND THE COSTA MESA POLICE MANAGEMENT ASSOCIATION (CMPMA) — Chief Executive Officer's Department/Human Resources Division RECOMMENDATION: 1. City Council hold the second Public Hearing as required by COIN; and 2. City Council approve and adopt the CMPMA Side Letter of Agreement (Attachment 1) between the City of Costa Mesa and the CMPMA for 26 consecutive pay periods through and inclusive of February 20th, 2016. 2. APPEAL OF PLANNING APPLICATION PA -14-40 FOR THE GANAHL LUMBER HARDWARE STORE AND OUTDOOR STORAGE YARD AT 1100 BRISTOL STREET — Planning Division/Development Services Department RECOMMENDATION: City Council uphold the Planning Commission's decision and approve PA -14-40 by adopting Resolution 15-xx, to be read by title only and further reading waived, A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF COSTA MESA UPHOLDING THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S APPROVAL OF PLANNING APPLICATION PA -14-40 FOR THE RELOCATION AND EXPANSION OF GANAHL LUMBER LOCATED AT 1100 BRISTOL STREET. OLD BUSINESS: None AGENDA — REGULAR MEETING — March 17, 2015 — PAGE 9 v.2, 03/17/15 NEW BUSINESS: 1. PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT FOR THE UPDATE OF THE OPEN SPACE MASTER PLAN OF PARKS AND RECREATION — Public Services Department RECOMMENDATION: 1. City Council award a contract to RJM Design Group, 31591 Camino Capistrano, San Juan Capistrano, CA 92675 in the amount of $161,270.00 for professional services for the update of the Open Space Master Plan of Parks and Recreation; and 2. City Council authorize the Mayor and the City Clerk to execute the Professional Services Agreement; and 3. City Council provide direction to Staff as to the status of the Fairview Park Citizens Advisory Committee. MOM7. ".*.14_. ...... . ........... ii. .. .... ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR REPORT — CITY ATTORNEY ADJOURNMENT — To Regular Meeting — April 7, 2015, at 5:00 p.m. AGENDA —REGULAR MEETING —March 17,2015— PAGE 10 v.2, 03/17/15 UPCOMING COMMUNITY ACTIVITIES, EVENTS AND MEETINGS • Community Outreach Meeting on the Paularino Channel Bicycle Trail, Wednesday, March 18, 2015 at 6:00 p.m., Emergency Operations Center (EOC) 99 Fair Dr. • Walk with the Mayor, Friday, March 20, 2015 from 5:30 a.m. — 7:30 a.m., Estancia High School Parking Lot, 2323 Placentia Avenue. • Centennial Farm Garden Class: "Dahlias Above and Below the Ground", Saturday, March 21, 2015 from 9:30 — 11:30 a.m., OC Fair & Event Center — Silo Building, Reservation deadline: Thursday, March 19, 2015 www.ocfair.com • The Living Legacy of the Tuskegee Airmen, Lyon Air Museum, Meet Tuskegee Airmen and listen to their amazing stories starting at 10:30am! Book signings will start after the presentation at 12pm. Saturday, March 21, 2015. For more details and questions, call Lyon Air Museum front desk: 714-210-4585 or email info lyonairmuseum.org • 8th Annual "All That Glitters" Gala Presented by The Estancia & TeWinkle Schools Foundation, Saturday, March 21, 2015 from 6:00 p.m. — 11:00 p.m., Costa Mesa Hilton. www.etsfoundation.org/ • Costa Mesa Downtown Recreation Center, Saturday, March 21, 2015 from 11:00 a.m. — 4:00 p.m., 11th Annual Mika CDC C3 Basketball Tournament. For more information, please visit, http://www.mikacdc.org/2015/02/save-the-date-for-c3- 2015/.org • Special Closed Session, Police Officer's Association Negotiations, Tuesday, March 24, 2015, 9:00 a.m., City Hall — Council Chambers, 77 Fair Drive. • Special Closed Session, Fire Management and Fire Negotiations, Tuesday, March 24, 2015, 5:00 p.m., City Hall — Council Chambers, 77 Fair Drive. • Special Closed Session, Police Management Negotiations, Tuesday, April 14, 2015, 5:00 p.m., City Hall — Council Chambers, 77 Fair Drive. • First Friday Road Show, Friday, April 3, 2015 from 5:30 p.m. — 8:30 p.m., Civic Center, 77 Fair Drive. • Community Meetings for the Library Project, Thursday, April 16, 2015 and Thursday, May 21, 2015, Neighborhood Community Center, 1845 Park Ave at 6:00 p.m. • Costa Mesa Community Run, Saturday, April 25, 2015 at 7:00 a.m. located at Fairview Park, 2323 Placentia Ave. For more information, please visit, https://racegrader.webconnex.com/costamesacommunityrun20l5 AGENDA — REGULAR MEETING — March 17, 2015 — PAGE 11 v.2, 03/17/15 ADDITIONAL WARRANT INFO 3-17-15 From: RODELIUS, SHARON Sent: Tuesday, March 17, 2015 9:29 AM To:'Gary Monahan'; CITY COUNCIL Cc: DEPARTMENT DIRECTORS Subject: Additional Warrant Info 3-17-15 CC -3 Payment Date Remittance to: Remittance Payment Explanation of payment Ref. ID: Amount 0166544 2127115 Indiana Furnia_ure 2239D $4,920.62 What office was this for?How many pieces? This furniture was purchased for the Recreation Department at City Hall. Eight pieces total. ()186567 2127.x15 MJ Jurado Inc 3445 $1,D00.00 What is this? Work required to tie City sidewalk improvements to existing grades on adjacent property. 018659 4 2,`27/15 R & S Overhead Door of 22710-:2-1 $11,569.00 What was this for and where? So Cal Emergency repair at Fire Station #3 apparatus door. 0186642 3,16115 AS SA ABLOY Entrance 2 x 4: $15,361.00 Where was this located? Systems ISS Senior Center sliding door installation. 0166646 3 615 Calver NewM Inc 21 uu4 831,384,80 How many chairs were there, and where did they all go? 13D total chairs. City Hall conference rooms and desk chairs or City staff. Sharon Rodelius Executive Secretary to the CFO's Office CITY OF COSTA MESA (714) 754-5107 Fax.- 754-5330 sharorr.rodefiusdcosramesaca.txov WARRANT RESOLUTION NO. 2532 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF COSTA MESA, CALIFORNIA, ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS, INCLUDING PAYROLL REGISTER NOS. 15-04 "A" FOR (-$4,547.74) AND 15-05 FOR $2,028,376.04; AND CITY OPERATING EXPENSES FOR $1,550,339.86, AND SPECIFYING THE FUNDS OUT OF WHICH THE SAME ARE TO BE PAID THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF COSTA MESA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. That the attached claims and demands have been audited as required by law and that the same are hereby allowed in the amounts, and the payments made are hereby ratified. SECTION 2. That the City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this warrant resolution and shall deliver a copy thereof to the City Treasurer/City Director of Finance, and shall retain a certified copy thereof in the City records in the Office of the City Clerk. PASSED AND ADOPTED this 17`h day of March, 2015. ATTEST: unc BRENDA GREEN CITY CLERK STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss CITY OF COSTA MESA ) t5 <Q / STEPHEN M. MENSINGER MAYOR I, BRENDA GREEN, City Clerk of the City of Costa Mesa, DO HEREBY CERTIFY that the above and foregoing is the original of Warrant Resolution No. 2532 and was duly passed and adopted by the City Council of the City of Costa Mesa at a regular meeting held on the 17`h day of March, 2015, by the following roll call vote, to wit: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: FOLEY, GENIS, RIGHEIMER, MENSINGER NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NONE ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: MONAHAN IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereby set my hand and affixed the seal of the City of Costa Mesa this 18`h day of March, 2015. buu & 44= - BRENDA GREEN, dTY CLERK CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT MEETING DATE: MARCH 17, 2015 ITEM NUMBER: CC -3 SUBJECT: ADOPTION OF WARRANT RESOLUTION DATE: March 9, 2015 FROM: Department of Finance FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Stephen Dunivent at 714-754-5243 RECOMMENDATION: City Council adopt Warrant Resolution No. 2532 to be read by title only and further reading waived. BACKGROUND: In accordance with Section 37202 of the California Government Code, the Director of Finance or their designated representative hereby certify to the accuracy of the following demands and to the availability of funds for payment thereof. FISCAL REVIEW: Funding Payroll No. 15-04 "A" for ($-4,547.74); Payroll No. 15-05 for $2,028,376.04, and City operating expenses for $1,550,339.86. STEPHEN DUNIVENT Interim Finance Director Report ID: CCM2001 V City of Costa Mesa Accounts Payable Page No. 1 CCM VOID CHECK LISTING Run Date Feb 26,2015 Bank: CITY Run Time 2:01:38 PM Cycle: Payment Ref Cancel Date Status Remit To Remit ID Payment Date Payment Amt 0182682 02/25/2015 V Orange County Conservation Corps 0000005510 08/29/14 (2,016.00) Line Description: Check never received. Stop payment placed on 2/25/15 and check re -issued on 2/27/15. 0182903 02/24/2015 V Gomez Trial Attorneys 0000022898 09/12/14 (550.00) Line Description: Did not received check. Stop Payment placed on 2/24/15. 0185484 02/24/2015 V Granicus Inc 0000015382 01/16/15 (4,650.00) Line Description: Vendor did not received the check. Stop payment placed on 2/24/2015. TOTAL ($7,216.00) J• 7,216-00- 1,134-00- 6,533-60+ 23=404.50+ 15;599.06+ 2=205.00+ �EC,918-01+ 2,7-J7-4 - t 00 96iu22•u; E End of Report Report ID: CCM2001 V City of Costa Mesa Accounts Payable Page No. 1 CCM VOID CHECK LISTING Run Date Feb 26,2015 Bank: CIN Run Time 4:43:22 PM Cycle: Payment Ref Cancel Date Status Remit To Remit ID Payment Date Payment Amt 0185832 02/25/2015 V Walter Dill 0000007117 01/30/15 (1,134.00) Line Description_ Check never received. Stop payment placed on 2/25/15 and check re -issued on 2/27/15. TOTAL ($1,134.00) End of Report )ort ID: CCM2001 City of Costa Mesa Accounts Payable Page No. SUMMARY CHECK REGISTER Run Date Feb 26,20 nk: COM1 Run Time 12:15:18 cle: acohntAl Payment Ref Date 000877 02/27/15 000878 02/27/15 000879 02/27/15 000880 02/27/15 Status Remit To P Apple One Employment Services Line Description: Temp Svs-Rec Svs 1/20-1/22/15 Temp Svs-Cntrl Svs1/20-1/23 P Ariel Supply Inc Line Description: Toner Cartidges Toner Cartridges Toner Cartridges Toner Cartridge P Hub Auto Supply Line Description: Auto Parts -Jan 2015 P Smith Pipe & Supply Inc Line Description: Irrigation Supplies for Parks End of Report Remit ID Payment Amt 0000001055 1.144.48 0000006035 1,897.11 0000002584 2,727.83 0000004049 769.18 TOTAL $6,538.60 Report ID: CCM2001 City of Costa Mesa Accounts Payable Page No. 1 SUMMARY CHECK REGISTER Run Date Feb 25,2015 Bank: DDP1 Run Time 8:27:44 AM C cle: Payment Ref Date Status Remit To Remit ID Payment Amt 003459 02/27/15 P Alan F Kent 0000006393 2,17479 Line Description: I% Supplemental Pay Mar 2015 003460 02/27/15 P Beckee Cost 0000016309 946.08 Line Description: 1% Supplemental Pay Mar 2015 003461 02/27/15 P Chris Morris 0000007439 2,500.00 Line Description: Monthly LTD Payment Mar 2015 003462 02/27/15 P Danny Hogue 0000006802 1,137.03 Line Description: 1% Supplemental Pay Mar 2015 003463 02/27/15 P Darlene Bell 0000005602 580.54 Line Description: 1% Supplemental Pay Mar 2015 003464 02/27/15 P David A Dye 0000002065 260.90 Line Description: I% Supplemental Pay Mar 2015 003465 02/27/15 P Edmond Zuorski 0000005299 1,009.04 Line Description: 1% Supplemental Pay Mar 2015 003466 02/27/15 P Edward Dryzmala 0000006686 1,37728 Line Description: 1 % Supplemental Pay Mar 2015 003467 02/27/15 P Gary D Webster 0000004487 1,204.44 Line Description: 1% Supplemental Pay Mar 2015 003468 02/27/15 P George J Yezbick Jr 0000005045 1,164.00 Line Description: 1 % Supplemental Pay Mar 2015 Report ID: CCM2001 City of Costa Mesa Accounts Payable Page No. 2 SUMMARY CHECK REGISTER Run Date Feb 25,2015 Bank: DDP1 Run Time 8:27:44 AM C cle: Arnpnp 3ayment Ref Date Status Remit To 003469 02/27/15 P Harlan Pauley Line Description: 1% Supplemental Pay Mar 2015 003470 02/27/15 P James M Miller Line Description: Monthly LTD Payment Mar 2015 003471 02/27/15 P Matthew J Collett Line Description: I% Supplemental Pay Mar 2015 003472 02/27/15 P Paul A Cappuccilli Line Description: 1 % Supplemental Pay Mar 2015 003473 02/27/15 P Phil Dickens Line Description: 1 % Supplemental Pay Mar 2015 003474 02/27/15 P Richard J Johnson Line Description: 1% Supplemental Pay Mar 2015 003475 02/27/15 P Ted Curry Line Description: Monthly LTD Payment Mar 2015 003476 02/27/15 P Thomas Boylan Line Description: 1 % Supplemental Pay Mar 2015 003477 02/27/15 P Thomas J Lazar Line Description: 1% Supplemental Pay Mar 2015 Remit ID 0000003569 [�IQ�UPLfL:IQ 0000001720 0000007705 [�LDLZ�bFY:IiLI 0000005620 0000001896 0000001366 0000002925 Payment Amt 232.12 2,500.00 856.58 1,214.50 51176 1,255.66 1,037.98 115.97 1,703.25 Report ID: CCM2001 City of Costa Mesa Accounts Payable Page No. 3 SUMMARY CHECK REGISTER Run Date Feb 25,2015 Bank: DDP1 Run Time 8:27:44 AM Cycle: ADIRBP Pavment Ref Date Status Remit To 003478 02/27/15 P William H Bechtel Line Description: 1 % Supplemental Pay Mar 2015 End of Report Remit ID 0000001224 Payment Amt 1,622.58 TOTAL $23,404.50 Report ID: CCM2001 City of Costa Mesa Accounts Payable Page No. 1 SUMMARY CHECK REGISTER Run Date Feb 26,2015 Bank: DDP1 Run Time 2:39:49 PM C cle: ADIRDP Payment Ref Date Status Remit To 003479 02/27/15 P Costa Mesa Employees Association Line Description: Payroll Deduction Check 1505 003480 02/27/15 P Costa Mesa Executive Club Line Description: Payroll Deduction Check 1505 003481 02/27/15 P Costa Mesa Firefighters Association Line Description: Payroll Deduction Check 1505 003482 02/27/15 P Costa Mesa Police Association Line Description: Payroll Deduction Check 1505 003483 02/27/15 P Costa Mesa Police Management Assn Line Description: Payroll Deduction Check 1505 End of Report Remit ID 0000006284 0000001812 0000001819 Payment Amt 4,082.26 180.00 5,556.80 5,580.00 0000005082 200.00 TOTAL $15,599.06 Report ID: CCM2001 City of Costa Mesa Accounts Payable Page No. 1 SUMMARY CHECK REGISTER Run Date Feb 20,2015 Bank: CITY Run Time 8:43:46 AM Cycle: QUICIso Payment Ref Date 0186473 02/20/15 Status Remit To P FTOG Inc Line Description: Interim Buyer 2/2-2/13/15 End of Report Remit ID 0000021401 Payment Amt 2,205.00 TOTAL $2,205.00 Report ID: CCM2001 City of Costa Mesa Accounts Payable Page No. 1 SUMMARY CHECK REGISTER Run Date Feb 26,2015 Bank: CITY Run Time 1:57:46 PM Cycle: Payment Ref Date Status Remit To 0186474 02/27/15 P CJ Concrete Construction Inc Line Description: City Project 13-19 Retentions Payable Proj #13-19 0186475 02/27/15 P G4S Secure Solutions Inc Line Description: Jail Svs 12/29/14-1/26/15 0186476 02/27/15 P Jones & Mayer Line Description: 71269-1872 Monrovia 71270-2280 Newport Blvd 71272 -Animal Cntrl 71274-Baltusis 71276 -City Clerk 71278 -CEO 71288 -Fire Dept 71287 -Finch 71286 -Finance 71285 -Development Svs 71284-Debroux 71282-Dadey 71281 -City Council 71280 -Code Enforcement 71279 -Civic Center Barrio 71297 -Martini 71296 -Lawrence 71295 -James 71294 -IT 71293 -Ida 71292 -Human Resources 71291 -Housing 71290-Hartbrodt 71289 -Goggin 71351 -Telecomm 71312 -Yellowstone 71311 -Solid Landing BH 71310-1008&1015 Wilson Remit ID Payment Amt 0000004857 153,053.55 0000022480 60,779.40 0000014653 156,143.96 Report ID: CCM2001 City of Costa Mesa Accounts Payable Page No. 11 SUMMARY CHECK REGISTER Run Date Feb 26,2015 Bank: CITY Run Time 1:57:46 PN Cycle: AIA/Ki v Payment Ref Date Status Remit To Line Description: 71309 -Risk Mgmnt 71308 -Ricks 71307 -Recreation 71306 -Quality of Life Group 71305 -Public Svs 71304 -Prada 71303 -Police Dept 71302 -Planning Comm 71301-Pfautz 71300 -Parks & Rec Comm 71299 -Olson 71298 -Mood 71277CityClerk PRR 71275 -City Attny 71273 -Bailey 71271 -Brownell 0186477 02/27/15 P Merchants Building Maintenance LLC Line Description: Janitorial Services Feb 2015 Janitorial Services 0186478 02/27/15 P Mesa Consolidated Water District Line Description: 3187 1/2 Red Hill 12/10-2/10 3191 1/2 Airport 12/10-2/10/15 1870 Anaheim 12/15-2/12/15 570 W 18th 12/15-2/12/15 NCC 12/15-2/12/15 DRC 12/15-2/12/15 695 1/2 W 19th 12/15-2/12/15 695 W 19th 2/15-2/12/15 Sr Cntr 12/15-2/12/15 FS #3 12/15-2/12/15 NCC 12/15-2/12/15 1015 1/2 W 19th 12/16-2/13/15 720 1/2 W 19th 12/18-2/18/15 751 Victoria 12/18-2/18/15 3143 Bear 1/15-2/17/15 D—:4 in 0000022950 0000003144 Payment Amt 28,775.11 21,594.96 Report ID: CCM2001 City of Costa Mesa Accounts Payable Page No. 3 SUMMARY CHECK REGISTER Run Date Feb 26,2015 Bank: CITY Run Time 1:57:46 PM Cycle: AWKIY Payment Ref Date Status Remit To Line Descnption: 3400 Smalley 1/15-2/17/15 FS #4 1/15-2/17/15 570 W 18th 1/15-2/17/15 CM Hist Sac 12/15-2/12/15 NCC 12/15-2/12/15 1741 Superior 12/11-2/11/15 1595 112 Newport 12/11-2/11/15 DRC 12/15-2/12115 1845 Park Ave 12/15-2/12/15 FS #3 12/15-2112115 895 W 19th 12/15-2/12/15 420 112 W 19th 12/17-2/17/15 562 1/2 W 19th 12/17-2/18/15 861 1/2 Victoria 12/18-2118115 940 Arbor 12/19-2/19/15 9551/2 Victoria 12/17-2119/15 2109 Canyon 12119-2/19/15 970 Arbor 12115-2/19/15 2115 Canyon 12/19-2119/15 1065 Sea Bluff 12/19-2/19/15 567 W 18th 12/15-2112/15 567 W 18th 12/15-2/12/15 782 Shallimar 12/16-2/12/15 524 1/2 W 19th 12117-2/18115 BCC 1/15-2/17/15 628 1/2 W 19th 12/17-2118/15 1900 Adams 1115-2117115 1200 Victoria 1/15-2/17115 970 Arlington 1115-2117115 523 Hamilton 12/17-2/18/15 1035 W 19th 12/16-2/13/15 2141 Tustin 12/9-2/9/15 0186481 02/27/15 P Midori Gardens Inc Line Description: Landscaping Svcs Harbor Blvd Landscape & Turf Maint Jan2015 Remit ID Payment Amt 37,940.13 Report ID: CCM2001 City of Costa Mesa Accounts Payable Page No. 4 SUMMARY CHECK REGISTER Run Date Feb 26,2015 Bank: CITY Run Time 1:57:46 PM Cycle: Payment Ref Date Status Remit To Remit ID Payment Amt 0186482 02/27/15 P Orange County Treasurer Tax Collector 0000003489 15,880.40 Line Description: AFIS for February 2015 Printing Charges for Jan 2015 Printing Charges for Dec 2014 0186483 02/27/15 P Place Works Inc 0000023119 20,384.05 Line Description: Initial Study/Mitigated Neg De 0186484 02/27/15 P Siemens Industry Inc 0000002904 - 62,492.90 Line Description: Signal Maint Svcs Dec 2014 Signal Maint Svcs Jan 2015 TraffcSignal CallOuts Jan2015 Loop Install @ 16th/Pomona Loop Install @ Adams/Pinecreek Loop Install @ Bear/Crystal Ct TraffcSignal CallOuts 12/2014 Newport NB/Del Mar Framework 19th/Pomona Knockdown 0186485 02/27/15 P Snap On Industrial 0000012101 49,660.07 Line Description: Build a Bay Workstations Sales Tax (8.00%) 0186486 02/27/15 P Southern California Edison Company 0000004088 30,782.18 Line Description: Fac & Equip 12/26-1/27/15 401 Broadway 111 6-2/17115 199 Broadway 1116-2117115 1040 Paularino 1119-2/18/15 2704 Harbor 1/22-2/23/15 0186487 02/27/15 P West Coast Arborists Inc 0000004498 24,744.00 Line Description: Tree Maint Svcs 1116-1/31/15 Report ID: CCM2001 City of Costa Mesa Accounts Payable Page No. 5 SUMMARY CHECK REGISTER Run Date Feb 26,2015 Bank: CITY Run Time 1:57:46 PM Cycle, 3ayment Ref Date Status Remit To Remit ID Payment Amt 0186488 02/27/15 P 1st Jonlnc 0000018321 125.00 Line Description: Porta Potty Svc 4 City Yard 0186489 02/27/15 P ARCO Business Solutions 0000018562 214.18 Line Description: Fuel 2/1-2/15/15 0186490 02/27/15 P AT & T 0000001107 1,57447 Line Description Local Usage 1/15-2/14/15 Wakeham Park 1/10-2/9/15 Balearic Center Fax 1115-2/14 Senior Center 1115-2/14/15 Senior Center 1/15-2/14/15 Senior Center 1/15-2/14/15 Firewall Fire Sta41 1/10-2/9 0186491 02/27/15 P AT & T 0000001107 464.23 Line Description: Cool Line for PD 217-3/6/15 911 Cama Trunks 2114-3/13/15 Cool Line for PD 2/7-3/6/15 - 0186492 02/27/15 P AT & T Mobility 0000001107 440.15 Line Description: Fire Cell Phone Usagel/12-2/11 IT Cell Phone Usage 1/12-2/11 0186493 02/27/15 P Accountemps 0000006816 1,301.60 Line Description: Temp Svs-Budget 2/9-2113/15 0186494 02/27/15 P Anaheim Regional Medical Center 0000021276 750.00 Line Descnption: Victim Physical -Case #1412910 0186495 02/27/15 P AndersonPenna Partners Inc 0000021535 8,026.00 Report ID: CCM2001 City of Costa Mesa Accounts Payable Page No. 6 SUMMARY CHECK REGISTER Run Date Feb 26,2015 Bank: CITY Run Time 1:57:46 PM C cle: AIA/Vi V 'ayment Ref Date Status Remit To Line Description: Bristol Median Proj 11129-1/30 0186496 02/27/15 P Aramark Correctional Services Inc Line Description: Jail Food Service 118-112 311 5 0186497 02/27/15 P Arrow International Inc Line Description: Paramedic Supplies 0186498 02/27/15 P Arrowhead Line Description: Water 4 City Council Mtng-Jan 0186499 02/27/15 P AutoZone Line Description: Suppplies-Corp Yard 0186500 02/27/15 P Beach Emergency Medical Associates Line Description: Emergency Rm Exam -12124114 0186501 02/27/15 P Blue Sky Outfitters Inc Line Description: Field Ambassador Uniforms 0186502 02/27/15 P Bound Tree Medical LLC Line Description: Paramedic Supplies Paramedic Supplies Paramedic Supplies Paramedic Supplies 0186503 02/27/15 P Bucknam Infrastructure Group Inc Line Description: Pavement Mgnt Prog Remit ID Payment Amt 0000013108 483.61 0000023149 1,251.02 0000015023 89.30 0000019364 213.35 0000023183 356.00 0000013653 380.42 0000011695 3,722.86 0000021371 1,44200 Report ID: CCM2001 City of Costa Mesa Accounts Payable Page No. 7 SUMMARY CHECK REGISTER Run Date Feb 26.2015 Bank: CITY Run Time 1:57:46 PM C cle: Payment Ref Date Status Remit To 0186504 02/27/15 P Business Machines Consultants Inc Line Description: Copier Maint 1118115-1117116 0186505 02/27/15 P CNC Engineering Inc Line Description: Redhill Median Proj-Jan 15 0186506 02/27/15 P Chem Mark Inc Line Description: Laurndry Chemicals 4 Jail 0186507 02/27/15 P Cherie M Pittington Line Description: Cal NENA Coni Mileage Exp 0186508 02/27/15 P Cheryl Jones Line Description: Refund Rec Receipt 2001674.002 Refund Rec Receipt 2001675.002 0186509 02/27/15 P City of Mission Viejo Line Description: IT Staffing Svs 1116-1131115 IT Staffing Svs 111-1/15/15 0186510 02/27/15 P Clean Street Line Description: Pressure Wash Sidewalk Sweeping Sidewalk & Street 0186511 02/27/15 P Colin K McCarthy Line Description: Planning Comm Mtng-Feb 2015 0186512 02/27/15 P CompuCom Systems Line Description: Software License and Assurance SQL Server License Remit ID 0000001459 0000008798 0000006262 0000003641 :Q01111WWWAI 0000022310 0000001098 PIIU➢PYAF[YI GPLLADMIF. l Payment Amt 621.00 4,015.00 66.39 59.57 84.00 6,240.00 700.00 400.00 7,615.61 Report ID: CCM2001 City of Costa Mesa Accounts Payable Page No. 8 SUMMARY CHECK REGISTER Run Data Feb 26,2015 Bank: CITY Run Time 1:57:46 PM Cycle, MAW Y Payment Ref Date Status Remit To 0186513 02/27/15 P CoreLogic Information Solutions Inc Line Description: Realquest Subscription -Jan 15 0186514 02/27/15 P Costa Mesa Lock & Key Line Description: Electronic Lock Replcmnt 0186515 02/27/15 P County of Orange Line Description: Refuse Disposal@CO-Jan 15 0186516 02/27/15 P Crown Ace Hardware Line Description: Supplies 0186517 02/27/15 P DF Polygraph Line Description: Polygraph Exams 0186518 02/27/15 P Daniels Tire Service Line Description: Tires 0186519 02/27/15 P De Lage Landen Financial Svs Line Description: Copiers Lease -Mar 2015 0186520 02/27/15 P Department of Motor Vehicles Line Description: 2015 Vehicle Code Books-CY 0186521 02/27/15 P Dunn Edwards Corp Line Description: Paints -Recreations Paint -Recreations Remit ID 0000004774 0000001817 0000003473 0000004751 0000021328 L�PUI�PUiFYYJ 0000019172 0000001542 0000002058 Payment Amt 37125 Y1c1ci6D1 1,473.03 5.51 250.00 182.43 1,118.58 W71101 701.48 Report ID: CCM2001 City of Costa Mesa Accounts Payable Page No. 9 SUMMARY CHECK REGISTER Run Date Feb 26,2015 Bank: CITY Run Time 1:57:46 PM C cle: Payment Ref Date Status Remit To Remit ID Payment Amt 0186522 02/27/15 P Enterprise FM Trust 0000023151 5,901.82 Line Description: PD Monthly Leases -Feb 2015 0186523 02/27/15 P Enterprise Rent A Car 0000002131 7,581.30 Line Description: Undercover Cars Undercover Cars Undercover Cars Undercover Cars Undercover Cars 0186524 02/27/15 P Ernie Gomez 0000023266 234.00 Line Description: Softball Umpire 2/11-2/12/15 Softball Umpire 2/19/15 0186525 02/27/15 P Express Medical Supplies 0000021902 1,182.99 Line Description: Antiseptic Towelettes Sales & Use Tax Payable Sales Tax (8.00%) Handling Fee 0186526 02/27/15 P Fed Ex Corp 0000002190 52.16 Line Description: Ground Delivery Svs Ground Delivery Svs Ground Delivery 0186527 02/27/15 P Fiberlink 0000021608 2,313.60 Line Description: Software Support Renewal 0186528 02/27/15 P File Keepers LLC 0000022380 95.00 Line Description: Records Destruction -Jan 14 Report ID: CCM2001 City of Costa Mesa Accounts Payable Page No. 10 SUMMARY CHECK REGISTER Run Date Feb 26,2015 Bank: CITY Run Time 1:57:46 PM Cycle: Payment Ref Date Status Remit To Remit ID Payment Amt 0186529 02/27/15 P Firestone 0000011366 3,959.54 Line Description: Warehouse Stock -Tires Warehouse Stock -Tires 0186530 02/27/15 P Fitzgeralds Auto Care Center 0000021295 606.01 Line Description: Oil Leak Repair -#736 0186531 02/27/15 P Flashbay Inc 0000000572 1,958.20 Line Description: Flash Drives Shipping Fee Sales Tax (8.00°/x) 0186532 02/27/15 P Forensic Nurse Specialists Inc 0000014039 1,300.00 Line Descnption: Victim Physical 1120 & 1127115 0186533 02/27/15 P GE Capital 0000021378 604.68 Line Description.: Color Copier Lease 3116-4115 Copier Lease 2/23-3/22/15 0186534 02/27/15 P Gale Tuso 0000017460 233.08 Line Description: 1 % Supplemental Pay Mar 2015 0186535 02/27/15 P Galls LLC 0000002297 635.96 Line Description: Uniforms 4 Field Ambassadors 0186536 02/27/15 P Gina Dehart 0000023272 83.00 Line Description: Refund Rec Receipt 2001681.002 0186537 02/27/15 P Gomez Trial Attorneys 0000022898 550.00 Line Description: Subpoena Dep Rfnd 001-00261671 Report ID: CCM2001 City of Costa Mesa Accounts Payable Page No. 11 SUMMARY CHECK REGISTER Run Date Feb 26,2015 Bank: CITY Run Time 1:57:46 PM Cycle, Payment Ref Date Status Remit To Line Description: Subpoena Dep Rfnd 001-00261671 Subpoena Dep Rfnd 001-00261670 Subpoena Dep Rfnd 001-00261670 0186538 02/27/15 P Granicus Inc Line Description: Weg Streaming 1/1-3/31/15 Weg Streaming 1/1-3131/15 Encoding Appliance 111-3/31115 Encoding Appliance 111-3131115 0186539 02/27/15 P Hans Guenther Line Description: Mileage 4 Mandatory Dept Mtg 0186540 02/27/15 P Harrell & Company Advisors LLC Line Description: Prep Aontiuning Disclosure Rpt 0186541 02/27/15 P Hireright Inc Line Description: Background Check Applications 0186542 02/27/15 P Huntington Beach Honda Line Description: Bulbs & Pamts-#635 Headlights Repair -#635 0186543 02/27/15 P Huntington Beach Hospital Line Description: Emrgncy Rm-10/31/14 0186544 02/27/15 P Indiana Furniture Line Description: Bookcase Credenza GSA Discount Table Top Sales Tax (8.00%) Remit ID 0000015382 0000015579 0000013793 0000021348 0000019158 1D1I11DYR11.11 0000022390 Payment Amt 4,650.00 160.76 4,200.00 57,75 412.45 287.45 4,920.62 Report ID: CCM2001 City of Costa Mesa Accounts Payable Page No. 12 SUMMARY CHECK REGISTER Run Date Feb 26,2015 Bank: CITY Run Time 1:57:46 PM C cle: AWKIY Payment Ref Date Status Remit To Remit ID Payment Amt Line Description: Desk Circular Table Bridge w/Modesty Panel 0186545 02/27/15 P Industrial Metal Supply 0000002653 30.41 Line Description: Dom RD Tube Pipes 0186546 02/27/15 P Interstate Batteries of California Coast 0000002700 107.05 Line Description: Batteries 0186547 02/27/15 P Irvine Pipe & Supply Inc 0000002711 548.09 Line Description: Flush -O -Meters Irrigation Supplies 0186548 02/27/15 P Irvine Ranch Water District 0000005112 389.90 Line Description: 220 23rd ST 119-2/7/15 258 Brentwood 119-2/6/15 261 Monte Vista 1/9-2/6/15 170 Del Mar 1/9-2/6115 2603 Elden 1/8-2/6/15 0186549 02/27/15 P JD Lock & Key 0000005930 8.53 Line Description: Lock & Key Svs 0186550 02/27/15 P Janet Wingert 0000011740 66.71 Line Description: Cal NENA Cont Mileage Exp 0186551 02/27/15 P Jeff R Mathews 0000020470 400.00 Line Description: Planning Comm Mtng-Feb 2015 0186552 02/27/15 P Jones Day 0000021335 11,756.25 Report ID: CCM2001 City of Costa Mesa Accounts Payable Page No. 13 SUMMARY CHECK REGISTER Run Date Feb 26,2015 Bank: CITY Run Time 1:57:46 PM C cle: Payment Ref Date Status Remit To Line Description: CMCEA-Nov 2014 0186553 02/27/15 P Jose Gutierrez Line Description: Refund Rec Receipt 2001682.002 0186554 02/27/15 P Joyce E Tillner Line Description: 1% Supplemental Pay Mar 2015 0186555 02/27/15 P Kabbara Engineering Line Description: PS&E Engineering Svs-9116-1/31 0186556 02/27/15 P Keystone Uniforms OC Line Description: Uniform-Fragale Uniform -LaPointe Uniform -Ortiz Uniform -Lara Uniform -Garcia Uniform -Ortiz Uniform -Frankie Uniform -Manson 0186557 02/27/15 P Khanh Tran Line Description: Refund Rec Receipt 2001673.002 0186558 02/27/15 P Kimball Midwest Line Description: Supplies 0186559 02/27/15 P Knorr Systems Inc Line Description: DRC Pool Chemicals DRC Pool Chemical Remit ID 0000006281 0000018762 0000002795 0000022280 0000012095 0000006819 .KKKKKfldrffi7 Payment Amt 350.00 65.65 8,685.70 1,747.48 42.00 533.54 60120 Report ID: CCM2001 City of Costa Mesa Accounts Payable Page No. 14 SUMMARY CHECK REGISTER Run Date Feb 26,2015 Bank: CITY Run Time 1:57:46 PM Cycle: Payment Ref Date Status Remit To Remit ID Payment Amt 0186560 02/27/15 P Lawrence P Shield 0000017089 156.00 Line Description: Softball Umpire 2/15-2/18/15 0186561 02/27/15 P Leo Arnold 0000022194 1,000.00 Line Description: Background Investigation Swcs 0186562 02/27/15 P LexisNexis 0000010987 153.00 Line Description: Online Legal Updates Jan 2015 0186563 02/27/15 P LexisNexis Risk Data Management Inc 0000019179 288.00 Line Description: OnlineComputerSubscriptn Jan 0186564 02/27/15 P Liebert Cassidy Whitmore 0000002960 11,738.81 Line Description: Legal -2014 POA Negotiations Legal -General Legal Legal Legal -60th Anniversarylnvstgtn Legal -2014 FMA Negotiations Legal -2014 POA Negotiations Legal -2014 Fire Negotiations Legal -2014 PMA Negotiations 0186565 02/27/15 P Liebert Cassidy Whitmore 0000002960 55.00 Line Description: Registration 4 Webinar-L Chen 0186566 02/27/15 P Los Angeles Times 0000003000 922.75 Line Description: Legal Notices for Planning Div Ad for City Proj #15-03 Ad for City Proj #15-01 Ad for City Proj #15-02 Report ID: CCM2001 City of Costa Mesa Accounts Payable Page No. 15 SUMMARY CHECK REGISTER Run Date Feb 26,2015 Bank: CITY Run Time 1:57:46 PM C cle: 3ayment Ref Date Status Remit To Remit ID Payment Amt 0186567 02/27/15 P MJ Jurado Inc 0000003445 1,000.00 Line Description: Dirt Grade Down 0186568 02/27/15 P Mar Vac Electronics Corporation 0000003049 15.88 Line Description: Electrical Supplies 4 Parks 0186569 02/27/15 P Marx Brothers Fire Extinguisher Company 0000003073 1,553:00 Line Description: Annual Certification of Fire E DRC Fire Extinguisher Recent 0186570 02/27/15 P Mary Jack 0000000353 42.00 Line Description: Refund Rec Receipt 2001676.002 0186571 02/27/15 P McClanahans Tire Recycling Inc 0000014280 395.00 Line Description: Tire Pickup for Recycling 0186572 02/27/15 P Mesa Hose & Supply 0000003146 115.98 Line Description: Hydraulic Hose for Unit #390 Shop Supplies 0186573 02/27/15 P Meyers Nave 0000022455 335.00 Line Description: Legal -Fairview Park 0186574 02/27/15 P Mike Linares Inc 0000002969 4,466.00 Line Description: CDBG/HOMEProg Svcs12/29/14-1/9 CDBG/HOME Prog Svcs 1112-1/23 0186575 02/27/15 P Molly Murphy 0000023270 60:00 Line Description: Refund Rec Receipt 2001679.002 Report ID: CCM2001 City of Costa Mesa Accounts Payable Page No. 16 SUMMARY CHECK REGISTER Run Date Feb 26,2015 Bank: CITY Run Time 1:57:46 PM C cle: MAW V Payment Ref Date Status Remit To Remit ID Payment Amt 0186576 02/27/15 P Moore lacofano Goltsman Inc 0000016407 6,437.50 Line Description: GP Update & Environmental Repo 0186577 02/27/15 P National Data & Surveying Services 0000021249 5,370.00 Line Description: Data Collection Svs 0186578 02/27/15 P National Emblem Inc 0000003293 199.95 Line Description: Fire Explorer Patches 0186579 02/27/15 P National Safety Compliance Inc 0000020714 300.00 Line Description: Random Drug & Alcohol Testing 0186580 02/27/15 P Newport Harbor Locksmith 0000003337 140.00 Line Description: Rekey Storage Doors-EstanciaPk 0186581 02/27/15 P Office Max Incorporated 0000020710 1,847.41 Line Description: Office Supplies -Bldg Safety Office Supplies -HR Office Supplies -PD CSI Office Supplies -Transportation Office Supplies -Telecomm Office Supplies-Rec Admin Office Supplies -PD Records Office Supplies-Maint Svcs Adm Office Supplies -Fire Admin Office Supplies -CEO Office Supplies-Dev Svcs Admin Office Supplies -Eng St Improve 0186582 02/27/15 P Orange Coast Trailer Supply Inc 0000003464 243.10 Line Description: Water Pump for Unit #366 Report ID: CCM2001 City of Costa Mesa Accounts Payable Page No. 17 SUMMARY CHECK REGISTER Run Date Feb 26,2015 Bank: CITY Run Time 1:57:46 PM C cle: Payment Ret Date Status Remit To 0186583 02/27/15 P Orange County Conservation Corps Line Description: FP Tumbleweed Removal FP Tumbleweed Removal FP Wetland Maint Shrub Removal FP Wetland Maint Shrub Removal 0186584 02/27/15 P Orange County Local Agency Formation Line Description: LAFCO Collaboration Summit 0186585 02/27/15 P Orange County Sheriffs Dept Line Description: Post Fld Tmg Offcr Update 0186586 02/27/15 P Oxygen Funding Inc Line Description: Extra Landscape & Turf Maint 0186587 02/27/15 P Parkhouse Tire Inc Line Descfiption: For Warehouse Automotive Stock For Warehouse Auto Recycle 0186588 02/27/15 P Patriot Paving Inc Line Description: Retention on Proj #14-05 0186589 02/27/15 P Paul McCarthy Line Description: Mileage 4 Mandatory Dept Mtg 0186590 02/27/15 P Philip C Price Line Description: Softball Umpire 2/18-2/20/15 Remit ID 0000005510 LI8 Q6YAJQ10 0000003451 DUDIR�YiCfi 0000003556 0000022732 0000003102 0000021846 Payment Amt 2,016.00 750.00 110.00 2,560.00 973.26 9,300.30 170.66 156.00 Report ID: CCM2001 City of Costa Mesa Accounts Payable Page No. 18 SUMMARY CHECK REGISTER Run Date Feb 26,2015 Bank: CITY Run Time 1:57:46 PM Cycle: Payment Ref Date Status Remit To Remit ID Payment Amt 0186591 02/27/15 P Pinnacle Training & Consulting 0000021407 95.00 Line Description: Custody Offcr Trng-J LaPointe 0186592 02/27/15 P Pro West Mechanical Inc 0000022697 1,926.00 Line Description: Emergency Repair FS#4 0186593 02/27/15 P ProCare Work Injury Center 0000022662 140.00 Line Description: DOT Risk Drug Testing Industrial Medical Clinic Sery Industrial Medical Clinic Sery 0186594 02/27/15 P R & S Overhead Door of So Cal Inc 0000022092 11,569.00 Line Description: Emergency Apparatus DoorRepair 0186595 02/27/15 P Randstad Technologies LP 0000022571 10,400.00 Line Description: Temp IT Support Staff 1/S2/1 0186596 02/27/15 P Red Wing Shoes 0000003772 330.90 Line Description: Safety Boots 4 Doug Lovell Safety Boots 4 Toby Ceniceros 0186597 02/27/15 P Reena Bolle 0000021326 64.75 Line Description: Cal NENA Cont Mileage Exp 0186598 02/27/15 P Republic Engines 0000003792 1,485.00 Line Description: MobileLightTowersCircuitBrakrs 0186599 02/27/15 P Robert L Dickson Jr 0000003671 400.00 Line Description: Planning Comm Mtg-Feb 2015 Report ID: CCM2001 City of Costa Mesa Accounts Payable Page No. 19 SUMMARY CHECK REGISTER Run Date Feb 26,2015 Bank: CITY Run Time 1:57:46 PM Cycle: Payment Ref Date Status Remit To 0186600 02/27/15 P Robert Wheeler Hunsaker & Associates Line Description: Refund Permit LL -14-07 0186601 02/27/15 P SC Fuels Line Description: Red Diesel Fuel for Corp Yard Red Diesel Fuel 4 CH Generator 0186602 02/27/15 P Scientia Consulting Group Inc Line Description: IT Consultant 11130-12/13/14 IT Consultant 1/11-1/24/15 0186603 02/27/15 P Set Remodeling Line Description: SFHRGrant-1750 Whittier#90-Dul 0186604 02/27/15 P Siemens Industry Inc Line Description: Repairs to CH Chiller 0186605 02/27/15 P Sign Depot Line Description: ADA Sign for Mens CH Restroom 0186606 02/27/15 P SolarCity Corporation Line Description: NCC Solar Energy Jan 2015 0186607 02/27/15 P Spectrum Gas Products Line Description: Oxygen Cylinder Rental-FS#1 0186608 02/27/15 P Stacy Bowler Line Description: ID & Birth Certs for NITF Remit ID Payment Amt 0000023265 800.00 0000013839 5,849.08 0000021410 12,706.50 0000023269 9,800.00 0000002904 358.00 0000004018 81.00 0000004629 1,303.53 0000012653 73.75 0000022524 55.00 Report ID: CCM2001 City of Costa Mesa Accounts Payable Page No. 20 SUMMARY CHECK REGISTER Run Date Feb 26,2015 Bank: CITY Run Time 1:57:46 PM C cle: WWI V Payment Ref Date Status Remit To 0186609 02/27/15 P State of California Dept of Justice Line Description: Fingerprint Apps for Jan 2015 Fingerprint Apps for Oct 2014 0186610 02/27/15 P Steen Security Inc Line Description: CY Alarm Monitoring Feb-Apr15 0186611 02/27/15 P .Stephan H Andranian Line Description: Planning Commision Mtg-Fe1b2015 0186612 02/27/15 P Steve Clever Line Description: Softball Umpire 2/19/15 0186613 02/27/15 P Technic Business Solutions Line Description: Printer Repairs Printer Repairs 0186614 02/27/15 P Terry Foster Line Description: Refund Rec Receipt 2001680.002 0186615 02/27/15 P The Sporting Good Line Description: Softballs 4 AdultSoftball Frog 0186616 02/27/15 P Theodore Robins Ford Line Description: Visor Assembly & Moulding -#132 Brake Kit Credit for Returned Part Remit ID Payment Amt 0000001534 11.901.00 0000015257 119.97 0000023273 400.00 0000010800 78.00 0000023087 307.51 0000000120 56.00 0000004312 907.20 0000004245 69.02 Report ID: CCM2001 City of Costa Mesa Accounts Payable Page No. 21 SUMMARY CHECK REGISTER Run Date Feb 26,2015 Bank: CITY Run Time 1:57:46 PM Cycle: Payment Ref Date Status Remit To Remit ID Payment Amt 0186617 02/27/15 P Thomson Reuters 0000022223 24644 Line Description: Clear Svcs Subscriptn Jan 2015 0186618 02/27/15 P Time Warner Cable 0000011202 221.99 Line Description: Equipment Fees 2/16-3/15/15 0186619 02/27/15 P Timothy W Sesler 0000021628 400.00 Line Description: Planning Comm Mtg-Feb 2015 0186620 02/27/15 P Turnout Maintenance Company LLC 0000020182 1,639.44 Line Description: Turnout Clean & Repairs -3 Empl Turnout Clean & Repairs -4 Empl Turnout Clean & Repairs -4 Empl 0186621 02/27/15 P Uline 0000010970 113.53 Line Description: Report Boxes for PD Records 0186622 02/27/15 P United Industries 0000010867 272.60 Line Description: Warehouse Stock -Safety Glasses Particulate Respirators 0186623 02/27/15 P United Paving Company 0000022642 5,458.15 Line Description: Retention on Proj #14-02 0186624 02/27/15 P United Rotary Brush Corp 0000003525 519.60 Line Description: Gutter Brooms Sales Tax (8.00%) 0186625 02/27/15 P VA Consulting Inc 0000019471 4,581.58 Line Description: Right Of Way Services Report ID: CCM2001 City of Costa Mesa Accounts Payable Page No. 22 SUMMARY CHECK REGISTER Run Date Feb 26,2015 Bank: CITY Run Time 1:57:46 PM Cycle: Payment Ref Date Status Remit To 0186626 02/27/15 P Vulcan Materials Company Line Description: Asphalt for Patching Potholes Asphalt for Patching Potholes Asphalt for Patching Potholes Asphalt for Patching Potholes Asphalt for Patching Potholes Asphalt for Patching Potholes Asphalt for Patching Potholes Asphalt for Patching Potholes 0186627 02/27/15 P Walter Dill Line Description: Qrtly Retiree Med Ins Payment Orly Retiree Med Ins Payment 0186628 02/27/15 P Ward Diesel Filter Systems Inc Line Description: Exhaust Filter Parts 0186629 02/27/15 P Waxie Sanitary Supply Line Description: For Warehouse Floor Stock 0186630 02/27/15 P Wayne Ritchie Line Description: Softball Umpire 2/17-2/18/15 Softball Umpire 2/19/15 0186631 02/27/15 P Williams Data Management Line Description: IT Data Storage for Jan 2015 0186632 02/27/15 P Yellow Cab Co Line Description: NIFT Transportation Svcs1/2-29 Remit ID 0000007403 0000007117 0000007843 0000004480 0000022963 11IfI111ilyP.fdQ6l 0000021749 Payment Amt 814.70 ifKL94I11 285.59 2,827.70 208.00 362.50 135.00 Report ID: CCM2001 City of Costa Mesa Accounts Payable Page No. 23 SUMMARY CHECK REGISTER Run Date Feb 26,2015 Bank: CITY Run Time 1:57:46 PM Cycle: Payment Ref Date 0186633 02/27/15 Status Remit To P Zap Manufacturing Inc Line Description: Stop Signs 4 Sign Replacements End of Report Remit ID Payment Amt 0000004613 981.86 TOTAL $918,918.01 Report ID: CCM2001 City of Costa Mesa Accounts Payable Page No. 1 SUMMARY CHECK REGISTER Run Date Feb 26,2015 Bank: CITY Run Time 2:23:59 PM Cycle: APAY Payment Ref Date Status Remit To 0186634 02/27/15 P CaIPERS Long -Term Care Program Line Description: Payroll Deduction Check 1505 0186635 02/27/15 P Carrie Beatteay Line Description: Payroll Deduction Check 1505 0186636 02/27/15 P Community Health Charities Line Descnption: Payroll Deduction Check 1505 0186637 02/27/15 P State of California Line Description: Payroll Deduction Check 1505 0186638 02/27/15 P State of California Line Description: Payroll Deduction Check 1505 0186639 02/27/15 P Tamra Williams Line Description: Payroll Deduction Check 1505 0186640 02/27/15 P Treasurer of Virginia Line Description: Payroll Deduction Check 1505 0186641 02/27/15 P United States Treasury Line Description: Payroll Deduction Check 1505 End of Report Remit ID 0000006287 0000023012 0000008015 IQIpZ1IlI1j(ZI:1 LIIIIIIIRK&MIL D7IDIISIIIYZ:EfI :�fIP➢IISCSLff Payment Amt 189.40 369.24 10.00 185.00 254.00 1,350.92 KOW11S 0000015556 85.38 TOTAL $2,707.44 Report ID: CCM20010 City of Costa Mesa Accounts Payable Page No. 1 CCM OVERFLOW CHECK LISTING Run Date Feb 26,2015 Bank: CITY Run Time 2:01:28 PM C cle: Payment Ref Date Status Remit To 0186479 02/27/15 O Mesa Consolidated Water District 0186480 02/27/15 O Line Description: Overflow Mesa Consolidated Water District Line Description: Overflow End of Report Remit ID 0000003144 Payment Amt 0.00 0000003144 0.00 TOTAL D_DD Report ID: CCM2001V City of Costa Mesa Accounts Payable Page No. 1 CCM VOID CHECK LISTING Run Date Mar 05,2015 Bank: CITY Run Time 2:43:36 PM Cycle: APAY Payment Ref Cancel Date Status Remit To 0186635 03/05/2015 V Carrie Beatteay Line Description: 3/5115 Did not received. Stop Payment placed. 0.00-* =33 51 5' 364.24- 2,033•73+ 001 53>3i7.2�a End of Report Remit ID Payment Date Payment Amt 0000023012 02/27/15 (369.24) TOTAL ($369.24) Report ID: CCM2001 City of Costa Mesa Accounts Payable Page No. 1 SUMMARY CHECK REGISTER Run Date Maro5,2015 Bank: COM1 Run Time 12:44:42 PM Cycle: aCOM I Payment Ref Date Status Remit To 000881 03/06/15 P Ariel Supply Inc Line Description: Toner Cartridges Toner Cartridges Toner Cartidges Toner Cartridges End of Report Remit ID 0000006035 Payment Amt 2,053.75 TOTAL $2,053.75 Report ID: CCM2001 City of Costa Mesa Accounts Payable Page No. 1 SUMMARY CHECK REGISTER Run Date Mar 05,2015 Bank: CITY Run Time 3:24:19 PM Cycle, Payment Ref Date Status Remit To 0186642 03/06/15 P ASSA ABLOY Entrance Systems US Inc Line Description: Sr Cntr Sliding Door Sys 0186643 03/06/15 P Albert Grover & Associates Inc Line Description: Baker/Placentia TSSP-Janl5 0186644 03/06/15 P City of Huntington Beach Line Description: Helicopter Svs-Jan 2015 0186645 03/06/15 P Copp Contracting Inc Line Description: City Project 14-11 Street Reha Retentions Payable Proj #14-11 0186646 03/06/15 P Culver Newlin Inc Line Description: Conference Chair - B. Mesh Back Chair - A. Delivery and Installation - 0. Executive Chair - C. Sales Tax (8.00%) 0186647 03/06/15 P Lilley Planning Group Line Description: PlanningConsultantSvcs Jan2015 0186648 03/06/15 P Newport Mesa Unified School District Line Description: Developer Fees for Dec 2014 0186649 03/06/15 P Patriot Contracting & Engineering Line Description: Alley Rehabilitation Proj14-10 Retentions Payable Proj #14-10 Remit ID 0000021745 0000014065 0000002599 0000015151 0000021554 0000021428 0000003339 11III611I11104ILMN'. Payment Amt 15,361.00 43,985.38 18,200.00 48,48026 31,384.80 26,050.00 25,395.68 132,065.34 Report ID: CCM2001 City of Costa Mesa Accounts Payable Page No. 2 SUMMARY CHECK REGISTER Run Date Mar 05,2015 Bank: CITY Run Time 3:24:11 PM Cycle: Payment Ref Date Status Remit To Remit ID Payment Amt 0186650 03/06/15 P SC Fuels 0000013839 16,365.55 Line Description: Unleaded Fuel for PD 0186651 03/06/15 P 1st Jon Inc 0000018321 244.20 Line Description: Porta Potty Svc-DelMar CommGar Porta Potty Svcs-HamiltonCommG Sales Tax (8.00%) Sales Tax (8.00%) 0186652 03/06/15 P 911 Vehicle 0000020861 776.00 Line Description: PA Broadcast Repair -4525 0186653 03/06/15 P ARCO Business Solutions 0000018562 133.02 Line Description: Temp SvsCntd Svs 2/16-2/28 0186654 03/06/15 P AT & T 0000001107 199.42 Line Description: SrCenter Elevator12/15/14-1/14 Sr Center Elevator 1/15-2/14 RMATS SCPL Substation)/17-2116 0186655 03/06/15 P AT & T 0000001107 168.57 Line Description: NCC DSL Line 2/20-3/19/15 0186656 03/06/15 P Aikido Federation of California 0000000937 145.95 Line Description: Instructor Pymnt-Winter 15 0186657 03/06/15 P Alert All Corp 0000015453 64.80 Line Description: 911 Alert Stickers 0186658 03/06/15 P All City Management Services Inc 0000009480 7,038.95 Report ID: CCM2001 City of Costa Mesa Accounts Payable Page No. 3 SUMMARY CHECK REGISTER Run Date Mar 05,2015 Bank: CITY Run Time 3:24:11 PM Cycle: Payment Ref Date Status Remit To Line Description: Schl Crsng Guard Sys 1118-1131 0186659 03/06/15 P Allied Nationwide Security Inc Line Description: Security Guard @Sr Cntrl/16-30 0186660 03/06/15 P American Forests Line Description: 2015 Mbrshp-D Kokesh 0186661 03/06/15 P Anthony Monteleone Line Description: Softball Umpire 2/12/15 Softball Umpire 7/3-7/10/14 Softball Umpire 2117/15 Softball Umpire 2/5/15 Softball Umpire 213/15 0186662 03/06/15 P Antje Morris Line Description: Instructor Pymnt-Winter 15 0186663 03/06/15 P BC Traffic Specialist Line Description: Barricades 4 Parks 0186664 03/06/15 P Barbara Burks Line Description: Instructor Pymnt-Winter 15 0186665 03/06/15 P Bee Busters Inc Line Description: Bee Removal 0186666 03/06/15 P Best Best & Krieger LLP Line Description: Election Work -Jan 15 Remit ID Payment Amt 0000022698 1,233.43 0000023275 25.00 0000021339 442.00 0000003234 14,164.15 0000022225 478.44 0000001280 920.40 0000007572 110.00 0000014491 270.00 Report ID: CCM2001 City of Costa Mesa Accounts Payable Page No. 4 SUMMARY CHECK REGISTER Run Date Mar 05,2015 Bank: CITY Run Time 3:24:11 PM Cycle: Payment Ref Date Status Remit To Remit ID Payment Amt 0186667 03/06/15 P Bon Appetit Management Company 0000023274 1,231.15 Line Description: Emplyee of Year Awards -2/25/15 0186668 03/06/15 P Bound Tree Medical LLC 0000011695 1,503.19 Line Description: Paramedic Supplies Paramedic Supplies Paramedic Supplies 0186669 03/06/15 P BmndU 0000022518 3,968.30 Line Description: Jacket Pocket Polo Sales Tax (8.00%) T -Shirts Shipping Fee Sales Tax (8.00%) Knit Polo 0186670 03/06/15 P Brandi Knox 0000020652 709.80 Line Description: Instructor Pymnt-Winter 15 0186671 03/06/15 P Brenda Emnck 0000014473 269.40 Line Description: Web Hosting 4 CERT Frog 0186672 03/06/15 P Brett Eckles 0000023276 100.00 Line Description: Park&Rec Comm Mtng-Feb 1 0186673 03/06/15 P Byron de Arakal 0000012401 100.00 Line Description: Park&Rec Comm Mtng-Feb 15 0186674 03106/15 P CAPF 0000004755 1,443.00 Line Description: Firefighter LTD -Mar 2015 Report ID: CCM2001 City of Costa Mesa Accounts Payable Page No. 5 SUMMARY CHECK REGISTER Run Date Mar 05,2015 Bank: CITY Run Time 3:24:11 PM Cycle: Payment Ref Date Status Remit To 0186675 03/06/15 P CBE Line Description: Copier Maint 2/5-314/15 Overage Fee 1/5-2/4/15 Copier Overage Fee 1/5-2/4115 Color Cpr Overage Fee 1/5-214 Copier Overage Charge 1/5-2/4 0186676 03/06/15 P CDW Government Inc Line Description: 3 HP Printers 0186677 03/06/15 P CLEA Line Description: Police Officers LTD-Mar2015 0186678 03/06/15 P CS Dance Factory Line Description: Instructor Pymnt-Winter 15 0186679 03/06/15 P CSG Consultants Inc Line Description: Bldg Plan Check ReviewJan15 0186680 03/06/15 P Carl Warren & Company Line Description: Liability Claims Adm Fee -Jan 15 0186681 03/06/15 P Carrie Beatteay Line Description: Payroll Deduction Check 1505 Payroll Deduction Check 1505 0186682 03/06/15 P Chandlers Air Conditioning & Line Description: Refgtr/Freezer Repair@Sr Cmr TWSC Ice Machine Repair Remit ID Payment Amt 0000015149 1,188.28 0000005402 922.82 0000004754 2,425.50 0000021618 875.87 0000001887 757.45 0000001578 3,250.00 0000023012 369.24 0000001640 673.84 Report ID: CCM2001 City of Costa Mesa Accounts Payable Page No. 6 SUMMARY CHECK REGISTER Run Date Mar 05,2015 Bank: CITY Run Time 3:24:11 PM Cycle: Payment Ref Date Status Remit To Remit ID Payment Amt 0186683 03/06/15 P City of Anaheim 0000016211 12,800.00 Line Description: Shrd HazMat Rspns Team 14/15 0186684 03/06/15 P Civil Source 0000017030 7,242.50 Line Description: Harbor Widening Proj-Sep/Oct14 Harbor Widening Proj-Nov/Dec14 0186685 03/06/15 P Clean Fun Promotional Marketing 0000010371 8,661.82 Line Description: Flyer Low Profile Cap Sales Tax (8.00%) Sales Tax (8.00%) Low Profile Cap YO-YO Visor Tumbler Tote Bag Sports Bottle Shipping Fee Set Up Charges Pen Hat 0186686 03/06/15 P CompuCom Systems 0000004859 871.00 Line Description: Software 4 Planning Staff 0186687 03/06/15 P Costa Mesa Collision & Auto Painting 0000022326 2,020.49 Line Description: Painting -#700 0186688 03/06/15 P Costa Mesa Lock & Key 0000001817 199.52 Line Description: Keys 4 Sr Center Report ID: CCM2001 City of Costa Mesa Accounts Payable Page No. 7 SUMMARY CHECK REGISTER Run Date Mar 05,2015 Bank: CITY Run Time 3:24:11 PM cle: Payment Ref Date Status Remit To 0186689 03/06/15 P D'Angelos Line Description: Warehouse Stock Warehouse Stock 0186690 03/06/15 P DF Polygraph Line Description: Polygraph Exam 2/6-2/10/15 0186691 03/06/15 P Dawna Sanse Line Description: Instructor Pymnt-Winter 15 0186692 03/06/15 P Debbie Dickens Line Description: Instructor Pymnt-Winter 15 0186693 03/06/15 P Delta Dental Insurance Co Line Description: Dental HMO Permium-Mar 15 0186694 03/06/15 P Dennis Harris Line Description: Basketball Referee 2/23/15 0186695 03/06/15 P Dog Dealers Inc Line Description: Instructor Pymnt-Winter 15 0186696 03/06/15 P Doug Johnson Line Description: Supervisory Update 2/24-2/26 0186697 03/06/15 P Dougherty + Dougherty Architects LLP Line Description: Interior Design Consulting -Jan Remit ID [1I1I1PIIP➢Ki/1 0000021328 0000001185 0000010708 0000001966 0000002466 0000002018 0000005743 0000021779 Payment Amt 535.05 1,000.00 632.77 W4&1111 3,007.48 [*A011] 6xraa91 [YWF9 431.46 Report ID: CCM2001 City of Costa Mesa Accounts Payable Page No. 8 SUMMARY CHECK REGISTER Run Date Mar 05,2015 Bank: CITY Run Time 3:24:11 PM Cycle, Payment Ref Date Status Remit To Remit ID Payment Amt 0186698 03/06/15 P Dunn Edwards Corp 0000002058 176.40 Line Description: Paint -Sr Cntr 0186699 03/06/15 P Elizabeth A Markley 0000023213 1,014.00 Line Description: Instructor Pymnt-Winter 15 0186700 03/06/15 P Ennis Traffic Safety Solutions 0000004281 1,715.58 Line Description: Paint-Curve/Medians 0186701 03/06/15 P Enterprise Counsel Group 0000022017 1,259.18 Line Description: Successor Agency DOF-Nov14 Successor Agency DOF-Dec 14 0186702 03/06/15 P Emie Gomez 0000023266 78.00 Line Description: Softball Umpire 2125115 0186703 03/06/15 P Ewing Irrigation Products 0000005063 1,085.22 Line Description: Irrigation Supplies Irrigation Supplies Irrigation Supplies Irrigation Supplies Irrigation Supplies 0186704 03/06/15 P Expo Propane Inc 0000017819 440-61 Line Description: Propane -Corp Yard 0186705 03/06/15 P FTOG Inc 0000021401 2,160.00 Line Description: Interim Buyer 2/16-2/27/15 0186706 03/06/15 P Felice Ilkcagla 0000005927 622.70 Report ID: GCM2001 City of Costa Mesa Accounts Payable Page No. 9 SUMMARY CHECK REGISTER Run Date Mar 05,2015 Bank: CITY Run Time 3:24:11 PM Cycle: 'ayment Ref Date Status Remit To Remit ID Payment Amt Line Description: Instructor Pymnt-Winter 15 0186707 03/06/15 P Ferguson Enterprises Inc 0000007785 18577 Line Description: Toilet Spuds 0186708 03/06/15 P Fitzgeralds Auto Care Center 0000021295 5,679.22 Line Description: Auto Repair -#773 Engine Repair -1053 0186709 03/06/15 P Glenns Alignment & Brake Service 0000002344 273.35 Line Description: Tie Rod/Alignment-#791 0186710 03/06/15 P Government Staffing Services Inc 0000022422 8,185.50 Line Description: Temp Svs-Eng 2/9-2/22/15 Mant Analyst 2/9-2/20/15 Temp Svs-Const Mgnt 2/9-20 0186711 03/06/15 P Hanks Electrical Supplies 0000002445 1,223.82 Line Description: Supplies Electrical Supplies Electrical Supplies Electrical Supplies Lt Sensor -2nd FI City Hall 0186712 03/06/15 P Healthy U 0000012092 193.70 Line Description: Instructor Pymnt-Winter 15 0186713 03/06/15 P Hitch Crafters 0000017053 979.91 Line Description: Trailer Hitch/Bike Racks 0186714 03/06/15 P Hoist Service Inc 0000014337 1,147.76 Report ID: CCM2001 City of Costa Mesa Accounts Payable Page No. 10 SUMMARY CHECK REGISTER Run Date Mar 05,2015 Bank: CITY Run Time 3:24:11 PM C cle: 'ayment Ref Date Status Remit To Remit ID Payment Amt Line Description: Hoist Maintenance Hoist RepairSafetyLeg Rpic 0186715 03/06/15 P Icon Safety Cc Inc 0000017665 5,999.20 Line Description: Calibration Gas Cylinder Shipping Fee Sales Tax (8.00%) Replacement Screw Kit Pelican Case Mondor Constant Flow Regulator GasAlert Quattro 0186716 03/06/15 P Industrial Networking Solutions 0000022583 2,913.55 Line Description: Cellular Antenna Sales Tax (8.00%) Shipping 0186717 03/06/15 P Janet Millian 0000007795 2,152.80 Line Description: Instructor Pymnt-Winter 15 0186718 03/06/15 P Jays Designated Operator Services 0000022328 1,229.52 Line Description: Replace Level Gauge@Telecomm Replace Level Gauge @City Hall 0186719 03/06/15 P Jessica Conder 0000011010 289.25 Line Description: Instructor Pymnt-Winter 15 0186720 03/06/15 P John Deere Landscapes Inc 0000016331 - 2,329.58 Line Description: Irrigation Controller Irrigation Sprinkler Heads Sales Tax (8.00%) Report ID: CCM2001 City of Costa Mesa Accounts Payable Page No. 11 SUMMARY CHECK REGISTER Run Date Maro5,2015 Bank: CITY Run Time 3:24:11 PM Cycle: Payment Ref Date Status Remit To 0186721 03/06/15 P Joyce Patrick Line Description: Instructor Pymnt-Winter 15 0186722 03/06/15 P Kathy Andruss Line Description: Instructor Pymm-Winter 15 0186723 03/06/15 P Kelly Paper Line Description: Paper 4 Printing 0186724 03/06/15 P Kellys Pool Service Line Description: DRC Pool Cleaning -Jan 15 0186725 03/06/15 P Keyser Marston Associates Inc Line Description: Consulting Svs-Jan 2015 Neighborhood Impvmnt-Jan 14 0186726 03/06/15 P Keystone Uniforms OC Line Description: Uniforms-Mancillas 0186727 03/06/15 P Kim Pederson Line Description: Park&Rec Comm Mtng-Feb 1 0186728 03/06/15 P Kimball Midwest Line Description: Paint 0186729 03/06/15 P Larry Kaban Line Description: Instructor Payment Winter 2015 Remit ID Payment Amt 0000021362 74.90 0000022992 1,098.50 0000014703 188.57 0000013443 210.00 0000002824 7,670.00 0000022280 124.01 0000010099 100.00 0000006819 60.35 0000002794 268.12 Report ID: CCM2001 City of Costa Mesa Accounts Payable Page No. 12 SUMMARY CHECK REGISTER Run Date Mar 05,2015 Bank: CITY Run Time 3:24:11 PM Cycle: Payment Ret Date Status Remit To Remit ID Payment Amt 0186730 03/06/15 P Lawrence P Shield 0000017089 104.00 Line Description: Softball Umpire 2/22 212 511 5 0186731 03/06/15 P Leo Arnold 0000022194 1,000.00 Line Description: Background Investigation SNcs 0186732 03/06/15 P Liebert Cassidy Whitmore 0000002960 9,492.50 Line Description: Legal -Personnel Matter 0186733 03/06/15 P Los Angeles Times 0000003000 364.94 Line Description: Ad 4 RFP#15-009 & RFP#15-011 Ad for 2014 FP CitizensAd Mtg Legal Notices for Planning Div 0186734 03/06/15 P Mar Vac Electronics Corporation 0000003049 36.49 Line Description: Hardware Supplies Capacitor 4 CH Door Opener 0186735 03/06/15 P Maria L D'Angelo 0000020378 188.50 Line Description: Instructor Payment Winter 2015 0186736 03/06/15 P Matt Sheridan 0000020379 900.90 Line Description: Instructor Payment Winter 2015 0186737 03/06/15 P Mayer Hoffman McCann PC 0000016047 1,935.00 Line Description: Transient Occupancy Tax Audit 0186738 03/06/15 P McMaster Carr Supply Company - 0000003118 74.31 Line Description: Supplies for Fleet Services Report ID: CCM2001 City of Costa Mesa Accounts Payable Page No. 13 SUMMARY CHECK REGISTER Run Date Mar 05,2015 Bank: CIT' Run Time 3:24:11 PM Cycle' Payment Ref Date Status Remit To 0186739 03/06/15 P Melad & Associates Line Description: Building Plan Checking & Inspe 0186740 03/06/15 P Merrill & Associates Line Description: Installation & Configuration 0186741 03/06/15 P Michael Balliet Line Description: SRRE Administrative Svs 0186742 03/06/15 P Michael J Bolden Line Description: Basketball Referee 11/26/15 Basketball Referee 2/9/15 0186743 03/06/15 P Michelle Rudaitis Line Description: Haz Mat Coordinator Feb 2015 0186744 03/06/15 P Midori Gardens Inc Line Description: Removed Pampas Grass & Weeds 0186745 03/06/15 P Miss Darcy Photography Line Description: 2015 City Council 30X40 Print 0186746 03/06/15 P Municipal Code Corporation Line Description: ImemetFee MuniCodes2/15-1/16 0186747 03/06/15 P Municipal Emergency Services Inc Line Description: Arson Helmet Headlamps Remit ID 0000005068 0000003986 0000008858 0000001329 ;�I�I�DPSi[:1.Yy 0000017059 0000003209 0000003257 0000021524 Payment Amt 1,94326 10"A 61 3,591.25 184.00 7,350.00 785.00 M3.'9AU1 G1.YoATi7 382.45 Report ID: CCM2001 City of Costa Mesa Accounts Payable Page No. 14 SUMMARY CHECK REGISTER Run Date Mar05,2015 Bank: CITY Run Time 3:24:11 PM Cycle: Payment Ref Date Status Remit To 0186748 03/06/15 P National Fire Protection Association Line Description: 2015 Mbrshp Dues -D Hollister 0186749 03/06/15 P Newport Harbor Locksmith Line Description: City Padlocks for Parks Div 0186750 03/06/15 P Niki Parker Line Description: Instructor Payment Winter 2015 0186751 03/06/15 P Noack Trophy & Engraving Company Line Description: Council Member Name Tag Name Plates & Holders 4 Buyers 0186752 03/06/15 P North American Youth Activities Line Description: Instructor Payment Winter 2015 0186753 03/06/15 P OC Vaulting Line Description: Instructor Payment Winter 2015 0186754 03/06/15 P Pat Hill Line Description: Instructor Payment Winter 2015 0186755 03/06/15 P Petty Cash Fund No. 1 Line Description: Reimbursements to Petty Cash Meals 4 League of City Mgrs Crucial Conversations Trng-SL Critica I I ncidentStressM g mt-TG Shot Show -Post Trng-LH League of CA Cities CEO Mtg-TH Exps 4 Sungard Conf=LE CA HomicidelnvestAssnConf-BL Remit ID Payment Amt 0000003295 165.00 0000003337 142.56 0000002913 824.20 0000003360 102.62 0000022736 709.80 0000022861 273.00 0000002532 490.10 0000001834 2,401.08 Report ID: CCM2001 City of Costa Mesa Accounts Payable Page No. 15 SUMMARY CHECK REGISTER Run Date Mar 05,2015 Bank: CITY Run Time 3:24:11 PM Cycle, payment Ref Date Status Remit To Line Description: Shot Show -Post Trng-JH 0186756 03/06/15 P Presbyterian Church of the Covenant Line Description: Prkng Usage-Bball Open Crmnies 0186757 03/06/15 P Quentin W McKenzie Line Description: Basketball Referee 2/23/15 Basketball Referee 3/2/15 0186758 03/06/15 P Quick Crete Products Corp Inc Line Description: Ash Rings 4 Concrete TrashCans 0186759 03/06/15 P Rick Francis Line Description: College Tuition Reimb-Fa112014 0186760 03/06/15 P Ricoh USA Inc Line Description: CEO Copier Usage Jan 2015 CEO Copier Lease Mar 2015 0186761 03/06/15 P Rincon Truck Center Inc Line Description: Fuel Caps for Shop Stock Brake Shoes -Unit #525 Brake Drums- Unit#525 0186762 03/06/15 P Robert E Graham Line Description: Park&Rec Comm Mtng-Feb 1 0186763 03/06/15 P Robert G Patterson Line Description: Instructor Payment Winter 2015 Remit ID 0000007444 0000011175 :610DBL1116R7 fQ1PI,➢113091,61 0000007311 0000013236 0000014777 0000014499 Payment Amt 500.00 184.00 347.76 1,025.00 122.84 69824 100.00 416.32 Report ID: CCM2001 City of Costa Mesa Accounts Payable Page No. 16 SUMMARY CHECK REGISTER Run Date Mar 05,2015 Bank: CIN Run Time 3:24:11 PM C cle: AIA/Vi V Payment Ref Date Status Remit To 0186764 03/06/15 P Rochester Midland Corporation Line Description: CH Qrtfy SanitizeSvcsFeb-Apr15 0186765 03/06/15 P Rock Star Music Studios Line Description: Instructor Payment Winter 2015 0186766 03/06/15 P Roy Center Line Description: Instructor Payment Winter 2015 0186767 03/06/15 P Ryan Lee Line Description: Instructor Payment Winter 2015 0186768 03/06/15 P SC Fuels Line Description: Diesel Fuel for Fire Sta#5 0186769 03/06/15 P Scientia Consulting Group Inc Line Description: IT Consultant 1/25-2!7/15 0186770 03/06/15 P Share Corp Line Description: Cleaner/Degreaser4 Fleet Svcs 0186771 03/06/15 P Southern California Edison Company Line Description: 348 E 17th 1/27-2/26/15 2301 Harbor 1/26-2/25/15 3349 Sakioka 1127 2 /2 6115 3351 Sakioka 1/27-2126/15 867 Prospect 1/23-2/24/15 555 1/2 Paularino 1/23-2/24/15 3120 Manistree 1/23-2/24/15 Remit ID Payment Amt 0000009114 16224 0000015839 315.00 0000002158 2,555.14 0000022993 292.50 0000013839 1,603.60 0000021410 6,385.50 0000022015 194.26 0000004088 724.48 Report ID: CCM2001 City of Costa Mesa Accounts Payable Page No. 17 SUMMARY CHECK REGISTER Run Date Mar05,2015 Bank: CITY Run Time 3:24:11 PM Cycle: Payment Ref Date Status Remit To Remit ID Payment Amt 0186772 03/06/15 P Southern California Gas Company 0000004092 3,102.94 Line Description: FS #4 1126-2/25/15 DRC Pool 1/23-2/24/15 Telecomm 1/26-2/25/15 NCC 1123-2/24/15 2300 Placentia 1/26-2/25/15 Historical See 1123-2/24/15 567 W 18th 1/23-2/24/15 2310 Placentia 1/26-2/25/15 PD 1/26-2/25115 Sr Cntr 1/23-2/24/15 FS #1 1126-2125/15 0186773 03/06/15 P Sparkletts 0000015725 82.27 Line Description: Water Service for Civic Center 0186774 03/06/15 P Steadfast Contracting Inc 0000021584 1,382.00 Line Description: Data Wire Installation Sales Tax (8.00%) Materials 0186775 03/06/15 P Steve Clever 0000010800 130.00 Line Description: Softball Umpire 2/25-2/26/15 0186776 03/06/15 P Susan Saxe Clifford PHD 0000003932 1,800.00 Line Description: Psych Evaluation for PD Psych Evaluation for PD Psych Evaluation 4 PD & Comm 0186777 03/06/15 P Tamara S Letourneau 0000022659 400.00 Line Description: Mbrshp 4 CA City Mgmt Foundatn Report ID: CCM2001 City of Costa Mesa Accounts Payable Page No. 18 SUMMARY CHECK REGISTER Run Date Mar 05,2015 Bank: CITY Run Time 3:24:11 PM C cle: NAWY Payment Ref Date Status Remit To Remit ID Payment Amt 0186778 03/06/15 P Theodore Robins Ford 0000004245 906.55 Line Description: Name Plate Fuel Pump & Sender Tube & Valve Assembly Retainer for Unit#132 Hub Cap for Unit#728 Cr 4 Core Return Cylinder Master -#783 Visor Assembly for Unit#132 0186779 03/06/15 P Time Clock Sales & Service Company Inc 0000004263 256.00 Line Description: Time Clock Maint 4 NCC 15/16 Finance Time Clock Maint 15/16 0186780 03/06/15 P Tomark Sports Inc 0000004273 510.33 Line Description: Materials 4 TeWinkleAthleticCm 0186781 03/06/15 P Travelodge 0000004526 3,614.00 Line Description: Refund Overpaid TOT FY13114 0186782 03/06/15 P Traveltech Enterprises 0000022894 5,512.00 Line Description: SrCntr Travel 2116115 Laughlin 0186783 03/06/15 P Trifytt Sports LLC 0000019031 4,022.85 Line Description: Instructor Payment Winter 2015 0186784 03/06/15 P US Bank 0000002228 4,967.40 Line Description: Payroll Deduction Check 1504 0186785 03/06/15 P United States Treasury 0000007179 1,498.00 Line Description: Replace Mirror @NCC Restroom Report ID: CCM2001 City of Costa Mesa Accounts Payable Page No. 19 SUMMARY CHECK REGISTER Run Date Mar 05,2015 Bank: CITY Run Time 3:24:11 PM Cycle: layment Ref Date Status Remit To 0186786 03/06/15 P Urs Corporation Line Description. Initial Study/Mitigated Negati 0186787 03/06/15 P ValueOptions of California Inc Line Description: EAP Services for Feb 2015 0186788 03/06/15 P Vic Duong Line Description: Softball Umpire 6/30-718/14 0186789 03/06/15 P Vision Internet Providers Inc Line Description: Web Hosting & Maint Feb 2015 0186790 03/06/15 P Vulcan Materials Company Line Description: Asphalt for Patching Potholes Asphalt for Patching Potholes 0186791 03/06/15 P Ware Disposal Inc Line Description: City Refuse Svcs Dec 2014 0186792 03/06/15 P Waxie Sanitary Supply Line Description: Hand Sanitizers 4 Sr Center 0186793 03/06/15 P West Coast Artwear Line Description: Artwork Setup Fee Shipping Fee Sales Tax (8.00%) Sweatshirts Remit ID Payment Ami 0000023041 6,888.55 0000020327 690.84 0000011215 52.00 0000010175 210.00 0000007403 221.40 0000000255 459.00 0000004480 408.06 0000023055 2,501.55 Report ID: CCM2001 City of Costa Mesa Accounts Payable Page No. 20 SUMMARY CHECK REGISTER Run Date Mar 05,2015 Bank: CITY Run Time 3:24:11 PM C cle: Payment Ref Date Status Remit To 0186794 03/06/15 P West Coast Dance Arts Line Description Instructor Payment Winter 2015 0186795 03/06/15 P Westminster Press Inc Line Description: 1-405 Mailer/Pringint Sales Tax (8.00%) 0186796 03/06/15 P Williams Data Management Line Description: IT Data Storage for Dec 2014 0186797 03/06/15 P Zap Manufacturing Inc Line Description: Recycled Aluminum 4 Signs End of Report Remit ID Payment Amt 0000021602 846.65 0000008619 2,230.80 0000018803 367.50 0000004613 989.75 TOTAL $587,632.74 CITY COUNCIL MEET/NG MEETING DATE: MARCH 17, 2015 ITEM NUMBER: CC -4 SUBJECT: APPROVE A BUDGET ADJUSTMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF $1,500 IN REGARDS TO A DONATION MADE BY THE COSTA MESA COMMUNITY RUN TO THE CITY'S "HAPPY FEET RUNNING CLUB" YOUTH SPORTS PROGRAM. DATE: MARCH 2, 2015 FROM: PARKS & COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT PRESENTATION TRAVIS KARLEN, RECREATION MANAGER BY: FOR FURTHER INFORMATION JUSTIN MARTIN, RECREATION SUPERVISOR AT CONTACT: 714-754-5065 RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the City Council authorize a budget adjustment (budget adjustment # 15-012) in the amount of $1,500 to accept a donation from the Costa Mesa Community Run for the youth sports program, "Happy Feet Running Club." The donated funds will be accepted and then used for club expenses which may include race entry fees, club apparel, nutritional snacks and other miscellaneous club supplies. BACKGROUND: One of the primary goals of the Costa Mesa Community Run is to increase youth participation; and by making this donation they are benefitting both the city's youth program and the run. In January 2015, Costa Mesa Community Run organizer, Karen Barloon, contacted City staff about providing a donation to youth participants that participate in the city's youth running program, "Happy Feet Running Club." The club meets twice per week, once at Balearic Community Center and once at Fairview Park. The club fosters an organized and fun training environment suitable for all fitness levels. The Costa Mesa Community Run hosts their annual 5K/10K event at the City's Fairview Park in partnership with the City of Costa Mesa. The run organizer wants to sponsor the "Happy Feet Running Club" participants and have the Community Run be their final run of the club's season. The intent of the donation is to provide the city's youth sports club with the opportunity to take part in one of Orange County's premiere 5K/10K runs, while having all of the supplies necessary to make it an enjoyable and memorable experience. The $1,500 donation will be allocated toward expenses that may include race entry fees, club apparel, club snacks and other miscellaneous supplies regarding the success of the program. ANALYSIS: In the current fiscal budget, funding is not in place to supply the running club with the means to pay for expenses related to race entries, apparel, snacks and other miscellaneous supplies. The donation is a way to expand the program and to gain participation with additional members; in -turn increasing the city's opportunities to actively engage youth. The program benefits of increased physical and social health are a clear marker that this free program is an enrichment to participants. ALTERNATIVES TO CONSIDER: The following are alternatives that the City Council may consider: 1. The City Council could reject the budget adjustment in the amount of $1,500, thus eliminate the enhancement to the youth sports program. 2. The City Council could reject the budget adjustment in the amount of $1,500 and refer staff to find the funds elsewhere. FISCAL REVIEW: There is no cost associated with accepting the donation from the Costa Mesa Community Run. Creating a budget adjustment to show both income and expense in the youth sports budget account will have no associated cost. LEGAL REVIEW: No legal review is required. CONCLUSION: In order to enhance the quality of the youth running club by creating additional experiences, staff is recommending that City Council authorize a budget adjustment in the amount of $1,500 income and $1,500 expense to the city's youth sports account. The $1,500 donation made by the Costa Mesa Community Run will account for the income and the city youth sports program will account for the expense. TAMARA S. LETOURNEAU Assistant Chief Executive Officer TRAVIS KARLEN Recreation Manager THOMAS R. HATCH Chief Executive Officer STEPHEN DUNIVENT Finance Director - Interim E UNOFFICIAL UNTIL APPROVED MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CLOSED SESSION MEETING OF THE COSTA MESA CITY COUNCIL July 25, 2012 The City Council of the City of Costa Mesa, California met in a Special Closed Session, on Wednesday, July 25, 2012 at 4;30 p.m. in Council Chambers, 77, Fair Drive, Costa Mesa. The Mayor Pro Tem called the meeting to order. ROLL CALL: Council Members Present: Mayor Eric R. Bever (arrived at 4:35 p.m.) Mayor Pro Tem James M. Righeimer Council Member Wendy Leece Council Member Stephen M. Mensinger Council Member Gary Monahan Council Members Absent: None Public Comments None Received. Closed Session 1. Conference with Thomas R. Hatch, Chief Executive Officer, and Labor Negotiator, Agency Negotiator regarding Employee Organizations: Costa Mesa City Employee Association (CMCEA), Costa Mesa Firefighters Association (CMFA), Costa Mesa Police Officers Association (CMPOA), Costa Mesa Police Management Association (CMPMA), Costa Mesa Fire Fighters Management Association, and Costa Mesa Division Managers Association pursuant to Government Code Section 54957.6 The City Attorney announced that there will be no closed session report. The Mayor Pro Tem recessed the meeting to Conference Room 1 B for the closed session. ADJOURNMENT Stephen M. Mensinger, Mayor ATTEST: Brenda Green, City Clerk Minutes — Special Closed Session Meeting — July 25, 2012 -- Page 1 CC -5 UNOFFICIAL UNTIL APPROVED MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CLOSED SESSION MEETING OF THE COSTA MESA CITY COUNCIL July 31, 2012 The City Council of the City of Costa Mesa, California met in a Special Closed Session, on Wednesday, July 31, 2012 at 6:00 p.m. in Council Chambers, 77, Fair Drive, Costa Mesa. The Mayor Pro Tem called the meeting to order. ROLL CALL: Council Members Present: Mayor Pro Tem James M. Righeimer Council Member Wendy I_eece Council Member Stephen M. Mensinger Council Member Gary Monahan Council Members Absent: Mayor Eric R. Bever Public Comments None Received. Closed Session 1. Conference with Thomas R. Hatch, Chief Executive Officer, and Labor Negotiator, Agency Negotiator regarding Employee Organizations: Costa Mesa City Employee Association (CMCEA), Costa Mesa Firefighters Association (CMFA), Costa Mesa Police Officers Association (CMPOA), Costa Mesa Police Management Association (CMPMA), Costa Mesa Fire Fighters Management Association, and Costa Mesa Division Managers Association pursuant to Government Code Section 54957.6 2. Conference with legal counsel regarding anticipated litigation, significant exposure to litigation pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(b) for one case. The City Attorney announced that there will be no closed session report. The Mayor Pro Tem recessed the meeting to Conference Room 1 B for the closed session. ADJOURNMENT Stephen M. Mensinger, Mayor ATTEST: Brenda Green, City Clerk Minutes — Special Closed Session Meeting — July 31, 2012 — Page 1 UNOFFICIAL UNTIL APPROVED MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CLOSED SESSION MEETING OF THE COSTA MESA CITY COUNCIL October 7, 2013 CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order by the Mayor at 10:00 a.m, in City Hall Council Chambers, 77 Fair Drive, Costa Mesa, California. ROLL CALL Present: Mayor James M. Righeimer, Mayor Pro Tem Stephen M. Mensinger, Council Member Sandra Genis, Council Member Wendy Leece, Council Member Gary Monahan Absent: None PUBLIC COMMENTS ON CLOSED SESSION ITEMS: None CLOSED SESSION The City Council recessed into closed session at 10:02 a.m. to consider the following item: CITY COUNCIL CLOSED SESSION: 1. Conference with legal counsel — anticipated litigation: Initiation of litigation pursuant to paragraph (4) of subdivision (d) of Section 54946.9: One case. CITY ATTORNEY CLOSED SESSION REPORT No reportable action. ADJOURNMENT: The special closed session was adjourned at 11:30 a.m. Stephen M. Mensinger, Mayor ATTEST: Brenda Green, City Clerk Minutes -- Special Closed Session — October 7, 2013 — Page 1 UNOFFICIAL UNTIL APPROVED MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CLOSED SESSION MEETING OF THE COSTA MESA CITY COUNCIL November 26, 2013 CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order by the Mayor at 6:00 p.m. in City Hall Council Chambers, 77 Fair Drive, Costa Mesa, California. ROLL CALL Present: Mayor James M. Righeimer, Mayor Pro Tem Stephen M. Mensinger, Council Member Sandra Genis, Council Member Wendy Leece, Council Member Gary Monahan Absent: None PUBLIC COMMENTS ON CLOSED SESSION ITEMS: None CLOSED SESSION The City Council recessed into closed session at 6:02 p.m, to consider the following item: CITY COUNCIL CLOSED SESSION: 1. Conference with Thomas R. Hatch, Chief Executive Officer, and Labor Negotiator, Agency Negotiator regarding Employee Organizations: Costa Mesa City Employee Association (CMCEA), pursuant to California Government Code Section 54957.6. CITY ATTORNEY CLOSED SESSION REPORT No reportable action. ADJOURNMENT: 7:35 p.m. Stephen M. Mensinger, Mayor ATTEST: Brenda Green, City Clerk Minutes -- Special Closed Session — November 26, 2013 — Page 1 UNOFFICIAL UNTIL APPROVED MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE COSTA MESA CITY COUNCIL, AND SUCCESSOR AGENCY TO THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING March 3, 2015 CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order by the Mayor at 5:05 p.m. in the Council Chambers at Costa Mesa City Hall, 77 Fair Drive, Costa Mesa, California. ROLL CALL Council Members Present: Mayor Mensinger, Mayor Pro Tem Righeimer, Council Member Foley, Council Member Genis and Council Member Monahan Council Members Absent: None PUBLIC COMMENTS ON CLOSED SESSION ITEMS CLOSED SESSION The City Council recessed into Closed Session at 5:07 p.m. to consider the following items: 1. Conference with Thomas R. Hatch, Chief Executive Officer, and Labor Negotiator, Agency Negotiator regarding Employee Organization: Costa Mesa City Employee Association (CMCEA), pursuant to California Government Code Section 54957.6. The City Council reconvened at 5:45 p.m. CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order by the Mayor at 5:45 p.m. in the Council Chambers at Costa Mesa City Hall, 77 Fair Drive, Costa Mesa, California. CALL TO ORDER (00:00:18) PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE (00:00:30) — Council Member Foley MOMENT OF SOLEMN EXPRESSION (00:00:60) Josh Harrison, ROCKHARBOR Church Minutes — Regular Meeting — March 3, 2015 - Page 1 UNOFFICIAL UNTIL APPROVED ROLL CALL (00:02:04) Present: Council Member Foley, Council Member Genis, Council Member Monahan, Mayor Pro Tem Righeimer, Mayor Mensinger Absent: None Officials Present: Chief Executive Officer Thomas R. Hatch, City Attorney Thomas Duarte, Assistant Chief Executive Officer Rick Francis, Economic and Development Services Director Gary Armstrong, Public Services Director Ernesto Munoz, and City Clerk Brenda Green. CITY ATTORNEY CLOSED SESSION REPORT (00:02:17) • COIN: Ex Parte Communications pursuant to Municipal Code Section 2-238 (b) - None ANNOUNCEMENTS (00:02:43) "Costa Mesa Minute" was played featuring upcoming events and activities in the community. PRESENTATIONS (00:02:48) Amy Potter, Chief Financial Officer of Transportation Corridor Agency (TCA) provided a report on the San Joaquin Hills refinancing; and financial feasibility. PUBLIC COMMENTS (00:10:10) Jay Humphrey, Costa Mesa, spoke on First Step Sober Living Home's lawsuit; and Police Department staffing levels. (00:10:15) Hank Lloyd, Costa Mesa, Operator, spoke on the Costa Mesa Tennis Center request for proposals. (00:13:30) Chuck Perry, Costa Mesa, spoke on support of public comments; thanked the City for improvements on 17th street; pavement work at Victoria St; graffiti removal; and reconsideration of the Community Center as a Library. (00:17:15) Beth Refakes, Costa Mesa, on behalf of the Military Affairs Team, spoke on the Easter donations and collections. (00:19:24) Jeannie Stewart, Costa Mesa, spoke in support of the Costa Mesa Tennis Center; and Hank Lloyd continuing as Operator. (00:21:20) Ann Parker, Costa Mesa, spoke on a development approved near Harper School by the Planning Commission. (00:22:20) Minutes -- Regular Meeting — March 3, 2015 - Page 2 UNOFFICIAL UNTIL APPROVED Barrie Fisher, Costa Mesa, spoke on Sober Living Home issues; Department of Health Care Services; and list of pending licenses. (00:25:28) Speaker, Costa Mesa, spoke on consolidated plan survey on the City website; and data. (00:29:24) Speaker, Costa Mesa, spoke on Economic Development Plan; areas that need attention including: a vision of the City; organizational structure of City leadership and reviews of CEO and City Attorney; review of budget and CAFR; and hotel tax. (00:31:29) JoAnn Copp, Costa Mesa, spoke in support of the Costa Mesa Tennis Center and Hank Lloyd; and children breaking rules at skate board park. (00:34:48) Paul Youngerman, Huntington Beach, spoke in support of the Costa Mesa Tennis Center and Hank Lloyd. (00:36:26) Andrea Marr, Costa Mesa, spoke on Costa Mesa Motor Inn conversion; and housing for low income and very low income families. (00:37:12) Kevin Orton, Costa Mesa, spoke on a need for more baseball fields in the City. (00:38:38) Cindy Brenneman, Costa Mesa, spoke on the First Friday Road Show; spoke on Public Safety meeting at College Park; Citizens Fire Academy; and Citizens Police Academy. (00:40:59) James H. Bridges, Costa Mesa, spoke on subsidized housing. (00:43:10) Tracy Hurd, Newport Beach, spoke in support of Hank and Marie Lloyd and the operation of the Costa Mesa Tennis Center. (00:45:47) Cynthia McDonald, Costa Mesa, spoke in support of Hank Lloyd and the operation of the Costa Mesa Tennis Center. (00:47:10) Robin Leffler, Costa Mesa, spoke in support of the Costa Mesa Tennis Center; and the Police Department staffing levels. (00:49:41) Richard Huffman, Costa Mesa, spoke in support of the Costa Mesa Tennis Center; the Police Department staffing levels; and Harbor Blvd. palm trees blown over in the winds. (00:52:42) Speaker, Costa Mesa, spoke on civil liberties; public records requests; and emails on the 60th anniversary. (00:55:29) Minutes — Regular Meeting — March 3, 2015 - Page 3 UNOFFICIAL UNTIL APPROVED COUNCIL MEMBER' REPORTS, COMMENTS, AND SUGGESTIONS (00:58:43) Council Member Foley thanked Costa Mesa Police Department on the Employee Recognition Breakfast; requested adjournment of meeting in memory of Crystal Morales; spoke on OCTA press conference, legislation and toll roads; thanked Hank Lloyd and The Costa Mesa Tennis Center; spoke on the RFP for the Costa Mesa Tennis Center; spoke on Costa Mesa High School electronic recycling event on Sunday; the Women in Business meeting on Sunday; requested an update and/or presentations on the following: Signature aAademies, Fire Department operations; City Council goal setting; Mayor's Dinner; and Sober Living Homes. (00:58:49) Council Member Genis requested a report on The Costa Mesa Tennis Center (CMTC) and changing of conditions and requested a legal opinion on the RFP for the CMTC; spoke on Consent Calendar item #9 regarding the Bioswale and the Equestrian groups,- spoke roups;spoke on Consent Calendar item #7 and expressed concerns with density bonus provisions; agreed on adjourning in memory of Crystal Morales and Henry Segerstrom; and spoke on the Armenian genocide. (01:06:44) Council Member Monahan spoke on the Little League opening day; improving baseball fields; AYSO opening day; public comment cards without names; the hotel tax; requested an update on the academies; congratulated Ed Fawcett on his retirement; requested an update on Talbert Park from O.C. Parks; agreed on adjourning the meeting in memory of Crystal Morales and Henry Segerstrom; and spoke in support of Hank Lloyd and the Costa Mesa Tennis Center and requested that the item be agendized. (01:11:14) Mayor Pro Tem Righeimer spoke on The Costa Mesa Tennis Center and Hank Lloyd; the RFP and process being open and transparent; OCTA toll -lanes legislation by Senator Kim; spoke on the Group Homes meeting at College Park Elementary School; Police Department recruitments; requested a memorandum and presentation on police staffing levels and recruitments; and agreed to adjourn meeting in memory of Crystal Morales and Henry Segerstrom. (01:16:22) Mayor Mensinger spoke on attending the service honoring Henry Segerstrom; spoke on attending the Mayor's conference; stated the Meet the Mayor will be cancelled on Sunday; spoke on Group Home issues; requests goal setting session for City Council Members; spoke on the Costa Mesa Tennis Center RFP and Hank Lloyd; spoke on attending Little League opening ceremony; and expressed condolences for Crystal Morales and family; and spoke on the OCTA toll lane press conference. (01:25:52) Minutes -- Regular Meeting — March 3, 2015 - Page 4 UNOFFICIAL UNTIL APPROVED REPORT — CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER (CEO) (01:35:32) CEO Tom Hatch spoke on the timing for presentations; spoke on police staffing levels and the recruitment process; spoke on a memorandum on police recruitments and a presentation; spoke on Group Homes issues and letter from the State; spoke on The Costa Mesa Tennis Center, Hank Lloyd and the RFP; and spoke on Consent calendar item #9 regarding the Bioswale and a meeting with the Equestrian Group. Council Member Foley requested a report on recruiting and hiring police officer laterals; and ensuring their longevity. Council Member Genis recommended the presentations be heard at Study Session Meetings since no Council action is required. CONSENT CALENDAR (02:00:58) MOTION: Approve recommended actions for Consent Calendar Item Nos. 1 through 9 except for Items 3, 4, 7, and 8. MOVED/SECOND: Council Member Monahan/Mayor Pro Tem Righeimer The motion carried by the following roll call vote: Ayes: Council Member Foley, Council Member Genis, Council Member Monahan, Mayor Pro Tem Righeimer, and Mayor Mensinger. Nays: None Absent: None Motions carried: 5-0 1. PROCEDURAL WAIVER: MOTION TO APPROVE THE READING BY TITLE ONLY OF ALL ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS. SAID ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS THAT APPEAR ON THE PUBLIC AGENDA SHALL BE READ BY TITLE ONLY AND FURTHER READING WAIVED ACTION: City Council waived reading in full of Ordinances and Resolutions and approved and adopted of same by reading title only. 2. READING FOLDER a. Claims received by the City Clerk: Christina Natividad. ACTION: City Council received and filed. Minutes — Regular Meeting — March 3, 2015 - Page 5 UNOFFICIAL UNTIL APPROVED 5. MINUTES (A) MOVEDISECOND: Council Member Monahan/Mayor Pro Tem Righeimer The motion carried by the following roll call vote: Ayes: Council Member Foley, Council Member Genis, Council Member Monahan, Mayor Pro Tem Righeimer and Mayor Mensinger. Nays: None Absent: None Abstain: None Motion carried: 5-0 ACTION: City Council approved the minutes of the Special Study Session of the Costa Mesa City Council of February 10, 2015; and minutes of the Regular Meeting of the Costa Mesa City Council and Successor Agency to the Redevelopment Agency and Special Agenda for the Housing Authority, Special Agenda for the Orange County Fairgrounds Authority, and Special Agenda for the Public Financing Authority of February 17, 2015. (B) MOVED/SECOND: Council Member Monahan/Mayor Pro Tem Righeimer The motion carried by the following roll call vote: Ayes: Council Member Genis, Council Member Monahan, Mayor Pro Tem Righeimer and Mayor Mensinger. Nays: None Absent: None Abstain: Council Member Foley (Not a Council Member at the meetings) Motion carried: 4-0-1 ACTION: City Council approved the minutes of the regular City Council and Successor Agency Meetings of October 4, 2011, July 2, 2013, July 15, 2014; and October 7, 2014; minutes of the Regular City Council, Costa Mesa Housing Authority, and Successor Agency Meeting of July 16, 2013; and minutes of the Special Joint Study Session of the City Council and Planning Commission of January 28, 2014. 6. YEAR TWO OF THE SUPPORT PERIOD OF RIMINI STREET FOR ORACLE/ PEOPLESOFT SUPPORT SERVICES ACTION: City Council authorized the City CEO to sign the Purchase Requisition for $115,855 with Rimini Street, Inc. (Rimini), to continue prodding support for the City's Oracle/PeopleSoft products on Year Two of the Support Period commencing on March 19, 2015. Minutes -- Regular Meeting -- March 3, 2015 - Page 6 UNOFFICIAL UNTIL APPROVED 9. TIME EXTENSION REQUEST FOR THE ARLINGTON DRIVE BIOSWALE AND DRY WEATHER DIVERSION PROJECT ACTION: City Council approved a request for a twenty-four month extension request from the Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) for the Arlington Drive Bioswale and Dry Weather Diversion Project. ____________---------------------- END OF CONSENT CALENDAR ------------------------ PUBLIC HEARINGS — 7:00 P.M. (Resolution NO. 05-55) -- (02:02:39) 1. CIVIC OPENNESS IN NEGOTIATIONS (COIN) ORDINANCE FIRST PUBLIC HEARING OF THE SIDE LETTER OF AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF COSTA MESA AND THE COSTA MESA POLICE MANAGEMENT ASSOCIATION (CMPMA) Laura Kalty, Chief Negotiator for the Costa Mesa Police Management Association (CMPMA), provided the staff report pursuant to the COIN Ordinance; spoke on the side letter agreement which is a continuation of the existing 5% cost sharing, valued at $69,063. (02:02:55) Discussion ensued regarding the pay period; the CMPMA membership; the Costa Mesa Police Association (CMPA) closed session discussions; whether or not a violation of Closed Session confidentiality occurred; clarification from the City Attorney on Closed Session confidentiality; the CMPA side letter; and the Mayor and Mayor Pro Tem participating in discussions. (02:04:28 — 02:11:31) Council Member Foley requested it to be reflected in the minutes the request for the timeline of upcoming negotiations and dates. (02:06:25) City Council recessed for a break at 7:57 p.m. City Council reconvened the meeting at 8:03 p.m. Discussion continued on whether or not a violation of Closed Session confidentiality occurred; penalties for violating closed session confidentiality; waiving Attorney/Client privilege; and what constitutes confidential communication. (02:18:00 — 02:23:09) Public Comments: Gene Hutchins, Costa Mesa, spoke on contributions; pensions crippling the City; spoke on unfunded liability; and increases in pensions. (02:24:12) Tamar Goldmann, Costa Mesa, spoke on atmosphere of work and proper work environment; and supports a retention bonus. (02:27:44) Minutes — Regular Meeting — March 3, 2015 - Page 7 UNOFFICIAL UNTIL APPROVED Jay Humphrey, Costa Mesa, spoke on uniqueness of this issue and that no comments should be made from the dais on negotiations. (02:29:32) Speaker, Costa Mesa, spoke on COIN and transparency; legal analysis; and invoking privilege. (02:31:52) Council Member Monahan spoke on public records and payroll records; and transparency. (02:34:11) Council Member Foley spoke on Closed Session confidentially; risk of liability; manipulation of the process; release of the offer; concern of City Attorney's opinion of confidentially and Closed Session communications. (02:34:46) Council Member Genis spoke on the Brown Act provisions; spoke on the release of the CMPA offer; concerned with conformance of the COIN ordinance; requested legal opinion of waiving confidentially privilege. (02:37:30) MOVEDISECOND: Council Member Monahan/Council Member Foley The motion carried by the following roll call vote: Ayes: Council Member Foley, Council Member Genis, Council Member Monahan, Mayor Pro Tem Righeimer and Mayor Mensinger. Nays: None Absent: None Motion carried: 5-0 ACTION: 1. City Council held the first Public Hearing as required by COIN; and 2. City Council scheduled the second and final Public Hearing as required by COIN for March 17th, 2015. 2. CODE AMENDMENT CO -15-01 — AMENDMENT TO TITLE 13, CHAPTER V, ARTICLE 2.5, RESIDENTIAL SMALL LOT SUBDIVISIONS, OF THE COSTA MESA MUNICIPAL CODE (02:39:55) Senior Planner, Minoo Ashabi, provided the Staff Report. (02:40:12) Discussion ensued on setbacks; consistency; variances; the residential guidelines; perimeter setbacks; change in parking; parking requirements; 10 ft. setback; stepped setbacks; variances; narrow lots; and projects before the Planning Commission. (02:44:41) Public Comments: Minutes -- Regular Meeting — March 3, 2015 - Page 8 UNOFFICIAL UNTIL APPROVED Jay Humphrey, Costa Mesa, spoke in support of guest parking onsite; expressed concern with high density developments; and is opposed to the default setback to 5 ft. (02:51:12) Speaker, Costa Mesa, spoke on non-compliance projects; in opposition of the Ordinance; and not enough parking. (02:53:51) Robin Leffler, Costa Mesa, spoke on Residential Design Guidelines; expressed concerns with density and small lot developments; open space, side setbacks, not enough parking; and shade and shadow; and requests a moratorium. (02:56:18) Speaker, Costa Mesa, spoke in opposition to the Ordinance because of reduced setbacks; noise issues; and parking requirements. (02:59:18) Tamar Goldmann, Costa Mesa, spoke in opposition to the Ordinance because of reduced setbacks and parking requirements. (03:02:11) Mayor Pro Tem Righeimer spoke on the Ordinance and clarified what the zones allow; and spoke on returning to the 5 ft. setback. (03:04:10) Council Member Genis spoke in opposition to the Ordinance for the following reasons: concern with accommodating longer narrow lots contrary to the General Plan ._policy_i requiring only_ 30% open space; impacts._of the R1 and R2 next to each other; and degradation of Single Family neighborhoods. (03:06:43) Mayor Mensinger spoke on the 5 ft. setbacks; that small lot Ordinances assist in rejuvenating neighborhoods; parking issues in R1 versus R2; HOA enforcement for parking in garages; and requested a presentation of before and after parking issues. (03:10:52) MOVED/SECOND: Council Member Monahan/Mayor Mensinger The motion carried by the following roll call vote: Ayes: Council Member Monahan, Mayor Pro Tem Righeimer and Mayor Mensinger. Nays: Council Member Genis and Council Member Foley Absent: None Motion carried: 3-2 ACTION: City Council held the Public Hearing and gave the first reading of Ordinance 15- xx, to be read by title only and waived further reading, as recommended by the Planning Commission. OLD BUSINESS: (03:15:52) Minutes — Regular Meeting — March 3, 2015 - Page 9 UNOFFICIAL UNTIL APPROVED 1. ADOPTION OF AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER IV (SENIOR COMMISSION) OF THE COSTA MESA MUNICIPAL CODE INCREASING THE NUMBER OF MEMBERS OF THE SENIOR COMMISSION Recreation Manager, Travis Karlen, provided the Staff Report. (01:27:40) MOVED/SECOND: Council Member Monahan/Council Member Foley The motion carried by the following roll call vote: Ayes: Council Member Foley, Council Member Genis, Council Member Monahan, Mayor Pro Tem Righeimer and Mayor Mensinger. Nays: None Absent: None Motion carried: 5-0 ACTION: City Council gave second reading, to be read by title only and waived further reading, and adopted Ordinance No. 15-02, increasing the number of Senior Commissioners from five (5) to seven (7), NEW BUSINESS (03:17:00) 1. FINANCIAL & BUDGET POLICIES CEO, Tom Hatch, provided an overview. (03:17:07) Interim Finance Director, Stephen Dunivent, provided the Staff Report. (03:18:06) Council Member Genis requested clarification on the difference between Capital Expenditures and Capital Facilities. (03:20:33) Stephen Dunivent spoke on Capital Expenditures are for streets projects, and Capital Facilities is a City facility such as a fire station. (03:21:13) Discussion regarding the amount of funding for the General Fund, the Capital Improvement Plan. (03:22:04) Council Member Genis spoke on 1.5% for Capital Facilities; and the 5% vs. 1.5%; and ranking of priorities. (03:24:48) Discussion ensued on Finance Advisory Committee's discussion of ranking concept. (03:26:11) Council Member Foley discussed the ranking prioritization and ability to refinance existing debt based on the Finance Advisory Committee's discussion. (03:27:24) Minutes — Regular Meeting — March 3, 2015 - Page 10 UNOFFICIAL UNTIL APPROVED Discussion ensued on 5% of General Fund allocated to Capital Projects could also go to Capital Facilities; and dedicating General Fund monies to repair and replace . (03:29:40) Council Member Genis showed slides in regards to rebuilding the General Fund; expressed concern with how define fiscal reserves; preference for net change in fund balance; reserves should not be used until the fund balance is replaced; and defining surplus. (03:32:17) Public Comments: Robin Leffler, Costa Mesa, spoke on fulfilling priorities; and concerns regarding reserves and decreasing debt. (03:37:16) Tamar Goldmann, Costa Mesa, supports Robin Leffler's comments. (03:40:48) Mayor Mensinger spoke on spending monies on Capital Improvement Projects. (03:41:41) Council Member Foley spoke on the Fire Side Fund; $500,000 minimum to reduce unfunded liability; stated for the record that previous City Council's had directed funds to numerous Capital Projects and it was an incorrect statement that previous Council's did nothing; and recommended building on reserves by obtaining grants. (03:44:23) MOVED/SECOND: Council Member Genis/Council Member Foley MOTION: Approve Staff s recommendation with striking out the following language on Page 5 of 8 pertaining to Operating Carryover and Surplus, "or when there is a positive budget variance". Discussion regarding reserves, and the policy. SUBSTITUTION MOTION/SECOND: Council Member Monahan/Mayor Pro Tem Righeimer MOTION: Approve Staff's recommendation. The motion carried by the following roll call vote: Ayes: Council Member Foley, Council Member Monahan, Mayor Pro Tem Righeimer and Mayor Mensinger, Nays: Council Member Genis Absent: None Motion carried: 4-1 ACTION: City Council adopted the financial and budget policies as recommended by Staff. Minutes — Regular Meeting — March 3, 2015 - Page 11 2. UNOFFICIAL UNTIL APPROVED GENERAL FUND RESERVES STUDY (04:00:19) CEO, Tom Hatch, provided brief overview. (04:00:23) Interim Finance Director, Stephen Dunivent, provided the Staff Report. (04:03:56) Mayor Pro Tem Righeimer spoke on insurance; and recommends $50 million for the reserves. (04:13:22) Discussion ensued on Fire Station No. 1 and Fire Station No. 2 building condition; insurance, Capital Improvement Project; and inflation. (04:16:39) Council Member Foley agreed that $45 million to $50 million is adequate for reserves. (04:19:42) Discussion ensued on natural disasters; and adequate reserve funds. (04:22:17) Public Comments Robin Leffler, Costa Mesa, spoke on accelerating payments to General Fund reserves until caught up on reserves. (04:25:00) Speaker, Costa Mesa, spoke on saving and putting money into reserves; provide for Capital Improvement Projects; supports conservative spending; and replenishing insurance fund. (04:27:32) Jay Humphrey, Costa Mesa, spoke on history of reserves fund balance. (04:29:37) Beth Rafakes, Costa Mesa, supports building up reserves and incorporate an inflation factor; and $10 million from the State should go into reserves. (04:32:44) Wendy Leece, Costa Mesa, spoke in support increasing reverves; prepaying debt; add up to $2 million a year; and supports $63,000,000 goal. (04:34:52) MOVED/SECOND: Mayor Pro Tem Righeimer/Council Member Monahan MOTION: $52 million for reserves; and add the monies each year returned from the State to reserves (approximately $700,000 from the State plus the added inflation factor until City reaches the reserves goal in about ten years). Council Member Foley requested the maker of the motion to agree to the following changes: $55 million for reserves, and $1.5 million per year until the reserves goal is met (approximately $700,000 from the State). Minutes — Regular Meeting — March 3, 2015 - Page 12 UNOFFICIAL UNTIL APPROVED Mayor Pro Tem Righeimer agreed to the changes. Council Member Monahan withdrew his second. Council Member Foley seconded the motion. MOTION/SECOND: Mayor Pro Tem Righeimer/Council Member Foley The motion carried by the following roll call vote: Ayes: Council Member Genis, Council Member Foley, Mayor Pro Tem Righeimer and Mayor Mensinger, Nays: Council Member Monahan Absent: None Motion carried: 4-1 ACTION: 1. City Council approved a recommended reserves goal of $55,000,000; adding an inflation factor annually; and 2. City Council approved a plan to add up to $1,500,000 per year to reserves, which includes the reimbursement from the State for Redevelopment Funds approximately in the amount of $700,000 annually, until the reserves goal is met. 3. FISCAL YEAR 2014-15 MID -YEAR BUDGET REPORT (04:45:16) Interim Finance Director, Stephen Dunivent, provided the Staff Report. (04:45:25) CEO Hatch spoke on expecting a $700,000 first payment from the State for Redevelopment Funds. (04:46:47) Mayor Pro Tem Righeimer spoke on updating the action for 1a to reflect the actions approved in item 2. (04:47:32) Public Comments: Robin Leffler, Costa Mesa, encouraged a one-time only extra payment of $1 million; and accelerate payments to the Fire Side Fund. (04:48:59) Speaker, Costa Mesa, spoke on City Legal fees. (04:50:00) Wendy Leece, Costa Mesa, spoke on prepaying the Fire Side Fund; and transfer to Capital Projects. (04:50:53) Mayor Pro Tem Righeimer spoke on the prepayment to Fire Side fund; and pension payments. (04:52:07) Minutes — Regular Meeting — March 3, 2015 - Page 13 UNOFFICIAL UNTIL APPROVED MOVED/SECOND: Mayor Pro Tem RigheimerlCouncil Member Monahan MOTION: Approve Staff recommendation with the changes as previously adopted. Council Member Genis spoke in opposition to the item and will not support as the reserves are too low; and spoke on budget surplus versus budget variance. (04:53:25) Council Member Foley spoke in support of the motion; spoke on a one-time payment to the reserves; and asked CEO to review carryovers. (04:55:41) MOVED/SECOND: Mayor Pro Tem RigheimerlCouncil Member Monahan The motion carried by the following roll call vote: Ayes: Council Member Foley, Councii Member Monahan, Mayor Pro Tem Righeimer and Mayor Mensinger. Nays: Council Member Genis Absent: None Motion carried: 4-1 ACTION: 1. City Council approved allocation of the FY 2013-14 net budget variance: a. $1,500,000 to reserves, which includes the reimbursement from the State for Redevelopment Funds approximately in the amount of $700,000 annually, until the reserves goal is met; b. $4,000,000 transfer to Capital Projects designated for capital facility projects; and 2. City Council approved recommended FY 2014-15 budget adjustments: a. Parks & Community Services b. Police Department c. Vehicle Replacement Fund 4. FAIRVIEW PARK USE SURVEY (04:57:30) Mayor, Stephen Mensinger spoke on the issue and requested the Community weigh in on the matter; and suggested a survey on open space areas. (04:57:33) Council Member Genis spoke on the open space master plan of parks and recreation scope of work; and the cost effectiveness of combining the surveys. (05:05:27) Discussion ensued regarding folding the survey into the open space master plan of parks and recreation scope of work, surveys, and community outreach. Minutes — Regular Meeting — March 3, 2015 - Page 14 UNOFFICIAL UNTIL APPROVED Council Member Foley read a letter from a resident Kelly Siegel pertaining to opposition of sports fields at Fairview Park, spending money on lighting current fields and no need for a survey. (05:14:25) Public Comments: Barrie Fisher, Costa Mesa, spoke in opposition of survey/poll; need current field usage statistics. (05:28:00) Jay Humphrey, Costa Mesa, spoke in opposition of survey/poll; and need further study of parks currently available. (05:30:55) Flo Martin, Costa Mesa, spoke in opposition of survey/poll; citizens need information for a balanced approach; and postpone vote. (05:33:52) Wendy Leece, Costa Mesa, spoke in need of data of field usage; or combine with open space master plan outreach. (05:36:15) Speaker, spoke in opposition of survey/poll; and sports fields at Fairview Park. (05:38:35) Robin Leffler, Costa Mesa, spoke in opposition of survey/poll; and sports fields at Fairview Park. (05:41:45) Harold Weitzberg, Costa Mesa, spoke in opposition of survey/poll; sports field at Fairview Park; and need for a needs assessment; fields on eastside and lighted fields. (05:44:32) Speaker, Costa Mesa, spoke of need to keep open space; opposed to fields; expensive to build and maintain fields; opposed to surveys;. (05:47:02) Anna Vrska, Costa Mesa, spoke as a member of Fairview Park Citizens Advisory Committee; and opposed survey/poll. (05:50:04) Gene Hutchins, Costa Mesa, spoke in support of open space; opposed survey/poll; and opposed sports fields. (05:52:33) Tamar Goldmann, Costa Mesa, spoke in opposition of survey/poll; supports accurate needs assessment; legality of sports fields at Fairview Park. (05:56:15) Cindy Brenneman, Costa Mesa, agreed with Tamar Goldmann's comments; opposition to survey/poll; and keep Fairview Park as is. (05:59:12) Margaret Mooney, Costa Mesa, spoke in opposition of survey/poll; opposed sports field; and need for lighted fields. (06:01:18) Minutes — Regular Meeting — March 3, 2015 - Page 15 UNOFFICIAL UNTIL APPROVED Beth Rafakes, Costa Mesa, spoke on phone poll problematic; way questions will be structured; a need for statistics; and put on ballot for voters to decide, (06:03:22) Charles Mooney, Costa Mesa, spoke on open space attracts families, support needs assessment; and look at lighting options. (06:05:45) MOTION: To continue the meeting past midnight. MOVEDISECOND: Council Member Foley/Council Member Genis The motion carried by the following roll call vote: Ayes: Council Member Foley, Council Member Genis, Council Member Monahan, Mayor Pro Tem Righeimer, and Mayor Mensinger. Nays: None Absent: None Motion carried: 5-0 Chuck Perry, Costa Mesa, spoke on history of Fairview Park; neighbors opposed lights; a need for restrooms and parking; and agreed with a survey/poll. (06:08:06) MOVED/SECOND. Council Member Foley/Council Member Genis MOTION: Receive and File. SUBSTITUTION MOTIONISECOND: Mayor Pro Tem Righeimer/Council Member Genis MOTION: Include questions pertaining to Fairview Park in the Open Space Master Plan Parks and Recreation Survey scope of work. The motion carried by the following roll call vote: Ayes: Council Member Genis, Council Member Foley, Council Member Monahan Mayor Pro Tem Righeimer and Mayor Mensinger. Nays: None Absent: None Motion carried: 5-0 ACTION: City Council approved including Fairview Park in the Open Space Master Plan Parks and Recreation Survey scope of work. ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR (06:28:24) City Council recessed for a break at 12:14 a.m. City Council reconvened the meeting at 12:19 a.m. Minutes — Regular Meeting — March 3, 2015 - Page 16 UNOFFICIAL UNTIL APPROVED 3. WARRANT RESOLUTION NO. 2531 OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF COSTA MESA, CALIFORNIA, ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS, INCLUDING PAYROLL REGISTER NOS. 15-03"A" FOR (-$4,716.45) AND 15-04 FOR $2,220,641.02; AND CITY OPERATING EXPENSES FOR $1,385,088.26; AND SPECIFYING THE FUNDS OUT OF WHICH THE SAME ARE TO BE PAID MOVED/SECOND: Council Member Monahan/Council Member Foley The motion carried by the following roll call vote: Ayes: Council Member Foley, Council Member Genis, Council Member Monahan, Mayor Pro Tem Righeimer and Mayor Mensinger. Nays: None Absent: None Motion carried: 5-0 ACTION: Approved Warrant Resolution No. 2531, to be read by the title only, and waived further reading. 4. ARTERIAL STREETS REHABILITATION PROJECT, CITY PROJECT NO. 13- 08 (06:34:15) MOVED/SECOND: Council Member Foley/Council Member Genis The motion carried by the following roll call vote: Ayes: Council Member Foley, Council Member Genis, Council Member Monahan, Mayor Pro Tem Righeimer and Mayor Mensinger. Nays: None Absent: None Motion carried: 5-0 ACTION: 1. City Council accepted the work performed by R.J. Noble Company, and authorized the City Clerk to file the Notice of Completion; and 2. City Council authorized the release the Labor and Material Bond seven (7) months after the filing date; authorized the release the Faithful Performance Bond one (1) year after the filing date; and authorized the release the retention monies 35 days after the Notice of Completion filing date. 7. PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT TO PROVIDE ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTING SERVICES FOR AN INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR 216 -UNIT APARTMENT DEVELOPMENT AT 2277 HARBOR BOULEVARD (06:34:33) Public Comments: Minutes — Regular Meeting — March 3, 2015 - Page 17 UNOFFICIAL UNTIL APPROVED Flo; Martin, Costa Mesa, spoke on article in OC Register and eviction from Motels and assistance to relocate; and affordability of rental units. (06:35:00) MOVED/SECOND: Council Member Monahan/Council Member Foley The motion carried by the following roll call vote: Ayes: Council Member Foley, Council Member Genis, Council Member Monahan, Mayor Pro Tem Righeimer and Mayor Mensinger. Nays: None Absent: None Motion carried: 5-0 ACTION: City Council awarded the contract to First Carbon Solutions (FCS) in the amount of $59,929.00 for preparation of the Initial Study 1 Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) for the proposed 216 -unit apartment development at 2277 Harbor Boulevard; authorized Mayor and City Clerk to sign and execute the contract, and authorized CEO to sign extensions or renewals of the contract. The total number of units may increase to 224, if the easement to the north of the property (0.15 -acre in area) is vacated through a separate action by City Council. S. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING STREET CLOSURES FOR THE 2015 ORANGE COUNTY MARATHON (06:45.13) Council Member Foley inquired about the cost to the City to allow for the OC Marathon and reimbursement. (06:45:53) Discussion ensued on the rate determination for the Police Officers compared by year; total cost for the City; and reimbursement. (06:46:24) Council Member Foley requested a breakdown of last year's costs for the OC Marathon. (06:50:04) Gary Kutcher, Event Director of the OC Marathon, spoke on payments to the City; supports bringing people in to stay at the hotels; charity foundations; and kid's participation. (06:52:32) Council Member Genis discussed percentages for hotel stays for the OC Marathon. (06:57:24) MOVED/SECOND: Council Member Monahan/Council Member Foley The motion carried by the following roll call vote: Ayes: Council Member Foley, Council Member Genis, Council Member Monahan, and Mayor Mensinger. Nays: None Absent: None Minutes -- Regular Meeting — March 3, 2015 - Page 18 UNOFFICIAL UNTIL APPROVED Abstain: Mayor Pro Tem Righeimer (Due to office location next door to Board Member Scott Baugh) Motion carried: 4-0-0-1 ACTION: City Council adopted the Resolution designating event routes for the 2015 Orange County (OC) Marathon and approved the temporary street closures for May 3, 2015, as requested for the 2015 OC Marathon. REPORT — CITY ATTORNEY — None (07:00:38) ADJOURNMENT —To the Regular Meeting, March 17, 2015, 5:00 p.m. The Mayor and City Council adjourned in memory of Crystal Morales and Henry Segerstrom at 12:46 a.m. Stephen M. Mensinger, Mayor Brenda Green, City Clerk Minutes — Regular Meeting — March 3, 2015 - Page 19 Cl T Y COUNCIL A GENDA REPORT MEETING DATE: MARCH 17, 2015 ITEM NUMBER: CC -6 SUBJECT: RELEASE OF BONDS IN CONNECTION WITH ENCROACHMENT PERMIT NO. PS10-00187 FOR STREET IMPROVEMENTS AND CORNER MONUMENTATION FOR TRACT 17176 LOCATED AT 351 W. BAY STREET, COSTA MESA, CALIFORNIA. DATE: MARCH 5, 2015 FROM: PUBLIC SERVICES DEPARTMENT/ENGINEERING DIVISION PRESENTATION BY: ERNESTO MUNOZ, PUBLIC SERVICES DIRECTOR FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: FARIBA FAZELI, CITY ENGINEER (714) 754-5335 RECOMMENDED ACTION Release the Performance and Labor and Material Bonds (Certificate No. 4371998) in the amounts of $18,266.00 each for street improvements and (Certificate No.4371999) for setting corner monuments in the amount of $2,750.00 to Bayside West, LLC (Developer), 190 Newport Center Drive, Suite 220, Newport Beach, California 92660. BACKGROUND On August 3, 2010, the City Council approved Final Map Tract No. 17176 for the subdivision of seven (7) residential lots and one (1) lettered lot for a common interest residential development. The Engineering Division required the setting of durable monuments at corners of exterior and interior lots. The Performance Bond in the amount of $2,750.00 was received and accepted by the Public Services Department as a guarantee for the setting of the monuments. Also, the Engineering Division issued Encroachment Permit No. PS10-00187 to Hillcrest Contracting Inc. (Contractor), for the construction of street improvements within Bay Street. The Encroachment Permit allowed for the construction of curb and gutter, sidewalk, drive approach, curb drain and street resurfacing. The Performance and Labor and Materials Bonds in the amounts of $18,266.00 each were received and accepted by the Public Services Department as a guarantee for the construction of the improvements. ANALYSIS All conditions of the Encroachment Permit have been met and the work has been completed and accepted by the Public Services Department. ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED The alternative to this Council action would be to retain the Performance and Labor and Material Bonds. Costa Mesa Municipal Code Section 15-32 states, "The condition of said bond shall be that the applicant will perform the work authorized by any permit issued pursuant to this chapter in a good and workmanlike manner and to the satisfaction of the City Engineer." These conditions have been met; therefore, retention of the bonds would be in violation of the Municipal Code. FISCAL REVIEW There is no fiscal impact to the City relative to this item. LEGAL REVIEW There is no legal review required relative to this item. CONCLUSION All of the required conditions of the Encroachment Permit have been completed by the contractor, and all of the monuments have been set by the Engineer. Therefore, staff recommends that the Performance and Labor and Material Bonds in the amounts of $18,266.00 each, and the bond for setting corner monuments in the amount of $2,750.00 be released to Bayside West, LLC. ERNESTO MUNOZ Public Services Director DISTRIBUTION CEO Assistant CEO City Attorney Staff FARIBA FAZELI City Engineer 2 Cl T Y COUNCIL A GENDA REPORT MEETING DATE: MARCH 17, 2015 ITEM NUMBER: CC -7 SUBJECT: RELEASE OF BONDS IN CONNECTION WITH ENCROACHMENT PERMIT NO. PS13- 00147 FOR STREET IMPROVEMENTS AND CORNER MONUMENTATION FOR TRACT 16990 LOCATED AT 372/378/382 VICTORIA STREET, COSTA MESA, CALIFORNIA. DATE: MARCH 5, 2015 FROM: PUBLIC SERVICES DEPARTMENT/ENGINEERING DIVISION PRESENTATION BY: ERNESTO MUNOZ, PUBLIC SERVICES DIRECTOR FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: FARIBA FAZELI, CITY ENGINEER (714) 754-5335 RECOMMENDED ACTION Release the Performance and Labor and Material Bonds (Certificate No. 0176156) in the amounts of $32,753.00 each for street improvements and (Certificate No. 0176155) for setting corner monuments in the amount of $1,500.00 to Taylor Morrison of California, LLC (Developer), 8105 Irvine Center Drive, Suite 1450, Irvine, CA 92618. BACKGROUND On June 18, 2013, the City Council approved Final Map Tract No. 16990 for the subdivision of thirty (30) number lots and six (6) lettered lots for a common interest residential development. The Engineering Division required the setting of durable monuments at corners of exterior and interior lots. The Performance Bond in the amount of $1,500.00 was received and accepted by the Public Services Department as a guarantee for the setting of the monuments. Also, the Engineering Division issued Encroachment Permit No. PS13-00147 for the construction of street improvements within Victoria Street. The Encroachment Permit allowed for the connection to the storm drain line, construction of curb and gutter, sidewalk, drive approaches and street resurfacing. The Performance and Labor and Materials Bonds in the amounts of $32,753.00 each were received and accepted by the Public Services Department as a guarantee for the construction of the improvements. ANALYSIS All conditions of the Encroachment Permit have been met and the work has been completed and accepted by the Public Services Department. ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED The alternative to this Council action would be to retain the Performance and Labor and Material Bonds. Costa Mesa Municipal Code Section 15-32 states, "The condition of said bond shall be that the applicant will perform the work authorized by any permit issued pursuant to this chapter in a good and workmanlike manner and to the satisfaction of the City Engineer." These conditions have been met; therefore, retention of the bonds would be in violation of the Municipal Code. FISCAL REVIEW There is no fiscal impact to the City relative to this item. LEGAL REVIEW There is no legal review required relative to this item. CONCLUSION All of the required conditions of the Encroachment Permit have been completed by the contractor, and all of the monuments have been set by the Engineer. Therefore, staff recommends that the Performance and Labor and Material Bonds in the amounts of $32,753.00 each, and the bond for setting corner monuments in the amount of $1,500.00 be released to Taylor Morrison California, LLC. ERNESTO MUNOZ Public Services Director DISTRIBUTION CEO Assistant CEO City Attorney Staff FARIBA FAZELI City Engineer 2 Cl T Y COUNCIL A GENDA REPORT MEETING DATE: MARCH 17, 2015 ITEM NUMBER: CC -8 SUBJECT: REFUND OF CASH DEPOSIT IN CONNECTION WITH ENCROACHMENT PERMIT NO. PS13-00230 FOR PARKWAY IMPROVEMENTS AT 421 BERNARD STREET, COSTA MESA, CALIFORNIA DATE: MARCH 5, 2015 FROM: PUBLIC SERVICES DEPARTMENT/ENGINEERING DIVISION PRESENTATION BY: ERNESTO MUNOZ, PUBLIC SERVICES DIRECTOR FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: FARIBA FAZELI, CITY ENGINEER (714)754-5335 RECOMMENDED ACTION: Refund cash deposit in connection with Encroachment Permit No. PS13-00230 in the amount of $88,185.25 to Behringer Harvard Pacifica, 5510 Morehouse Dr. Suite 200, San Diego, CA 92121. BACKGROUND: The Engineering Division issued Encroachment Permit No. PS13-00230 to Mike Kilbride (Contractor) for parkway and alley improvements at 421 Bernard Street. The Encroachment Permit allowed for the reconstruction of the alley, drive approaches, curb & gutter, sidewalk and utilities installation. The cash deposit in the amount of $88,185.25 was received and accepted by the Public Services Department as a guarantee for the construction of parkway improvements. ANALYSIS: All Conditions of Approval for the project and Encroachment Permit have been met, and the work has been completed and accepted by the Public Services Department. ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED: The alternative to this Council action would be to retain the cash deposit. The Costa Mesa Municipal Code Section 15-32(b) states, "The condition of said bond (or cash deposit) shall be that the applicant will perform the work authorized by any permit issued pursuant to this chapter in a good and workmanlike manner and to the satisfaction of the City Engineer." These conditions have been met; therefore, retention of the cash deposit would be in violation of the Municipal Code. FISCAL REVIEW: There is no fiscal impact to the City relative to this item. LEGAL REVIEW: There is no legal review required relative to this item. CONCLUSION: All of the required conditions of the Encroachment Permit have been completed by the contractor. Therefore, staff recommends that the cash deposit in the amount of $88,185.25 be released and refunded to Behringer Harvard Pacifica (Developer). ERNESTO MUNOZ Public Services Director DISTRIBUTION Chief Executive Officer Assistant CEO City Attorney City Clerk Staff FARIBA FAZELI City Engineer 2 Cl T Y COUNCIL A GENDA REPORT MEETING DATE: MARCH 17, 2015 ITEM NUMBER: CC -9 SUBJECT: FINAL MAP FOR TRACT NO. 17708 LOCATED AT 2075 PLACENTIA AVENUE, COSTA MESA, CALIFORNIA DATE: MARCH 5, 2015 FROM: PUBLIC SERVICES DEPARTMENT/ENGINEERING DIVISION PRESENTATION ERNESTO MUNOZ, PUBLIC SERVICES DIRECTOR BY: FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: FARIBA FAZELI, CITY ENGINEER, AT 714-754-5335 RECOMMENDATION: Approve the Final Map for Tract No. 17708 and authorize signing of the Map by the City Clerk and the City Engineer. BACKGROUND: The Tentative Map for Tract No. 17708 and Conditions of Approval were approved by the Planning Commission on February 24, 2014. The Map consists of a subdivision for 14 three-story detached, live/work units with roof decks on a 0.93 -acre lot. ANALYSIS: All Conditions of Approval imposed by the Planning Commission have been complied with and the Final Map is in substantial conformance with the Tentative Map approved by the Planning Commission. The Tract Map has been checked and found to be technically correct, and includes an easement for sidewalk purposes, the release and relinquishment of access rights to Placentia Avenue and an easement for emergency and public security vehicle purposes to be accepted by the City. ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED: No alternatives were considered. FISCAL REVIEW: All Tract Map filing fees have been paid. 1 LEGAL REVIEW: There is no legal review required relative to this item. CONCLUSION: Staff recommends that City Council approve the Final Map and authorize the City Clerk and the City Engineer to sign the Map. ERNESTO MUNOZ Public Services Director ATTACHMENTS: 1 — Final Tract Map 2 — Letter of Conditions DISTRIBUTION: CEO Assistant CEO City Attorney City Clerk Staff FARIBA FAZELI City Engineer 2 SHEET 1 OF 3 SHEETS TRACT NO. 1 1 NUMBERED LOT AND 1 LETTERED LOT AREA: GROSS AREA: 41,178 SO. FT. IN THE CITY OF COSTA MESA, COUNTY OF ORANGE, NET AREA: 27,478 SO. FT. (ALL OF TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 17708) STATE OF CALIFORNIA BEING A SUBDIVISION OF LOT 4 IN BLOCK W OF TRACT NO. 612, COSTA MESA TERRACE AS SHOWN ON MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 20, PAGES 1 AND 2 OF MISCELLANEOUS MAPS, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY. HUNSAKER AND ASSOCIATES IRVINE, INC. ROBERT L WHEELER IV, L.S. 8639 DATE OF SURVEY: AUGUST, 2014 ACCEPTED AND FILED AT THE REQUEST OF FIRST AMERICAN TITLE COMPANY DATE: TIME: FEE: �$ INSTRUMENT NO. BOOK PAGE HUGH NGUYEN COUNTY CLERK — RECORDER BY FOR CONDOMINIUM PURPOSES DEPUTY OWNERSHIP CERTIFICATE: WE, THE UNDERSIGNED, BEING ALL PARTIES HAVING ANY RECORD TITLE INTEREST IN THE LAND SURVEYOR'S STATEMENT. COVERED BY THIS MAP, DO HEREBY CONSENT TO THE PREPARATION AND RECORDATION OF SAID MAP, THIS MAP WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTION AND IS BASED UPON A FIELD SURVEY IN AS SHOWN WITHIN THE DISTINCTIVE BORDER LINE. CONFORMANCE WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE SUBDIVISION MAP ACT AND LOCAL ORDINANCE AT THE REAL PROPERTY DESCRIBED BELOW IS DEDICATED TO THE CITY OF COSTA MESA AS AN EASEMENT THE REQUEST OF RICHMOND AMERICAN HOMES OF MARYLAND, INC., IN AUGUST, 2014. 1 HEREBY STATE THAT ALL MONUMENTS ARE OF THE CHARACTER AND OCCUPY THE POSITIONS INDICATED, OR FOR PUBLIC PURPOSES: THAT THEY WILL BE SET IN SUCH POSITIONS WITHIN NINETY DAYS AFTER ACCEPTANCE OF 1. THE INGRESS AND EGRESS EASEMENTS FOR EMERGENCY ACCESS AND PUBLIC SECURITY VEHICLE IMPROVEMENTS; AND THAT SAID MONUMENTS ARE SUFFICIENT TO ENABLE THE SURVEY TO BE RETRACED. I HEREBY STATE THAT THIS FINAL MAP SUBSTANTIALLY CONFORMS TO THE PURPOSES, AS SHOWN ON THIS MAP. CONDITIONALLY APPROVED TENTATIVE MAP. 2. THE EASEMENT FOR SIDEWALK PURPOSES, AS SHOWN ON THIS MAP. WE HEREBY RELEASE AND RELINQUISH TO THE CITY OF COSTA MESA, ALL VEHICULAR AND PEDESTRIAN ACCESS RIGHTS ALONG PLACENTIA AVENUE, EXCEPT AT APPROVED ACCESS LOCATIONS AND STREET INTERSECTONS. RICHMOND AMERICAN HOMES OF MARYLAND, INC., A MARYLAND CORPORATION BY: BY: NAME: NAME: TITLE: TITLE: NOTARY ACKNOWLEDGMENT: A NOTARY PUBLIC OR OTHER OFFICER COMPLETING THIS CERTIFICATE VERIFIES ONLY THE IDENTITY OF THE INDIVIDUAL WHO SIGNED THE DOCUMENT TO WHICH THIS CERTIFICATE IS ATTACHED, AND NOT TO THE TRUTHFULNESS, ACCURACY, OR VALIDITY OF THAT DOCUMENT. STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ) SS ON BEFORE ME, PERSONALLY APPEARED A NOTARY PUBLIC, WHO PROVED TO ME ON THE BASIS OF SATISFACTORY EVIDENCE TO BE THE PERSON(S) WHOSE NAME(S) IS/ARE SUBSCRIBED TO THE WITHIN INSTRUMENT AND ACKNOWLEDGED TO ME THAT HE/SHE/THEY EXECUTED THE SAME IN HIS/HER/THEIR AUTHORIZED CAPACITY(IES), AND THAT BY HIS/HER/THEIR SIGNATURE(S) ON THE INSTRUMENT THE PERSON(S), OR THE ENTITY UPON BEHALF OF WHICH THE PERSON(S) ACTED, EXECUTED THE INSTRUMENT. I CERTIFY UNDER PENALTY OF PERJURY UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA THAT THE FOREGOING PARAGRAPH IS TRUE AND CORRECT. WITNESS MY HAND: SIGNATURE MY PRINCIPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS IS NOTARY PUBLIC IN AND FOR SAID STATE IN COUNTY. (NAME PRINTED) MY COMMISSION EXPIRES: MY COMMISSION NO: SIGNATURE OMISSIONS: PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 66436 (a)(3)(A)&(C) OF THE SUBDIVISION MAP ACT, THE FOLLOWING SIGNATURES HAVE BEEN OMITTED: SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANY, A CORPORATION, HOLDER OF AN EASEMENT FOR POLE LINES AND INCIDENTAL PURPOSES RECORDED FEBRUARY 27, 1948 IN BOOK 1730, PAGE 54, OF OFFICIAL RECORDS. CITY OF COSTA MESA, HOLDER OF AN EASEMENT FOR STREET AND HIGHWAY AND INCIDENTAL PURPOSES RECORDED OCTOBER 4, 1967 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 2420 IN BOOK 8393, PAGE 373, OF OFFICIAL RECORDS. K. PAUL JOHNSTONE AND MARY JANE JOHNSTONE, HUSBAND AND WIFE, HOLDER OF OIL, GAS, MINERALS AND OTHER HYDROCARBON SUBSTANCES AS RESERVED IN GRANT DEED RECORDED JUNE 20, 1969 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 14945 IN BOOK 8995, PAGE 839, OF OFFICIAL RECORDS. (NOT PLOTTED, BLANKET IN NATURE) ROBERT L. WHEELER IV, L.S. 8639 DATE No. 8639 N9T� OF CA��F�Qa`Q COUNTY SURVEYOR'S STATEMENT: I HEREBY STATE THAT I HAVE EXAMINED. THIS MAP AND HAVE FOUND THAT ALL MAPPING PROVISIONS OF THE SUBDIVISION MAP ACT HAVE BEEN COMPLIED WITH AND I AM SATISFIED SAID MAP IS TECHNICALLY CORRECT. DATED THIS DAY OF KEVIN R. HILLS, COUNTY SURVEYOR L.S. 6617, EXPIRATION DATE: 12/31/15 BY: CRAIG S. WEHRMAN, CHIEF DEPUTY SURVEYOR CITY ENGINEER'S STATEMENT: 2015. I HEREBY STATE THAT I HAVE EXAMINED THIS MAP AND HAVE FOUND IT TO BE SUBSTANTIALLY IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE TENTATIVE MAP AS FILED WITH, AMENDED AND APPROVED BY THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION; THAT ALL PROVISIONS OF THE SUBDIVISION MAP ACT AND CITY SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS HAVE BEEN COMPLIED WITH. DATED THIS DAY OF FARIBA FAZED, R.C.E. 51480 INTERIM CITY ENGINEER, CITY OF COSTA MESA REGISTRATION EXPIRES 06/30/2016 CITY CLERK'S CERTIFICATE: STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ss. CITY OF COSTA MESA 2015. I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS MAP WAS PRESENTED FOR APPROVAL TO THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF COSTA MESA AT A REGULAR MEETING THEREOF HELD ON THE DAY OF 2015 AND THAT THEREUPON SAID COUNCIL DID BY AN ORDER DULY PASSED AND ENTERED, APPROVED SAID MAP AND DID ALSO ACCEPT ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OF COSTA MESA: 1. THE INGRESS AND EGRESS EASEMENT FOR EMERGENCY AND PUBLIC SECURITY VEHICLES PURPOSES, AS DEDICATED. 2. THE EASEMENT FOR SIDEWALK PURPOSES, AS DEDICATED. 3. THE VEHICULAR AND PEDESTRIAN ACCESS RIGHTS ALONG PLACENTIA AVENUE, AS RELEASED AND RELINQUISHED. AND DID ALSO APPROVE SUBJECT MAP PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 66436(a)(3)(A) OF THE SUBDIVISION MAP ACT. IN WITNESS WHEREOF I HAVE HEREUNTO SET MY HAND AND AFFIXED THE OFFICIAL SEAL OF THE CITY OF COSTA MESA. DATED THIS DAY OF 2015. BRENDA GREEN CITY CLERK OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF COSTA MESA COUNTY TREASURER -TAX COLLECTOR'S CERTIFICATE: STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) ss. COUNTY OF ORANGE ) I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT ACCORDING TO THE RECORDS OF MY OFFICE THERE ARE NO LIENS AGAINST THE LAND COVERED BY THIS MAP OR ANY PART THEREOF FOR UNPAID STATE, COUNTY, MUNICIPAL OR LOCAL TAXES OR SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS COLLECTED AS TAXES, EXCEPT TAXES OR SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS COLLECTED AS TAXES NOT YET PAYABLE. AND DO CERTIFY TO THE RECORDER OF ORANGE COUNTY THAT THE PROVISIONS OF THE SUBDIVISION MAP ACT HAVE BEEN COMPLIED WITH REGARDING DEPOSITS TO SECURE PAYMENT OF TAXES OR SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS COLLECTED AS TAXES ON THE LAND COVERED BY THIS MAP. DATED THIS DAY OF 2015. SHARI L. FR ID NRI .H BY: COUNTY TREASURER—TAX COLLECTOR DEPUTY TREASURER—TAX COLLECTOR "-I n 9 m z ..L SHEET 2 OF 3 SHEETS 1 NUMBS E109 DL TRACT NO. 17708 1 NUMBERED LOT AND 1 LETTERED LOT AREA GROSS AREA 41178 SQ, FT IN THE CITY OF COSTA MESA, COUNTY OF ORANGE, NET AREA 27,478 SQ FT. STATE OF CALIFORNIA (ALL OF TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 17708) W Z W J IY W IOL HUNSAKER AND ASSOCIATES IRVINE, INC. ROBERT L WHEELER IV, LS. 8639 DATE OF SURVEY: AUGUST, 2014 BOUNDARY ESTABLISHMENT, GPS CONTROL SCHEME AND MONUMENT NOTES ri VICTORIA STREET ,' _ M3 BASIS OF BEARINGS: [4.70'] R4 «a, , THE BEARINGS SHOWN HEREON ARE BASED ON THE BEARING BETWEEN O.C.S. HORIZONTAL Nes°39'08"W 644.90 644.6 5 132 & 133 (844.89 134 CONTROL STATION GPS NO. 6223 AND STATION GPS NO. 6197132 BEING N15°33'57"W PER RECORDS ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE ORANGE COUNTY SURVEYOR. EXISTING CENTERUNE PER R4 •%r, DATUM STATEMENT: SEARCHED FOUND NOTHING. ESTABLISHED RECORD DISTANCE FROM M3 PER R4 SEE DETAIL HEREON COORDINATES SHOWN ARE BASED ON THE CALIFORNIA COORDINATE SYSTEM (CCS83), a J ZONE W, 1983 NAD, (2007.0 EPOCH OCS GPS ADJUSTMENT). ALL DISTANCES SHOWN f ARE GROUND, UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. TO OBTAIN GRID DISTANCE MULTIPLY GROUND z 30' 'EMENT IV, DISTANCE BY 0.99997000. THIS COMBINATION FACTOR IS PROJECT SPECIFIC. :' `� MONUMENT NOTES: ,•, ;Ir. a 2" ILP TAGGED L.S. 8639 OR LEAD, TACK & TAG L.S. 8639 OR 8" SPIKE I....!47)g /, ;. AND WASHER STAMPED L.S. 8639 TO BE SET AT ALL TRACT BOUNDARY •i j r i CORNERS WITHIN 90 DAYS AFTER ACCEPTANCE OF IMPROVEMENTS, UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. M12 FOUND SPIKE & WASHER TAGGED "RCE 6579" PER R2. M6 SEARCHED FOUND NOTHING. ESTABLISHED BY PRORATION FROM M7 AND - M13 SEARCHED FOUND NOTHING. ESTABUSHED BY INTERSECTION FROM Mt AND M2 WLY PROLONGATION 1" I.P. TAGGED L.S. 8639 OR LEAD, TACK & TAG L.S. 8639 OR 8" SPIKE z IS ' 9 {;, ..+ AND WASHER STAMPED LS. 8639 TO BE SET AT ALL LOT CORNERS, WITHIN :{.,• ?' W • 90 DAYS AFTER ACCEPTANCE OF IMPROVEMENTS, UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. M13 MS Mt INDICATES FOUND ORANGE COUNTY SURVEYOR GPS CONTROL S M8 2005-0205. STATION IS LOCATED IN THE INTERSECTION OF WILSON ST. AND PLACENTIA AVE. NORTH 2186477.69, EAST 6049807.00. MONUMENT PER RECORDS ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE ORANGE M2 M3 N89°38'53"W 975.12' i COUNTY SURVEYOR. _ 644.91' [140 (844.90' CALC) 135 .60'] R6 7 '- - - - - 464.91' M4 FITS IMPROVEMENT _----- _ 330.21_ 33D.17 R8 - e INDICATES FOUND MONUMENT AS NOTED, `' O.C.S. GPS 6233 12 y T HAMILTON STREET ~ .•{• _ - r °'•. .Q INDICATES 8" SPIKE AND WASHER STAMPED L.S. 8639 TO BE SET. SFN SNI _ _ _ U - - - �` 2005-15036. STATION IS LOCATED AT CENTERLINE INTER OF 19TH ST. AND POMONA AVE. NORTH 2181847.85, EAST 6051096.70. SFN SEARCHED FOUND NOTHING M1 FOUND SPIKE & WASHER TAGGED "LS 7707" FLUSH, NO REF., ACCEPTED t'"' °-' r'I,��• Al O.C.S GPS 6197132 AS CENTERLINE INTERSECTION OF HAMILTON STREET AND PALACE AVENUE. FIT TIES PER CR 2006-0434A. V " } r• S {•n' M18 !? '� ' N ` M2 FOUND SPIKE &WASHER TAGGED "LS 6970" PER CR 2005-02088. _ SFN ;' S'LY LINE OF LOT 6 OF Rt. M3 FOUND MAG NAIL & WASHER TAGGED "LS 6970" PER CR 2005-02078. `::'` (ti�� ' a ^•� �•" 3'tJ Mit FITS IMPROVEMENT Mr •'=•• ti � t j?j SFN M4 SEARCHED FOUND NOTHING. ESTABLISHED BY INTERSECTION OF A LINE WHICH IS PARALLEL WITH AND DISTANT 140.00 FEET OF FEDERAL AVENUE M8 1 I 1 � 1 PER R6 AND THE WLY PROLONGATION OF HAMILTON AVENUE PER R8. 'EMENT 'f N89.38'40"W;,474.92' (474.90') R1 r w --• 1 ( W 1 X01• W v Q M5 FOUND SPIKE & WASHER TAGGED "LS 5411" PER CR 2008-11948. I....!47)g /, ;. :.r.,. ., ;� j W W M V M12 FOUND SPIKE & WASHER TAGGED "RCE 6579" PER R2. M6 SEARCHED FOUND NOTHING. ESTABLISHED BY PRORATION FROM M7 AND - M13 SEARCHED FOUND NOTHING. ESTABUSHED BY INTERSECTION FROM Mt AND M2 WLY PROLONGATION N89°36'35'W 474.92' 474.90' 131 z IS ' I 1 1�- 30' :{.,• ?' W M8 PER R1. ;. 3 " Mt `: M8 2005-0205. STATION IS LOCATED IN THE INTERSECTION OF WILSON ST. AND PLACENTIA AVE. NORTH 2186477.69, EAST 6049807.00. -� 1� �-j M3$ ����L s M7 ESTABLISHED BY INTERSECTION OF WLY LINE OF PLACENTA AVE AND A "LS 4 ! FITS IMPROVEMENT O.C.S. GPS 6233 12 y F LINE BETWEEN M11 AND A FOUND L&T TAGGED 413_" NO REF. WHICH _ - r °'•. ,.. z 2005-15036. STATION IS LOCATED AT CENTERLINE INTER OF 19TH ST. AND POMONA AVE. NORTH 2181847.85, EAST 6051096.70. W v; �. BEARS N89°38'26"W 1.13'. ACCEPTED AS LOT CORNER PRODUCTION OF -.- -� N89'39'06"W 644.90' - - ,1, , �j (644.85') R2 & R3 (644.88') R4 I, ; r7 Q r• [ ]INDICATES RECORD AND MEASURED DATA AS NOTED. ' N N S'LY LINE OF LOT 6 OF Rt. t f: SFN FIT TRACT N0. 612, M.M. 20/1-2. 1 i SQ R2 PARCEL MAP NO. BO -383, P.M.B. 156/9-11. R3 PARCEL MAP NO 80-381 P M B 149/1-2 g n -fin g ^ M8 ESTABLISHED BY INTERSECTION OF WLY LINE OF PLACENTA AVE AND A LINE "RCE 1n BETWEEN M4 AND A FOUND L&T TAGGED 24404" NO REF. WHICH BEARS N89°38'53"W 1.05. ACCEPTED AS LOT CORNER fn PRODUCTION OF N'LY LINE OF LOT 1 OF R1. _ N89°3826"W 464.92' 464.94 CALC R1 - t - ,- -p pM9 t FOUND 4 TANGENT OVER 3.0 FEET MAG NAIL & WASHER TAGGED "LS M11 N L, 6970" PER CR 2005-02098. CENTERLINE FALLS ON MANHOLE. st '' �• Z n 1 M10 FOUND "C" NAIL PER R7. W 1 X01• W v Q M11 SEARCHED FOUND NOTHING. ESTABLISHED BY PRORATION FROM M4 AND M5 PER RL V & Z O.C.S. GPS 6233 M17 FOUND SPIKE & WASHER TAGGED "LS 5411" PER CR 2008-1192B. $IJ j W W M V M12 FOUND SPIKE & WASHER TAGGED "RCE 6579" PER R2. ! < M13 SEARCHED FOUND NOTHING. ESTABUSHED BY INTERSECTION FROM Mt AND M2 WLY PROLONGATION �b �\ AND M12 AND M17. M14 FOUND 4 CHISELED "X" ON MANHOLE RIM PER R9 :{.,• ?' W 1 M15 FOUND 4 TANGENT OVER 1.50 FEET L,T&T "L.S. 6940" PER CR st '' 2005-15068. "5 a. 1 I M16 FOUND 4 CHISELED "X" ON MANHOLE RIM PER R9. V & O.C.S. GPS 6233 M17 FOUND SPIKE & WASHER TAGGED "LS 5411" PER CR 2008-1192B. $IJ m cd M18 FOUND L&T TAGGED "RCE 24404" NO REF, ACCEPTED AS LOT CORNER cic� PRODUCTION MONUMENT BEARS N89°38'51"W 1.01'. �b gel PROPOSED CENTERLINE PER 134 e n O.C.S. GPS 6197R2 FD GEAR SPIKE AND WASHER STAMPED "LS 6970" PER CORNER RECORD N MIN V'� p'� 2005-0205. STATION IS LOCATED IN THE INTERSECTION OF WILSON ST. AND PLACENTIA AVE. NORTH 2186477.69, EAST 6049807.00. -� 1� �-j M3$ ����L s w wIN - 1 O.C.S. GPS 6233 12 F FD PUNCHED 2" BRASS CAP, DOWN 1.5' IN WELL MONUMENT PER CR b EXISTING CENTERLINE PER R4 '•� W VICTORIA STREET z a z 2005-15036. STATION IS LOCATED AT CENTERLINE INTER OF 19TH ST. AND POMONA AVE. NORTH 2181847.85, EAST 6051096.70. W a MEASURED AND RECORD DATA NOTES: -.- -� N89'39'06"W 644.90' - - ,1, , �j (644.85') R2 & R3 (644.88') R4 I, ; r7 Q a [ ]INDICATES RECORD AND MEASURED DATA AS NOTED. ' N N ( )INDICATES RECORD DATA AS NOTED. SEARCHED FOUND NOTHING. n ESTABLISHED RECORD DISTANCE N `� Q a r 1 FIT TRACT N0. 612, M.M. 20/1-2. FROM M3 PER R4 "";a w o R2 PARCEL MAP NO. BO -383, P.M.B. 156/9-11. R3 PARCEL MAP NO 80-381 P M B 149/1-2 to .�1" W R4 RECORD OF SURVEY 90-1029, R.S.B. 132/8-13, I I 8 DETAIL 40 R5 TRACT NO. 1713, M.M. 51/16-17. R6 TRACT NO. 1712, M.M. 50/32-36. 1 I N.T.S. I I I R7 PARCEL MAP 83-391, M.B. 186/41-42. W R8 TRACT N0. 11475, M.M. 496/21-22. I 139 PARCEL MAP, P.M.B. 66/7. W i R10 CR 2008-11946 I �F t --- N89°40'59'W [330.10'] 137 (33D.00') RI Q r r M9 WEST 20TH STREE ' (329.74') 31 (332.77) Rs L1J ' i N69°37'37"W 329.93' mi V s 1 M10 /j.. n • } ) n 1 :p �N $ UNE TABLE UNE BEARING LENGTH L1 N00°21'09"E 88.71' NOTES: LOT A IS FOR PRIVATE PARK PURPOSES AND NOT A SEPARATE BUILDING SITE. I LOT IIS FOR 14 THREE-STORY DETACHED LIVE/WORK UNITS. M15 i0y?„ K3e y� I i I (140.06' R6 ; (; W 19TH STREET M,4 - [140.00'] 136--.-• • N89°39'54"W 644.96' (644.99') R2 - Mil � M5 1/27/2015 SHEET 3 OF 3 SHEETS 1 NUMBERED LOT AND 1 LETTERED LOT AREA GROSS AREA 41178 SQ FT. NET AREA 27,178 SQ FT. (ALL OF TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 17708) TRACT NO. 17708 IN THE CITY OF COSTA MESA, COUNTY OF ORANGE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA HUNSAKER AND ASSOCIATES IRVINE, INC. ROBERT L WHEELER IV, LS, 8839 DATE OF SURVEY' AUGUST, 2014 In EASEMENT NOTES: OINDICATES AN INGRESS AND EGRESS EASEMENT FOR EMERGENCY ACCESS AND PUBLIC SECURITY VEHICLE PURPOSES DEDICATED HEREON TO THE CITY OF COSTA MESA. ®INDICATES AN EASEMENT FOR POLE LINES AND INCIDENTAL PURPOSES It FAVOR OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANY RECORDED FEBRUARY 27, 1948 IN BOOK 1730, PAGE 54, OF OFFICIAL RECORDS. OINDICATES AN EASEMENT FOR INGRESS, EGRESS AND ACCESS PURPOSES RESERVED HEREON FOR THE BENEFIT OF LOT A. INDICATES AN EASEMENT FOR STREET AND HIGHWAY AND INCIDENTAL O PURPOSES IN FAVOR OF THE CITY OF COSTA MESA RECORDED OCTOBER 4, 1967 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 2420 IN BOOK 8393, PAGE 373, OF OFFICIAL RECORDS. OINDICATES AN EASEMENT FOR SIDEWALK PURPOSES DEDICATED HEREON TO THE CITY OF COSTA MESA. ff N89°38'51"W 4.00' --- 5 1 - W ( �---' W • Z189°38'40'W 367.50'— & Z Q E Q YI, N pm m AC �4, ----------------------- WZ VQQQQV $ e% _ — — N89'3W40"W 367.50' -- N89°38'51"W 4:00'-• =- !g, n •. � 122 N.T.S. j I 30 nD' v \\ BO' — �� y z o •. C • ,mV N . r., ..... +..f 9 -------------------------------- • • ... � N I :.i.~ I `r ZL c Z r W W O� Qc W G~ Q I • .N.. M 2 Z M11 W � V Ind (' B B M8 m N0.1 g m W ... , --"" 57.42' - - - N89°38'40"W 474.92' (474.90') R1 (DE) N89°38'51"W I,, i W ----1 407.50' __ 3 -N0 11.3' —°2120"E 70' _ •• n & g gui "-'-,' >-A=90°00'00" 1n o 30' y 40' - - R=15.00' L=23.56' ;.1 � Uc, R �, z "tom_—---�----------N89°38'40"W 0.---- 367.5 -------�—�w—[�, n () • •'r LOT A o `" a c m LOT 1 a c m$^Ito _ •.. gg� 4,978 S.F. am 3 g { ---1------- A=90°00'00" 4 332 SF. N89'38'40'W 367.50'--------- jm v mH ---`— g � 1O n .mn <Pif i m Ty R=15.00' L=23.56' $ g z10 z N00 °21'20"E 11.37' DETAIL �HFREON n a � • - 7.41 _-- "_ 407.51 - ------ _ M71 N89.3W35'W 474.92' (474.90) Rt � N89'51 W" !' ��• MB (RE) I y R Ij U po ' U�Na � gm — — — — s --k -A 30' 110'--�I~ — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — -- — — — — — — — — — 40• 4p• _ EASEMENT NOTES: OINDICATES AN INGRESS AND EGRESS EASEMENT FOR EMERGENCY ACCESS AND PUBLIC SECURITY VEHICLE PURPOSES DEDICATED HEREON TO THE CITY OF COSTA MESA. ®INDICATES AN EASEMENT FOR POLE LINES AND INCIDENTAL PURPOSES It FAVOR OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANY RECORDED FEBRUARY 27, 1948 IN BOOK 1730, PAGE 54, OF OFFICIAL RECORDS. OINDICATES AN EASEMENT FOR INGRESS, EGRESS AND ACCESS PURPOSES RESERVED HEREON FOR THE BENEFIT OF LOT A. INDICATES AN EASEMENT FOR STREET AND HIGHWAY AND INCIDENTAL O PURPOSES IN FAVOR OF THE CITY OF COSTA MESA RECORDED OCTOBER 4, 1967 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 2420 IN BOOK 8393, PAGE 373, OF OFFICIAL RECORDS. OINDICATES AN EASEMENT FOR SIDEWALK PURPOSES DEDICATED HEREON TO THE CITY OF COSTA MESA. ff N89°38'51"W 4.00' --- 1 - W ( �---' W • Z189°38'40'W 367.50'— & Z Q E Q YI, N pm m AC �4, Z W WZ VQQQQV $ e% _ — — N89'3W40"W 367.50' -- N89°38'51"W 4:00'-• =- !g, n •. � N DETAIL N.T.S. j SEE SHEET 2 FOR BOUNDARY ESTABLISHMENT, GPS CONTROL SCHEME, BASIS OF BEARINGS, DATUM STATEMENT, MONUMENT NOTES, NOTES, MEASURED AND RECORD DATA NOTES February 11, 2014 ATTACHMENT 2 CITY OF COSTA MESA P.O. BOX 1200 • 77 FAIR DRIVE - CALIFORNIA 92628-1200 FROM THE DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SERVICES/ENGINEERING DIVISION Costa Mesa Planning Commission City of Costa Mesa 77 Fair Drive Costa Mesa, CA 92626 SUBJECT: Tract No. 17708 LOCATION: 2075 Placentia Avenue Dear Commissioners: Tentative Tract Map No. 17708 as furnished by the Planning Division for review by the Public Services Department consists of a subdivision to construct 14 -units, three-story detached live/work units. Tentative Tract Map No. 17708 meets with the approval of the Public Services Department, subject to the following conditions: 1. The Tract shall be developed in full compliance with the State Map Act and the City of Costa Mesa Municipal Code (C.C.M.M.C.), except as authorized by the Costa Mesa City Council and/or Planning Commission. The attention of the Subdivider and his engineer is directed to Section 13-208 through 13-261 inclusive, of the Municipal Code. 2. The Subdivider shall conduct soil investigations and provide the results to the City of Costa Mesa Engineering and Building Divisions pursuant to Ordinance 97-11. 3. Two copies of the Final Tract Map shall be submitted to the Engineering Division for checking. Map check fee shall be paid per C.C.M.M.C. Section 13-231. 4. A current copy of the title search shall be submitted to the Engineering Division with the first submittal of the Final Tract Map. 5. Dedicate an ingress/egress easement to the City for emergency and public security vehicles purposes only. Maintenance of easement shall be the sole responsibility of a Homeowners Association formed to conform to Section 13-41 (e) of the C.C.M.M.C. 6. Vehicular and pedestrian access rights to Placentia Avenue shall be released and relinquished to the City of Costa Mesa except at approved access locations. 7. Obtain a permit from the City of Costa Mesa, Engineering Division, at the time of development and then remove any existing driveways and/or curb depressions that will not be used and replace with full height curb and sidewalk. 8. Obtain a permit from the City of Costa Mesa, Engineering Division, at the time of development and then reconstruct P.C.C. driveway approach per City of Costa Mesa Standards as shown on the Offsite Plan to comply with ADA. Location and dimensions are subject to the approval of the Transportation Services Manager. 9. The Subdivider shall submit a cash deposit of $980 for street sweeping at time of issuance of a Construction Access permit. Full amount of deposit shall be maintained on a monthly basis prior to and during construction until completion of project. PHONE: (714) 754-5335 FAX: (714) 754-5028 TDD: (714) 7545244 wmxostamesaca.gov Cl T Y COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT MEETING DATE: March 17, 2015 ITEM NUMBER: CC -10 SUBJECT: BLOOD WITHDRAWAL TESTING SERVICES AGREEMENT DATE: MARCH 5, 2015 FROM: POLICE DEPARTMENT- FIELD OPERATIONS DIVISION PRESENTATION BY: GREG SCOTT, LIEUTENANT FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: GREG SCOTT (714) 754-5265 RECOMMENDATION: Award professional services contract to California Forensic Phlebotomy, Inc., 27762 Antonio Parkway, Suite L1-647, Ladera Ranch, CA, for blood withdrawal testing services for a three-year period for an amount not to exceed $91,000 per year. 2. Authorize the Mayor and the Deputy City Clerk to execute the Professional Services Agreement. 3. Authorize the Chief Executive Officer to sign for any rate increases or any amount above $91,000 as long as the increase falls within his signing authority. BACKGROUND: The Police Department requires blood withdrawal testing services to screen blood for alcohol, drug content, and genetic markers. This contract provides professional licensed personnel to respond when and where requested by Police personnel to draw blood for evidence purposes and to testify in court when needed. Employees of the contractor must be available on-call twenty-four hours a day, 365 days per year and they must also be able to respond to any given location within 45 minutes. California Forensic Phlebotomy Inc. has been providing blood withdrawal testing services for the City of Costa Mesa for over 26 years. Currently, CFP is the sole source provider of blood alcohol testing services for all Orange County law enforcement agencies. On February 21, 2012, CFP was awarded Costa Mesa's blood withdrawal services contract. In 2008, CFP was awarded the contract as a sole source contractor. On November 22, 2005 CFP was awarded Costa Mesa's blood withdrawal services contract after a formal bid process. The Police Department seeks to extend the agreement for three additional year term. ANALYSIS: California Forensic Phlebotomy, Inc., submitted a rate quote of $92.00 each blood withdrawal and an hourly rate of $117.75 for fixed posts (DUI checkpoints), with a guaranteed three-hour minimum. The Police Department estimates approximately 840 tests will be performed annually and that the fixed posts, such as DUI checkpoints will occur five or six times annually. However, due to the fact that this approximation is based on a fluctuating crime rate and officer self -initiated activities; blood withdrawal request could either increase or decrease in number. The total annual expenditures for these services are as follows: • 2014 = $26,834 • 2013 = $65,656 • 2012 = $93,468 • 2011 = $78,546. • 2010 = $74,349 • 2009 + $68,913 When blood withdrawals correspond to a DUI conviction, the City is reimbursed $37.00 per case. To address the fluctuations and the potential for any future rate increase, the Police Department is requesting the City CEO be authorized to sign for any amount which exceeds $91,000 and falls under his signing authority. ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED: No other alternatives have been considered. FISCAL REVIEW: The FY 15-16 budget provides funding for this service. LEGAL REVIEW: The City Attorney's office has reviewed and approved the attached Professional Services agreement as to form. CONCLUSION: Currently California Forensic Phlebotomy inc. is the exclusive provider of this service for all Orange County law enforcement agencies. It is recommended that City Council award professional service contract to California Forensic Phlebotomy, Inc., for a three-year price agreement of $92.00 each blood withdrawal and an hourly rate for fixed posts of $117.75 in an amount not to exceed $91,000 per year and to authorize the Mayor and the Deputy City Clerk to execute the Professional Services Agreement. 2 RONALD E. LOWENBERG Interim Chief of Police GREG SCOTT Lieutenant Attachments: Attachment I. Professional Services Aareement Distribution: Police Chief City Attorney Deputy City Clerk 3 SECOND AMENDMENT TO PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT THIS SECOND AMENDMENT TO PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT, is made and entered into March 25, 2015, ("Effective Date"), by and between the CITY OF COSTA MESA, a municipal corporation (the "City") and CALIFORNIA FORENSIC PHLEBOTOMY, a California corporation ("Consultant"). Recitals WHEREAS, the City and Consultant entered into a Professional Services Agreement on January 27, 2012 (the "Agreement") to perform blood sample collections; and WHEREAS, the term of the Agreement was set to expire on January 25, 2015 with an option to renew up to four one year terms; and WHEREAS, the Parties desire to extend the term of the Agreement for one (1) additional year; and WHEREAS, pursuant to authority granted to the City Manager, on January 25, 2015, the parties entered into a First Amendment to the Professional Services Agreement ("First Amendment") extending the term of the original Agreement for two (2) additional months, in order to seek approval from the Council for the full one year renewal. NOW, THEREFORE, for valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged; the parties hereby amend the Agreement as follows: 1. Section 4.1 of the Agreement is hereby amended to change the date of termination of the Agreement to January 25, 2016. 2. All other terms and provisions of the Agreement, as amended by the First Amendment, shall remain in full force and effect. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed by and through their respective authorized officers, as of the date first above written. CITY OF COSTA MESA, A municipal corporation y " Date: of Executive Officer 2�U lad� Date: Interim Finance Director CONSULT Date: ignatu ' tA I I rye—.,, Name and Title Social Security or Taxpayer ID Number ATTEST: City Clerk and ex -officio Clerk of the City of Costa Mesa APPROV T O Date: City Afforhie, APPROVED AS TO INSU Risk E: Date: APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: Date. Project Manager CFP California Forensic Phlebotomy, Inc. January 8, 2015 CITY OF COSTA MESA POLICE DEPARTMENT 99 Fair Drive Costa Mesa, CA 92626 RE: Contract Extension — Blood Alcohol Testing Sirs: 27762 Antonio Parkway, Suite L1-647 Ladera Ranch, CA 92694 24 Hour Technician Response (714) 529-0515 Administration (949) 309-2459 Fax (949) 203-2133 cvc23158@aol.com We wish to take this opportunity to thank the City of Costa Mesa Police Department for its continued utilization and support of our services over the past contract period. We are now in our 33rd year of operation of providing Blood Alcohol Testing services exclusively to Orange County law enforcement agencies. We continue to be the sole source provider of Blood Alcohol Testing services for ALL Orange County law enforcement agencies. We very much wish in continuing to provide you with our services during this next contract period and for many years to come. In order for us to continue to provide you with the quality of service required by the City of Costa Mesa Police Department we must slightly increase our rates for the upcoming contract period. We have not increased our rates in over 3 years. Our new rates for the upcoming contract period will be $92.00 per blood test. This rate increase of less than 2.9% is considerably less than the CPI for medical services for the same period. We do not anticipate any additional rate increases over the next 3 years. Once again we wish to thank you for your continued support and we look forward to continuing our long term relationship with the City of Costa Mesa Police Department. Please contact us at your convenience if you should have any questions or if we can be of any additional service. Sincerely, "�4 Russell A. Liedholm President Date: 02/09/15 Contact: Lt. G JUSTIFICATION FOR SOLE SOURCE REQUEST Dept. /Div.: Police Description of Equip./Service Req.: Blood Alcohol Testin Recommended Vendor: California Forensic Phlebotomy, Inc Phone: 714-754-5265 Address: 27762 Antonio Parkway. Suite L1-647 Ladera Ranch, CA Phone: 949-309-2459 1. Check reason for sole source request: ® Sole Source: No other items are known to exist which perform the same function. ❑ Proprietary: The item is held under exclusive title, trademark or copyright by a private person or company; a proprietary distributorship would also apply. Standardization: The City requires the item(s) to standardize parts, design, quality, etc. (explain in more detail below) 2. Is the product or service available from other sources? ❑ Yes ® No If YES, list name of vendors: If NO, explain why the product/service is available from only one source: CFP is a single source provider of blood alcohol testing services for all Orange Coutny law enforchement aeencies 3. Can your requirements be modified so that competitive products or services may be used? ❑ Yes ® No Please explain: This contract provides for professional licensed personnel and to the ability to testify in court. 4. How does the recommended vendor's prices or fees compare to the general market? 2.9% increase from last vear but thev haven't increase the rates in over 3 years Dept./Div. Head's Signature: Date: I Purchasing Supervisor's Signature: Date: Purchasing Officer's Signature: Sole Source Vendor fora} - online Date: April 30, 2012 CITY OF COSTA MESA CALIFORNIA 92628-1200 P,O. BOX 1200 FROM THE OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK Russ Liedholm California Forensic Phlebotomy, Inc: 27762 Antonio Parkway, Suite L1-647 Ladera Ranch, CA 92694 Dear Mr. Liedholm: RE: Professional Services Agreement for Blood Withdrawal Testing At the regular meeting held on February 21, 2012, the City Council approved the agreement with California Forensic Phlebotomy, Inc. for blood withdrawal testing services for a three-year term in an amount not to exceed $88,000 per year. A fully executed copy of the agreement is enclosed for your records. Sincerely, (X) CHRISTINE CORDON Acting Deputy City Clerk Enclosure (1) cc: Lt, Rob Sharpnack, Police Department Finance Department a/ i 1 ITEM NO. CC -6 77 FAIR DRIVE PHONE: (714)754-5223 , TDO: (714) 754.5244 - WYN/Gi-GOSta-mesa.ca.us ��: p� i PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT CITY OF COSTA MESA BLOOD WITHDRAWAL TESTING THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into this 27 day of Tanuary, 2012 ("Effective Date"), by and between the CITY OF COSTA MESA, a municipal corporation ("City"), and CALIFORNIA FORENSIC PHLEBOTOMY, INC., a California corporation ("Consultant"). WITNESSETH: A. WHEREAS, City proposes to utilize the Services of Consultant as an independent contractor to perforin blood sample collections as more fully described in Scope of Services and Compensation attached as Exhibit "A"; and B. WHEREAS,. Consultant represents that it has that degree of specialized expertise contemplated within California Government Code, Section 37103, and holds all necessary licenses to practice and perform the Services herein contemplated; and C. WHEREAS, City and Consultant desire to contract for the specific Services described in Exhibit "A" (the "Project") and desire to set forth their rights, duties and liabilities in connection with the Services to be performed.; and D, WHEREAS, no official or employee of City has a financial interest, within the provisions of California Government Code, Sections 1090-1092, in the subject matter of this Ao eernent, NOW, THEREFORE, for and in consideration of the mutual covenants and conditions contained herein, the parties hereby agree as follows: 1.4. SERVICES PROVIDED BY CONSULTANT 1.1. 5. cope Qg ,eivices, Consultant shall provide the professional Services ("Se -1 -vices") described in Scope of Services and Compensation, a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and incorporated herein by this reference. 1.2. Professicual. Practices, All professional Services to be, provided by Consultant Pursuant to this Agreement shall be provided by personnel experienced in their respective fields and in a manner consistent with the standards of care, diligence and skill ordinarily exercised by professional consultants in similar fields and circumstances- in accord ce with sound Professional practices. It is understood that in the exercise of every aspect of its role, within the scalae of work, considtant will be representing the City of Costa Mesa, and all of its actions, communications, or Other work, during its employment, under this contract is ander the direction of the department. Consultant also warrants that it is familiar with all laws that may affect its Performance of this Agreement and shall advise City of any changes in any laws that may af,ect Consultant's performance of this Agreement. 1.3. Performance to Satisfaction of City. Consultant agrees to perform all the work to the complete satisfaction of the City and within the hereinafter specified. Evaluations of the work will be done by the City Clerk or her designee, If the quality of work is not satisfactory, Professional Services Agreement for Blood Wi$idrawal Testing Page 11 City in its discretion has the right to: (a) Meet with Consultant to review the quality of the work and resolve the matters of concern; (b) Require Consultant to repeat the -'work at no additional fee until it is satisfactory; and/or .(c) Terminate the Agreement as hereinafter set forth. 1.4. Warranty. Consultant warrants that it shall perform the Services required by this Agreement in compliance with all applicable Federal and California employment laws including, but not lim ted to, those laws related to minimum hours and wages; occupational health and safety; fair employment and employment practices; workers' compensation insurance and safety in employment; and all other Federal, State and local laws and ordinances -applicable to the Services required.under this Agreement.' Consultant shall indemnify and hold harmless City from and against all claims, demands, payments, suits, actions, proceedings, and judgments of every nature and description including attorneys' fees and costs, presented, brought, or recovered against City for, or on account of any liability under any of the above-mentioned laws, which may be incurred by reason of Consultant's performance under this Agreement. 1.5. Non-discrimination. In performing this Agreement, Consultant shall not engage in, nor permit its agents to engage in, discrimination in employment of persons because of their race, religion, color, national origin, ancestry, age, physical handicap, medical condition, marital status, sexual gender or sexual orientation, except as permitted pursuant to Section 12940 of the Government Code. 1.6. Non -Exclusive Agrcement. Consultant acknowledges that City may enter into agreements with other consultants for Services similar to -the -Services that are subject to this Agreement or may have its own employees perform Services similar to those Services contemplated by this Agreement. 1.7. Delegation and Assignment. This is a personal service contract, and the duties set forth herein shall not bedelegated or assigned to any person or entity without the prior written consent of City.. Consultant may engage a subcontractor(s) as permitted bylaw and may employ other personnel to perform Services contemplated by this Agreement at Consultant's sole cast and expense, 1.8. Confidentiality. Erriployees of Consultant in the course of their duties may have access to financial, accounting, statistical, and personnel data of private individuals and employees of City. Consultant. covenants that all data, documents, � discussion, or other information developed or received by Consultant or provided for performance of this Agreement are deemed confidential and shall not be disclosed by Consultant without written authorization by City. City shall grant such authorization if disclosure is required by.law. All City data shall be returned to City upon the termination of this Agreement. Consultant's covenant under this .Section shall survive the termination of this Agreement. Professional Services Agreement for Blood Withdrawal Testing Page 12 2.0. COMPENSATION AND BILLING 2.7. Compensation. As compensation for the provision of Services outlined in Exhibit "A" and in accordance with this agreement, Consultant shall be paid in accordance with the Cornpertsation set forth in Exhibit "A," attached hereto and incorporated by reference. Consultant's total compensation shall not exceed Eighty -Eight Thousand Dollars ($ 88,000,00) per year. 2.2, Additional Services. Consultant shall not receive compensation for any Services provided outside the scope of Services specified in the Consultant's Proposed unless the City or the Project Manager for this Project, prior to Consultant performing the additional Services, approves such additional Services in writing. It is specifically understood that oral requests and/or approvals of such additional Services or additional compensation shall be barred and are unenforceable. 2.3. Method of Billing. Consultant may submit invoices to City supervisor for approval on a progress basis, but no more often than two times a month. Said invoice shall be based on the total of all Consultants' Services which have been completed to City's sole satisfaction as of the date the invoice is created. City shall pay Consultant's invoice within forty- five (45) days from the data City receives said invoice. Each invoice shall describe in detail, the Services performed, the date of performance, and the associated time for completion. Any additional Services approved and performed pursuant to this Agreement shall be designated as "Additional Services" and shall identify the number of the authorized change order, where applicable, on all invoices. 2.4. Records and Audits. Records of Consultant's Services relating to this Agreement shall be maintained in accordance with generally recognized accounting principles and shall be made ,available to City or its Project Manager for inspection and/or audit at mutually convenient times for a period of three (3) years from the Effective Date. 3.0. TIME OF PERFORMANCE 3.1. Commencement and Completion of Work. The professional Services to be performed pursuant to this Agreement shall commence within five (5) days from the Effective Date of this Agreement. Said Services shall be performed as needed within the term of this Agreement. Faihlre to commence work in a timely manner and/or diligently pursue work to completion maybe grounds for termination of this Agreement. 3.2. Excusable Delays, Neither party shall be responsible for delays or lack of performance resulting from acts beyond the reasonable control of the party or parties. Such acts shall include, batt not be limited to, acts of God, fire, strikes, material shortages, compliance with laws or regulations, riots, Acts of war, or any other conditions beyond the reasonable control of a party. Professional Services Agreement for Blood Withdrawal Testing Page 13 4.0. TERM AND TERMINATION 4.1,, Term. This Agreement shall: commence on the Effective Date and continue for a period of three _(3). years ending on January 25;2015, unless previously terminated as provided herein or. as otherwise .agreed to in writing by the parties. At the end of the term period, Consultant and City may mutually agree, in writing, to renew the contract for up to four (4) term periods of one (1) year each. 4.2. Notice of Termination. - The City reserves and has the .right and privilege of canceling; :suspending or abandoning the execution of all or any part of the work contemplated by this. Agreement, with or without cause, at anytime, by providing written notice to Consultant The termination of. this Agreement shall be deemed effective upon receipt of the .notice of termination. In' the event of such termination, Consultant shall immediately stop rendering Services under this Agreement unless directed otherwise by the City. 4.3, Compensation. In the event - of, termination, City shall pay Consultant for reasonable costs incurred and professional Services satisfactorily perf(jimed up to and including the date of City's -written noticd of termination. Compensation for work in progress shall be prorated as, to the percentage of work completed as of the effective date of terrninatiori-Ln accordance with the fees set forth herein. In ascertaining the professional Services actually rendered hereunder up to the effective date of termination of this Agreement, consideration shall be given to both completed work and work in progress, to complete and incomplete drawings, and to other documents pertaining to the Services contemplated herein whether delivered to the City or in the possession of the Consultant. 4.4. Documents. In the event of termination of this Agreement, all documents. prepared by Consultant in its performance of this Agreement including,' but not limited to, finished or unfinished design, development and construction documents, data studies, drawings, maps and reports, shall be delivered to the City within ten (10) days of delivery of termination notice to Consultant, at no cost to City. Any use of uncompleted documents without specific written authorization from Consultant shall be at City's sole risk and without liability or legal expense to Consultant. 5.0. INSURANCE 5.1. Minimum Scope, and Limits of Insurance. Consultant shall obtain, maintain, and keep in full force and effect during the life of this Agreement all of the following minimum scope of insurance coverages, with an insurance company admitted to do business in California, rated "A," Class X, or better in. the most recent Best's Key i Insurance. Rating Guide., and approved by City: (a) Commercial general liability, including premises -operations, products/completed operations, broad form property damage, blanket contractual liability, independent contractors, personal injury or bodily injury with a policy unit of not fess than One Million Dollars ($1,000,000,00), combined single limits, per occurrence. If such insurance Professional Services Agreement For Blood Withdrawal Testing Page 14 contains a general aggregate limit, it shall apply separately to this Agreement or shall be twice the required occurrence limit. (b) Business automobile liability for owned vehicles, hired, and non -owned vehicles, with a policy limit of not less than One Million Dollars ($1,000,000.00), combined single limits, per occurrence for bodily injury and property damage, (c) Workers' compensation insurance as required by the State of California. Consultant agrees to waive, and to obtain endorsements from its workers' compensation insurer waiving subrogation rights under its workers' compensation insurance policy against the City, its officers, agents, employees, and volunteers arising from work performed by Consultant for the City and to require each of its subcontractors, if any, to do likewlse. under their workers' compensation insurance policies. (d) Professional errors and omissions ("E&O") liability insurance with policy limits of not less than One Million Dollars ($1,000,000.00), combined single limits, per occurrence and aggregate. Architects' and engineers' coverage shall be endorsed to include contractual liability. If the policy is written as a "claims made" policy, the retro date shall be prior to the- start of the contract work. Consultant shall obtain and maintain, said E&O liability insurance during the life of this Agreement and for three years after completion of the work hereunder. 5.2. Endorsements. The commercial general liability insurance policy and business automobile liability policy shall contain or be endorsed to contain the following provisions (a) Additional insureds "The City of Costa Mesa and its elected and appointed boards, officers, officials, agents, employees, and volunteers are additional insureds with respect to: liability arising out of activities performed by or on behalf of the Consultant pursuant to its contract with the City; products and completed operations of the Consultant; premises owned, occupied or used by the Consultant; automobiles owned, leased, hired, or borrowed by the Consultant.." (b) Notice: "Said policy shall not terminate, be suspended, or voided, nor shall it be cancelled, nor the coverage or limits reduced, until thirty (30) days after written notice is given to City. (c) Other insurance: "The Consultant's insurance coverage shall be primary insurance as respects the City of Costa Mesa, its officers, officials, agents, employees, and volunteers. Any other insurance maintained by the City of Costa Mesa shall be excess and not contributing with the insurance provided by this policy." (d) Any failure to comply with the reporting provisions of the policies shall not affect coverage provided to the City of Costa Mesa, its officers, Professional Services Agreement for Blood Withdrawal Testing Page 15 officials, agents, employees, and volunteers. (e) The Consultant's insurance shall apply separately to each insured against whom claim is made or suit is brought, except with respect to the limits of the insurer's liability. 5.3. Deductible or Self Insured Retention. If any of such policies provide for a deductible or self-insured retention to provide such coverage, the amount of such deductible or self-insured retention shall be approved in advance by City. No policy of insurance issued as to which the City is an additional insured shall contain a provision which requires that no insured except the named insured can satisfy any such deductible or self-insured retention. 5.4. Certificates of Insurance: Consultant shall.. provide to City certificates of insurance showing the insurance coverages and required endorsements described above, in a form and content approved by City, prior to performing any -Services under this Agreement. 5.5. Non -limiting: Nothing in this Section shall be construed as limiting in any .way, the indemnification provision contained in this Agreement, or the extent to which Consultant may be held responsible for payments of damages to persons or property. 6.0. GENERAL PROVISIONS .. 6.1. Entire Agreement: This Agreement constitutes the entire Agreement between the parties with respect to any matter referenced herein and supersedes any and all other prior writings and oral negotiations. This Agreement may be modified only in writing, and signed by the parties in interest at the time of such modification. The terms of this Agreement shall prevail over any inconsistent provision in any other contract document appurtenant hereto, including exhibits to this Agreement. 6.2. Representatives. The City Manager or - his or her designee shall be the representative of City for purposes of this Agreement and may issue .all consents, approvals, directives -and agreements on behalf of the City,: called for by this Agreement, except as otherwise expressly provided in this Agreement. Consultant shall designate a representative for purposes of this Agreement who shall be authorized to issue all consents, approvals, directives and agreements on behalf of Consultant called for by this Agreement, except as. otherwise expressly provided in this Agreement. 6.3. Project Managers. City shall designate a Project Manager to work directly with Consultant in the performance of this Agreement. Consultant shall designate a Project Manager who shall represent it and be its agent in all consultations with City during the tern of this Agreement. Consultant or its Project Manager shall attend and assist in all coordination meetings called by City, 6.4. Notices: Any notices, documents, correspondence or other communications concerning this - Agreement or : the, work hereunder may be provided by personal delivery, Professional Services Agreement for Blood Withdrawal Testing Page 16 facsimile or mail and shall be addressed as set forth below. Such con-imunication shall be decrued served or delivered: a) at the time of delivery if such communication is sent by personal delivery; b) at the time of transmission if such communication is sent by facsimile; and c) 48 hours after deposit in the U,S. Mail as reflected by the official U.S. postmark if such communication is sent through regular United States mail, IF TO CONSULTANT: California Forensic Phlebotomy, Inc. 27762 Antonio Parkway, Suite L1-647 L'adera. Ranch, CA 92694 Tel: 949-309-2459/714-529-0515 Fax: 949-203-2133 Attn: Russ Liedholm IF TO CITY: City of Costa Mesa 77 Fair Drive Costa Mesa, CA 92626 Tel: 714-754-5156 Fax: 714-754-5330 Attn: Lieutenant Rob Sharpnack 6.5, Drug-free Workplace Policy. Consultant shall provide a drug-free workplace by complying with all provisions set forth in City's Council Policy 100-5, attached hereto as Exhibit "B" and incorporated herein by reference. Consultant's failure to conform to the requirements set forth in Council Policy 100-5 shall constitute a material breach of this Agreement and shall be cause for immediate termination of this Agreement by City. 6.6. Attorneys' Fees: In the event that litigation is brought by any party in corlawion with this Agreement, the prevailing. party shall be entitled to recover from the opposing party all costs and expenses, including reasonable attorneys' fees, incurred by the ,prevailing party in the exercise of any of its rights or remedies hereunder or the enforcement of any of the terms,. conditions, or provisions hereof. 6.7. Governing Law: This Agreement shall be governed by and construed under the lativs of the State of California without giving effect to that body of laws pertaining to conflict of laws. In the event of any legal action to enforce or interpret this Agreement, the parties hereto agree that the sole and exclusive venue shall be a court of competent jurisdiction. located in Orange County, California, 6.8. Assi ent: Consultant shall not voluntarily or by operation of law assign, transfer, sublet or encumber all or any part of Consultant's interest in this Agreernent without City's prior written consent, Any attempted assignment, transfer, subletting or encumbrance shall be void and shall constitute a breach of this Agreement and cause for tennination of this Agreement, Regardless of City's consent, no subletting or assignment shall release Consultant of Consultant's obligation to perforrn all other obligations to be performed by Consultant hereunder for the term of this Agreement. 6.9. Indemnification and Hold Harmless Consultant agrees to defend, indemnify, hold free and hannless the City, its elected officials, officers, agents and employees, at Consultant's sole expense, from and against any and all claims, actions, suits or other legal proceedings brought against the City, its elected officials, officers, agents and employees arising out of the performance of the Consultant, its employees, and/or authorized subcontractors, of the work undertaken pursuant to this Agreement. The defense obligation provided for hereunder shall apply without any advance showing of negligence or wrongdoing by the Consultant, its Professional Services Agreement for Blood Withdrawal Testing Page 17 employees, and/or authorized subcontractors, but shall be required whenever any claim, action, complaint, or suit asserts as its basis the negligence, errors, omissions or misconduct of the Consultant, its employees, and/or authorized subcontractors, and/or whenever any claim," action, complaint or suit asserts liability against tbe' City; its elected officials, officers, agents and employees based upon the work performed by the Consultant, its employees, and/or authorized subcontractors under this Agreement, whether or not the Consultant, its employees, andlor authorized subcontractors are. specifically named or otherwise asserted to be /table. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Consultant shall not be liable for the defense or indemnification of the City for claims, actions, cronaplaints or suits arising out of the sole active negligence or willful misconduct of the City. This provision shall supersede and replace all other indemnity provisions contained either in the City's specifications or Consultant's Proposal, which shall be of no force and effect. 6.10. Inde endent Contractor. Consultant is and shall be acting at all times as an independent contractor and not as an employee of City. Consultant shall have no power to incur any debt, obligation, or liability on behalf of City or otherwise act on behalf of City as an agent. Neither City nor any of its agents shall have control over the conduct of Consultant or any of Consultant's employees, except as set forth in this Agreement. Consultant shall not, at any time, or in any manner, represent that it or any of its or employees are in any mariner agents or employees o1= City. Ccasultant shall secure, at its sole expense, and be responsible for any and all payment of Income Tax, Social Security, State Disability 'Insurance ' Compensation, Unemployment Compensation, and other payroll. deductions for Consultant and its officers, agents, and employees, and all business licenses, if any are required, .irs connection with the Services to be performed hereunder.. Consultant shall indemnify and hold City harmless frorn any and all taxes, assessments, penalties, and interest asserted against City by reason of the ndependcnt contractor relationship created by this Agreement. Consultant further agrees to indemnify and hold City harmless from any failure of Consultant to comply with the applicable worker's compensation laws. City shalll have the right to offset against the amount of any fees due to Consultant under this Agreement Iany amount due to City from Consultant as a result of Consultant's failure to promptlypay to City any reimbursement or indemnification arising under this paragraph. 6.11. PERSEffigibility Indemnification. In the event that Consultant or any employee, agent, or subcontractor of Consultant providing Services under this Agreement claims or is determined by a court of competent jurisdiction or the California Public Employees Retirement System (PBRS) to be eligible for enrollment in PERS as an employee of the City; Consultant shall indemnify; defend, and hold haranless. City for the payment of any employee and/or employer contributions for PERS benefits on behalf of Consultant or its employees, agents, or subcontractors, as well as for the payment of any penalties and interest on such contributions, which would otherwise be the responsibility of City. Notwithstanding any other agency, state or federal policy, rule, regulation, law or ordinance to the contrary, Consultant and any of its employees, agents, and subcontractors providing service under this Agreement shall; not qualify for or becorm entitled to, and hereby agree to waive any claims to, tiny compensation, benefit, or any incident of employment by City, including but not limited to eligibility to enroll in PERS as an employee of CiLy and entitlement to any contribution to be paid by City for employer contribution andlar employee contributions for PERS benefits. Professional Services Agreement for Blood Withdrawal Testing Page 18 6.12. Cooperation. in the event any claim or action is brought against City relating to Consultant's performance or Services rendered under this Agreement, Consultant shall render any reasonable assistance and cooperation which City might require, 6.13. Qwnership of Documents. All findings, reports, documents, information and data including, but not limited to, computer tapes or discs, files and tapes furnished or prepared by Consultant or any of its subcontractors iri the course of performance of this Agreement, shall be and remain the sole property of City. Consultant agrees that any such documents or information shall not be made available to any individual or organization without the prior consent of City. Any use of such documents for other projects not contemplated by this Agreement, and any use of incomplete documents, shall be at the sole risk of City and without liability or legal exposure to Consultant. City shall inderruufy and hold harmless Consultant from all claims, damages, losses, and expenses, including attorneys, fees, arising out of or resulting from City's use of such documents for other projects not contemplated by this Agreement or use of incomplete documents furnished by Consultant. Consultant shall deliver to City any findings, reports, documents, information, data, in any form, including but not limited to, computer tapes, discs, files audio tapes or any other Project related items as requested by City or its authorized representative, at no additional cost to the City. 6.14. Public Records Act Disclosure. Consultant has been advised and is aware that all reports, documents, information and data including, but not limited to, computer tapes, discs or files furnished or prepared by Consultant, or any of its subcontractors, and provided to City may be subject to public disclosure as required by the Califomiia public Records Act (California Government Code Section 6250 et. seq.). Exceptions to publao disclosure may be those documents or information that qualify as trade secrets, as that term is defined in the California Government Code Section 6254.7, and of which Consultant informs City of such trade secret, The City will endeavor to maintain as confidential all information obtained by it that is designated as a trade secret. The ,City shall not, in any way, be liable or responsible for the disclosure of any trade secret including, without lirrlitation,.those records so marked if disclosure is deemed to be required by lav or by order of the Court. 6.1.5. Conflict of interest. Consultant and its officers, employees, associates and subconsultants, if any, wail comply with all conflict of interest statutes of the State of California applicable to Consultant's Services under this agreement, including, but not limited to, the Political Reform Act (Government Code Sections 81000, et seq.) and Government Code Section 1090. During the terni of this Agreement, Consultant and its officers, employees, associates and subconsuttari.ts shall not, without the prior written approval of the City Representative, perform work for another person or entity for whom Consultant is not currently performing work that would require Consultant or one of its officers, employees, associates or subconsultants to abstain from a decision under this Agreement pursuant to a conflict of interest statute. 6. L6. Res onsibility far En'ors. Consultant shall be responsible for its work and results tinder this Agreement, Consultant, when requested, shall furnish clarification and/or explanation as may he required by the City's representative, regarding any Services rendered under this Agreement at no additional cost to City. In the event that an error or omission attributable to Consultant occurs, theri Consultant shall, at no cost to City, provide all necessary design drawings, estimates and other Consultant professional Services necessary to rectify and correct Professional Services Agreement for Blood Withdrawal Testing Pa9 o the matter to the sole satisfaction of City and to participate in any meeting required with regard to the correction. 6.17, Prohibited Employment, Consultant will not employ any regular employee of City while this Agreement is in effect. 6.18. Order,of - Precedence. In the event t of an inconsistency in this Agreement and any of the attached Exhibits, the terms set forth in this Agreement - shall prevail. If, and to the extent this Agreement inc.orporatesby reference any provision of any document, such provision shall be deemed a part of this Agreement. Nevertheless, if there is any -conflict" among the terms and conditions of this Agreement and those of any such provision or provisions so' incorporated by reference, this Agreement shall govern over the document referenced. 6.19, Costs, Each party shall bear its own costs and fees incurred in the, preparation and negotiation of this Agreement, and. in .the performance of its obligations hereunder except as expressly provided herein. 6,20, No Third Party Beneficiary Rights. This Agreement is entered into for the sole benefit of City and Consultant and no other parties are intended to be direct or incidental beneficiaries of this Agreement and no third party shall have any right in, under or to this Agreement.. 6,21, Headings.. Paragraphs and subparagraph headings contained in this Agreement I are included solely for co - rivemence and are not intended to modify, explain or to be a full or accurate description of the content thereof and shall not in any way affect the meaning or interpretation of this Agreement. 6.22. Construction. The parties have participated jointly in the negotiation and drafting .of this Agreement. In the event an ambiguity or question of intent or interpretation arises with respect to this Agreement, t, tIds Agreement shall be construed as if drafted jointly by the parties and in accordance with its fair .meaning. There shall be no presumption or burden of proof favoring or disfavoring any pLty by virtue of the authorship of any of the provisions of this Agreement. 6.23, Amendments. Only a writing executed by the parties hereto or their respective successors and assigns may amend this Agreement. 6,24. Waiver. The delay or failure of either party at any time to require performance or compliance by the other of any. of its obligationg or agreements shall in no way be deemed a waiver of those rights to require such performance or compliance. No waiver of any provision of this Agreement shall be effective unless in writing and signed by a duly authorized representative of the party against whom enforcement of a waiver is sought. The waiver of any right or remedy in respect to any occurrence or event shall not be, deemed a waiver of any rig-lil or remedy in respect to any other occurrence or event, nor shall any waiver constiftite a continuing waiver. 6.25..Scvorabifity, If any.proVision of this. Agreement is deteilfflned by a court of compettri ' t.juris . diction. to be unenforceable in any circumstance;, u . mstance,such determination shall not affect the validity or.enforceability of the 'remaining tem -is and provisions hereof or of the Professional Services Agreement for Blood withdrawal Testing Page 110 offending provision in any other circumstance. Notwithstanding the foregoing, if the value of this Agreement, based upon the substantial benefit of the bargain for an unpaired, which determination made b the g y Party, is materially mpetent jurisdiction shall be binding, then both parties agree rto presiding substitute such p ourt or bis on(s)�hrongh good faith. negotiations. 6.26. Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in one or more counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original. All counterparts shall be construed together and shall constitute one agreement, 6.27. Como ate AULo-rlt The persons executing this Agreement on behalf of the panties hereto warrant that they are duly authorized to execute this Agreement on behalf of said parties and that by doing so the parties he are formally bound to the provisions of this Agreement. I Professional Services Agreemenh for Blood Withdrawal Testing Page 111 I IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the. parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed by and through their respective authorized officers, as of the date first above written. CITY OF COSTA MESA, A municipal corporation Date: 2 Chief Executive Officer of Costa Mesa CONSULTANT f� G Date: Signature Name and Title 7-� V Social Security or Taxpayer ID Number ATTEST: —�ij 0 A r City Clerk and ex -officio Clerk of the City of Costa Mesa �// 011;2, Professional Services Agreement for Blood Withdrawal Testing Page 112 APPROVE To FORM: Date: City Attam y APPROVED AS TO INSURANCE: RIMWemen APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: Project Manager Date: —? ag))& Date: Professional Services Agreement for Blood Withdrawai Testing P a g e 113 m EXHIBIT A SCOPE OF SERVICES AND COMPENSATION Professional Services.Agreen Lent For BIood Withdrawal Testing Page 114 Sco e of Services: Consultants shah provide the professional services of obtaining blood samples at the direction of police officers and appear to testify in court at the direction of the District Attorney's office, Consultants shall respond when and where requested by Police personne-I to draw blood for evidentiary purposes and to testify 1r1 court when needed, Employees of the contractor must be available on-call 24 hours a day, 3 65 days per year, and must be able to respond to any given location within 45 minutes, Compensation: Consultants, compensation for services rendered will be as followed; $89.45 per blood test and $117.75 per hour for DUI checkpoint coverage, The consultant, compensation shall in no case exceed Eighty -Eight Thousand Dollars per year ($88,000.00). Professional SerAces Agreement for Blood Withdrawal Testing Page Iis EXHIBIT B CITY COUNCIL POLICY 100-5 Professional Services Agreement for,Dlood WithdraWil Testing P a g e 116 SUBJECT DRUG-FREE WORKPLACE BACKGROUND POLICY �EFFECTiPE7AfGNUMBER DATE 100-5 18-8-89 Under the Federal Drug -Free Workplace Act of 1988, passed as part of omnibus drug legislation enacted November 18, 1988, contractors and grantees of Federal funds must certify that they will provide drug-free workplaces, At the present time, the City of Costa Mesa, as a sub -grantee of Federal funds under a variety of programs, is required to abide by this Act, The City Council has expressed its support of the national effort to eradicate drug abuse through the creation of a Substance Abuse Committee, institution of a City-wide D.A.R.E. program in all local schools and other activities in support of a drug-free community. This policy is intended to extend that effort to contractors and grantees of the City of Costa Mesa in the elimination of dangerous drugs in the workplace. PURPOSE It is the purpose of this Policy to: 1. Clearly state the City of Costa Mesa's commitment to a drug-free society. 2. Set forth guidelines to ensure that public, private, and nonprofit organizations receiving funds from the City of Costa Mesa share the commitment to a drug-free workplace, POLICY The City Manager, under direction by the City Council, shall take the necessary steps to see that the following provisions are included in all contracts and agreements entered into by the City of Costa Mesa involving the disbursement of funds. 1, Contractor or Sub -grantee hereby certifies that it will provide a drug-free workplace by: a. Publishing a statement notifying employees that the unlawful manufacture, distribution, dispensing, possession, or use of a controlled substance is prohibited in Contractor's and/or sub -grantee's workplace, specifically the job site or location included in this contract, and specifying the actions that will be taken against the employees for violation of such prohibition; PrOfeS8ioiial Sel"vices Agreement for Blood Withdrawal Testing Page 117 SUBJECT POLICY EFFECTIVE N TNMER DATE DRUG-FREE WORKPLACE 100-5 8-8-89 b. Establishing a Drug -Free Awareness Program to inform employees about: 1. The dangers of drug abuse in the workplace; i PAGE 2of3 2. Contractor's and/or sub-grantee's'policy of maintaining a drug-free workplace; 3. Any.available drug counseling, rehabilitation and employee assistance programs; and: 4.. The penalties that may be imposed upon employees for drug abuse violations occurring in the workplace; c. Malting it a requirement that each employee to be engaged in the performance of the contract be given a copy of the statement required by subparagraph A, d. Notifying the employee in the statement required by subparagraph I A that, as a condition of employment under the contract, the employee will: 1. Abide by the terms of the statement; and 2. Notify the employer of any criminal drug statute conviction for a violation occurring in the workplace no later than five (5) days after such conviction; e. Notifying the by of Costa Mesa within ten. (10) days after receiving notice under subparagraph 1 D 2 from an .employee or otherwise receiving' the actual notice of such conviction; f. Taking one of the following actions within thirty (30) days of receiving notice under subparagraph 1 D 2 with respect to an employee who is so convicted: 1. Taking appropriate personnel action against such an employee, up to and including termination; or 2. Requiring such employee to participate satisfactorily in a drug abuse assistance or rehabilitation program approved for such purposes by a Federal, State, or local health agency, law enforcement, or other appropriate agency; Professional Services Agreement for Blood Withdrawal Testing Page 118 SUBJECT POLICY EFFECTIVE PAGE NUMBER DATE DRUG-FREE WORKPLACE 100-5 8-8-89 3 of 3 g. Making a good faith effort to maintain a drug-free workplace through implementation of subparagraphs 1 A through 1 F, inclusive. 2, Contractor and/or sub -grantee shall be deemed to be in violation of this Policy if the City of Costa Mesa determines that; a. Contractor and/or sub -grantee has made a false certification under paragraph I above; b• Contractor and/or sub -grantee has violated the certification by failing to carry out the requirements of subparagraphs 1 A through 1 G above; c. Such number of employees of Contractor and/or sub -grantee have been convicted of violations of criminal drug statutes for violations occurring in the workplace as to indicate that the contractor and/or sub -grantee has failed to make a good faith effort to provide a drug-free workplace. Should any contractor and/or sub -grantee be deemed to be in violation of this Policy pursuant to the provisions of 2 A, B, and. C, a suspension, termination or debarment proceeding subject to applicable Federal, State, and local laws shall be conducted. Upon issuance of any final decision under this section requiring debarment of a contractor and/or sub -grantee, the contractor and/or sub -grantee shall be ineligible for award of any contract, agreement or grant from the City of Costa Mesa for a period specified in the decision, not to exceed five (5) years. Upon issuance of any final decision recommending against debarment of the contractor and/or sub -grantee, the contractor and/or sub -grantee shall be eligible for compensation as provided by law. Professional Services Agreement for Blood Withdrawal Testing P a g e 119 CALI-10 OP ID: AH .41 � CERTIFICATE OF LIABILITY INSURANCE DATE(MW191201149120114rz414 THIS CERTIFICATE IS ISSUED AS A MATTER OF INFORMATION ONLY AND CONFERS NO RIGHTS UPON THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER, THIS CERTIFICATE DOES NOT AFFIRMATIVELY OR NEGATIVELY AMEND, EXTEND OR ALTER THE COVERAGE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES BELOW. THIS CERTIFICATE OF INSURANCE DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A CONTRACT BETWEEN THE ISSUING INSURER(S), AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE OR PRODUCER, AND THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER. IMPORTANT: If the certificate holder is an ADDITIONAL INSURED, the policy(iss) must be endorsed. If SUBP.OGATION IS WAIVED, subject to the terms and conditions of the policy, certain policies may require an endorsement. A statement on this certificate does not confer rights to the certificate holder in lieu of such endorsement(s). PRODUCER Fullerton Insurance Service CDI #D596796 P.O.Box 4054 Fullerton, CA 92834-4054 C"TA" Commercial Lines Dept. PHCrp a E : 714-577-5800 FQ�tiI, 714-447-0011 NlAll ADDRESi: rec@fultertoninsurance.com INSURER(S) AFFORDING COVERAGE NAICM Kevin P. McCarthy INSURER A: Evanston Insurance Co. 135378 € INSURED CallSornla Forensic Phlebotomy Inc. INSURERS: 27762 Antonio Pkwy, Ste L1-647 INSURERC: + Ladera Ranch, CA 52694 v INSURER D: INSURER E: SM903018 r ENSURER F : ` s 11/1712015 rc''�gwAXG.E OF1ENTED14D,000 COVEiRAGE$ CERTIFICATE NUMBER: PPWRION NI INIRF4- THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE POLICIES OF INSURANCE LISTED BELOW HAVE BEEN ISSUED TO THE INSURED NAMED ABOVE FOR THE POLICY PERIOD INDICATED. NOTWITHSTANDING ANY REQUIREMENT. TERM OR CONDITION OF ANY CONTRACT OR OTHER DOCUMENT WITH RESPECT TO WHICH THIS CERTIFICATE MAY BE ISSUED OR MAY PERTAIN, THE INSURANCE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES DESCRIBED HEREIN IS SUBJECT TO ALL THE TERMS, EXCLUSIONS AND CONDITIONS OF SUCH POLICIES, LIMITS SHOWN MAY HAVE BEEN BY PAID CLAIMS. tiSi YR TYPE OF INSURANCE •r I V + >ti0L[CY NUh18EA ,REDUCED 16l69T1E4NYYY MMaDD YfYYf LIMITS A X ! COMMERCIAL GENERAL LIABILITY I` € I EACH OCCURRENCE 1,040,000 CLAIMS -MADE E OCCUR I X SM903018 11!1712014 s 11/1712015 rc''�gwAXG.E OF1ENTED14D,000 PRf.Mj$ES Ea t,0 we1CLY +— } DEXP ycnepeT=! IS 5,00 " PERSONAL X AOV I^UURY 15 1,000.000 GEN'L AGGREGATE LIIAIT APPLIES PEF:i I3I _ O -RyLpG s � i .3 2,000,000 j POLICY PRO- JEC7 u LOC ?RODUCTS-COnAFfOPAGG $ Included f OTHER:s AUTOMOBILE LLkEILITY f COMBINtQ $[ Lf: UAI S Ea 3txnt1 ANYAUTO EODILY IMURY(Per person) S ALLOWNED SACHEDULED AUTOS _UTOS IJ fi001LY INJl1R'llPer accder.;j c - NCN-0VVNED HIRED AUTOS AUTOS i PRCPErTrY ,. �E_�rs 7Fa•.r ara.;anli � � $ HUM6RELLA LIAR I CCCUREACH OCCURRENCEEXCESS LIAR CLAIM . A:GGr� r,,TE s I nen i 1 RE-rea � raa+o s 1 � s N/ORKERS COMPENSATION I'SYAER?UTc AND Eh1PLOYERS'LIABILIT( Y r N ! I `R ANY PROPRIETOR-PARTNERIEXECLMVE OFFICEWE:ISER EXCLUDEO? fN NIA BL cRC[- uet`IQhr $ - (Mandatory in NH) rEsrCOnPder ' E.L. DISEASE - 2A ENIFLOYEE S QGtde1d0GPFAkTIONS beJcw E.L. DISEASE -POLICY UFAT ' S A Professional Liab. 1 tSM903918 11/17/2014 11/17/2015 Aggregate 2,000,000 RetroDalte:11119/g1 CLAIMS MADE $1M EA. CLAIM pad 2,500 DESCRIPTION OF OPERATIONS f LOCATICNS I VEHICLES (ACORD 101, Additional Remarks Schedule, may be attached if meta space Is required) The City of Costa Mesa and its elected and appointed boards, officers, agets, and employees are named as additional insureds as respects to gezeral liability policy limits per endorsement attached to the policy. FICATE HOLD CITYCM- SHOULD ANY CF THE ABOVE DESCRIBED POLICIES HE CANCELLED BEFORE City of Costa Mesa THE EXPIRATION DATE THEREOF, NOTICE WILL BE DELIVERED IN PO Box 1200 ACCORDANCE WITH THE POLICY PROVISIONS, Costa Mesa, CA 92628-1200 AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE © 1988-2014 ACORD CORPORATION. All rights reserved_ ACORD 25 (2014/01) The ACORD name and logo are registered marks of ACORD POLICYHOLDER COPY SG P.O. BOX 8192, PLEASANTON, CA 94588 CERTIFICATE OF WORKERS' COMPENSATION INSURANCE ISSUE DATE: 01-22-2015 CITY OF COSTA MESA SG 77 FAIR OR COSTA MESA CA 92626-6520 GROUP: POLICY NU'v18ER: 0653723-2014 CERTIFICATE. 10: 45 CERTIFICATE EXPIRES: 10-01-2015 10-01-2014/10-01-2015 This is to certify that we have issued a valid Workers' Conpensa:icn insurance policy in a form apprdved by `,:-te California Insurance Cemmisstoner to the employer named below for the policy period indicated. This Policy is not subject to cancellation by the Fund except upon 30 days advance written notice to the employer. We will also give YOLI 30 clays advance notice should this policy be cancelled prior to its normal expiration. This c rtificaae of insurance is not an insurance policy and does not amend, extend or alter the eoverace afforded by the policy listed herein. Notwithstanding any requirement, terns or condition of any contract or ether document with respect to Which This certificate of insurance may be issued or to which it may pertain, the insurance afforded by the policy described herein is subject to of) Lye te=s, excfusiors, and conditions, of such policy. Authorized Representative President and CEO E.MPLOYER'S LIABILITY LIMIT INCLUDING DEFENSE COSTS: 51.000.000 PER nCC€JRRFNCP_ ENDtPSEI1ENT ""001a ENTITLED ADDITIONAL INSURED EMPLOYER EFFECTIVE 2015-01-22 IS ATTACHED TO AND FORMS A PART OF THIS POLICY. NAME OF ADDITIONAL INSURED: CITY OF COSTA MESA ENDORSEMENT ;'1600 - RUSSELL LIEDHOLM, PRES,Sr-C,TRES - EXCLUDED. ENDORSEMENT =2065 ENTITLED CERTIFICATE HOLDERS' NOTICE EFFECTIVE 10-01-1990 IS ATTACHED TO AND FORMS A PART OF THIS POLICY. =iu1F -0YcR CALIFORNIA FORENSIC PHLEBOTOMY INC. SG 27762 ANTONIO PKWY STE Li -647 LADERA RANCH CA 926694 [P1 s,SGj 4aEv.7-2es41 PRINTED : 01-22-2015 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT MEETING DATE: MARCH 17, 2015 SUBJECT: BRENTWOOD PARK, PHASE II, CITY PROJECT NO. 14-17 DATE: MARCH 5, 2015 ITEM NUMBER: CC -1 1 FROM: PUBLIC SERVICES DEPARTMENT/ENGINEERING DIVISION PRESENTATION ERNESTO MUNOZ, PUBLIC SERVICES DIRECTOR BY: FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: FARIBA FAZELI, CITY ENGINEER, (714) 754-5335 RECOMMENDATION Reject all bids and re -advertise the project. BACKGROUND The Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF) provides matching grants to state and local governments for recreation planning, acquisition and development. On May 16, 2012, the Public Services Department captured a $294,250 grant for the development of the Brentwood Park Master Plan improvements. The scope of work for this project consists of constructing a decomposed granite trail, fitness stations, a landscaping and irrigation system, and a picnic area. ANALYSIS On December 8, 2014, the City Clerk received and opened three (3) bids for the Brentwood Park Project 14-17. Two of the bids have been determined to be non-responsive bids due to clerical and mathematical errors. The lowest responsive bid was from Kasa Construction, Inc., Chino, in the amount of $811,815 and was 225% greater than the Engineer's estimate of $360,000. Re -advertisement of the project will not only allow other potential bidders to submit bids for the project, but will also allow those bidders who submitted incomplete proposals a chance to submit responsive bids. ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED The City Council may opt to cancel the project, withdraw the project from the Land and Water Conservation Fund program, and return all funds received to date for the design of the project. FISCAL REVIEW Funding for this project is provided by a $294,250 LCWF grant from the California Department of Parks and Recreation with a $294,250 match of City Park Development Funds allocated in Fiscal Year 2012-2013. Approximately $92,000 has been expended on the design, $37,150 of which has been reimbursed by the California Department of Parks and Recreation. Additional funds are being requested this upcoming fiscal year to complete the project. LEGAL REVIEW California Public Contract Code Section 20166 allows the legislative body, at its discretion, to reject any bids presented for a project and to re -advertise the project at a future date. CONCLUSION It is recommended that the City Council reject all bids for the Brentwood Park Project No. 14-17 and authorize the Public Services Department to re -advertise at a future date. ERNESTO MUNOZ FARIBA FAZELI Public Services Director City Engineer DISTRIBUTION: Chief Executive Officer Assistant Chief Executive Officer City Attorney City Clerk Staff File Cl T Y COUNCIL A GENDA REPORT MEETING DATE: MARCH 17, 2015 ITEM NUMBER: CC -1 2 SUBJECT: ENERGY PARTNERSHIP CONTRACT EXTENSIONS BETWEEN SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON AND SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA GAS AND THE CITY OF COSTA MESA FOR 2015-2016. DATE: FEBRUARY 27, 2015 FROM: CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICE PRESENTATION DANIEL K. BAKER, PUBLIC AFFAIRS MANAGER BY: FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: DAN BAKER (714) 754-5156 RECOMMENDATION: • Approve and authorize the Mayor and City CEO to execute the "Second Amendment" to the Agreement to Jointly Deliver the 2010-2012 Orange County Energy Leader Partnership Program with Southern California Edison Company; and, • Approve and authorize the Mayor and City CEO to execute the "Second Amendment" to the Agreement to Jointly Deliver the 2010-2012 Orange County Energy Leader Partnership Program with Southern California Gas Company and adjacent Orange County cities; and, • Authorize the City CEO to execute any subsequent documents approved as to form by the City Attorney necessary to advance, manage or complete Energy Leader Partnership activities. BACKGROUND: The City of Costa Mesa entered into a Local Government Energy Action partnership in 2009. The City subsequently replaced that agreement in 2010, with both Southern California Edison (SCE) and Southern California Gas Company (SCG) for Program Year 2010-2012 and approved first amendments to the agreements for program years 2013- 2014. The second amendments will continue the program through 2016. ANALYSIS: SCE and SCG partnered with Costa Mesa and other adjacent Orange County Cities in 2010 through 2012 to implement a local government energy efficiency partnership. The partnership framework provides enhanced incentives for energy saving projects in City facilities, technical assistance, marketing, education and outreach funding to support Costa Mesa's energy and sustainability efforts in the community. The funds are Public Goods charge funds that SCE and SCG are required by the Public Utilities Commission (PUC) to collect. SCE administers these funds with PUC oversight to increase energy efficiency, eliminating the need to build new power plants. These contract amendments will extend the effectiveness of existing and planned Capital Improvement Projects that increase energy efficiency. The PUC approved extending this program through 2014 and subsequent amendments to the original agreements were approved in 2013. The PUC recently extended the program through 2015. Over the course of the program, the City has received nearly one hundred thousand ($100,000) in incentive funding for projects including interior lighting upgrades, LED lighting retrofits, chiller upgrades and City Hall and the police department. These extensions will assist the City by providing better information about how to prioritize energy efficiency upgrades, reduce annual maintenance costs, increase cost savings, conserve resources and reduce green house gas emissions. Additionally, it allows the City to gain access to additional grant funding provided by the California Energy Commission that is only available to city's participating in energy partnerships. The overall program strategy is to continue to partner with SCE and SCG to provide energy information, and to identify and implement sustainable energy efficiency activities. The City and its energy partners will leverage the strengths of each other to cost effectively deliver energy and demand savings. If approved, these agreements will allow the City to continue to be reimbursed for Kilowatt hours saved for municipal retrofit projects as well as have access to a number of other potential grant opportunities that Edison and Southern California Gas routinely solicits. Additionally, the agreements will allow the City to receive additional financial incentives for a number of upcoming energy projects that include lighting upgrades for both the Tennis Center and safety lighting at street intersections. ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED: An alternate consideration is for the City to not reenter into the partnership agreements. FISCAL REVIEW: By entering into these agreements, the City of Costa Mesa will benefit from additional funding to supplement its energy efficiency goals that are provided to participating members of the partnership. LEGAL REVIEW: Legal has reviewed the documents and approved them as to form. DANIEL K. BAKER Public Affairs Manager ATTACHMENTS: 1 Southern California Edison Extension Agreement 2 Southern California Gas Company Extension Agreement Attachment 1 SECOND AMENDMENT THIS SECOND AMENDMENT ("SECOND AMENDMENT") TO THE AGREEMENT TO JOINTLY DELVER THE 2010-2012 ENERGY LEADER PARTNERSHIP PROGRAM dated January 1, 2010 (the "Agreement") is effective as of January 1, 2015 (the "Second Amendment Effective Date") by and between SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANY ("SCE"), AND the City of Costa Mesa ("The City"). Terms not otherwise defined herein shall have the meaning ascribed to them in the Agreement. SCE may be referred to individually herein as the "Utility". The Utility and the City may be referred to herein individually as a "Party" or collectively as the "Parties." RECITALS WHEREAS, the Parties previously executed the Agreement effective January 1, 2010 and subsequently amended the Agreement to extend its term through December 31, 2014 in accordance with the applicable decisions of the California Public Utilities Commission ("Commission"); WHEREAS, on November 14, 2013, the Utility submitted its application ("2015 Application") for the implementation of energy efficiency programs to be delivered to California utility customers for the years 2015, which included the a continuation of the Orange County Cities Program through 2015("2015 Program"); WHEREAS, on [October 16, 2014,] the Commission issued its Decision [D.14-10-016] approving the continuation of the Energy Efficiency Partnership Programs, which includes the 2015 Program, and the Parties desire to extend the Agreement through 2015 under the terms and conditions set forth in the Agreement, except as otherwise provided in this Second Amendment; and WHEREAS, the Parties desire to further amend the Agreement as necessary to provide an authorized budget for the 2015 Program and to update the Agreement as required to reflect the extended 2015 Program cycle. NOW THEREFORE, for valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, the Parties agree as follows: 1. To the extent applicable, any reference in the Agreement, as amended, to the "2010-2012 Program" shall also hereby include the 2015 Program. SCE CONFIDENTIAL 1 of 5 2. Section 11 of the Agreement is hereby deleted in its entirety and replaced with the following: 11. END DATE FOR PROGRAM AND ADMINISTRATIVE ACTIVITIES Unless this Agreement is terminated pursuant to Section 25 below, or unless otherwise agreed to by the Parties or so ordered by the Commission, the Parties shall complete all Program Administrative activities (as defined in the PIP) and all reporting requirements by no later than March 31, 2016, and all Direct Implementation and Marketing & Outreach activities by no later than December 31, 2015. 3. Section 12 of the Agreement is hereby deleted in its entirety and replaced with the following: 12. FINAL INVOICES The City must submit final invoices to the Utility no later than March 31, 2016. 4. Section 25.1 of the Agreement is hereby deleted in its entirety and replaced with the following: 25.1 Term. This Agreement shall be effective as of the Effective Date. Subject to Section 37, the Agreement shall continue in effect until June 30, 2016 unless otherwise terminated in accordance with the provisions of Section 25.2 or 30 below. 5. Section 26 of the Agreement is hereby deleted in its entirety and replaced with the following: 26. WRITTEN NOTICES Any written notice, demand or request required or authorized in connection with this Agreement, shall be deemed properly given if delivered in person or sent by facsimile, nationally recognized overnight courier, or first class mail, postage prepaid, to the address specified below, or to another address specified in writing by a Party as follows: City of Costa Mesa Dan Baker Management Analyst 77 Fair Drive Costa Mesa, CA SCE: Southern California Edison Company Bernard Adebayo-Ige Program Manager 1515 Walnut Grove Avenue Rosemead, CA 91770 Notices shall be deemed received (a) if personally or hand -delivered, upon the date of delivery to the address of the person to receive such notice if delivered before 5:00 p.m. PST (or PDT, as applicable), or otherwise on the Business Day following personal delivery; (b) if mailed, three (3) Business Days after the date the notice is postmarked; (c) if by facsimile, upon electronic confirmation of transmission, followed by telephone notification of transmission by the noticing Party; or (d) if by overnight courier, on the Business Day following delivery to the overnight courier within the time limits set by that courier for next -day delivery. 6. This Second Amendment may be executed in one or more counterparts, each of which shall be deemed to be an original, but all of which together shall be deemed to be one and the same instrument. SCE CONFIDENTIAL 2 of 5 7. Exhibit B-1 and B-2 (ENERGY LEADER PARTNERSHIP PROGRAM 2010-12 GOALS & PARTNER BUDGET) of the Agreement are hereby deleted in their entirety and replaced with the version of Exhibit B-1 (ENERGY LEADER PARTNERSHIP PROGRAM 2015 GOALS & PARTNER BUDGET FOR The City -attached to this Second Amendment, which attached versions are incorporated herein by reference and made a part of the Agreement. 8. General. From and after the Second Amendment Effective Date, any reference to the Agreement contained in any notice, request, certificate or other instrument, document or agreement shall be deemed to mean the Agreement, as amended by any prior amendments to the Agreement, and this Second Amendment. In the event of any conflict between the Agreement, as amended, and this Second Amendment, this Second Amendment shall prevail. All remaining provisions of the Agreement shall remain unchanged and in full force and effect. Each party is fully responsible for ensuring that the person signing this Second Amendment on that party's behalf has the requisite legal authority to do so. [SIGNATURES FOLLOW ON NEXT PAGE] SCE CONFIDENTIAL 3 of 5 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties hereto have caused this Second Amendment to be executed by their duly authorized representatives as of the Second Amendment Effective Date. The City: Citv of Costa Mesa By: Name Printed: Tom Hatch Title: CEO Date: SCE: SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANY By: Name Printed: Kevin Payne Title: Senior Vice President, Customer Service Date: SCE CONFIDENTIAL 4 of 5 EXHIBIT B-1 ENERGY LEADER PARTNERSHIP PROGRAM 2015 GOALS & PARTNER BUDGET FOR ORANGE COUNTY CITIES Program Cycle Partner Budget and Goals: 2015 Energy Savings Goal Maximum Partner Maximum Partner Maximum Partner 245 Budget Budget Budget Direct Implementation 2013' 2014' 2015 Total: $766,851 $766,852 $850,183 Incentive: $441,851 $441,852 $634,183 Non -Incentive: (Marketing & Outreach, Technical Assistance, Direct Implementation and $325,000 $325,000 $216,000 Strategic Plan) 2015 Energy Savings Goal kWh kW 1,600,000 245 Budget Category 20152 Administrative $70,000 Marketing & Outreach $36,000 Technical Assistance $80,000 Direct Implementation $30,000 Incentive $634,183 Strategic Plan $_ Total Partner Budget $850,183 ' 2013 and 2014 Budget figures represent the total Authorized Budget, not the available remaining budget. The 2015 Budget was approved by the CPUC to be the third year of the 2013-2014 Program. Unspent funds from 2013- 2014 may be carried over for use in 2015, in addition to the 2015 Budget. 2 Budget category breakdowns are estimates of amounts that will be spent in each category. Actual Partner expenses may be different, to the extent permitted by program rules and applicable CPUC decisions SCE CONFIDENTIAL 5 of 5 SCE CONFIDENTIAL 6 of 5 Attachment 2 SECOND AMENDMENT THIS SECOND AMENDMENT ("SECOND AMENDMENT") TO THE AGREEMENT TO JOINTLY DELIVER THE 2010-2012 ORANGE COUNTY CITIES ENERGY EFFICIENCY PARTNERSHIP PROGRAM dated January 1, 2010 (the "Agreement" or the "Program") is effective as of January 1, 2015 (the "Second Amendment Effective Date") as defined below by and among SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA GAS COMPANY ("SCG") AND THE CITY OF COSTA MESA, THE CITY OF FOUNTAIN VALLEY, THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH, THE CITY OF WESTMINSTER and THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH (the "Cities"). Terms not otherwise defined herein shall have the meaning ascribed to them in the Agreement. SCG and the Cities may be referred to herein individually as a "Party" and collectively as the 'Parties." RECITALS WHEREAS, SCG and the Cities previously executed the Agreement effective January 1, 2010 and subsequently amended the Agreement to extend its term through December 3 1, 2014 in accordance with the applicable decisions of the California Public Utilities Commission; WHEREAS, on March 26, 2014, the Utility submitted its application ("2015 Application") for the implementation of energy efficiency programs to be delivered to California utility customers for the years 2015, which includes the continuation of the Orange County Cities Partnership Program through 2015 ("2015 Program"); WHEREAS, on October 24, 2014, the Commission issued a Final Decision (D.14-10-046) approving the continuation of the Energy Efficiency Programs through 2015 (the "2015 Program"), and the Parties wish to extend the Agreement through 2015 under the terms and conditions set forth in the Agreement; and WHEREAS, the Parties desire to farther amend the Agreement as necessary to provide an authorized budget for the 2015 Program and to update the Agreement as required to reflect the extended 2015 Program cycle. NOW THEREFORE, for valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, the Parties agree as follows: 1. Effective Date and Conditions Precedent to Effectiveness: The "Second Amendment Effective Date" shall be the date by which all of the following conditions precedent have been met: a. All Parties have signed this Second Amendment; and b. The Commission has issued a Final Decision approving the Utility's respective 2015 Program as filed, or in a form acceptable to the Utility in its sole discretion. 2. Except as provided herein, and to the extent applicable, any reference in the Agreement to the "2010- 2012 Program" shall hereby include both the 2013-2014 Program and the 2015 Program. Second Amendment lofll 3. Section 1.1 of the Agreement is hereby deleted in its entirety and replaced with the following: 11. END DATE FOR PROGRAM AND ADMINISTRATIV E ACTIVITIES Unless this Agreement is terminated pursuant to Section 25 (TERM AND TERMINATION), or unless otherwise agreed to by the Parties or so ordered by the Commission, the Parties shall complete all Program Administrative activities (as defined in the PIP) and all reporting requirements by no later than March 31, 2016, and all Direct Implementation and Marketing & Outreach activities by no later than December 31, 2015. 4. Section 12 of the Agreement is hereby deleted in its entirety and replaced with the following: 12. FINAL INVOICES Each City must submit final invoices to SCG no later than March 31, 2016. 5. Section 25.1 of the Agreement is hereby deleted in its entirety and replaced with the following: 25.1 Term. This Agreement shall be effective as of the Effective Date. Subject to Section 37, the Agreement shall continue in effect until June 30, 201 6 unless otherwise terminated in accordance with the provisions of Section 25.2 or 30 of the Agreement. 6. Section 26 of the Agreement is hereby deleted in its entirety and replaced with the following: 26. WRITTEN NOTICES Any written notice, demand or request required or authorized in connection with this Agreement, shall be deemed properly given if delivered in person or sent by facsimile, nationally recognized overnight courier, or first class mail, postage prepaid, to the address specified below, or to another address specified in writing by a Party as follows: The OC Cities: City of Costa Mesa Daniel Baker 77 Fair Drive Costa Mesa, CA 92648 Tel: (714) 754-5156 Email: daniel.baker@costamesaca.gov City of Fountain Valley Matt Mogensen, Management Analyst 10200 Slater Ave. Fountain Valley, CA 92708 Tel: (714) 593-4412 Email: Matt.Mogensen@fountainvalley.org Second Amendment SCG: Southern California Gas Company Ann Teall, Program Advisor 555 W. Fifth Street, GT20134 Los Angeles, CA 90013 Tel: (213) 244-5843 Email: alcall@scmprautilitics.com 2 of 11 City of Huntington Beach Ken Dills 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Tel: (714) 375-5055 Email: kdills@surfcity-hb.org City of Newport Beach Iris Lee, Senior Civil Engineer 100 Civic Center Drive Newport Beach, CA 92660 Tel: (949) 644-3323 Email: IrisLee@newportbeachca.gov City of Westminster Soroosh Rahbari, Building Official 8200 Westminster Blvd. Westminster, CA 92683 Tel: (714) 898-3311, ext. 250 Email: sorooshr(iDci. westmi nster.ca.us Notices shall be deemed received (a) if personally or hand -delivered, upon the date of delivery to the address of the person to receive such notice if delivered before 5:00 p.m. PST (or PDT, as applicable), or otherwise on the Business Day following personal delivery; (b) if mailed, three (3) Business Days after the date the notice is postmarked; (c) if by facsimile, upon electronic confirmation of transmission, followed by telephone notification of transmission by the noticing Party; or (d) if by overnight courier, on the Business Day following delivery to the overnight courier within the time limits set by that courier for next -day delivery. 7. This Second Amendment may be executed in one or more counterparts, each of which shall be deemed to be an original, but all of which together shall be deemed to be one and the same instrument. 8. Exhibit B (2010-12 ORANGE COUNTY CITIES PARTNERSHIP PROGRAM GOALS AND BUDGET) of the Agreement are hereby deleted in their entirety and replaced with the version of Exhibit B (2013-2015 ORANGE COUNTY CITIES PARTNERSHIP PROGRAM GOALS AND BUDGET) attached to this Second Amendment, which attached version is incorporated herein by reference and made a part of the Agreement. 9. General. From and after the Second Amendment Effective Date, any reference to the Agreement contained in any notice, request, certificate or other instrument, document or agreement shall be deemed to mean the Agreement, as amended by this Second Amendment. In the event of any conflict between the Agreement, as amended, and this Second Amendment, this Second Amendment shall prevail. All remaining provisions of the Agreement shall remain unchanged and in full force and effect. Each party is fully responsible for ensuring that the person signing this Second Amendment on that party's behalf has the requisite legal authority to do so. Second Amendment 3 of 11 [SIGNATURES FOLLOW] IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties hereto have caused this First Amendment to be executed by their duly authorized representatives as of the Second Amendment Effective Date. The Cities: CITY OF COSTA MESA By: By: Name Printed: Stephen Mensinger Name Printed: Thomas R. Hatch Title: Mayor Title: CEO Date: Second Amendment Date: 4 of 11 [SIGNATURES FOLLOW] IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties hereto have caused this First Amendment to be executed by their duly authorized representatives as of the Second Amendment Effective Date. The Cities: CITY OF COSTA MESA By: Name Printed: Stephen Mensinger Title: Mayor Date: By: Name Printed: Thomas R. Hatch Title: CEO Date: Second Amendment 5 of 11 CITY OF FOUNTAIN VALLEY Un Name Printed: Bob Hall Title: City Manager Date: Second Amendment 6 of 11 CaIW961VAIRUIMC KOXI : � a LM Name Printed: Matthew Harper Title: Mayor Date: By: Name Printed: Fred Wilson Title: City Manager Date: Second Amendment 7 of 11 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH LN Name Printed: Dave Kiff Title: City Manager Date: Second Amendment 8 of 11 CITY OF WESTMINSTER By: Name Printed: Mitch Waller Title: City Manager Date: Second Amendment 9 of 11 SCG: SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA GAS COMPANY 0 Name Printed: Daniel Rendler Title: Director, Customer Programs and Assistance Date: Second Amendment 10 of 11 EXHIBIT B 2013-15 Orange County Cities Partnership Program Goals and Budget 2013-2015 Energy Savings (Gross Therms) $425,641 2014 2013 2014 2015 3-YearTotal SCG 40,000 Therms 40,000 Therms 40,000 Therms 120,000 Therms Other non -resource goals are contained in the SCG PIP in Exhibit A. SCG 2013-2015 OC Cities Partnership Total Non -Incentive Budget $425,641 2014 SCG Authorized Budget 2013-2014 (Previous) 2015 2013-2015 Total Budget $10,000 Marketing & Outreach $7,000 $7,000 SCG Administrative Other $90,687 $62,233 $152,920 SCG Administrative Overhead $12,949 $7,319 $20,268 Total Utility Authorized Budget $103,636 $69,552 $173,188 OC Cities Authorized Budget $168,302 $84,151 $252,453 2013-15 Total Non -incentive Program Budget $271,938 $153,703 $425,641 Projected Allocations for OC Cities Authorized Budget $252,453 Note: Incentive is a part of SCG Core Program's Incentive Budget. The incentive level is $1.00 per therm for calculated measures or 80% of the equipment cost, whichever is the lesser of the two. Incentives for deemed measures are in accordance with the incentive levels for the applicable SCG Core Programs. Second Amendment 11 of 11 2013 2014 2015 Administration $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 Marketing & Outreach $7,000 $7,000 $7,000 Direct implementation $67,151 $67,151 $67,151 Note: Incentive is a part of SCG Core Program's Incentive Budget. The incentive level is $1.00 per therm for calculated measures or 80% of the equipment cost, whichever is the lesser of the two. Incentives for deemed measures are in accordance with the incentive levels for the applicable SCG Core Programs. Second Amendment 11 of 11 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPOkT MEETING DATE: March 17th, 2015 ITEM NUMBER: CC -13 SUBJECT: APPPOINTMENT OF CITY NEGOTIATORS FOR THE COSTA MESA CITY EMPLOYEES ASSOCIATION MEET AND CONFER RE SALARY REOPENER AND AUTHORIZATION TO PROCEED WITH THE FINANCIAL ANALYSIS OF THE MOU PER THE COIN ORDINANCE DATE: MARCH 5T", 2015 FROM: THOMAS R. HATCH, CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER PRESENTATION THOMAS R. HATCH, CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER BY: FOR FURTHER INFORMATION TAMARA S. LETOURNEAU, ASSISTANT CHIEF CONTACT: EXECUTIVE OFFICER (714) 754-5122 RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the City Council: 1. Designate Tamara Letourneau, Assistant Chief Executive Officer and Laura Kalty, Partner, Liebert Cassidy Whitmore as the City's representatives in negotiations with the Costa Mesa City Employees Association (CMCEA) as to the salary reopener. 2. Authorize staff to have the independent fiscal analysis of the current CMCEA Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) completed per the requirements of the COIN Ordinance. BACKGROUND AND ANLYSIS: The current Memorandum of Understanding between the City and CMCEA specifies a "singular reopener." The negotiations shall be limited to base salary only, Article 3 — Salaries and Wages, 3.1 states: "...Therefore, on or about June 1, 2015, the parties shall convene the meet and confer process in this singular regard'." Per the COIN ordinance, the City Council must designate a principal representative and at least one representative on behalf of the City to represent the City in negotiations. The ordinance states that "in an effort to avoid inherent conflicts of interest, the principal representative negotiating on behalf of the city 1) shall not be an employee of the City, 2) shall not be a member of any retirement system providing a defined benefit to the member, and 3) shall have a demonstrated expertise in negotiating labor and employment agreements on behalf of municipalities. The City Council shall designate one or more executive employees to be present during negotiations and to assist the principal negotiator as the city council and/or principal negotiator deem appropriate." Staff recommends that the City Council designate Tamara Letourneau, Assistant Chief Executive Officer and Laura Kalty, Partner, Liebert Cassidy Whitmore as the City's representatives in negotiations with the CMCEA. Further, Section 2-237 of the COIN Ordinance requires that an independent auditor complete a fiscal analysis of the fiscal impacts of the current MOU. In addition, Section 2-237 (b) states "the report and findings of the independent auditor shall be completed and made available for review by the City Council and the public at least 30 days prior to consideration by the city council of an initial meet and confer proposal to be presented to any recognized employee organization regarding negotiation of an amended, extended, successor, or original memorandum of understanding." To that end, staff recommends that the City Council authorize staff to have the independent fiscal analysis of the current CMCEA MOU completed per the requirements of the COIN Ordinance. ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED: An alternative is to propose other designated representatives and authorize the completion of the fiscal analysis. FISCAL REVIEW: The funds are budgeted in the General Fund in the Human Resources Division budget for outside legal counsel for negotiations. The cost to complete the fiscal analysis by the independent auditor is approximately $2,500 and is budgeted in the General Fund in the Finance Department budget. CONCLUSION: Staff recommends that the Mayor and City Council formally approve Ms. Letoumeau and Ms. Kalty to represent the City in negotiations with the CMCEA as to the salary reopener and direct staff to have the independent fiscal analysis completed of the current CMCEA MOU. TAMARA S. LETOURNEAU THOMAS R. HATCH Assistant Chief Executive Officer Chief Executive Officer -AVA THOMAS DUARTE City Attorney DISTRIBUTION: Chief Executive Officer City Clerk STEVE DUNIVENT Interim Finance Director 2 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA /DA REPOR T MEETING DATE: March 17, 2015 ITEM NUMBER: CC -14 SUBJECT: Amendment to Joint Agreement for the Operation, Maintenance and Financial Management of the Orange County 800 Megahertz Countywide Coordinated Communications System DATE: March 9, 2015 FROM: POLICE DEPARTMENT — SUPPORT SERVICES DIVISION PRESENTATION BY: KEITH DAVIS, LIEUTENANT — SUPPORT SERVICES DIVISION FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: LT. KEITH DAVIS — 714-754-5660 RECOMMENDATIONS: Approve the terms of the Amendment to the Joint Agreement for the Operation, Maintenance, and Financial Management of the 800 Megahertz Countywide Coordinated Communications System. BACKGROUND: The City of Costa Mesa, as a member of the 800 Megahertz Countywide Coordinated Communications System (CCCS), agrees to the joint management and governance of the shared communication system. This amended agreement addresses the estimated cost of upgrading aging backbone equipment through a cost-sharing allocation and memorializes the City's commitment to funding of the Next Generation Project. ANALYSIS: The City of Costa Mesa, along with 33 other Orange County municipalities, the County of Orange, and the Orange County Fire Authority, jointly govern and finance the 800 MHz Countywide Coordinated Communications System (CCCS). The 800 MHz CCCS provides a fully interoperable communications network that is utilized by several departments at the City, including Fire, Police, Municipal Operations/Utilities, and Public Works. The 800 MHz system is a nationwide resource that has provided reliable communications in time of crisis for Public Safety and Public Works agencies. The rise in the growth of cell phone use has resulted in an increase in radio interference from cellular sites, resulting in missed or poor transmissions nationwide, including the County's public safety network. This interference is because the cellular frequencies are mixed with the public safety 800 MHz frequencies. The Sheriffs Communications Division worked closely with local cellular companies to alleviate some of this interference and to monitor future cellular installations, but was unable to fully address the interference issues. On October 29, 2004, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), mandated a national program that involves the 1 reallocation of frequencies in the 800 MHz band so that the cellular frequencies are separated from the public safety frequencies ("FCC Order"). The extensive County 800 MHz radio communication system is near its expected end of life and requires a complete replacement of both the large backbone equipment and the individual radios. The FCC Order requires that any replacement system must be P25 700MHz compatible to ensure clear communications that will work across County agencies and provide interoperability with FEMA and the Department of Homeland Security. The CCCS member agencies, including the City of Costa Mesa, engaged in significant discussions as to how to take on this upcoming replacement project and have decided on a four year phased cost allocation beginning in FY14-15 and continuing through FY17-18. The terms of the agreement and estimated cost sharing allocations are outlined in the Amendment to the Joint Agreement attached to this report. ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED: No other alternatives were considered as this communication system is the only available system that fully integrates police, fire and public services communications for all county agencies. FISCAL REVIEW: The City's estimated share of this system is $5,308,909 and there is a plan to set aside funds for this system annually over four years. Funds in the amount of $1,584,000 were set aside in the FY 2014-15 adopted budget. Funds in the amount of $1,239,909 will be requested in the FY 2015-15 recommended budget and the following two fiscal' year budgets. CONCLUSION: Approval of this amendment will help ensure the City's continued participation in this vital communications system. KEITH DAVIS Lieutenant STEPHEN DUNIVENT Interim Finance Director Attachment Amendment to Joint Agreement -/1Z 6- niw, I f I �/ V t 1 4 11L - ONALD E. Lt7W NBERG Interim Chief of Police THOMAI R E City Attorney 2 AMENDMENT TO JOINT AGREEMENT FOR THE OPERATION, MAINTENANCE AND FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT OF THE ORANGE COUNTY 800 MEGAHERTZ COUNTYWIDE COORDINATED COMMUNICATIONS SYSTEM THIS AMENDMENT ("Amendment") is entered into on , 2015 by and between the Parties listed on Exhibit A, attached hereto, which are sometimes individually referred to as "Party" or collectively referred to as the "Parties." RECITALS A. On November 23, 2004, the Parties executed that certain document entitled Joint Agreement for the Operation, Maintenance and Financial Management of the Orange County 800 Megahertz Countywide Coordinated Communications System ("Agreement"), which provides for the management and governance of the 800 MHz Countywide Coordinated Communications System ("800 MHz CCCS"). B. The 800 MHz CCCS requires significant enhancement in order to extend the life of the system. C. Pursuant to Section 15.10 of the Agreement, the Governance Committee and the County have developed a long-range implementation plan to extend the CCCS, and have developed a scope of work, which includes all the activities, infrastructure and project schedule information for fiscal years 2014-19 described on Exhibit B, attached hereto ("System Extension"). D. The Governance Committee and County have also developed the overall estimated cost of the System Extension, including each Party's estimated funding share by fiscal year described on Exhibit C, attached hereto. E. A Party's funding plan for the System Extension may consist of one or more of the following: 1) a Party's cash contribution, 2) a Party or a group of Parties financing all or a portion of the System Extension through the issuance of tax exempt bonds or other public financing mechanisms, and/or 3) a Party or group of Parties financing all or a portion of the System Extension through the County approved System Extension vendor. F. The Parties desire to amend the Agreement to provide their commitment to the System Extension and describe their implementation and funding obligations. G. This Amendment has been approved by the Governance Committee. AGREEMENT NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing recitals and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the Parties hereby agree as follows: Page 1 of 11 1. Implementation Obligations. The Parties hereby commit to fund and implement the System Extension as described on Exhibit B and Exhibit C. a. California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA"). The County shall be the lead agency for purposes of CEQA and shall obtain all necessary approvals for the System Extension. b. Party Cost Share. The Parties intend to implement and fund the System Extension over several years beginning in fiscal year 2014-15 through fiscal year 2018-19. Each Party is responsible for its fair share contribution to the System Extension. The total estimated budget for the System Extension and each Party's fair share contribution is depicted on Exhibit C ("Cost Share"). A Party's Cost Share is determined by the number of subscriber radios used by the Party on the CCCS, as well as the Party's proportionate share of the System Extension dedicated to System Backbone. Each Party shall pay its total Cost Share in five fiscal year payments beginning in fiscal year 2014-15 through fiscal year 2018-19 in accordance with the procedures in Subsection (c) below. Each Parry acknowledges that its Cost Share for the System Extension is an estimate and is expressed as a not to exceed amount. Each Party's Cost Share will be based on an actual quote by a third party vendor who will perform the System Extension under a contract or series of contracts approved and managed by the County ("Contractor"). A Party's actual Cost Share amount will be determined prior to the beginning of each fiscal year in which it is due and will be based on the Contractor's scope of work for the respective fiscal year. Therefore, the Cost Share depicted on Exhibit C may change, and may be periodically updated by the Parties to reflect any changed equipment or authorized System Extension modification expenses. C. Invoicing & Payment. The County will calculate the actual Cost Share amount due the following fiscal year, and will invoice each Party by July 1. Each Party shall pay its respective Cost Share to the County within thirty (30) days of the start of the fiscal year. A Party is exempt from the payment procedures of this Subsection Lc for the relevant fiscal year if it has: i. Executed a binding agreement with the County approved Contractor, agreeing to pay or finance its Cost Share through the Contractor directly, or ii. Executed a binding agreement with the County agreeing to jointly finance its Cost Share. d. Cost Share Responsibility. Upon execution of this Amendment, each Party is responsible for its actual Cost Share regardless of the form and manner of payment described herein, such that the Party cannot terminate its Cost Share obligation for any reason. In the event of a withdrawal from the system in accordance with Section 20 of the Agreement or in the case of a default for failure to pay its Cost Share in accordance with this Amendment, each Party remains obligated to pay to County the Party's outstanding Cost Share as that obligation becomes due. Should any Party fail to pay its respective Cost Share when due, the County shall take action as is appropriate to obtain such payment. Nothing herein shall be construed as the County's exclusive remedy for the remediation of defaults by a Party or Parties, Page 2 of 11 and the County reserves the right to pursue any and all available rights and remedies at law or in equity. e. County Trust Account. The County shall deposit all Cost Share contributions into a trust account that is managed solely for the purpose of the System Extension. 2. System Extension Administration. The Orange County Sheriff -Coroner Department/Communications & Technology Division shall administer all agreements for the System Extension, and regularly report such progress to the Governance Committee. 3. Participating Agencies. The Parties hereby update the list of Participating Agencies described on Exhibit D, attached hereto, which shall replace in its entirety Exhibit C of the Agreement. Participating Agencies will continue to contribute to overall backbone costs through the payment of a separate and established entry fee for every radio added to the system. 4. Capitalized Terms. Any capitalized terms not defined herein shall have the meanings set forth in the Agreement. 5. Counterparts. This Amendment may be executed in two or more counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original, but all of which together shall constitute but one and the same instrument. 6. Full Force. Except as expressly set forth herein, the Agreement shall remain unmodified and in full force and effect. Page 3 of 11 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have executed this Amendment as of the date first written above. THE COUNTY OF ORANGE, a political subdivision of the State of California By: Chairman of the Board of Supervisors SIGNED AND CERTIFIED THAT A COPY OF THIS DOCUMENT HAS BEEN DELIVERED TO THE CHAIRMAN OF THE BOARD M. Clerk of the Board of Supervisors County of Orange, California APPROVED AS TO FORM: COUNTY COUNSEL APPROVED AS TO FORM: CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE Date: By: Thomas Duarte City Attorney ATTEST: Date: By: Brenda Green City Clerk Page 4 of 11 CITY OF COSTA MESA, a California municipal corporation Date: WE Stephen Mensinger Mayor EXHIBIT A PARTIES TO THE AMENDMENT Page 5 of 11 RESPONSIBLE ENTITY ADMINISTRATOR ADDRESS PHONE # Aliso Viejo City Manager 12 Journey, Suite 100 949/425-2512 Aliso Viejo, CA 92656-5335 200 S. Anaheim Blvd. Anaheim City Manager 714/765-5162 Anaheim, CA 92805 City Manager 1 Civic Center Circle 714/990-7770 Brea Brea, CA 92821-5732 6650 Beach Blvd. Buena Park City Manager 714/562-3550 Buena Park, CA 90620 77 Fair Drive Costa Mesa City Manager 714/754-5328 Costa Mesa, CA 92626 5275 Orange Avenue Cypress City Manager 714/229-6688 Cypress, CA 90630 33282 Golden Lantern, Suite 203 Dana Point City Manager 949/248-3513 Dana Point, CA 92629 10200 Slater Avenue Fountain Valley City Manager 714/593-4410 Fountain Valley, CA 92708 303 W. Commonwealth Ave Fullerton City Manager Fullerton, CA 92832 714/738-6310 11222 Acacia Parkway Garden Grove City Manager 714/741-5100 Garden Grove, CA 92840 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach City Administrator 714/536-5575 Huntington Beach, CA 92648 1 Civic Center Plaza Irvine City Manager Irvine, CA 92623-9575 949/724-6246 201 E. La Habra Blvd. La Habra City Manager 562/905-9701 La Habra, CA 90633 Page 5 of 11 Page 6 of 11 RESPONSIBLE ENTITY ADMINISTRATOR ADDRESS PHONE # 7822 Walker Street La Palma City Manager 714/690-3333 La Palma, CA 90623 505 Forest Avenue Laguna Beach City Manager 949/497-0704 Laguna Beach, CA 92651 24035 El Toro Road Laguna Hills City Manager 949/707-2610 Laguna Hills, CA 92653 27801 La Paz Road Laguna Niguel City Manager 949/362-4300 Laguna Niguel, CA 92677 24264 El Toro Road Laguna Woods City Manager 949/639-0525 Laguna Woods, CA 92653 25550 Commercentre Drive Lake Forest City Manager 949/461-3410 Lake Forest, CA 92630 3191 Katella Avenue 562/431-3538 Los Alamitos City Manager Los Alamitos, CA 90720 ext. 201 Metro Cities Fire 201 S. Anaheim Blvd., Suite 302 Manager 714/765-4077 Authority Anaheim, CA 92805 200 Civic Center Mission Viejo City Manager 949/470-3051 Mission Viejo, CA 92691 3300 Newport Blvd. Newport Beach City Manager 949/644-3000 Newport Beach, CA 92663-3884 300 East Chapman Ave. Orange City Manager 714/744-2222 Orange, CA 92866 Orange County Fire I Fire Authority Road Fire Chief 714/573-6010 Authority Irvine, CA 92602 333 W. Santa Ana Blvd. Orange, County of CEO 714/834-6200 Santa Ana, CA 92701 Page 6 of 11 Page 7 of 11 RESPONSIBLE ENTITY ADMINISTRATOR ADDRESS PHONE # 401 East Chapman Ave Placentia City Administrator Placentia, CA 92870 714/993-8117 Rancho Santa City Manager 22112 El Paseo 949/635-1800 Margarita Rancho Santa Margarita, CA 92688 ext. 210 100 Avenida Presidio San Clemente City Manager 949/361-8322 San Clemente, CA 92672 32400 Paseo Adelanto San Juan Capistrano City Administrator 949/443-6317 San Juan Capistrano, CA 92675 20 Civic Center Plaza Santa Ana City Manager 714/647-5200 Santa Ana, CA 92701 211 8th Street 562/431-2527 Seal Beach City Manager Seal Beach, CA 90740 ext. 300 7800 Katella Avenue 714/379-9222 Stanton City Manager Stanton, CA 90680-3162 ext. 240 300 Centennial Way Tustin City Manager Tustin, CA 92780 714/573-3010 17855 Santiago Blvd. Villa Park City Manager 714/998-1500 Villa Park, CA 92861 West Cities Police West -Comm 911 Seal Beach Blvd. 562/594-7243 Communications Administrator Seal Beach, CA 90740 8200 Westminster Blvd. 714/898-3311 Westminster City Manager Westminster, CA 92683 ext. 402 4845 Casa Loma Avenue Yorba Linda City Manager 714/961-7110 Yorba Linda, CA 92886 Page 7 of 11 EXHIBIT B GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF SYSTEM EXTENSION AND PROJECT SCHEDULE 1.0 Overview The System Extension plan will focus on extending the life of the existing CCCS radio system by systematically replacing end -of -life equipment in strategic phases culminating in an upgrade to P25 compliance with the goal of continuing to provide quality radio communications to the law, fire, lifeguard and public works agencies in Orange County. 2.0 Description of System Extension 2.1 System Backbone — Radio infrastructure equipment that is at or near the end of its expected life will be directly replaced with the current version of the same equipment that will maintain all existing features and functionalities and is able to work with the existing backhaul network. Specifically, this will involve the replacement of 565+ existing Quantar radio base stations and ancillary equipment at 25 radio sites with 800 MHz 3600 baud GTR8000 base stations and ancillary equipment. This will be accomplished in accordance with the following schedule: System Backbone schedule: Northwest Cell = 24 Quantars replaced in 2015 Southwest Cell = 40 Quantars replaced in 2015 Laguna Cell = 33 Quantars replaced in 2016 Moorhead IR Site = 8 Quantars replaced in 2016 North Cell = 105 Quantars replaced in 2016 South Cell = 135 Quantars replaced in 2017 Crystal Cove IR Site = 4 Quantars replaced in 2017 Countywide Cell = 210 Quantars replaced in 2017 Carbon Canyon IR Site = 3 Quantars replaced in 2017 Silverado IR Site = 3 Quantars replaced in 2017 2.2 Law Enforcement Dispatch Consoles — Police Dispatch Gold Elite consoles will be out -of -service by the vendor in 2018 and will need to be replaced prior to 2018 to maintain the existing console priority feature once the system is upgraded to P25. Console priority is a feature unique to law enforcement dispatch and allows dispatch to have the ability to transmit and receive audio simultaneously and is an officer safety necessity. Existing Gold Elite Console equipment will be replaced with its successor console, the MCC7500. Due to the complexity of the replacement at each law dispatch center, only 6 dispatch centers can be upgraded each year. A schedule has been developed to address the 20 law dispatch centers on the system, as shown below. Page 8 of 11 Console schedule: FY14/15 - Loma Ridge, Irvine, Laguna Beach, Huntington Beach FYI 5/16 - Anaheim, Brea, West Comm, Santa Ana, Tustin FYI 6/17 - Orange, Fullerton, Costa Mesa, Garden Grove, Westminster FYI 7/18 - Placentia, La Palma, Newport Beach, Fountain Valley, Buena Park, La Habra 2.3 System Field Equipment — When the System Backbone is upgraded to the P25 standard in FY 2018/2019, all subscriber radio equipment will also need to be P25 capable. Subscriber radios that are capable of being upgraded will need to receive the software/firmware upgrade prior to the backbone upgrade. Older subscriber radio equipment that is not capable of being upgraded to the P25 standard will need to be replaced prior to the P25 upgrade. Each agency will be responsible for the purchase of either replacement radios, or the necessary subscriber upgrade package for upgradable radios. 2.4 P25 Upgrade — When all backbone sites and law dispatch consoles have completed their equipment replacement, the vendor will initiate the necessary equipment and software update to bring the system up to the 7.18 software platform for P25 compliance. This final phase of the System Extension plan is scheduled for FY 2018/2019. Page 9 of 11 EXHIBIT C TOTAL ESTIMATED SYSTEM EXTENSION COST & ESTIMATED PARTY COST SHARE BY FISCAL YEAR itm costs stated neretn are esalma red costs expressed 8snot to exceed amounts saweel to 114111U r,Va4 tlh@ Tuna system design. PARTNERSHIP TOTAL ' Itis recommended thatthe Parhtership co-ordinate a hulk equipmentpurchase in FY 1617. Jarxiiay2015 Page 10 of 11 FY 15-16 Radio Counts CrtyJAgency Cost ESTIMATED COST Partnership Cost CHWASENCY Upgrade Replace 9P25 Capable (Upgade To YAM SoftP25 Hot Upgrade ? --m-) TataI Console Equipment Radia Equipment' FY 15-16 Horth& Lg-. Cells FY 1617 south& Countywide Cell FY 17-18 Remaining Baclb- TOTAL 1. ALISO VIEJO 1.1 21 32 $ $ 138,650 $ 7,028 $ 18,930 $ 43,599 $ 208,206 2 ANAHEIM 432 1,351 1,783 1,928,869 8602644 391,545 1054,758 2,429,268 14407 41 3. BREA 62 302 364 648,137 1,883,300 79 891 215,329 495,936 3,322,593 4. BUENA PARK 76 258 334 569,804 1.635400 73,276. 157582 455,062 2,931,924 5. COSTA MESA 1D5 523 628 684,354 3,258,750 137,966 371,502 855,626 5,344,997 B. CYPRESS 24 170 194 0 1,047,600 42 604 114,763 264,317 1,469,2a5 7. DANAPOINT 95 49 64 0 311,250 14,054 37,860 57,196 450,362 B. FOUNTAIN VALLEY 45 244 249 443,290 1,275,750 54 702 147.299 339,253 2,260,294 9. FULLERTON 125 513 638 501,417 3,221.750 140,141 377418 869250 5909976 10. GARDEN GROVE 115 475 590 369,244 2,932,250 129,608 349,023 W3,852 4,633,972 11.. HUNTING -TON BEACH 452 820 1,272 1,097,718 5439 800 279,398 752,469 1,733,051 9 302,436 12. IRVINE 111 503 614 432,209 3145 650 134.m 3G3,220 w6,551 4,912,509 13. LA MORA 73 190 263 573,584 1,223,950 57 809 155,581 35B,.327 2,369,252 14.1 LA PALMA 31 51 82 166,901 341,650 18,0(18 48,508 111,722 686,789 15.. LA.GUNA BEACH 85 247 332 526,652 1,579,7-50 72 883 196,399 452,337 2,828,021 16. LA.GUNAHILLS 4 41 45 0 250644 9,875 26,620 61311 348,407 17.. LACUNA NIGUEL 9 55 64 0 340,350 14,061 37,860 57,198 479,489 18. LACUNA WOODS 2 4 6 0 26,300 1,330 3,549 8,175 39,354 19. LAKE FOREST 21 67 88 0 426,150 19,325 52,058 119,897 617,429 20. LOS ALAMITOS 15 45 60 0 287.250 f3,176 35,494 81,748 417,666 21.. METRCNET 37 10 47 1,966,250 102 550 10,321 27 803 64,036 2170 960 22. MISSIONVIEJO 3D 90 120 0 574,500 26,366 70,988 163,495 835,349 23. NENPORT BEACH 438 401 839 5a2,934 2,909,70D 184290 496,322 1,143,195 5,266,351 244. ORANGE 115 514 629 598,012 3,216,250 137 88.9 372,094 856,968 5181 233 25.. PLACENTIA 30 107 137 413,990 676,500 30,119 81,044 1.86657 1,387,410 28. RANCHO SNTA MARG. 7 29 36 0 182,D50 7,9G6 21,296 49,049 260,301 27.. SAN CLEMENTE 92 97 109 0 595.800 23,931 64A80 148,508 832,719 28. SAN JUAN CAPISTRAh:' : 6 33 39 0 2D4,999 8,525 23,071 53,136 289,E32 29. SANTA ANA 219 518 1,037 591,620 5,159,850 227 713 613,451 9 412 872 8,005,506 30. SEAL BEACH 25 97 122 0 610754 26,844 72,171 1'.66220 875,965 31.. STANTON 10 63 73 0 389,500 16,051 43 184 99,460 548,195 32. TUSSTIN 81 243 324 483,266 1.551150 71,126 191,667 441,437 2738,646 33. VILLAPARK 0 6 6 0 36,040 1,318 3,549 8,175 49,042 34.. WEST -COMM 4 13 17 631,052 82.600 3 733 1D.057 23,162 750,604 35. WESTMINSTER 73 274 347 549,621 1,727,950 76137 205,273 472774 3039,755 36. YORBA LINDA 35 62 97 0 412,250 21,302 57,382 132159 623,092 37. 0CFA 950 863 1,513 3,217,500 6270 540 397,622 1,072,505 2 474142 13428269 38. OCTA 70 43 113 0 338 504 24,8T5 66,847 153,958 584,179 39.. OC LIFEGUARD 7 47 54 438,900 290,050 11,865 39,944 73,573 846,333 40.1 IRVINE VLLY. CLLG. PD 16 0 16 0 18,400 3,527 9,465 21,799 53,192 41.. SANTA ANA UNIF_ SO. PD 51 2 53 0 70,650 11,639 31,353 72,210 185,852 42. SADDLEBACK CLLG. PD 18 0 16 0 20,700 3,953 10,648 24,524 59,825 43. CEO 1 1 2 0 7,150 4391 1,183 2,725 11,497 44. DA 0 225 225 0 1350DDD 49,411 133102 306,554 1839,067 45. HCA 184 98 282 0 799,600 61,804 166,821 3134,214 1,412,439 40. JWA 39 194 233 536,250 1,2D8,&50 51 175 137,834 1 317,453 2,251,563 47.. DC ANIMAL CONTROL 1D 110 120 350,000 671500 26,386 70988 163,495 1282,369 48. CC DANA POI NT HARBOR D 13 13 0 78,D90 2,= 7,690 17,712 106,225 49..1 OC PARKS 131 248 379 0 1638,650 83,218 224,2D3 516373 2,462,443 50. OCFLY 1D 469 479 D 2,825.500 105270 253,359 652,619 3866,748 51.00WR 59 1 3 62 0 85850 13,602 36,677 84,473 220,602 52_ PROBATION 177 435 612 0 21813,550 134,695 362,037 833,826 4,144,108 53. SHERIFF 857 1 922 2 779 4,428,82S 12,517,550 610 825 1,643955 3,786 280 22,987,439 54. SSA 99 0 19 01 21,850 1 4173 1 11.240 25887 63149 TOTAL $ 4,1 45.2 $ 11,211 945 $ 25 822 727 itm costs stated neretn are esalma red costs expressed 8snot to exceed amounts saweel to 114111U r,Va4 tlh@ Tuna system design. PARTNERSHIP TOTAL ' Itis recommended thatthe Parhtership co-ordinate a hulk equipmentpurchase in FY 1617. Jarxiiay2015 Page 10 of 11 EXHIBIT D PARTICIPATING AGENCIES Page 11 of 11 RESPONSIBLE AGENCY ADMINISTRATOR ADDRESS PHONE # Irvine Valley College Police Chief 5500 Irvine Center Drive, Irvine CA 949/451-5201 Police Department 92618 Orange County Administrator Transportation 600 S. Main Street, Orange CA 92868 714/560-6282 Authority Saddleback College 28000 Marguerite Parkway, Mission Police Chief 949/582-4390 Police Department Viejo CA 92692 Santa Ana Unified police Chief 1601 E. Chestnut Avenue, Santa Ana CA 714/558-5536 School District Police 92701 Department US Ocean Safety (OC 34127 Pacific Coast Highway, Dana president 949/276-5050 Lifeguards) Point CA 92629 Page 11 of 11 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT MEETING DATE: March 17TH, 2015 ITEM NUMBER: PH -1 SUBJECT: CIVIC OPENNESS IN NEGOTIATIONS (COIN) ORDINANCE SECOND PUBLIC HEARING OF THE APPROVAL AND ADOPTION OF THE SIDE LETTER OF AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF COSTA MESA AND THE COSTA MESA POLICE MANAGEMENT ASSOCIATION (CMPMA). DATE: March 5'h, 2015 FROM: CHIEF EXECUTIVE'S OFFICE/HUMAN RESOURCES DIVISION PRESENTATION LAURA KALTY, CHIEF NEGOTIATOR BY: LANCE M. NAKAMOTO, HUMAN RESOURCES MANAGER FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: LANCE NAKAMOTO (714) 754-5172 RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the City Council: 1. Hold the second Public Hearing as required by COIN. 2. Approve and adopt the attached CMPMA Side Letter of Agreement (Attachment I) between the City of Costa Mesa and the CMPMA for 26 consecutive pay periods through and inclusive of February 20th, 2016. BACKGROUND: The CMPMA MOU including subsequent side letter agreement between the City and the CMPMA expired June 30th, 2014. Employees covered by this Agreement agreed to contribute 5% of the employee's PERSable earnings towards the employee retirement contribution for a period of one -hundred and four (104) consecutive pay periods. The 104th and final pay period ended February 21St, 2015. ANALYSIS: In accordance with the COIN Ordinance and the initial stages of the meet and confer process, negotiations are ongoing. As a result, the parties to this side letter agreement in the content of good faith negotiations in accordance with Government Code Section 3500 et seq. (Meyers-Milias-Brown Act) have agreed to extend the 5% employee contribution for a period of 26 pay periods, while negotiations continue. The first pay period will be effective February 22nd, 2015 and the deduction will continue by using Section 20516 as stated by PERS to be "Cost Sharing." 1 ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED: The alternative is to allow the 5% employee contribution to expire effective February 21$t 2015. Based upon CMPMA's CalPERS base salary of $1,381,264, the value of this alternative is $69,063. FISCAL REVIEW: As stated previously in the Alternatives Considered Section, the value to the City in continuing the cost sharing is approximately $69,063. The value for the current Fiscal Year 2014-2015 is $23,906 and an additional $45,157 for Fiscal Year 2015-2016. LEGAL REVIEW: The City Attorney has reviewed the documents and approved them as to form. CONCLUSION: The March 17' Public Hearing is the second and final of the two mandated City Council Meetings conducted pursuant to the COIN Ordinance. In conjunction with the Public Hearing, Staff recommends that the City Council approve and adopt the CMPMA Side Letter (Attachment 1). LANCE M. NAKAMOTO Human Resources Manager Interim Finance Director DISTRIBUTION: Chief Executive Officer City Clerk ATTACHMENT: I CMPMA Side Letter TAMARA S. LETOURNEAU Assistant of Executive Officer THOMAS DUARTE 011 ATTACHMENT I Side Letter of Agreement September 1, 2007 — August 31, 2010 Memorandum of Understanding Between the Costa Mesa Police Management Association (CMPMA) and the City of Costa Mesa This Side Letter of Agreement ("Agreement") is entered into by and between the City of Costa Mesa ("City") and the Costa Mesa Police Management Association ("CMPMA"). The City and CMPMA have met and conferred in good faith and agree that the September 1, 2007 — August 31, 2010 CMPMA Memorandum of Understanding ("MOU"), extended through June 30, 2014, via Side Letter of Agreement, shall be continued and supplemented with the following amendment: II. Article 5 — Retirement Contribution Employees covered by this Agreement shall contribute 5% of the employee's PERSable earnings towards the employee retirement contribution for a period of twenty six (26) consecutive pay periods. The commencement date for the twenty six (26) pay periods will be February 22, 2015. To the extent permitted by CAPERS and the IRS regulations, this 5% contribution shall be implemented through payroll deduction on a pre-tax basis. The contribution will be enacted by using Section 20516 as stated by PERS to be "Cost Sharing." VIII. MOU Provisions: Except as provided herein, all remaining terms and provisions of the aforementioned MOU and Side Letter Agreement shall remain in full force and effect through the term of the Agreement. REPRESENTATIVES OF THE COSTA MESA POLICE MANAGEMENT ASSOCIATION LT. PAUL BECKMAN CMPMA President K. y� LT. KEITH DAVIS CMPMA Representative LW9RYAN F. GLASS CMPMA Representative 896476.1 C0190-031 REPRESENTATIVES OF THE CITY OF COSTA MESA TAMARA LETOURNEAU Assistant Chief Executive Officer LANCE M. NAKAMOTO Human Resources Manager Additional documents CITY COUNCIL SUPPLEMENTAL MEMORANDUM MEETING DATE: MARCH 17, 2015 SUBJECT: APPEAL OF PLANNING APPLICATION PA -14-40 FOR THE GANAHL LUMBER HARDWARE STORE AND OUTDOOR STORAGE YARD AT 1100 BRISTOL STREET FROM: PLANNING DIVISION/DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT PRESENTATION BY: MEL LEE, SENIOR PLANNER DATE: MARCH 1S, 2015 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: MEL LEE, AICD, SENIOR PLANNER (714) 754-5611 mel.lee0costamesaca.gov The attached letter and exhibits were prepared by the applicant's traffic consultant, Linscott, Law, & Greenspan Engineers (LL&G) to help clarify the proposed improvements on Bristol Street for the project, as well as illustrate the existing businesses and their driveway locations, across the street from the proposed project. MEL LEE, AICP GARY A ST ONG, AI Senior Planner Director of Economic & evelopment 1 Deputy CEO cc: Chief Executive Officer Assistant Chief Executive Officer Director of Economic & Development 1 Deputy CEO City Attorney Public Services Director Transportation Svs, Mgr. City Engineer City Clerk (9) Staff (7) File (2) Distribution List MEMORANDUM To: Mike Shumaker, General Manager Date: March 16, 2015 Ganahl Lumber Costa Mesa Frorn Richard E. Barretto, P.E., Princi LG Ref:2.14.3455.1 Linscott, Law & Greenspan, Eng` - Cc: Patrick Ganahl, Ganahl Construction Corporation subject: Ganahl Lumher Costa Mesa Relocation Project, Costa Mesa Linscott, Law & Greenspan, Engineers (LLG) is pleased to present two figures that provide further clarification to the proposed access improvement on Bristol Street associated with the proposed Ganahl Lumber Costa Mesa Relocation Project. The Project site is a 5.93± acre parcel of land that is located north of Bristol Street and west of the existing Ganahl Lumber facility in the City of Costa Mesa, California. The subject property's street address is 1100 Bristol Street. The information provided herein is similar to the that which was included the Revised Focused Traffic Impact Studio for Ganahl Lumber Costar Mesa Relocation, dated November 18, 2014, prepared fey LL G. Project Site Plan and Access Figure A illustrates the proposed site plan for the Project prepared by Onyx Architects. This figure illustrates the Proposed Site Plan of the Project, the current layout/striping conditions on Bristol Street, bordering the subject property, and the existing commercial properties and associated driveways along the south side of Bristol Street. As shown in Figure A, access to the Project site is to be provided by two driveways on Bristol Street. To minimize turning conflicts along the existing two-way left -turn median lane on Bristol Street along the Project frontage as well as impacts to the properties bordering Bristol Street on the south, primary access is proposed via a full access signalized driveway at the western property line along Bristol Street to be constructed opposite northbound Newport Boulevard, Secondary access is to be provided via a proposed unsignalized driveway on Bristol Street that is located at the eastern property line. It is noted that the "eastern driveway" is a "truck -only gated entry" driveway (no exit) for truck -related traffic; trucks will exit the site at the signalized driveway. A further review of Figure A shows that access to the existing commercial properties along the south side of Bristol Street (1072 — 1262) will not change as the existing two-way left -turn lane on Bristol Street will remain as is and continue to provide left - turn and/or right -turn access to these sites. Engineers& Planners Traffic Transportation Parking Linscott, Law & Greenspan, Engineers 2 Executive Circle Suite 250 1 rvine, CA 92614 949.925.6175 r 949.625.6173 r wwwAgengineers.com Pasadena Irvine San Diego Woodland Nips Ganahl Lumber March 16, 2015 Page 2 Conceptual Improvement Plan — Bristol Street at NB Newport Blvd-Ganahl Access Figure B presents a conceptual improvement plan for Bristol Street at Northbound Newport Boulevard that illustrates the recommended improvements at this existing signalized intersection to accommodate full access to the Project site. As illustrated, the improvements to be completed as a part of the Project at the Bristol Street/Northbound Newport Boulevard intersection, subject to the approval of the City of Costa include the following: ❑ Modification of the existing median on Bristol Street to provide a dedicated eastbound left -turn lane, ❑ Restriping the northbound approach to provide one left -turn lane, an option left-tum/through lane, and a separate right -turn lane, ❑ Construction of the new site driveway to provide a southbound (outbound) left -turn lane and southbound (outbound) right -turn lane and one departure (inbound) lane (southbound through traffic movements will be prohibited); and. ❑ Modification of the existing traffic signal, to include split phase operation on Northbound Newport Boulevard/Driveway No. 1. Please note that access to the to the existing commercial properties along the south side of Bristol Street (1072 1262) will remain as they currently exists with the implementation of the above -referenced improvements at the intersection of Bristol Street at Northbound Newport Boulevard. Please let me know if you have any comments or questions regarding this memorandum and the attached figures. Attachments Jov6o gtoz—Zl—£0 94PBZ;9l fm 6MP`o—jgg4c\6MP\o$aw oisoa 'sl} pasnOOj Jagwnl 140006 — 55>£4LZ\e?LPb£�:u XI . •I r I I I r l N ` � I} 11 o r I WIII rrr UIP I g I r i r r u ,.' r i/ r I I r � In O II 11 1• N r I II U� III / p zWp 1 CQ Noll I I I / ti � II I I ;Z= R Fm i I tt 1 1 I I 111 •�,, �` --_��` wo� II I I I I I I I N r I, R '� do POO If Lq ir Jopnbo 91OZ—ZL—£O MK:9L d(I7 6mp'q—JSSb£\6Mp\oaaw oaeoa 'sia pasnoo; jagwni 14ouo6 — S84£4LZ\004£\:u I I � I I • � I i l I I I i fr I l i i i � _ 1 I I I l I 'oo I l I I I s LLA L � w -V)a uj Ls aha cco J O � Z La IXS 0 0 0 FX O m z 00 = w "f 0 z o�oa wm nw Z F- Lu Z)a� NJm0 0 F0�O4 I 2 O 4 Z OU 4 U in�2-th J Wow o I �v I Z w oaj2< I UJ RO -rA j 0 �CYOOZ 0 a j w F F0 LuO Xuj V)00 wujwin0 W W �Sn O J Wa O 7 Z 0 Oxw¢z m m p J a cw Z p w O w _<j ZzP p00 JW L, WO W=� oir,, om Zaz m� wOa uj aa��Q tnm� w waaWWN m<—i JQ I I \ F Qw zOW Om a I I I I rM 2pr0 0 �mZ a '� zr�0 �a CUL. I�� Z Wa0 QJ a r -i>-'Z0 uj Ls aha cco J O � Z La IXS 0 0 0 FX O m z 00 = w "f 0 z o�oa wm nw Z F- Lu Z)a� NJm0 0 F0�O4 I 2 O 4 Z OU 4 U in�2-th J Wow o I �v I Z w oaj2< I UJ RO -rA j 0 �CYOOZ 0 a j w F F0 LuO Xuj V)00 wujwin0 W W �Sn O J Wa O 7 Z 0 Oxw¢z m m p J a cw Z p w O w _<j ZzP p00 JW L, WO W=� oir,, om Zaz m� wOa uj aa��Q tnm� w waaWWN m<—i JQ MEJIA, JESSICA Subject: FW: Objection to the Proposed Ganahl Lumber Yard Project - Letter Attachments: DOCOOO.pdf From: Michelle M. Pase [mailto:MPase@ptwww.com] Sent: Tuesday, March 17, 2015 4:40 PM To: LEE, MEL; GREEN, BRENDA; CITY COUNCIL Cc: Michael H. Leifer; Erin Balsara Naderi; Michelle M. Pase Subject: Objection to the Proposed Ganahl Lumber Yard Project - Letter In advance of tonight's City Council meeting, please find enclosed an objection letter to the Ganahl Project for distribution to the City Council. Exhibits will be sent by 3 separate e-mails due to the size of the PDF attachment. Michelle Pase I Assistant to Michael H. Leifer, Erin B. Naderi, and Steven R. Guess Palmieri, Tyler, Wiener, Wilhelm & Waldron LLP 2603 Main Street, Suite 1300 1 Irvine, CA 92614 Direct Dial (949) 851-7325 1 Facsimile (949) 851-1554 Email I Website IRS Circular 230 Disclosure: Pursuant to Internal Revenue Service Circular 230, only formal opinions satisfying specific requirements may be relied on for the purpose of avoiding certain penalties under the Internal Revenue Code. Any tax advice contained in this communication (including attachments) does not constitute a formal opinion satisfying such requirements. Accordingly, we must advise you that any such tax advice was not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, by you or any other person as such an opinion for the purpose of (i) avoiding penalties imposed under the Internal Revenue Code or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any matters addressed herein. This message and any attached documents contain information from the law firm of Palmieri, Tyler, Wiener, Wilhelm & Waldron LLP that may be privileged and confidential and protected from disclosure. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, or an employee or agent responsible for delivering this message to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by replying to the message and deleting it from your computer. Thank you. PALM IERI. TYLER, W{ENER, WILHEUM & WALDRON ANGELO J. PALMIERI (1929.1998) ROBERT F. WALDRON (1927.1999) MICHAEL J. GREENE' RYAN M. EASTER DENNIS W. GHAN' ELISE M. KERN DAVID D. PARR' MELISA R. PEREZ CHARLES H KANTER* MICHAEL I KEHOE PATRICK A HENNESSEY CHADWICK C BUNCH DON FISHER ANISH J. BANKER GREGORY N. WEILER RYAN M. PRAGER WARREN A. WILLIAMS ERIN BALSARA NADER? JOHN R. LISTER ERICA M. SOROSKY MICHAEL H. LEIFER JERAD BELTZ SCOTT R. CARPENTER CANDICE L. LEE RICHARD A. SALUS MICHAEL P. BURNS NORMAN J. RODICH JOSHUA J, MARX RONALD M. COLE ERIN K. OYAMA MICHAEL L. D'ANGELO STEVEN R. GUESS STEPHEN A. SCHECK KATHERINE M. HARRISON DONNA L. SNOW BRIAN GLICKLIN ALAN H. WIENER-, OF COUNSEL ROBERT C. IHRXE, OF COUNSEL MICHAEL C. CHO, OF COUNSEL JAMES E. WILHELM, RETIRED DENNIS G. TYLER-, RETIRED 'A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION VIA E-MAIL 2603 MAIM STREET EAST TOWER —SUITE 1300 IRVINE, CALIFORNIA 92614-4281 (949) 851-9400 WWW.ptWWW.CCITTI March 17, 2015 Members of the Costa Mesa City Council c/o Brenda Green, City Clerk 77 Fair Drive Costa Mesa, CA 92628 Re: Objection to the Proposed Ganahl Lumber Yard Project Dear Mayor and Members of the City Council: P O BOX 19712 IRVINE, CA 92623-9712 WRITER'S DIRECT DIAL NUMBER (949)851-7294 WRITER'S DIRECT FACSIMILE NUMBER (949) 825-5412 FIRM'S DIRECT FACSIMILE NUMBERS (949)851-1554 (949) 757-1225 mleiferaptwwwxom REFER TO FILE NO 36650-003 This office represents the ownership of the 1072 Bristol Street property --1072 Bristol Street Partners, LP (1072 Bristol). 1072 Bristol objects to the proposed very large Ganahl Lumber project directly across Bristol. As such, 1072 Bristol has appealed the Planning Commission's approval of the Ganahl Lumber project. This letter and its enclosures must be included in the administrative record for this proj ect. The public has not been provided correct, adequate or timely information about this mega- lumber yard project. The project applicant even submitted a late I' supplemental" traffic study demonstrating merit in our prior objections. The supplemental traffic study was just received yesterday! 1482446.3 PALMIERI, TYLER, WIENER, WILHELM &WALDRON � Members of the Costa Mesa City Council March 17, 2015 Page 2 The Planning Commission's approval did not come within field artillery -range of complying with the City's Municipal Code or relevant state law. It was defective both in substance and procedure. The City is empowered and yet constrained by the substance and the procedures in its Municipal Code. The Planning Commission is supposed to guard and enforce the Municipal Code. It is not supposed to pretend that it does not exist. The mega-Ganahl lumber project that staff recommended and the Planning Commission approved simply does not comply with the City's Zoning Code. The Planning Commission was required to properly apply the Zoning Code even if it received a Staff Report that was inadequate or just plain wrong. This Council is bound to properly adhere to its Zoning Code even though staff and the Planning Commission have failed to do so. Compounding previous errors is not a defense. The mega-Ganahl lumber project applicant, apparently enabled by Staff and the Planning Commission, wants to be excused from complying with the fundamental requirements of the City's Zoning Code: Fundamental Zoning Requirement: The material sales yard/lumber yard use is not permitted in the C1 zone. Fundamental Zoning Requirement: The buildings proposed are far too big in FAR, height and layout on the proposed site. Fundamental Zoning Requirement: The mega-Ganahl lumber project does not comply with City's commercial parking requirements. It's not even close. Further, Staff recommendation and the Planning Commission decision was based upon improper considerations: • The age, background story and success of the Ganahl Lumber business is irrelevant to this project site application. The City's Zoning Code does not have a "we like this business" exception to any or all of its requirements. • The fact that Ganahl wants to relocate from a non -conforming site is irrelevant to its compliance with the Zoning requirements at a new site. 1482446,3 PALMIEIti, TYLER. WIE.NEK. WILHELM &WALDRON al Members of the Costa Mesa City Council March 17, 2015 Page 3 Ganahl Lumber locations outside of the City (totally irrelevant, lack foundation as to applicability.) • Non-Ganahl Lumber locations that were developed either outside the City or prior to the City's Code. • Unsupported opinions and assertions by Staff, the Applicant and the County. The Planning Commission's approval constitutes a windfall award of privileges to the applicant. The City cannot award a privilege or series of privileges to the applicant. Based upon the actual requirements of the City's Zoning Code, this is not a close call. The proposed Ganahl lumber yard project should be denied. 1. The lumber yard project is not permitted or conditionally permitted in the C1 Zone. Ganahl's lumber yard project does not even come close to complying with the City's C 1 zone.. Ganahl and Staff improperly attempt to effectuate a zone change. through conditional use permit and variance. To the Planning Commission, the Staff Report claimed that the proposed lumber yard complies with the City's C1 zoning. The Staff Report provided absolutely no analysis or support for that claim. On appeal, in the Staff Report to this Council, staff claims that Ganahl's proposed use is not specifically listed in the Zoning Code's Land Use Matrix, Wrong. Staff further argues its unsupported opinion that there is retail which is a permitted use and that the lumber stock, mill shed and storage sheds are simply an incidental "outdoor storage yard" use that can be considered through a Conditional Use Permit. Staff is wrong again. Section 13-30 of the Zoning Code provides a comprehensive list of uses. if a use is listed in Section 13-30 and is not permitted in a zoning district, there is no way around that prohibition. Ganahl Lumber is a lumber and building materials dealer. Ganahl's website so confirms. (Exs. 1-3.) At the Planning Commission hearing on February 23, 2015, 1482446.3 PALMIEKI, TYLER, WIENER, WILHELM &WALDRON � Members of the Costa Mesa City Council March 17, 2015 Page 4 Ganahl's representatives made clear that 90 percent of Ganahl's customers are contractors --not the end retail consumer,'' (Testimony by Ganahl Costa Mesa Store Manager Schumacher.) A lumber and building materials dealer use is specifically listed in the Land Use Matrix. (See Zoning Code § 13-30, Table 13-30, Use 89.) A lumber and building materials use is not permitted in the C 1 Zone in the City of Costa Mesa --end of story. Ganahl's use is p�nly permitted in the MG, MP and PDI zones. The Standard Industrial Code for Ganahl is "lumber and other building materials"- -SIC 52110000. The City's Zoning Code description 89 matches the SIC description for Ganahl. Dtompman of SCC Ciassl uanon 52116600 Lv&ber and Chhe a Building Mlmerials Dtaleft. This Classification is out of Major Group 52: Building 1Satereals, Kard«are. Garden Supply, and Mobile Nome Dealers and part of industry G7oup 51C 521 Lusnbcr and Other Building Xlaterutls Dealers Contrary to staffs assertion, Ganahl's proposed lumberyard use is listed in the Land Use Matrix in the Zoning Code. It is listed as not permitted and not conditionally permitted in the C-1 zone. For argument's sake, even following staff s ridiculous claim that the Ganahl lumberyard is not specifically listed, Section 13-30 of the Zoning Code mandates a procedure that was not followed by the City. Section 13-30, subdivision (d) provides that where a use is not listed in the Land Use Matrix, the use "shall be reviewed by the development services director to determine its similarity to another listed use." Nothing in the record demonstrates that this was done. Moreover, the proposed Ganahl lumber yard project exemplifies Number 89 of the Land Use Matrix --lumber and building materials dealer. It is not permitted in the C-1 zone. i 1072 Bristol requests that the transcript from the Planning Commission hearing be included in the administrative record on this matter. 1482446.3 PALMIERI, TYLER, WIENER. WILHELM &WALDRON � Members of the Costa Mesa City Council March 17, 2015 Page 5 It is g�nly where there is no substantial similarity between a proposed use and the uses listed in the Land Use Matrix that a conditional use permit is required and may be sought. So far, the City has ignored the obvious, failed to follow its required procedures, failed to show evidence in the record. Then, on appeal, staff has turned its required procedures upside down. A. The Ganahl lumberyard is not a retail use. This project is for a lumber yard-- a giant one fronting on a commercial street. Ganahl Lumber is a lumber company. It is a lumber and building materials dealer. A significant component of the project is a request for a sawmill. The B -Shed and Mill Shed are 34,253 square -feet of mill -type activities and material storage for material sales. There are also substantial outdoor lumber and material yard activities including the large area of outdoor storage of lumber (the total area is unknown as there is no information provided in the Staff Reports or the plans regarding that area). This project is significantly different from a hardware store. From what can be seen in the site plan submitted, the Ganahl project is a large lumber yard operation with an ancillary retail component --not the other way around. This is evident by the proposed site configuration and design and the building layout and the testimony of its general manager. The site layout demonstrates that it is a lumberyard. There are few parking spaces. It does not meet retail parking requirements for building area square footage. The location of the spaces and their accessibility demonstrate that it is not predominantly "retail." When it comes to land use compatibility for the C 1 zone, the City, staff and the applicant claim that it is retail. When it comes to parking requirements, the City, staff and the applicant claim it is a lumberyard and that the Zoning Code does not provide a parking ratio for lumberyards. Staff therefore tries to justify application of a parking requirement significantly less than that required by a retail use. The City and Applicant cannot have it both ways. The rights of the stakeholders and citizens of the City are abridged by contradictory application of the rules to benefit the Applicant. Retail uses under the City's Zoning Code require 4 parking spaces for every 1,000 square -feet of retail. The building that would house the claimed "retail" component of 1482446.3 PALMIERI. TYLER, WIENER, WILHELM &WALDRON n Members of the Costa Mesa City Council March 17, 2015 Page 6 the proposed Ganahl Project (along with the lumber yard office operations) contains 65,263 square -feet. That building alone would require 261 parking spaces. While this project claims to provide 286 parking spaces, the majority of those spaces are on the roof of the building and behind gates. The site layout alone demonstrates that the use is not retail. To the extent that the Applicant claims that it is like a Home Depot, it isn't. Home Depots do not provide a significant number of parking spaces behind guard gates or on a roof of a building. For over 105,000 square feet of building on the proposed site, fewer than 50 surface parking spaces are outside the gates of the lumberyard. B. The argument that this is a proposed relocation site is totally irrelevant, . At the February 2015 Planning Commission hearing, in an attempt to support its approval of this project, a number of Planning Commissioners made reference to the fact that the existing Ganahl site is right next door to the proposed site. So what? There is no, "I used to be right next door, or at least really close by," exception to the City's C 1 zone unpermitted uses. Without support or analysis, the current Staff Report repeats this flawed basis for approval. 1072 Bristol objects to such an assertion -- it is irrelevant and without any support. The existing Ganahl location provides no justification whatsoever for the proposed project. First, the existing Ganahl site is a different zone classification than the subject site. 1275 Bristol Street is in the C2 zone. Next, there is no evidence that the existing Ganahl is a "legally permitted use" as claimed in the Staff Deport. In fact, the evidence and information provided demonstrates that the existing Ganahl use is nonconforming to its zone and current development standards. Based on the Staff Report, the existing Ganahl site was developed in the early 1970's. The Staff Report states, "[a]t that time in the 1970's and 1980's these commercial facilities which were retail in nature were considered permitted uses and did not require a CUP." This proves that the existing Ganahl site is nonconforming to the current Zoning Code. Nonconforming uses may not be enlarged or transferred. 1482446.3 PALMIERI, TYLER, WIENER, WILHELM &WALDRON !; Members of the Costa Mesa City Council March 17, 2015 Page 7 The current Zoning Code was not enacted until May 5, 1997. On that date, the entire Zoning Code was replaced in its entirety by Ordinance 97-11. As such, the existing Ganahl site was not developed under the current Zoning Code. This office attempted to obtain copies of the entitlements for the existing Ganahl site from the City's Planning Department in advance of this hearing. Planning Staff could not (or would not) locate the entitlements for the development of the existing Ganahl site. (Ex. 14.) The only entitlement related documents Planning Staff could locate was a 1991 CUP for a mobile food cart near the entrance of the building. (Ex. 5.) The existing Ganahl use at 1275 Bristol is nonconforming to even the C2 zone. Chapter X of the Zoning Code (regarding Nonconforming uses) does not allow the transfer of a legal nonconforming use to a new property. The City very well knows that. Yet, transfer is what it is saying that it is doing. Even if the existing Ganahl use at 1275 Bristol had been approved under the current Zoning Code (which it wasn't), it is unknown what, if any, objections were raised. Prior City Zoning Code violations certainly do not justify further violations. C. The comparison of the proposed Ganahl lumber yard to the Home Depot is improper. Again, this Staff Report follows the misguided lead of the Planning Commission. At the February 2015 Planning Commission hearing, a Planning Commissioner sought to compare the proposed Ganahl project to the existing Home Depot located in the Harbor Center shopping center on Harbor Blvd. in Costa Mesa. The Staff Report now makes that same assertion to this Council to leap to the totally unsupported and improper conclusion that the proposed Ganahl use is permitted in the C 1 zone. Again, this conclusion is flawed. The layout, parking, and compliance with development standards of the Dome Depot use and the proposed Ganahl use are very different. Home Depot does not have 50 parking spaces. It does not have a giant outdoor lumber yard, among other things. A comparison of aerial photos of the Home Depot at Harbor Center and the existing Ganahl in Costa Mesa demonstrates vast differences. (Ex. 6 [Home Depot Aerial]; Ex. 4 [Ganahl Aerial].) 1482446.3 PALMIERI, TYLER, WIENER, WILHELM &WALDRON 2� Members of the Costa Mesa City Council March 17, 2015 Page 8 The Home Depot is a concrete tilt -up retail building. It is well set back from the street. The parking and access lay -out is for a shopping center. At Home Depot, the uses (other than the enclosed, but roof -less garden center) are all indoors. (Ex. b.) In fact, the signage on the Home Depot store states that it has an "Indoor Lumber Yard." (Ex. 7.) All of the lumber on site is stored inside the building. The City does not address whether any objections were raised to the propriety of the Home Depots approval. Again, past noncompliance doesn't excuse the City's current noncompliance with its zoning code, From our site review, the Home Depot store has only two lumber -cutting saws for on-site cutting of lumber for customers. (Ex. 7.) Again, both saws are located inside the Home Depot store. The saw cuts for customers take place in the building. There is no apparent on-going sawmill operation inside Home Depot. Further, the Home Depot parking is in front of the building --not behind gates. The Harbor Center Home Depot highlights the differences in these uses. The Home Depot is your typical big box retail hardware store. The proposed Ganahl use is not. As discussed above, it is a lumber and other building materials dealer. D. 1072 Bristol objects to the Staff Report's comparison of this use to other Ganahl Lumber locations in other jurisdictions. In an attempt to bolster the Planning Commission's flawed approval, the Staff Report provides even more irrelevant information. The Staff Report makes the unsubstantiated claim that "other jurisdictions also consider Ganahl Lumber stores as commercial uses." Whether other jurisdictions consider Ganahl Lumber stores to be commercial uses or have otherwise permitted Ganahl Lumber in commercial zones is completely irrelevant. The issue here is whether the City of Costa Mesa Zoning Code permits the proposed Ganahl Lumber use in its C1 zone. The list of Ganahl Lumber stores located in commercial zones of other jurisdictions provides no support for the approval. From the scant information provided on those other properties in other jurisdictions, it is not clear whether the Ganahl Lumber uses in those jurisdictions were entitled under the existing codes of those jurisdictions or whether the uses are legal nonconforming. It is also unclear whether the commercial 1482446.3 PALMIERI, TYLER. WIENER WI LH ELM &-WALDRON -� Members of the Costa Mesa City Council March 17, 2015 Page 9 zones in those other jurisdictions allow for a lumber and building materials dealer use in the commercial zone. The information of Ganahl Lumber Stores in other jurisdictions does nothing to shed light onto whether this proposed use in this City under this Zoning Code is allowed. 1072 Bristol objects to the consideration of this information. If the City Council is going to consider such information over 1072 Bristol's objection, then it should also consider information that Staff and the applicant have omitted from other jurisdictions, Ganahl is actually proposing a very similar development in Torrance nearly concurrent with this project, The Initial Study is available on the City of Torrance website for the proposed Ganahl Torrance project. Like this proposed project, the Ganahl Torrance project proposes a Building A, a B Shed, a Mill Shed and a Pole shed, The proposed Ganahl site in Torrance is located in a Heavy Industrial zone adjacent to a chemical plant. The Ganahl Torrance project is described as "a new lumberyard and building supply sales store in the City of Torrance that would serve as a distribution center to the South Bay and surrounding areas." (Ex. 8 [Excerpt from Torrance Initial Study].) Unconstrained by its pretense to fit in a commercial zone designation, Ganahl admits contrary to what is being presented in Costa Mesa --it is a lumberyard first and foremost. E. 1072 Bristol objects to letter submitted by the site's property owner (the County of Orange). 1072 Bristol also objects to the implication made in the Staff Report that the proposed site's property owner's claim that the proposed use complies with the City Zoning Code is somehow relevant and should be considered. The Staff Report includes a discussion of the property owner's selection process for a use on the subject site, The Staff Report also attaches a letter dated March 6, 2015 -- after the Planning Commission hearing and filing of this appeal --from the County of Orange regarding its selection of Ganahl as a tenant. 1072 Bristol objects to consideration of both the statements in the Staff Report and the March 6, 2015 County of Orange letter. Both items are irrelevant. They are unsupported. They lack foundation and are the opinion of a staff member from another public agency. A property owner's opinion in selecting a tenant is not relevant to whether the use is actually permitted under the City Zoning Code. 1482446.3 PALMIER[, TYLER WIENER, WILHELM &WALD4ZON � Members of the Costa Mesa City Council March 17, 2015 Page 10 At the Planning Commission hearing, and again in this Staff Report, much has been made of the County and City's bureaucratic processes followed by an alleged long development and planning process by Ganahl. They are not relevant. As an aside however, it is noteworthy that during the long bureaucratic processes, no one from the City, County or Ganahl reached out to discuss this proposed project with the neighboring properties. 2. The proposed building setback variance does not comply with the Zoning Code requirements for a variance, This project requests a very large variance from the building setback requirements in the Zoning Code, The variance is not justified. The Planning Commission's findings were not supported by relevant evidence. A. Ganahl can comply with the required setback requirement. 'Therefore, it must. Supported by the City, it simply chooses not to. There,are no, special circumstances to justify this significant of a variance. Put another way, there is no hardship that justifies the granting of the variance to Ganahl. There is no evidence that Ganahl cannot comply with the required setback --it simply does not want to. It wants a privilege. In fact, it is the nonconforming outdoor lumberyard use and -the significant mass of the shed buildings that appears to cause this request for variance. Ganahl could reduce the length of the shed buildings and reduce the outdoor lumber storage area and meet the 20 -foot setback requirement. It does not want to. It wants a privilege. Ganahl has chosen to not comply with the very setback requirements that the City has imposed on developments right across the street. The Planning Commission's approval of a variance provided Ganahl with a privilege not shared by other property owners under similar zoning. That privilege violates law and offends the rights of all others who were required to comply with the City's requirements. A recent development in this area of Bristol within the C 1 zoning was of the three office buildings approved at 1122 Bristol Street. Those properties were approved for development in 2002, (Ex. 9.) Those properties were developed in compliance with the C 1 zone requirements including the required 20 -foot front setback. (Iliad.) 1482446.3 PALMI ERI, TYLER, WIENER, WILHELM &WALDRON 3 Members of the Costa Mesa City Council March 17, 2015 Page 11 B. The setback variance is inconsistent with other properties in the area. To the Planning Commission, Staff attempted to justify the variance from the setback requirements by comparing the proposed project to the 1072 Bristol property and the property located at 1182 Bristol Street claiming that both of these properties have less than the 20 -foot landscape requirement. (Staff Report to Planning Commission.) The current Staff Report repeats this improper comparison and also compares the requested variance to the apartment complex on Bristol --1312 Bristol. Staffs comparison fails for a number of reasons. It is well-known that a variance cannot be justified based on reliance on legal nonconforming properties. 1072 and 1182 Bristol were not developed under the City of Costa Mesa's Zoning Code. This is demonstrated by the fact that the Staff Report could not provide more than an "approximate" setback for these properties. In fact, 1072 and 1182 Bristol were not annexed into the City of Costa Mesa until 2000. (Exs. 10, 11.) 1072 and 1182 Bristol were developed many decades before annexation to the City of Costa Mesa. The properties -were developed under the zoning regulations of the County of Orange --not the City of Costa Mesa. This fact was confirmed by Principal Planner and Zoning Administrator, Willa Bouwens-Killeen. Further, these properties have been through the widening of Bristol Street which has condemned some of the setback the properties once enjoyed. The reduced setback of 1072 and 1182 Bristol are legal non -conforming. 2 Our office sought entitlement information regarding 1072 and 1182 Bristol from the Planning Department and the County of Orange. The County of Orange stated that any files that it had for properties were transferred to the City upon annexation. (Ex. 13). The County of Orange did provide a copy of the LAFCO Resolution approving the annexation in 2000. The City Planning Department did not have any entitlement information for these properties. Planner Ryan Loomis reviewed the City's computer system and the documents on microfiche and was unable to locate the entitlement information. Principal Planner and ,Zoning Administrator, Willa Bouwens-Killeen, located the annexation map and confirmed that these properties were not annexed into the City of Costa Mesa until 2000. Ms. Bouwens-Killeen also confirmed that those properties were not developed under the City Zoning Code. (Ex. 14.) 1482446.3 PALMIERi, TYLER, WIENER, WILHELM &WALDRON �1 Members of the Costa Mesa City Council March 17, 2015 Page 12 1312 Bristol is a new comparison property by Staff. It was not presented to the Planning Commission and could not have supported the Commissions unsupported decision. Notably, 1312 Bristol is not a C 1 zoned property. This office attempted to obtain the entitlement information for this property from the Planning Department. Despite providing the property address identification as presented in the current Staff Report --1312 Bristol --Planning Staff claimed that such an address did not exist in their planning system. Again, the Staff Report could not give any more than an "approximate" setback for 1312 Bristol. That indicates that there is no entitlement information available and/or that there was no variance given for that property (indicating that the setback is legal nonconforming). The information therefore lacks foundation and all other evidentiary support. The Staff comparisons to 1072, 1182 and 1312 Bristol also fail due to the amount of Ganahl lumberyard building that is being proposed in the setback area. 1072 and 1182 Bristol each have less than 50 lineal feet of building within the required setback area. While 1312 Bristol has more frontage on Bristol than the 1072 and 1182 properties, there are only pqrtions of the building within the setback required under the current Zoning Code. Ganahl seeks a monolithic 400 -plus foot wall of building within the required setback. (See Ex. 12.) The Ganahl project seeks a windfall privilege on a massive scale provided to no others on this reach of Bristol. Ganahl plans to put nearly 450 lineal feet of building (without any break) within the required setback. The differential treatment of Ganahl over all others in the City of Costa Mesa is frankly offensive. Ganahl seeks to use four - and -a -half football fields of a building in a setback that is already oversized due to an objectionable height variance and parking space relief. There is simply no comparison that can be made to any other property on Bristol. Ganahl seeks relief from all major zoning requirements on a massive scale simply because it wants relief from the City's requirements. No justification has been or can be provided for the privileges sought by Ganahl. The Ganahl Lumber yard project is not comparable to the 1072, 1182 and 1312 Bristol properties. 1482446.3 PALMIERI, TYLER, WIENER, WILHELM &_WALDKON � Members of the Costa Mesa City Council March 17, 2015 Page 13 3. The proposed height variance does not comply with the Zoning Code requirements for a variance. The variance approved by the Planning Commission from the height standards is not justified. Again, there are no special circumstances requiring the variance of the height standards. Rather, the "special circumstance" cited by the Staff Report to the Planning Commission was the use that is not permitted by the Zoning Code. No new evidence or justification for the height variance is posed by the current Staff Report. There is no support for the variance. Further, the conditions of approval approved by the Planning Commission provide that Ganahl can later install "rooftop solar canopies" on the B -shed (that required a height variance and a setback variance), increasing the height of the B -Shed even further, through a simple approval from the Development Services Director. That condition is also not supported. 4. Approval of the signage that doubles the height allowed by, the Zoning Code provides a privilege to Ganahl. There was no justification for the Planned Sign Program that the Planning Commission approved allowing a 24 -foot high freestanding sign --a 100 percent increase from what is allowable by the City Code. The Staff Report's claim that the approval "will not constitute a grant of special privilege or allow substantially greater overall visibility" is, to put it politely, totally and completely without support. The current Staff Report adds evidence not submitted to the Planning Commission to attempt to justify the privilege of the oversized Ganahl sign. Staff purports to include information of pylon signs of neighboring properties along Bristol. Again, this office attempted to obtain information on the sign approvals listed in Attachment S of the current Staff Report, armed with information of the property address and the permit number information identified in the Staff Report. Again, the Planning Department was unable to locate the sign approvals for those properties. The Planner assisting said that the permit numbers were not correct. (Ex. 13.) 1482446.3 PALMIER-[, TYLER, WIENER, WILHELM &WALDRON Members of the Costa Mesa City Council March 17, 2015 Page 14 There is no evidence in the record that the signs used to justify the Ganahl were approved under the current Zoning Code. The photos of the claimed "comparable" signage in the area demonstrate that the massing of the proposed Ganahl signage is much greater than the existing signs in the area. 5. The parking analysis contradicts the City's use analysis. The City and the applicant are inconsistent. Both Staff and the applicant pick and choose what use to apply in order to fit this project into the Zoning and reduce the requirements.. When it comes to use, Staff and the applicant tout the retail component of the project. When it comes to parking, Staff and the applicant tout the lumber yard component of the project to reduce the required parking. If this was a retail use, as claimed by Staff and the applicant in the use analysis, the parking requirements would be much greater -4 parking spaces for every 1,000 square -feet of building. Further, the discussion of the number of parking spaces provided on-site is misleading. While the project proposes 286 parking spaces, there is no discussion of the location of those spaces. For example, it appears that nearly 60 spaces are behind gates. 108 of the spaces are on the roof of the building. As a condition of approval, the employees are to exclusively use the roof parking. In the Staff Report to the Planning Commission and the applicant's presentation to the Planning Commission at the February 2015 hearing, it was mentioned that the "proposed facility would employ approximately 120 employees at full capacity..." This means that all of the roof parking would be taken by employees with some spilling over to the surface parking spaces. As discussed above, that means that there are really less than 50 parking spaces available for customers for the 99,516 square -feet of building in this project. Now, the current Staff Report claims that the Zoning Code allows a "unique parking rate for this project." Staff ridiculously claims that there is no parking requirement specified for hardware stores with outdoor lumberyards. There is a retail 1482446.3 PALMIERI, TYLER, WIENER, WILHELM &WALDRON � Members of the Costa Mesa City Council March 17, 2015 Page 15 parking requirement in the Zoning Code, however. Notably, when considering uses, Staff wanted to compare this use to the Home Depot in Harbor Center. Now, there is no such comparison because that Home Depot appears to comply with retail parking requirements. Further, while a proposed project can demonstrate that the parking required by the City's Zoning Code will substantially exceed the demand of the actual use, the City has not followed its own Code in this regard. Section 13-89.5 of the Zoning Code provides that in such situations, a reduction in the amount of required zoning must be approved by the zoning administrator by a minor conditional use permit. No CUP has approval of the reduction in the amount of parking has been requested or approved here. As demonstrated by the Zoning Code, such a process allows the zoning administrator to place conditions on the approval including requiring the excess parking be provided as landscaping (not consumed by open lumber yard storage) or requiring a recordation of a land use restriction to restrict future use to ensure adequate parking. None of that has occurred here. 6. The Ganahl Project does not comply with the FAR requirements of the Zoning Code. The proposed project does not comply with the FAR requirements. In an attempt to claim the project complies, the Staff Report explains that the FAR calculation does not include the 6,672 square -foot "Pole Shed" because the "Pole Shed" is not an enclosed building. As pointed out in our objection to the Planning Commission, the Zoning Code does not provide such an exception to the FAR calculation. Notably, the current Staff Report does not tie their "not an enclosed building" exception to the Zoning Code. Instead, it provides the objectionable claims of the property owner's irrelevant interpretation of the City's Zoning Code. By Staffs omission, it is evident that the Zoning Code does not provide for any such exception. In fact, Section 13-67 explains that the purpose of Article 8 of the Zoning Code regarding Floor Area Ratios is to "define the maximum building intensity for nonresidential developments. (Emphasis added.) 1482445.3 PALMIERI, TYLER, WIENER. WILHELM &WALDRON � Members of the Costa Mesa City Council March 17, 2015 Page 16 The Zoning Code specifically defines "building." That definition does not have any requirement of being enclosed or having a certain number of walls. Rather the definition provides it is "any structure having roof and walls and requiring permanent location on the ground, built and maintained for the support, shelter or enclosure of persons, animals, chattels or property of any kind." (Zoning Code, § 13-6 [emphasis added].) Based on the City's own Code, it is required to include the pole shed in the FAR calculation. That means that this project exceeds the allowable FAR, 7. The Supplemental Traffic Study received on the eve of this City Council hearing proves that there was no analysis of the impact to access to the properties on the south side of Bristol caused by the project's proposed (modifications to Bristol and that the (Mitigated Negative Declaration was and is deficient. The proposed changes to be made to Bristol were completely absent from the Staff Report to the Planning Commission and the conditions of approval approved by the Planning Commission. 1072 Bristol's objection caused Ganahl's consultants to get up before the Planning Commission and make unsubstantiated assertions that there would be no impact to access for existing properties --assertions that were contradicted by the information provided to the public in the Mitigated Negative Declaration. 1072 Bristol objected then (as it does now). 1072 Bristol pointed out that while the Mitigated Negative Declaration provides some information regarding the modifications to Bristol, the information provided lacks detail and analysis. On March 6, 2015, I received a call from Peter Ganahl. Mr. Ganahl asked about our objections to the project. I gave him an overview --he received improper preferential treatment from the City. His use wasn't legal. His project was too big, took up too much room, didn't set back far enough, was too tall, etc. We also discussed how his project was set up to prevent and impede my client's access to and from Bristol. Initially, Mr. Ganahl claimed that his new access point at the intersection of Bristol and Newport Blvd: would not affect access to 1072 Bristol. During our conversation it came out that Mr. 1482446.3 PALMIERI, TYLER, WIENER, WILHELM &WALDRON � Members of the Costa Mesa City Council March 17, 2015 Page 17 Ganahl was mistaken about the location of the 1072 Bristol building --he thought that the 1072 Bristol property was mid -block on the south side of Bristol. When I corrected him, I took him to concede that the left turn into the 1072 Bristol property for vehicles travelling west on Bristol would be terminated. Now, the applicant and the City have commissioned a "supplemental traffic study." The "supplement" was not available until March 16, 2015 --the day before this City Council hearing. Despite the late information, the Staff Deport that was publicly available as early as Thursday, March 12, 2015 was already recommending that the City Council uphold the Planning Commission's approval. How could Staff recommend approval when it did not have this information? This "supplement" was provided on the eve of the City Council hearing. The "supplement" shows a new and different plan for Bristol. (Cf. Supplemental Staff Report, Figures A and B to Appendix H of the Mitigated Negative Declaration, Figures 9-1, 9-2, 9-3, 10-1.) This "supplement" is proof that City Staff, the Planning Commission and the City in general (by way of the Mitigated Negative Declaration) did not analyze the impacts to access in the first instance. Yet, Staffs proposed draft Resolution for this City Council to adopt claims that "no significant new information has been added to the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration and no changes to the proposed project have occurred which would require recirculation of the Initial Study/Mitigate Negative Declaration . . . " This is just false. The conceptual plan for modifications to the Bristol/Newport Blvd. intersection has changed. In the Mitigated Negative Declaration, and to the Planning Commission, Ganahl proposed changes to the center median in front of 1072 Bristol that completely eliminated the left -turn in to the 1072 Bristol property. Now, the Supplemental Traffic Study purports to show a different plan that seems to provide a left -turn in to 1072 Bristol. Based on this new plan received on the eve of this hearing, it appears that the left turn would not allow a normal 90 -degree turning movement and would require realignment and widening of the drive apron on 1072 Bristol. The right side of the driveway entrance does not appear line up with where a car would be permitted to turn from in the median. As such, it would require a left -turn at an unconventional angle. 1072 Bristol appealed what was approved by the Planning Commission, Ganahl is apparently changing its project. Yet, Ganahl and the City are relying on the rest of the 1482446.3 PALMIERI, TYLER, WIENER, WILHELM &WALDRON 24 Members of the Costa Mesa City Council March 17, 2015 Page 18 flawed analysis in the Mitigated Negative Declaration. If the project has changed in this regard --a rather significant change as it relates to traffic --the proves that the Mitigated Negative Declaration is deficient. The Mitigated Negative Declaration did not and has not analyzed this new plan. The Mitigated Negative Declaration did not analyze the truck turning movements for trucks exiting the proposed Ganahl site. Any analysis was based on the prior conceptual plan --not the new and different plan. Further, as is apparent by this new iteration of the modifications to Bristol, Ganahl and the City could potentially change the center median again later to eliminate 1072 Bristol's access. Despite the fact that there are significant changes being made to the conceptual plan for Bristol compared to what was before the Planning Commission, Staff ridiculously requests that this City Council merely uphold the Planning Commission's decision. Doing so would not provide any approval or constraint on Ganahl regarding the new and different plan for the Bristol modifications. 8. The Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration is also deficient as the analysis was based on the application of an incorrect zoning assumption. The Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration is deficient. Its analysis is premised on the application of an incorrect zoning assumption --that the proposed project complies with the C-1 zoning. It does not consider the impacts to access to properties on the south side of Bristol caused by the project's proposed modifications to Bristol. It does not consider the light and glare impacts caused by the numerous reflective surfaces being added. 4. Conclusion. The City has improperly approved a project for Ganahl that flat-out accords preferential status to Ganahl. The approval is totally unsupported by evidence, findings and the City's Municipal Code. The following should be offended by the unsupported approval by the Planning Commission: 1482446,3 PALMIERI, TYLER, WIENER, WILHELM &WALDRON Members of the Costa Mesa City Council March 17, 2015 Page 19 • Anyone who has built a compliant project in Costa Mesa. • Anyone who is in the planning process in Costa Mesa and is being told that the City has actual requirements. • Anyone who was deterred from building a project in Costa Mesa due to published requirements. • Anyone who was interested in the County's property but were deterred by published requirements. • Those who believe in a level playing field in dealing with the City To uphold the Planning Commission's decision and approve this proposed project would relieve Ganahl Lumber of virtually all of the requirements of the Zoning Code that are applied, on a regular basis, to other property owners and users. Based on the foregoing objections, the objections previously made by 1072 Bristol Partners and incorporating any and all objections to this project made by others, 1072 Bristol Partners requests that the City Council to reject the Planning Commission's adoption of the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration and the Ganahl Lumber application. MHL:ebn cc: Mel Lee, Senior Planner 1482446.3 Very truly yours, M�ohae1 H T- eif r MEJIA, JESSICA Subject: FW: Objection to the Proposed Ganahl Lumber Yard Project - Exhibits 1 of 3 Attachments: Exhibits 1 to 5.pdf From: Michelle M. Pase [mailto:MPase@ptwww.com] Sent: Tuesday, March 17, 2015 4:41 PM To: LEE, MEL; GREEN, BRENDA; CITY COUNCIL Cc: Michael H. Leifer; Erin Balsara Naderi; Michelle M. Pase Subject: Objection to the Proposed Ganahl Lumber Yard Project - Exhibits 1 of 3 In advance of tonight's City Council meeting, please find enclosed an objection letter to the Ganahl Project for distribution to the City Council. Exhibits will be sent by 3 separate e-mails due to the size of the PDF attachment. Michelle Pase I Assistant to Michael H. Leifer, Erin B. Palmieri, Tyler, Wiener, Wilhelm & Waldron LLP 2603 Main Street, Suite 1300 1 Irvine, CA 92614 Direct Dial (949) 851-7325 1 Facsimile (949) 851-1554 Email I Website Naderi, and Steven R. Guess 1"ur.uiN IRS Circular 230 Disclosure: Pursuant to Internal Revenue Service Circular 230, only formal opinions satisfying specific requirements may be relied on for the purpose of avoiding certain penalties under the Internal Revenue Code. Any tax advice contained in this communication (including attachments) does not constitute a formal opinion satisfying such requirements. Accordingly, we must advise you that any such tax advice was not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, by you or any other person as such an opinion for the purpose of (i) avoiding penalties imposed under the Internal Revenue Code or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any matters addressed herein, This message and any attached documents contain information from the law firm of Palmieri, Tyler, Wiener, Wilhelm & Waldron LLP that may be privileged and confidential and protected from disclosure. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, or an employee or agent responsible for delivering this message to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by replying to the message and deleting it from your computer. Thank you. EXHIBIT 1 I039904A 0 EXHIBIT 2 1039904.1 (ifi kf ((! §k ;||I - /\}� f� [} r[ 2 {, ! f$ �{ \/ * aj / ! | | ;( 7 EXHIBIT 3 1039904.1 Commercial, Government and Industrial Sales Lumber Plywood D.O.D. Specialty Douglas Fir CDX, Struct 1, OSB Fire Treated Lumber - Rough, S4S, All Sizes BBOES, CCX PTS, U/L Heat Treated Lumber Pine Sanded Damage Control Plugs #2 & #3 Common, Clear - ACX, ABX, Marine, Shop Wedges All Patterns, All Sizes Siding Solid Wood Block • Cedar T-1 11, 3/8" and 5/8" Target Frames STK, Clear, Rough, 54S 4x8 — 4x10 Railroad Ties - All Patterns, All Sizes Particle Board, MDO, HDD Cribbing Spruce Hardboard - S4S, S3S, All Patterns Insulation & Sound Board Additional Services Crating Grade • Plastic Laminates • Level "A" Packaging Pressure Treated • Hardwood Plywoods Special Order Certified Lumber - Oak, Birch, Mahogany Delivery Engineered Wood - Walnut, Okoume/Meranti - CONUS and OCONUS • Decking &Fencing •Custom Milling General Hardware Hardwood Lumber TAA Compliant Windows • Domestic and Import Power Tools Wood, Vinyl, Clad, Metal - Walnut, Alder, Poplar, Ash - Dewalt, Milwaukee, Hitachi Patio Doors - Maple, Birch, Cherry, Oak Fein, Festool and More - Sliding, Lift -n -Slide, French - Purple Heart, Apitong Hand Tools, Accessories Commercial / Residential - Honduran Mahogany Cabinet Hardware Skylights More Species Available Measuring Tools • Hardwood Mouldings Fasteners Doors • Lacey Act Compliant Simpson Strong -Tie Exterior Nails, Wire Products -Entry Doors Millwork • moor Hardware Wood, Steel, Fiberglass Moulding - Commercial & Institutional Interior MDF, Pine, PVC - Paint and Stain Grade - Custom Profiles Available Finishes - Wood, MDF, Hardboard • Paints and Stains Commercial Building Materials Benjamin Moore Dealer - Hollow Metal Insulation - Custom Mixing - Pre -Finished Steel Frames Concrete Products • Sundries - Hardware, ADA Steel Products - Applicators (brushes/Rollers) Gypsum Board, Roofing - Tape, Sandpaper, Tools Polyfilm - Bulk Pricing Available Ceiling Systems �� Ad vantage j m Advantage! Contract GS -07F -0133U P 91F,' 1220 E. BALL RD. ez`4oaa w�— ANAHEIM, ICA 92805 FXHIRIT A TOLL FREE: 1 855 422 3661 PHONE: (714) 956 2050 FAX : (714) 772 4237 EMAIL: gsasalesCganahl.com Visit Our New Expanded Selection of Hardwoods at Ganahl Anaheim! We're not the best because we're over 125 years old, we're over 125 years old because we're the best! Ganahl Lumber Company is the oldest privately owned lumberyard in California. Others have come and gone, but we're still here because our customers 0 value hospitality and quality products! Scan QR Cade to learn more TOLL FREE: 1 855 422 3661 PHONE: (714) 956 2050 FAX: (714) 772 4237 EMAIL: gsasales@ganahl.com Complete Milling & Delivery Services Available Advantage! TIA Contract GS -07F -0133U 8 OTHER CONVENIENT LOCATIONS 6586BBW818UMa 391628OM O'PAOI[RR SOW.BIMSi Yn5SBRISLOL TIfi5LA1BIOACANYONRR 2313208A111 A8E 11902LOSAIA86L0SB0FO 30O3ECOLORDOBLY0. BUNF71RN 991522.2880 CAP8i1WORN 1949149"Ab COW 199112784880 COSOIMM (191556.1589 LUMBM 1949149MB WIFFORIST 1949183&3800 IASAMOS 9141521.2285 PASAB9fA 184819Si1158 OPNNTWPYSANITNI ARNMBN-$ANNOSIDENN BPfNMNNdA OMOSNN 9MN7AAYS.AWO NPNNMONSANCI=80N NNAMOM UNIWON 1KNi9AYS1WFM[ FXHIRIT VISIT WS ONLINE ganahllumbencomlindustrial-sales TOLL FREE: 1 855 422 3661 PHONE: (714) 956 2050 FAX: (714) 772 4237 EMAIL: gsasales@ganahl.com Complete Milling & Delivery Services Available Advantage! TIA Contract GS -07F -0133U 8 OTHER CONVENIENT LOCATIONS 6586BBW818UMa 391628OM O'PAOI[RR SOW.BIMSi Yn5SBRISLOL TIfi5LA1BIOACANYONRR 2313208A111 A8E 11902LOSAIA86L0SB0FO 30O3ECOLORDOBLY0. BUNF71RN 991522.2880 CAP8i1WORN 1949149"Ab COW 199112784880 COSOIMM (191556.1589 LUMBM 1949149MB WIFFORIST 1949183&3800 IASAMOS 9141521.2285 PASAB9fA 184819Si1158 OPNNTWPYSANITNI ARNMBN-$ANNOSIDENN BPfNMNNdA OMOSNN 9MN7AAYS.AWO NPNNMONSANCI=80N NNAMOM UNIWON 1KNi9AYS1WFM[ FXHIRIT EXHIBIT 4 1034404.1 EXHIBIT 5 1039904.1 May 4, 1992 CITY OF COSTA MESA CALIFORNIA 92628.1200 P,Ov BOK 1200 DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT Wendy Humphreys 125 Melville Drive Fullerton, CA 92635 RE= PLANNING ACTION PA -91-26 CONDITIONAL USE PMWIT TO OPERATE A MOBILE FOOD CART NEAR THE ENTRANCE OF AN EXISTING COMMERCIAL BUILDING 1.275 SOUTH BRISTOL, COS'T'A MESA Hear•Ms Humghrsys: As the above permit was due for review March 11, 1992, Staff inspected the subject site. The property has been found to satisfy the conditions of Approval, of the subject permit, and to be in compliance with applicable ordinance requirements. In addition, no complaints have been received regarding the property or use. The subject permit is extended for an additional two years, and will expire March 11, 1994. At that time, a further extension must be requested should you wish to continue the operation. If you have any questions or concerns, please feel free to call me at 754-5245. Sincerely, STEVEN CIARKE ASSISTANT PLANNER (1 Z75S8R1X7'R)1I cc: Harrington Investment company Attn. J. Harrington P.O. Box 1158 Huntington Beach, CA 92647 77 FAIR DRIVE Bullding Division (714) 754-5626 • Code EnforcemanVOusinsas LIc®ns® (714) 754.5234 + Planning Division (714) 754-5245 FAX {714) 556.7506 EXHIBIT 5 PLANNING 01VISION STAFF REPORT SITE LOCATION 1275 South Bristol APPLICATION NO. AGENDA NO. PA -91-26 AP # 427-362-01 MANDATORY ACTION DATE August 25, 1991 APPLICANT Harrington Investment C�mpan�iUTWORCZED AGENT Wendy Humphreys r 9 ecor ADDRESS P O Box 1188 ADDRESS 128 Melville Drive Attn: J. Harrington ^� Fullerton, CA 92635 Huntington Beach, CA 92647 Applicant Is reminded that all ordinances and regulations PREPARED BY Steven C. Clarke governing the use of the land or building(s) to which this applf Assistant Planner cation psrtalns must be complied with whether specified SUBMITTED BY Steven C. Clarke heroin or not. Assistant Planner REQUEST: For a conditional LIoa Permit tip, +4pa7t:at* a m.*iDiie food cart bear the entrance of an iSting 00fterldial bulldinq. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: APPLICANT NOTIFIED ns DATE March 14, 1991 CITY OF COSTA MESA, 77 FAIR DRIVE, COSTA MESA, CA 92628-1200 (714) 754.6245 , Ain+ &So EXHIBIT 5 APDL. PAGE � I. Location - 1275 South Bristol Street 2. General Plan Designation - General Commercial 3. Zone - C2 4. Present Development - 42,225 sq. ft. commercial ]building. 5. Lot Area - 5.15 ac. 6. CEQA - Exempt B. avrreendinq Brenartiv 1. North - 73 (Corona Del Mar) Freeway 2. South - Across Briatol, R2 & Cl, apts. and restaurant 3. East - C1, Retail 4. West - Cl, Vacant a. a2mwnt Conditional Use Permit to Operate a mobile pushcart near the entrance of an existing commercial building (Barr Lumber). ilojsitl :' !' Applicant proposes to operate a mobile pushcart that sella; hot dogs and sodas on the property of an existing retail hardware and lumber store (Barr Lumber). The location of the pushcart will be near the store entrance. The proposed hours of operation are 9:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. and the cart will be removed from the site daily. Because the proposed use will not be conducted underroof, a Conditional Use Permit is required. The site currently has adequate parking for the existing use (169 spaces required, 198 provided) and the proposed use should not generate an increased parking requirement or impact any existing spaces. Additionally, the proposed location of the pushcart will not obstruct the flow of either vehicular or pedestrian access, on site. 2- EXHIBIT 5 APP%. PAGE 3 �� On February 4, 1991, the City Council adopted an.ordinance amending the regulation of pushcart operations within the City. The proposed pushcart operation appears to meet the revised regulation in regard to location and dimension. The amended regulations will be included as Conditions of Approval to insure future compliance. The proposed pushcart use will be appurtenant to the existing retail use and should not significantly impact the existing development or surrounding developments. IV, RIVQ11 A. The'information presented substantially complies with Sections 9-191.13 and 13-347 of the Municipal Code in that the proposed pushcart is substantially compatible with developments in the same general area' granting the.Conditional Use Permit -will not be detrimental to the health, safety and general welfare of the public or other properties or improvements within the immediate vicinity; and granting the Conditional Use Permit will not allow a use, density or intensity which is not in accordance with the General Plan designation for the property. H. The project is consistent with Article 22-1/2, Transportation Systems Management, of the Costa Mesa Municipal Code in that no intersection to which the project contributes measurable traffic shall operate at less that the Standard Level of Service as a result of project implementation. Approve, subject to conditions. Shall meet all requirements of the various City Departments, copy attached hereto. J EXHIBIT 5 Ping. 1. Development shall comply with all requirements of Article 2, Chapter I1., Title 9 of the Costa Mesa Municipal Code. EXHIBIT 5 ADPL. RA=21--a. PAHO �. Ping. 1. The operator's permit shall be affixed to the pushcart in plain view, as required by the newly adopted pushcart ordinance. 2. The pushcart may not obstruct the normal flow of vehicular or pedestrian access, within ten (10) feet of any intersection, driveway, or building entrance, or in 3. any space designated for vehicular parking. The maximuM dimension of any pushcart shall not exceed six (6) feet in length by four (4) feet in width. 4. Only signs affixed to or painted on the pushcart or its canopy will be permitted. 5. The operator of the pushcart is required to wear a uniform as defined in Section 9-191.1 Cade. of the Municipal 6• 7• No artificial lighting of any pushcart is permitted. A refuse bin of at least one cubic foot shall 'be provided in or -on the pushcart. a. The Conditional- use' Permit herein approved shall be valid until revoked, but shall expire upon discontinuance of the activity authorized hereby for a period of 180 days or more. The Conditional Use Permit may be referred to the Planning commission for modification or revocation at any time if the Conditions of Approval have not been complied with, if the use is being operated in violation of applicable laws or ordinances, or if, in the opinion of the Development Services Director or his designee, any of the findings upon which the approval was based are no longer applicable. 9• A copy Of the conditions of approval for the Conditional Use Permit must be kept on premises and presented to any authorized City official upon request. New business/property owners shall be notified of conditions of approval upon transfer of business or ownership of land. Trans. 10. The mobile food cart may not be operated in any location that will obstruct pedestrian or vehicular traffic or obstruct vehicle sight distance. Ping. 1. Development shall comply with all requirements of Article 2, Chapter I1., Title 9 of the Costa Mesa Municipal Code. EXHIBIT 5 ADPL, I f PAGIS 5 z. Development shall comply with all requirements of Article 16, Chapter 11,0 Title 13 of the Costa Mesa Municipal Code. 3. Permits shall be obtained for all signs, including banners and other special event signing, according to the provisions of the Costa Mesa Sign ordinance. Bldg. 4. Comply with the requirements of the Uniform Building code as to design and construction. Fire 5. Cart may not block egress or exit path from building at any time. C EXHIBIT 5 From: Michelle M. Pase [mailto:MPase@ptwww.com] Sent: Tuesday, March 17, 2015 4:41 PM To: LEE, MEL; GREEN, BRENDA; CITY COUNCIL Cc: Michael H. Leifer; Erin Balsara Naderi; Michelle M. Pase Subject: Objection to the Proposed Ganahl Lumber Yard Project - Exhibits 2 of 3 In advance of tonight's City Council meeting, please find enclosed an objection letter to the Ganahl Project for distribution to the City Council. Exhibits will be sent by 3 separate e-mails due to the size of the PDF attachment. Michelle Pase I Assistant to Michael H. Leifer, Erin B. Naderi, and Steven R. Guess Palmieri, Tyler, Wiener, Wilhelm & Waldron LLP 2603 Main Street, Suite 1300 1 Irvine, CA 92614 Direct Dial (949) 851-7325 1 Facsimile (949) 851-1554 11MMM J*AL sig M. I� LLFL WIEN[ & WiLl i Ldns ,�, VVAI LIMNI Email I Website IRS Circular 230 Disclosure: Pursuant to Internal Revenue Service Circular 230, only formal opinions satisfying specific requirements may be relied on for the purpose of avoiding certain penalties under the Internal Revenue Code. Any tax advice contained in this communication (including attachments) does not constitute a formal opinion satisfying such requirements. Accordingly, we must advise you that any such tax advice was not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, by you or any other person as such an opinion for the purpose of (i) avoiding penalties imposed under the Internal Revenue Code or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any matters addressed herein. This message and any attached documents contain information from the law firm of Palmieri, Tyler, Wiener, Wilhelm & Waldron LLP that may be privileged and confidential and protected from disclosure. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, or an employee or agent responsible for delivering this message to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by replying to the message and deleting it from your computer. Thank you. EXHIBIT 6 1039904.1 2 0:�—"' t. - u M v 0 1-1 10 EXHIBIT 7 1039904.1 a, --- -- — M Sol- Y-1 iwqj A, Ball VIN ?In i! ' •., +4 .. y� �r sk ma +rx F/ • SII I 1io aw r 1 Boise Casa: �i EXHIBIT 7 35 EXHIBIT 7 Nq rW 10—W - _ r EXHIBIT 7 rt •�.> I�[1II V -01J SAWIT LUMBER — . Pa >, z. „ti . a CUTTING r+� POLICY =A0f 41 _�� ■r= :µCi: FREE; ra. eat+atluawc� �o. _ ••-_•�. •-•^ - Foul M[Nt m 9E oPlRII By nwP oyws may � - -- e.... _ t i x. �. _ i�^ � i n®In�1RRp 7YfRwed � r -i w $ Ra3nnR-. �i7 III , � ` !•rofw i®�ufl InValta�lue ■.aAa6f� ��use Uur Af-home Sarrises,�copram � S6 Reliable 16 Quality Work ..._ • —.-- Y�J Satisfaction e �Il Financing I Win. ° • � �. ---- ter; EXHIBIT 7 rt IFi L_1 1 EXHIBIT 7 r''II W j I 5 � E ji yof p IJI U4 M � it E 1 J € I ,ai ifaeli i a IFi L_1 1 EXHIBIT 7 r''II INN "ImF � A3�• ALI .w. w mom, • . ' r r urnnn r EXHIBIT 7 AN S• `"ru.0 wr NMY 4btf wVrgOgq WOW f i IWA iNOOOR iisaa Re EXHIBIT 8 1039904.1 City of Torrance, Community Development Department Jeffery W. Gibson, Director 3031 Torrance Blvd., Torrance, CA 90503 (310) 618-5990 Environmental Checklist Form 1. Project Title: 2. Lead Agency Name and Address: 3. Contact Person and Phone Number: 4. Project Location: 5. Project Sponsor's Name & Address: 6. General Plan Designation: 7. Zoning: 8. Description of the Project: (Describe the whole action involved, including but not limited to later phases of the project, and any secondary, support, or off-site features necessary for its implementation. Attach additional sheets if necessary.) Detailed Project Description: Project Background History of Ganahl Lumber Company Ganahl Lumber South Bay Project City of Torrance 3031 Torrance Boulevard Torrance, CA 90503 Gregg Lodan, Planning Manager (310) 618-5990 2600 Del Amo Boulevard Torrance, CA 90503 Ganahl Lumber Company 1220 East Ball Road Anaheim, CA 92805 Heavy Industrial (max 0.6 FAR) M2 — Heavy Manufacturing The Proposed Project consist of the construction and operation of a new lumberyard and building supply sales store in the City of Torrance that would serve as a distribution center to the South Bay and surrounding areas. The new facility would include one main building, three sheds, and a maintenance building. Ganahl Lumber Company is the oldest lumberyard in California. In 1884, an Austrian immigrant named Christian Ganahl and his brother Frank moved to Los Angeles from St. Louis. Christian Ganahl purchased a lumber company and named it the C. Ganahl Lumber Company. Eventually there were several yards located throughout the Los Angeles area, including one he opened in Anaheim in 1904. In the 1930s the inventory of the lumber business continued to change with the addition of hardware. In the late 1940's there was a growing interest in millwork products so Ganahl opened a mill division. Through the years the company has acquired other locations throughout the counties of Orange, Los Angeles, and Riverside, making the company the nine -store business it is today. EXHIBIT 8 Page 1 of 64 City of Torrance, Community Development Department Jeffery W. Gibson, Director 3031 Torrance Blvd., Torrance, CA 90503 (310) 618-5990 Environmental Checklist Form Relevance of Ganahl Lumber to Torrance and the South Bay The City of Torrance has a 100 -year history as a model industrial town. The city was envisioned by J. Sydney Torrance as a haven for workers and industrialists alike, in contrast with other portions of Southern California which were experiencing labor unrest. Improved housing conditions for workers were also part of the vision. Architect Irving Gill and city designer Frederick Law Olmsted Jr. contributed to envision the town plan. Old Torrance still bears some of the signature features of these designers, with features like landscaped parkways, a prebuilt sewer system, and civic center. Early enterprises such as the Hendrie Rubber Company and Glass Factory, Llewellyn Ironworks, and service by the Union Pacific Railway, helped establish the model for industrial use in the community. With the discovery of oil in the city in the 1920s, the community started to develop further. Around the time that the City of Torrance was being formed, Ganahl was shipping lumber down along the Pacific Coast from the northwest forests and milling locations down to Southern California. Ganahl helped the South Bay region grow in the early 20th Century as a major lumber supplier to the region. Several generations later, Ganahl Lumber proposes to return to this area with a new store and distribution center. Project Characteristics The Proposed Project includes the construction and operation of a new lumberyard, building materials retail store, and distribution center for the Ganahl Lumber Company. The Proposed Project seeks to establish a variety of simple details and materials, reflecting the values of Ganahl Lumber Company and the City of Torrance. This would be accomplished by providing durable and sustainable design, arranged in a way that would provide for a state-of-the-art building materials facility, while adhering to the City's General Plan intent. Building A, Sheds, and Maintenance Building The new facility would include one main building and three sheds: Building A, B Shed, Mill Shed, and Pole Shed, and a separate Maintenance Building. Total gross square footage (GSF) and features for these structures are listed in Table 1. A Site Plan is included as Figure 1. Table 1. Gross Square Footage The total area of the site is 808,384 SF (18.6 acres), which equates to a floor area ratio of 0.204. EXHIBIT 8 Page 2of64 Gross Square Feet Structure (GSF) Building A: • Main Store Sales • Doors and Windows • Sales Offices/Counters 86,102 • Mezzanine • Control Room • Will -Call Storage (storage/operations offices) B Shed 40,507 Mill Shed and Mill Office 13,395 Pole Shed 21,374 Maintenance Building 3,528 TOTAL 164,906 The total area of the site is 808,384 SF (18.6 acres), which equates to a floor area ratio of 0.204. EXHIBIT 8 Page 2of64 EXHIBIT 9 1039904.1 ()iL 400 oq EXHIBIT 9 . .. 1 120 BRISTOL STREET 1 122 BRISTOL STREET 1 124 BRISTOL STREET THESE OFFICE BUILDINGS HAVE BEEN APPROVED AT A LOW TRAFFIC F.A.R. OF 0.40 See DR -02-04 for details PROHIBITED USES: o MEDICAL USE /Rt4ct;/ o OR ANY USE IDENTIFIED AS MODERATE OR HIGH TRAFFIC F.A.R. EXHIBIT 9 MAX. ALLOWED PROPOSED F.A.R. 1 0.40 (39,378 SQ.FT.) 0.40 (39,250 SQ.FT.) See DR -02-04 for details PROHIBITED USES: o MEDICAL USE /Rt4ct;/ o OR ANY USE IDENTIFIED AS MODERATE OR HIGH TRAFFIC F.A.R. EXHIBIT 9 November 1, 2002 CITY OF COSTA MESA P.O. BOX 1200 - 77 FAIR DRIVE - CALIFORNIA 92828-1200 DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT Terry Loomis Irvine Ranch Water Service Co./LLC 15600 Sand Canyon Ave. Irvine, CA 92618 RE: DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DR -02-04 1122 BRISTOL STREET, COSTA MESA Dear Mr. Loomis: The Development Review for the above -referenced project has been completed. The various City departments have recommended approval of the proposal based on the following description and findings, and subject to the following conditions: DESCRIPTION The applicant proposes to construct three (3), 2 -story office buildings, totaling 39,250 square feet on a vacant lot (formerly Santa Ana Heights Water Company). The property is approximately 2 acres in size, is zoned C1 (Local Business District) and has a General Plan designation of General Commercial. The proposed development meets or exceeds all commercial development standards. FINDINGS I A. Approval of the development review will allow a use, density, and intensity that is in accordance with the General Plan designation for the property. Specifically, the General Plan designation for the subject property is General Commercial, which allows general office use. The proposed development also complies with all commercial development standards. B. The proposed project complies with Costa Mesa Municipal Code Section 13-29 (e) because: a. The proposed development and use is compatible and harmonious with uses both on-site as well as those on surrounding properties. b. Safety and compatibility of the design of the buildings, parking areas, landscaping, luminaries, and other site features including functional aspects of the site development such as automobile and pedestrian Bul *q DlvWw (714) 754-5273 - Code EntoMonenl (714) 754-5823 - Plem*V DMaian (714) 7545245 FAX (714) 754-4858 - TDD (714) 754.5244 - www d.costagnw&cs.us EXHIBIT 9 November 1, 2002 DR -02-04 Page 2 circulation have been considered. c. The project is consistent with the General Plan. d. The planning application is for a project -specific case and does not establish a precedent for future development. C. An initial study was prepared, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act. Although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, according to the initial study and mitigated negative declaration, which reflect the independent judgment of the City of Costa Mesa, there will not be a significant effect on the environment because mitigation measures have been added to the project. D. The project is exempt from Chapter XII, Article 3, Transportation System Management, of Title 13 of the Costa Mesa Municipal Code. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL * Mitigation Measures Ping. Address assignment shall be requested from the Planning Division prior to submittal of working drawings for plan check. The approved address of individual units, suites, buildings, etc., shall be blueprinted on the site plan and on all floor plans in the working drawings. 1. Prior to issuance of building permits, applicant shall contact the US Postal Service with regard to location and design of mail delivery facilities. Such facilities shall be shown on the site plan, landscape plan, and/or floor plan. 2. Street addresses shall be displayed on the freestanding sign or, if there is no freestanding sign, on the fascia or store front adjacent to the main entrance of the building, in a manner visible to the public street. Numerals shall be a minimum 12" in height with not less than %" stroke and shall contrast sharply with the background. Identification of individual units shall be provided adjacent to the unit entrances. Letters or numerals shall be 4" in height with not fess than A " stroke and shall contrast sharply with the background. 3. The subject property's ultimate finished grade level may not be filled/raised in excess of 30" above the finished grade of any abutting property. If additional fill dirt is needed to provide acceptable onsite stormwater flow to a public street, an alternative means of accommodating that drainage shall be approved by the City's Building Official prior to issuance of any grading or building permits. Such alternatives may include subsurface tie-in to public stormwater facilities, subsurface drainage collection systems and/or sumps with mechanical pump discharge in -lieu of gravity flow. if mechanical pump method is determined appropriate, said mechanical pump(s) EXHIBIT 9 November 1, 2002 DR -02-04 Page 3 shall continuously be maintained in working order. In any case, development of subject property shall preserve or improve the existing pattern of drainage on abutting properties. 4. To avoid an alley -like appearance, if the driveway is paved with asphalt, it shall be developed without a center concrete swale. Design shall be approved by the Planning Division. 5. All new construction shall be architecturally compatible with regard to building materials, style, colors, etc. Plans submitted for plan check shall indicate how architectural compatibility will be accomplished. 6. The applicant shall contact AT&T/Broadband Cable Television of Costa Mesa at 200 Paularino, Costa Mesa, (888.255.5789) prior to issuance of building permits to arrange for pre -wiring for future cable communication service. 7. The conditions of approval and code requirements of DR -02-04 shall be blueprinted on the face of the site plan as part of the plan check submittal package. 8. The applicant shall contact the Planning Division to arrange for a Planning inspection of the site prior to the release of occupancy/utilities. This inspection is to confirm that the conditions of approval and code requirements have been satisfied. 9. All rooftop mechanical equipment shall be screened from view on- and off-site as depicted in the approved plans. 10. Show method of screening for all ground -mounted equipment (backflow prevention devices, Fire Department connections, electrical transformers, etc.). Ground -mounted equipment shall not be located in any landscaped setback visible from the street, except when required by applicable uniform codes, and shall be screened from view, under the direction of Planning Staff. 11. 6 exterior roof access ladders, staircases, roof drain scuppers, or roof drain downspouts shall be permitted. * 12. SCAQMD Rule 403 shall be adhered to, ensuring the clean up of construction -related dirt on approach routes to the site. Rule 403 prohibits the release of fugitive dust emissions from any active operation, open storage pile, or disturbed surface area beyond the property line of the emission source. Particulate matter deposits on public roadways are also prohibited. *13. Adequate watering techniques shall be employed to partially mitigate the impact of construction -generated dust particulates. Portions of the project site that are undergoing earth moving operations shall be watered such that a crust will be formed on the ground surface and then watered again at the end of the day. * 14. Grading operations shall be suspended during first and second stage ozone episodes or when winds exceed 25 mph. EXHIBIT 9 November 1, 2002 DR -02-04 Page 4 Eng. 15. Maintain the public right-of-way in a "wet -down" condition to prevent excessive dust and promptly remove any spillage from the public right- of-way by sweeping or sprinkling. SUMMARY OF CODE REQUIREMENTS * Mitigation Measures The following list of Federal, State, and local laws applicable to the project has been compiled by Staff for the applicant's reference. Any reference to "City" pertains to the City of Costa Mesa. Ping 1 . All contractors and subcontractors must have valid business licenses to do business in the City of Costa Mesa. Final occupancy will not be granted until all such licenses have been obtained. 2. Approval of the development is valid for one (1) year and will expire at the end of that period unless building permits are obtained and construction commences, or the applicant applies for and is granted an extension of time. 3. Mechanical equipment, transformers, etc., shall not be located in any landscaped setbacks visible from the street. 4. Permits shall be obtained for all signs according to the provisions of the Costa Mesa Sign Ordinance. 5. Development shall comply with all requirements of Section 45 and Article 9, Chapter V, Title 13 of the Costa Mesa Municipal Code relating to commercial development standards. 6. All on-site utility services shall be installed underground. 7. Installation of all utility meters shall be performed in a manner so as to obscure the installation from view from any place on or off the %property. The installation shall be in a manner acceptable to the public utility and shall be in the form of a vault, wall cabinet, or wall box under the direction of the Planning Division. 8. Parking stalls shall be double -striped in accordance with City standards. 9. Any mechanical equipment such as air-conditioning equipment, duct work, and fire sprinkler risers shall be screened from view in a manner approved by the Planning Division. 10. All required setbacks abutting a public right-of-way shall be landscaped (except for walks and driveways which provide access from a public right of way). The property owner shall be responsible for the maintenance of the landscaping on the property. 11. Trash enclosures or other acceptable means of trash disposal shall be provided. Design of trash enclosures shall conform with City standards. Standard drawings are available from the Planning Division. EXHIBIT 9 November 1, 2002 DR -02-04 Page 5 12. Four (4) sets of detailed landscape and irrigation plans shall be required as part of the project plan check review and approval process. Three (3) sets shall be provided to the representative water agency and one (1) set shall be submitted to the Planning Division for review. Plans shall be approved by the water agency with two (2) approved sets forwarded by the applicant to the Planning Division for final approval prior to issuance of building permits. 13. Two (2) sets of landscape and irrigation plans, approved by both the water agency and the Planning Division, shall be attached to two of the final building plan sets. 14. Landscape and irrigation plans shall meet the requirements set forth in Costa Mesa Municipal Code Sections 13-101 through 13-108 as well as irrigation requirements set forth by the water agency. Consult with the representative water agency Mesa Consolidated Water District, Chris Blank — (949) 631-1291. 15. Landscaping and irrigation shall be installed in accordance with the approved plans prior to final inspection or occupancy clearance. 16. All landscaped areas shall be separated from paved vehicular areas by 6" high continuous Portland Cement Concrete curbing. *17 Prior to the initiation of any work on the site (including, but not limited to, grading), applicant shall contact the County of Orange Solid Waste Local Enforcement Agency (714-667-3600) for application procedures and guidelines. Issuance of building permits will be held until a clearance report is issued by the health agency and is submitted to the Planning Division. * 18. If present and/or projected exterior noise exceeds 65 CNEL, commercial and industrial buildings shall meet the following interior noise standards: Level Use L (eQ)*(12)** Private office, conference room, etc. 45 dB(A) General office, reception, clerical, etc. 50 dB(A) *L (eq) is the equivalent sound level for a specified time period in dB(A). **Measured from 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. or other appropriate, approved time period. If required interior noise levels are achieved by requiring that windows be unopenable or closed, the design for the structure must also specify the means that will be employed to provide ventilation, and cooling if necessary, to provide a habitable interior environment. EXHIBIT 9 November 1, 2002 DR -02-04 Page 6 Bldg Eng *19. In compliance with the provisions of the California Administrative Code, Title 25, Chapter 1, Subchapter 1, Article 4, the applicant shall submit an acoustical analysis of the proposed development, prepared under the supervision of a person experienced in the field of acoustical engineering. Two copies of the report shall be submitted with the application for building permits. The acoustical analysis shall evaluate existing and projected noise levels, noise attenuation measures to be applied, and the noise insulation effectiveness of the proposed construction. The person preparing the report shall, under the direction of a person experienced in the field of acoustical engineering, perform an inspection of the project prior to or at the time of the framing inspection to certify that construction techniques comply with recommendations contained within the acoustical analysis. Upon completion of the subject structures, field tests may be required under the provisions of Title 25. *20. Construction, grading, materials delivery, equipment operation or other noise -generating activity shall be limited to between the hours of 7 a.m. and 8 p.m., Monday through Friday, and between the hours of 8 a.m. and 7 p.m. on Saturday, Sunday, and Federal holidays. Exceptions may be made for activities that will not generate noise audible from off-site, such as painting and other quiet interior work. 21. In compliance with the City's mitigation monitoring program, the applicant shall submit a compliance report to the Planning Division along with plans for plan check, that lists each mitigation measure and states when and how the mitigation measures are to be met. *22. Comply with the requirements of the Uniform Building Code as to design and construction and CCR Title 24 pertaining to "Disabled l Access Regulations". 23. Prior to or concurrent with submittal of plans for building plan check, applicant shall submit a Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) that identifies the application and incorporation of those routine structural and non-structural Best Management Practices (BMPs) outlined in the Countywide National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Drainage Area Management Plan (DAMP), Appendix G. The WQMP shall detail implementation of BMPs not dependent on specific land uses, for review and approval by the Development Services Department. 24. At the time of development submit for approval an off-site plan to the Engineering Division and grading plan to the Building Division that shows sewer, water, existing parkway improvements and the limits of work on the site, both prepared by a civil engineer or architect. Construction access approval must be obtained prior to building or engineering permits being issued by the City of Costa Mesa. Pay EXHIBIT 9 November 1, 2002 DR -02-04 Page 7 offsite plan check fee to the Engineering Division. An approved offsite plan and fee shall be required prior to engineering/utility permits being issued by the City. 25. A construction access permit and deposit of $750 for street sweeping will be required by the Engineering Division prior to the start of any on- or off-site work. 26. Submit required cash deposit or surety bond to guarantee construction of offsite street improvements at time of permit per Costa Mesa Municipal Code Section 15-32, and as approved by City engineer. Cash deposit or surety bond amount to be determined by the City engineer. 27. Obtain a permit from the Engineering Division, at the time of development and then construct 8' wide P.C.C. commercial sidewalk per City of Costa Mesa standards as shown on the offsite plan. Only City standard sidewalk allowed within public right of way. 28. Obtain a permit from the Engineering Division at the time of development and then construct P.C.C. driveway approach per City of Costa Mesa standards as shown on the offsite plan. Location and dimensions are subject to the approval of the Transportation Services Manager. A.D.A. compliance is required for all new driveway approaches. 29 Obtain a permit from the Engineering Division, at the time of development and then remove any existing driveways and/or curb depressions that will not be used and replace with full height curb and sidewalk at applicant's expense. 30. Dedicate a sidewalk easement behind existing right of way line on Bristol Street to accommodate the design of the new A.D.A. ,driveway approaches. 31. Dedicate all land for street and highway purposes within 8 feet of the southerly curb of Bristol street. 32. Submit legal description for the new area of dedication, plat of new dedication area, both prepared by a civil engineer, and title report update of subject property. 33. Fulfill drainage ordinance fee requirements prior to approval of plans. 34. Private on-site drainage facilities and parkway culverts or drains will not be maintained by the City of Costa Mesa; they shall be maintained by the owner or developer of the property. Private lateral connections to City storm drains will require a Hold Harmless Agreement prior to issuance of permit. 35. There shall be four feet of clear sidewalk behind all immovable objects within public right of way. Provide sidewalk easement and construct new sidewalk where applicable. EXHIBIT 9 November 1, 2002 DR -02-04 Page 8 36. Provide a storm runoff study showing existing and proposed facilities and the method of draining the site and tributary areas without exceeding the capacity of any on-site or off-site drainage facility. Provide study with first plan check submittal. 37. Site shall be designed to connect on-site drainage facilities directly into the existing storm drain within Bristol Street. No surface flow from site to public right of way allowed. 38. Applicant is advised Bristol Street is under a "no open cut" moratorium until 9/20/04. Open cutting the street pavement will only be allowed by the City Engineer with special resurfacing requirements. Trans. 39. Construct Type II commercial wide flare driveway approaches at locations submitted on site plan. 40. Relocate fire hydrant and power pole to accommodate construction of southerly drive approach. 41. Close unused drive approach(es) with full height curb and gutter. 42. Fulfill mitigation of off-site traffic impacts at the time of issuance of Certificate of Occupancy by submitting to the Planning Division the required Traffic Impact Fee pursuant to the prevailing schedule of charges adopted by the City Council. The Traffic Impact Fee is calculated based upon the average daily trip generation of 315 trip ends for the proposed project and includes a credit for any previously existing use. At the current rate the Traffic Impact Fee is estimated at $55,755.00. NOTE: The Traffic Impact Fee will be recalculated at the time of issuance of Certificate of Occupancy based upon any changes in the prevailing schedule of charges adopted by the City Council and in effect at that time. Fire 43. Access consisting of a minimum 20 ft. wide roadway capable of supporting fire apparatus shall be maintained to all fire hydrants from the time that the hydrants are placed into service. Special consideration shall be given to maintaining the integrity of such roadways during periods of inclement weather. 44. Provide fire extinguishers with a minimum rating of 2A to be located within 75 feet of travel distance from all areas. Extinguishers may be of a type rated 2A, 10BC as these extinguishers are suitable for all types of fires and are less expensive. 45. Provide an automatic fire sprinkler system according to NFPA 13. SPECIAL DISTRICT REQUIREMENTS The following requirements of the following special districts are hereby forwarded to the applicant: EXHIBIT 9 pOk November 1, 2002 DR -02-04 Page 9 Sani. 1. Developer will be required to construct sewers to serve this project, at his own expense, meeting the approval of the Costa Mesa Sanitary District. 2. Orange County Sanitation District fees, fixture fees, inspection fees, and sewer permit required prior to issuance of building permits. To receive credit for buildings to be demolished, call (714) 754-5307 for inspection. 3. Developer shall submit a plan showing sewer improvements that meets with the District Engineer's approval to the Building Division as a part of the plans submitted for plan check. AQMD 4. Applicant shall contact the Air Quality Management District (800) 288- 7664 for potential additional conditions of development or for additional permits required by the district. CDFA 5. Comply with the requirements of the California Department of Food and Agriculture (CDFA) to determine if red imported fire ants exist on the property prior to any soil movement or excavation. Call CDFA at 714.708.1910 for information. Once again, the above conditions and code requirements must be printed on the face of the site plan prior to submittal of the working drawings. The decision will become final at 5:00 p.m. on November 8, 2002, unless appealed by an affected party or a member of the Planning Commission or City Council, including filing of the necessary application and payment of the appropriate fee. If you have any questions regarding this letter or the project, please feel free to contact me at (714) 754-5136 between 1 p.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday. Sincerely, WENDY IH Assistant Planner Attachment: Conceptually Approved Plans cc: Engineering/Dev. Ser. Hossein Afshari Fire Protection Analyst DesignWorx Water District 43 Tesla Way, Ste. 100 Building Division Irvine, CA 92618 EXHIBIT 9 November 1, 2002 DR -02-04 Page 10 Location: PLANNING APPLICATION SUMMARY 1 122 Bristol Street Application: DR -02-04 Request: Development review to construct 3, 2 -story office buildings, totaling 39,250 sq.ft. SUBJECT PROPERTY: Zone: C1 General Plan: General Commercial Lot D mensions. Lot Area: Existng Development: SURROUNDING PROPERTY: North: Corona Del Mar Freeway South: R1 — Single -Family Residential Irregular East: C1 - commercial 2.26 acres West: Cl- commercial Vacant (formerly Santa Ana Heights Water Company). DEVELOPMENT STANDARD COMPARISON Development Standard Code Requirement Proposed/Provided Lot Size: Lot Width 60 ft. 168.03 ft. Lot Area 12,000 sq. ft. 98,445 sq.ft. (2.26 acres) Floor Area Ratio: (Low Traffic FAR) .40 (39,378 s .ft.) .40 (39,250 s .ft.) Building Height: 2 stories/30 ft. 2 stories/ 30 ft. Interior landscaping: 3,925 s .ft. 20,128 s .ft. Setbacks: Front 20 ft. 20 ft. Side 0 ft./15 ft. 10 ft./15 ft. Rear 60 ft. 67 ft. Parking: Standard 151 151 Compact 0 0 Handicapped 6 6 TOTAL: 157 157 Driveway width: 20 ft. 25 ft. CEQA Status Mitigated Negative Declaration Final Action Staff EXHIBIT 9 4 PLANNI* DIVISION -CITY OF COSI MESA DESCRIPTION/JUSTIFICATION Application P Environmental Determination: Address: 1. Fully describe your request: 3-r".T—UP 04zFtt'.e 6UIL/�/�JG,S2—szo�yi SKOOTH 1x1Qt$t'1,gp.IN-rS0 1="&s TAri0iiv eq A'KD 301 4414H, Wet¢( & 20 ^1 Z R-* l=ISL-r t v 5 &t L A SS 2. Justification A. For a Conditional Use Permit or Minor Conditional Use Permit: Describe how the proposed use is substantially compatible with uses permitted in the same general area and how the proposed use would not be materially detrimental to other properties in the same area. B. For a Variance or Administrative Adjustment: Describe the property's special circumstances, including size, shape, topography, location or surroundings that deprive the property of privileges enjoyed by other properties in the . vicinity under the identical zoning classification due to strict application of the Zoning Code. 3. This project is: (check where appropriate) In a flood zone. Subject to future street widening. In the Redevelopment Area. In a Specific Plan Area. 4. 1 have reviewed the HAZARDOUS WASTE AND SUBSTANCES SITES LIST published by the office of Planning and Research and reproduced on the rear of this page and have determined that the project: Is not included in the publication indicated above. Is included in the publication indicated above. March '96 EXHIBIT 9 Date HAZAHOOUS WASTE AND SUBSTANCE';2ITES Source: State of California Department of Toxic Substances Control, April 1998 ■wyY /M EXHIBIT 9 Address 204 East 17' Street LTank 2248 Harbor Boulevard LTank 295 East 17"' Street LTank 2249 Harbor Boulevard LTank 411 East 17"" Street LTank 2252 Harbor Boulevard LTank 481 East 171 Street LTar:k 2502 Harbor Boulevard LTank 490 East 17" Street LTank 2666 Harbor Boulevard LTank 671 Wesf 17' Street, LTank 2799 Harbor Boulevard LTank 2801 Harbor Boulevard LTank 790 West 19'^ Street LTank 2850 Harbor boulevard LTank 801 West 19`^ Street LTank 3001 Harbor Boulevard LTank 3131 Harbor Boulevard LTank 1645 Adams Avenue LTank 3195 Harbor Boulevard LTank 3201 Harbor Boulevard LTank 751 Baker Street LTank 3599 Harbor Boulevard LTank 800 Baker Street LTank 1151 Baker Street LTank 18990 Ike Jones LTank 1195 Baker Street LTank 18992 Ike Jones LTank 1201 Baker Street LTank 1450 Baker Street LTank 200 Kalmus Drive LTank 330 Bay Street LTank 1267 Logan Avenue LTank 1476 Bristol Street LTank 1740 Newport Boulevard LTank 2931 Bristol Street LTank 1900 Newport Boulevard LTank 2990 Bristol Street LTank 2021 Newport Boulevard LTank 2995 Bristol Street LTank 2025 Newport Boulevard LTank 3045 Bristol Street LTank 2436 Newport Boulevard LTank 3048 Bristol Street LTank 2590 Newport Boulevard LTank 3067 Bristol Street LTank 2651 Newport Boulevard LTank 3333 Bristol Street LTank 3003 Newport Boulevard LTank 2972 Century Place LTank 366 Paularino Avenue LTank 3000 Club House Drive LTank 1901 Placentia Avenue LTank 1965 Placentia Avenue LTank 2252 Fairview Road LTank 2310 Placentia Avenue LTank 2490 Fairview Road LTank 3000 Fairview Road LTank 3128 Red Hill Avenue LTank 3315 Fairview Road LTank 3333 Fairview Road LTank 1375 Sunflower Avenue LTank 3470 Fairview Road LTar.k 14850 Sunflower Avenue LTank 1640 Superior Avenue LTank 2990 Grace Lane LTank 1695 Superior Avenue LTank 2050 Harbor Boulevard LTank 1701 Tustin Avenue LTank 2073 Harbor Boulevard LTank 2160 Harbor Boulevard LTank Source: State of California Department of Toxic Substances Control, April 1998 ■wyY /M EXHIBIT 9 PUBLICATION The Costa Mesa Planning Staff will render a decision on Wednesday October 30, 2002, or as soon as possible thereafter, on the following items: 1. Development Review DR -02-04 for Hossein Afshari/DesignWorx, authorized agent for Terry Loomis/Irvine Ranch Water District, to construct 3 office buildings, totaling 39,250 sq. ft., located at 1122 Bristol Street in a C1 zone. Environmental determination: mitigated negative declaration. The project location is not listed as a hazardous waste site. The environmental document is available for public review and comment from October 10, 2002 to October 29, 2002 at the following locations: (a) Public Counter, Planning Division, City Hall, 77 Fair Drive, (b) Mesa Verde Library, 2969 Mesa Verde Drive, East, (c) Orange County Public Library (Park Avenue Branch), 1855 Park Avenue. FOR PUBLICATION ON THURSDAY OCTOBER 10, 2002 10/08/20027:41 AM EXHIBIT 9 r—Da67 0ctobv 0, 200: TO Fmm Tina Wendy Shih w,ones Fhoeus (714) 754-5136 FaxY Faze 949 646-5008 714 754-5618 10/08/20027:41 AM EXHIBIT 9 City of Costa Mesa Development Services Department CERTIFICATION OF PUBLICATION This is to certify that Z'S for (Applicant/Authorized Agent) was published /0 with �Q postcards (Date) (Number) being mailed to property owners of record as shown in our files on (Bate) IV DONALD D. LAMM Deputy City Manager Development Services Director EXHIBIT 9 PUBLICATION The Costa Mesa Planning Staff will render a decision on Thursday, October 17, 2002, or as soon as possible thereafter, on the following items: i. Development Review DR -02-04 for Hossein Xfshari/DesignWorx, authorized agent for Terry Loomis/Irvine Ranch Water District, to construct 3 office buildings, totaling 39,300 sq. ft., located at 1122 Bristol Street in a C1 zone. Environmental determination: negative declaration. The project location is not listed as a hazardous waste site. The environmental document is available for public review and comment from September 27, 2002 to October 17, 2002 at the following locations: (a) Public Counter, Planning Division, City Hall, 77 Fair Drive, (b) Mesa Verde Library, 2969 Mesa Verde Drive, East, (c) Orange County Public Library (Park Avenue Branch), 1855 Park Avenue. FOR PUBLICATION ON FRIDAY/ SEPTEMBER 271 2002 09/24/20022:28 PM EXHIBIT 9 ® September 24, 2002 To From Tina Suemy Arruda Phones pfgne# (714) 754-5618 LL --*—i L Faxs 949 646-5008 714 754-5618 09/24/20022:28 PM EXHIBIT 9 PROOF SHEETS SUSAN W. CASE, INC. OWNERSHIP LISTING SERVICE 917 Glenneyre Street, Suite 7 e Laguna Beach, CA 92651 PHONE (949) 494-6105 a FAX (949) 494-7418 1122 SE BRISTOL ST FILE#602684 SANTA ANA/COSTA MESA CA 500' LISTING 439 321 03 JUNE 17 2002 0R-02-040 119 200 21 119 39101 119 391 02 SANTA ANA COUNTRY CLUB Vandean Terry Elizabeth Lopez 20382 Newport Blvd 102 Masters Cir 106 The Masters Cir Santa Ana CA 92707 Costa Mesa CA 92627 Costa Mesa CA 92627 119 391 03 119 39104 119 391 05 Hugh Dubberly Timothy & Claudia Tebbs Harold Dickerson 4250 EI Camino Real #8220 114 The Masters Cir 118 Masters Cir Palo Alto CA 94306 Costa Mesa CA 92627 Costa Mesa CA 92627 119 391 06 119 391 07 119 391 08 Rudy Rivera Daniel Taylor William & Cindy Newland 122 Masters Cir 126 The Masters Cir 130 The Masters Cir Costa Mesa CA 92627 Costa Mesa CA 92627 Costa Mesa CA 92627 119 391 09 119 391 10 119 391 11 Joseph Miracle John & Sherie Vanek Arthur Olstad 134 The Masters Cir 138 The Masters Cir 142 The Masters Cir Costa Mesa CA 92627 Costa Mesa CA 92627 Costa Mesa CA 92627 119 391 12 119 391 13 119 391 14 Willard Holmes Hochderffer Betty Dean Denise Johnston 146 The Masters Cir 528 Paseo Companeros St 154 Masters Cir Costa Mesa CA 92627 Chico CA 95928 Costa Mesa CA 92626 11939115 11939116 11939117 Robert Schaulis Jeanne Bishop Peggy Zip 158 The Masters Cir 405 N Heathdale Ave 166 Masters Cir Costa Mesa CA 92627 Covina CA 91722 Costa Mesa CA 92627 119 391 18 119 391 19 119 39120 BENTLEY 2001 T James Orr Sabine Martens 170 The Masters Cir 174 The Masters Cir 178 The Masters Cir Costa Mesa CA 92627 Costa Mesa CA 92627 Costa Mesa CA 92627 119 391 21 119 391 22 119 39123 Florence Gumaer Charlene Kass Catherine Prowse 4001 Marion Way 188 The Masters Cir 192 The Masters Cir Long Beach CA 90807 Costa Mesa CA 92627 Costa Mesa CA 92627 EXHIBIT 9 119 391 24 William Tate 196 Masters Cir Costa Mesa CA 92627 119 391 27 Robert Quartieri Redmond 189 The Masters Cir Costa Mesa CA 92627 11939130 GENTRY JEAN 2002 177 The Masters Cir Costa Mesa CA 92627 11939133 D Dickerson McCoy 165 The Masters Cir Costa Mesa CA 92627 119 391 36 Leslie Demille 20202 SW Cypress St Newport Beach CA 92660 119-391-39 NANCY M HOAGLAND 300 E COAST HWY NEWPORT BEACH CA 119 39125 John Gabriel 197 The Masters Cir Costa Mesa CA 92627 119 391 28 Robert Earling Hammerquist 185 The Masters Cir Costa Mesa CA 92627 119 391 31 Robert Hoyt 173 The Masters Cir Costa Mesa CA 92627 119 391 34 Robert Peelor 161 The Masters Cir Costa Mesa CA 92627 119 391 37 W Jack Van Rossem 149 Masters Cir Costa Mesa CA 92627 119 391 40 Edith Robinson SPACE 3 137 The Masters Cir 92660 Costa Mesa CA 92627 119 391 42 Schellie Trust Walsh 717 Lido Park Dr Newport Beach CA 92663 119 391 45 James Okeefe 117 The Masters Cir Costa Mesa CA 92627 119 391 48 William Krisman 105 Masters Cir Costa Mesa CA 92627 119 39151 STATE OF CALIFORNIA DIV OF HW 119 391 43 L Jerome Wolcott Jr. 125 The Masters Cir Costa Mesa CA 92627 119 391 46 Alvin Blair 113 The Masters Cir Costa Mesa CA 92627 119 39149 Dennis Hogland 1769 Newport Blvd Costa Mesa CA 92627 427 362 01 HARRINGTON INVESTMENT CO 31 Rue Grand Vallee Newport Beach CA 92660 EXHIBIT 9 0a-02-04.,. 119 391 26 WHITE 2001 193 The Masters Cir Costa Mesa CA 92627 119 39129 Stacy Astor 316 Miller Ave #H Mill Valley CA 94941 119 391 32 Philip Arnold 169 The Masters Cir Costa Mesa CA 92627 119-391-35 MERRILEE T DUNGAN 157 THE MASTERS CIR COSTA MESA CA 92627 119 391 38 Orma Crank Sr. 145 The Masters Cir Costa Mesa CA 92627 119 39141 Donald Ward 133 The Masters Cir Costa Mesa CA 92627 119 391 44 Anthony Montapert 41 Royal Saint George R Newport Beach CA 92660 119 391 47 Forrest 8 Beth Drain 109 The Masters Cir Costa Mesa CA 92627 119 391 50 STATE OF CALIFORNIA DIV OF HW 427 363 01 ORANGE COUNTY FLOOD CONTR 3101 State Rd Bakersfield CA 93308 439 311 06 SIBLING ASSOCIATES 2699 White Rd #160 Irvine CA 92614 439-321-02 DRAIN - 1072 SE BRISTOL ST SANTA ANA HEIGHTS 92707 439 321 05 DMC MANAGAMENT LLC 18500 Studebaker Rd Cerritos CA 90703 439-321-08 BELL PAC 1206 SE BRISTOL SANTA ANA CA 92707 439 311 09 SIBLING ASSOCIATES 2699 White Rd #150 Irvine CA 92614 439 321 03 SANTA ANA HGTS WATER CO 15600 Sand Canyon Ave Irvine CA 92618 439 321 06 DMC MANAGAMENT LLC 18500 Studebaker Rd Cerrtos CA 90703 EXHIBIT 9 QR -02-043 439 321 01 Forrest Drain 1072 SE Bristol St Santa Ana CA 92707 439 321 04 SLUSHER SECOND FAMILY LTD PA 8 Morning Dove Laguna Niguel CA 92677 439 321 07 CD PROP 1816 Buttonshell Ln Newport Beach CA 92660 SUSAN W. CASE, INC. OWNERSHIP LISTING SERVICE 917 GZenneyre Street, Suite 7 • Laguna Beach, CA 92651 PHONE (949) 494-6105 • FAX (949) 494-7418 CERTIFICATION OF PROPERTY OWNERS LIST THE ATTACHED LIST REPRESENTS THE NARES AND ADDRESSES OF ALL PROPERTY OWNERS LOCATED WITHIN tO FEET OF THE EXTERIOR BOUNDARIES OF THE PROPERTY LOCATED THIS INFORMATION WAS OBTAINED THROUGH FIRST AMERICAN REAL ESTATES SOLUTIONS, A DATA SOURCE UTILIZING THE COUNTY ASSESSMENT ROLLS AND OTHER AVAILABLE DATA SOURCES. THIS INFORMATION IS GENERALLY DEEMED RELIABLE, BUT IS NOT GUARANTEED. RETURN OF SOME PROPERTY ADDRESSES THAT ARE DEEMED UNDELIVERABLE BY THE Q.S. POSTAL SERVICE IS A POSSIBILITY. SUSAN W. CASE, INC. IS NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR PROVIDING FURTHER INVESTIGATION OF SAID LABELS. ACCEPTANCE OF THE PACKAGE ACKNOWLEDGES THIS FACT. - ------ ------ ------------------ SUSAN W. CASE, INC. EXHIBIT 9 D R- 0 Z- 04 4 na�im■1 � BAt�H lama= RECEIVED CITY OF COSTA MESA IRTffl RAnCg %M DI8 RIOT 1WW Sand f1FVCI nm�� dIE UT SFPvir,Fc n"ARTMENT CalryonA•P.O.Bar57Cp0•/n�v�CaBbmie5�fg7D���4,9)D�SZ �pp•ww�xirwdaom September 27, 2002 d Ms. Willa Bouwens-Killeen Senior Planner City of Costa Mesa 77 Fair Drive Costa Mesa, CA 92628-1200 RE: IRVME RANCH WATER DISTRICT BRISTOL BUSINESS PARK 1122 BRISTOL STREET Dear Ms. Bouwens-Killeen: As you know, the Irvine Ranch Water District and its development project manager, Newport Real Estate Services, Inc. (NRES), are currently processing a development application for the referenced property. This property was acquired by the District in 1998 when the former Santa Ana Heights Water Company (SAHWC) was consolidated with the Irvine Ranch Water District (District). Pursuant to the terms and conditions established in the 1997 Pre -Annexation Agreement between the District and the former SAHWC, all of the economic advantage derived from the District's development of the property will go to the benefit of the former SAHWC customers. As a long-term service provider in the City of Costa Mesa, the District is very sensitive and dedicated to its role of being a good community neighbor. To this end, our development team has designed a high quality project that is in full compliance with the zoning and the community development regulations applicable to the site. The District believes the proposed office buildings will be a strong, positive addition to the Bristol Street corridor. In addition to having a high quality exterior appearance with abundant landscaping, these buildings will accommodate a wide range of professional office uses, including cutting edge design, technology and professional service firms seeking a unique business environment that is located close to the retail, cultural and entertainment core of Costa Mesa. Members of our development team have met once with the Bristol Street Committee (with another meeting scheduled on October 1) to fully explain our project and the benefits it will bring to the area. EXHIBIT 9 Ms. Willa Bouwens-Killeen September 27, 2002 Page 2 Finally, the District has been approached by numerous parties over the past months that are interested in acquiring the site for a variety of uses. This extensive interest serves to validate the development potential of the property. As stated above, the District has a commitment to its customers to maximize the value of the property and to pass along the increased economic benefits from development to them. The District's internal financial resources, a key factor in today's investment climate, will ensure development of the project, and the resulting benefits to the City and our common constituents, in a very timely manner. The District and NRES have enjoyed an excellent working relationship with the City staff, and we look forward to finalizing our development processing and moving forward with construction of this project. Sincerely, AJ'k�� Ron Zenk Treasurer cc: Glen Allen — Newport Real Estate Services, Inc. Dave Anderson — Newport Real Estate Services, Inc. Terrell Loomis — Irvine Ranch Water District EXHIBIT 9 09/27/2002 14:33 9497521494 NRES PAGE 01/06 m EwoRT 1101 DOVESTREEr, SU►rE230 NEWPORTBEACH, CALIFOKWA 92660 From the desk of Real Estate Services, Inc. (949) 752-1491 ExT 24 JENjW SHIX (949) 752-1494 (FACSIMILE) jshihCmnres. net TO: W ENDY S14TH DATE: SEPTEMBER 27, 2002 COMPANY: CITY OF COSTA MESA FAX #: 714754-4856 PROJECT: IRWD-BRISTOL STREET PAGES: 6 INCLUDNOCOV'ER RE: LEGAL Ev nTY ATTACHED YOU WILL FIND A LETTER PROM BOWIE, AILVESON, WILES & GIANNONE AND A RECORDED LIMITED LTASTLITY COMPANY CERTIFICATE OF MERGER. NOTICE TO RECIPIENT: THIS mESSACE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE LNDIVIDITAL OR ENTITY TO WHICH IT IS ADDRESSED, AND -MAY CONTAIN INFORMATION THAT IS PRIVILEGED, CONFIDENTIAL AND EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE UNDER APPLICABLE LAR'. IF THE READER OF THIS MESSAGE IS NOT THE M71INDED RECIPIENT, OR THE EMPLOYEE OR AGENT RESPONSIBLE FOR DEL7Y'FRING TH75 MESSAGE TO THE INTENDED RECIPIENT, YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED THAT ANY DISSEMINATION, DISTRIBUTION OR COPYING OF THIS COMMUNICATION IS STRICTLi PROHIBITED. IF YOU HAVE RF,CETWO THIS COMMUNICATION IN ERROR, PLEASE NOTIFY IIS IMMEDIATELY BY TELEPHONE AND RETURN THE ORIGINAL MESSAGE TO US AT THE ABOVE ADDRESS VIA THE U.S. POSTAL SERVICE. THANK YOU. EXHIBIT 9 09/27/2002 14:33 9497521494 NRES PAGE 02/06 BOWIE, ARNESON, WILES & GIANNONE A PART%-URSH@ INCLUDING PROFESSIONAL CORPORATTO\T ATLOA4aYS AT IAW ALMANDER BOW16' qm CAMPUS DRIVE (100) d94M7 JOAN G ARNESON NEWPORT BRACK CALIFOR\1A 926W PAIL (9� I51-2011 WENDY H WILES- (919)131•LM PATRICIA B GIANNO,NE ROBERT B. A.%". W M am M.F BRIAN W SMITH TYREE IL OORWARD SALLY n. ROEINSON DAW\ \I. NZS9ER • I M OM[WNAL CORRIRITON IR B 25 September 26, 2002 Mr. Dave A. Anderson Newport Real Estate Services, Inc. 1101 Dove Street Suite 230 Newport Beach, CA 92660 Re: Property on Bristol Dear Mr. Anderson: Enclosed is a recorded copy of the June 20, 1997 Limited Liability Company Certificate of Merger, which shows that the Santa Ana Heights Water Company, as the disappearing entity, was legally merged into the Irvine Ranch Water District Water Service Company LLC. as the surviving entity. This document was recorded in the office of the Orange County Recorder on July 25, 1997. As a result of the merger, the Imine Ranch Water Distnct Water Sen ice Company LLC became the legal owner of the property of the former Santa Ana Heights Water Company. JCA/ Enclosures cc: Terry Loomis Very truly yours, BOWIE, ARNESON, WILES & GTANNONE By: foan Arneson EXHIBIT 9 09/27/2002 14:33 9+9'521494 RECORDING REOUFSTED BY Latham b Watkins ' 11 RECORDED RETURN TO Latham b Watkins 650 Town Center Drive 20th Floor Costa Mesa, California 92626-1918 Attn: Kate Walther , 1'ES PAGE 03/06 CONFORMED COPY tY of or" California Reeordod ina�ah°g co i C1arK/RacordeT c.r L.' 16.80 09713S2129 i4;i4P 81/ 5191 T.O8.00 0. SSS +2025223 12 33 00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Cja ..--cnvlD FOR RECORDER'S USE Limited Liability Company Certificate of Merger EXHIBIT 9 09/27/2002 14:33 9497521494 S PAGE 04/86 RECORDING REQUESTED BY AND WHEN RECORDED MAIL. TO: SPACE AROVETHIS LINE FOR RECORDER'S USE �ibate of Efife ails �II�� a�IIQi�g �ffrrhle of�t.* SACRANE,N'TO E oje UP us e RY I, BILL JONES, Secretary of State of California, hereby certify: That the annexed transcript of A page(s) was prepared by and in this office from the record on file, of which it purports to be a copy, and that it is full, true and correct. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I execute this certificate and affix the Greai Seal of the State of California JUL - 1 1497 MM PAI N�m Secretary of State EXHIBIT 9 09/27/2002 14:33 9497521494 NRES State of California ' Bill Jorles Secretary of state LIMITED LTABILCCY COMPANY (ERTIFICA'r'E OF MZRGER 22— RTA S - Rud the Lutrueism Won eempkdog the term. 72& dnatmeeit V predeated f" Mkg 110numt to Seefoe 17157 d the CaVerale COrpormdM Cods ine`a c`i''Water District 3 �peet d )alfa �• Domestic PAGE 05/06 LLC -9 1•Kl d LLC 101997147017 California ;ansa �ei 09/27/2002 14:33 9497521494 STATE OF CALIFORNIA FRANCHISE TAX BOARD y; PO BOX 1468 SACRAMENTO CA 95B12-1468 June 6, 1997 LATHUM A WATKINS ATTN: RITA K PFET2ING 650 TOWN CENTER DRIVE SUITE 2000 COSTA MESA CA 92626-1925 NRES PAGE 06/06 TAX CLEARANCE CERTIFICATE EXPIRATION DATE: September 15, 1997 ISSUED TO: SANTA AWA HEIGHTS WATER COMPANY Entity ID 0099496 This is to certify that all taxes imposed under the Bank and Corporation Tax Law on 'this corporation have been Paid, assumed, or are secured by other means. If a final return has not been filed, one should be filed within two months and 15 days after the close of the month in which the dissolution or lithdrawal takes place. If the corporation was inactive, a statement to .hat effect should be attached to the tax forms. All returns remain subject to audit until the expiration of the normal statutory period. Failure to file required returns may result in additional assessments. A copy of this Tax Clearance Certificate has been sent to the Office of the the Secretary of State. This original Tax Clearance Certificate may be retained in the files of the corporation. By the Expiration Date noted above, this corporation must have filed the documents required by the Secretary of State to dissolve, withdraw or merge. Requests for the appropriate documents must be directed to: Office of the Secretary of State at 1500 11th Street, 3rd Floor, Sacramento CA. 9se14, or by telea.`.2-e,(916) 657-5448. NOTE: If the required documents are not filed with the Secretary of State prior to the Expiration Date noted above, the corporation will remain subJect to the filing requirements of the Bank and Corporation Tax Law. BY N. Hermarsen Special Audit Unit Corporation Audit Section Telephone (916) 845-4124 EXHIBIT 9 City of Costa Mesa Interoffice Memorandum To- Bristol Street Specific Plan Oversight Committee From: Wendy Shih, Assistant Planner Date: September 5, 2002 Subject: PROPOSED 39,250 SQ. FT. OFFICE DEVELOPMENT 1122 BRISTOL STREET COMMITTEE MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 17, 2002 The City has received an application for development of 39,250 square feet of offices, in three buildings, on the now -vacant Irvine Ranch Water District (IRWD) parcel at 1 122 Bristol Street. This is the first Bristol Street development proposal that had not already received initial approval from the City at the time the Bristol Street Specific Plan Oversight Committee was formed. At the June 24, 2002, Planning Commission meeting, concern was expressed that development would be taking place in the Bristol Street Specific Plan area while the Specific Plan is still in formulation stages, thus foreclosing opportunities for Plan implementation. It was suggested that new development proposals in the Specific Plan area be referred to the Committee for comment before the City takes action on them. Attached are copies of plans for the proposed development. The property is zoned C1, and is designated General Commercial on the City's General Plan land use map. The proposed project complies with all C1 development standards and zoning requirements. The required level of review is a Development Review, which is a discretionary permit reviewed and acted upon by City staff. No public hearings would be required for the plan as currently designed. There is no requirement for the Committee to take formal action or vote on the project. We are simply providing you an opportunity to review the plan and offer comments as to the appropriateness of the proposed land use and design as they relate to the Bristol Street corridor—both existing and future. If you have any questions about the plan before the meeting, feel free to call me at (714) 754-5136. EXHIBIT 9 Attachment Mike Robinson, Planning and Redevelopment Manager Claire Flynn, Associate Planner Willa Bouwens-Killeen, Senior Planner Mr. Hossein Afshari Design Worx 43 Tesla, Suite 100 Irvine, California 92618 EXHIBIT 9 F AUG 20 2002 10:43SM HP_i_RSERJET 3201 tk r" Fax Transmittal: TO: WIENDY fROM: M)SSEIN /d`aliARI P 1 DESIGNb' ORX 43 Tesla, Supe 101) Irvine, G4 926111 Tel (949) ast-0600 Fax (94S) 341-GSK COMPANY: CI1Y OF' COSTA MESA [TATE: 08/iO,'2002 FAX NUMBER: 7114-754-4&% PHONE NVMBEE:: RE: 9RISTQ- OFFICE PARI: TOTAL W. OF Pk3i:S INCLUDING COVER: 2 SENOEp'S REFERENTI. WMBEA: CC: DRiE AMERSON. KrAS a��a�a��mv® m Vis:.=aoaam�®csac�te 11 F02 YOUR A)P20NAL ❑ FOR REVIEW & COMMENT ❑ AS REQUESTED t:l PLEASE CALL ❑ FOR YOUR USE COMMENTS: Dear Wendy, Our client has regLea~ted to reactivate the projQct. Ploase start pioce:ssing the project including "E.6stol Street Spec'fic Plen Committee" review. If you have an, question(s), please call me at: (949) 3,11-0600 ex... 12. You can also E-mail me at: hossein@dworx.net Sincerely, Hossein Afshar) Principal De.signwarx IFYOIJ HAVE /WY PROBL=PAS OR QUESTIONS CONCERNING THIS F OW, Pr -EASE CALL 9L9-341-03( EXHIBIT 9 City of Costa Mesa Interoffice Memorandum To: Bristol Street Specific Plan Oversight Committee From: Perry Valantine, Assistant Development Services Director I k Date: July 10, 2002 Subject: PROPOSED 39,300 SQ. FT. OFFICE DEVELOPMENT 1122 BRISTOL STREET COMMITTEE MEETING OF JULY 16, 2002 The City has received an application for development of 39,300 square feet of offices, in three buildings, on the now -vacant Irvine Ranch Water District (IRWD) parcel at 1122 Bristol Street. This is the first Bristol Street development proposal that had not already received initial approval from the City at the time the Bristol Street Specific Plan Oversight Committee was formed. At the June 24, 2002, Planning Commission meeting, concern was expressed that development would be taking place in the Bristol Street Specific Plan area while the Specific Plan is still in the. formulation stages, thus foreclosing opportunities for Plan implementation. It was suggested that new development proposals in the Specific Plan area be referred to the Committee for comment before the City takes action on them. Attached are copies of plans for the proposed development. The property is zoned C1, and is designated General Commercial on the City's General Plan land use map. The proposed project complies with all C1 development standards and zoning requirements. The required level of review is a Development Review, which is a discretionary permit reviewed and acted upon by City staff. No public hearings would be required for the plan as currently designed. The applicant has asked that we temporarily suspend processing of the plan, while they conduct further research. However, we have chosen to refer it to the Bristol Street Specific Plan Oversight Committee's July 16" meeting to avoid further delays if the applicant asks us to resume processing. There is no requirement for the Committee to take formal action or vote on the project. We are simply providing you an opportunity to review the plan and offer EXHIBIT 9 comments as to the appropriateness of the proposed land use and design as they relate to the Bristol Street corridor—both existing and future. if you have any questions about the plan before the meeting, feel free to call me at (714) 754-5609. Attachment Mike Robinson, Planning and Redevelopment Manager Claire Flynn, Associate Planner Willa Bouwens-Killeen, Senior Planner Mr. Hossein Afshari Design Worx 43 Tesla, Suite 100 Irvine, California 92618 EXHIBIT 9 E Ty REC ED OEVELO SENO FpCa0SrA 7/02/02 +cE,s n 44 MENr SOC O 8 2002 t BRISTOL OFFICE PARK Willa Boumns-Killeen Senior Planner City of Costa Mesa 77 Fair Drive Costa Mesa, CA 92628-1200 DESIGNWORX 43 Tesla, Suite 100 Irvine, CA 92618 1 (949) 341-0600 F. (949) 341-0606 Dear Willa, Our client has requested to put the project on hold and wait for their instructions. Please stop processing the project tall further notice. Sincerely, Principal cc ' Tent' Loomis, IRWD Ron Zenk, IRWD EXHIBIT 9 City of Costa Mesa Interoffice Memorandum To: Planning Commission From: Perry Valantine, Assistant Development Services Director Date: June 27, 2002 Subject: BRISTOL STREET SPECIFIC PLAN AREA CHRONOLOGY AND PENDING DEVELOPMENTS This is in response to some of the questions raised at last Monday's meeting, regarding processing of developments in the Bristol Street Specific Plan area. CHRONOLOGY The Bristol Street Specific Plan grew out of discussions regarding an auto lube and oil facility proposed for the southwest corner of Bristol Street and Paularino Avenue. This development application was heard by the Planning Commission on June 11, 2001, and by the City Council on July 16, 2001. Following are key dates in the history of the Bristol Street Specific Plan: August 20, 2001 City Council provides basic direction for specific plan December 17, 2001 City Council determines make-up of Specific Plan Oversight Although the process may seem to have taken a long time to get to this point, it • should be noted that the time between the August and December 2001, Council meetings was a period in which Planning staff was processing the Home Ranch development application, EIR, and Development Agreement, while coping with vacancies in two staff positions. EXHIBIT 9 Committee December 28, 2001 Press release seeking Committee appl cations January 14, 2002 Planning Commission appoints representative to Committee February 19, 2002 City Council appoints remaining Committee members May 9, 2002 Request for Proposals for consultant support completed May 21, 2002 Specific Plan Committee's first meeting June 18, 2002 Specific Plan Committee's second meeting Although the process may seem to have taken a long time to get to this point, it • should be noted that the time between the August and December 2001, Council meetings was a period in which Planning staff was processing the Home Ranch development application, EIR, and Development Agreement, while coping with vacancies in two staff positions. EXHIBIT 9 PENDING DEVELOPMENTS The August 2001, staff report to City Council identified five vacant properties on Bristol Street. One was The Camp, which was under construction at the time, and one was the Irvine Ranch Water District (IRWD) property at 1122 Bristol. Street, which had not yet applied for development approval. The other three had already received Development Review approval for new office and/or retail buildings. One of those three was the proposed office building at 2800 Bristol Street, which was the subject of a variance request at last Monday's (June 24) Planning Commission meeting, due to a code change subsequent to the Development Review approval. Remaining vacant properties are: I zio5 tsristoi In plan check; building permit application pending 1 1122 Bristol , Development Review application pending The proposed development at 1122 Bristol Street consists of three, two-story office buildings, totaling 39,300 square feet, on a 2.3 -acre parcel. Staff will present the proposed plans to the Specific Plan Oversight Committee for their review and comment at the Committee's July 16, 2002, meeting. Until the Bristol Street Specific Plan is adopted, any future applications for development, redevelopment, or discretionary use permits will be referred to the Specific Plan Oversight Committee for comment. C: Don Lamm, Deputy City Manager - Development Services Mike Robinson, Planning and Redevelopment Manager Willa Bouwens-Killeen, Senior Planner Claire Flynn, Associate Planner Tom Wood, Assistant City Attorney Bristol Street Specific Plan Oversight Committee members F EXHIBIT 9 SHIH, WENDY From: Dave Anderson [danderson@nres.net] Sent: Tuesday, June 18, 2002 4:41 PM To: wendyshih@ci.costa-mesa.ca.us Cc: Hossein Afshari; Terrell Loomis Subject: Bristol Office Park Wendy, The official Owner name for the Bristol Office Park Project is "Irvine Ranch Water Service Company LLC" . Please change the name accordingly on our application for the Negative Declaration the address and contact person for the Owner can remain the same. Sincerely, David A. Anderson Newport Real Estate Services, Inc. 1101 Dove Street, Suite 230 Newport Beach, CA 92660 949.752.1491 Ext. 21 Fax 949.752.1494 danderson@nres.net EXHIBIT 9 06/13/2002 09:22 9497521494 NRES PACE 01 �EWPORT Real Estate Services, Loc. 1101 Dove Street, Suite 230 Newport Beach, Callfornla 92660 Direct: (949) 752-1491, Ext. 21 Facsimile: (949) 752-1494 E -Mall- dandersonVnres.net DATE: 6/13/02 T0: Wendy Shlh - Assistant Planner CC: FAX NO.: 1-714-754-4856 OFFICE NO.: 1-714-754-5136 RE: Bristol Office Park Wendy, From the desk of--.. DAVEANDERSON NUMBER OF PACES: 4 (Including cover) Attached is a copy of Title Co. description of the easement identified as item number 13. Hopefully this will help clear up the parcel discrepancy issue. Thanks, Dave EXHIBIT 9 06/13/29e2 69:22 ..f 10. 11. 9497521494 5: (Continuedl NRES PAGF 62 Order No. 9733500 Easements) for the purpose(s) shown below and rigta incidental thereto as granted in a document: Granted to: Costa Mesa Sanitary District Purpose: Underground sewer pipe line Recorded: June 9, 1969, Instrument No. 5898, book 8983, Page 414, of Official Records Affects: A portion of the land Easement(s) for the purposeisl shown below and rights incidental thereto as granted In a document, Granted to: Larmor Development Company, a California corporation and Marjorie Zoul Purpose: Vehicular ingress and egress to and from the public street Recorded: May 23, 1980, Instrument No. 25324, Book 13615, Page 1166. of Official Records Affects: A portion of the land Covenants, conditions and restrictions (deleting therefrom any festrictlons Indicating any preference, limitation or discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, handicap, familial status or. national origin) as set forth in the document referred t3 in the numbered item last above shown. 12. Easements) for the Purposelsl shovm below and rights incidental thereto as granted In a document: Granted to: County of Orange Purpose: Street and highway purposes Recorded: September 10, 1980, Instrument no. 13077, Book 13737, Page 547, of Official Records Affects: A portion of the. land 13. E©sementlsl for the purpose(s) shown below and rights incidental thereto as condemned by Final Decree of Condemnation, Superior Court of: Orange County Case No.: 779831 In favor of: City of Costa Mesa Purpose: Public use and purpose, street Recorded: July 9, 1998, Instrument No. 19980440392. of Official Records • And corrected June 5, 2000 as Instrument No. 2 ' I Records. 14. Matters which may be diseWed by an Inspection and/or by a correct ALTA/AGSM Land Title Survey of sold land that is satisfactory to this Company, and/or by incuiry of the parties In possession thereof. 15. Any easements not disclosed by those public records which impart constructive notice as to matters affecting title to real property and which are not visible and apparent from an inspection of the surface o' said land. 1 EXHIBIT 9 06/13/2062 09:22 9497521494 r ORDER NO. 9733500 PIG: 0 MIA NO. 0: � ITEM NO. 7: ITEM NO. 9: ITEM NO. 10: � ITEM NO. 12: ITEM N0, 13: 427.3E z j BR�S7oc i . o a w NRES PAGE 03 .131-x12' . I Piul�ett� ' ' �r •1RAC1 M0. d5b if. N. 17_9 NOW - Aslessoo'S &OCR d ASSifSOR'S AfAP PARCEL NtACEr! 8708 439 PACE 32 SHOWN IN CIRCLES COUNTr OF ORANCf fltf613NMIKM NA WifVffAD=M=CW. •ANDrowartresAULMOO mara�ea�o pcwv i1ww AM?f "*FiALMlMMMN==WA - EXHIBIT 9 06/13/2022 09:22 9497521494 NRES IMAGE 04 Order No. 97:3500 EXHIBIT "ONE" PORTION OF LOT 3 OF TRACT NO. 455, IN THE UNINCORPORATED TERRITORY Ur I Mt COUNTY OF ORANGE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS SHOWN ON A MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 17, PAGE 9 OF MISCELLANEOUS MAPS, IN THE OFFICE OF THI! COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT A POINT IN THE SOUTHWESTERLY LINE OF LCAT 3, TRACT NO. 456, AS SHOWN ON A MAP THEREOF RECORDED IN BOOK 17, PAGE 9, MISCELLANEOUS MAPS, RECORDS OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, WHICH SAID POINT IS DISTANT, SOUTHEASTERLY MEASURED ALONG THE SOUTHWESTERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 3, 150.42 FEET, FROM THE MOST WESTERLY CORNER OF SAID LOT 3; AND RUNNING THENCE FROM SAID POINT OF BEGINNING' SOUTH 3027'00' EAST ALONG SAID SOUTHWESTERLY LINE OF LOT 3, 395.00 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE NORTH 39°48'45" EAST, 303.28 FEET TO A POINT IN THE NORTHEASTERLY LINE OF SAID _OT 3, SAID POINT BEING IN THE SOUTHWESTERLY LINE OF PALISADES ROAD; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY, ALONG SAID NORTHEASTERLY LINE OF LOT 3, TO A POINT WH;CH BEARS NORTH 39048'45" EAST FROM THE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE SOUTH 39o48'45"WEST 253.64 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. EXCEPTING THEREFROM THAT PORTION OF SAID LAND CONVEYED TO THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA BY DEED RECORDED NOVEMBER 27, 1970, IN BOOK 9471, PAGE 979 OFFICIAL RECORDS, IN THE OFFICE OF THE RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY. Assessor's Parcal No. 439-321-03 EXHIBIT 9 CITY OF COSTA MESA } P O BOX 1200 • 77 FAIR DRIVE • CA-FORNIA 92828-1200 V b0► DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT Date r2 Lx ! 1i2 /.2 Dear Applicant and/or Authorized Agent: In accordance with State law, staff has 30 days to review an application to determ;ne if it is complete. After reviewing your application packet, staff has found your application to be incomplete. Specifically, the following information is needed: 1. Application needs to be signed by the property owner/authorized agent. 2. Project description/justification form needs to be submitted/is incomplete. 3. Proof of ownership needs to be provided. 4. Submitted plans are unacceptable. 5. Additional plans need to be submitted. 6. Notification information has not been submitted or is incomplete. > Other/details regarding above: if Wf �. 2c iYlll'Vl(,Ivn. i� I��r✓ F � ,i� . Until these items have been provided, the applicati n is considered Incomplete and no further processing will take place. Once these items have been provided, staff will again review the plans to determine whether the application is complete and processing can continue. You project planner is- &4d4dblT ! who can be reached at 714.754 -�G between the hours of / nvic and DA L---. Please feel free to call with any questions. Sincerely, CITY OF COSTA MESA PLANNING DIVISION cc: tau id n® Division (714) 754-5273 • Code Enforcement (714) 7S45823 . Planning Division (714) 754.5245 FAX (714) 754.4858 • TDD (71 4) 7545244 • www d costa-mesaxems EXHIBIT 9 .1h . City of Costa Mesa, Development Ices Department 77 Fair Drive, P.O. Box 1200, Costa Mesa, CA 92628-1200 Telephone: (714) 754-5245 a Fax: (714) 754-4856 Application for Planning/Zoning Approval PART ONE - Print or Type Address/Location of Property 10 Property Owner Application #(p- o2 tt Phone L34q) 4 S 3 -T 300 Contact Person Tr a 2-( L,C2A!� M 1 S Fax Address f � 1 -Ag 0 enLiy Y'n ,J Ad& City I iL_J r n! a State CU. Zip Code Property Owner's Signature Date E}OSSg ►�.J Authorized Agent Phone �i4�,�iid�.T O�edy Fax�4Q� 341-eGbfe Address +3 TESLA WAY ga fc- I IDD City I D %11 ti E _ L-1 f q State GA, Zip Code q2 61$ Authorized Agent's Signature PF �. . WARM Date �Z 5 /ZemZ NOTICE TO APPLICANT: If you challenge this action in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the Public Hearing for this item, or in written correspondence delivered to the staff or Planning Commission at, or prior to, the Public Hearing or final decision. WHEN COMPLETED, PLEASE RETURN ALL COPIES TO PLANNING DIVISION PART TWO (Office use only) ,/ Date Application Received 4 2-55 L By. 0919 Receipt #c�T'��G�� Date Application Accepted as Complete '�i- CIZ By Development Review $_ General Plan Amendment $ ❑ Administrative Adjustment ❑ General Plan Amendment Screen'rg ❑ Variance ❑ Rezone ❑ Minor Conditional Use Permit ❑ Subdivision ❑ Conditional Use Permit ❑ Lot Line Adjustment ❑ Master Plan (Preliminary or Final) ❑ Planned Signing Program ❑ Redevelopment Agency Review ❑ Negative Declaration ❑ Minor Design Review ❑ Other ❑ Design Review TOTAL FEE $ Assessors Parcel No. AP # x'77^ -J CEOA Zone General Plan Designation Request. To construct three office buildings, totaling 39,300 sq. ft. 2082•30 Rev. 7101 WIWe - ft—v. C—y - Appk t. Pk - k mnzad A9W EXHIBIT 9 r.� City of Costa Mesa, Development "-vices Department DEVEI n A+ �,T COSTA MESA 77 Fair Drive, P.O. Box 1200, Costs ...esa, CA 92628-1200 44TUPMT Telephone: (714) 754-5245 a Fax: (714) 754-4856 _ APR 3 0 2002 Application for Planning/Zoning Approval A plication # 1`- M-04 PART ONE - Print or Type Address/Location of Property 101 (I 2 Z, t t ? [9 gi? (STO L -3-T Property Owner I &V I A/ E flip N � �~7 one (-144)4'7- �i _ 300 Contact Person 'TFtzF—Y Lllo,"✓I� Fax Mtkq) 45?j• 9('Zg Address f 5600 C;ty State dd Zip Code CJ' IZ Property Owner's Signature �'�'�'e�) Date �t �(FOSSg lal Authorized Agent SIG►/ ln/OQX� Phone 44 )� (-..D D ,1Faxoq)341-341 Add ess 43 TESLA WAY 4.tlli - ISD City t%J I, 4' State -A Zip Code 2 61 g Authorized Agent's Signature Date 'I /Z 5 /ZWZ Request '0 � ,tip • -NI-[ DCIV, G••� _ !7 f/ STAn101tJCn Bf�.�dar rpt T vP tSGFI n' Q rx1�l� (s) W! rH EiIV1 r 0 A t -PA Ia7F%2_r✓ALt V t Q4!7w/2d is LA s EAC�f RutLnr sir_ t S -r un S-t.�K 1 C Ei A2 i.,T �.�EE? NOTICE TO APPLICANT: If you challenge this action in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the Public Hearing for this item, or in written correspondence delivered to the staff or Planning Commission at, or prior to, the Public Hearing or final decision. WHEN COMPLETED, PLEASE RETURN ALL COPIES TO PLANNING DIVISION PART TWO (Office use only) Date Application Received By Receipt # IPOZ - ��p Date Application Accepted as Complete & By W5 Development Review $--5Dtv ❑ General Plan Amendment $ ❑ Admimslrali Adjustment ❑ General Plan Amendment Screening ❑ Variance ❑ Rezone ❑ Minor Conditional Use Permit ❑ Subdivision ❑ Conditional Use Permit ❑ Lot Line Adjustment ❑ Master Plan (Preliminary or Final) ❑ Planned Signing Program ❑ Redevelopment Agency Review ❑ Negative Declaration ❑ Minor Design Review ❑ Other ❑ Design Review TOTAL FEE $ Assessors Parcel No. AP #_Aw-!div -(3c CEOA , Zone General Plan Designation __ Reguest: ZM-30 Pe 7AtVM10-ftnmp,Cnq-Appp=L Pmw- Au&4=W ApM EXHIBIT 9 March 21, 2000 To: Building Safety Division Code Enforcement Communications County Clerk County Planning and Dev. Services County Registrar of Voters County Tax Assessor Engineering Division (2) ESRI Fire Admin. - Training Officer Fire Admin. - Mark Brown (Station 6) Fire Prevention Irvine Ranch Water D'strict Mesa Consolidated Water District OLD ADDRESS 1122 Bristol Street AT&T Broadband Newport -Mesa Unified School. Dist.(2) Pacific Bell Police Dept. - Planning & Research Sanitary District Engineer Sanitation Division Office So California Edison Company Southern California Gas State Board of Equalization U. S. Post Office - AIS U. S. Post Office, Adams Thomas Brothers File (2) NEW ADDRESS 1120 Bristol Street 1122 Bristol Street 1 124 Bristol Street Your cooperation in this matter is appreciated. Sincerely, WEND �HIH Assistant Planner c: Terrell Loomis Irvine Ranch Water District 15600 Sand Canyon Avenue Irvine, CA 92618 EXHIBIT 9 A. P. N0. 439-321-03 woPo®awea woc IRVINE RANCH WATER DISTRICT w.r..ea.. o.uP. EXHIBIT 9 SITE _PLAN iv\ IRVINE RANCH WATER D lar PROJECT SUMIMARV: am ARCA RI.w M POWCIOT CN1a PMRO MTa V .w OF OOTOYl00 WS DEmNWORx AreR I re & Land Planning ora.A wm �w r ewN w.m PARK wPl.p OWNER OMNE RANCH WATER DIaTRKTT SRH PLAN RBCE VI!0 WY OF MYA MASA pEYELOwRR 1lIgnCFi �FN�TIgNT .AIN o 7 toot mKMP G2-015 DoBc a4TS-07 Bhael Na O T End FLOOR PLAN r{i' atv-N n bi I of FLOOR PLANT Nt M•N a EXHIBIT 9 oEBIONVAM aadaDtwe a Land Pla tnS 4TOM YID .m I.IWIi�rtl01 BRISTOL OFFICE PARI( aY�r\C� OWl'" MANE RANCH WATER DIBiRIDf BUUJWM A FLOOR PLAMB ReNtlarc ` Zoe NXMW. 02-15 OYt 0422-2 Omet Shsst Na At I� I� I\ I of FLOOR PLANT Nt M•N a EXHIBIT 9 oEBIONVAM aadaDtwe a Land Pla tnS 4TOM YID .m I.IWIi�rtl01 BRISTOL OFFICE PARI( aY�r\C� OWl'" MANE RANCH WATER DIBiRIDf BUUJWM A FLOOR PLAMB ReNtlarc ` Zoe NXMW. 02-15 OYt 0422-2 Omet Shsst Na At NORM ELEVATION , aomcew� DESIONWOIa B o.woE WEST ELEVATION O O O 714-11-�Li rrrirl rrr N'rr �� RI �'. 4 !N rrH,,llr' .N rrrrr /rrr r1rrl■� tl• `� �rrN;r[. !N rrH�rr rl,rr N rrij 1� �III�����/} N■n■ ■r�■n■n■n �inrr ■r1 rrlE;rr� �� ��— wErrElrew rr{��rr��rrlll,rrlurr� r� EEl�r�i`�,rr wort ��rr� ■Irr�l'rr_I�:rrr�'rr�,1,1IrrA T. �:� T..!:!T.f_ -. , ii. .. w1.—►./!6:�.\r_.�. G:.��rT N;T ...r�'....�.. r.� SOUTH ELEVATION EAST ELEVATION EXHIBIT 9 OWNER ItNWE R#JoM WATMM twEltaOT MnLOENO A ELEVATIONS i114//o 02-0+5 on OFII@ 0-z Sh/et N/. A• :..d ROOD PLM w EXHIBIT 9 1 n ROOK PLAN \ DE aNWbmt •rahMeoaxs a Lath PlanhP.a�a P,ft �e anmraL CFPICO PAac GWNK" UMNa RANCH wATM OUrFlt Cr aunooso a FLCCn PLAN NeNerom: lot NSOc M.MS an o4aa2 crag Shoat No. al 0 iF, NNN7 INNN2 r/ wf OWN! w� On MINEIHUH� Elmon I Iin��L���IY�n �1111,m-f1'��1 R.� T. -.. iT t. 1 1 �r R►+-.� ►.. •T� ...� .ate. Minot V1, Mo in AK lion l2 f �� t 1 �, i'i � ii!� -. .N..�\5..15 _T►T�..!_!.f>.. ,�■�■� ='= —' �®. DEBIMIwbW( ArchI... -. � dmmY► ��� - a =_" re .r ►� d Plum 0 YIdA Y_..A frIJIrOL JN#IL•f in.._ O T adv �d ■I���rr ��jfr �� N �� N d!i 17�.r�1 ■ionion ■ f CCW00:1 C ■ ■' 1�.■� •�'. .CC ...T.:/� 1i�! �L'fdST—_ -►! : �.,.'1.. mac..=_� wn.,!u��►irifl.. pr■n�■��.:r■n■n!■n■r �. w1 �� 11 ��. �• J �11 wII��II II�111^ !19 �I� n�� EXHIBIT 9 MMM IJMNf rANL`N V ATOI C19RWr BLAMING B M"ATTONB a Elm J,b .. " 7.01115 01t W22-02 Shoot N0. 02 =0 &W FLOOR PLAN 1st FLOOR PIAN EXHIBIT 9 c u"QNVAM AFohttsatu, a teNa Ptanning OR98TOL OFRCY PARK t.a tte t.r oe�� m4u OWNER RWM6 RANON WMMZR 87ta0T BUUANNO O FLOOR PLAN Re.hbna: Jo0RPe8 024"s ORK Ot-Il-0t Q� Shoat No. O1 O " yy O &W FLOOR PLAN 1st FLOOR PIAN EXHIBIT 9 c u"QNVAM AFohttsatu, a teNa Ptanning OR98TOL OFRCY PARK t.a tte t.r oe�� m4u OWNER RWM6 RANON WMMZR 87ta0T BUUANNO O FLOOR PLAN Re.hbna: Jo0RPe8 024"s ORK Ot-Il-0t Q� Shoat No. O1 e 0 0 0 0 0 0 }!, 17...,..�I..M.'M,...i.. a....1.. M.. ... H. M;00� 1/ ■....i1.Hsl1. M�.. M..1/ i��jj I� w .,.. M...M.. Hlr -1 �.�..H.... �. 1. .111..11..,. �. i /' �Nq n — _wuN1l..nr..lnja',zri..lr--1 11.1.. _ _!. _. � A!:�t�1......! •� R�!1\.�� .. � ��� _=A:__�II! �. N �� 7; � r��r•.�•S. C�I.T�.v!w.. � .. s._ EXHIBIT 9 •._..'W -r a°y/ + 1 :.�'i ai icon 'carr 1'+ ti.' G�.� ,, y I I_I � �bl' I � i I w 1�'I"r — •_•� �'i'-�-----.- - �� 'i �a'.a a �i i a ° jj� 4. 1•• S Ir Sf'� �7t , ii • - i` )• t 1�\ ___ 4.__ li t � • � 1 G7 �- a : � '�j"�-�\I 'Ij--= t `� `3 g `•�� ii�l t'9'"+- �1�,-'"-n� tilt ---- -AA 1 r. II _. BRISTOL STREET 1; (PALISADES ROAD) EXHIBIT 9 VICINITY MAP A.L.T.A. SURVEY S P e -p" g IRVINE RANCH WATER DISTRICT 1 -- �maaa emrm rwaawe• � inaewaa amuir awns rck u EXHIBIT 10 1039904.1 STA.TE OF CALIFORNIA ,STATE BOARD OF EQUALIZATIONFogJoXLENS TAX AREA SERVICES SECTION 450 N Street, MIC: 59 P. O. Box 942879 Saawnento, CA 94279-0059 Telephone: (916) 322-7185 FAX: (916) 327-4251 Ms. Dana M. Smith, Executive Officer Orange County LAFCo 12 Civic Center Plaza, Room 235 Santa Ana, CA 92701 Imo: DEC 11 2000 I.OM AG9V MRMATIO14 COgIl,11S "33 'Ewa" Ok6CW DEAN ANOAI. wooed Otstrht. StacWmn CLAUDE PARRISH TMbd Oftut Taranos JOHN CHWrG f=arm Ott Los Ar"" KATHLEEN CONNELL This is to acknowledge receipt of the statements(s) required by Section 54900, at seq., of the Govenment Code for the action described below. Copies of your documents will be forwarded by us to other agencies. Your are required by Section 54902 of the Government Code to file a complete set of documents, except for the processing fee, with the County Assessor and Auditor affected by this action. Tax rate area boundaries and property tax allocations will become effective for the assessment roll indicated below. Assessment Ron: 2001/02 County: 30 Orange DisMct COSTA MESA Conducting Authority: CITY Short Title: BRISTOL ANX. Type of Action: 02 Annexation to City Resolution/Ord. No.: LAFCo No.: CA97-21 Effective Date: 11/28/2000 Fee: $600 Acreage: 1.62 cc. County Assessor, County Audifor EXHIBIT 10 David J. Martin, Supervisor Tax Area Services Section JAMES f< SPEED RECE�VE D 0 DEC 1 12000 ffAI AGENCY FORMATION COMMISSfON Recorded in Official Records, County of Orange Gary Oranville, Clerk -Recorder IIIN11111I111111111111I Ia1NO FEE 20000646145 09:00am 11129100 113 33 C16 10 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Pursuant to Govt Code Section 6103, because the Local Agency Formation Commission is a government agency, no ,filing fee shall be charged for the filing of this document Recorded at the request of and return by Interoffice mail to: ORANGE LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION COMMISSION 12 Civic Center Plaza, Room 235 Santa Ana CA 92701 CERTIFICATE OF COMPLETION icy Pursuant to Government Code Section 57200, this Certificate is issued by the Executive Officer of the Local Agency Formation Commission of Orange County, California. 1. The short-term designation, as determined by LAFCO, is: `Bristol Annexation to the City of Costa Mesa' (CA 97-21) 2. The name of each district or city involved in this change of organization or reorganization and the kind or type of change of organization ordered for each city or district are as follows: CITY: City of Costs Mesa TYPE OF CHANGE OF REORGANIZATION: Annexation 3. The above listed cities and/or districts are located within the following county(ies): Orange 4. A description of the boundaries of the above cited change of organization or mon is shown on the attached legal description and map, marked Exhibit A and B, and by this reference incorporated herein. 5. The territory is uninhabited. 6. This change of organization has been approved subject to the following terms and conditions, if any: a) Payment of Recorder and State Board of Equalization fees. b) The applicant agrees to defend, hold harmless and indemnify LAFCO and/or its agents, officers and employees from any claim, action or proceeding against LAFCO EXHIBIT 10 'Certificate of Completion -- CA97-21 Page 2 and/or its agents, officers and employees to attach, set aside, void or annul approval of LAFCO concerning this proposal or any action relating to or arising out of such approval. c) Upon annexation of the territory to the city, all right, title, and interest of the county, including the underlying fee where owned by the county in any and all storm drains, trails, landscaped areas, street lights, signals, open space, local parks and bridges shall vest in the city. The city shall assume ownership and maintenance responsibility upon the issuance of the certificate of completion by the executive officer. d) The effective date shall be the date of recordation. 7. The resolution (No. 00-82) ordering this change of organization without election, or confirming an order for this change after confirmation by the voters, was adopted on I November 6, 2000 by the City Council of the City of Costa Mesa. I hereby certify under penalty of perjury that I have examined the resolution cited above, including any terms and conditions, and the map and legal description, and that they are true and complete copies. Orange County Local Agency Formation Commission Dana M. Smith, Executive Officer DATE: November 14, 2000 • 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 is 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Block 5450; 5550 Modules 93 02,12 E)QIIBPT `A' Bristol Annexation To the City of Costa Mesa (CA 97-21) PAR EL 1 That portion of the Unincorporated Territory in the County of Orange, State of California, more particularly described as follows: BEGINNING at an angle point in the existing boundary line of the City of Costa Mesa as established by the "Country Club North Annexation (Revised)", said angle point being the Northeasterly terminus of that certain course described as South 39°48'45" West, 280.20 feet in said annexation; THENCE following along said existing boundary line of said City per "Paularino No. 12 Annexation", per "Country Club No. 2 Annexation (Revised)" and per said "Country Club North Annexation (Revised)" through it's various courses in a general Southeasterly, Southwesterly, Northwesterly and Northeasterly direction to the POINT OF BEGINNING. The above described parcel of land contains 5.69 acres, more or less. PARCEL2 That portion of the Unincorporated Territory in the County of Orange, State of California, more particularly described as follows: BEGINNING at an angle point in the existing boundary line of the City of Costa Mesa as established by the "Country Club No.2 Annexation (Revised) and the "Paularino No. 12 Annexation", said angle point being the most Easterly corner of said "Country Club No. 2 Annexation (Revised)" and the most Southerly corner of said "Paularino No. 12 Annexation"; Page 1 of 2 EXHIBIT 10 2 3 4 s 6 s 9 10 11 12 13 14 is 16 17 18 19 20 21' 22 23 24 25 EXHIBIT `A' Bristol Annexation To the City of Costa Mesa (CA 97-21) THENCE following along said existing boundary line of said Ci per said "Country Club No. 2 Annexation (Revised)", per the "Bristol/Red Hill Annexation" and per "Red Hill No. 1 Annexation", through it's various courses in a general Southwesterly, Southeasterly, Northeasterly and Northwesterly direction to the POINT OF BEGINNING. The above described parcel of land contains 1.62 acres, more or less. Attached and made a part thereof is a map designated as Exhibit `B'. This document was prepared by me or Under my direction and supervision. Dated this Z,1,4 day ofAat;L1999. Robert Je k, P.L.S. 6803 My license expires 9/30/00 This document does meet the approval of The Orange County Surveyor's Office. t ft4"_ (aw elm Page 2 of 2 EXHIBIT 10 a 3MEk 5450, 5550 Nodules 93 , 02,12 , f^ EXHIBIT "B" Bristol Annexation to the City of Costa ♦ , -,� , %, ,s o (CA 97-21) LEGEND Annexation Boundary .. _ Existing City Boundary Line 1! 100 0 100 200 300 ,per, .� G , , A \% s ♦ 'p��zo^ o ., „yam %f Il %oJ ° • k \ `` f�o o %• ♦ ♦ '1 ♦ 7 S.@'y e T T O \ 10 .l ' q o d? . \ •�coo.\ . .Z� J I/ , This document was prepared by me or under my 'supervision and direct f n. at this b70 da of 1999. C obert Mine , L.S. No.6803 My license expires 90/00 This document does meet the approval of the Onge County Surveyor's office , 1999 Canes, EXHIBIT 10 No.X03 O 0+a e .0 a gyp. 9/30�ipp \ fio y 9A a\per X �••\ �', 4°!e4QG' ` 0C �FCALIfA� \ �' °j �` ro`y ti�� �o '' \ c W,' } t ilia a40t * �" , J'' '\Bristol/Red Hill rl�iQ1 Q• ,' ' Annexation EXHIBIT 10 RESOLUTION NO. Oo - S'&I-, A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF COSTA MESA, CALIFORNIA, ORDERING THE ANNEXATION OF TERRITORY DESIGNATED AS "BRISTOL ANNEXATION TO THE CITY OF COSTA MESA" (CA -97-21). THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF COSTA MESA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: WHEREAS, the Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) of Orange County, California, adopted Resolution No. CA -97-21 on June 14, 2000, making determinations and approving the proposed annexation to the City of Costa Mesa of territory described in Exhibit A attached hereto, and by this reference incorporated herein; and WHEREAS, the terms and conditions of the annexation as approved by the Local Agency Formation Commission are as follows: (a) Payment by the City of Costa Mesa of the State Board of Equalization fens. (b) The City agrees to defend, hold harmless and indemnify LAFCO and/or its agents, officers, and employees from any claim, action, or proceeding against LAFCO and/or its agents, officers, and employees to attack, set aside, void, or annul the approval of LAFCO concerning this proposal or any action relating to or arising out of such approval. - (c) The owners of each of the territories to be annexed to the City of Costa Mesa pursuant to this change of organization shall be required to pay, on EXHIBIT an annual basis, an amount equal to such other taxes, assessments, and service charges, rentals, and rates imposed by the City of Costa Mesa on similarly situated real property in the City as existing on the date of effectiveness of this change of organization, and shall further be subject to all new or increased taxes, assessments, and service charges, rentals, and rates as may be imposed by the City of Costa Mesa, pursuant to applicable law, after the date of effectiveness of this change of organization. (d) Upon annexation of the territory to the city, all right, title, and interest of the county, including the underlying fee where owned by the county in any and all storm drains, trails, landscaped areas, street lights, signals, open space, local parks, and bridges shall vest in the city. The city shall assume ownership and maintenance responsibility upon the issuance of the Certificate of Completion by the Executive Officer. (e) The effective date shall be the date of recordation. WHEREAS, the reasons for this proposed annexation are to eliminate unincorporated county island areas surrounded entirely by the City of Costa Mesa, thereby eliminating the duplication of governmental services and ensuring the efficient delivery of services; and WHEREAS, the regular county assessment roll is utilized by this city; and WHEREAS, the City Council certifies that the project is exempt from the requirements of CEQA (California Environmental Quality Act) per Class 15319; and EXHIBIT 10 . t:•_. 0 . 2 W � Q isO _ C O...... . .... i:c W U C • O O W i'. O N 'Z C 2 is f :• O ri• . • a fQi U - From: Michelle M. Pase [mailto:MPase@ptwww.com] Sent: Tuesday, March 17, 2015 4:42 PM To: LEE, MEL; GREEN, BRENDA; CITY COUNCIL Cc: Michael H. Leifer; Erin Balsara Naderi; Michelle M. Pase Subject: Objection to the Proposed Ganahl Lumber Yard Project - Exhibits 3 of 3 In advance of tonight's City Council meeting, please find enclosed an objection letter to the Ganahl Project for distribution to the City Council. Exhibits will be sent by 3 separate e-mails due to the size of the PDF attachment. Michelle Pase I Assistant to Michael H. Leifer, Erin B. Naderi, and Steven R. Guess Palmieri, Tyler, Wiener, Wilhelm & Waldron LLP 2603 Main Street, Suite 1300 1 Irvine, CA 92614 Direct Dial (949) 851-7325 1 Facsimile (949) 851-1554 11MMM J*AL sig M. I� LLFL WIEN[ & WiLl i Ldns ,�, VVAI LIMNI Email I Website IRS Circular 230 Disclosure: Pursuant to Internal Revenue Service Circular 230, only formal opinions satisfying specific requirements may be relied on for the purpose of avoiding certain penalties under the Internal Revenue Code. Any tax advice contained in this communication (including attachments) does not constitute a formal opinion satisfying such requirements. Accordingly, we must advise you that any such tax advice was not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, by you or any other person as such an opinion for the purpose of (i) avoiding penalties imposed under the Internal Revenue Code or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any matters addressed herein. This message and any attached documents contain information from the law firm of Palmieri, Tyler, Wiener, Wilhelm & Waldron LLP that may be privileged and confidential and protected from disclosure. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, or an employee or agent responsible for delivering this message to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by replying to the message and deleting it from your computer. Thank you. EXHIBIT 11 1039904.1 RESOLUTION NO. Do — 8'.-L., A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF COSTA MESA, CALIFORNIA, ORDERING THE ANNEXATION OF TERRITORY DESIGNATED AS "BRISTOL ANNEXATION TO THE CITY OF COSTA MESA" (CA -97-21). THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF COSTA MESA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: WHEREAS, the Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) of Orange County, California, adopted Resolution No. CA -97-21 on June 14, 2000, making determ'nations and approving the proposed annexation to the City of Costa Mesa of territory described in Exhibit A attached hereto, and by this reference incorporated herein; and WHEREAS, the terms and conditions of the annexation as approved by the Local Agency Formation Commission are as follows: (a) Payment by the City of Costa Mesa of the State Board of Equalization fens. (b) The City agrees to defend, hold harmless and indemnify LAFCO and/or its agents, officers, and employees from any claim, action, or proceeding against LAFCO and/or its agents, officers, and employees to attack, set aside, void, or annul the approval of LAFCO concerning this proposal or any action relating to or arising out of such approval. (c) The owners of each of the territories to be annexed to the City of Costa, Mesa pursuant to.this change of organization shall be required to pay, on EXHIBIT 11 an annual basis, an amount equal to such other taxes, assessments, and service charges, rentals, and rates imposed by the City of Costa Mesa on similarly situated real property in the City as existing on the date of effectiveness of this change of organization, and shall further be subject to all new or increased taxes, assessments, and service charges, rentals, and rates as may be imposed by the City of Costa Mesa, pursuant to applicable law, after the date of effectiveness of this change of organization. (d) Upon annexation of the territory to the city, all right, title, and interest of the county, including the underlying fee where owned by the county in any and all storm drains, trails, landscaped areas, street lights, signals, open space, local parks, and bridges shall vest in the city. The city shall assume ownership and maintenance responsibility upon the issuance of the Certificate of Completion by the Executive Officer. (e) The effective date shall be the date of recordation. WHEREAS, the reasons for this proposed annexation are to eliminate unincorporated county island areas surrounded entirely by the City of Costa Mesa, thereby eliminating the duplication of governmental services and ensuring the efficient delivery of services; and WHEREAS, the regular county assessment roll is utilized by this city; and WHEREAS, the City Council certifies that the project is exempt from the requirements of CEQA (California Environmental Quality Act) per Class 15319; and EXHIBIT 11 WHEREAS, a public hearing on this annexation was called for and held by the City Council at the place and time noticed therefore on November 6, 2000, and this City Council finds and determines that the value of written protests filed and not withdrawn is less than 25 percent of the registered voters residing within the territory to be annexed, and less than 25 percent of the number of owners of land owning less than 25 percent of the assessed value of land within the territory.; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Costa Mesa hereby orders the territory described in Exhibit A annexed; and directs the City Clerk of the City of Costa Mesa to transmit a certified copy of this resolution with applicable fees required by Section 54902.5 of the Government Code to the Executive Officer of the Local Agency Formation Commission of Orange County. PASSED AND ADOPTED this 6" day of November, 2000. City of Costa Mesa T Deputy City C(fylrk of the City of Costa Mesa APPROVED AS • FORM EXHIBIT 11 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss CITY OF COSTA MESA ) I, MARY T. ELLIOTT, Deputy City Clerk and ex -officio Clerk of the City Council of the City of Costa Mesa, hereby certify that the above and foregoing Resolution No. D _ a-- was duly and regularly passed and adopted by the said City Council at a regular meeting thereof held on the Vh day of November, 2000. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the Seal of the City of Costa Mesa this 7' day of November, 2000. Deputy City CI k and ex -officio Clerk of the City Coun ' of the City of Costa Mesa EXHIBIT 11 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ILU .......... .......... . . . . . . . . . . ... ... .. .... ... Emil' Ekki B It"! 1 C) 0 < 001 X ;t UZI W z 0 0 U ul LL 0 0 LU L) U) IL LL - 0 w a- S r= C) U 4 Z Z,t, CO z CL L) 7 EXHIBIT 12 1039904.1 ... � �s, •pa� } +Erin CD \ T 3• ■N V P' � tis, • �\ :UP In Smoke 43_', 1 ti ` a ✓ - p., Q/ r .mho fro ta.l.a sn Al 11,11I.-_ � ,>E- \ •,\\ f r, j .P N Lh InkIGfill �s „ \ \ a y !\.. a •*/\ iii% \" ; :` '_ . %/I / '� mays .-12015 Goop^MZV darn lv.niS Google Ir:vacy Repmrta Prahlem SOh^ EXHIBIT 13 1039904.1 I, Lauren Murphy, declare as follows: 1. I have personal knowledge of all matters stated herein and if called as a witness could testify competently thereto. 2. I am a paralegal at the law firm of Palmieri, Tyler, Wiener, Wilhelm & Waldron LLP. 3. On March 4, 2015, I visited the Orange County Planning Department in the City of Santa Ana and requested property records for three properties: 1072 Bristol Street, 1182 Bristol Street, and 1275 Bristol Street, all in the City of Costa Mesa, California. The County Planning Department did not have the documents relating to the original development entitlements for these properties. The Planning Department confirmed that 1182 Bristol was annexed into the City of Costa Mesa on November 29, 2000 via Annex No. 110. I requested information concerning the annexation of the other two properties and was told I would need to get that information from the Survey Department upstairs. 4. I then proceeded to go upstairs to the Survey Department. I was informed by the desk attendant in the Survey Department that they were having computer problems with their parcel information and they were unable to access information regarding annexation. To help me without the benefit of the computer, they pulled out a big annex map and confirmed that 1072 and 1182 Bristol were part of the November 29, 2000 annexation to the City of Costa Mesa. They were able to locate a document entitled Acknowledgment of the 'Bristol Annexation" to the City of Costa Mesa effective November 29, 2000 and related documents (including the City of Costa Mesa Resolution 1482403.2 EXHIBIT 13 00-82 and the Orange Local Agency Formation Commission's CA97-21). The Survey Department advised me that once a property is annexed to a city, all records for that property are transferred to that City. 5. On March 12, 2015, I visited the City Clerk's office for the City of Costa Mesa and made a Public Record's Request for Resolution No. 00-82, the attachments and any supporting documentation including Staff Reports. The department clerk was only able to locate the body of the requested resolution and told me that the attachments were massive and that she would have them scanned and emailed to me. The following day, March 13, 2015, I received an email from Michael Dunn, Deputy City Clerk, who informed me that "The council report no longer exists, however, I have attached a page of the minutes for the item of November 6, 2000 related to the Bristol Annexation." 6. I then went up to the second floor of City Hall to the City of Costa Mesa Planning Department. I met with Associate Planner, Stephanie Roxas. I requested copies of the approvals and staff reports for the development of the property located at 1120 Bristol Street, 1122 Bristol Street, and 1124 Bristol Street. Ms. Roxas did a search on the computer at the planning desk and was able to locate the entitlement documents related to 1122 Bristol Street. She provided me with copies of those entitlement documents. Those documents appear to include the development of the three buildings located at 1120, 1122 and 1124 Bristol. I also asked Ms. Roxas for a copy of the CUP for a mobile food cart. Initially, Ms. Roxas did not think they would have the document, but she again searched the computer at the Planning counter. She was able to locate and provide me with copies of the 1991 CUP for a mobile hot dog cart on 1275 South Bristol Street, and the 1482403.2 EXHIBIT 13 associated Staff Report. I also asked to see copies of the zoning code that was in effect prior to May 5, 1997. Ms. Roxas was directed by another gentleman behind the counter to a drawer where old zoning codes were kept. Ms. Roxas found an envelope that contained a zoning code that went into effect on February 18, 1993. I asked for a copy of the document. Ms. Roxas said that she would have a copy made and that I could pick it up when it was completed. To date, no one from Planning has contacted me to pick up the copy of the requested document. (When I visited the Planning Department a second time on March 13th, I learned that the requested document was still on their desk and had not even been sent for copying yet). On March 13, 2015, I went to the Planning Department for a second time. This time, I was assisted by Assistant Planner, Chelsea Crager. 7. I asked Ms. Crager for approvals and Staff Reports relating to the current Home Depot at 2300 S. Harbor Boulevard in Costa Mesa. Ms. Crager pulled the area of the subject property up on the computer screen at the Planning Counter. Ms. Crager said that the address 2300 S. Harbor Boulevard relates to a lot of parcels. She was having trouble narrowing down which building was the Home Depot. Ms. Crager did identify the Home Depot on the computer screen and found its associated Assessor's Parcel Number. Ms. Crager informed me that there were hundreds of permits on the property. I told her I was interested in when it was developed. Ms. Crager said the computer system only goes back to 1998 and what she could tell me was that it was "last assessed in 2014," but that was all. -3- 1482403.2 EXHIBIT 13 8. Next I asked Ms. Crager if we could check for entitlement documents and Staff Reports that related to 1312 Bristol, Costa Mesa, California (this is the address provided in the current Staff Report). I told her I was interested in when it was developed and when it was annexed into the City. Ms. Crager was unable to find any files that related to this address. She believed, from her memory, that the address is an apartment complex. Ms. Crager did not provide me with any documents relating to that property. 9. Then, I asked Ms. Crager if we could check for entitlements, including sign approvals and Staff Reports for certain properties on Bristol Street. I told her I already had a few permit numbers for those properties and I would like to get copies of those specific items as well. 10. The first property we reviewed together was 1182 Bristol, specifically Permit Number PA99-0128 (again, the permit number that is provided in the current Staff Report). Ms. Crager informed me that Permit Number PA99-0128 was not a correct permit number. She explained that PA stands for "Permit Application," the "99" stands for the year of the Permit Application, and the last four digits indicate the number of permits issued on the property. She told me that there would not be 128 permits issued that year on the property. Ms Crager was unable to find any permits in the system for this property. 11. We then went through each of the property addresses and permit numbers (as provided in Attachment 8 to the Staff Report). Ms. Crager was not able to locate any of the main sign permits for any of the properties. -4- 1482403.2 EXHIBIT 13 12. I spoke with both Chelsea Crager, and Assistant Planner Stephanie Roxas, about making a list of what Zoning Codes were in existence in the 1970's and the 1980's. During my prior visit to the Planning Department Ms. Roxas was shown a drawer that contained copies of the old Zoning Codes. I asked if I could look at these codes during this visit and make a list of what codes were in effect for what years. The Assistant Planners pulled papers out of the code drawer, but the codes were no longer intact. There were parts of books and pieces of paper in disarray. They were unable to piece them together during my visit. I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on this 17th day of March, 2015, at Irvine, California. Irl aure Murphy -5- ]482403,2 EXHIBIT 13 EXHIBIT 14 1039904.1 I, Erin B. Naderi, declare as follows: 1. I have personal knowledge of all matters stated herein and if called as a witness could testify competently thereto. 2. I am an attorney at law duly licensed to practice before all courts in the State of California. I am a partner of the law firm of Palmieri, Tyler, Wiener, Wilhelm & Waldron, counsel for the ownership of the property located at 1072 Bristol, Costa Mesa, California --1072 Bristol Partners, LP. 3. On March 4, 2015, I went to City Hall to try and obtain entitlement information and annexation information for various properties. I went to the Second Floor of City Hall to the Planning Department. 4. I was first helped by "Ryan" in the Planning Department. I informed him that I was looking for the entitlements for the development of the 1072 Bristol property. Ryan ran a search on the computer at the Planning counter. He showed me his computer screen indicating that the computer did not have the entitlement information for the development of the 1072 Bristol property. 5. I also asked Ryan for the entitlement information for 1182 Bristol. Again, Ryan ran a search on the computer at the Planning counter and was unable to find the entitlement information for the development of that property. 6. Ryan then indicated that the documents may be available on microfiche. Ryan then went into a back area of the Planning Department (out of my view) to review the microfiche. After approximately 10-15 minutes, Ryan advised that he could not find any documents on the microfiche for those properties. 1483671.1 EXHIBIT 14 7. I also asked Ryan for the entitlement information for 1275 Bristol --the existing Ganahl Lumber site. Again, Ryan ran a search on the computer at the Planning Counter and was unable to find the entitlement information for the development of that property. The only entitlement document he located was a CUP for a hot dog cart in front of the Barr Lumber building. We both reviewed that CUP on his screen to see if it had any information on the prior entitlements (which it did not). 8. I then asked Ryan if we could determine when these properties were annexed into the City of Costa Mesa. Ryan looked for annexation information. At first he did not find anything. He then went to the back and came back to the Planning counter with Willa Bouwens-Killeen. Willa then pulled out an accordion folder from under the Planning counter and pulled out various maps. Eventually she found a color - coded map showing when various properties were annexed into the City of Costa Mesa. Willa confirmed that 1072 Bristol and 1182 Bristol were both annexed into the City of Costa Mesa in 2000. We also noted that it looked like the existing Ganahl Lumber site at 1275 Bristol was annexed into the City of Costa Mesa between 1960 and 1977. 9. We also looked at an aerial of 1072 Bristol and 1182 Bristol on the Planning computer screen. Willa told me that the three buildings that were between 1072 and 1182 Bristol were developed under the City of Costa Mesa. She said that 1072 and 1182 Bristol were developed before they were annexed into the City of Costa Mesa. 10. I asked Willa who would have the entitlement information for these properties. She said that I should try the County. I told her that we had already been to the County and that they said that any County records were transferred over to the City -2- 1483671.1 EXHIBIT 14 upon annexation. She said that is probably true, but that they didn't know where those documents would be. 11. On Saturday, March 14, 2015, I went to the existing Home Depot at Harbor Center in Costa Mesa referenced in the current Staff Report. I took the photos of the existing Home Depot that are being submitted to the City Council. 12. Upon my driving into Harbor Center, I immediately noticed the signage on the Home Depot that stated there was an "Indoor Lumber Yard." I also noted that the Home Depot was conventionally parked like a retail building with the parking spaces available for customers in front of the building. 13. Walking up to the Home Depot entrance, I noticed that there were approximately 8 parking spaces near the exit of the store that were designated as "Pro Customer Parking." 14. I walked into the Home Depot and took photos of the indoor lumber yard. All of the lumber was located indoors within the building. Towards the back of the store, I found two saws. There was a large saw that was being operated by a Home Depot employee. While I was there observing this area, I noticed that there were a number of customers waiting for cuts. The customers appeared to be regular retail customers --I noticed a few couples as well as a mother and daughter waiting. There was also a radial saw in the back area that was not in use while I was there. There is a roll up door in the back area near where the saws are located. While I was at the Home Depot, I observed a product delivery --the roll up door is opened when there are product deliveries and is then closed when the product delivery is completed. -3- 1483671.1 EXHIBIT 14 15. The only outdoor area at the Home Depot is the Garden Center. The Garden Center has an open shed -like area as well as an open area for the plants. The outdoor area is enclosed with a wall/fencing. 16. After walking through the store, I then took photos of the parking lot in front of the Home Depot. I also drove around the building to view and take photos of the back of the building. There was no outdoor lumber use at the Home Depot. I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on this 17th day of March, 2015, at Irvine, California. -4- 1483671.1 EXHIBIT 14 EXHIBIT 15 1039904.1 Lauren Murphy <mlauren1616@gmail.com> PRR #153 RESPONSE -Murphy (Res. 00-82, Staff Reports) 1 message; DUNN, MICHAEL <MICHAEL.DUNN@costamesaca.gov> Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 2:10 PM To: "MLAUREN1616@gmail.com" <MLAUREN1616@gmail.com> Dear Ms. Murphy, This is in response to your public records request (attached). The council report no longer exists, however, I have attached a page of the minutes for the item of November 6, 2000 related to the Bristol Annexation. Thank you Michael Dunn Deputy City Clerk i Costa Mesa City Hall 77 Fair Dr. Costa Mesa, CA 92628 714-754-5225 www.costamesaca.gov 2 attachments PRR-Murphy (Res 00-82, staff reports).pdf 447K MINUTES 11 06 OO.pdf 44K EXHBITI 15 0,34 ADMINISTRATIVE Bids received for Bid Item No. 1054, Five New Kawasaki ACTIONS/Awarded Motorcycles, and trade-in of three used Kawasaki Motorcycles, are Bid Item 1054, in file on the City Clerk's office. The contract was awarded to Motorcycles, to Burbank Kawasaki, 1329 Hollywood Way, Burbank, for a total net Burbank Kawasaki cost of $37,320.90. Awarded Seismic Bids received for Seismic Retrofit of City Half and the Corporation Retrofit of City Hall Yard (base bid only, eliminating the Police Facility), Project No. 00 - and Corp Yard, 14, are on file in the City Clerk's office. The contract was awarded Project No. 00-14, to Anderson[White, 229 South Raymond Avenue, Alhambra, for to Anderson[White $2,800,000,00, and the. Mayor and Deputy City Clerk were authorized to sign on behalf of the City. Approved Agree- An agreement was approved with Analytical Planning Services, ment with Analytical Inc., 15707 Rockfield, Suite 225, Irvine, for $271,876.00, to provide Planning Services construction management services for the seismic retrofit, and the for Seismic Retrofit Mayor and Deputy City Clerk were authorized to sign on behalf of Services the City. Approved Agree- An agreement was approved with Ware & Malcomb Architects, ment with Ware & Inc., 18111 Von Karman Avenue, Suite 600, Irvine, for Malcomb for $100,500.00, to provide architectural and engineering services for Seismic Retrofit the seismic retrofit, and the Mayor and Deputy City Clerk were Services authorized to sign on behalf of the City. PUBLIC HEARING The Deputy City Clerk announced that this was the time and place Bristol Street set for the public hearing to consider the Bristol Street Annexation Annexation located within the sphere of influence of the City of Costa Mesa, located on the corner of Newport Boulevard and Bristol Street and the corner of Santa Ana Avenue and Bristol Street. The Affidavit of Publication is on file in the City Clerk's office. No communications were received. The Development Services Director reviewed the Agenda Report dated October 23, 2000, There being no speakers, the Mayor closed the public hearing, MOTION/Adopted On motion by Council Member Erickson, seconded by Mayor Pro Resolution 00-82 Tem Cowan, and carried 5-0, Resolution 00-82 was adopted: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL. OF THE CITY OF COSTA MESA, CALIFORNIA, ORDERING THE ANNEXATION OF TERRITORY DESIGNATED AS "BRISTOL. ANNEXATION TO THE CITY OF COSTA MESA" (CA -21). OLD BUSINESS The Deputy City Clerk presented from the meeting of October 16, West Side Specific 2000, West Side Specific Plan public review alternatives and Plan adoption schedule. The Development Services Director summarized the Agenda Report dated October 23, 2000, proposing that the retention of a trained public participation facilitator would allow the City to identify areas of common agreement and conflict within local community interest groups and associations and move toward consensus regarding the final recommendations of the plan. Martin Millard, 2973 Harbor Boulevard, Costa Mesa, stated that he had attended every meeting on the West Side Specific Plan, reporting that the consensus of opinion indicated that most residents wanted the City to replicate Newport Beach. He observed that the final report suggested that the area should resemble Huntington Park. Mr. Millard suggested that the City Manager assume the position of the facilitator. EXHBITI 15 PUBLIC RECORDS REQUEST Ta Insure a proper response to your request, it is preferred, but not maJ,idatory that you provide in the space below the name of.the document or ocuments you are requesting. VVe will make every effort to provide the documents requested in a reasonable time. However, please be aware that under CALIFORNIA GOVERNMENT CODE fi2g0 ET SEQ th C't h t 10 1 d d ft b FOES elE f l i t'LJ CITY CLERK 15 W12 x14 I: Ci-Iy OF CCS. A By� § e i y as en % ) ca en ar ay - a er you su MIL this form to determine whether the records you have requested is subject to disclosure under the PUBLIC RECORDS ACT. After the City has made this determination, you will be immediately notified of the determination and reasons therefore. If the City determines that the documents you have requested are subject to disclosure, they will be produced within a reasonable time thereafter. PLEASE NOTE: GENERALLY, COPY COSTS FOR STANDARD BLACK AND WHITE 85' x 11" COPIES ARE TEN (14) CENTS PER PAGE. HOWEVER, THE CITY'S CURRENT FEE RESOLUTION SETS FORTH SPECIFIC COPY COSTS FOR CERTAIN DOCUMENTS SUCH AS POLICE REPORTS AND FIRE INCIDENT REPORTS, AS WELL AS OTHER TYPES OF RECORDS. COSTS FOR ELECTRONIC RECORDS MAY INCLUDE THE COST TO CONSTRUCT A RECORD AND THE COST OF PROGRAMMING AND COMPUTER SERVICES NECESSARY TO PRODUCE A COPY OF THE RECORD. NAME: - $Y� �l �, DAYTIME PHONE NO.: MAILING ADDRESS: a- ❑'`} WILL PICK UP ❑ PLEASE MAIL DESCRIPTION OF THE REQUESTED DOCUMENT(S): yes4 %0 -r 00.1 V Signature'' Date PLEASE SUBMIT THIS FORM TO: OFFICE OF THE C tT tL;ERK, 77 FAIR DRIVE, COSTA MESA, CA 92626 EXHBITI 15 Cl T Y COUNCIL A GENDA REPORT MEETING DATE: MARCH 17, 2015 ITEM NUMBER: PH -2 SUBJECT: APPEAL OF PLANNING APPLICATION PA -14-40 FOR THE GANAHL LUMBER HARDWARE STORE AND OUTDOOR STORAGE YARD AT 1100 BRISTOL STREET FROM: PLANNING DIVISION/DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT PRESENTATION BY: MEL LEE, SENIOR PLANNER DATE: MARCH 9, 2015 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: MEL LEE, AICP (714) 754-5611 mel.lee@costamesaca.gov RECOMMENDATION: UPHOLD the Planning Commission's decision to approve the proposed project, described below: 1. Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND). 2. Planning Application PA -14-40: • Development Review for the construction of a 65,263 square foot building materials retail store with administrative offices (Main Building A). A total of 286 parking spaces are proposed; 108 parking stalls would be provided on the roof of the retail building; and 178 at -grade parking stalls would be provided throughout the project site; • Variance from front setback requirement for the parking lot, B Shed and Mill Shed along Bristol Street (20 -foot setback required; 10 -foot setback proposed); • Variance from maximum building height for the solar photovoltaic canopy and elevator overrun on Main Building A (30 -foot maximum height allowed; 34 feet to the solar canopy and 41 feet to the top of the elevator proposed); • Variance from maximum building height for the B Shed (30 -foot maximum allowed; 34 feet proposed); • Conditional Use Permit for the proposed outdoor storage yard consisting of three sheds (B Shed, Mill Shed, and Pole Shed) totaling 40,925 square feet; and • Planned Signing Program to allow the proposed 24 -foot high freestanding sign (12 feet allowed, 24 feet proposed). APPLICANT: The applicant is Patrick Ganahl of The Ganahl Lumber Company, representing the County of Orange, the property owner. APPELLANTS: The appellants are Joseph E. Miller and Alison Miller. PLANNING APPLICATION SUMMARY Location: 1100 Bristol Street Application: Request: Ganahl Lumber Hardware Store and Outdoor Storage Yard SUBJECT PROPERTY: SURROUNDING PROPERTY: Zone: C1 North: SR -55 and SR -73 F General Plan: General Commercial Lot Dimensions: Irregular Lot Area: 6.6 Acres (287,696 SF) Existing Development: Vacant PA -14-40 South: C2, Commercial Use (Existing Ganahl Lumber) East: 73 Freeway West: (Acr Bristol) C1. Commercial Uses DEVELOPMENT STANDARD COMPARISON Development Standard Required/Allowed Proposed/Provided Lot Size: Lot Width 120 FT 1,127 FT Lot Area 12,000 SF 6.6 Acres (287,696 SF) FAR (Floor Area Ratio) .35 (100,694 SF) 65,263 SF (Bldg. A & Mezz.) 30,262 SF (B Shed) 3,991 SF (Mill Shed) 99,516 SF (.346 FAR Total) No. of Stories/Building Height 2 Stories/30 FT Main Bldg. A & Mezz: 2 1 Story+Mezz./34 FT (To Solar Roof Canopy)/41 FT (To Top of Elevator) B Shed: 1 Story /34 FT Pole Shed: 1 Story/20 FT Interior Landscaping 4,450 SF 4,478 SF Setbacks Front (Bristol St.) 20 FT 10 FT2 Side (left/right) 15 FT/ 0 FT 40 FT/0 FT Rear 0 FT 0 FT Parking (2.87 spaces per 1,000 SF) Standard 279 279 Handicap 7 7 TOTAL 286 Spaces 286 Spaces 4 Signage (SF) 1,329 SF 982 SF Freestanding Sign Height 12 FT 24 FT 3 NA = Not Applicable or No Requirement (1) .35 FAR Allowed per 2000 Costa Mesa General Plan Policy LU -1 E.1(a). (2) Variance requested for building height and front setback. (3) Planned sign program requested. (4) Parking rate based on parking study by LLG for other Ganahl Lumber stores. CEQA Status Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Final Action City Council (Appeal) BACKGROUND Ganahl Lumber is a family and employee -owned company that has been in business for over 100 years. Ganahl Lumber is proposing to relocate its Costa Mesa facility, located adjacent to the project site at 1275 Bristol Street, due to market demand for their business, size constraints, and energy and maintenance requirements of the current facility. Relocating the store would allow Ganahl Lumber to execute a lease that would allow them to do business adjacent to their existing Costa Mesa location for the next 63 years, and result in the construction of a larger store and storage areas that would support a greater inventory and product mix, be more energy efficient, and require less maintenance. Additionally, the new hardware store would provide an opportunity to expand the home design showroom space. The project includes the construction and operation of a new lumberyard and building materials retail store for the Ganahl Lumber Company. The existing Costa Mesa Ganahl Lumber store is located on the adjacent property would close once the new store is completed. A detailed discussion of the various components of the proposed project is contained the Planning Commission Staff Report dated February 23, 2015, a copy of which is attached to this report (Attachment 5). Summary of Planning Commission Action The Planning Commission held a public hearing on February 23, 2015, which included presentation of the project by staff and the applicant, as well as information related to the environmental impact analysis of the project by the City's environmental consultant, LSA Associates. In addition, public comments were received by the Planning Commission. Based on the evidence and testimony presented during the hearing, the Planning Commission voted to approve the project by a 5-0 vote. An appeal of the Planning Commission's decision was filed on February 27, 2015. Appeal/De Novo Hearing It should be noted that the City Council hearing for this appeal is a de novo hearing in which the City Council may consider the project in its entirety. The purpose of this report is to provide responses to the issues raised by the appellant, and to highlight and/or clarify the evidence in the administrative record that was presented to the Planning Commission prior to its action. Issues Raised by Appellant in Appeal Application Following is listing of the concerns described in the appeal application: 1. The proposed use is not permitted or conditionally permitted in the C1 zone. 2. The project proposes modifications to Bristol Street that will negatively impact access to and from the properties on the South side of Bristol Street. 3. There were no facts to support the findings to approve the conditional use permit. 4. The findings supporting the variances were not supported by the substantial evidence. 5. The approval of signage the doubles the height allowed by the Zoning code was not supported by substantial evidence. 6. The project is under -parked and does not comply with the parking requirements provided in the Zoning Code. 7. The project does not comply with the FAR requirements provided in the Zoning Code. 8. The conditions of approval are vague. 9. The Planning Commission improperly approved the mitigated negative declaration when the environmental document failed to consider, among other things, the access impacts to the properties on the south side of Bristol Street caused by the proposed modifications to the center median on Bristol Street. ANALYSIS The following analysis provides responses to the concerns raised by the appellant. More detailed information is provided in the: • Planning Commission staff report; • Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (Under Separate Cover); and • Supplemental Traffic Analysis by LLG, dated March 2015 [This supplemental report is pending and will be provided to the City Council prior to the hearing.] • The proposed Ganahl Lumber Hardware Store & Outdoor Storage Yard is considered a conditionally permitted use in the C1 zone (Local Business District,. Specifically, the proposal requires discretionary action on the Development Review, CUP, and Variance approvals. The main building (Building A) contains the main store retail sales area, which is a permitted use in the C1 (Local Business District) Zone per Zoning Code Land Use Matrix Section 13-30(130 — Retail: General). Code requires that the outdoor storage yard (containing lumber stock, a mill shed, and storage sheds) be considered through a conditional use permit per Zoning Code Section 13-30(d) — Citywide Land Use Matrix. Outdoor lumber yards are not specifically listed in the corresponding Land Use Matrix, and the Conditional Use Permit process allows the City to impose consider this type of use on a case-by-case basis and impose conditions of approval, as applicable. • Adjacent to the subject site, the existing Ganahl store (formerly Barr Lumber) at 1275 Bristol Street is considered a legally -permitted use in the commercial zone. Both of the existing and proposed locations for Ganahl Lumber are designated General Commercial by the Costa Mesa General Plan. According to City records, the existing Ganahl Lumber facility at 1275 Bristol Street, which is zoned C2 (General Commercial), was originally built as Ward and Harrington Home Improvement Center in the early 1970's and previously used by Barr Lumber until the facility was acquired by Ganahl Lumber in the 1990's. The historic uses of this property by Harrington Home and by Barr Lumber included an outdoor storage yard. At that time in the 1970's and 1980's, these commercial facilities which were retail in nature were considered permitted uses and did not require a CUP. • Per the Costa Mesa Zoning Code, commercial zones are considered appropriate for home improvement stores and hardware stores with outdoor storage yards, subiect to conditions. The existing Home Depot at Harbor Center in Costa Mesa is also located in the General Commercial land use designation. Home Depot required discretionary approval of a Master Plan in the C1 -S zone. Other jurisdictions also consider Ganahl Lumber stores as commercial uses. For reference purposes, following is a list of similar Ganahl Lumber stores located in commercial zones in other jurisdictions: Other Ganahl Lumber.Zones Store Locations CG (Commercial General) City of Buena Park 6586 Beach Blvd, Buena Park, CA 90621 (East Colorado Specific Plan -Commercial City of Pasadena General- The Chihuahuita area.) 3003 E Colorado Blvd, Pasadena, CA 91107 C C/P (Community Commercial/Pedestrian) City of Capistrano Beach 34162 Doheny Park Dr., Capistrano Beach, CA 92624 C -G (General Commercial Zoning District) - City of Los Alamitos Hardware Store 10742 Los Alamitos Blvd. Los Alamitos, CA 90720 • Traffic analysis related to transportation and circulation issues were considered by the Planning Commission, including discussion of any impacts to level of service and commercial aroaerties on the south side of Bristol Street. During the Planning Commission hearing, Ryan Bensley from LSA Associates, who prepared the IS/MND for the City, addressed this issue by stating that the properties on the south side of Bristol Street would not be adversely affected by the project. Specifically, there are no modifications to the center left turn lane on Bristol Street which would adversely impact access to the properties on the south side of Bristol Street. A detailed response to this issue is being prepared by Linscott, Law, and Greenspan traffic engineers as a supplemental report. This will be forwarded to the City Council prior to the public hearing. • Approved by the City Attorney's office as to form and substance, the facts and findings for the approval of the CUP and variances for Ganahl Lumber are contained in the Planninq Commission resolution. The evidence supporting the variances are contained in the Planning Commission Staff Report, and are also referenced as the facts in support of the findings contained in Planning Commission Resolution No. PC -15-11, which is attached to this report. The analysis contained in this staff report is also included in Exhibit A, Findings, of the Council approval resolution. The applicant's request includes a variance from the Bristol Street setback (20 - feet required, 10 -feet proposed). Attachment 8 depicts the existing setbacks along Bristol Street for neighboring properties which do not meet this requirement. These include the following properties: 1. 1072 Bristol Street — approximate 12 foot setback. 2. 1182 Bristol Street — less than 10 foot setback. 3. 1312 Bristol Street — approximate 15 foot setback. • Code allows consideration of a 24 -foot high sign through the approval of a Planned Signing Program, and the evidence justifying the approval of the proposed sign is contained in the administrative record. The evidence supporting the Planned Sign Program for the proposed 24 -foot tall freestanding sign are contained in the Planning Commission Staff Report dated February 23, 2015, and are also referenced as the facts in support of the findings contained in Planning Commission Resolution No. PC -15-11, which is attached to this report. A survey of existing freestanding signs in neighboring properties along Bristol Street provides information on pylon signs of comparable height (See photos in Attachment 8): Description Address Sign Height (Approx.) Agape Wellness Center 1182 Bristol St. 22 feet Animal Hospital 1206 Bristol St. 15 feet Extra Storage 1250 Bristol St. 25 feet Acapulco Rest. 1262 Bristol St. 19'6" feet Travelodge 1400 Bristol St. 20 feet Bill's Burgers 1476 Bristol St. 16 feet Bristol Village Center 270 Bristol St. 25 feet Car Wash 2770 Bristol St. 24 feet Bristol Design Center 2777 Bristol St. 25 feet • Code allows the approval of a unique parking rate for this project based on the Parking study that was prepared; the proposed store provides a greater ratio of parking spaces compared to the existing Ganahl Lumber location. As noted in the Planning Commission Staff Report, the Zoning Code does not specify a parking requirement for hardware stores with outdoor lumber yards. As allowed by Code, a parking analysis was conducted by LL&G using the parking and traffic accumulation data collected in February 2014 for the existing Ganahl Lumber operation. Based on this analysis, a parking ratio of 2.87 spaces per 1,000 square feet was determined to be required for the proposed project. When applied to Building A and Building B, a parking demand of 239 spaces is forecast. With a proposed supply of 286 spaces, parking will be sufficient for this use. • The proposed 0.35 FAR is consistent with the General Commercial land use designation, and Ganahl Lumber was considered the "least intense development of the four proposals that the County received" [County letter dated March 6, 2015 — Attachment 7. This property is owned by the County Flood Control District and is limited in development potential due to its location and required unbuildable easements by Caltrans and the County Flood Control District. As noted in the Planning Commission Staff Report, the Floor Area Ratio (FAR) for the project is 0.346, excluding the Pole Shed, which is not enclosed, and the proposal will not exceed the City's maximum FAR requirement (.35 FAR maximum allowed). This site has been vacant for about seven years since the Bristol Street Mini Storage was removed. As indicated in the letter submitted by the County of Orange Executive Office, which facilitated the lease of their property to Ganahl Lumber, the County determined that the Ganahl Lumber proposal was the least intensive land development that their office received (Attachment 7). In November 2013, the County's evaluation panel gave Ganahl the highest rating above one proposal from Lyon -NCA Bristol Venture for 207 apartments and two other proposals for hotels. All of the other proposals are not consistent with the current GP/zoning, and would require a General Plan amendment and Rezone of the property. • The project was approved with a number of conditions of approval to ensure land use compatibility. The conditions of approval are contained in Planning Commission Resolution No. PC -15-11, which is attached to this report. Since appellants made no reference as to which condition of approval was vague, a specific response to this issue cannot be prepared. • Prepared by LSA Associates, the Initial Stud /y Mitigated Negative Declaration complies with State law requirements. This document analyzes the environmental impacts of the project and describes mitigation measures and conditions of approval to minimize impacts to below a level of significance. The environmental document was circulated through the State Clearinghouse for the required 30 -day public review period. The environmental document and copies of correspondence received to date are included in the administrative record. LEGAL REVIEW The draft resolution has been reviewed and approved as to form by the City Attorney's Office. ALTERNATIVES The City Council may take the following actions: • Uphold the Planning Commission's decision and approve PA -14-40. Any modifications to the conditions of approval, such as additions or deletions, can be made by the Council as part of this action; or • Reverse the Planning Commission's approval and deny PA -14-40. If the project were to be denied, appropriate findings would need to be made and the project applicant could not submit substantially the same type of application for six months. CONCLUSION De novo literally translates to "anew," "afresh" or "a second time." A de novo hearing is essentially a new proceeding where the proposal is presented to the City Council for final consideration. In its decision making, City Council is not restricted to the evidence that was previously presented to the Planning Commission. MEL LEE, AICP Senior Planner GARY ARMSTRONG, AICP Director of Economic & Development / Deputy CEO Attachments: 1. Location Map and Plans 2. Draft Resolutions 3. Appeal Application and Attachments 4. Planning Commission Minute Excerpts 5. Planning Commission Staff Report and Related Exhibits (Note: Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Is Under Separate Cover) 6. Planning Commission Resolution 7. Correspondence From Public 8. Existing Building Setbacks and Signage along Bristol Street cc: Chief Executive Officer Assistant Chief Executive Officer Director of Economic & Development / Deputy CEO City Attorney Public Services Director Transportation Svs. Mgr. City Engineer City Clerk (9) Staff (7) File (2) Joseph E. Miller 1072 Bristol Partners, LP 1072 Bristol Street, Suite 100 Costa Mesa, CA 92626 Ganahl Lumber Distribution List Ganahl Lumber Attn: Patrick Q. Ganahl 14072 Stratton Way Santa Ana, CA 92705 Ganahl Lumber Attn: Mike Shumaker 1275 South Bristol Street Costa Mesa, CA 92626 Ganahl Lumber Attn: Brad Satterfield 1275 South Bristol Street Costa Mesa, CA 92626 Onyx Architects Attn: Robert Carpenter 316 North Sierra Madre Boulevard Pasadena, CA 91107 Onyx Architects Attn: Dale Brown, AIA 316 North Sierra Madre Boulevard Pasadena, CA 91107 County of Orange County Executive Office Attn: Channary Gould 333 W. Santa Ana Boulevard, 3rd Floor Santa Ana, CA 92701 LSA Associates, Inc. Attn: Ryan Bensley 20 Executive Park, Suite 200 Irvine, CA 92614 LSA Associates, Inc. Attn: Ashley Davis 20 Executive Park, Suite 200 Irvine, CA 92614 ECORP Consulting Inc. Attn: Freddie Olmos 215 North Street Redlands, CA 92374 Peter Nagahvi In Focus Consultants 418 Avenida Salvador San Clemente, CA 92672 ATTACHMENT 1 LOCATION MAP AND PLANS T CL M U C x Iq 00 N M 0— Ly' a In C � M o 0 mC 4, a�..!] 6 m err OC4-j ON -j 13 cC Q C < a z m U ur Ey ini d J -6 CL m U N C m J X Ln 06 N (0 4. N M Ln (0 U U) Q N 77 N M O r LO r O N N CD m 9) U a � U) OO U W LL OO U U —13— `. ww `w L j� Fil _ a U 6 : Zw CI a :' w u i QCT dl —13— `. OCFCD KEYNOTES COUNTY OCFCD REQUIREMENTS INCORPORATED INTO DRAWING O20'- 0" CLEAR ACCESS FROM PUBLIC ROAD TO MAINTENANCE HATCH. O20' - 0" CLEAR AREA AT MAINTENANCE HATCH IF CONTINUOUS ACCESS IS PROVIDED O 12'-0" MINIMUM CLEAR AROUND ACCESS HATCH O50'- 0" MINIMUM TURN AROUND / STAGING AREA IF ACCESS TERMINATES AT AND/OR AROUND ACCESS HATCH OFOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION PLEASE SEE OCFCD FLOOD CONTROL MANUAL ADDENDUM #4 CRITERIA © ACCESS GATE TO PUBLIC WAY —I........ ---- - --- 6RIS� �L STREEf - — -- -- — _. — — -- — — -- — — ..... -- — — — — � r SEE INSET 1 0 SITE PLAN I 'PROPOSED SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN III I 7 �4r/���,.f �•� •,• III -1,6- GANAHL LUMBER COSTA MESA FEBRUARY 2015 , 1 100 SOUTH BRISTOL STREET COSTA MESA, CA 92626 I'J"'Hfi N V1 I (fl l,if Ir l Pk(/)PO) 'I STl l 4 KEYNOTES EXTERIOR MATERIAL RACKING SYSTEMS ® FENCING AND GATES ® LANDSCAPE AREA ® BUILDING SIGNAGE ® HEAD RIG SAW LOCATION 0 PROPERTY LINE ® FLOOD CONTROL ACCESS STRUCTURE -ACCESS HATCH CUSTOMER PARKING AREA POLE SHED RACK FUEL STATION PAINTED PARKING STRIPS RAISED CURB CONVENIENCE ELEC. GENERATOR - DIESEL FUEL W/ DAY TANK ELECTRICAL TRANSFORMER 0 MAIN ELECTRICAL SWITCH 1 STATE PARCEL B f \ I f I ' u et M 1p 1 r +n STATE !/ rll I b� LO OARCEL A / OCFCD KEYNOTES COUNTY OCFCD REQUIREMENTS INCORPORATED INTO DRAWING O20'- 0" CLEAR ACCESS FROM PUBLIC ROAD TO MAINTENANCE HATCH. O20' - 0" CLEAR AREA AT MAINTENANCE HATCH IF CONTINUOUS ACCESS IS PROVIDED O 12'-0" MINIMUM CLEAR AROUND ACCESS HATCH O50'- 0" MINIMUM TURN AROUND / STAGING AREA IF ACCESS TERMINATES AT AND/OR AROUND ACCESS HATCH OFOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION PLEASE SEE OCFCD FLOOD CONTROL MANUAL ADDENDUM #4 CRITERIA © ACCESS GATE TO PUBLIC WAY —I........ ---- - --- 6RIS� �L STREEf - — -- -- — _. — — -- — — -- — — ..... -- — — — — � r SEE INSET 1 0 SITE PLAN I 'PROPOSED SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN III I 7 �4r/���,.f �•� •,• III -1,6- GANAHL LUMBER COSTA MESA FEBRUARY 2015 , 1 100 SOUTH BRISTOL STREET COSTA MESA, CA 92626 I'J"'Hfi N V1 I (fl l,if Ir l Pk(/)PO) 'I STl l 4 RETAIL STORE -- --- rl-`"f1- Plass walls make the main store'visible from the street Publi t parking%6 th ample landscape borders and trees to minimize heat island effect. Permeable pavement used as applicable MATERIAL S TO RAG E MILL Shed building is attractively designed facing the street and blocks the view into the yard SITE PERSPECTIVE GANAHL LUMBER COSTA MESA FEBRUARY 2015 1 100 SOUTH BRISTOL STREET COSTA MESA, CA 92626 BUILDING A I SOUTHWEST CORNER LOOKING NORTHEAST BUILDING A I SOUTHEAST CORNER LOOKING NORTHWES' ROOFCANOPY n 33' - 9" TOP OF PARKING -81 - 8" --MEZZAtNlNE ■� FIRST FIX OE3_ {i--01. r BUILDING A I NORTH ELEVATIOI ROOFCANOP Y n 33'- 9"V TOP OF PARKING SLA 23' - 9" �ME7T e_ (pd� Fl[iST FLOOR A '4'` - 0 ` BUILDING A I SOUTH ELEVATIOI GANAHL LUMBER COSTA MESA FEBRUARY 2015 1 100 SOUTH BRISTOL STREET COSTA MESA, CA 92626 BUILDING A I NORTHWEST CORNER LOOKING SOUTHEAST BUILDING A I WEST FACE LOOKING EAST OOF_CANOPY Ag., 33' S" TOP OF PARKING ILII., j I r .= _ SLAB n J1 23'-9 MEZZANINE r& V FIRST FLOOR - e- om BUILDING A I EAST ELEVATIOP ROOF CANOPY- � 33 9" TOP OF PARKING SLAB n MEZZANINE n 101-0 FIRST FLOOR n 0' _ 0' 1 BUILDING A I WEST ELEVATION M GANAHL LUMBER COSTA MESA FEBRUARY 2015 1100 SOUTH BRISTOL STREET COSTA MESA, CA 92626 SITE PLAN I AERIAL PERSPECTIVE 4 GANAHL LUMBER COSTA MESA FEBRUARY 2015 1 100 SOUTH BRISTOL STREET COSTA MESA, CA 92626 GANIA HL .'�i:{F . �, - ��• ,gyp ®. r . WE .. ►�p{IIM Ip}f�e err sb urr ea -w --, . a.r Ni RI L U M B E R. ,r; i �i i�� ��-7' /'�' ����R, r�. . ��l ��i �N ��.�� ������ �li����������������������������'a,�+l���'�������71������������������� ��� ■�i i•. - �' ��� •1 �- _ _ rltra 1 ry6lilli[�3 r� i RI iil l iy■I (-'. {ji ,..rstliiir ...l.... 1Fia yi¢� Y IAmok '�� r'�i11 �y'1 ilrlfr I }+ esti Eerr rritia a+ ei1161 ar.ei�'a� , �� 1 s 1' !� Ir•n111111 II! Fi llgilll��.==Mw RowL +� � � i' / i LIa4;lilRs& 11111lu ,�.,. � 1�•r_ ;;_ PERSPECTIVE I LOOKING EAST FROM INSTERSECTION OF NEWPORT BLVD + BRISTOL ST -20._ GANAHL LUMBER COSTA MESA FEBRUARY 2015 1 100 SOUTH BRISTOL STREET COSTA MESA, CA 92626 STATE - - PARCEL B 21,532 SF 00501 ACRES r PROPERTY LINE PROPERTY LINE j COUNTY PROPERTY ",1111 'A84 ACRES PROPERTY LINE _` I P, iIL", - / V COUNTY PARCEL A , 188,3525E 028 ACRE PROPERTY ANALYSIS Description SF Acre County RFP Property County Parcel A 186,352 4.28 County Parcel B 72,200 1.66 Subtotal 258,552 5.94 Potential Added County Property County Parcel C 20,199 0.46 Subtotal, 20,199 0.46 Lost County Property City Landscape Area (20,052) -0.460 Street and Highway Easement (15,695) -0.360 Subtotal (35,747) -0.821 Adjusted Countyrotal 243,004 5.58 Net Lost County Property (151548) -0.357: CalTrans Property State Parcel A 2,777 0.06 State Parcel B 21,863: 0.50 Subtotal 24,640 0.57 PROPERTY LINE COUNTY PARCEL B 223005E 188 ACRES Grand Total 267,644 , 6.14 Net Added Property 9,092 0.21 1� --SR15Ar CITY CF COSTA MESA -IANCSCAPE AREA —' 20,052 SF, 0460 ACRES- --���_ _ -------- �r_ ---'--—--•—s.R—.--�----.-- oxa rcRe� GICrCAIKNV KOCaSlIY S1P'tr COs}hMEV +e OY+SI 1`—S PROPERTY STATE LINE PARCEL A BMSTOLSSTREET 2.777 SF 0060 ACRES -21 PRINTED ONI 125(2014 11:34:23 AM ONYX ARCHITECTS© (a GANAFL LUMM 00. REPLOCAl1ON PROJECT 1100 SOUTHEAST BRISTOL STREET OOSTA NQA CA 92626 13041 PROJECT ME Schematic Design SITE RAN - PROPERTY LEASE A0.1.8 4 T1 !_ I• - I1/ jTLATT ¢ � w ILJO. C!!l4(3E8Y91'il' �1 --_'I 1 E � �, ;II i�11�--Irl I R �I 11 - I — s iil X111 i41*-il, I c.= 11= 11 I = r -111 ;jai 1t1. 1 RUN LINE AROUND I FRONT STORE ENTRANCE SIGNAGE ELEMENT SO IT'POPS' PERIMETER CMU WALL @ EAST END DRIVEWAY LOWER SIGN. BOX ELEMENTS, PAINTED BLACK, 49 SF TOTAL BUILDING SIGN #1 = 199 SF BUILDING SIGN #1 -STORE FRONT SIGN I v4" = r-0'• FACE OF OVERHANG l — OUTRIGGER BEAMS r' SUPPORT STRUTS I T�--—--- UPPER INDIVIDUAL i I 1 TO BEAM PAINTED SIGN Q BOXES WITH I _ rr.r i� `INDIVIDUAL SIGN BOXES -- j WHITESIGN PAINTED GANAHL RED -- o LETTER 25 SF EACH 4 T1 !_ I• - I1/ jTLATT ¢ � w ILJO. C!!l4(3E8Y91'il' �1 --_'I 1 E � �, ;II i�11�--Irl I R �I 11 - I — s iil X111 i41*-il, I c.= 11= 11 I = r -111 ;jai 1t1. 1 RUN LINE AROUND I FRONT STORE ENTRANCE SIGNAGE ELEMENT SO IT'POPS' PERIMETER CMU WALL @ EAST END DRIVEWAY LOWER SIGN. BOX ELEMENTS, PAINTED BLACK, 49 SF TOTAL BUILDING SIGN #1 = 199 SF BUILDING SIGN #1 -STORE FRONT SIGN I v4" = r-0'• FACE OF OVERHANG l — OUTRIGGER BEAMS r' BUILDING SIGN #1 - SECTION Z � 1 I B -SHED BUILDING --- CORRUGATED METAL SHEETING INDIVIDUALSIGN ONYX ARCHITECTS© .-: BOXES I GANAHL RED -25 SF EACH _. ---• INDIVIDUAL SIGN BOX LITTER UPPER INDIVIDUAL SIGN N BOXES WITH TRANSLUCENT WHITE SIGN LETTE TYPICAL LETTER _ -- PROJECTION:3" 'a1' [M Lu BACK -LIT SIGNAGE + SYSTEM 57 e� - ai I p• LOWER BLACK �• -� BOX = 152 SFN. a_ NI — — C%al4A1FL LUMBER CO d -- —' RER-OCATIC�1 PROJECT -:._._1 IIOO SOUTHEAST BRISTOL SfkgT mm� _ "-• - ------ LOWER PAINTED CONTINOUS COSTA MESA CA 92626 y- SIGN BOX WITH TRANSLUCENT f WHITE SIGN LETTERS I3943 BUILDING SIGN #2 = 287 SF BUILDING SIGN #2 - BSHED SIGN 3 114" =1'-0" BUILDING SIGN #2 -SECTION 1n-111.. 1'-0'• PRINTED ONI 1/25/2014 11:34:48AN PRCIECTME Sdiemadc Design SIGNAGE TYPES A0.3.2a SUPPORT STRUTS —^— - T�--—--- UPPER INDIVIDUAL TO BEAM PAINTED SIGN Q BOXES WITH TRANSLUCENT j WHITESIGN F LETTER --� CURTAIN WALL LOWER SIGN WITH TRANSLUCENT LETTERS BUILDING SIGN #1 - SECTION Z � 1 I B -SHED BUILDING --- CORRUGATED METAL SHEETING INDIVIDUALSIGN ONYX ARCHITECTS© .-: BOXES I GANAHL RED -25 SF EACH _. ---• INDIVIDUAL SIGN BOX LITTER UPPER INDIVIDUAL SIGN N BOXES WITH TRANSLUCENT WHITE SIGN LETTE TYPICAL LETTER _ -- PROJECTION:3" 'a1' [M Lu BACK -LIT SIGNAGE + SYSTEM 57 e� - ai I p• LOWER BLACK �• -� BOX = 152 SFN. a_ NI — — C%al4A1FL LUMBER CO d -- —' RER-OCATIC�1 PROJECT -:._._1 IIOO SOUTHEAST BRISTOL SfkgT mm� _ "-• - ------ LOWER PAINTED CONTINOUS COSTA MESA CA 92626 y- SIGN BOX WITH TRANSLUCENT f WHITE SIGN LETTERS I3943 BUILDING SIGN #2 = 287 SF BUILDING SIGN #2 - BSHED SIGN 3 114" =1'-0" BUILDING SIGN #2 -SECTION 1n-111.. 1'-0'• PRINTED ONI 1/25/2014 11:34:48AN PRCIECTME Sdiemadc Design SIGNAGE TYPES A0.3.2a NAGE SIGN -FREESTANDING l/W-1W. 2 -2-3- ONYX ARCHITECTS©© " (a C%814AI-L LUMBER CO. REPI-OCATION PROJECT 1100 SOUTHEAST BRISTOL STREET OOSTA MESA CA 92626 13043 PRqECrVrASE RhemAc Design SIGNAGE TYPES AO.3.2b cl) <01 C2) 30M.1 06 RA., J, "ID"M f— IIIAI Km STAIR 01 7 I I X. 7- 1-17 DOOR- -3 VANOOM MANAGER CASH 4-1 c --------- SALES - D-1 10 - SALES MANAM Grand WWI 57,313SF 3921'-0- ­2/1— STAIR 10 LL I� _VMMkW$ ROOM j k117 CREW DEPARTMENT A-111 --------------- W r PAINT DOOR. STORAGE ACKROOMWINDOWS aLcpqloom A-122 A 121 ----- --- -------- !CONFERENCE r — ------------ ----_--------------- ROOM ------ A-106 I RA., J, "ID"M f— IIIAI Km STAIR 01 7 I I X. 7- 1-17 DOOR- -3 VANOOM MANAGER CASH 4-1 c --------- SALES - D-1 10 - SALES MANAM Grand WWI 57,313SF 3921'-0- ­2/1— STAIR 10 LL I� _VMMkW$ ROOM j k117 CREW DEPARTMENT A-111 A-124 j_- D I F_ L------- -OPERATION DFIFICE ETOPERATIONS d AAW CFNTI5RMANAGER kll�� 04D A-123 TM 1 W -V V ­ la lEr 116 13Z 164 N .. ............... FIRST FLOOR PLAN PRINTED ON: 10(3120146-04-54PM SI T N KEYNOTES 0 NEWRAMPTOPAR­GDECK 0 BUILDINGJDINTBEIWEENRAMPANDBUILDINGSTRUC RE 0 CMUINA-1-C LOREDANDBURNWEDWHEREI­OSED;WP TREATMENTAT EXTERIOR FACES OHOWOWAWOODSIDINDOVERSNDWAL(NEEDSINDICATION) 0 INT ­GR PARTITIONS, GWSUM BOARD OVER STILIM: PAINT O-NUM (CLEAR FINISH) AND GLASS CURTAIN WALL SYSTEM WITH FIOEMULSTEEL REINFORCING OALUMINUM ("EARFINISH)ANDGI-ASS STOREFRONT—TE 0 ALUMINUM (CLEAHTISH)ANDGI-ASS A- SLIDING DOORS CASI­OWDESKSAND­ONS CASEWORKTYPECUSTOMERCOUNTERS CASEWORKTWECUSTOMER COUNTERS (D WITH LEVERS AND SPECIAL SS ACCESSORIES ­SHEDCONG­11 (D —ETTILES TOILET ROOMS: GYPEUM BOARD CEILING AND WALLS w'TH PATIFANEDSTANLESS STEEL PANELS ATWETWALLS SUSPENDED IFIMRIMAND TOILET —ON i ES ACCESSORIES S. THOUGH SINK FFOKY FINISH FLOORS WITH ROLLED BASE OD INTERIORDIEFI-AYRAMICIANDGC)NDOILAS (D IRON FENCING AND GATES (D CONCRETEFARKNGDECKABC­WITH EI_h9TOM­CW­AT`NG5YSTEhI NEW EIV­ENGY EGRESS STAIR POTENTIAL ­ ELECTRICAL ROOM ONYX ARCHITECTS" ro VAN GANAHL LUMBER COL NEW COSTA MESA FA(3L]TY mosours-EAST BRIST01-snuiT COSTA MESA CA 926B DDG I`RqKT%�T SCHEMATIC RRST FLOOR PLAN ALI CREDIT MANAGER WILL -CALL STORAGE A-122 !CONFERENCE ROOM A-106 I M.TOM.ET i WTORETSTAJI104 W_ A-125 -126 -k-l—S4 J.CL,,T A-124 j_- D I F_ L------- -OPERATION DFIFICE ETOPERATIONS d AAW CFNTI5RMANAGER kll�� 04D A-123 TM 1 W -V V ­ la lEr 116 13Z 164 N .. ............... FIRST FLOOR PLAN PRINTED ON: 10(3120146-04-54PM SI T N KEYNOTES 0 NEWRAMPTOPAR­GDECK 0 BUILDINGJDINTBEIWEENRAMPANDBUILDINGSTRUC RE 0 CMUINA-1-C LOREDANDBURNWEDWHEREI­OSED;WP TREATMENTAT EXTERIOR FACES OHOWOWAWOODSIDINDOVERSNDWAL(NEEDSINDICATION) 0 INT ­GR PARTITIONS, GWSUM BOARD OVER STILIM: PAINT O-NUM (CLEAR FINISH) AND GLASS CURTAIN WALL SYSTEM WITH FIOEMULSTEEL REINFORCING OALUMINUM ("EARFINISH)ANDGI-ASS STOREFRONT—TE 0 ALUMINUM (CLEAHTISH)ANDGI-ASS A- SLIDING DOORS CASI­OWDESKSAND­ONS CASEWORKTYPECUSTOMERCOUNTERS CASEWORKTWECUSTOMER COUNTERS (D WITH LEVERS AND SPECIAL SS ACCESSORIES ­SHEDCONG­11 (D —ETTILES TOILET ROOMS: GYPEUM BOARD CEILING AND WALLS w'TH PATIFANEDSTANLESS STEEL PANELS ATWETWALLS SUSPENDED IFIMRIMAND TOILET —ON i ES ACCESSORIES S. THOUGH SINK FFOKY FINISH FLOORS WITH ROLLED BASE OD INTERIORDIEFI-AYRAMICIANDGC)NDOILAS (D IRON FENCING AND GATES (D CONCRETEFARKNGDECKABC­WITH EI_h9TOM­CW­AT`NG5YSTEhI NEW EIV­ENGY EGRESS STAIR POTENTIAL ­ ELECTRICAL ROOM ONYX ARCHITECTS" ro VAN GANAHL LUMBER COL NEW COSTA MESA FA(3L]TY mosours-EAST BRIST01-snuiT COSTA MESA CA 926B DDG I`RqKT%�T SCHEMATIC RRST FLOOR PLAN ALI { t � I II►)[ I IIWBEX A1'1d ! • • - - PER OF - BATHROOM 1 RAMP SURFACE (OUTSIDE) ROOMS BE OW 0 A-213 s AIR Ire _ I UoW I I TAS - L+ 6TA14k:MP 1., i ROOiA s A38T - ELEVATORI _ L .215.. I A1•EV2 p 1 - /111 ITOFFICE,� I_ .iti[ti .t. UHMkXSHOWER AM M.1 RI LIMI'6314OWER -'--- SECURTIY _•Ai 251 j I t, I AW2 i OPENTOBELOW ! i. 1V11 I I i i ' CIRCULATION -fiZpd� ! A,TDS I D„x i OPEN TO BELOW 1 1 Rat F j I - _ELECOMr.RM ! wx1 STAR#3 139 SF Po 139 SF <AT -T 0 A.R. 1 mA-217 `ry LEVEL I OaERAiION9 AREA A-0 i d f - M.1 Ad1 h1.1 f f I I f I GJ I ler T1s 13r 164 MEZZANINE. PRINTED ON: 10/3/20146.0+56M ONYX ARCHITECTSMO ME nn)--r- 'k-10 GANAFL LUMBER COL NEW OOSTA MESA FACILFrY 1100SOUPFEAST PISTUSfRfff COSTA MESA, 0447626 IBOO PRqECrMW .7 . A " IA 1\... MEZZ w FLAN All KEYNOTES O NIWRMPTOPA MDECK © BUILDINGJOIMBE'IWEENRAMPANDBURDWGMUCTURE ©CMU WNLCOLO E0/ WDBURNISHWWHEREE%P09ED;WP TREATMEMAT DOERIOR FACES O HORRONTALWOOD 910140 OVER STUD WALL (NEED9INOICATIDN) GYPSUM BOARD ®IWERIORP-DONS, OVER SUDS; PAINT ALUMNUM(C FlNUH)AND GLA93 CURTAIN WALL O SYSTEM W.BXTERNALSTEEL REINFORCING OALUMINUM(CLEARFWISH)ANDOLA9S STOREFRONT SYSTEM m CMIMORKWPEDMOMOPARTTON3 CASEWORKTYPECUSIOAER COUNTERS W" UNEMMD SPECIAL W ACCE990RIE9 ONOBSIM4FN1EDTYEAYPtPJfIJK wIT4 CDPD 1 IONT wq �TmacuaE DtY UHME,QIEWDDECAf )II sesrvn AMpER P�axo DECK ® CARPETnlE9 TO ROOMS: GYPSUM BOARD CEILING ®31EELPANE PND WALLS WTM PATIERNFD WNNLES9 ATWETWALLS 9UWMDM FIMURE9 ANO TOILET PARTRIONB MACCESONE9 99 TROUGH 9WKE WFINISH ROOM WITH ROLLED BASE ® IRONFMCINOANDDATEB ® NEWEMERGENCYEGMWWNR WACSPL79Y9TQB ® ELECTRICAL RM- MNN ELECT DISTWBURON PANELS m S% BB' ROLL UP ACCESS DOOR ONYX ARCHITECTSMO ME nn)--r- 'k-10 GANAFL LUMBER COL NEW OOSTA MESA FACILFrY 1100SOUPFEAST PISTUSfRfff COSTA MESA, 0447626 IBOO PRqECrMW .7 . A " IA 1\... MEZZ w FLAN All I I I tlf.P r 1 PMJeg eWdIA6 _ i4go['CMck j mvic F."ft LWW Count T.G. OM6640 SLA& - -'" .101 ae% t6 zx RAMP sox I b F ..................... .—.---------- m ._.— —._ m ZI 22 23 24 Za ! 161 ���.•_• - NC ITC r i Ra TJ 25 Z9 AiS N T let- , f (^„ I..�.� .�_.__ _ _163_ .. ,�.. - _ _ _ _ _... _ � _ ._ b� _ � _ - — -. _ _ � _ � ;� d•?; _ -_ _ _^ •�.- 4.-_.f � ...®- � --moi � 'I` • 161 _... M _ -. +f_- a3 Lf M_ L.•..tl {{��y 1 �: — �—'� -- .Y a_, ..__...�._._ '- - _•.- i -` �1 1 g'n �.�'` `3• All I, B3 B4 65. - Id _ _I Y• i _____..-._.�.�._..."�........ "----- ._........ .....�.L...._�.•r...-..........�..�......._:—....-. T-.. yS, 11 a OD (DI I 1 m IS 1 I re YI T2 73 - 76 r Ts I/ -- Ta rr Tr » b rt �' Ea +1 p- - eb 4f. M 88 8B BO B1 ! 82 II] !I A �— m mm m A21 00, Ae e Y to Ie 11e In 164 4 T.O. PARKING SLAB PRINTED ON: 10(3/2014 6.04.57 PM KEYN0TE5 ONEW RMP TO PMWNG DECK BUILDING JOINT BERYEEN RAMP STRUMRE MD BUILDING STRUCTURE CONCRETE DECK WITH ELASTOMEIIIC WP W ,,NG Sy— M— tUDING YSTETnMETH. BUKDING STRUCTURE WITH W SYSTEMMOYE NEW EMERGENCY EGRESS STAIR ® ROOF SUN SHADE SYS FOR GLAZING BELOW NEW VE]LJ—ON FM UNIT ® NEW HVAC PACKAGE UNIT HYAC SPLIT S—m YERTICMACCESS WAYFROMSOLMPMELCONDUITS TO ACCESS ELECTRICAL RM ON ME—NINE ONYX ARCHITECTSMro 21 ID GANAI-L LU BFR M NEW COSTA MESA FACUTY 1100 SCUT EAST BRISICI smu OOSTA MESS CA 92676 Ina PRgELTMA22 AT SCHEM ROOF PLAN A1.3 ROOF CANOPY 33'- 9" T.O. PARKING SLAB V 23'. 9^ MEZZANINE Il �0'-0^ FIRST FLOOR 0'-0" 2 ROOFCANOPY� 33'-B" V T.O. PARMIG A. e i 0`-0't7F NORTH ELEVATION I 1H8" m i' -0i1 _ ROOF CANOPY n 3 3._9„ V r—'^ TO. PARKING EDGE OF OUBIOE OIR310E -" CORNER f i ROOF CAN n 33'-9" V T.Q. PARKING A--9" ROOF_CANOPY n 33'-9^ 1 T -O. PARKING A ue_ 23'-9" ME_Z I_ NE n 10'-0" V FIRST FLOOR n 0' _ 0' 1 Wt51 LLtVAII1L �N A PRINTED ON: 10/320146:05:02 PM ONYX ARCHITECTSVAN" GANAFL LUPI ER M NEW COSTA MESA FACMIT Y 1100SOUTI-EASE BUS MOUIT OOSEA MRA CA 97626 1300 IRgECER{ASE SCHEMAM EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS I �•�# UNISEX f r�y`I Ar;s UNISEX BATHROOM A-215 STAIR, BATHROOM1 A•1S2 I A-213 UNISEX 879F 222 SF 81 Sr BATHROOM 2 .911 ELEVATOR 9k 1_EV2 - - 94 SF R OFFICE A 209 ___ 94 SF E AAI 1T A-208 — 94 SF SECURITY I A 407 1625F rARCULATION A•201 i — 632 SF 81 - 4.1 AST 139 SF —} --. ® BUILDING IOINT BE EEN RAMP AND BUILDINGSTRUC URE HALLWAY `-j -s--- A-210-- ENLARGED BLD A - SALES FLOOR PLAN 146 SF CASEWORK TYPE DESKS AND IONS GROSSLAMINATEO TIMBER ME—INE STRUCTURE WITH SUSPENDED LIGHTING, MECHANICAL, AND FIRE SUPPRESSION SYSTEMS UNDER EXPOSED DECK JAN CARPEf n— 216 AND WALLS WITH PATTERNED STAINLESS 26 SF ANDTO BusVE.9 FIXTURESAND- S PARTITIONS 89 UNISEX SHOWER FINISH RO9 TROUGH SINK EPDXY FINISH ROOKS EPDXY WITH ROLLED BASE 2 A-212 93 SF UNISEX SHOWER 1 A-211 91 SF ELEC DIST. RM •-- A-203 359 SF n e WOMEN'S ROOM ! few =7 214 SIF 214 SF # © Atl ta•-s• jll'•2 to -a 1 I. STAR 02 --s.. yCC 222 SF ELEVATOR 94 SF I} r r S-4• S'-4• a -B• B -a• z �l aLt `.. , .. .. I CASH t - rA-112 • , _ - 140 SF I ® I STORAGE— A-110 174 SF I E I n I \ / CREDIT DEPARTMENT A-111 466 SF GENERAL ! I f MANAGER__ A•f09- m CREDI7MANAGER 1765E A-108 206 SF to -e• b b V I 6 SALES SUPPORT T rJ .-1 I 1,946 SF m t — [ a CONFERENCE A4:1 SALES MANAGES ROOM �— ... ... A-10fi A-105 - — —++#-+r, +• 285 SF 188 SF 't►i' PRINTED ON: 10/3/2014 &05D4 M KEYNOTES ® BUILDING IOINT BE EEN RAMP AND BUILDINGSTRUC URE OHORIZONTAL WOOD SIDING OVER STUD WALL (NEEDS INDICAnDN) ENLARGED BLD A - MEZZANINE PLAN 2 ENLARGED BLD A - SALES FLOOR PLAN PRINTED ON: 10/3/2014 &05D4 M ONYX ARCHITECTSK� oFrxy GANAFL LLW43M M NEW OOSTA MESA FAOLITY 1100 SCUTI-EASE BRLSTM STAffT CCSTA MA, CA 9.1676 1100 PRqECFMW SCHBIAM ENLARCCED SALES + NEZZANNE PLAN Pa. 1.1 KEYNOTES ® BUILDING IOINT BE EEN RAMP AND BUILDINGSTRUC URE OHORIZONTAL WOOD SIDING OVER STUD WALL (NEEDS INDICAnDN) ©INTERIOR PANTTTIONS, GYPSUM BOARD DYER STUDS; FNNT CASEWORK TYPE DESKS AND IONS GROSSLAMINATEO TIMBER ME—INE STRUCTURE WITH SUSPENDED LIGHTING, MECHANICAL, AND FIRE SUPPRESSION SYSTEMS UNDER EXPOSED DECK ® CARPEf n— TOILET ROOMS: GYPSUM BOARD CEILING AND WALLS WITH PATTERNED STAINLESS ®SUS—DEGFMRE ANDTO BusVE.9 FIXTURESAND- S PARTITIONS 89 FINISH RO9 TROUGH SINK EPDXY FINISH ROOKS EPDXY WITH ROLLED BASE NEWEMERGENCYECAESSSTAIR ONYX ARCHITECTSK� oFrxy GANAFL LLW43M M NEW OOSTA MESA FAOLITY 1100 SCUTI-EASE BRLSTM STAffT CCSTA MA, CA 9.1676 1100 PRqECFMW SCHBIAM ENLARCCED SALES + NEZZANNE PLAN Pa. 1.1 ENLARGED WILL -CALL STORAGE MEZZANINE 2 -i1. rw-r ENLARGED OPERATIONS FLOOR PLAN I PRINTED ON: IUM01405:04 PM KEYNOTES ©CMUWNLCOLOREDANDBURNISHWWHEREENP—;WP TRFATME W AT EMERIOR FACES O MMOWALWW SIDIWOWRMDWA UNI SINDICA1ON) ©INTERIOR PA 01,15, GYPSUM BOARD OYERSNDS: PAI W OAWMINUM(CI MNISH)ANDOLASSCUWAINWA SYSTEM WDN EMERIIAL SIEEL REINFORCING OAWMINUM(CLEMMN )ANDG P99 STOREFROWSYS,EM CASEWORKTYPE DESKS ANO PMTIIIONS aI POLLSHWCONCRETEFLOOR ® CARPET T°ca TOILETROOMS: GYPSUM BOARD CEILING AND WALLS WRN PATTENNEO STAINLESS ®STEELPANELSATWET WALLS SUSPENDED FI—IRES MO TaI PARWI- SS ACCESSORIES SS TROUGH SINK EPDW FINISH FLOORS W RH ROLLED BASE NM WEMENCYEORESSS,NR ® ANITORCIST83TORAUE ONYX ARCHITECTS" ID GANAFL LUMBER COL NEW C06TA MESA FAauTr )lWsam-mms,a.sr T C06TAM EA CA97676 Ima PPRR/OJEECCT�R WE /��7/'+ .7�.T1O"Y11 R. WILL -CALL SfORAC E OPERAMOM RMS JU.2 I 3Y -T 23' -19' ENLARGED WILL -CALL STORAGE MEZZANINE 2 -i1. rw-r ENLARGED OPERATIONS FLOOR PLAN I PRINTED ON: IUM01405:04 PM KEYNOTES ©CMUWNLCOLOREDANDBURNISHWWHEREENP—;WP TRFATME W AT EMERIOR FACES O MMOWALWW SIDIWOWRMDWA UNI SINDICA1ON) ©INTERIOR PA 01,15, GYPSUM BOARD OYERSNDS: PAI W OAWMINUM(CI MNISH)ANDOLASSCUWAINWA SYSTEM WDN EMERIIAL SIEEL REINFORCING OAWMINUM(CLEMMN )ANDG P99 STOREFROWSYS,EM CASEWORKTYPE DESKS ANO PMTIIIONS aI POLLSHWCONCRETEFLOOR ® CARPET T°ca TOILETROOMS: GYPSUM BOARD CEILING AND WALLS WRN PATTENNEO STAINLESS ®STEELPANELSATWET WALLS SUSPENDED FI—IRES MO TaI PARWI- SS ACCESSORIES SS TROUGH SINK EPDW FINISH FLOORS W RH ROLLED BASE NM WEMENCYEORESSS,NR ® ANITORCIST83TORAUE ONYX ARCHITECTS" ID GANAFL LUMBER COL NEW C06TA MESA FAauTr )lWsam-mms,a.sr T C06TAM EA CA97676 Ima PPRR/OJEECCT�R WE /��7/'+ .7�.T1O"Y11 R. WILL -CALL SfORAC E OPERAMOM RMS JU.2 I CONFERENCE RM FA-�204 QD SO SF - -SOLAR PANEL DEM PARKING LEVEL "LL11L CONFERENCE SALES MANAAM STORAGE ROOM r-ATgd�- A-122 108 SF 11,294 SF 285 SF T.C. PARKING IIt=11074; IIF'� &Am A-101 I 35,899 SF SECTION ENV I SECTION ENV 12 STAIR #3 ELEC DIST. RM CONFERENCE FtM MEMNSHALL ' ITOIFFICE HALL BREAK ROOM A-2EV3 8T A-206 kl) A � A-209 A-202 A-206 139 SF 899 SF 1,725 SF 94 SF --I SF III 3F (A 4 SOLAR PANEL DECK- ---------- < i", ?g CANOp" SOLAR PANEL DECK PARG NG LEVEL T.01PARKING RAMP PAMMILEVEL TO PARKING U27MEZZANINE FIW FLOOR 7-7 0. F!rLO low — — -- — — — SALES — — — — VALL-CALL A-lDl_ GENERAL STORAGE SALES 35,899 SF CASH SALES A-122 A-101 A-105 A-104 .1 ....... . .... 11,204 SF SECTION ENV 12 PARKING LEVELI -SECTION WS 1 11116—T -W, CANOPY - - - - — - — - — - — -'--AWNF- .. P. SLAB u g u 0 v 23'-S' MEZZANINE RAW FIRST FI-090�� � 11 SALES LEM] 35,899 SF SECTION N/S 2 PRINTED ON: 10/3120146.-05:08PM ONYX I ARCHITECTSMO ri FAI (a GANAHILLUMBER M NEW COSTA MESA FACILITY 1100 SOUTI-EAST BPISTCL SnUEF OCSTA MA, CA 92Q6 11041 PRqTCT WLW SCHm-nc BUILDING SEC7110\5 AU STAIR #3 ELEC DIST. RM CONFERENCE FtM MEMNSHALL ' STAJRS_2 A-2EV3 8T A-206 kl) A � A-202 A-ISZ 139 SF 899 SF 1,725 SF 402 SF 222 SF (A SOLAR PANEL DECK- ---------- . ............. ?g CANOp" PARG NG LEVEL T.01PARKING RAMP U27MEZZANINE i F!rLO GENERAL SALES SALES MANAGER SALES SUPPORT MANAGER STORAGE CASH SALES TOOLS. A-101 A-105 A-104 .1 -'Til A,11211 35,899 SF 188 SF 1,946 SF 176 SF 114 7 140 SF 35,899 SF 1,153 SF PARKING LEVELI -SECTION WS 1 11116—T -W, CANOPY - - - - — - — - — - — -'--AWNF- .. P. SLAB u g u 0 v 23'-S' MEZZANINE RAW FIRST FI-090�� � 11 SALES LEM] 35,899 SF SECTION N/S 2 PRINTED ON: 10/3120146.-05:08PM ONYX I ARCHITECTSMO ri FAI (a GANAHILLUMBER M NEW COSTA MESA FACILITY 1100 SOUTI-EAST BPISTCL SnUEF OCSTA MA, CA 92Q6 11041 PRqTCT WLW SCHm-nc BUILDING SEC7110\5 AU QnJ_ - l 0 i T 0D, ------------ ( ._.._1 _.. (c) BSHED-ROOF Z v€6" - r - a' aAs s 19 1$ 17 iB i5' 14 (3� 12 11 1a <�7 � C3 C2) T 13'-4• 13'-9• T3'•1' 30-0• V -S, 1f.Y ! •.e tr.r w.v W -Y 20'-0• 20'-0• 20'-1 20'-0• 20'-0• 4O' -0'- --___- s rt ID- i SERVICE MILL €,1S3 SF "HED 1 I �� I II I tAtr b b B -1R1 i I ,u I 3Af:-r 26,776 SF II ' MILL B-103 b 3,5 B SF I R I INM-L O1 i I I : I S•fDi { I b +� m m r B 105 �a SF AN ---------- I KEYNOTES OPRE -MANUFACTURED BUILDING SYSTEM; CDMPONENTS INCLUDE: STRUCTURAL SYSTEM PM WISHED METAL SIDING WALL SYSTEM PREFINISHED METAL ROOF SYSTEM INTERIOR AND EXTERIOR LING WINDOWS, DOORS, VENUWTION SYSTEM CONCRETE FLOOR FIN - 0 CUSTOMER SERVICE MILL © MILLUNE OOFFICE © TOOL STORAGE RACKANO WORK BENCH OUNISEX TOILET ROOM O ELECTMIA CONTROL PANELS OCYCLONE DUST COLLECTOR SYSTEM OCLEARSTORY LIGHT AND VENPIATION SYSTEM �i RACKING S STORAGE SYSTEM ID MAN ELECT PANEL BOARD ONYX ARCHITECTS" GAWAI-L LUMBER M NEW COSTA MESA FAOUTY 1 I0D San€fAsr ERU0L s1Rgr COSTA MRA CA 41676 1300 KqE fflk% $Ci en-odc Design DRIVE-THRU SHED B - R RST R-OOR + ROOF la la I16' I3Y I" -B.-SHED-FIRST FLOOR I PLAN2A1.1 PRINTED ON: 10/3/20145:45:56 PM (1) 9 I0 11 12 13 14 iS 18 17 78 I LlLl_❑r Cir DUDSUDU ❑QDQQ_ ❑❑dRd]__ C]❑uou _.oudbua uzubbou- ❑❑❑ou I., \ OPEN �i yOPEN I (i 1318] 17 16 14, 18 X12 t'1 (3 j ❑❑❑❑❑. ❑❑E]❑❑❑❑ L]❑❑❑❑ UP Cl LUEJUL :w I " f \Iy I _ 1521! fr .tiM1 T _B -SHED -ROOF n 24' - 0" V 4} BSHED-FIRST 118fI FLO B -SHED - NORTHI I OA ' B -SHED -ROOF C ` BSHEDST FLOOR n -FIROOR _ B -SHED -ROOF D - 24!-0' V c BSHED-FIRST FLO 0. -0. VOR n ..— - - - A, fi0.0• Y r31 t BSHED-ROOF ,1010 �rR z4•� _,P.T � i b 1 I �OPEN� II B -SHED -FIRST FLOOR�� B -SHED - WEST 4 PRINTED ON: 10/3!20145:45:59 PM KEYNOTES OPRE -MANUFACTURED BUILDINGSYSTEM; COMPONENTS INCLUDE: STRUCTURAL SYSTEM PREFINMHED METAL SIDING WALL SYSTEM PREFINISHED METAL ROOF SYSTEM INTENORAND EKTERIOR LIGHTING WINDOWS, DOORS, V NRIATON SYSTEM CONCRETEFLOORRNISH © CUSTOMER SE -CE MILL © MILL LINE OOFRCE © TOOL STORAGE PACK AND WORK BENCH OUNISEKTOILETROOM OELECTRICAL CONTROL PANEL9 OCYCLONE DUST COLLECTOR SYSTEM OCLEARSTORY LIGHT AND VENT TION SYSTEM (I PACKING 6 STORAGE SYSTEM Q) MAIN ELECT. PANEL BOARD ONYX ARCHITECTS" a DANA L LU B ER M NEW COMA MESA FAauTY I I OD SOUn-EASr BRLSTOL STRffT COSTA VEiq CA 9W6 Imo FRqECrWAZ DRIVE-THRU SHED B - EXTERIOR 8"AT1OM 2fiai �I .YiI-p SHED ROOF A FIRST FLOOR V 0-0 iat.p &LEFT END T" = 2PA` A 1 xl.ti ( 2 A l r �pp r A � r r r n SHED ROOF / }2 i3 A r r 14 j A 1 use / i5 N ��SRqITEN 7NY.7 �s j.xr.r -FT- - - Sf{EDr�G,4F _ _ _ SHED ROOF -D" 20'-0' n M s FBi$T,FLDOR_f9 FIRST FLOO� PRINTED ON: 10/3/20145:14:29 PM ONYX ARCHITECTSMof NMCOSTA VESA FAauTY 1100 Sam -EAST BRLS CL S PHT COSTA VIS, CAWQ6 two POLE SFED PLAN 3A L I KEY NOTES O OUTLINE OF ROOF OVERHEAD ® STRUCTURAL SUPPORT FOR PRE-ENGNERRED SHED ® COVERED LAYDOWN SPACE FOR 9TACI�D LUMBER (NOT RACKED LUMBER) O PRE-ENGINEERED SHED - WITH A ROOF AND THREE SIDES CLOSED (OPEN ON ONE SIDE) ONYX ARCHITECTSMof NMCOSTA VESA FAauTY 1100 Sam -EAST BRLS CL S PHT COSTA VIS, CAWQ6 two POLE SFED PLAN 3A L I ATTACHMENT 2 DRAFT RESOLUTIONS -3- RESOLUTION NO. 15- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF COSTA MESA UPHOLDING THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S APPROVAL OF PLANNING APPLICATION PA -14-40 FOR THE RELOCATION AND EXPANSION OF GANAHL LUMBER LOCATED AT 1100 BRISTOL STREET THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF COSTA MESA HEREBY RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: WHEREAS, an application was filed Patrick Ganahl, lessee of the property owned by the County of Orange, requesting approval of the following: Planning Application PA -14-40: The proposed project ("Project") involves the development of a 6.6 acre vacant lot to accommodate the relocation of the Costa Mesa Ganahl Lumber store to a site owned by the County of Orange and leased to Ganahl Lumber. The existing Costa Mesa Ganahl Lumber store is located on an adjacent property to the east and would be closed once the new store is completed. The development proposal includes the following: • Development Review for the construction of a 65,263 square foot building materials retail store with administrative offices (Main Building A). A total of 286 parking spaces are proposed; 108 parking stalls would be provided on the roof of the retail building; and 178 at -grade parking stalls would be provided throughout the project site; • Variance from front setback requirement for the parking lot, B Shed and Mill Shed along Bristol Street (20 -foot setback required; 10 -foot setback proposed); • Variance from maximum building height for the solar photovoltaic canopy and elevator overrun on Main Building A (30 -foot maximum height allowed; 34 feet to the solar canopy and 41 feet to the top of the elevator proposed); • Variance from maximum building height for the B Shed (30 -foot maximum allowed; 34 feet proposed); • Conditional Use Permit for the proposed outdoor storage yard consisting of three sheds (B Shed, Mill Shed, and Pole Shed) totaling 40,925 square feet; and • Planned Signing Program to allow the proposed 24 -foot high freestanding sign (12 feet allowed, 24 feet proposed). WHEREAS, on or about January 19, 2015, the City filed the Notice of Intent to Adopt A Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Project prepared by LSA Associates Inc., with the public review period from January 23, 2015 through February 22, 2015; and WHEREAS, in response to the "Comment Letter to the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration", LSA prepared written "Responses to Additional Comments on the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Prepared for Ganahl Lumber Hardware Store and Lumber Yard Project" (Planning Application No. PA -14-40, Exhibit D); and WHEREAS, on February 23, 2015, a duly noticed public hearing was held before the Planning Commission, which included presentation of the project by staff and the applicant, as well as information related to the environmental impact analysis of the project by LSA Associates; and WHEREAS, on February 23, 2015, prior to the Planning Commission meeting, the City received an "Objection to the Proposed Ganahl Lumber Project" raising numerous objections to the Project (Exhibit E); and WHEREAS, at the public hearing, the Planning Commission received public comments and elicited responses from staff and LSA regarding the objections raised; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, based on the evidence and testimony presented during the hearing, voted to approve the project by a 5-0 vote; and WHEREAS, on February 27, 2015, an appeal of the decision of the Planning Commission's approval of the project was filed; and WHEREAS, a duly noticed public hearing was held by the City Council on March 17, 2015 with all persons having the opportunity to speak for and against the proposal; and WHEREAS, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), an Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared and circulated from January 23, 2015 to February 22, 2015 for public review and comment; and WHEREAS, the City of Costa Mesa received written comments from the general public, government entities, and other interested parties during the public review period; and —— WHEREAS, written comments received from the general public, government entities, and other interested parties were responded to, where appropriate, in the manner prescribed in California Code of Regulations Section 15073; and WHEREAS, no significant new information has been added to the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration and no changes to the proposed project have occurred which would require recirculation of the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration under CEQA Guidelines Section 15073.5; and WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed all environmental documents comprising the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration and has found that the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration considers all environmental impacts of the proposed project and a reasonable range of alternatives, and the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration is complete, adequate, and fully complies with all requirements of CEQA, the CEQA Guidelines, and the City of Costa Mesa Environmental Guidelines; and WHEREAS, the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for this project reflects the independent judgment of the City of Costa Mesa. NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF COSTA MESA FINDS AND RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: BE IT RESOLVED, therefore, that based on the evidence in the record and the findings contained in Exhibit A, and subject to the conditions of approval and mitigation measures indicated in the Mitigation Monitoring Program contained within Exhibits B and C, respectively, the City Council hereby ADOPTS the Initial Study/Mitigated Declaration and APPROVES Planning Application PA -14-40. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Costa Mesa City Council does hereby find and determine that adoption of this Resolution is expressly predicated upon the activity as described in the staff report for Planning Application PA -14-40 and upon the applicant's compliance with each and all of the conditions in Exhibits B, the Mitigation Monitoring Program in Exhibit C, and compliance of all applicable federal, state, and local laws. Any approval granted by this resolution shall be subject to review, modification or revocation if there is a material change that occurs in the operation, or if the applicant fails to comply with any of the conditions of approval and/or mitigation measures. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that if any section, division, sentence, clause, phrase or portion of this resolution, or the documents in the record in support of this resolution, are for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining provisions. The City Clerk shall attest to the adoption of this resolution and shall forward a copy to the applicant, and any person requesting the same. PASSED AND ADOPTED on this 17TH day of March, 2015. STEPHEN M. MENSINGER Mayor, City of Costa Mesa ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM: CITY CLERK OF THE CITY ATTORNEY CITY OF COSTA MESA -36- STATE OF CALIFORNIA) )ss COUNTY OF ORANGE ) I, BRENDA GREEN, City Clerk and ex -officio Clerk of the City Council of the City of Costa Mesa, hereby certify that the above Council Resolution Number 15__ as considered at a regular meeting of said City Council held on the 17th day of March, 2015, and thereafter passed and adopted as a whole at the regular meeting of said City Council held on the 17th day of March, 2015, by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereby set my hand and affixed the Seal of the City of Costa Mesa this day of 2015 — 3q^ EXHIBIT A FINDINGS (APPROVAL) A. The information presented substantially complies with Costa Mesa Municipal Code Section 13-29(8)(2) because: Finding: The proposed development is substantially compatible with developments in the same general area and would not be materially detrimental to other properties within the area. Facts in Support of Findings: The proposed use, with the recommended conditions of approval, is compatible with the other uses in the immediate vicinity. The proposed location for the Project is adjacent to its existing facility. The existing Ganahl Lumber facility at 1275 Bristol Street, which is zoned C2 (General Commercial), was originally built as Ward and Harrington Home Improvement Center in the early 1970's and previously used by Barr Lumber until the facility was acquired by Ganahl Lumber in the 1990's. The property is surrounded to the north, northeast and northwest by the 73 and 55 freeways. Additionally, the northern portion of the property line runs along the Santa Ana Delhi Channel. Compliance with the conditions of approval will allow this use to operate with minimal impact on other surrounding properties and uses. The main building (Building A) contains the main store retail sales area, which is a permitted use in the C1 (Local Business District) Zone per Zoning Code Land Use Matrix Section 13-30(130 — Retail: General). Code requires that the outdoor storage yard (containing lumber stock, a mill shed, and storage sheds) be considered through a conditional use permit per Zoning Code Section 13-30(d) — Citywide Land Use Matrix. Outdoor lumber yards are not specifically listed in the corresponding Land Use Matrix, and the Conditional Use Permit process allows the City to impose consider this type of use on a case-by-case basis and impose conditions of approval, as applicable. Finding: Granting the conditional use permit will not be materially detrimental to the health, safety and general welfare of the public or otherwise injurious to property or improvements within the immediate neighborhood. Facts in Support of Findings: With the exception of the building setback and height as discussed above, the development is a commercial project consistent with the C1 zoning of the property and the other commercially - zoned properties in the vicinity. Compliance with the applicable Building and Fire Safety Codes will ensure that the project is not materially detrimental to the health, safety and general welfare of the public or otherwise injurious to property or improvements within the immediate neighborhood. The properties on the south side of Bristol Street will not be adversely affected by the project. Specifically, there are no modifications to the center left turn lane on Bristol Street which would adversely impact access to the properties on the south side of Bristol Street. Finding: Granting the conditional use permit will not allow a use, density or intensity which is not in accordance with the general plan designation for the property. Facts in Support of Findings: The project site is zoned C1 (Local Business District) and has a General Plan Designation of General Commercial. The project, as conditioned, is consistent with the applicable provisions of the General Commercial General Plan Designation. The existing Home Depot at Harbor Center in Costa Mesa is also located in the General Commercial land use designation. Home Depot required discretionary approval of a Master Plan in the C1 -S zone. Other jurisdictions also consider Ganahl Lumber stores as commercial uses. For reference purposes, following is a list of similar Ganahl Lumber stores located in commercial zones in other jurisdictions: CG (Commercial General) City of Buena Park 6586 Beach Blvd, Buena Park, CA 90621 City of Pasadena 3003 E Colorado Blvd, Pasadena, CA 91107 City of Capistrano Beach 34162 Doheny Park Dr., Capistrano Beach, CA 92624 (East Colorado Specific Plan -Commercial General- The Chihuahuita area.) C C/P (Community Commercial/Pedestrian) C -G (General Commercial Zoning District) - City of Los Alamitos Hardware Store 10742 Los Alamitos Blvd. Los Alamitos, CA 90720 This property is owned by the County Flood Control District and is limited in development potential due to its location and required unbuildable easements by Caltrans and the County Flood Control District. As noted in the Planning Commission Staff Report, the Floor Area Ratio (FAR) for the project is 0.346, excluding the Pole Shed, which is not enclosed, and the proposal will not exceed the City's maximum FAR requirement (.35 FAR maximum allowed). This site has been vacant for about seven years since the Bristol Street Mini Storage was removed. As indicated in the letter submitted by the County of Orange Executive Office, which facilitated the lease of their property to Ganahl Lumber, the County determined that the Ganahl Lumber proposal was the least intensive land development that their office received (Attachment 7). In November 2013, the County's evaluation panel gave Ganahl the highest rating above one proposal from Lyon -NCA Bristol Venture for 207 apartments and two other proposals for hotels. All of the other proposals are not consistent with the current GP/zoning, and would require a General Plan amendment and Rezone of the property. The following describes the proposed project's consistency with specific goals and objectives of the General Plan, Land Use Element. Goal LU -1: Land Use: It is the goal of the City of Costa Mesa to provide its citizens with a balanced community of residential, commercial, industrial, recreational, and institutional uses to satisfy the needs of the social and economic segments of the population and to retain the residential character of the City, to meet the competing demands for alternative developments within each land use classification within reasonable land use intensity limits; and to ensure the long term viability and productivity of the community's natural and man-made environments. Consistency: The infill nature of the proposed commercial project protects the balance of land uses satisfying the needs of the community as it pertains to commercial retail uses. The project will ensure the long-term viability of the natural and man-made environment and decreases the need for significant infrastructure improvements. The project is consistent with this General Plan goal. Objective LU -1A.3: Locate high-intensity developments or high traffic generating uses away from low-density residential in order to buffer the more sensitive land uses from the potentially adverse impacts of the more intense developments or uses. Consistency: The project is a commercial development located along Bristol Street, a major traffic arterial in the City. The project site does not abut residential properties. As indicated in the IS/MND, adequate infrastructure is available to serve the proposed project. Therefore, the project is consistent with this General Plan objective. Objective LU -1 C.1: Permit the construction of buildings over two stories or 30 feet only when it can be shown that the construction of such structures will not adversely impact surrounding developments and deprive existing land uses of adequate light, air, privacy, and solar access. Consistency: The proposed buildings that exceed the 30 -foot height limit will not adversely impact surrounding developments and deprive existing land uses of adequate light, air, privacy, and solar access as the site is abutting a major street on one side and freeways on the other side. The buildings that exceed to the 30 -foot height limit do not immediately abut the existing Ganahl Lumber site to the east. Therefore, the project is consistent with this General Plan objective. Goal LU -2: Development: It is the goal of the City of Costa Mesa to establish development policies that will create and maintain an aesthetically pleasing and functional environment and minimize impacts on existing physical and social resources. Consistency: The project would allow for the redevelopment of a vacant commercially -zoned property. On-site vegetation is minimal. The proposed project would enhance the visual appearance of the site through the construction of new buildings and implementation of the proposed landscape plan. In addition, the project would provide a high-quality architectural design to the community. As a result, the proposed project is consistent with this General Plan goal. Objective LU -2A: Encourage new development and redevelopment to improve and maintain the quality of the environment. Consistency: As indicated in the IS/MND, the proposed project with mitigation incorporated would not result in any significant adverse environmental impacts. Because the project is an infill development, it would not result in the loss of any habitat, or require extensive infrastructure improvements to provide service to the site. The project is consistent with this objective. B. The requested variance substantially complies with Costa Mesa Municipal Code Section 13-29(g)(1) in that: Findings: • Because of special circumstances applicable to the property, the strict application of development standards deprives the property of privileges enjoyed by others in the vicinity. • The deviation shall not constitute a grant of special privileges inconsistent with other properties in the vicinity. • The granting of the deviation will not allow a use, density, or intensity which is not in accordance with the general plan designation for the property. Facts in Support of Findings: Despite the request for deviations from Code requirements for the building setback for the B Shed and Mill Shed (20 -foot setback required; 10 feet proposed) and the height for the Main Building A (30 -foot height required; 34 feet to the solar panels and 41 feet to the elevator shaft) and the B Shed (30 -foot height required; 34 feet proposed), of the variances are justified based on the following: The unique shape and location along the Bristol Street frontage justify a deviation from the front landscape setback requirement. Because of special circumstances applicable to the property, the strict application of _q3_ development standards deprives the property of privileges enjoyed by others in the vicinity. The property is shaped triangular with the B Shed and Mill Shed sitting within the apex. Additionally, the northern property line runs adjacent to the Santa Ana Delhi Channel and 73 -freeway. The purpose of the 20 -foot landscape setback (10 feet proposed) is to provide a visual buffer between the public sidewalk and any perimeter walls or buildings. In this case, the B Shed and Mill Shed are proposed to have a 10 -foot landscape setback from property line, which is consistent with several properties across Bristol Street, including the two-story office buildings at 1072 and 1182 Bristol Street, both of which have less than the 20 foot landscape requirement. Additionally, because of the irregular shape of the property, the 20 -foot setback is infeasible. The reduced setback enjoyed by these two properties, in combination with the unusual shape of the subject, property, creates a special circumstance applicable to the property where the strict application of the 20 -foot landscape setback would deprive the property of privileges enjoyed by others in the vicinity. The B Shed and Mill Shed will also act a visual screen to the storage yard and the proposed 10 - foot landscape setback will be required to be densely landscaped and have exterior building treatments. Similarly, as to the height of the Main Building, the irregular shape of the property, limits the space available for parking on the ground floor, thus, necessitating rooftop parking. The applicant's request includes a variance from the Bristol Street setback (20 -feet required, 10 -feet proposed). Existing setbacks along Bristol Street for neighboring properties also do not meet this requirement. These include the following properties: 1. 1072 Bristol Street – approximate 12 foot setback. 2. 1182 Bristol Street – less than 10 foot setback. 3. 1312 Bristol Street – approximate 15 foot setback. With regard to the building height, special circumstances exist in that the proximity of the elevated freeways and Santa Ana Delhi Channel will limit visual impacts to surrounding properties and does not constitute a grant of special privileges inconsistent with the limitations upon other properties in the vicinity and zone in which the property is situated_ . The proposed buildings that exceed the 30 -foot height limit will not adversely impact surrounding developments and deprive existing land uses of adequate light, air, privacy, and solar access as the site is abutting a major street on one side and freeways along with the flood control channel on the other side. The buildings that exceed the 30 -foot height limit do not immediately abut the existing Ganahl Lumber site to the east. Therefore, the increased building height will not constitute a grant of special privileges inconsistent with other properties in the vicinity. The deviations will not allow a use, density, or intensity which is not in accordance with the general plan designation for the property. The granting of the deviations will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or _41 — welfare, or be materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. The development is consistent with the General Plan goals and policies as discussed earlier in this report, and will be required to comply with all applicable Building and Fire Safety regulations to ensure that no adverse impact to the public health, safety, or welfare is created as a result of this project. The proposed project is a conditionally permitted use in the C1 zone. This property is owned by the County Flood Control District and is limited in development potential due to its location and required unbuildable easements by Caltrans and the County Flood Control District. The Floor Area Ratio (FAR) for the project is 0.346, excluding the Pole Shed, which is not enclosed, and the proposal will not exceed the City's maximum FAR requirement (.35 FAR maximum allowed). Due to the unique nature of the use, a parking ratio of 2.87 spaces per 1,000 square feet was determined to be required for the proposed project. When applied to Building A and Building B, a parking demand of 239 spaces is forecast. With a proposed supply of 286 spaces, parking will be sufficient for this use. C. The information presented substantially complies with Costa Mesa Municipal Code Section 13-29(g)(8) in that: Finding: The proposed signing is consistent with the intent of Title 13, Chapter VIII (Signs) and the General Plan. Facts in Support of Findings: The proposed 24 -foot high freestanding sign will not constitute a grant of special privilege or allow substantially greater overall visibility than the standard ordinance provisions allow. The purpose of this planned signing program is to allow for approval of a freestanding sign that is not subject to the typical code requirements. The square footage of the total site signage will not exceed the maximum sign area allowed under the Costa Mesa's Municipal Code: 1,329 square feet of total site signage allowed; 982 square feet of total signage proposed. On the City's Master Plan of Highways, Bristol Street is designated as an Augmented Major Street (±120 feet in width) and the proposed signage provides adequate visibility for two-way traffic on Bristol Street for the business. The planned sign program is also consistent with the following objectives of the City's General Plan: Objective LU -1 B: Ensure the long term productivity and viability of the community's economic base. Consistency: The sign will be consistent in appearance with the proposed wall signage as well as existing freestanding signs in the vicinity. As a result, the sign will be compatible with the surrounding land uses. Objective CD -13: Facilitate the installation of signs that contribute to a positive image of the public realm, consistent with the Costa Mesa Zoning Code. Consistency: The proposed sign will be compatible and harmonious with uses that exist within the general neighborhood. The sign features quality construction and materials. The proposed sign will improve and enhance the appearance of the property from Bristol Street. Objective LU -1 B: Ensure the long term productivity and viability of the community's economic base. Consistency: Ganahl Lumber provides large and specific purchases of lumber products with a customer base spread over a large geographical area. As a result, the signage will not constitute a grant of special privilege since it is consistent with the signage for similar uses. Additionally, it will not allow substantially greater visibility than what the standard sign provisions would allow for commercial uses since the overall site signage is less than the maximum allowed under the City's Municipal Code. Objective CD -13: Facilitate the installation of signs that contribute to a positive image of the public realm, consistent with the Costa Mesa Zoning Code. Consistency: With the implementation of the recommended conditions of approval, the proposed sign will be compatible and harmonious with uses that exist within the general neighborhood. The sign features quality construction and materials. The proposed sign will improve and enhance the appearance of the property from Bristol Street. Finding: The proposed signs are consistent with each other in design and construction – taking into account sign style and shape, materials, letter style, colors and illumination. Facts in Support of Findings: The freestanding sign, as conditioned, will be consistent in color, height, and appearance with the proposed signage on site. Finding: The proposed signs are compatible with the buildings and developments they identify – taking into account materials, colors and design motif. Facts in Support of Findings: The proposed signage is consistent with current image standards for Ganahl Lumber as well as the City's Municipal Code. Finding: Approval does not constitute a grant of special privilege or allow substantially greater overall visibility than the standard ordinance provisions allow. Facts in Support of Findings: Ganahl Lumber provides large and specific purchases of lumber products with a customer base spread over a large geographical area. As a result, the signage will not constitute a grant of special privilege since it is consistent with the signage for similar uses. Additionally, it will not allow substantially greater visibility than what the 1-�(0— standard sign provisions would allow for commercial uses since the overall site signage is less than the maximum allowed under the City's Municipal Code. A survey of existing freestanding signs in neighboring properties along Bristol Street provides information on pylon signs of comparable height: Description Address Sign Height (Approx.) Agape Wellness Center 1182 Bristol St. 22 feet Animal Hospital 1206 Bristol St. 15 feet Extra Storage 1250 Bristol St. 25 feet Acapulco Rest. 1262 Bristol St. 19'6" feet Travelodge 1400 Bristol St. 20 feet Bill's Burgers 1476 Bristol St. 16 feet Bristol Village Center 270 Bristol St. 25 feet Car Wash 2770 Bristol St. 24 feet Bristol Design Center 2777 Bristol St. 25 feet D, The project has been reviewed for compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the CEQA Guidelines, and the City's environmental procedures. An Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) has been prepared for the project in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Mitigation measures from the IS/MND have been included as Exhibit C. If any of these conditions are removed, the decision-making body must make a finding that the project will not result in significant environmental impacts, that the conditions are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency, or that specific economic, social or other considerations make the mitigation measures infeasible. E. The project, as conditioned, is consistent with Chapter XII, Article 3, Transportation System Management, of Title 13 of the Costa Mesa Municipal Code in that the development project's traffic impacts will be mitigated at all affected intersections and by the payment of traffic impact fees. F. The proposed buildings are an excessive distance from the street necessitating fire apparatus access and provisions of on-site fire hydrants. q9 - FXHIRIT R CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Ping. 1. Planning Application PA -14-40 shall comply with the conditions of approval, code requirements, special district requirements, and mitigation measures of the IS/MND for this project and as listed in the attached Mitigation Monitoring Program (Exhibit C). 2. The use shall be limited to the type of operation as described in the staff report. Any change in the operational characteristics including, but not limited to, the hours of operation indicated, shall require review by the Planning Division and may require an amendment to the conditional use permit, subject to either Zoning Administrator or Planning Commission approval, depending on the nature of the proposed change. The applicant is reminded that Code allows the Planning Commission to modify or revoke any planning application based on findings related to public nuisance and/or noncompliance with conditions of approval [Title 13, Section 13-29(0)]. 3. If parking shortages or other parking -related problems arise, the business operator shall institute whatever reasonable operational measures necessary to minimize or eliminate the problem. 4. The business operator shall install bike racks for employees on the site. This condition shall be completed prior to final occupancy/start of business, under the direction of the Development Services Department. 5. Mitigation measures from the IS/MND for this project have been included as Exhibit C. If any of these conditions are removed, the Planning Commission must make a finding that the project will not result in significant environmental impacts, that the conditions are within the responsibility of another public agency, or that specific economic, social, or other considerations make the mitigation measures infeasible. 6. The conditions of approval including Mitigation Measures incorporated by reference in these Conditions of Approval as Exhibit C, code requirements, and special district requirements of PA -14-40 shall be blueprinted on the face of the site plan as part of the plan check submittal package. 7. Prior to issuance of building permits, a final landscape plan indicating the landscape palette and the design/material of paved areas shall be submitted for review and approval by the Planning Division. 8. Landscaping and irrigation shall be installed in accordance with the approved plans prior to final inspection or occupancy clearance. 9, Landscaping along Bristol Street shall be planted with trees and vegetation. The landscape plan shall be approved prior to issuance of building permits and shall contain additional 24 -inch box trees above the minimum Code requirements to the satisfaction of the Development Services Director. Compliance with this requirement may include upgrading smaller sized trees to 24 -inch box trees or providing additional 24 -inch box trees. 10. Developer shall contact the City's Transportation Services Division and the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) to replace the -I F- chain link fencing between the subject property and the Caltrans property abutting the 73 and 55 Freeways with a combination wrought iron fence with pilaster supports or other fence/barrier acceptable to both the City and Caltrans. The fencing shall be submitted for review and approval by the Planning Division. Issuance of certificate of occupancy shall not be withheld pending the completion of this condition; however, the applicant shall provide documentation of the progress and estimated time of completion of the condition prior to the issuance of the certificate of occupancy. 11. No mechanical equipment or other rooftop appurtenances shall be located on the elevator overrun area of Main Building A above the approved 41 -foot height limit. 12. Future installation of rooftop solar canopies on the outdoor storage sheds (i.e. Pole Shed, Shed B, and Mill Shed) may be approved by the Development Services Director as an amendment to the Conditional Use Permit, provided that there are no adverse impacts (light, glare) to surrounding properties. 13. Final location of the gate and proper signage of the hours of operation at the gated entrance shall be approved by the Development Services Director and Transportation Services Manager to avoid customer confusion and circulation impacts on Bristol Street. 14. The business operator shall require that Ganahl Lumber employee vehicles be exclusively parked in the rooftop parking level in order to make the at -grade parking lot available for customers/contractors to the fullest extent possible. 15. Prior to issuance of building permits, developer shall contact the U.S. Postal Service with regard to location and design of mail delivery facilities. Such facilities shall be shown on the site plan, landscape plan, and/or floor plan. 16. No modification(s) of the approved building elevations including, but not limited to, change of architectural type, changes that increase the building height, removal of building articulation, or a change of the finish material(s), shall be made during construction without prior Planning Division written approval. Failure to obtain prior Planning Division approval of the modification could result in the requirement of the applicant to (re)process the modification through a discretionary review process or a variance, or in the requirement to modify the construction to reflect the approved plans. 17. No exterior roof access ladders, roof drain scuppers, or roof drain downspouts are permitted. This condition relates to visually prominent features of scuppers or downspouts that not only detract from the architecture but may be spilling water from overhead without an integrated gutter system which would typically channel the rainwater from the scupper/downspout to the ground. An integrated downspout/gutter system which is painted to match the building would comply with the condition. This condition shall be completed under the direction of the . lq, Planning Division. 18. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the applicant shall submit a Lighting Plan and Photometric Study for the approval of the City's Development Services Department. The Lighting Plan shall demonstrate compliance with the following: • All site lighting fixtures shall be provided with a flat glass lens. Photometric calculations shall indicate the effect of the flat glass lens fixture efficiency. • Lighting design and layout shall limit spill light to no more than 0.5 foot-candle at the property line of the surrounding properties, consistent with the level of lighting that is determined necessary for safety and security purposes on site. • Light standards located at the top level of the parking structure shall be a maximum of 15 feet in height, located and oriented in such a way as to minimize light spillage onto surrounding properties. Light standards shall be custom -fitted with glare shields to focus light spillage in the parking structure area to the fullest extent possible. 19. It is recommended that the project incorporate green building design and construction techniques where feasible. The applicant may contact the Building Safety Division at (714) 754-5273 for additional information. CAL Green Code or higher as determined by applicant. 20. Prior to issuance of grading permits, developer shall submit for review and approval a Construction Management Plan. This plan features methods to minimize disruption to the neighboring residential uses to the fullest extent that is reasonable and practicable. The plan shall include construction parking and vehicle access and specifying staging areas and delivery and hauling truck routes. The plan should mitigate disruption to residents during construction. The truck route plan shall preclude truck routes through residential areas and major truck traffic during peak hours. The total truck trips to the site shall not exceed 200 trucks per day (i.e., 100 truck trips to the site plus 100 truck trips from the site) unless approved by the Development Services Director or Transportation Services Manager. 21. The subject property's ultimate finished grade level may not be filled/raised in excess of 36 inches above the finished grade of any abutting property. If additional fill dirt is needed to provide acceptable on-site storm water flow to a public street, an alternative means of accommodating that drainage shall be approved by the City's Building Official prior to issuance of any grading or building permits. Such alternatives may include subsurface tie-in to public storm water facilities, subsurface drainage collection systems and/or sumps with mechanical pump discharge in -lieu of gravity flow. If mechanical pump method is determined appropriate, said mechanical pump(s) shall continuously be maintained in working order. In any case, development of subject property shall preserve or improve the existing pattern of drainage on abutting properties. 22. The applicant shall contact the Planning Division to arrange a Planning inspection of the site prior to the release of occupancy/utilities. This inspection is to confirm that the conditions of approval and code requirements have been satisfied. 23. Transformers, backflow preventers, and any other approved above- ground utility improvement shall be located outside of the required street setback area and shall be screened from view, under direction of Planning staff. Any deviation from this requirement shall be subject to review and approval of the Development Services Director. 24. A comprehensive sign program shall be submitted for all on-site signs (i.e., monument, directional, wall mounted) for review and approval of the Development Services Director prior to issuance of building permits. 25. The applicant shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City, its elected and appointed officials, agents, officers and employees from any claim, action, or proceeding (collectively referred to as "proceeding") brought against the City, its elected and appointed officials, agents, officers or employees arising out of, or which are in any way related to, the applicant's project, or any approvals granted by City related to the applicant's project. The indemnification shall include, but not be limited to, damages, fees and/or costs awarded against the City, if any, and cost of suit, attorney's fees, and other costs, liabilities and expenses incurred in connection with such proceeding whether incurred by the applicant, the City and/or the parties initiating or bringing such proceeding. This indemnity provision shall include the applicant's obligation to indemnify the City for all the City's costs, fees, and damages that the City incurs in enforcing the indemnification provisions set forth in this section. City shall have the right to choose its own legal counsel to represent the City's interests, and applicant shall indemnify City for all such costs incurred by City. Eng. 26. Maintain the public right-of-way in a "wet -down" condition to prevent excessive dust and promptly remove any spillage from the public right-of- way by sweeping or sprinkling. Trans. 27. Design and construct the improvements required for providing a signalized access to the project site at the intersection of Bristol Street and Newport Boulevard Northbound. The applicant will be responsible for procuring all applicable permits and approvals from Caltrans and City of Costa Mesa prior to beginning of construction. Street 28. Trees within the 10 -foot landscape setback along the Bristol Street Trees frontage shall complement the tabebuia avellanedae street trees required to be planted within the public right-of-way per Code Requirement number 34. The applicant shall contact the City Arborist for preferred tree types and additional information. City 29. Prior to issuance of a building permit, applicant shall remit Atty, documentation verifying the approval of: (a) Required encroachment —,5(— permit from the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) and (b) Ground lease from the Orange County Flood Control District. The Development Services Director may modify/extend the timing of the required submissions as necessary. Ping. 30. The applicant shall submit a transition management plan to the Comm. satisfaction of the Development Services Director that provides a cohesive plan for the closure of the existing operation and opening of the project prior to issuance of certificate of occupancy. 31. The applicant shall provide enhanced building treatment and materials on the B Shed and Mill Shed elevations facing Bristol Street, subject to review and approval by the Development Services Director. CODE REQUIREMENTS The following list of federal, state and local laws applicable to the project has been compiled by staff for the applicant's reference. Any reference to "City" pertains to the City of Costa Mesa. Ping. 1. All contractors and subcontractors must have valid business licenses to do business in the City of Costa Mesa. Final inspections, final occupancy and utility releases will not be granted until all such licenses have been obtained. 2. Address assignment shall be requested from the Planning Division prior to submittal of working drawings for plan check. The approved address of individual units, suites, buildings, etc., shall be blueprinted on the site plan and on all floor plans in the working drawings. 3. Prior to issuance of building permits, applicant shall contact the US Postal Service with regard to location and design of mail delivery facilities. Such facilities shall be shown on the site plan, landscape plan, and/or floor plan. 4. Hours of construction shall comply with Section 13-279, Title 13, of the Costa Mesa Municipal Code. 5. Two (2) sets of detailed landscape and irrigation plans, which meet the requirements set forth in Costa Mesa Municipal Code Sections 13-101 through 13-108 and the City's Water Efficient Landscape Guidelines, shall be required as part of the project plan check review and approval process. Plans shall be forwarded to the Planning Division for final approval prior to issuance of building permits. 6. Two (2) sets of landscape and irrigation plans, approved by the Planning Division, shall be attached to two of the final building plan sets. 7. All on-site utility services shall be installed underground. 8. Installation of all utility meters shall be performed in a manner so as to obscure the installation from view from any place on or off the property. The installation shall be in a manner acceptable to the public utility and 16. All construction contractors shall comply with South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) regulations, including Rule 403, Fugitive Dust. All grading (regardless of acreage) shall apply best available control measures for fugitive dust in accordance with Rule 403. To ensure that the project is in full compliance with applicable SCAQMD dust regulations and that there is no nuisance impact off the site, the contractor would implement each of the following: a. Moisten soil not more than 15 minutes prior to moving soil or conduct whatever watering is necessary to prevent visible dust emissions from exceeding 100 feet in any direction. b. Apply chemical stabilizers to disturbed surface areas (completed grading areas) within five days of completing grading or apply dust suppressants or vegetation sufficient to maintain a stabilized surface. c. Water excavated soil piles hourly or covered with temporary coverings. 53 shall be in the form of a vault, wall cabinet, or wall box under the direction of the Planning Division. 9. Any mechanical equipment such as air-conditioning equipment and duct work shall be screened from view in a manner approved by the Planning Division. 10. Prior to approval of plans, the project shall fulfill the City of Costa Mesa Drainage Ordinance No. 06-19 requirements. Bldg. 11. Comply with the requirements of the 2013 California Building Code, 2013 California Residential Code, 2013 California Electrical Code, 2013 California Mechanical Code, 2013 California Plumbing Code, 2013 California Green Building Standards Code and 2013 California Energy Code (or the applicable adopted, California Building Code, California Electrical Code, California Mechanical Code, California Plumbing Code, California Green Building Standards, and California Energy Code at the time of plan submittal or permit issuance) and California Code of Regulations also known as the California Building Standards Code, as amended by the City of Costa Mesa. 12. Submit precise grading plans, an erosion control plan, and a hydrology study. 13. Submit a soils report for this project. Soil's report recommendations shall be blueprinted on both the architectural and grading plans. 14. On graded sites the top of exterior foundation shall extend above the elevation of the street gutter at point of discharge or the inlet of an approved discharge devise a minimum of 12 inches plus 2 percent. 2013 California Building Code Section 1808.7.4. 15. The ground immediately adjacent to the foundation shall be sloped away from the building at a slope of not less than 5% for a minimum distance of 10 feet measured perpendicular to the face of the wall per BCB Section 1804.3 16. All construction contractors shall comply with South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) regulations, including Rule 403, Fugitive Dust. All grading (regardless of acreage) shall apply best available control measures for fugitive dust in accordance with Rule 403. To ensure that the project is in full compliance with applicable SCAQMD dust regulations and that there is no nuisance impact off the site, the contractor would implement each of the following: a. Moisten soil not more than 15 minutes prior to moving soil or conduct whatever watering is necessary to prevent visible dust emissions from exceeding 100 feet in any direction. b. Apply chemical stabilizers to disturbed surface areas (completed grading areas) within five days of completing grading or apply dust suppressants or vegetation sufficient to maintain a stabilized surface. c. Water excavated soil piles hourly or covered with temporary coverings. 53 d. Water exposed surfaces at least twice a day under calm conditions. Water as often as needed on windy days when winds are less than 25 miles per day or during very dry weather in order to maintain a surface crust and prevent the release of visible emissions from the construction site. e. Wash mud -covered tired and under -carriages of trucks leaving construction sites. f. Provide for street sweeping, as needed, on adjacent roadways to 19. remove dirt dropped by construction vehicles or mud, which would otherwise be carried off by trucks departing project sites. g. Securely cover loads with a tight fitting tarp on any truck leaving the construction sites to dispose of debris. h. Cease grading during period when winds exceed 25 miles per hour. Trans. 17. Construct all proposed driveway approaches to comply with city standards. 18. Fulfill mitigation of off-site traffic impacts at the time of issuance of occupancy by submitting to the Planning Division the required traffic impact fee pursuant to the prevailing schedule of charges adopted by the City Council. The traffic impact fee is calculated including credits for all existing uses. NOTE: The Traffic Impact Fee will be recalculated at the time of issuance of building permit/certificate of occupancy based upon any changes in the prevailing schedule of charges adopted by the City Council and in effect at that time. 19. Fulfill San Joaquin Hills Transportation Corridor Fee Ordinance (if applicable) at the time of issuance of building permit by submitting the required fee to the Transportation Services Division. Note that the fee is subject to revision and possible increase July 1 of each year. 20. Close unused drive approaches, or portion of, with full height curb and gutter that comply with City Standards. 21. Delivery truck gate shall be designed to prevent trucks from backing up onto Bristol Street. Eng. 22. At the time of development submit for approval an offsite plan to the engineering division and grading plan to the building division that shows sewer, water, existing parkway improvements and the limits of work on the site, and hydrology calculations, both prepared by a registered civil engineer or architect. Cross lot drainage shall not occur. Construction access approval must be obtained prior to building or engineering permits being issued by the city of costa mesa. Pay offsite plan check fee per section 13-231 of the C.C.M.M.C. and an approved offsite plan shall be required prior to engineering permits being issued by the City Of Costa Mesa. 23. A construction access permit and deposit of $1,230.00 will be required by City of Costa Mesa, engineering division prior to start of any on-site work, necessary during construction for street sweeping and to guarantee replacement costs in case of damage to existing public -5-1- improvements. 24. Obtain a permit from the City of Costa Mesa, engineering division, at the time of development and then construct P.C.C. driveway approaches per City Of Costa Mesa standards as shown on the offsite plan. Location and dimensions are subject to the approval of the transportation services manager. ADA compliance required for all new driveway approaches. 25. Obtain a permit from the City Of Costa Mesa, Engineering Division, at the time of development and then remove any existing driveways and/or curb depressions that will not be used and replace with full height curb and sidewalk. 26. Fulfill City Of Costa Mesa Drainage Ordinance No. 06-19 requirements prior to approval of plans. 27. Submit to the Engineering Division a storm runoff study showing existing and proposed facilities and the method of draining this area and tributary areas without exceeding the capacity of any street or drainage facility on-site or off-site to the satisfaction of the city engineer. If possible, drain the entire site directly to the flood control channel. Fire 28. Provide (4) Class A fire hydrants at the direction of the Fire Department. See Fire Prevention. 29. Flammable Fuel Storage and use shall comply with California Fire Code, 2013. 30. Provide fire sprinkler systems for all buildings per NFPA 13, 2013. 31. Provide Fire Department key access per CMFD standards. 32. Provide 12 inch address on building and at street. Address must be visible form the street and contrast in color with its background. 33. A Fire Master Plan shall be approved by CMFD prior to formal building submittal. Street 34. Create not more than fifteen (15) — 4'X4' tree wells adjacent to curb and Trees plant fifteen (15) 24" Box size Tabebuia avellanedae along Bristol Street. SPECIAL DISTRICT REQUIREMENTS The requirements of the following special districts are hereby forwarded to the applicant: Sani. 1. Applicant will be required to construct sewers to serve this project, at his own expense, meeting the approval of the Costa Mesa Sanitary District. 2. County Sanitation District fees, fixture fees, inspection fees, and sewer permit are required prior to installation of sewer. 3. Applicant shall submit a plan showing sewer improvements that meets the District Engineer's approval to the Building Division as part of the plans submitted for plan check. 4. The applicant is required to contact the Costa Mesa Sanitary District at (714) 754-5307 to arrange final sign -off prior to certificate of occupancy being released. 5. Applicant shall contact Costa Mesa Sanitary District at (949) 654-8400 for any additional district requirements. AQMD 6. Applicant shall contact the Air Quality Management District (AQMD) at (800) 288-7664 for potential additional conditions of development or for additional permits required by AQMD. Water 7. Customer shall contact the Mesa Water District — Engineering Desk and submit an application and plans for project review. Customer must obtain a letter of approval and a letter of project completion from Mesa Water District. School 8. Pay applicable Newport Mesa Unified School District fees to the Building Division prior is issuance of building permits. State 9. Comply with the requirements of the California Department of Food and Agriculture (CDFA) to determine if red imported fire ants (RIFA) exist on the property prior to any soil movement or excavation. Call CDFA at (714) 708-1910 for information. EXHIBIT C MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM -6-7- I f l I. I y r �1 �r r > •J ,�. = -75 -56- G i 7D J 71 Imo• 77 r _ _ f J J J Cz J J 7-7 IJ zo 'J J _ 7I1 _ _ _> �_ I .L _/ � f � � � tJ _ _ J = _ _7 — =111 — _ _ '3 •J — 73 Z. J J ! al r. 7 jz '7 — — — L J • • • • • f vel J G .J Y ti U n U L n v v v � J� v v y C 7 v b v C 3 ^ v n. 1 131 1 I75 Z :3y? �:J -z! b b T � •� ?V b � b v y U � � U cif +-. � � '� Ute... ,,i y .� � . -. -• J •y Q U .. --, r ,-. li 3 v= o DI y3b qm y a V lz �. o 72 v 72 MzMzMxM3 3 MzMz LTJ 0 W d z� I � T r x^. q z � J TT n I Ty ;b .y C•. b y e �v1 C _ n n O y 'O p JO I � � � n 71 +•. V � q w u u y C° C 7O71 O 23 T y y U J !1 J a b b 7 r v ,� n •o ao y u yam. o. F O> cV v 3 U J u 3 p v v v u, p Y o 30 O n ,� n .. b rr '� v • � � -d _°�, v ° � ? G U •" o ; � ,vim, ? � .2 U .� ° n -. 4 � � U y O. � • 7 � ` � :d � � `� n y � : iU., b �" O U v p .yam.. U ti 7 y O .] b y 4. ++ •ll .O '-' :d y (O' .-�+ b y n x7 j y" -[ d ~i �. O O i �, n O v • �;, �" CL 4 N a � U Lr, •� -� y. p U ;d y C �. q O a o. :a '�••� ,y + y o 'b to q ,y >ao y i•+ U �. O ! G". =+ '� •� y J am,, ° 'J ;a `.� w :C ° y _ .J. O y'y � y O � AJ . �4 ' � Si � U �" O i`d. 'v "� C •ted T `� > =� � � • y O -Ij 6� ',+�+ n ci 00 u J , o° C y O z y y v b n d J n0 .5 y y v O> py b U yCP , ,i 3 6.. y. �. G .0 .� J chi y ��i •" [ ~ ' > 4 q p :d [ n [ O ICi b y C n _ C q C S ' [ Q L". U 'O 4" y '� :d S[C O. ❑ h •j ..>. ,•°� :I, SI ,7 y�j vI ley" a y y x Ei" O u p U .^ _O b j 4C yj n y b E O ii� > -d n d O b 0 7 4 r" y .y C U n E . 5q O 3 pk0� L L" C n y y y F x ^Lf J y. •>ll �ll ��" j y Q. •b O Cl, jp [ y • J [. b +� �, ,ll, W �.+ {�".4'C j cid to y Q O b N[ U to no tw . p 5u u° U U a" = tai •~i rt J J f J l ^ Fj f f 1J f) < J JJJ i ;L � r � r, J � -• f - r - � JIJ J ' � � i � -_ •� .- r � 'J i r f � r I - - .� ! - \ 1 iJ 1j = -• _ .f f .J f J JL _ .! � f � i _ 'V J � _ _ � J � � J .Il J •J ' ' 'f. f J J ! j J J � f � "J JlJ � � JIJ � � � •� � � � � � - - - , 77 � i J f f � J J l •J .J -' 'J J r � 'J - % 'J �+ ✓ G � _ rt r1 rr, rt w n v 6-1 U v � v J � U 'n o 0 •Jd U r w 70 i C d I U _ �o b v v 0 • '� � —. V n y — 5 '• — � It ll Ij 1) -• y - v A A.�n. ti 4 V v v v 3 El V li U U 7 �. U V v v ll r 'y 7 '.r Jy. 7U 7-0 �q. ti n 77j 71 7110 ]0 v v v b_ v v v v n .. r i� :J r. J� � a b v b v 0 v y.� � v g v y v v Q .» •� v ��^ 6. 6. • . . y �,x�- 'Q Z 71 U n r L n b n J w Cd h L n O CL 2,i i fry M t�1 c+1 Z M N1 M "" M� N1 ` 5 T EXHIBIT D RESPONSES TO COMMENTS _6(6- L A LSA ASSOCIATES, I N C. \20 EXECUTIVE PARK, SUITE _'00 IRVINE, CALIFORNIA 92614 MEMORANDUM DATE: February 23, 2015 T 1u -a BERKELEY FRESNO RIVERSIDE 949 553 0666 TEL CARLSBAD PALM SPRINGS ROCKLIN 949 553 8076 FAX FORD COLLINS PT RICHMOND SAN LUIS OBISPO TO: Mel Lee, AICP, Senior Planner, City of Costa Mesa CC: Claire L. Flynn, AICP, Assistant Development Services Director, City of Costa Mesa FROM: Ryan Bensley, Senior Environmental Planner, LSA Associates, Inc. SUBJECT: Responses to Additional Comments on the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Prepared for the Ganahl Lumber Hardware Store and Lumber Yard Project (Planning Application No. PA -14-40) Following the distribution of a Supplemental Memorandum to the Planning Commission on Friday, February 20, 2015, the City of Costa Mesa (City) received one additional comment letter regarding the Draft Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) for the Ganahl Lumber Hardware Store and Lumber Yard Project (proposed project). The purpose of this supplemental memorandum is to address this additional comment letter regarding the environmental information and analyses contained in the Draft IS/MND. As required by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines (State CEQA Guidelines) Section 15087, a Notice of Completion (NOC) of the Draft IS/MND for the proposed project was filed with the State Clearinghouse on January 22, 2015, and the Notice of Intent (NOI) to Adopt an MND was filed with the County of Orange (County) Clerk on January 23, 2015. The Draft IS/MND was circulated for public review for a period of 30 days, from January 23, 2015, to February 22, 2015. The NOI and/or copies of the Draft IS/MND were distributed to all Responsible Agencies and to the State Clearinghouse in addition to various public agencies, citizen groups, and interested individuals. Copies of the Draft IS/MND were also made available for public review at the City's Public Counter, the Mesa Verde Library, and the Costa Mesa/Donald Dungan Library, and on the City's website. As described in CEQA Guidelines Section 15074(b), "[p]rior to approving a project, the decision- making body of the lead agency [in this case, the City's Planning Commission], shall consider the proposed... mitigated negative declaration together with any comments received during the public review process. The decision-making body shall adopt the proposed... mitigated negative declaration only if it finds on the basis of the whole record before it (including the initial study and any comments received), that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment and that the... mitigated negative declaration reflects the lead agency's independent judgment and analysis." Although the City is not required by CEQA to respond to the comments submitted on the Draft IS/MND, a summary of each comment is provided below along with a draft response. 2/23/15 (C:\Users\LEE_NMppData\Local\NIicrosoti\Windows\Temporary Intemet Files\ContenLOut look\2VAZIGDW\Response to 1072 Bristol Comments.doc) ' �� 1072 Bristol Partners, LP I-1 1072 Bristol Street, Suite 100 Costa Mesa, CA 92626 February 19, 2015 VIA E-MAIL & FACSIMILE Claire Flynn, Asst. Development Services Director City of Costa Mesa 77 Fair Drive Costa Mesa, CA 92628 Re: Comment to Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the proposed Ganahl Lumber Protect Dear Ms. Flynn: I am an owner representative of the ownership of 1072 Bristol Street. Our property is across Bristol from the proposed Mega Ganahl Lumber project. We are not being provided with adequate information about this giant project right across the street. What is referred to as "The Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration" does not come close to addressing the many impacts of the Mega Ganahl. A 1-1-2 great deal of it is false. What remains is inadequate, The "conclusions" asserted are not made in good faith. The "analysis" regarding land use is based on many wrong assumptions. A fundamental wrong assumption is that the Mega Ganahl is permitted under the City's zoning. It does not come close. The traffic "analysis" is also totally inadequate and seems to be purposefully so. It fails to address the traffic impacts on the south side of Bristol. 1460456.1 The aesthetics aesthetics "analysis" is also not adequate. S' rely, Joseph E. Miller I-1-5 1072 BRISTOL PARTNERS, LP LETTER CODE: I-1 DATE: February 19, 2015 RESPONSE I-1-1 This comment explains that the commenter represents 1072 Bristol Partners, LP, the owner of 1072 Bristol Street, which is located across Bristol from the project site. Comment noted. RESPONSE I-1-2 This comment claims that the Draft Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) does not contain adequate information about the proposed project, fails to address the proposed project's environmental impacts, and contains false information. The commenter appears to suggest that the proposed project would result in impacts related to environmental topic areas without providing any basis for their claims. The commenter also appears to be unfamiliar with the CEQA-mandated scope of environmental review and the concept of thresholds of significance. In accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15204(c), [rjeviewers should explain the basis for their comments, and should submit data or references offering facts, reasonable assumptions based on facts, or expert opinion supported by facts in support of the comments. CEQA Guidelines Section 15204(c) also states that effects shall not be considered significant in the absence of substantial evidence. Therefore, because the commenter fails to provide any facts or evidence in support of the claims included in their comments, such comments are considered to be personal opinions and no further response is required by the City. As described on page 1 of the Draft IS/MND, "[t]he purpose of this Initial Study (IS)/Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) is to evaluate the potential environmental impacts that would occur as a result of construction and the subsequent operation of the Ganahl Hardware Store and Lumber Yard...," as required by CEQA. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15382, a "significant impact" or "significant effect" means "a substantial, or potentially substantial, adverse change in any of the physical conditions within the area affected by the project." For each environmental impact issue analyzed, the Draft IS/MND includes a detailed explanation of the existing conditions, thresholds of significance that will be applied to determine whether the project's impacts are significant or less than significant, analysis of the environmental impacts against established thresholds, and a determination of whether the project would have a significant impact if implemented. A proper understanding and application of thresholds of significance is an essential part of the CEQA process. Thresholds of significance are identifiable quantitative, qualitative, or performance level metrics for a particular environmental effect, which form the basis of conclusions of significance in the Draft IS/MND. While public agencies in California are free to adopt their own significance 2/23/15 (C:\Users\LEE_N[\App Data\Local\N[icrosoft\Windows\Temporary [ntemet Files\Content.0utlook\2VAZIGDW,Response to 1072 Bristol Comments.doc) I i A Ai;fP I A FF.S INC thresholds, most agencies, including the City of Costa Mesa, rely on the significance thresholds included in Appendix G of the State CEQA Guidelines. In addition, the City has adopted its own format for Initial Study and Initial Study Checklist forms. For each environmental topic analyzed in the Draft IS/MND, the measured impacts of the project were evaluated against the significance thresholds for that topic. In this manner, the Draft IS/MND presented a qualitative or quantitative impact discussion for each applicable environmental topic. The Draft IS/MND was prepared in a manner consistent with professional industry standards. Chapter 2.0, Project Description, of the Draft IS/MND contains a detailed description of the proposed project's various design elements, including the height and square footage of the proposed project's structures, floorplans, elevations, and renderings, and information regarding the operational characteristics of the proposed project. This comment does not explain the basis for their claim that the Draft IS/MND contains false information. Therefore, the City is unable to respond to the commenter's claims regarding the alleged inclusion of false information in the document. RESPONSE I-1-3 This comment asserts that the land use analysis in the Draft IS/MND is based on many wrong assumptions and claims that the proposed project is not permitted under the City's Zoning Ordinance. As described in Section 3.10, Land Use/Planning, of the Draft IS/MND, the Zoning Ordinance designation for the project site is C1 (Local Business). The Cl zoning designation allows for a variety of commercial and industrial land uses, including hardware stores and the retail sale of building supplies, which are applicable to the proposed project. Further, as described in Table 3.10.A of the Draft IS/MND, the proposed project would be consistent with all applicable City development standards set forth in the City's Zoning Ordinance for the C 1 zoning designation; however, as described in Table 3.10.A, the proposed project would require variances from the maximum height limit of two stories/30 feet in the C 1 zone to allow a maximum height of 41 feet related to the elevator/stairwell overrun, and 34 feet for the solar roof canopy, B Shed, and the roof -deck parking level. In addition, a Planned Sign Program would be required to allow a proposed sign height of 25 feet, which is higher than the maximum 12 -foot height allowed by the development standards contained in the City's Zoning Ordinance. With approval of such variances, the proposed project would be consistent with the City's Zoning Code. The proposed project would be a compatible use subject to a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) that would allow for a hardware store and outdoor storage yard in an area zoned for commercial uses. These uses are similar to the uses at the existing Ganahl hardware store and lumber yard adjacent to the project site. With approval of the CUP and Development Review, the proposed project would be consistent with applicable goals and policies outlined in the City's General Plan and development standards outlined in the City's Zoning Code. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not result in conflicts with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation applicable to the project. 2i23/15 (C:\Users\.LEE_NI\App Data\Local\iVlicrosoft\Windows\Temporary Internet Files\Content.Outlook\2VAZIGDW\Response to 1072 Bristol 4 Comments.doc) I iA 1ii1)( I A F I I i IN( This comment does not explain the basis for their claim that the land use analysis in the Draft IS/MND is based on wrong assumptions. Therefore, the City is unable to respond to the commenter's claims regarding the assumptions in the document. RESPONSE I-1-4 This comment claims that the traffic analysis in the Draft IS/MND is intentionally inadequate and fails to address the traffic impacts on the south side of Bristol Street. Section 3.16, Transportation/Traffic, of the Draft IS/MND analyzes whether the proposed project would result in significant environmental impacts related to traffic and transportation. As described above in the Response to Comment I-1-2, the environmental impact analysis contained in the Draft IS/MND is based on the thresholds included in Appendix G of the State CEQA Guidelines. Other than claiming that the traffic analysis fails to address the traffic impacts on the south side of Bristol Street, this comment fails to explain why the analysis included in Section 3.16 of the Draft IS/MND is inadequate. The traffic analysis evaluated traffic impacts at three existing study intersections along Bristol Street (Southbound Newport Boulevard at Bristol Street, Northbound Newport Boulevard at Bristol Street, and Red Hill Avenue/Santa Ana Avenue at Bristol Street). These key locations were selected for evaluation based on discussions with City staff and in consideration of the Orange County Congestion Management Program. The traffic impact analysis considered potential increases in traffic volumes and delay at each of the legs of the study intersections. Therefore, the impact analysis considered the potential for traffic impacts to occur along both northbound and southbound Bristol Street in the vicinity of the project site. RESPONSE I-1-5 This comment asserts that the aesthetics analysis contained in the Draft IS/MND is inadequate. Section 3.1, Aesthetics, of the Draft IS/MND analyzes whether the proposed project would result in significant environmental impacts related to aesthetics, including scenic vistas, scenic resources, visual character, or light or glare sources. As described above in the Response to Comment I-1-2, the environmental impact analysis contained in the Draft IS/MND is based on the thresholds included in Appendix G of the State CEQA Guidelines. This comment fails to explain why the analysis included in Section 3.1 of the Draft IS/MND is inadequate. No further response is required. 2/23/t5 (C:\Users\LEE_N[\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Window s\Temporary [nternet Files\Content.Out look\2VAZIGDW\Response to t072 Bristol 5 Comments.doc) EXHIBIT E OBJECTIONS TO PROJECT _�7-_ ANGELO J PALMIERI (1223 1205) ROBERT F WALDRON (1027-1208) MICHAEL J. GREENE' DENNIS 'W GHAN' DAVID D PARR' CHARLES H KANTER' PATRICK A HENNE33EY DON FISHER GREGORY WEBER WARREN A WILLIAMS JOHN R LISTER MICHAEL H LEIFER SCOTT R CARPENTER RICHARD A SALUS NORMAN J RODICH RONALD M COLE MICHAEL L D'ANGELO STEPHEN A SCHECK DONNA L SNOW PALMIM. TYLER, WIENER, WILHEL,M &WALDRON RYAN M EASTER ELISE M KERN MELISA R. PEREZ MICHAEL 1. KEHOE CHADWICK C BUNCH ANISH J. BANKER RYAN M PRAGER ERIN BALSARA NADERI ERICA M- SOROSKY JERAD BELTZ CANDICEL LEE MICHAEL P BURNS JOSHUA) MARX ERIN K OYAMA STEVEN R GUESS KATHERINE M HARRISON BRIAN GLICKLIN ALAN H WIENER', OF COUNSEL ROBERT C IHRKE. OF COUNSEL MICHAEL C CHO, OF COUNSEL JAMES E WILHELM RETIRED DENNIS G TYLER% RETIRED 'A PROFE 1310NAL CORPORATION VIA E-MAIL Planning Commissioners City of Costa Mesa 77 Fair Drive Costa Mesa, CA 92628 2603 MAIN STREET EAST TOWER —SUITE 1300 IRVINE, CALIFORNIA 92614-4281 (949) 851-9400 Www.Ptwww.com February 23, 2015 Re: Obiection to the Proposed Ganahl Lumber Project Dear Honorable Members of the Costa Mesa Planning Commission: TH-2- P O BOK 19712 IRVINE, CA 92623-9712 WRITER'S DIRECT DIAL NUMBER (949) 851 7294 WRITER'S DIRECT FACSIMILE NUMBER (949)825-5412 FIRM'S DIRECT FACSIMILE NUMBERS (949) 851-1554 (949) 757.1225 mleifer(aptwww.com REFER TO FILE NO 36650.003 This office represents the ownership of the 1072 Bristol Street property --1072 Bristol Street Partners, LP (1072 Bristol). 1072 Bristol objects to the proposed very large Ganahl Lumber Project directly across Bristol. We request that this letter be included in the administrative record for this project. The public has not been provided correct or adequate information about this mega - lumber yard project. In reviewing the Staff Report, the Staff Report omits material and fundamental information. Further, it lacks analysis and support. In many areas, the words that are strung together are bureaucratese. The mega Ganahl simply does not comply with the City's Zoning Code. This Planning Commission is required to apply the Zoning Code even if it receives an inadequate Staff report. The number of years a company has been in business is no 1461587.3 -_73 PALMI ERI, TYLER. WIENER, WILH ELM &WALDRON a Planning Commissioners February 23, 2015 Page 2 justification for non-compliance with a request to build a mega project (as the Staff Report ridiculously seems to suggest). Here, this applicant is seeking to be excused from compliance with nearly all of the requirements of the Zoning Code. The use is not permitted in the zone. The buildings proposed are far too big. There is woefully insufficient parking and the buildings are too close to the street. Staff seems to focus the Ganahl business as a justification for wholesale noncompliance with the City's code. There is no "likeability" exception. The City cannot award a privilege or series of privileges to the applicant. This applicant is requesting that the Planning Commission approve a project that requires the City to essentially disregard the Zoning Code, while there is a pretense of compliance. Based upon the actual requirements of the City's Zoning Code, this is not a close call. The proposed Ganahl mega lumber yard project should be denied. 1. The lumber yard project does not comply with the City's C1 Zonina. Without any analysis, the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for this project and the Staff Report claim that the proposed lumber yard complies with the City's C 1 zoning. It does not even come close. This is a lumber yard. Ganahl Lumber is a lumber company. It is a lumber and building materials dealer. A significant component of the project is a request for a sawmill. A retail use under the zoning code does not include or allow lumber yards or sawmills. The Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration spins the project as a "hybrid" use. There is no "hybrid" use in the Municipal Code. At best, the Ganahl lumber yard mega project is a lumber yard with an ancillary retail use --not the other way around. This is evident by the proposed site configuration and design and the building layout. It is evident by the proposed location and distribution of parking. Retail uses do not provide a significant number of parking spaces behind guard gates or on a roof of a 1461587.3 7.i PALMI ERI. TYLER, WIENER. WILHELM &WALDRON� Planning Commissioners February 23, 2015 Page 3 building. There are less than 50 surface parking spaces that are not behind guard gates for a 65,263 square -foot "retail" building. That is a parking ratio of .75 spaces for every 1,000 square -feet of the "retail" building --a far cry from the City's 4 spaces for every 1,000 square -feet of retail requirement (this ratio is even more egregious when considering the rest of the proposed buildings in the calculation). Further, the Staff Report admits that the City's Municipal Code does not provide a parking requirement for lumber yards. (Staff Report, p. 13.) This proves that this is not retail --this is a lumber yard. A lumber yard is not permitted. 2. The Staff Report does not inform the Planning Commission of the proposed modifications to be made to Bristol that will impact access to the properfies on the south side of Bristol. One of the aspects of Ganahl's mega lumber yard project that is completely absent from the Staff Report (and the conditions of approval) are the proposed changes to be made to Bristol. The Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration provides some information regarding the modifications. Even then, the information provided lacks detail and analysis. From the little information provided, the Ganahl lumber yard project will make significant modifications to Bristol in order to accommodate the two new entrances to the Ganahl property. Instead of taking access from the existing curb -cut at the middle of the property, Ganahl is proposing two new access points on Bristol. To provide access to those two new proposed access points, there will be modifications made to Bristol (changes to the Newport Blvd./Bristol intersection and a dedicated left -turn in to the new driveway at the east end of the property from Bristol). Those modifications will negatively impact access to the properties on the south side of Bristol including the 1072 Bristol property for vehicles travelling west on Bristol. Yet, no information was provided in the Staff Report of these modifications and neither 14615873 _-�5__ PALMIERI. TYLER, WIENER, WILHELM &WALDRON3 Planning Commissioners February 23, 2015 Page 4 the Staff Report or the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration analyze or discuss the impacts to the properties opposite the proposed Ganahl lumber yard site. 3. The proposed building setback variance does not comply with the Zoning Code requirements for a variance. This project requests a very large variance from the building setback requirements in the Zoning Code. The variance is not justified. There are no special circumstances to justify this significant of a variance. Approving a variance here would provide a privilege to Ganahl. The proposed variance is inconsistent with other properties in the area. As such, the Planning Commission cannot make the required findings. The Staff Report attempts to justify the variance from the setback requirements by comparing the proposed project to the 1072 Bristol property and the property located at 1182 Bristol Street claiming that both of these properties have less than the 20 foot landscape requirement. (Staff Report, p. 10.) The comparison fails for a number of reasons. One of the more significant reasons is the amount of building that is being proposed in the setback area. The comparison properties (1072 and It 82) each have less than 50 lineal feet of building in the required setback area. The Ganahl project plans to put nearly 450 lineal feet of building (without any break), a building that is already oversized (proposed with an objectionable height variance), in the required setback area. Allowing a height variance and a setback variance for a building with a use not allowed by the C-1 zoning, spanning nearly four - and -a -half football fields of frontage on Bristol is not comparable to the 1072 and 1182 Bristol properties. 4. The propond hei ht variance does not comply with the Zoninz Code requirements for a variance. The requested variance from the height standards is not justified. There are no special circumstances requiring the variance. Rather, the "special circumstance" cited by the Staff Report is the use that is not permitted by the Zoning Code. 1461587.3 PALM IERLTYLER, WIENER, WILHELM &WALDRON3 Planning Commissioners February 23, 2015 Page 5 Further, the condition of approval that provides that the B -shed, that requires a height variance, can later install "rooftop solar canopies" that will increase the height of the B -Shed even further, through a simple approval from the Development Services Director is also not supported. Approval of the signage that doubles the height allowed by the ZonwR Code provides a privileze to Ganahl. There is no justification for the Planned Sign Program that proposes to approve a 24 -foot high freestanding sign --a 100 percent increase from what is allowably by the City Code. The Staff Report's claim that the approval "will not constitute a grant of special privilege or allow substantially greater overall visibility" is without support. 6. The Staff Report does not explain what the CUP is required for. There is no evidence to support the approval of the proposed CUP. Generally, a Staff Report will clearly state what use requires a CUP. Here, the Staff Report makes no such statement. The use proposed for the CUP is not permitted in the C 1 zone. There is no analysis of the "CUP" sought. There are no real conditions of approval being applied to the use proposed. 7. The parking analysis does not make sense. As discussed above, the parking discussion demonstrates that the proposed use is a lumber yard --not retail. If this was a retail use, the parking requirements would be much greater -4 parking spaces for every 1,000 square -feet of building. Further, the discussion of the number of parking spaces provided on-site is misleading. While the project proposes 286 parking spaces, there is no discussion of the location of those spaces. For example, it appears that nearly 60 spaces are behind gates, 108 of the spaces are on the roof of the building. As a condition of approval, the employees are to exclusively use the roof parking. (Staff Report, p. 13.) Elsewhere the Staff Report discusses that the "proposed facility would employ approximately 120 1461587.3 -7-7 PALM IERI. TYLER. WIENER. WILHELM &WALDRON? Planning Commissioners February 23, 2015 Page 6 employees at full capacity..." (Staff Report, p. 7.) This means that all of the roof parking would be taken by employees with some spilling over to the surface parking spaces. As discussed above, that means that there are really less than 50 parking spaces available for customers for the 99,516 square -feet of building in this project. 8. The Ganahl Proiect does not comply with the FAR requirements of the Zoning Code. The proposed project does not comply with the FAR requirements. In an attempt to claim the project complies, the Staff Report includes a footnote explaining that the FAR calculation does not include the 6,672 square -foot "Pole Shed" because the "Pole Shed" is not an enclosed buildings. The Zoning Code does not provide such an exception to the FAR calculation. 9. The Initial Study/Mitiaated Negative Declaration does not consider the real impacts of the proiect. The Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration is deficient. Its analysis is premised on the application of an incorrect zoning assumption --that the proposed project complies with the C-1 zoning. It does not consider the impacts to access to properties on the south side of Bristol caused by the project's proposed modifications to Bristol. It does not consider the light and glare impacts caused by the numerous reflective surfaces being added. 10. Conclusion. To approve this proposed project would relieve Ganahl lumber of virtually all of the requirements of the Zoning Code that are applied, on a regular basis, to other property owners and users. The Ganahl lumber yard project cannot exist here. It is too big. It is too close to the street. There is no evidence to support the deviation from the Zoning Code. 1461587.3 PALMIERI, TYLER, WIENER, WILHELM &WALDRON I Planning Commissioners February 23, 2015 Page 7 1072 Bristol Partners requests that the Planning Commission not adopt the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration and deny the Ganahl Lumber application. 7 Very truly yours, Michael f]< Leifer MHL:ebn cc: Brenda Green, City Clerk Me] Lee, Senior Planner 1161587 3 -�Q RESOLUTION NO. 15- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF COSTA MESA REVERSING THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S APPROVAL OF PLANNING APPLICATION PA -14-40 FOR THE RELOCATION AND EXPANSION OF GANAHL LUMBER LOCATED AT 1100 BRISTOL STREET THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF COSTA MESA HEREBY RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: WHEREAS, an application was filed Patrick Ganahl, representing the County of Orange, the property owner, requesting approval of the following: Planning Application PA -14-40: The proposed project involves the development of a 6.6 acre vacant lot to accommodate the relocation of the Costa Mesa Ganahl Lumber store to a site owned by the County of Orange and leased to Ganahl Lumber. The existing Costa Mesa Ganahl Lumber store is located on an adjacent property to the east and would be closed once the new store is completed. The development proposal includes the following: • Development Review for the construction of a 65,263 square foot building materials retail store with administrative offices (Main Building A). A total of 286 parking spaces are proposed; 108 parking stalls would be provided on the roof of the retail building; and 178 at -grade parking stalls would be provided throughout the project site; • Variance from front setback requirement for the parking lot, B Shed and Mill Shed along Bristol Street (20 -foot setback required; 10 -foot setback proposed); • Variance from maximum building height for the solar photovoltaic canopy and elevator overrun on Main Building A (30 -foot maximum height allowed; 34 feet to the solar canopy and 41 feet to the top of the elevator proposed); • Variance from maximum building height for the B Shed (30 -foot maximum allowed; 34 feet proposed); • Conditional Use Permit for the proposed outdoor storage yard consisting of three sheds (B Shed, Mill Shed, and Pole Shed) totaling 40,925 square feet; and • Planned Signing Program to allow the proposed 24 -foot high freestanding sign (12 feet allowed, 24 feet proposed). -3o- WHEREAS, on February 23, 2015, a duly noticed public hearing was held before the Planning Commission, which included presentation of the project by staff and the applicant, as well as information related to the environmental impact analysis of the project by the City's consultant. In addition, public comments were received by the Planning Commission; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, based on the evidence and testimony presented during the hearing, voted to approve the project by a 5-0 vote; and WHEREAS, on February 27, 2015, an appeal of the decision of the Planning Commission's approval was filed; and WHEREAS, a duly noticed public hearing was held by the City Council on March 17, 2015 with all persons having the opportunity to speak for and against the proposal. NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF COSTA MESA FINDS AND RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: BE IT RESOLVED, therefore, that based on the evidence in the record and the findings contained in this resolution, the City Council hereby reverses the approval of the Planning Commission and DENIES PA -14-40 with respect to the property described above. The City Clerk shall attest to the adoption of this resolution and shall forward a copy to the applicant, and any person requesting the same. PASSED AND ADOPTED on this 17TH day of March, 2015. STEPHEN M. MENSINGER Mayor, City of Costa Mesa ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM: CITY CLERK OF THE CITY ATTORNEY CITY OF COSTA MESA STATE OF CALIFORNIA) )ss COUNTY OF ORANGE ) I, BRENDA GREEN, City Clerk and ex -officio Clerk of the City Council of the City of Costa Mesa, hereby certify that the above Council Resolution Number 15 as considered at a regular meeting of said City Council held on the 17th day of March, 2015, and thereafter passed and adopted as a whole at the regular meeting of said City Council held on the 17th day of March, 2015, by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereby set my hand and affixed the Seal of the City of Costa Mesa this day of , 2015 EXHIBIT A FINDINGS (DENIA A. The requested variances do not comply with Costa Mesa Municipal Code Section 13-29(g)(1) in that: Findings: • Because of special circumstances applicable to the property, the strict application of development standards does not deprive the property of privileges enjoyed by others in the vicinity. • The deviations constitute a grant of special privileges inconsistent with other properties in the vicinity. • The granting of the deviations will allow a use, density, or intensity which is not in accordance with the general plan designation for the property. B. The requested conditional use permit does not comply with Costa Mesa Municipal Code Section 13-29(g)(2) because: Finding: The proposed development is not compatible with developments in the same general area and would be materially detrimental to other properties within the area. Finding: Granting the conditional use permit will be materially detrimental to the health, safety and general welfare of the public or otherwise injurious to property or improvements within the immediate neighborhood. Finding: Granting the conditional use permit will t allow a use, density or intensity which is not in accordance with the general plan designation for the property. C. The information presented does not comply with Costa Mesa Municipal Code Section 13-29(g)(8) in that: Finding: The proposed signing is not consistent with the intent of Title 13, Chapter VIII (Signs) and the General Plan. Finding: The proposed signs are not consistent with each other in design and construction — taking into account sign style and shape, materials, letter style, colors and illumination. Finding: The proposed signs are not compatible with the buildings and developments they identify — taking into account materials, colors and design motif. Finding: Approval does constitutes a grant of special privilege or allow substantially greater overall visibility than the standard ordinance provisions allow. D. The Costa Mesa City Council has denied Planning Application PA -14-40. —'S3— Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21080(b) (5) and CEQA Guidelines Section 15270(a) CEQA does not apply to this project because it has been rejected and will not be carried out. E. The project is exempt from Chapter IX, Article 11, Transportation System Management, of Title 13 of the Costa Mesa Municipal Code. 63Q ATTACHMENT 3 APPEAL REGENEU CITY CLERK 15 FEB 27 PSI 2: 46 Costa Mesa City of Costa Mesa ❑ Appeal of Planning Commission Declsion/Rehearing: $1,220.00 CITY, F� Cu TA -ES I� Y ❑ APP KATION FOR APPEAL, R Applicant Name* Joseph E. Miller / 1072 Bristol Partners, LP Address 1072 Bristol Street, Suite 100, Costa M CA 92620 Appeal of Zoning Administrator/ Building Official / Fire Marshal / Staff Decision: $690.00 LING, OR REVIEW I son Nt, IIPr Phone 714-935-2315 Representing 1072 Bristol._ Partners. LP REQUEST FOR: ❑ REHEARING X APPEAL ❑ REVIEW*" Decision of which appeal, rehearing, or review is requested: (give application number, if applicable, and the date of the decision, if known.) Approval of Ganahl Lumber Project and Mitigated Negative Declaration - PA -14-40; decided by the Planning Commission on 2/23/2015. Decision by: Planning Commission Reasons for requesting appeal, rehearing, or review: The Planning Commission's approval of the Ganahl Lumber Project was a prejudicial abuse of discretion because, among other things, • Ganahl Lumber's proposed lumber yard use is not permitted or conditionally permitted in the C-1 zone. • The Ganahl Lumber project proposes modifications to Bristol Street that will negatively impact access to and from the properties on the south side of Bristol. • There were no facts to support the "findings" to approve the Conditional Use Permit, • The "findings" supporting the variances (for setback and height) were not supported by substantial evidence. • The approval of signage that doubles the height allowed by the Zoning Code was not supported by substantial evidence. • The project is under -parked and does not comply with the parking requirements provided in the City's Municipal Code. • The project does not comply with the FAR requirements provided in the City's Municipal Code. • The conditions of approval are vague. • The Planning Commission improperly approved the mitigated negative declaration when the environmental document failed to consider, among other things, the access impacts to the properties on the south side of Bristol caused by the proposed modifications to the center median on Bristol. 1072 Bristol's objection letter submitted to the Planning Commission is also attached. This application in no way limits the ;rounds or evidence on which this appeal is being made. NM lnvc-;tmen'tS (—LC,) 4t 5,P n1 A - M Date: Febmary 26, 2015 Signature: 'If you are serving as the agent for another person, please identify the person you represent and provide proof of authorization. "Review may be requested only by Planning Commission, Planning Commission Member, City Council, or City Council Member For office use only — do not write below this line SCHEDULED FOR THE CITY COUNCIL/PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF: If appeal, rehearing, or review is for a person or body other than City Council/Planning Commission, date of hearing of appeal, rehearing, or review: Updated July 2011 __ \J 15 ANGELO J. PALMIERI ( 1 92 811 9 911) ROBERT F. WALDRON (1921-1990) MICHAEL J. GREENE- DENNIS W. GRAN' DAVID 0. PARR - CHARLES H KANTER- PATRICK A HENNESSEY DON F18HER GREGORY WLILFR WARREN A. WILLIAMS JOHN R. LISTER MICHAEL N LEIFER SCOTT R, CARPENTER RICHARD A. SALUS NORMAN J. RODICH RONALD M COLE MICHAEL D'ANGELO STEPHEN A SCHECK DONNA L. SNOW PALMIERE, TYLER, WELNER, WILHELM &WALDRONI RYAN M EASTER ELISE M KERN MELISA R. PEREZ MICHAEL I. KEHOE CHADWICK C. BUNCH AN18H J. BANKER RYAN M. PRAGER ERIN BALSARA NADERI ERICA M. 8OR08KY JERAD BELTZ CANDICE L LEE MICHAEL P. BURNS JOSHUA J. MARX ERIN K. OYAMA STEVEN R. GUESS KATHERINE M. HARRISON BRIAN GLICKLIN ALAN H. WIENER•, OF COUNSEL ROBERT C. IHRKE, OF COUNSEL MICHAEL C CHO, OF COUNSEL JAMES E WILHELM RETIRED DENNIS G. TYLER RETIRED 'A PROFEMONAk C'JNPONATIUN VIA E-MAIL Planning Commissioners City of Costa Mesa 77 Fair Drive Costa Mesa, CA 92628 2603 MAIN STREET EAST TOWER — SUITE 1 300 IRVINE, CALIFORNIA 92614-4281 P O. BOX 19712 (949)651-9400 IRVINE, CA 92623 9712 WWW. fitWWW,COl11 WRITER'S DIRECT DIAL NUMBER (949) 451.7294 2015 WRITER'S DIRECTFebrua'J23f FACSIMILE NUMBER (949)825.5412 FIRM'S DIRECT FACSIMILE NUMBERS (949)851-1554 (949)757.1225 mleifer@plwww,com REFER TO FILE NO 36650003 Re: Objection to the Proposed Ganahl Lumber Project Dear Honorable Members of the Costa Mesa Planning Commission: This office represents the ownership of the 1072 Bristol Street property --1072 Bristol Street Partners, LP (1072 Bristol). 1072 Bristol objects to the proposed very large Ganahl Lumber Project directly across Bristol. We request that this letter be included in the administrative record for this project. The public has not been provided correct or adequate information about this mega - lumber yard project. In reviewing the Staff Report, the Staff Report omits material and fundamental information. Further, it lacks analysis and support. In many areas, the words that are strung together are bureaucratese. The mega Ganahl simply does not comply with the City's Zoning Code. This Planning Commission is required to apply the Zoning Code even if it receives an inadequate Staff report. The number of years a company has been in business is no 1461587.3 (0 . PALM IERI, TYLER, WIENER, WILHELM &WALDRON Planning Commissioners February 23, 2015 Page 2 justification for non-compliance with a request to build a mega project (as the Staff Report ridiculously seems to suggest), Here, this applicant is seeking to be excused from compliance with nearly all of the requirements of the Zoning Code, The use is not permitted in the zone. The buildings proposed are far too big. There is woefully insufficient parking and the buildings are too close to the street. Staff seems to focus the Ganahl business as a justification for wholesale noncompliance with the City's code. There is no "likeability" exception. The City cannot award a privilege or series of privileges to the applicant. This applicant is requesting that the Planning Commission approve a project that requires the City to essentially disregard the Zoning Code, while there is a pretense of compliance. Based upon the actual requirements of the City's Zoning Code, this is not a close call. The proposed Ganahl mega lumber yard project should be denied. 1. The lumber vard project does not comply with the City's C1 Zoning. Without any analysis, the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for this project and the Staff Report claim that the proposed lumber yard complies with the City's C 1 zoning. It does not even come close. This is a lumber yard. Ganahl Lumber is a lumber company. It is a lumber and building materials dealer. A significant component of the project is a request for a sawmill. A retail use under the zoning code does not include or allow lumber yards or sawmills. The Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration spins the project as a "hybrid" use. There is no "hybrid" use in the Municipal Code. At best, the Ganahl lumber yard mega project is a lumber yard with an ancillary retail use --not the other way around. This is evident by the proposed site configuration and design and the building layout. It is evident by the proposed location and distribution of parking. Retail uses do not provide a significant number of parking spaces behind guard gates or on a roof of a 1461587.3 _ kn� PALM IERI, TYLER, WIENER, WILHELM &WALDRON3 Planning Commissioners February 23, 2015 Page 3 building. There are less than 50 surface parking spaces that are not behind guard gates for a 65,263 square -foot "retail" building. That is a parking ratio of .75 spaces for every 1,000 square -feet of the "retail" building --a far cry from the City's 4 spaces for every 1,000 square -feet of retail requirement (this ratio is even more egregious when considering the rest of the proposed buildings in the calculation). Further, the Staff Report admits that the City's Municipal Code does not provide a parking requirement for lumber yards. (Staff Report, p. 13-) This proves that this is not retail --this is a lumber yard. A lumber yard is not permitted. 2. The Staff Report does not inform the Planning Commission of the propLsed modifications to be made to Bristol that will im act access to the prODerties on the south side of Bristol. One of the aspects of Ganahl's mega lumber yard project that is completely absent from the Staff Report (and the conditions of approval) are the proposed changes to be made to Bristol. The Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration provides some information regarding the modifications. Even then, the information provided lacks detail and analysis. From the little information provided, the Ganahl lumber yard project will make significant modifications to Bristol in order to accommodate the two new entrances to the Ganahl property. Instead of taking access from the existing curb -cut at the middle of the property, Ganahl is proposing two new access points on Bristol. To provide access to those two new proposed access points, there will be modifications made to Bristol (changes to the Newport Blvd./Bristol intersection and a dedicated left -turn in to the new driveway at the east end of the property from Bristol), Those modifications will negatively impact access to the properties on the south side of Bristol including the 1072 Bristol property for vehicles travelling west on Bristol. Yet, no information was provided in the Staff Report of these modifications and neither 1461587.3 PALMIERI, TYLER, WIENER, WILHELM &WALDRON� Planning Commissioners February 23, 2015 Page 4 the Staff Report or the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration analyze or discuss the impacts to the properties opposite the proposed Ganahl lumber yard site, 3. The vrovosed building setback variance does not comply -with the Zoning Code requirements for a variance. This project requests a very large variance from the building setback requirements in the Zoning Code. The variance is not justified. There are no special circumstances to justify this significant of a variance. Approving a variance here would provide a privilege to Ganahl. The proposed variance is inconsistent with other properties in the area. As such, the Planning Commission cannot make the required findings. The Staff Report attempts to justify the variance from the setback requirements by comparing the proposed project to the 1072 Bristol property and the property located at 1182 Bristol Street claiming that both of these properties have less than the 20 foot landscape requirement. (Staff Report, p. 10.) The comparison fails for a number of reasons. One of the more significant reasons is the amount of building that is being proposed in the setback area. The comparison properties (1072 and 1182) each have less than 50 lineal feet of building in the required setback area. The Ganahl project plans to put nearly 450 lineal feet of building (without any break), a building that is already oversized (proposed with an objectionable height variance), in the required setback area. Allowing a height variance and a setback variance for a building with a use not allowed by the C-1 zoning, spanning nearly four - and -a -half football fields of frontage on Bristol is not comparable to the 1072 and 1182 Bristol properties. 4. The proposed height variance does not comply with the Zoning Code requirements for a variance. The requested variance from the height standards is not justified. There are no special circumstances requiring the variance. Rather, the "special circumstance" cited by the Staff Report is the use that is not permitted by the Zoning Code. 1461587.3 C" - PALMI ERI, TYLER, WIENER, WILHELM &WALDRON3 Planning Commissioners February 23, 2015 Page 5 Further, the condition of approval that provides that the B -shed, that requires a height variance, can later install "rooftop solar canopies" that will increase the height of the B -Shed even further, through a simple approval from the Development Services Director is also not supported. 5. Approval of the signage that doubles the height allowed by the Zoning Code provides a privilege to Ganahl. There is no justification for the Planned Sign Program that proposes to approve a 24 -foot high freestanding sign --a 100 percent increase from what is allowably by the City Code. The Staff Report's claim that the approval "will not constitute a grant of special privilege or allow substantially greater overall visibility" is without support. 6. The Staff Report does not explain what the CUP is required, for There is no evidence to support the approval of the proposed CUP. Generally, a Staff Report will clearly state what use requires a CUP. Here, the Staff Report makes no such statement. The use proposed for the CUP is not permitted in the C1 zone. There is no analysis of the "CUP" sought. There are no real conditions of approval being applied to the use proposed. 7. The parking analysis does not make sense. As discussed above, the parking discussion demonstrates that the proposed use is a lumber yard --not retail. If this was a retail use, the parking requirements would be much greater -4 parking spaces for every 1,000 square -feet of building. Further, the discussion of the number of parking spaces provided on-site is misleading. While the project proposes 286 parking spaces, there is no discussion of the location of those spaces. For example, it appears that nearly 60 spaces are behind gates. 108 of the spaces are on the roof of the building. As a condition of approval, the employees are to exclusively use the roof parking. (Staff Report, p. 13.) Elsewhere the Staff Report discusses that the "proposed facility would employ approximately 120 1461587.3 _qO _ PALMIERI.TYLER, WIENER, WILHELM &WALDRON� Planning Commissioners February 23, 2015 Page 6 employees at full capacity..." (Staff Report, p. 7.) This means that all of the roof parking would be taken by employees with some spilling over to the surface parking spaces. As discussed above, that means that there are really less than 50 parking spaces available for customers for the 99,516 square -feet of building in this project. 8. The Ganahl Proiect does not comply, with the FAR requirements of the Zoning Code. The proposed project does not comply with the FAR requirements. In an attempt to claim the project complies, the Staff Report includes a footnote explaining that the FAR calculation does not include the 6,672 square -foot "Pole Shed" because the "Pole Shed" is not an enclosed buildings. The Zoning Code does not provide such an exception to the FAR calculation. 9. The Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration does not consider the real impacts of the proiect. The Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration is deficient. Its analysis is premised on the application of an incorrect zoning assumption --that the proposed project complies with the C-1 zoning. It does not consider the impacts to access to properties on the south side of Bristol caused by the project's proposed modifications to Bristol. It does not consider the light and glare impacts caused by the numerous reflective surfaces being added. 10. Conclusion. To approve this proposed project would relieve Ganahl lumber of virtually all of the requirements of the Zoning Code that are applied, on a regular basis, to other property owners and users. The Ganahl lumber yard project cannot exist here. It is too big. It is too close to the street. There is no evidence to support the deviation from the Zoning Code. 1461587.3 _q I PALMIERI, TYLER, WIENER, WILHELM &WALDRON � Planning Commissioners February 23, 2015 Page 7 1072 Bristol Partners requests that the Planning Commission not adopt the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration and deny the GGaanahl Lumber application. ,f. Very troryours, MHL:ebn Michael 1-1,, Leifer cc: Brenda Green, City Clerk Mel Lee, Senior Planner 1461587.3 ATTACHMENT 4 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTE EXCERPTS _q3- UNOFFICIAL UNTIL APPROVED MINUTE EXCERPTS FROM THE FEBRUARY 23, 2015 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING REGARDING GANAHL LUMBER (Public Hearing No. 2 – PA -14-40) 2. Application No.: PA -14-40: Ganahl Lumber Hardware Store and Outdoor Storage Yard at a Site Owned by the County of Orange at 1100 South Bristol Street Applicant: Patrick Ganahl Site Address: 1100 Bristol Street Zone: C1 Project Planner: Mel Lee Environmental Determination: Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Description; 1. Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND): The environmental document was completed in accordance with the Lead Agency's Guidelines implementing the California Environmental Quality Act and has been made available for public review from January 23, 2015, to February 22, 2015. The Initial Study/MND found that the environmental effects from the project would be less than significant with the incorporation of standard conditions and mitigation measures. This document analyzes the environmental impacts of the project and describes mitigation measures and conditions of approval to minimize impacts to below a level of significance. 2. Planning Application PA -14-40: • Development Review for the construction of a 65,263 square foot building materials retail store with administrative offices (Main Building A). A total of 286 parking spaces are proposed; 108 parking stalls would be provided on the roof of the retail building; and 178 at -grade parking stalls would be provided throughout the project site; • Variance from front setback requirement for the parking lot, B Shed and Mill Shed along Bristol Street (20 -foot setback required; 10 -foot setback proposed); • Variance from maximum building height for the solar photovoltaic canopy and elevator overrun on Main Building A (30 -foot maximum height allowed; 34 feet to the solar canopy and 41 feet to the top of the elevator proposed); • Variance from maximum building height for the B Shed (30 -foot maximum allowed; 34 feet proposed); • Conditional Use Permit for the proposed outdoor storage yard consisting of three sheds (B Shed, Mill Shed, and Pole Shed) totaling 40,925 square feet; and • Planned Signing Program to allow the proposed 24 -foot high freestanding sign (12 feet allowed, 24 feet proposed). — ci l Mel Lee, Senior Planner, presented the staff report that consisted of two components 1) proposed adoption of California Environmental Quality Act Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration and 2) approval of Planning Application PA -14-40 that included development review for the overall project and several code deviations. Mr. Lee advised the Supplemental Memo contained additional Conditions of Approval by staff. Two pieces of correspondence opposing the project were received. Mr. Lee responded to questions from the Commission. Ryan Bensley from LSA Associates provided explanations for the issues addressed on the February 23, 2015 correspondence from Palmieri, Tyler, Wiener, Wilhelm & Waldron. PUBLIC COMMENTS The Ganahl Team gave a presentation regarding the history of the Ganahl business, the proposed project and addressed LED lighting, traffic impacts, noise mitigation measures, solar panels, height issues and B Shed materials. Members of the Ganahl Team who spoke were Peter Ganahl, CEO of Ganahl Lumber; Bob Carpenter, Project Architect with Onyx Architects; Peter Naghavi, Infocus Consultants and Mike Schumacher, General Manager. Jay Humphrey, Costa Mesa resident, liked the proposed project but expressed concern with the Commission setting precedence. Beth Refakes, Costa Mesa resident, spoke about the pros and cons of the project. Joe Miller, representing the owners of 1072 Bristol, was opposed to the proposed project due to its character, large scale and incompatible use (industrial for the lumber yard). Erin Naderi from the law firm Palmieri Tyler, representing the owners of 1072 Bristol Street, did not have the chance to review the additional Conditions of Approval in the Supplemental Memo because they were not provided with a copy. Ms. Naderi respectfully disagreed with the responses staff provided to their objection letter. She urged the Commission not to adopt the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration and deny the project. MOTION: Approve Planning Application PA -14-40 and Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration by adoption of the Planning Commission resolution, based on the evidence in the record and the Findings set forth in Exhibit A, subject to the Conditions of Approval in Exhibit B with the following added Conditions of Approval: 27. Design and construct the improvements required for providing a signalized access to the project site at the intersection of Bristol Street and Newport Boulevard Northbound. The applicant will be responsible for procuring all applicable permits and approvals from Caltrans and City of Costa Mesa prior to beginning of construction. 28. Trees within the 10 -foot landscape setback along the Bristol Street frontage shall complement the tabebuia avellanedae street trees required to be planted within the public right-of-way per Code Requirement number 34. The applicant shall contact the City Arborist for preferred tree types and additional information. 29. Prior to issuance of a building permit, applicant shall remit documentation verifying the approval of: (a) Required encroachment permit from the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) and (b) Ground lease from the Orange County Flood Control District. The Development Services Director may modify/extend the timing of the required submissions as necessary. 30. The applicant shall submit a transition management plan to the satisfaction of the Development Services Director that provides a cohesive plan for the closures of the existing operation and opening of the project prior to the issuance of certificate of occupancy. 31. The applicant shall provide enhanced building treatment and materials on the B Shed and Mill Shed elevations facing Bristol Street, subject to review and approval by the Development Services Director. Moved by Commissioner McCarthy, Chair Dickson. RESOLUTION NO. 15-11 — A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF COSTA MESA ADOPTING THE INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION PA - 14 -40 FOR THE RELOCATION AND EXPANSION OF GANAHL LUMBER LOCATED AT 1100 BRISTOL STREET The motion carried by the following roll call vote: Ayes: Dickson, Mathews, McCarthy, Sesler, Andranian Noes: None Absent: None Abstained: None Chair Dickson explained the appeal process. _q(^— ATTACHMENT 5 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT (IS/MND UNDER SEPARATE COVER) __ q i] PLANNING COMM/SS/ON AGENDA REPORT MEETING DATE: FEBRUARY 23, 2015 ITEM NUMBER: SUBJECT: PLANNING APPLICATION PA -14-40 FOR THE GANAHL LUMBER HARDWARE STORE AND OUTDOOR STORAGE YARD AT 1100 BRISTOL STREET DATE: FEBRUARY 12, 2015 FROM: PLANNING DIVISION/DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT PRESENTATION BY: MEL LEE, SENIOR PLANNER FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: MEL LEE, AICP (714) 754-5611 mel.lee@costamesaca.gov DESCRIPTION The proposed project involves the following: Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (!S/MND): This document analyzes the environmental impacts of the project and describes mitigation measures and conditions of approval to minimize impacts to below a level of significance. 2. Planning Application PA -14-40: • Development Review for the construction of a 65,263 square foot building materials retail store with administrative offices (Main Building A). A total of 286 parking spaces are proposed; 108 parking stalls would be provided on the roof of the retail building; and 178 at -grade parking stalls would be provided throughout the project site; • Variance from front setback requirement for the parking lot, B Shed and Mill Shed along Bristol Street (20 -foot setback required; 10 -foot setback proposed); • Variance from maximum building height for the solar photovoltaic canopy and elevator overrun on Main Building A (30 -foot maximum height allowed; 34 feet to the solar canopy and 41 feet to the top of the elevator proposed); • Variance from maximum building height for the B Shed (30 -foot maximum allowed; 34 feet proposed); • Conditional Use Permit for the proposed outdoor storage yard consisting of three sheds (B Shed, Mill Shed, and Pole Shed) totaling 40,925 square feet; and • Planned Signing Program to allow the proposed 24 -foot high freestanding sign (12 feet allowed, 24 feet proposed). APPLICANT The applicant is Patrick Ganahl of The Ganahl Lumber Company, representing the County of Orange, the property owner. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt a resolution to: 1. Adopt the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) for the project; 2. Approve the project, subject to conditions of approval and mitigation measures. PLANNING APPLICATION SUMMARY Location: 1100 Bristol Street Application: PA -14-40 Request: Ganahl Lumber Hardware Store and Outdoor Storage Yard SUBJECT PROPERTY: SURROUNDING PROPERTY: Zone: C1 North: SR -55 and SR -73 Freeways General Plan: General Commercial South: C2, Commercial Use (Existing Ganahl Lumber) Lot Dimensions: Irregular East: 73 Freeway Lot Area: 6.6 Acres (287,696 SF) West: (Acr Bristol) C1, Commercial Uses Existing Development: Vacant FAR (Floor Area Ratio) DEVELOPMENT STANDARD COMPARISON Development Standard Required/Allowed Proposed/Provided Lot Size: Lot Width 120 FT 1,127 FT Lot Area 12,000 SF 6.6 Acres 287,696 SF FAR (Floor Area Ratio) .35 (100,694 SF) 65,263 SF (Bldg. A & Mezz.) 30,262 SF (B Shed) 3,991 SF (Mill Shed) 99,516 SF (.346 FAR Total)1 No. of Stories/Building Height 2 Stories/30 FT Main Bldg. A & Mezz: 2 1 Story+Mezz./34 FT (To Solar Roof Canopy)/41 FT (To Top of Elevator) B Shed: 1 Story /34 FT Pole Shed: 1 Story/20 FT Interior Landscaping 4,450 SF 4,478 SF Setbacks Front (Bristol St.) 20 FT 10 FT2 Side (left/right 15 FT/ 0 FT 40 FT/0 FT Rear 0 FT 0 FT Parkin 2.87 spaces per 1,000 SF Standard 279 279 Handicap 7 7 TOTAL 286 Spaces 286 Spaces 4 Si na a SF 1,329 SF 982 SF Freestanding Sign Height 12 FT 24 FT 3 NA = Not Applicable or No Requirement _ (1) .35 FAR Allowed per 2000 Costa Mesa General Plan Policy LUA EA(a). (2) Variance requested for building height and front setback (see staff report discussion). (3) Planned sign program requested (see staff report discussion). 4) Parking rate based on parkin study by LLG for other Ganahl Lumber stores. CEQA Status Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Final Action Planning Commission -100 BACKGROUND Project Site/Environs The project site is located on the east side of Bristol Street, south of the juncture of State Route 55 (SR -55) and State Route 73 (SR -73). The 6.6 -acre project site is currently vacant, and does not have any existing structures. The site contains a block wall along the Bristol Street frontage, asphalt -paved entrance area, and associated landscaping. The majority of the project site lot is unpaved and is covered with gravel. The Santa Ana Delhi Channel runs underground beneath the central and eastern portion of the project site. Most of the project site is owned by the Orange County Flood Control District (OCFCD), and would be leased by Ganahl Lumber Company. The site includes three parcels owned by the OCFCD and two parcels owned by the State of California Department of Transportation (Caltrans). The site is zoned C1 (Local Business District) and has a General Plan Land Use Designation of General Commercial. Surrounding land uses include: the SR -73 and SR -55 interchange and a Caltrans maintenance facility to the north and west; the existing Ganahl Lumber Costa Mesa store to the east; commercial uses (offices) and residential land uses (along the Masters Circle) to the south. The existing Ganahl Lumber facility in Costa Mesa was originally part of Barr Lumber, purchased in 1998. It is located immediately to the east of and adjacent to the project site at 1275 Bristol Street. It has a total of 55,540 square feet of building/shed area. ANALYSIS Project Description Ganahl Lumber is a family and employee -owned company that has been in business for over 100 years. Ganahl Lumber is proposing to relocate its Costa Mesa facility due to market demand for their business, size constraints, and energy and maintenance requirements of the current facility. Relocating the store would allow Ganahl Lumber to execute a lease that would allow them to do business adjacent to their existing Costa Mesa location for the next 63 years, and result in the construction of a larger store and storage areas that would support a greater inventory and product mix, be more energy efficient, and require less maintenance. Additionally, the new hardware store would provide an opportunity to expand the home design showroom space. The project includes the construction and operation of a new lumberyard and building materials retail store for the Ganahl Lumber Company. The existing Costa Mesa Ganahl Lumber store is located on an adjacent property to the east and would be closed once the new store is completed. Iol Summary of Building Sq. Ft. for Proposed Building Building A: Main Store Sales Doors and Windows Sales Offices/Counters Mezzanine Control Room Will -Call Storage (storage/operations offices B Shed (Storage): Mill Shed (Mill Operation): Pole Shed (Storage): TOTAL BUILDINGS AND Gross Square Feet 65,263 SF 30,262 SF 3,991 SF 6,6721 SF ENCLOSED SHEDS: 99,516 SF (excludes unenclosed Pole Shed) 'Because it is not an enclosed building, the square footage of the pole shed is not included in the total square footage for purposes of calculating the allowable Floor Area Ratio (FAR) or required parking for the site. Source: Ganahl Project IS/MND The proposed use(s) of Building A and the sheds are described below. Ganahl Hardware Store (Building A) Building A would house two principal functions: retail sales and large volume distribution operations. This building would include a complete hardware store, a doors and windows showroom and sales department, hardwood and molding display areas, as well as sales and customer service areas. The structure would be 65,263 square feet in size and would also include a control room, mezzanine, rooftop parking, as well as structural support for a solar photovoltaic (PV) system overhead of the parking surface. The rooftop parking would be accessed via a ramp located on the north side of the building. The sales area would feature large amounts of glass. Building A would be 23 feet, 9 inches in height, with the roof canopy and solar panels extending an additional 10 feet above the height of the building (34 feet total). The elevator and stairwell towers providing access to the roof top parking deck above Building A would be 40 feet, 5 inches in height. Height variance is requested, which is discussed later in this report. Retail business hours would be 6:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., Monday through Friday; 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. on Saturdays; and 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. on Sundays. In addition, some staff would arrive a half hour to an hour prior to opening to prepare the store for customers. A night shift would be scheduled to work in Building A until 11:00 p.m. and may work longer as needed depending on work load. After-hours activities would include replenishment, cleaning, and order pulling for the next day. The service and building materials stock areas (sheds) would be located at the back of the site. This area would be designed to be functional and attractive, yet would be screened from public view by a new fencing system. The sheds are described below. -,102- B Shed The 30,262 square foot B Shed would be used to store lumber and wood products and includes a small area for custom cutting and bundling. This shed would not be permanently staffed. Employees and customers would come and go as stored product is sold or replenished in the regular sales cycle. Products located in this building would include building materials, drywall, panels, and lumber. The B Shed would include a rooftop solar panel system and would be 34 feet, 1 inch in height. Mill Shed The Mill Shed would encompass a 3,991 square foot area for lumber milling of wood products. The mill would typically have three to four employees working from 7:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m., Monday through Friday. The mill operation consists of cutting and sizing wood products to meet customer needs. There would be no wood finishing or painting activities in this facility. The Mill Shed would include a sawdust collection system that would comply with South Coast Air Quality Management District regulations, which requires woodworking facilities to completely vent their sawdust emissions to ensure that there are no visible emissions. Pole Shed The pole shed is 6,672 square feet in size and is not an enclosed building. The pole shed on the north perimeter of the project site would be used for outdoor storage of back stock of products in the yard as well as products designated for the B Shed. Those products consist of lumber, plywood, and other panel products. Outgoing loads for deliveries would also be stored in this shed. At the current Ganahl outdoor storage yard, extensive tarping of outdoor storage materials to protect the lumber products from weather and particulate matter (dust, soot, exhaust particulates from motor vehicles, etc.) due to the proximity to the freeway has been an ongoing activity. The pole shed would allow better containment and protection of these building materials. A diesel fueling station for use by Ganahl Lumber trucks and yard vehicles would be located at the west end of the pole shed. During operations, the diesel fueling station would be enclosed within integrated containment vessels, and would be required to be operated in compliance with all applicable State and federal regulations governing the handling of diesel fuels. In addition, the diesel fueling station would meet all best management practice (BMPs) and City code requirements, including a roof shed above the fueling area. The existing Ganahl Lumber facility has a similar fueling station on the existing site located directly above the Delhi Channel. The fuel area would be built to comply with all cover and containment requirements. A trash bin enclosure used for the disposal of trash created by the facility would also be located on the west end. Open Yard Area — Delivery & Receiving of Contractors The open yard area would support seven to ten trucks for deliveries to customers. The on-site fleet would consist of 10 wheel, bobtail, and box trucks. Customer deliveries per day would typically number from 20 to 40 stops compared to 20 to 35 at the existing facility. Receiving will typically handle 20 to 30 incoming vendor trucks supplying material -1013.- for replenishment of inventory. All receiving would take place during regular business hours. All Ganahl Lumber trucks and vendor deliveries coming into the facility would enter at a non -customer approach located at the east end of the project site. All Ganahl Lumber and vendor trucks would exit at the proposed signalized exit at the west end of the project site. Approximately 15 to 20 material handling vehicles would be used to stack, load, and unload product at the yard. Storage in the yard would consist of lumber and building materials located in covered racking and storage sheds as described above. The racking would vary to match the products stored. Pallet racks, cantilever racks, and custom racks for storing doors and windows would be incorporated in the layout of the yard. Customer traffic into the yard area would enter and exit through a controlled and guarded point located in front of Building A. This gate guard building would be staffed during all business hours and would have closed and secured gates when the business is closed to customers. Employees The employee count at the new facility is expected to start at 90 to 100 people compared to the current facility count of 80 people. The proposed facility would employ approximately 120 employees at full capacity, dependent on economic conditions and the construction market. Typically 80 percent of the employees would work in Building A. The balance of employees would move around the site to fill customer orders and prepare orders for delivery. On -Site Parking and Circulation The project would provide a total of 286 on-site parking spaces: 108 on the roof of Building A and the remainder at grade (including handicap accessible stalls and walkways) available to employees and customers. Building A would include a covered roof deck for additional parking with a solar panel system. The covered roof deck would provide natural ventilation and shade the building to provide cost savings in energy use. A ramp on the north side of Building A would provide access to the roof deck. A Traffic Impact Study was completed for the project by Linscott, Law, & Greenspan, Engineers (LL&G) based on an evaluation of the trip generation studies conducted at the existing Ganahl Lumber facility located at 1275 Bristol Street. As indicated in the traffic impact study, traffic counts were collected at the two existing driveways that provide access to the existing site on Tuesday, February 11, 2014, Wednesday, February 12, 2014 and Thursday, February 13, 2014. From the results of the trip generation studies, LL&G calculated the required parking for the project as noted above by comparing inbound vehicles vs. outbound vehicles at the two driveways that now serve the site. Access to the site would be provided by two driveways on Bristol Street. To minimize turning conflicts on the existing two-way left -turn median lane on Bristol Street along the Project frontage, primary access is proposed via a full access signalized driveway along Bristol Street to be constructed opposite northbound Newport Boulevard (Driveway No. 1), with secondary access to be provided via a proposed unsignalized driveway on Bristol Street that is located at the eastern edge of the project site (Driveway No. 2). The locations of the Proposed Project's two driveways are shown in Figure 2.3. Driveway No. 1, which requires utilization of a Caltrans easement, would provide access to customer, employee, and contractor -related traffic, while Driveway No. 2 is proposed as a "truck - only entry" driveway (no exit) for truck -related traffic; trucks would exit the site at Driveway No. 1. Building Architecture The proposed architecture is a contemporary design consisting of a glass storefront for the main building, and corrugated metal material for the sheds. The elevation of the B Shed facing towards Bristol Street will be enhanced to provide an attractive appearance from the street, which will also be landscaped. Site Signage Site signage consists on wall signs on the Main Building A and the B Shed, as well as the proposed freestanding sign. The total signage for the site is 982 square feet, which does not exceed the 1,329 square feet allowed by the City's Sign Code; however, a Planned Sign Program is required for the height of the proposed freestanding sign (12 feet allowed; 24 feet proposed). Typically, Planned Sign Programs are reviewed by the City Zoning Administrator; in this case, Code allows concurrent processing of discretionary applications to streamline the planning process. Thus, the proposed signage is being forwarded to the Planning Commission as part of PA -14-40 for the Commission's consideration. GENERAL PLAN AND ZONING CODE CONFORMANCE The proposed project involves a Master Plan for a mixed-use development which is considered a conditional use. Pursuant to an approved Master Plan, the proposed project would be in conformance with the following planning documents: • General Plan • Zoning Code Conformance with the City of Costa Mesa General Plan Future development of all land within the City of Costa Mesa is guided by the General Plan adopted in 2002. The Land Use Element of the General Plan directs long-range development in the City by indicating the location and extent of development to be allowed. The General Plan sets forth land use goals, policies, and objectives that guide new development. The General Plan land use designation for the project area is General Commercial. The following analysis evaluates the proposed project's consistency with specific goals, and objectives of the General Plan, Land Use Element. o Goal LU -1: Land Use: It is the goal of the City of Costa Mesa to provide its citizens with a balanced community of residential, commercial, industrial, recreational, and institutional uses to satisfy the needs of the social and economic segments of the population and to retain the residential character of the City, to meet the competing demands for alternative developments within each land use O ty— classification within reasonable land use intensity limits; and to ensure the long term viability and productivity of the community's natural and man-made environments. Consistency: The infill nature of the proposed commercial project protects the balance of land uses satisfying the needs of the community as it pertains to commercial retail uses. The project will ensure the long-term viability of the natural and man-made environment and decreases the need for significant infrastructure improvements. The project is consistent with this General Plan goal. o Objective LU -1A.3: Locate high-intensity developments or high traffic generating uses away from low-density residential in order to buffer the more sensitive land uses from the potentially adverse impacts of the more intense developments or uses. Consistency: The project is a commercial development located along Bristol Street, an Augmented Major Street (±120 feet in width) in the City. The project site does not abut residential properties. As indicated in the IS/MND, adequate infrastructure is available to serve the proposed project. Therefore, the project is consistent with this General Plan objective. o Objective LU -1C.1: Permit the construction of buildings over two stories or 30 feet only when it can be shown that the construction of such structures will not adversely impact surrounding developments and deprive existing land uses of adequate light, air, privacy, and solar access. o Consistency: The proposed buildings that exceed the 30 -foot height limit will not adversely impact surrounding developments and deprive existing land uses of adequate light, air, privacy, and solar access as the site is abutting a major street on one side and freeways on the other side. The buildings that exceed to the 30 - foot height limit do not immediately abut the existing Ganahl Lumber site to the east. Therefore, the project is consistent with this General Plan objective. o Goal LU -2: Development: It is the goal of the City of Costa Mesa to establish development policies that will create and maintain an aesthetically pleasing and functional environment and minimize impacts on existing physical and social resources. Consistency: The project would allow for the redevelopment of a vacant commercially -zoned property. On-site vegetation is minimal. The proposed project would enhance the visual appearance of the site through the construction of new buildings and implementation of the proposed landscape plan. In addition, the project would provide a high-quality architectural design to the community. As a result, the proposed project is consistent with this General Plan goal. o Objective LU -2A: Encourage new development and redevelopment to improve and maintain the quality of the environment. — job— Consistency: As indicated in the IS/MND, the proposed project with mitigation incorporated would not result in any significant adverse environmental impacts. Because the project is an infill development, it would not result in the loss of any habitat, or require extensive infrastructure improvements to provide service to the site. The project is consistent with this objective. Justifications for Approval Pursuant to Title 13, Section 13-29(g), Findings, of the Costa Mesa Municipal Code, the Planning Commission shall find that the evidence presented in the administrative record substantially meets specified findings. Staff recommends approval of the proposed project, based on an assessment of facts and findings which are also reflected in the draft resolution. Variance Code Section 13-29(g)(1) requires any of the following findings for variances: 1. Because of special circumstances applicable to the property, the strict application of development standards deprives the property of privileges enjoyed by others in the vicinity. 2. The deviation shall not constitute a grant of special privileges inconsistent with other properties in the vicinity. 3. The granting of the deviation will not allow a use, density, or intensity which is not in accordance with the general plan designation for the property. Despite the request for deviations from Code requirements for the building setback for the B Shed and Mill Shed (20 -foot setback required; 10 feet proposed) and the height for the Main Building A (30 -foot height required; 34 feet to the solar panels and 41 feet to the elevator shaft) and the B Shed (30 -foot height required; 34 feet proposed), findings for approval of the variances are justified based on the following: o The unique shape of the propertand location along the Bristol Street frontage justify a deviation from the front landscape setback requirement. Because of special circumstances applicable to the property, the strict application of development standards deprives the property of privileges enjoyed by others in the vicinity. With regard to the landscape setback for the B Shed and Mill Shed (20 feet required; 10 feet proposed) the purpose of the 20 -foot landscape setback is to provide a visual buffer between the public sidewalk and any perimeter walls or buildings. In this case, the B Shed and Mill Shed are proposed to have a 10 -foot landscape setback from property line, which is consistent with several properties across Bristol Street, including the two-story office buildings at 1072 and 1182 Bristol Street, both of which have less than the 20 foot landscape requirement (see site photos attached to this report). The reduced setback enjoyed by these two properties, in combination with the unusual oval shape of the subject, property, creates a special circumstance applicable to the property where the strict application of the 20 -foot landscape setback would deprive the property of privileges enjoyed by others in the vicinity. The B Shed and Mill Shed will also act a visual screen to the storage yard and ICQ_ the proposed 10 -foot landscape setback will be required to be densely landscaped and have exterior building treatments. o A condition of approval requires mature trees to be installed in the 10 -foot setback area along the Bristol Street frontage. The landscape plan is required to be approved prior to issuance of building permits and contain additional 24 -inch box trees above the minimum Code requirements to the satisfaction of the Development Services Director. Compliance with this requirement may include upgrading smaller sized trees to 24 -inch box trees or providing additional 24 -inch box trees. o .With regard to the building height, special circumstances exist in that the proximity of the elevated freeways will__limit visual iMacrs to surrounding properties and does not constitute a grant of special privileges inconsistent with the limitations upon other properties in the vicinity and zone in which the property is situated. The building design necessitates higher ceilings to accommodate the specialized operations of the Ganahl Lumber business. The proposed buildings that exceed the 30 -foot height limit will not adversely impact surrounding developments and deprive existing land uses of adequate light, air, privacy, and solar access as the site is abutting a major street on one side and freeways on the other side. The buildings that exceed to the 30 -foot height limit do not immediately abut the existing Ganahl Lumber site to the east. Therefore, the existing elevated freeways will not constitute a grant of special privileges inconsistent with other properties in the vicinity. A condition of approval requires that no mechanical equipment or other rooftop appurtenances be located on the elevator overrun area of Main Building A above the approved 41 -foot height limit. With regard to the roof deck parking level, a condition of approval requires light standards located at the top level of the parking structure to be a maximum of 15 feet in height, located and oriented in such a way as to minimize light spillage onto surrounding properties. Light standards shall be custom -fitted with glare shields to focus light spillage in the parking structure area to the fullest extent possible. A condition allows that any future installation of rooftop solar canopies on the outdoor storage sheds (i.e. Pole Shed, Shed B, and Mill Shed) may be approved by the Development Services Director as an amendment to the Conditional Use Permit, provided that there are no adverse impacts (light, glare) to surrounding properties., o The deviations will not allow a use, density, or intensity which is not in accordance with the general plan designation for the property. The granting of the deviations will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or be materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. The development is consistent with the General Plan goals and policies as discussed earlier in this report, and will be required to comply with all applicable Building and Fire Safety regulations to ensure that no adverse impact to the public health, safety, or welfare is created as a result of this project. oG— The primary access for contractor's vehicles shall occur along the southerly area of the property and would be gated after hours. The gate is proposed to be located behind the 10 -foot wide landscape planter along the Bristol Street frontage adjacent to the Mill Shed. A condition of approval requires that the final location of the gate and proper signage of the hours of operation at the gated entrance be approved by the Development Services Director to avoid customer confusion and circulation impacts on Bristol Street. Conditional Use Permit • The proposed development is substantially compatible with developments in the same general area and would not be materially detrimental to other properties within the area. With the exception of the building setback and height as discussed above, the development is a commercial project consistent with the C1 zoning of the property and the other commercially -zoned properties in the vicinity. Compliance with the applicable Building and Fire Safety Codes will ensure that the project is not materially detrimental to the health, safety and general welfare of the public or otherwise injurious to property or improvements within the immediate neighborhood. • The proposed Ganahl Lumber Hardware Store and Outdoor Storage Yard provides for a reasonable expansion of the existing operations. Granting the conditional use permit will not allow a use, density or intensity which is not in accordance with the general plan designation for the property. The development is consistent with the General Plan goals and policies as discussed earlier in this report. The Floor Area Ratio (FAR) for the project would be 0.346, excluding the Pole Shed, and will not exceed the City's FAR requirements. Comparison of Existing to Proposed Operations for Ganahl Lumber K16 Existing Operations New Store & Outdoor Retail Building 35,650 SF 65,263 SF Square Footage (SF) Shed Buildings 19,890 SF 41,059 SF SF _ 55,540 SF 106,322 SF Total Building Area SF # On -Site 153 Spaces 286 Spaces Parking Spaces 2.5 spaces per 1,000 SF) 2.87 spaces per 1,000 SF # of Employees 80 persons Estimated 90-100 persons Outdoor Storage Yard Area 2 Acres 3.6 Acres acres % Increase of Estimated Inventor /Stock NA 50% Increase K16 • The parking requirement for the project is consistent with the existing_ operations of the lumber store at other locations. The Zoning Code does not specify a parking requirement for lumber yards; as a result, a parking analysis was conducted by LL&G using the parking and traffic accumulation data collected in February 2014 for the existing Ganahl Lumber operation. Based on this analysis, a parking ratio of 2.87 spaces per 1,000 square feet was determined to be required for the proposed project. When applied to Building A and Building B, a parking demand of 239 spaces is forecast. With a proposed supply of 286 spaces, parking will be sufficient for this use. A condition of approval requires that Ganahl Lumber employee vehicles be exclusively parked in the rooftop parking level in order to make the at -grade parking lot available for customers/contractors to the fullest extent possible. • The project exhibits excellence in design, site planning, integration of uses and structures, and protect the integrity of neighboring development. The proposed architecture and site design will enhance the street view and potentially evoke new development in the area. The overall architectural design promotes excellence and compatibility. The variety of building elevations, materials and proposed landscape treatments will enhance the project site and the surrounding area. • The project will not significantly impact key intersections which would continue to operate at an acceptable Level of Service (LOS). As noted earlier, a parking and traffic study conducted for the project by LL&G concluded that the existing plus project traffic conditions would not result in any significant impacts. See table below. Source: Linscott, Law, & Greenspan, Engineers (2014). HCM = Highway Capacity Manual ICU = Intersection Capacity Utilization LOS = level of service NB = northbound SB = southbound s/v = seconds per vehicle -- = intersection is part of Proposed Project and does not currently exist Source: Ganahl Lumber IS/MND — it Q Existing Traffic Existing Plus Project Significant Time Conditions Traffic Conditions Impact Key Intersection Period ICU/ ICM/ LOS LOS Yes/No HCM Newport Boulevard AM 0.233 __HCM A 0.233 A No (SB) at Bristol PM 0.492 A 0.492 A No Street Newport Boulevard AM 0.276 A 0.426 _ A No (NB)/Driveway 1 at PM _� 0.415 A 0.444 A No Bristol Street Red Hill Avenue at AM 0.409 A 0.409 A No Bristol Street PM 0.287 A 0.287 A No Driveway 2 (truck- AM -- -- 8.3 s/v A No entry only) at PM13.3 �- -- s/v B No Bristol Street Source: Linscott, Law, & Greenspan, Engineers (2014). HCM = Highway Capacity Manual ICU = Intersection Capacity Utilization LOS = level of service NB = northbound SB = southbound s/v = seconds per vehicle -- = intersection is part of Proposed Project and does not currently exist Source: Ganahl Lumber IS/MND — it Q Planned Sign Program The proposed 24 -foot high freestanding sign will not constitute a grant of special privilege or allow substantially greater overall visibility than the standard ordinance provisions allow. The purpose of this planned signing program is to allow for approval of a freestanding sign that is not subject to the typical code requirements. The square footage of the total site signage will not exceed the maximum sign area allowed under the Costa Mesa's Municipal Code: 1,329 square feet of total site signage allowed; 982 square feet of total signage proposed. On the City's Master Plan of Highways, Bristol Street is designated as an Augmented Major Street (±120 feet in width) and the proposed signage provides adequate visibility for two-way traffic on Bristol Street for the business. The planned sign program is also consistent with the following objectives of the City's General Plan: Objective LU -1 B: Ensure the long term productivity and viability of the community's economic base. Consistency: The sign will be consistent in appearance with the proposed wall signage as well as existing freestanding signs in the vicinity. As a result, the sign will be compatible with the surrounding land uses. o Objective CD -13: Facilitate the installation of signs that contribute to a positive image of the public realm, consistent with the Costa Mesa Zoning Code. Consistency: The proposed sign will be compatible and harmonious with uses that exist within the general neighborhood. The sign features quality construction and materials. The proposed sign will improve and enhance the appearance of the property from Bristol Street. Ganahl Lumber provides large and specific purchases of lumber products with a customer base spread over a large geographical area. As a result, the signage will not constitute a grant of special privilege since it is consistent with the signage for similar uses. Additionally, it will not allow substantially greater visibility than what the standard sign provisions would allow for commercial uses since the overall site signage is less than the maximum allowed under the City's Municipal Code. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION An Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) has been prepared for the project in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). In accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15073, the IS/MND was made available for a 30 -day public review and comment period beginning on January 23, 2015, and remained available for comment until February 22, 2015. A copy of the IS/MND is included with this report under separate cover. CEQA does not require formal written responses to comments for mitigated negative declarations. However, LSA staff will prepare Responses to Comments received during the review period, which ends on February 22, 2015, prior to the February 23, 2015 hearing. Summary of Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures Under CEQA, a "significant impact" represents a substantial or potentially substantial adverse physical change to the environment. In evaluating specific effects of the project on the environment, the IS/MND identifies thresholds of significance for each effect, evaluates the potential environmental change associated with each effect, and then characterizes the effects as impacts. With the implementation of the mitigation measures identified in the IS/MND for the proposed project, all potentially significant impacts have been reduced to less than significant levels, as summarized in the following table: Summary of Potentially Significant Environmental Impacts Potentially Significant Level of Significance After Environmental Effects I' Mitigation Measures B-1: Comply with Migratory Bird Treaty Mitigation Biology Less than significant Act. B-2: Permitting for Drainage Impacts. Cultural Resources CR -1: Archaeological Monitors. Less than significant CR -2: Paleontological Resources Impact Mitigation Program. CR -3: Human Remains. Hydrology and Water WQ-1: Construction General Permit. Less than significant Quality WQ-2: Final Water Quality Management Plan. GEO-1: Comply with Recommendations Less than significant Geology and Soils in Geotechnical Report. HAZ-1: Contingency Plan. Hazards & Hazardous Less than significant Materials HAZ-2: Protection Against Landfill Gas Hazards. HAZ-3: Construction Staging and Traffic Control Plan. Noise NOISE -1: Noise Reduction Features. Less than significant NOISE -2: Short Term Construction Related Noise Impacts. Source: Ganahl Lumber IS/MND LEGAL REVIEW The draft resolutions have been reviewed and approved as to form by the City Attorney's Office. ALTERNATIVES 1. Approve the project with modifications. The Planning Commission may suggest specific changes that are necessary to alleviate concerns. If any of the additional requested changes are substantial, the item should be continued to a future meeting to allow a redesign or additional analysis. In the event of significant modifications to the proposal, should the Planning Commission choose to do so, staff will return with a revised resolution incorporating new findings and/or conditions. -I 12- 2. Deny the proiect. If the Planning Commission believes that there are insufficient facts to support the findings for approval, Planning Commission must deny the application and provide facts in support of denial to be included in the attached draft resolution for denial. If the project were denied, the applicant could not submit substantially the same type of application for six months. CONCLUSION The overall design reflects a quality project that is consistent with the intent of the Zoning Code and General Plan. With the implementation of the mitigation measures identified in the CEQA Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the proposed project, all potentially significant impacts have been reduced to less than significant levels. &4 MEL LEE, AICP Senior Planner 6114(0 - CLAIRE FLYNN,I P Asst. Developmen Services Director Attachments: 1. Draft Planning Commission Resolutions and Exhibits 2. Applicant's Project Description 3. Site Photos of Existing and Proposed Sites 4. Vicinity and Zoning Map 5. Project Plans/Elevations/Perspectives 6. Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (Under Separate Cover) Distribution: Director of Economic & Development Services/Deputy CEO Assistant Development Services Director Senior Deputy City Attorney Public Services Director City Engineer Transportation Services Manager Fire Protection Analyst Staff (6) File (2) Distribution List -113- Ganahl Lumber Distribution List Ganahl Lumber Attn: Patrick Q. Ganahl 14072 Stratton Way Santa Ana, CA 92705 Ganahl Lumber Attn: Mike Shumaker 1275 South Bristol Street Costa Mesa, CA 92626 Ganahl Lumber Attn: Brad Satterfield 1275 South Bristol Street Costa Mesa, CA 92626 Oynx Architects Attn: Robert Carpenter 316 North Sierra Madre Boulevard Pasadena, CA 91107 Oynx Architects Attn: Dale Brown, AIA 316 North Sierra Madre Boulevard Pasadena, CA 91107 County of Orange County Executive Office Attn: Channary Gould 333 W. Santa Ana Boulevard, 3rd Floor Santa Ana, CA 92701 LSA Associates, Inc. Attn: Ryan Bensley 20 Executive Park, Suite 200 Irvine, CA 92614 LSA Associates, Inc. Attn: Ashley Davis 20 Executive Park, Suite 200 Irvine, CA 92614 ECORP Consulting Inc. Attn: Freddie Olmos 215 North Street Redlands, CA 92374 —)`1— Peter Nagahvi In Focus Consultants 418 Avenida Salvador San Clemente, CA 92672 —W5— ATTACHMENT 1 DRAFT RESOLUTIONS AND EXHIBITS �01 RESOLUTION NO. PC -15- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF COSTA MESA ADOPTING THE INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION PA -14-40 FOR THE RELOCATION AND EXPANSION OF GANAHL LUMBER LOCATED AT 1100 BRISTOL STREET THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF COSTA MESA HEREBY RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: WHEREAS, an application was filed Patrick Ganahl, representing the County of Orange, the property owner, requesting approval of the following: Planning Application PA -14-40: The proposed project involves the development of a 6.6 acre vacant lot to accommodate the relocation of the Costa Mesa Ganahl Lumber store to a site owned by the County of Orange and leased to Ganahl Lumber. The existing Costa Mesa Ganahl Lumber store is located on an adjacent property to the east and would be closed once the new store is completed. The development proposal includes the following: • Development Review for the construction of a 65,263 square foot building materials retail store with administrative offices (Main Building A). A total of 286 parking spaces are proposed; 108 parking stalls would be provided on the roof of the retail building; and 178 at -grade parking stalls would be provided throughout the project site; • Variance from front setback requirement for the parking lot, B Shed and Mill Shed along Bristol Street (20 -foot setback required; 10 -foot setback proposed); • Variance from maximum building height for the solar photovoltaic canopy and elevator overrun on Main Building A (30 -foot maximum height allowed; 34 feet to the solar canopy and 41 feet to the top of the elevator proposed); • Variance from maximum building height for the B Shed (30 -foot maximum allowed; 34 feet proposed); • Conditional Use Permit for the proposed outdoor storage yard consisting of three sheds (B Shed, Mill Shed, and Pole Shed) totaling 40,925 square feet; and • Planned Signing Program to allow the proposed 24 -foot high freestanding sign (12 feet allowed, 24 feet proposed). -119- WHEREAS, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), an Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared and circulated from January 23, 2015 to February 22, 2015 for public review and comment. WHEREAS, the City of Costa Mesa received written comments from the general public, government entities, and other interested parties during the public review period. WHEREAS, written comments received from the general public, government entities, and other interested parties were responded to, where appropriate, in the manner prescribed in California Code of Regulations Section 15073. WHEREAS, no significant new information has been added to the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration and no changes to the proposed project have occurred which would require recirculation of the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration under CEQA Guidelines Section 15073.5. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed all environmental documents comprising the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration and has found that the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration considers all environmental impacts of the proposed project and a reasonable range of alternatives, and the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration is complete, adequate, and fully complies with all requirements of CEQA, the CEQA Guidelines, and the City of Costa Mesa Environmental Guidelines. WHEREAS, the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for this project reflects the independent judgment of the City of Costa Mesa. WHEREAS, a duly noticed public hearing was held by the Planning Commission on February 23, 2015 with all persons having the opportunity to speak for and against the proposal. BE IT RESOLVED that, based on the evidence in the record and the findings contained in Exhibit A, and subject to the conditions of approval and mitigation measures indicated in the Mitigation Monitoring Program contained within Exhibits B and C, respectively, the Planning Commission hereby ADOPTS the Initial Study/Mitigated Declaration and APPROVES Planning Application PA -14-40. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Costa Mesa Planning Commission does hereby find and determine that adoption of this Resolution is expressly predicated upon the activity as described in the staff report for Planning Application PA -14-40 and upon the applicant's compliance with each and` all of the conditions in Exhibits B, the —116— UQr Mitigation Monitoring Program in Exhibit C, and compliance of all applicable federal, state, and local laws. Any approval granted by this resolution shall be subject to review, modification or revocation if there is a material change that occurs in the operation, or if the applicant fails to comply with any of the conditions of approval and/or mitigation measures. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that if any section, division, sentence, clause, phrase or portion of this resolution, or the documents in the record in support of this resolution, are for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining provisions. PASSED AND ADOPTED this 23rd day of February, 2015. Chair Costa Mesa Planning Commission I Iq — STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) ) ss COUNTY OF ORANGE ) I, Claire Flynn, Secretary to the Planning Commission of the City of Costa Mesa, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was passed and adopted at a meeting of the City of Costa Mesa Planning Commission held on February 23, 2015 by the following votes: AYES: COMMISSIONERS NOES: COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS Claire L. Flynn, Secretary Costa Mesa Planning Commission .12-0- EXHIBIT A FINDINGS (APPROVAL A. The information presented substantially complies with Costa Mesa Municipal Code Section 13-29(g)(2) because: Finding: The proposed development is substantially compatible with developments in the same general area and would not be materially detrimental to other properties within the area. Facts in Support of Findings: The proposed use, with the recommended conditions of approval, will be consistent with the other uses in the immediate vicinity. Compliance with the conditions of approval will allow this use to operate with minimal impact on surrounding properties and uses. Finding: Granting the conditional use permit will not be materially detrimental to the health, safety and general welfare of the public or otherwise injurious to property or improvements within the immediate neighborhood. Facts in Support of Findings: With the exception of the building setback and height as discussed above, the development is a commercial project consistent with the C1 zoning of the property and the other commercially - zoned properties in the vicinity. Compliance with the applicable Building and Fire Safety Codes will ensure that the project is not materially detrimental to the health, safety and general welfare of the public or otherwise injurious to property or improvements within the immediate neighborhood. Finding: Granting the conditional use permit will not allow a use, density or intensity which is not in accordance with the general plan designation for the property. Facts in Support of Findings: The project site is zoned C1 (Local Business District) and has a General Plan Designation of General Commercial. The project, as conditioned, is consistent with the applicable provisions of the General Commercial General Plan Designation. The following describes the proposed project's consistency with specific goals and objectives of the General Plan, Land Use Element. Goal LU -1: Land Use: It is the goal of the City of Costa Mesa to provide its citizens with a balanced community of residential, commercial, industrial, recreational, and institutional uses to satisfy the needs of the social and economic segments of the population and to retain the residential character of the City; to meet the competing demands for alternative developments within each land use classification within reasonable land use intensity limits; and to ensure the long term viability and productivity of the community's natural and man-made environments. Consistency: The infill nature of the proposed commercial project protects the balance of land uses satisfying the needs of the community as it pertains r-I21- to commercial retail uses. The project will ensure the long-term viability of the natural and man-made environment and decreases the need for significant infrastructure improvements. The project is consistent with this General Plan goal. Objective LU -1A.3: Locate high-intensity developments or high traffic generating uses away from low-density residential in order to buffer the more sensitive land uses from the potentially adverse impacts of the more intense developments or uses. Consistency: The project is a commercial development located along Bristol Street, a major traffic arterial in the City. The project site does not abut residential properties. As indicated in the IS/MND, adequate infrastructure is available to serve the proposed project. Therefore, the project is consistent with this General Plan objective. o Objective LU -1 C.1: Permit the construction of buildings over two stories or 30 feet only when it can be shown that the construction of such structures will not adversely impact surrounding developments and deprive existing land uses of adequate light, air, privacy, and solar access. o Consistency: The proposed buildings that exceed the 30 -foot height limit will not adversely impact surrounding developments and deprive existing land uses of adequate light, air, privacy, and solar access as the site is abutting a major street on one side and freeways on the other side. The buildings that exceed to the 30 -foot height limit do not immediately abut the existing Ganahl Lumber site to the east. Therefore, the project is consistent with this General Plan objective. Goal LU -2: Development: It is the goal of the City of Costa Mesa to establish development policies that will create and maintain an aesthetically pleasing and functional environment and minimize impacts on existing physical and social resources. Consistency: The project would allow for the redevelopment of a vacant commercially -zoned property. On-site vegetation is minimal. The proposed project would enhance the visual appearance of the site through the construction of new buildings and implementation of the proposed landscape plan. In addition, the project would provide a high-quality architectural design to the community. As a result, the proposed project is consistent with this General Plan goal. o Objective LU -2A: Encourage new development and redevelopment to improve and maintain the quality of the environment. Consistency: As indicated in the IS/MND, the proposed project with mitigation incorporated would not result in any significant adverse environmental impacts. Because the project is an infill development, it would not result in the loss of any habitat, or require extensive infrastructure improvements to provide service to the site. The project is consistent with this objective. B. The requested variance substantially complies with Costa Mesa Municipal Code Section 13-29(g)(1) in that: Findings: • Because of special circumstances applicable to the property, the strict application of development standards deprives the property of privileges enjoyed by others in the vicinity. • The deviation shall not constitute a grant of special privileges inconsistent with other properties in the vicinity. • The granting of the deviation will not allow a use, density, or intensity which is not in accordance with the general plan designation for the property. Facts in Support of Findings: Despite the request for deviations from Code requirements for the building setback for the B Shed and Mill Shed (20 -foot setback required; 10 feet proposed) and the height for the Main Building A (30 -foot height required; 34 feet to the solar panels and 41 feet to the elevator shaft) and the B Shed (30 -foot height required; 34 feet proposed), of the variances are justified based on the following: o The unique shape and location along the Bristol Street frontage iustifya deviation from the front landscape setback requirement. Because of special circumstances applicable to the property, the strict application of development standards deprives the property of privileges enjoyed by others in the vicinity. With regard to the landscape setback for the B Shed and Mill Shed (20 feet required; 10 feet proposed) the purpose of the 20 -foot landscape setback is to provide a visual buffer between the public sidewalk and any perimeter walls or buildings. In this case, the B Shed and Mill Shed are proposed to have a 10 -foot landscape setback from property line, which is consistent with several properties across Bristol Street, including the two- story office buildings at 1072 and 1182 Bristol Street, both of which have less than the 20 foot landscape requirement. The reduced setback enjoyed by these two properties, in combination with the unusual oval shape of the subject, property, creates a special circumstance applicable to the property where the strict application of the 20 -foot landscape setback would deprive the property of privileges enjoyed by others in the vicinity. The B Shed and Mill Shed will also act a visual screen to the storage yard and the proposed 10 -foot landscape setback will be required to be densely landscaped and have exterior building treatments. o With regard to the building height, special circumstances exist in that the proximity of the elevated freeways will limit visual impacts to surrounding properties and does not constitute a grant of special privileges inconsistent with the limitations upon other properties in the vicinity and zone in which the property is situated. The proposed buildings that exceed the 30 -foot height limit will not adversely impact surrounding developments and deprive —i23 existing land uses of adequate light, air, privacy, and solar access as the site is abutting a major street on one side and freeways on the other side. The buildings that exceed to the 30 -foot height limit do not immediately abut the existing Ganahl Lumber site to the east. Therefore, the existing elevated freeways will not constitute a grant of special privileges inconsistent with other properties in the vicinity create a special circumstance. o The deviations will not allow a use, density, or intensity which is not in accordance with the general plan designation for the property. The granting of the deviations will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or be materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. The development is consistent with the General Plan goals and policies as discussed earlier in this report, and will be required to comply with all applicable Building and Fire Safety regulations to ensure that no adverse impact to the public health, safety, or welfare is created as a result of this project. C. The information presented substantially complies with Costa Mesa Municipal Code Section 13-29(g)(8) in that: Finding: The proposed signing is consistent with the intent of Title 13, Chapter VIII (Signs) and the General Plan. Facts in Support of Findings: The proposed 24 -foot high freestanding sign will not constitute a grant of special privilege or allow substantially greater overall visibility than the standard ordinance provisions allow. The purpose of this planned signing program is to allow for approval of a freestanding sign that is not subject to the typical code requirements. The square footage of the total site signage will not exceed the maximum sign area allowed under the Costa Mesa's Municipal Code: 1,329 square feet of total site signage allowed; 982 square feet of total signage proposed. On the City's Master Plan of Highways, Bristol Street is designated as an Augmented Major Street (±120 feet in width) and the proposed signage provides adequate visibility for two-way traffic on Bristol Street for the business. The planned sign program is also consistent with the following objectives of the City's General Plan: o Objective LU -1 B: Ensure the long term productivity and viability of the community's economic base. Consistency: The sign will be consistent in appearance with the proposed wall signage as well as existing freestanding signs in the vicinity. As a result, the sign will be compatible with the surrounding land uses. Objective CD -13: Facilitate the installation of signs that contribute to a positive image of the public realm, consistent with the Costa Mesa Zoning Code. Consistency: The proposed sign will be compatible and harmonious with uses that exist within the general neighborhood. The sign features quality 1 -2,� — construction and materials. The proposed sign will improve and enhance the appearance of the property from Bristol Street. o Objective LU -1B: Ensure the long term productivity and viability of the community's economic base. Consistency: Ganahl Lumber provides large and specific purchases of lumber products with a customer base spread over a large geographical area. As a result, the signage will not constitute a grant of special privilege since it is consistent with the signage for similar uses. Additionally, it will not allow substantially greater visibility than what the standard sign provisions would allow for commercial uses since the overall site signage is less than the maximum allowed under the City's Municipal Code. o Objective CD -13: Facilitate the installation of signs that contribute to a positive image of the public realm, consistent with the Costa Mesa Zoning Code. Consistency: With the implementation of the recommended conditions of approval, the proposed sign will be compatible and harmonious with uses that exist within the general neighborhood. The sign features quality construction and materials. The proposed sign will improve and enhance the appearance of the property from Bristol Street. Finding: The proposed signs are consistent with each other in design and construction — taking into account sign style and shape, materials, letter style, colors and illumination. Facts in Support of Findings: The freestanding sign, as conditioned, will be consistent in color, height, and appearance with the proposed signage on site. Finding: The proposed signs are compatible with the buildings and developments they identify — taking into account materials, colors and design motif. Facts in Support of Findings: The proposed signage is consistent with current image standards for Ganahl Lumber as well as the City's Municipal Code. Finding: Approval does not constitute a grant of special privilege or allow substantially greater overall visibility than the standard ordinance provisions allow. Facts in Support of Findings: Ganahl Lumber provides large and specific purchases of lumber products with a customer base spread over a large geographical area. As a result, the signage will not constitute a grant of special privilege since it is consistent with the signage for similar uses. Additionally, it will not allow substantially greater visibility than what the standard sign provisions would allow for commercial uses since the overall site signage is less than the maximum allowed under the City's Municipal Code. D. The project has been reviewed for compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the CEQA Guidelines, and the City's environmental procedures. An Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) has been prepared for the project in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Mitigation measures from the IS/MND have been included as Exhibit C. If any of these conditions are removed, the decision-making body must make a finding that the project will not result in significant environmental impacts, that the conditions are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency, or that specific economic, social or other considerations make the mitigation measures infeasible. E. The project, as conditioned, is consistent with Chapter XII, Article 3, Transportation System Management, of Title 13 of the Costa Mesa Municipal Code in that the development project's traffic impacts will be mitigated at all affected intersections and by the payment of traffic impact fees. F. The proposed buildings are an excessive distance from the street necessitating fire apparatus access and provisions of on-site fire hydrants. 12to EXHIBIT B CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Ping. 1. Planning Application PA -14-40 shall comply with the conditions of approval, code requirements, special district requirements, and mitigation measures of the IS/MND for this project and as listed in the attached Mitigation Monitoring Program (Exhibit C). 2. The use shall be limited to the type of operation as described in the staff report. Any change in the operational characteristics including, but not limited to, the hours of operation indicated, shall require review by the Planning Division and may require an amendment to the conditional use permit, subject to either Zoning Administrator or Planning Commission approval, depending on the nature of the proposed change. The applicant is reminded that Code allows the Planning Commission to modify or revoke any planning application based on findings related to public nuisance and/or noncompliance with conditions of approval [Title 13, Section 13-29(o)]. 3. If parking shortages or other parking -related problems arise, the business operator shall institute whatever reasonable operational measures necessary to minimize or eliminate the problem. 4. The business operator shall install bike racks for employees on the site. This condition shall be completed prior to final occupancy/start of business, under the direction of the Development Services Department. 5. Mitigation measures from the IS/MND for this project have been included as Exhibit C. If any of these conditions are removed, the Planning Commission must make a finding that the project will not result in significant environmental impacts, that the conditions are within the responsibility of another public agency, or that specific economic, social, or other considerations make the mitigation measures infeasible. & The conditions of approval including Mitigation Measures incorporated by reference in these Conditions of Approval as Exhibit C, code requirements, and special district requirements of PA -14-40 shall be blueprinted on the face of the site plan as part of the plan check submittal package. 7. Prior to issuance of building permits, a final landscape plan indicating the landscape palette and the design/material of paved areas shall be submitted for review and approval by the Planning Division. 8. Landscaping and irrigation shall be installed in accordance with the approved plans prior to final inspection or occupancy clearance. 9. Landscaping along Bristol Street shall be planted with trees and vegetation. The landscape plan shall be approved prior to issuance of building permits and shall contain additional 24 -inch box trees above the minimum Code requirements to the satisfaction of the Development Services Director. Compliance with this requirement may include upgrading smaller sized trees to 24 -inch box trees or providing additional 24 -inch box trees. 10. Developer shall contact the City's Transportation Services Division and the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) to replace the chain link fencing between the subject property and the Caltrans property -121- abutting the 73 and 55 Freeways with a combination wrought iron fence with pilaster supports or other fence/barrier acceptable to both the City and Caltrans. The fencing shall be submitted for review and approval by the Planning Division. Issuance of certificate of occupancy shall not be withheld pending the completion of this condition; however, the applicant shall provide documentation of the progress and estimated time of completion of the condition prior to the issuance of the certificate of occupancy. 11. No mechanical equipment or other rooftop appurtenances shall be located on the elevator overrun area of Main Building A above the approved 41 -foot height limit. 12. Future installation of rooftop solar canopies on the outdoor storage sheds (i.e. Pole Shed, Shed B, and Mill Shed) may be approved by the Development Services Director as an amendment to the Conditional Use Permit, provided that there are no adverse impacts (light, glare) to surrounding properties. 13. Final location of the gate and proper signage of the hours of operation at the gated entrance shall be approved by the Development Services Director and Transportation Services Manager to avoid customer confusion and circulation impacts on Bristol Street. 14. The business operator shall require that Ganahl Lumber employee vehicles be exclusively parked in the rooftop parking level in order to make the at -grade parking lot available for customers/contractors to the fullest extent possible. 15. Prior to issuance of building permits, developer shall contact the U.S. Postal Service with regard to location and design of mail delivery facilities. Such facilities shall be shown on the site plan, landscape plan, and/or floor plan. 16. No modification(s) of the approved building elevations including, but not limited to, change of architectural type, changes that increase the building height, removal of building articulation, or a change of the finish material(s), shall be made during construction without prior Planning Division written approval. Failure to obtain prior Planning Division approval of the modification could result in the requirement of the applicant to (re)process the modification through a discretionary review process or a variance, or in the requirement to modify the construction to reflect the approved plans. 17. No exterior roof access ladders, roof drain scuppers, or roof drain downspouts are permitted. This condition relates to visually prominent features of scuppers or downspouts that not only detract from the architecture but may be spilling water from overhead without an integrated gutter system which would typically channel the rainwater from the scupper/downspout to the ground. An integrated downspout/gutter system which is painted to match the building would comply with the condition. This condition shall be completed under the direction of the Planning Division. 12g- 18. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the applicant shall submit a Lighting Plan and Photometric Study for the approval of the City's Development Services Department. The Lighting Plan shall demonstrate compliance with the following: • All site lighting fixtures shall be provided with a flat glass lens. Photometric calculations shall indicate the effect of the flat glass lens fixture efficiency. • Lighting design and layout shall limit spill light to no more than 0.5 foot-candle at the property line of the surrounding properties, consistent with the level of lighting that is determined necessary for safety and security purposes on site. • Light standards located at the top level of the parking structure shall be a maximum of 15 feet in height, located and oriented in such a way as to minimize light spillage onto surrounding properties. Light standards shall be custom -fitted with glare shields to focus light spillage in the parking structure area to the fullest extent possible. 19. It is recommended that the project incorporate green building design and construction techniques where feasible. The applicant may contact the Building Safety Division at (714) 754-5273 for additional information. CAL Green Code or higher as determined by applicant. 20. Prior to issuance of grading permits, developer shall submit for review and approval a Construction Management Plan. This plan features methods to minimize disruption to the neighboring residential uses to the fullest extent that is reasonable and practicable. The plan shall include construction parking and vehicle access and specifying staging areas and delivery and hauling truck routes. The plan should mitigate disruption to residents during construction. The truck route plan shall preclude truck routes through residential areas and major truck traffic during peak hours. The total truck trips to the site shall not exceed 200 trucks per day (i.e., 100 truck trips to the site plus 100 truck trips from the site) unless approved by the Development Services Director or Transportation Services Manager. 21. The subject property's ultimate finished grade level may not be filled/raised in excess of 36 inches above the finished grade of any abutting property. If additional fill dirt is needed to provide acceptable on-site storm water flow to a public street, an alternative means of accommodating that drainage shall be approved by the City's Building Official prior to issuance of any grading or building permits. Such alternatives may include subsurface tie-in to public storm water facilities, subsurface drainage collection systems and/or sumps with mechanical pump discharge in -lieu of gravity flow. If mechanical pump method is determined appropriate, said mechanical pump(s) shall continuously be maintained in working order. In any case, development of subject property shall preserve or improve the existing pattern of drainage on abutting properties. 22. The applicant shall contact the Planning Division to arrange a Planning 12q- inspection of the site prior to the release of occupancy/utilities. This inspection is to confirm that the conditions of approval and code requirements have been satisfied. 23. Transformers, backflow preventers, and any other approved above- ground utility improvement shall be located outside of the required street setback area and shall be screened from view, under direction of Planning staff. Any deviation from this requirement shall be subject to review and approval of the Development Services Director. 24. A comprehensive sign program shall be submitted for all on-site signs (i.e., monument, directional, wall mounted) for review and approval of the Development Services Director prior to issuance of building permits. 25. The applicant shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City, its elected and appointed officials, agents, officers and employees from any claim, action, or proceeding (collectively referred to as "proceeding") brought against the City, its elected and appointed officials, agents, officers or employees arising out of, or which are in any way related to, the applicant's project, or any approvals granted by City related to the applicant's project. The indemnification shall include, but not be limited to, damages, fees and/or costs awarded against the City, if any, and cost of suit, attorney's fees, and other costs, liabilities and expenses incurred in connection with such proceeding whether incurred by the applicant, the City and/or the parties initiating or bringing such proceeding. This indemnity provision shall include the applicant's obligation to indemnify the City for all the City's costs, fees, and damages that the City incurs in enforcing the indemnification provisions set forth in this section. City shall have the right to choose its own legal counsel to represent the City's interests, and applicant shall indemnify City for all such costs incurred by City. Eng. 26. Maintain the public right-of-way in a "wet -down" condition to prevent excessive dust and promptly remove any spillage from the public right-of- way by sweeping or sprinkling. CODE REQUIREMENTS The following list of federal, state and local laws applicable to the project has been compiled by staff for the applicant's reference. Any reference to "City" pertains to the City of Costa Mesa. Ping. 1. All contractors and subcontractors must have valid business licenses to do business in the City of Costa Mesa. Final inspections, final occupancy and utility releases will not be granted until all such licenses have been obtained. 2. Address assignment shall be requested from the Planning Division prior to submittal of working drawings for plan check. The approved address of individual units, suites, buildings, etc., shall be blueprinted on the site plan and on all floor plans in the working drawings. I 3. Prior to issuance of building permits, applicant shall contact the US Postal Service with regard to location and design of mail delivery facilities. Such facilities shall be shown on the site plan, landscape plan, and/or floor plan. 4. Hours of construction shall comply with Section 13-279, Title 13, of the Costa Mesa Municipal Code. 5. Two (2) sets of detailed landscape and irrigation plans, which meet the requirements set forth in Costa Mesa Municipal Code Sections 13-101 through 13-108 and the City's Water Efficient Landscape Guidelines, shall be required as part of the project plan check review and approval process. Plans shall be forwarded to the Planning Division for final approval prior to issuance of building permits. 6. Two (2) sets of landscape and irrigation plans, approved by the Planning Division, shall be attached to two of the final building plan sets. 7. All on-site utility services shall be installed underground. 8. Installation of all utility meters shall be performed in a manner so as to obscure the installation from view from any place on or off the property. The installation shall be in a manner acceptable to the public utility and shall be in the form of a vault, wall cabinet, or wall box under the direction of the Planning Division. 9. Any mechanical equipment such as air-conditioning equipment and duct work shall be screened from view in a manner approved by the Planning Division. 10. Prior to approval of plans, the project shall fulfill the City of Costa Mesa Drainage Ordinance No. 06-19 requirements. Bldg. 11. Comply with the requirements of the 2013 California Building Code, 2013 California Residential Code, 2013 California Electrical Code, 2013 California Mechanical Code, 2013 California Plumbing Code, 2013 California Green Building Standards Code and 2013 California Energy Code (or the applicable adopted, California Building Code, California Electrical Code, California Mechanical Code, California Plumbing Code, California Green Building Standards, and California Energy Code at the time of plan submittal or permit issuance) and California Code of Regulations also known as the California Building Standards Code, as amended by the City of Costa Mesa. 12. Submit precise grading plans, an erosion control plan, and a hydrology study. 13. Submit a soils report for this project. Soil's report recommendations shall be blueprinted on both the architectural and grading plans. 14. On graded sites the top of exterior foundation shall extend above the elevation of the street gutter at point of discharge or the inlet of an approved discharge devise a minimum of 12 inches plus 2 percent. 2013 California Building Code Section 1808.7.4. 15. The ground immediately adjacent to the foundation shall be sloped -131- away from the building at a slope of not less than 5% for a minimum distance of 10 feet measured perpendicular to the face of the wall per BCB Section 1804.3 16. All construction contractors shall comply with South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) regulations, including Rule 403, Fugitive Dust. All grading (regardless of acreage) shall apply best available control measures for fugitive dust in accordance with Rule 403. To ensure that the project is in full compliance with applicable SCAQMD dust regulations and that there is no nuisance impact off the site, the contractor would implement each of the following: a. Moisten soil not more than 15 minutes prior to moving soil or conduct whatever watering is necessary to prevent visible dust emissions from exceeding 100 feet in any direction. b. Apply chemical stabilizers to disturbed surface areas (completed grading areas) within five days of completing grading or apply dust suppressants or vegetation sufficient to maintain a stabilized surface. c. Water excavated soil piles hourly or covered with temporary coverings. d. Water exposed surfaces at least twice a day under calm conditions. Water as often as needed on windy days when winds are less than 25 miles per day or during very dry weather in order to maintain a surface crust and prevent the release of visible emissions from the construction site. e. Wash mud -covered tired and under -carriages of trucks leaving construction sites. f. Provide for street sweeping, as needed, on adjacent roadways to remove dirt dropped by construction vehicles or mud, which would otherwise be carried off by trucks departing project sites. g. Securely cover loads with a tight fitting tarp on any truck leaving the construction sites to dispose of debris. h. Cease grading during period when winds exceed 25 miles per hour. Trans. 17. Construct all proposed driveway approaches to comply with city standards. 18. Fulfill mitigation of off-site traffic impacts at the time of issuance of occupancy by submitting to the Planning Division the required traffic impact fee pursuant to the prevailing schedule of charges adopted by the City Council. The traffic impact fee is calculated including credits for all existing uses. NOTE: The Traffic Impact Fee will be recalculated at the time of issuance of building permit/certificate of occupancy based upon any changes in the prevailing schedule of charges adopted by the City Council and in effect at that time. 19. Fulfill San Joaquin Hills Transportation Corridor Fee Ordinance (if applicable) at the time of issuance of building permit by submitting the required fee to the Transportation Services Division. Note that the fee is subject to revision and possible increase July 1 of each year. 32_ 20. Close unused drive approaches, or portion of, with full height curb and gutter that comply with City Standards. 21. Delivery truck gate shall be designed to prevent trucks from backing up onto Bristol Street. Eng. 22. At the time of development submit for approval an offsite plan to the engineering division and grading plan to the building division that shows sewer, water, existing parkway improvements and the limits of work on the site, and hydrology calculations, both prepared by a registered civil engineer or architect. Cross lot drainage shall not occur. Construction access approval must be obtained prior to building or engineering permits being issued by the city of costa mesa. Pay offsite plan check fee per section 13-231 of the C.C.M.M.C. and an approved offsite plan shall be required prior to engineering permits being issued by the City Of Costa Mesa. 23. A construction access permit and deposit of $1,230.00 will be required by City of Costa Mesa, engineering division prior to start of any on-site work, necessary during construction for street sweeping and to guarantee replacement costs in case of damage to existing public improvements. 24. Obtain a permit from the City of Costa Mesa, engineering division, at the time of development and then construct P.C.C. driveway approaches per City Of Costa Mesa standards as shown on the offsite plan. Location and dimensions are subject to the approval of the transportation services manager. ADA compliance required for all new driveway approaches. 25. Obtain a permit from the City Of Costa Mesa, Engineering Division, at the time of development and then remove any existing driveways and/or curb depressions that will not be used and replace with full height curb and sidewalk. 26. Fulfill City Of Costa Mesa Drainage Ordinance No. 06-19 requirements prior to approval of plans. 27. Submit to the Engineering Division a storm runoff study showing existing and proposed facilities and the method of draining this area and tributary areas without exceeding the capacity of any street or drainage facility on-site or off-site to the satisfaction of the city engineer. If possible, drain the entire site directly to the flood control channel. Fire 28. Provide (4) Class A fire hydrants at the direction of the Fire Department. See Fire Prevention. 29. Flammable Fuel Storage and use shall comply with California Fire Code, 2013. 30. Provide fire sprinkler systems for all buildings per NFPA 13, 2013. 31. Provide Fire Department key access per CMFD standards. 32. Provide 12 inch address on building and at street. Address must be --) 3-3- visible form the street and contrast in color with its background. 33. A Fire Master Plan shall be approved by CMFD prior to formal building submittal. Street 34. Create not more than fifteen (15) — 4'X4' tree wells adjacent to curb and Trees plant fifteen (15) 24" Box size Tabebuia avellanedae along Bristol Street. SPECIAL DISTRICT REQUIREMENTS The requirements of the following special districts are hereby forwarded to the applicant: Sani. 1. Applicant will be required to construct sewers to serve this project, at his own expense, meeting the approval of the Costa Mesa Sanitary District. 2. County Sanitation District fees, fixture fees, inspection fees, and sewer permit are required prior to installation of sewer. 3. Applicant shall submit a plan showing sewer improvements that meets the District Engineer's approval to the Building Division as part of the plans submitted for plan check. 4. The applicant is required to contact the Costa Mesa Sanitary District at (714) 754-5307 to arrange final sign -off prior to certificate of occupancy being released. 5. Applicant shall contact Costa Mesa Sanitary District at (949) 654-8400 for any additional district requirements. AQMD 6. Applicant shall contact the Air Quality Management District (AQMD) at (800) 288-7664 for potential additional conditions of development or for additional permits required by AQMD. Water 7. Customer shall contact the Mesa Water District — Engineering Desk and submit an application and plans for project review. Customer must obtain a letter of approval and a letter of project completion from Mesa Water District. School 8. Pay applicable Newport Mesa Unified School District fees to the Building Division prior is issuance of building permits. State 9. Comply with the requirements of the California Department of Food and Agriculture (CDFA) to determine if red imported fire ants (RIFA) exist on the property prior to any soil movement or excavation. Call CDFA at (714) 708-1910 for information. EXHIBIT C MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM 3s- s .] a Gi �a d O .� 0 0 0 U .+ A a >w°U z UU-o p b .C3 p O U m g o � .J� Cd cd cd U o 14 cd a y �wA33 c crW :7 ca tu o w O m O rij U cd CO N "O N to S O cd 5bj) O0 ca F" ° cra, ° oo w ° cn b cd w -d •� cd b N O U N Q co a� cC N ��" y 0 ° -d fn o a� Q 0„ OU. �" �'" O i�r pU U .� " O U 'd O y ro ..+ b4 cd cc 0) J. co'30 ' po 0cn > � �o M ' cd' `` co o °0 oo M cd eg 0 CO 0 U ., p U ++ O N 4.r 4�r 'b N +� Nom; > ^ o co '" CZ' cd. L." O •� cd bq a� " d A OA Cd bo O U o. o o ai b COD bj) = b - a k4 ami cd b U b o oA Gw A °' F. cd lo � v' 4 u o� '�; •'� bA b n �.� �icd 6 rOn 0 Q. o a b a a n o 3 CO q 0o cd Q °: o b cl 4"' N Nb`�' U 7 4: r. o +, 0 .+ W ' U cd U N �D O «U+ b w C' ¢ d ani C ¢ a G E y N .V. N N �•� �"' cn U p„ w • 0 En 0 � r'7 + M 6E7 4U+ � � N id � N c0 • � � ° tocz ��D'In . U Q, U ' i" N td cC to In bD y w , a .�.+ N N > �.�o-5 Yo U �� ,U„ !H F. N N . o� � - �w M 'A ° cd O O U N N •'"+ O N �. M r,� > "o > + N O C1r > .-.. T. ': U 0¢ �s� _ ° cd c p 00 •.•.� N Gam' y CO "' ,,3 o y p N L� ' N c+ cd �+ 0 p o o H�ouu a��— am may,, �A o o4b o a. � .�wA to ' .d 6- = � a� ., � y � 4. p aF =_ a) >, N "... � � Ln 0 a� o o b b cc M a1 d a� a '-� b— o w b N N cd c°a Q •o � -d ;qj w CL to O Lv rA Z O G 6O > s>�, r = ate+ U Vj O ..O b 3 U 4r O 6J ri 4•.i O 4, O v° U o�� w� i. cd U cn O co o N N N +' w o a' b b/1 U 0 O Z w � DD O a. y c+'d -o w :° OA R 'A O C +-' p= p, b4 0, y .-. p �' y y �+ y, cd U C_ U, n N w � Q N c7 O � ^o v G4 v vb^ Ln > ,, a o 4. VvC 45 -cllw =y" 'O '!+nC� Ocd cd ¢, • cd.. CUUP fs�O". x. Sw" cd pp N M U U N¢o d O 4°. F C QU OU' O .0 O p � avid w aS oq�A y r E UM �' cid O O p� O O N U b m O _o Z. cd U F, M a... av dam, o aU on E- o cz N cd O CO .0 N .� a o 3A.,xv� U U a° �- �U� r "o ct V .� ca m w co m e p Q tee` L Gq �e�zr-;zMzea O [+1 O O �t ~ N oa R1 PLO w w O 4. �n o O U Cc ° ; ci ° > b 'd q o 14 O N w 0 UUC� � g o U O y U a� y o � ° P: to 4. � y b O cod m 0N 3 cd ° ° o ., � o Q o a o .o P. cd v o `� `d a" N cd cd 3 �, ° N o ,.., U cd ,� •� .b 12 ed cz o b :� o b °" a c o o o x a� . oo N o o o '" .J . w U = 4U1 ami . � 3 —,d Nd° o M Yo o `n° w� od o � cd o � .-G m >, '«'" q 's., VJ QUrn cd w 0 .- 0 � G U ° dU w �/ o`du d v� ° :� "o �n aU°¢ L�3o� �o'85 b o ' o —cz a Q a o 4U , N1) Q 'p tY;6 aoo Q° •c. c 0 d C a cod " a °ro ro ,Fod 00 U omov o bq > o ''0 cd 0 U ,d 0 O Uva > aE-'�Y 3.° o -a > q'� 0 0 > ob o,5 ° o q co -0 cl LgN U bD CGn •ar'.9 c N En 0�"'. +- o cd m u 3' ccdd ' u° ' M b u cod o o 0 'd LO, ° m G w 0 cd In U) o '> o 3 �cd cz q ami w o -4 o 0 h >, cd Z cd ° o o cd o = o �, o > .. o 'a w cd UJ ° m y U° b 0 O wA yow `d w con.� a °; c«, ° "o m Y •°� cd r" o b c� b cd o 4 U 3 ami w .y y coi Q p. o o ° o >> o ?; o u ' u c.; 'v N cd �.o U U a� ° ���' cd u'ou� �'an ' o o '� .a ono p •� �o U 'ono cd ° o o N " w C) —0) 0 a°ui a ro• ro y b cod b o ° o a a� G o° 0 Q - U -p >.�o fi-b:? ° m ad U ".40 oo w ° ;w o on 0w to ° cd O cd 0 cd a� a"i b cod > 4) o U cd > b> > >° ro ° ° o oc0 OU o 4. 0 vw cd U U P. O. CL ." 4. w cd " v, b O w v, 62rn ." 4, .0 2 Ls ~ 00 � iYi M e•i U "39 N n IE M h n u LT a n I I r Id a� E IvQ C, cn 14, o o y Cd O a) o cql UUQ 1A, p o a� a� p UU(� 0 w 0 > cd o ce a� p ami cd cz ow 'l' Q)ani v > �.�+ U ° cd ' N U Ln > +� bA w p 'w a) ani OQ O y cera ': cl ^m cd icC+ U O "" tU. 4. a) cd (, v .Ur .b a) N , 2 'O O tC N .-.. N N - p M bo - N N C s'"' tO wa' - = . - cC N N O N W N 0 N id .yC cd w. .� Ocd U OU 'C g o .� N o �a o +, U o ° �" O a) bb '� •� o ° 0) b a a o o ro o o ay .� •" o b�°° M Q +' " O p O O bQ rn i." cC �+ O U G. O 'CILO O "L'7 i" "' cll u (1)> 3 -o -o o s. o ao au o =' 0) Qw m bw twcLn (L) 4. wr w OO .b �w"o bo U N o 'y ' o o °�'' o U 0:. N 2 bD O 0a) ' N bN co �� 0oV ° Uy� P. v cz °rte. bo — co ao y Q) �? s. > -� o cd q q R o fl o b4 �° p co co (44 �u o `y° o v to w o s~ 0 d o °3 ) .r E y U t. to cz O cd O U 4, A .0 r.+ Q. O O O o L� v' s. U in p, v C> U '.�+'-' i-. p a) O 0 y a) O c.. = U U N O p • `n c'•' O � N U 0 c�j Lo ccz m vii bA .D �,.," • � �'-. G o v� bo ,x o ..�'. v) y o cd a w co r3 cd cd Fr ° � H o o to r. b cd it v U yi. co `n o Q 'C r N G U q U N t " Q. m N C1C ' p 0 0 O m O o a w R. o o a 'py" ^ o .J m a: o a s�, U o °sem' o o w.°. a� ,._, —. 'm tea/ O C.' o b 'O L: ~ Ce ,°2, v' v' L: U Cn U O Q Ci, `� O u. °: 1 N,°.1 ' O • w 'ca o • ' V •O ° °r .«3 ;- co ,>', ,� C, cd cn 7-1 y0 cd U 0 M � U 0 OA Y � � U � .2 � Q � � � • ° � �' N a)�r r� � X4)1 °" 1.. a) v� '�-I" O a) ro 'C a) � a) G4 >. cd v ' zi �^v�y iY.. U U �P IvQ C, cn a C6 p•d O O U � U ao y O O U cn � � �, � b � no 04 � an cam. y • 3 3 2 b b E°•� � .off .off o � F" o m otQ 3 o ° o In 3 as Ao 0) on " o a d eA = Cd MM ) PWbi 3 ° o 'o a w 3 ( " as N O L r U O Ly ° N -O0 a �O 64 s �QY, U E 0 i as • � O O N d Z,d U� w " U. ° o0 o ca > U. " .= Wrn n Acli mIr o' Y fro " co 33 �a tea° A U � 3 °'� bq �w U p �3�° ❑� P y; 6.°��oo C v w a� U a bO�zo u o .U. O �� U ° ro° a ca to � ° o t<s ro w Cd cz 0 cn Cd Cd Cd O °' "o °' " 3 O `� w °o ,, �. a� ° b C7 `c° q P0. "D "D U ;a CdU O b " 0 0 p ro o o i�"Q °w~•� � b a� R. 0 0 Q-0 O "m �O " ` O zW °O ^ 14 � O U 00 ° v �'aA". 3 �ab.�b � " mo w• cao w 0 w C)0 . Cd 03 ca d� w w 0 w° Q ° 0 V C7 U w.°. o o .. i 3 a3i ami O d b + p°q O b O FS N is —� N C O w cl o 0 =cy co 64 . N O G> b0 b0o ° oo O O Z a d 0 +. bq . 0U CU cd oD O y yEi0 A) P e a�> d u m v Ln •' / y' i]r ,a i/] ,ti :: Q 64 O Q a bO° U o U ° aO. o C%] cC cC co ya,1 as �J rn V V1 M.Y y F+K V] V] �D �zMZeti O t- O 00 3 t�zk-iz O , � "Imm e a d o w o a� cqj ° > oEn�- U u Imo. a. C 'G °' c °3 °_' Q• c E O O l'O 3cr_ zi '"O o73 oo o f7 ro>' 0 a v3r r 0 ° °uto 0 b o a G ° cz" z ° 0 o� z o U •U Ud «C tti O N O U co cd zw y D ng ct 6w O o ° a cd a c cd bp 0 0 0 0 u in cu 43 U `U" OU y o Q R m S3 03 w cyUd cd C) O o >, o o4. co w CL tyOC °�' w 75 F" p" cu ami 4) ao� eoi w c r sa ca fl LCL. ° ca 101, v aha chi . E E ELZ 0 vo ed ~ ~ EG QJ GJ N N N U a� a� a� a� a� m m o m b -C ca m m o - ° •o ° Z 7o •q y ° y O o ° ° ° V C] cc m ca C y ate+ CI L'1 ° r r r n • a4. �+-! 14. Y-. �i+ .y� a P6a o a� Lnw rUo m m m m m o 06 ' � m a., ro. -� Z o 0 0 ° 0 0co 0 0 0 .2 5 m o o o o o o o o o o 0 cu O o V� a� v •roi U atp ch O G C3 Lam. v o U U �„�cz �'' u a b eti 'D 'b ue W ro c o O o O9.a o m cc oco 3 *•+� O .-� `n o 'tr ri V' O rl m K7 O r^'1 E P O r-! In O j.:i w•i .= U NN N N N Ch z M Z M Zi 1K3 Z MZ r''1 Zf- .-1.40-- i d If r r r s E O , btiU U C cC N a U ° U N a aOi U ° ° >,°�° O Z O W ° F, n N U Q O fs; o Cd cu U o i aOi b p �° b ° Q q W W p 0 O V �+ U rC q. cd G .fir �• � Q. q � yam, O cd H Q+ cd q a � ° ° o o0 CA r U U o 0 rob m O � a.) a n U 04 1,21 U w ca a� cz C6,, o b.� C, 'y b b y b °A a t w o °' oO~n 0" aoi ca ct c�yy WO m, o R b0 b0 L •� . `� U G +�+ U r p U G� (d Q U ro a) O� Q) a) ° a) N U U 'O C O •+�' b w• 0 y b .D En.U-. O O ,� vi O ,� •0 U N L." N O r. O Q, .. v O . O on I -a ° co u) U E GO. 0 0 WQ) in •.. O U- O p '7 O W Q) O i [ QJ U ° > o ro a '~ ca 3 �° U ° ° ca Cd o o a s _°.° c o y U w U a Q o•° d a°i ' mo w coa N o° ro^ d C 0 C7 p 0 b ° 0 ed 6, �5 u W 3 G° n, o b P, O aJ • X O b ° .� .0 G ccz W U G� .�.. .-' R. 'O O a•UJ ¢, U U. En bA OC L+ • n .a: '+�- N a) . 4. bq N U Q i. ^y W 0, p OCZ F. O O 0 s, 0 >, .0 b o b c,-., o U p 00 0 0 U a� p o° E+ aUi U °° °' U cOa ° a .0 U° � a o cd 'b o 0 cd .�� U O aJ O Cd �+ bq •--� a) V o O W mu bq Vi U o y . c� tb0 w 9 U u� w U o -0 = Ga b O :� U .o is ' q b w° b w e0 p -a U p [_ O_ o bA U w °n o 3' �• 3 a� a4 0 4 : 3 O O a) b Ll O O w d 'y co U L," (n O, p O H .., co O -Z`°� A, U O U O q Loo CZ m bo bb ++ rn U F7•, O O U Cq b " y H p>> U U cn O OU L", C q b b O ++ U° �+ Cj U ..fl O "C c��d �n, O N bD O 0' c ° ° ° b o U U a� is A o o id J� yCq0" p> W a U Cl)p vp.) C O b U p 0 0 W Q "3 OU ¢ a UO m En " b y c� UO N V 2. U O > [� q o A, U '5 • Q x x E Q b O U CO30� ti) O x q y U° o Q O W ° U 2 O .� W . UO >>>� AWA w bf es • c �w N W .. W a� o i vcts cct c`d�o to i o N q q S".�0 q O y M. �q��G ��°o �.�"a�°i:� OO °' .dam �U'd �� ��w~ o o °. q o o.A a� o o A q o a, ami ca y � '� � G. N � .� N p, • � -� � y N w. � ro dj >i N .�" � p > N ..>. vi i C4-4 cd 0 o `d'00 mmo, U nq 0 Vi Ga �-+ /l Y .�-1 y "'•� ii ° i ^I m 0 O °. CA a? � � � •D '� N�"•� N cd N N 3 p„ U b O W � d3 .� ,�Cy�' : � id �'^ In 0 q �C Wco ;° `° 11 14-1 Y 3 ° O .b Cd a� ° k a4 '; q v U b W N q o El o A v L) o W id '•o o = q G ou q o ori '� a� cd 'b UO O = ° 0 ° ° o � o 'b .� O co rn N w -~ cd O U cd P-4 g U4 V '" Mo °�' q o �; b cd 0co a� ^d q 3 o q aj 0 0 0 coo b q y O N O O v j b p0, b W N p cd U id b .o ti O •.L'+ o m U q0 -� W •O W q •b4 '°^ °' '+•" V W O Cd w d >,'U > [G q •� ° •b 4.� ° co � '" v � °+�' ai q co a� ' 3 Cd qr. o In En o o pa " b 3 ° o v v ° cd " q° ^Up U aqi v G q ami 3 o °: cd o b w G• = o x p. N p .� 0. cd • *� a>i o a>> u o y O D p° q ee o° m q > o v .J b UCd m 14) uO `° °' " ccd a >, coq o p 3 a u q •'� o q ;;14+ N CA U y N bo bo d U bD cd O L7 G'. q V" O •�," ,� ► C4 A o . Z F- . N QN DU a� as b p mN m 00 q N 0Wp e.W . coQ U= � N -5 c � o � a4 r''7UW aed �j riE+mx E y c o' 0 0 co O Cd :d G o ;.d um b o a� eo o a~ ey � b b � o I� -d � o� 3 ° a• a bb 0 cr O O 0 Cd tw 7:1UYr. 3. �U ° 0 C13 ° a 3 -0 U a4, -Y 0 Gn �+ o ° 6,Q. ° 'b 3 ° Z moi°. Cq acn oIn b a >co COa b x w 0 [ o y> o a�IOLw o -0 p ami Ln '03?. o 0 0 �_ o 0 0� 0 7:1a� Qn > °J ° `� ° q ao 00 a a 64 6 1-4 3� � " a a a El i 0 o P. CL ai 0 0 fi N 0 3 O 3VI N d s.. N N o M Z 0 474 0 d d o 0 w a°, 0 w o 0o m � -o cd ca q � c� co o ro w °' '- a o " o N 0.) — b b x° a co w � G w w w °' 0 aUi Cl) oa all . o g P, Cd v G "0 . w W) n -O V, V w n w �a±� o -0 �A 4.) '� y := s0., w s0, " O w , t04-4 t0. cn as cpa Q C p Q q .J x �„ G ° [ o° 5. O to g v�o cn v 0°oo o'n oG b 0 o mu �i ncd w om 3— a cd 04 P-4 4Z .O -i rOn� v0i L n � n V v0i � Ln EA " p v0i Lp. O b O 6J p O a. p 4 '.^"� O 10. o q O O CSR O a,a P. o P. P, a� c*i H ri H ri H c•i Z ri H r i E� ri H cri 134 K1 F I9-5- RESOLUTION NO. PC -15- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF COSTA MESA DENYING PLANNING APPLICATION PA -14-40 FOR THE RELOCATION AND EXPANSION OF GANAHL LUMBER LOCATED AT 1100 BRISTOL STREET THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF COSTA MESA HEREBY RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: WHEREAS, an application was filed Patrick Ganahl, representing the County of Orange, the property owner, requesting approval of the following: Planning Application PA -14-40: The proposed project involves the development of a 6.6 acre vacant lot to accommodate the relocation of the Costa Mesa Ganahl Lumber store to a site owned by the County of Orange and leased to Ganahl Lumber. The existing Costa Mesa Ganahl Lumber store is located on an adjacent property to the east and would be closed once the new store is completed. The development proposal includes the following: • Development Review for the construction of a 65,263 square foot building materials retail store with administrative offices (Main Building A). A total of 286 parking spaces are proposed; 108 parking stalls would be provided on the roof of the retail building; and 178 at -grade parking stalls would be provided throughout the project site; • Variance from front setback requirement for the parking lot, B Shed and Mill Shed along Bristol Street (20 -foot setback required; 10 -foot setback proposed); • Variance from maximum building height for the solar photovoltaic canopy and elevator overrun on Main Building A (30 -foot maximum height allowed; 34 feet to the solar canopy and 41 feet to the top of the elevator proposed); • Variance from maximum building height for the B Shed (30 -foot maximum allowed; 34 feet proposed); • Conditional Use Permit for the proposed outdoor storage yard consisting of three sheds (B Shed, Mill Shed, and Pole Shed) totaling 40,925 square feet; and • Planned Signing Program to allow the proposed 24 -foot high freestanding sign (12 feet allowed, 24 feet proposed). H-4 WHEREAS, a duly noticed public hearing was held by the Planning Commission on February 23, 2015 with all persons having the opportunity to speak for and against the proposal; BE IT RESOLVED that, based on the evidence in the record and the findings contained in Exhibit A, the Planning Commission hereby DENIES Planning Application PA -14-40. PASSED AND ADOPTED this 23rd day of February, 2015. Chair Costa Mesa Planning Commission +vs— STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) ) ss COUNTY OF ORANGE ) I, Claire Flynn, Secretary to the Planning Commission of the City of Costa Mesa, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was passed and adopted at a meeting of the City of Costa Mesa Planning Commission held on February 23, 2015 by the following votes: AYES: COMMISSIONERS NOES: COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS Claire L. Flynn, Secretary Costa Mesa Planning Commission EXHIBIT A FINDINGS (DENIAL) A. The requested variances do not comply with Costa Mesa Municipal Code Section 13-29(g)(1) in that: Findings: • Because of special circumstances applicable to the property, the strict application of development standards does not deprive the property of privileges enjoyed by others in the vicinity. • The deviations constitute a grant of special privileges inconsistent with other properties in the vicinity. • The granting of the deviations will allow a use, density, or intensity which is not in accordance with the general plan designation for the property. B. The requested conditional use permit does not comply with Costa Mesa Municipal Code Section 13-29(g)(2) because: Finding: The proposed development is not compatible with developments in the same general area and would be materially detrimental to other properties within the area. Finding: Granting the conditional use permit will be materially detrimental to the health, safety and general welfare of the public or otherwise injurious to property or improvements within the immediate neighborhood. Finding: Granting the conditional use permit will t allow a use, density or intensity which is not in accordance with the general plan designation for the property. C. The information presented does not comply with Costa Mesa Municipal Code Section 13-29(g)(8) in that: Finding: The proposed signing is not consistent with the intent of Title 13, Chapter VIII (Signs) and the General Plan. Finding: The proposed signs are not consistent with each other in design and construction — taking into account sign style and shape, materials, letter style, colors and illumination. Finding: The proposed signs are not compatible with the buildings and developments they identify — taking into account materials, colors and design motif. Finding: Approval does constitutes a grant of special privilege or allow substantially greater overall visibility than the standard ordinance provisions allow. D. The Costa Mesa Planning Commission has denied Planning Application PA-14- 1-19-- 40. Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21080(b) (5) and CEQA Guidelines Section 15270(a) CEQA does not apply to this project because it has been rejected and will not be carried out. E. The project is exempt from Chapter IX, Article 11, Transportation System Management, of Title 13 of the Costa Mesa Municipal Code. -M-. ATTACHMENT 2 APPLICANT'S PROJECT DESCRIPTION 7 October 2014 City of Costa Mesa Development Services Department 77 Fair Drive Costa Mesa, CA 92628 Attn: Mel Lee, Senior Planner RE: New Ganahl Lumber Project 1100 South East Bristol St. Costa Mesa, CA 92626 ONYX Project No. P13043 SUBJECT: Application for Entitlement Dear Mr. Lee, On behalf of Ganahl Lumber, Onyx Architects is pleased to submit an Application for Entitlement for the above referenced project. The Costa Mesa Administrative Adjustment application form along with a complete list of enclosed documents is located herein. Additionally, you will find the requested copies of all documents per submittal instruction. Background. The project site is owned by County of Orange which intends to lease the land to Ganahl Lumber to allow development of its new retail sales and construction product supply center. Ganahl is relocating its operations from the site directly to the East to the new site and building a state -of -the art building materials center. Ganahl was selected by the County through a formal submittal process in the fall of 2013 and Ganahl's proposal was deemed to be the best fit for the site and for the City of Costa Mesa. The project site is currently not occupied. The most recent use of the site was for storage of miscellaneous items including recreational vehicles and household items. It has been unoccupied for several years. Project Description: The project anticipates the development of a 6.60 acre parcel of land near the 73 and 55 Freeway crossing; address referenced above. The proposed use as a retail outlet of building products is consistent with C1 -Local Business zoning classification identified by the City of Costa Mesa for local business and sales. The site will also be used for open warehousing of building products and limited product finishing (milling of wood) on a portion of the site. There are no proposed changes in use from its current operation on Ganahl's existing site; the use will be the same. ONYX ARCHITECTS 316 NORTH SIERRA MADRE BLVD, PASADENA, CALIFORNIA 91 107 V 626.405.8001 F 626.405.8150 �15LJ Mel Lee, Senior Planner New Ganahl Lumber Store — Costa Mesa 07 Oct 2014 Page 2 The Project Includes: Building A is the site's main retail building with seven product centers: Window and Doors; Hardwoods; Tools — Hand tools and Power tools; Plumbing; Electrical, Lighting; Hardware, Finish Hardware and Paint & Stains. Ganahl caters to the general public and professional contractors with large educational displays that show windows, doors and other larger -scale building components in actual construction settings. Additionally there are staff taking over-the-counter and phone orders; private offices, and other associated spaces. Building A also has an operations section for marshalling orders for customer pickup and facilities to support the management of the product/material storage yard. It has a main level and a mezzanine level, and there is rooftop parking for 108 cars and a structure support system for solar photovoltaic panels used to supplement and offset Ganahl's electrical usage. Total area of Building A is 68,500 SF. Building B is an open-air, single story, 32,000 SF covered lumber storage shed with racking system. It has a wide central aisle to promote material transfer and placement. Pole Shed is an open-air, single story, 6,600 SF covered lumber storage shed with racking system. The Mill is a 4,200 SF milling plant for custom shaping of wood material. The at -grade shop is covered by an open sided structure. It also has a dust collection system located adjacent to the structure Site Features include: Customer and staff parking: Parking for 286 cars has been designed. This includes 178 spaces on grade and 108 spaces on top of Building A. The minimum amount required is 263 spaces. Energy Conservation: All structures and sheds on-site are open are and require not energy to heat and cool. Building A will be mainly a naturally ventilated building and will only engage air- conditioning in extreme conditions. The site lighting and the general lighting in Building A will be LED electronic controlled lighting and will exceed the 2014 Title 24 energy standards. Energy Generation: The project anticipates the use of solar photovoltaic electrical panels located on both roofs of Building A and Building B. Along with the anticipated wind generator system planned alongside Building B, the total energy generated will be used to help reduce peak demand and dependence on electricity created by fossil fuels. Water retention and reuse: The parking surface has designated areas to allow for percolation and ground water recharge. Also, a water capturing system to gather rain water, then filter and distribute to landscape areas on site will be employed. Landscaping: Landscape materials will be drought resistant vegetation along with native trees and shrubs that work with the coastal conditions. Irrigation system will be supplied with captured rainwater and fed to irrigation locations by gravity. Total land area assigned for landscape is nearly 16,000 SF. Open-air product racking and storage: The rear part of the site is largely used for open product and specialized racking system storage. The yard is designed for efficiency and will be kept neat and orderly. ONYX ARCHITECTS -[S[- Mel Lee, Senior Planner New Ganahl Lumber Store — Costa Mesa 07 Oct 2014 Pa Signage: The project anticipates the installation of three wall signs and potentially a ground sign at the main customer entrance. Project Schedule: The schedule anticipates the start of construction on or before June 2015 and open for business a year later. We believe this entitlement submittal is complete. However, should you need additional information or clarification on any topic, please reach out at any time. Sincerely, ONl'-X-ARCHITECTS, INC. Dale W. Brown Principal in Charge ncc/document enclosure: Application for Entitlement cc: Patrick Ganahl — Ganahl Construction Brad Satterfield — Ganahl Lumber Mike Shumaker — Ganahl Lumber ONYX ARCHITECTS SZ- County of Orange California James Campbell Land Development Manager County Executive Office 333 W. Santa Ana Blvd. Third Floor Santa Ana, California 92701-4062 September 29, 2014 Mr. Gary Armstrong Economic and Development Services Director City of Costa Mesa 77 Fair Drive Costa Mesa, CA 92626 Subject: Ganahl as Project Applicant for Flood Control District Property at 1100 S. Bristol Street Dear Mr. Armstrong: On behalf of the County of Orange and the Orange County Flood Control District, I authorize Ganahl Lumber Company, represented by Mr. Patrick Ganahl, Mr. Mike Shumaker, and Mr. Brad Satterfield to serve as the project applicant and submit plans for proposed improvements to 1100 S. Bristol Street. Ganahl Lumber Company will be serving as the project applicant and submitting a planning application to the City of Costa Mesa. The County of Orange and Orange County Flood Control District have been keeping in continual communications with Ganahl Lumber Company. We have reviewed the plans that Ganahl prepared, last dated August 7, 2014. Since then, the County is aware that Ganahl has been in the process of preparing a planning application package that includes the site plan that the County reviewed in August. Any substantial revisions to the site plan through the City's review process would need to be reviewed by the County to confirm that the Orange County Flood Control District's channel access requirements are maintained and not compromised by the proposed site plan, should the plans need to be revised. The County acknowledges that Ganahl Lumber Company's site plan includes property that is owned by Caltrans, located along the northerly area of the site. On August 8, 2014, the County submitted an application and request for Caltrans to decertify the subject property. Currently, Caltrans is still reviewing the County's decertification request. Please feel free to contact Channary Gould at 714-667-4980 or me at 714-667-9673 if you have any questions. We look forward to working with the City on this project. Sip,%r_ely, pp4s Campbi nd Development Manager Tel: (714) 834-6200 Fax: (714) 834-3018 Web: www.ocgov.com _ ATTACHMENT 3 SITE PHOTOS OF EXISTING AND PROPOSED SITES vx z H W LL 0 w IL J x d z L7 Z H �C W wwpm� b M'. a 0 o: t 4 z t� LU 0 0 Q w CL r W CL0 Ix CL t Q Z W 0 CL 0 ce L W CL0 Ix CL t Q Z W 0 CL 0 ce L 10 0 J a Z Z a Uj W W 0 0. W W IL�F z > fi ca LU z CL a LA 19 ui I- 20 20 1%4 LL.O N OQv V H m Q � H W W W p- eg J W W H IL 0:ILLI Z �~Q t7 N J Z� HV V� W ; W ce CL PLANNING COMM/SS/ON SUPPLEMENTAL MEMORANDUM MEETING DATE: FEBRUARY 23, 2015 ITEM NUMBER: -P —Z SUBJECT: PLANNING APPLICATION PA -14-40 FOR THE EXPANSION AND RELOCATION OF GANAHL LUMBER COSTA MESA TO 1100 BRISTOL STREET DATE: FEBRUARY 20, 2015 FROM: PLANNING DIVISION/DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT PRESENTATION BY: MEL LEE, SENIOR PLANNER ay�� FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: MEL LEE,,AICP (714) 754-5611 mel.lee@costamesaca.gov The purpose of this memo is to advise the Planning Commission of three additional conditions of approval as suggested by the Transportation Services Division, the City Arborist of the Public Services Division, and the City Attorney's Office: Trans. 27. Design and construct the improvements required for providing a signalized access to the project site at the intersection of Bristol Street and Newport Boulevard Northbound. The applicant will be responsible for procuring all applicable permits and approvals from Caltrans and City of Costa Mesa prior to beginning of construction. Street 28. Trees within the 10 -foot landscape setback along the Bristol Street Trees frontage shall complement the tabebuia avellanedae street trees required to be planted within the public right-of-way per Code Requirement number 34. The applicant shall contact the City Arborist for preferred tree types and additional information. 29. Prior to issuance of a building permit, applicant shall remit documentation verifying the approval of: (a) Required encroachment permit from the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) and (b) Ground lease from the Orange County Flood Control District. The Development Services Director may modify/extend the timing of the required submissions as necessary. Also attached is the response to comments for the two letters received during the comment period for the IS/MND for the project. Distribution: Director of Economic & Development Services/Deputy CEO Assistant Development Services Director Senior Deputy City Attorney Public Services Director City Engineer I( 0 — Transportation Services Manager Fire Protection Analyst Staff (6) File (2) Ganahl Lumber Distribution List Ganahl Lumber Attn: Patrick Q. Ganahl 14072 Stratton Way Santa Ana, CA 92705 Ganahl Lumber Attn: Mike Shumaker 1275 South Bristol Street Costa Mesa, CA 92626 Ganahl Lumber Attn: Brad Satterfield 1275 South Bristol Street Costa Mesa, CA 92626 Oynx Architects Attn: Robert Carpenter 316 North Sierra Madre Boulevard Pasadena, CA 91107 Oynx Architects Attn: Dale Brown, AIA 316 North Sierra Madre Boulevard Pasadena, CA 91107 County of Orange County Executive Office Attn: Channary Gould 333 W. Santa Ana Boulevard, 3rd Floor Santa Ana, CA 92701 LSA Associates, Inc. Attn: Ryan Bensley 20 Executive Park, Suite 200 Irvine, CA 92614 LSA Associates, Inc. Attn: Ashley Davis 20 Executive Park, Suite 200 Irvine, CA 92614 ECORP Consulting Inc. f62 Attn: Freddie Olmos 215 North Street Redlands, CA 92374 Peter Nagahvi In Focus Consultants 418 Avenida Salvador San Clemente, CA 92672 LS A LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. 20 EXECUTIVE PARK, SUITE 200 IRVINE, CALIFORNIA 926 I4 fug 0VK6x f: ►�Nff1_x1 I DATE: February 20, 2015 BERKELEY FRESNO RIVERSIDE 949 553.0666 TEL CARLSBAD PALM SPRINGS ROCKLIN 949 553 8076 FAX FORT COLLINS PT, RICHMOND SAN LUIS OBISPO To: Mel Lee, AICP, Senior Planner, City of Costa Mesa CC: Claire L. Flynn, AICP, Assistant Development Services Director, City of Costa Mesa FROM: Ryan Bensley, Senior Environmental Planner, LSA Associates, Inc. SUBJECT: Responses to Comments on the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Prepared for the Ganahl Lumber Hardware Store and Lumber Yard Project (Planning Application No. PA -14-40) This memorandum provides a summary of the comments received by the City of Costa Mesa during the public review period or immediately thereafter for the Draft Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) for the Ganahl Lumber Hardware Store and Lumber Yard Project (proposed project). The purpose of this memorandum is to address all comments received by the City of Costa Mesa (City) from public agencies regarding the environmental information and analyses contained in the Draft IS/MND. As required by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines (State CEQA Guidelines) Section 15087, a Notice of Completion (NOC) of the Draft IS/MND for the proposed project was filed with the State Clearinghouse on January 22, 2015, and the Notice of Intent (NOI) to Adopt an MND was filed with the County of Orange (County) Clerk on January 23, 2015. The Draft IS/MND was circulated for public review for a period of 30 days, from January 23, 2015, to February 22, 2015. The NOI and/or copies of the Draft IS/MND were distributed to all Responsible Agencies and to the State Clearinghouse in addition to various public agencies, citizen groups, and interested individuals. Copies of the Draft IS/MND were also made available for public review at the City's Public Counter, the Mesa Verde Library, and the Costa Mesa/Donald Dungan Library, and on the City's website. A total of 2 comment letters were received during the public review period or immediately thereafter. Both comment letters were submitted by local agencies. As described in CEQA Guidelines Section 15074(b), "[p]rior to approving a project, the decision- making body of the lead agency [in this case, the City's Planning Commission], shall consider the proposed... mitigated negative declaration together with any comments received during the public review process. The decision-making body shall adopt the proposed... mitigated negative declaration only if it finds on the basis of the whole record before it (including the initial study and any comments received), that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment and that the... mitigated negative declaration reflects the lead agency's independent judgment and analysis." 2/20/15 (C:\Users\LEE_M\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\Temporary Intemet Files\Content.Outlook\2VAZIGDW\Response to Comments Memo.doc) LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. Although the City is not required by CEQA to respond to the comments submitted on the Draft IS/MND, a summary of each comment is provided below along with a draft response. The following is an index list of the agencies, organizations, and individuals that commented on the Draft IS/MND. Each comment letter received is indexed with a number below. Comment Code Signatory Date Local Agencies L4 City of Santa Ana January 26, 2015 L-2 Orange County Public Works February 11, 2015 Draft responses to each of the comment letters are provided herein. The City's responses to each comment letter immediately follow each letter and are referenced by the index numbers in the margins. 2/20/15 (C:\Users\LEE_M\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\Temporaryinternet Files\Content.Outlook\2VAZIGDW\Response to Comments 2 Memo.doc) MAYOR Miguel A. Pulido MAYOR PRO TEM Vincent F. Sarmiento COUNCILMEMBERS Angelica Amezcua P. David Benavides Michele Martinez Roman Reyna Sal Tinajero January 26, 2015 Claire Flynn, Asst. City of Costa Mesa 77 Fair Drive CITY OF SANTA ANA PLANNING & BUILDING AGENCY 20 Civic Center Plaza P.O. Box 1988 . Santa Ana, California 92702 www.santa-ana.org/pba Development Services Director Costa Mesa, CA 92628 CITY MAN,ZER David Cawos CITY ATTORNEY Sonia R. rvalho CLERK OF THE COUNCIL Maria D. Hulzar Subject: Ganahl Lumber Costa Mesa Relocation Project (Planning Application No. PA - 14 -40 Dear Ms. Flynn: Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this project. Although we have no comments at this time, we look forward to updates as the project progresses. For L-1-1 questions, you may contact Hally Soboleske, Associate Planner at (714) 647-5842 or at hsoboleske@santa-ana.org. Sincerely, Hally Sobol ske Associate Planner HS: Hs/correspondence/150112_GanahlMltNeg Dec.docx C: Ivan Orozco, Assistant Planner SANTA ANA CITY COUNCIL Miguel A. Pulido Vincent F. Sannlenlo Michele Martinez Angellca Amezcua P. David Benavides Roman Reyna Sal TinaJero Mayor Mayor Pro Tem, Ward 1 Ward 2 Ward 3 Ward 4 Ward 5 Ward 6 MPulldok�sanla-ana.org VSarmlentoftsanla-ana.oro MMartlnezCdlsante-ena.gM AAmezcuai LSA ASSOCIATES, INC CITY OF SANTA ANA LETTER CODE: L-1 DATE: January 26, 2015 RESPONSE L-1-1 This comment indicates that the City of Santa Ana does not have any comments on the Draft Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) at this time. This comment has been noted. No response is necessary. 2/20/15 (C:\Users\LEE_M\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\Temporary Internet Files\Content.Outlook\2VAZIGDW\Response to Comments 4 Memo.doc) J �^ 6% L-2 PublileWorks Integrity, Accountability, Service, Trust Shane L. Silsby, Director Memorandum DATE: February 11, 2015 TO: Claire Flynn, City of Costa Mesa Development Services (claire.flynn@costamesaca.gov) FROM: Hossein Ajideh, Chief, OC Infrastructure Programs/OC Flood Support/Hydrology SUBJECT: Initial Study/ Notice to Adopt Mitigated negative Declaration for the Ganahl Lumber Hardware Store and Lumber Yard project, City of Costa Mesa In response to your request, Hydrology Section of OC Public Works/OC Infrastructure Programs reviewed the submitted document and offer the following comments: 1. It appears the east side of the proposed project area is adjacent to Santa Ana -Delhi Channel (F01). All work (if any) within or adjacent to any OCFCD right-of-way for regional flood control facilities should be conducted so as not to adversely impact channel's structural integrity, hydraulic flow conditions, access and maintainability. Furthermore, all work within OCFCD's right-of-way should be conducted only after an encroachment permit for the proposed work has been obtained from the County. For information regarding the permit application process and other details please refer to the County Property Permit Section link on OC Planning's website http://ocplanning.net/. Technical reviews and approvals for the proposed work will be accomplished within the permit process. If you have any questions regarding these comments, please contact me at (714) 245-4503. Ho ein.Ajideh- 5:\Flood Program\Hydrology\Anna Brzezicki\NCL, EIR\2015\Log # 698 NOP to Adopt MND for Ganahl Lumber Hardware Store and Yard, City of Costa Mesa.doc 300 N. Flower Street, Santa Ana, CA 92703 P.O. Box 4048, Santa Ana, CA 92702-4048 L-2-1 www.ocpublicworks.com 714 667.8800 1 Info@OCPW.ocgov.com LSA ASSOCIATES. INC. ORANGE COUNTY PUBLIC WORKS LETTER CODE: L-2 DATE: February 11, 2015 RESPONSE L-2-1 This comment notes that all work within or adjacent to any Orange County Flood Control District (OCFCD) right-of-way for regional flood control facilities should be conducted so as not to adversely impact the structural integrity, hydraulic flow conditions, access and maintainability of the Santa Ana -Delhi Channel. The comment also notes that an encroachment permit should be obtained from the County prior to any work within OCFCD's right-of-way and provides information regarding the County's permit application process. This comment has been noted. As noted in Chapter 2.0, Project Description, of the Draft IS/MND, the proposed project would allow the OCFCD to continue to access and maintain the Santa Ana -Delhi Channel beneath the project site. As described in Section 3.9, Hydrology and Water Quality, of the Draft IS/MND, the Santa Ana Delhi Channel would not be affected by the proposed project. Although no project -related work is anticipated within OCFCD's right-of-way, the City acknowledges that the Applicant would be required to obtain an encroachment permit from the County prior to conducting such work, if it should become necessary for any reason. No further response is necessary. 2/20/15 (C:\Users\LEE_M\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\Temporary [ntemet Files\Content.Outlook\2VAZiGDW\Response to Comments 6 Memo.doc) LS A LSA ECUTI EPAR ,C. 20 EXECUTIVE PARK, SUITE 200 IRVINE, CALIFORNIA 926[4 ffuIusT KOM\_ 2 � ,� DATE: February 23, 2015 _N -a BERKELEY FRESNO RIVERSIDE 949 553 0666 TEL CARLSBAD PALM SPRINGS ROCKLIN 949 553 8076 FAX FORT COLLINS PT RICHMOND SAN LUIS OBISPO TO: Mel Lee, AICP, Senior Planner, City of Costa Mesa CC: Claire L. Flynn, AICP, Assistant Development Services Director, City of Costa Mesa FROM: Ryan Bensley, Senior Environmental Planner, LSA Associates, Inc. SUBJECT: Responses to Additional Comments on the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Prepared for the Ganahl Lumber Hardware Store and Lumber Yard Project (Planning Application No. PA -14-40) Following the distribution of a Supplemental Memorandum to the Planning Commission on Friday, February 20, 2015, the City of Costa Mesa (City) received one additional comment letter regarding the Draft Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) for the Ganahl Lumber Hardware Store and Lumber Yard Project (proposed project). The purpose of this supplemental memorandum is to address this additional comment letter regarding the environmental information and analyses contained in the Draft IS/MND. As required by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines (State CEQA Guidelines) Section 15087, a Notice of Completion (NOC) of the Draft IS/MND for the proposed project was filed with the State Clearinghouse on January 22, 2015, and the Notice of Intent (NOI) to Adopt an MND was filed with the County of Orange (County) Clerk on January 23, 2015. The Draft IS/MND was circulated for public review for a period of 30 days, from January 23, 2015, to February 22, 2015. The NOI and/or copies of the Draft IS/MND were distributed to all Responsible Agencies and to the State Clearinghouse in addition to various public agencies, citizen groups, and interested individuals. Copies of the Draft IS/MND were also made available for public review at the City's Public Counter, the Mesa Verde Library, and the Costa Mesa/Donald Dungan Library, and on the City's website. As described in CEQA Guidelines Section 15074(b), "[p]rior to approving a project, the decision- making body of the lead agency [in this case, the City's Planning Commission], shall consider the proposed... mitigated negative declaration together with any comments received during the public review process. The decision-making body shall adopt the proposed... mitigated negative declaration only if it finds on the basis of the whole record before it (including the initial study and any comments received), that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment and that the... mitigated negative declaration reflects the lead agency's independent judgment and analysis." Although the City is not required by CEQA to respond to the comments submitted on the Draft IS/MND, a summary of each comment is provided below along with a draft response. 2/23/15 (C:\Users\L.EE_M\AppData\L.ocal\Microsoft\Windows\Temporary [ntemet Files\Content.Outlook\2VAZIGDW\Response to 1072 Bristol Comments.doc) —190— 1072 Bristol Partners, LP I-1 1072 Bristol Street, Suite 100 Costa Mesa, CA 92626 February 19, 2015 VIA E-MAIL & FACSIMILE Claire Flynn, Asst. Development Services Director City of Costa Mesa 77 Fair Drive Costa Mesa, CA 92628 Re: Comment to Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the proposed Ganahl Lumber Project Dear Ms. Flynn: I am an owner representative of the ownership of 1072 Bristol Street. Our property is across Bristol from the proposed Mega Ganahl Lumber project. We are not being provided with adequate information about this giant project right across the street. What is referred to as "The Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration" does not come close to addressing the many impacts of the Mega Ganahl. A I-1-2 great deal of it is false. What remains is inadequate. The "conclusions" asserted are not made in good faith. The "analysis" regarding land use is based on many wrong assumptions. A fundamental wrong assumption is that the Mega Ganahl is permitted under the City's zoning. It does not come close. The traffic "analysis" is also totally inadequate and seems to be purposefully so. It fails to address the traffic impacts on the south side of Bristol. 11- 1460456,1 The aesthetics "analysis" is also not adequate. S` rely, Joseph E. Miller ---Iq'- 1-I-5 i-sA assoCi.Arrs. [yc 1072 BRISTOL PARTNERS, LP LETTER CODE: I-1 DATE: February 19, 2015 RESPONSE I-1-1 This comment explains that the commenter represents 1072 Bristol Partners, LP, the owner of 1072 Bristol Street, which is located across Bristol from the project site. Comment noted. RESPONSE I-1-2 This comment claims that the Draft Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) does not contain adequate information about the proposed project, fails to address the proposed project's environmental impacts, and contains false information. The commenter appears to suggest that the proposed project would result in impacts related to environmental topic areas without providing any basis for their claims. The commenter also appears to be unfamiliar with the CEQA-mandated scope of environmental review and the concept of thresholds of significance. In accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15204(c), [r]eviewers should explain the basis for their comments, and should submit data or references offering facts, reasonable assumptions based on facts, or expert opinion supported by facts in support of the comments. CEQA Guidelines Section 15204(c) also states that effects shall not be considered significant in the absence of substantial evidence. Therefore, because the commenter fails to provide any facts or evidence in support of the claims included in their comments, such comments are considered to be personal opinions and no further response is required by the City. As described on page 1 of the Draft IS/MND, "[t]he purpose of this Initial Study (IS)/Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) is to evaluate the potential environmental impacts that would occur as a result of construction and the subsequent operation of the Ganahl Hardware Store and Lumber Yard...," as required by CEQA. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15382, a "significant impact" or "significant effect" means "a substantial, or potentially substantial, adverse change in any of the physical conditions within the area affected by the project." For each environmental impact issue analyzed, the Draft IS/MND includes a detailed explanation of the existing conditions, thresholds of significance that will be applied to determine whether the project's impacts are significant or less than significant, analysis of the environmental impacts against established thresholds, and a determination of whether the project would have a significant impact if implemented. A proper understanding and application of thresholds of significance is an essential part of the CEQA process. Thresholds of significance are identifiable quantitative, qualitative, or performance level metrics for a particular environmental effect, which form the basis of conclusions of significance in the Draft IS/MND. While public agencies in California are free to adopt their own significance 2/23/15 (C:\Users\LEE_M\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\Temporary Intemet Files\Content.Outlook\2VAZIGDW\Response to 1072 Bristol Comments.doc) LSA ASSOCATGS, INC thresholds, most agencies, including the City of Costa Mesa, rely on the significance thresholds included in Appendix G of the State CEQA Guidelines. In addition, the City has adopted its own format for Initial Study and Initial Study Checklist forms. For each environmental topic analyzed in the Draft IS/MND, the measured impacts of the project were evaluated against the significance thresholds for that topic. In this manner, the Draft IS/MND presented a qualitative or quantitative impact discussion for each applicable environmental topic. The Draft IS/MND was prepared in a manner consistent with professional industry standards. Chapter 2.0, Project Description, of the Draft IS/MND contains a detailed description of the proposed project's various design elements, including the height and square footage of the proposed project's structures, floorplans, elevations, and renderings, and information regarding the operational characteristics of the proposed project. This comment does not explain the basis for their claim that the Draft IS/MND contains false information. Therefore, the City is unable to respond to the commenter's claims regarding the alleged inclusion of false information in the document. RESPONSE I-1-3 This comment asserts that the land use analysis in the Draft IS/MND is based on many wrong assumptions and claims that the proposed project is not permitted under the City's Zoning Ordinance. As described in Section 3.10, Land Use/Planning, of the Draft IS/MND, the Zoning Ordinance designation for the project site is C1 (Local Business). The C1 zoning designation allows for a variety of commercial and industrial land uses, including hardware stores and the retail sale of building supplies, which are applicable to the proposed project. Further, as described in Table 3.10.A of the Draft IS/MND, the proposed project would be consistent with all applicable City development standards set forth in the City's Zoning Ordinance for the C1 zoning designation; however, as described in Table 3.10.A, the proposed project would require variances from the maximum height limit of two stories/30 feet in the C 1 zone to allow a maximum height of 41 feet related to the elevator/stairwell overrun, and 34 feet for the solar roof canopy, B Shed, and the roof -deck parking level. In addition, a Planned Sign Program would be required to allow a proposed sign height of 25 feet, which is higher than the maximum 12 -foot height allowed by the development standards contained in the City's Zoning Ordinance. With approval of such variances, the proposed project would be consistent with the City's Zoning Code. The proposed project would be a compatible use subject to a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) that would allow for a hardware store and outdoor storage yard in an area zoned for commercial uses. These uses are similar to the uses at the existing Ganahl hardware store and lumber yard adjacent to the project site. With approval of the CUP and Development Review, the proposed project would be consistent with applicable goals and policies outlined in the City's General Plan and development standards outlined in the City's Zoning Code. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not result in conflicts with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation applicable to the project. 2/23/15 (C:\Users\LEE_M\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\Temporary Internet Files\Content.Outlook\2VAZIGDW\Response to 1072 Bristol 4 Comments.doc) --193- LSA AS SOCIA rGS. IVC. This comment does not explain the basis for their claim that the land use analysis in the Draft IS/MND is based on wrong assumptions. Therefore, the City is unable to respond to the commenter's claims regarding the assumptions in the document. RESPONSE I-1-4 This comment claims that the traffic analysis in the Draft IS/MND is intentionally inadequate and fails to address the traffic impacts on the south side of Bristol Street. Section 3.16, Transportation/Traffic, of the Draft IS/MND analyzes whether the proposed project would result in significant environmental impacts related to traffic and transportation. As described above in the Response to Comment I-1-2, the environmental impact analysis contained in the Draft IS/MND is based on the thresholds included in Appendix G of the State CEQA Guidelines. Other than claiming that the traffic analysis fails to address the traffic impacts on the south side of Bristol Street, this comment fails to explain why the analysis included in Section 3.16 of the Draft IS/MND is inadequate. The traffic analysis evaluated traffic impacts at three existing study intersections along Bristol Street (Southbound Newport Boulevard at Bristol Street, Northbound Newport Boulevard at Bristol Street, and Red Hill Avenue/Santa Ana Avenue at Bristol Street). These key locations were selected for evaluation based on discussions with City staff and in consideration of the Orange County Congestion Management Program. The traffic impact analysis considered potential increases in traffic volumes and delay at each of the legs of the study intersections. Therefore, the impact analysis considered the potential for traffic impacts to occur along both northbound and southbound Bristol Street in the vicinity of the project site. RESPONSE I-1-5 This comment asserts that the aesthetics analysis contained in the Draft IS/MND is inadequate. Section 3. 1, Aesthetics, of the Draft IS/MND analyzes whether the proposed project would result in significant environmental impacts related to aesthetics, including scenic vistas, scenic resources, visual character, or light or glare sources. As described above in the Response to Comment I-1-2, the environmental impact analysis contained in the Draft IS/MND is based on the thresholds included in Appendix G of the State CEQA Guidelines. This comment fails to explain why the analysis included in Section 3.1 of the Draft IS/MND is inadequate. No further response is required. 2/23/15 (C:\Users\LEE_M\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\Temporary Intemet Files\Content.Outlook\2VAZIGDW\Response to 1072 Bristol Comments.doc) `Ir7-1 ATTACHMENT 6 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION RESOLUTION NO. PC -15-11 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF COSTA MESA ADOPTING THE INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION PA -14-40 FOR THE RELOCATION AND EXPANSION OF GANAHL LUMBER LOCATED AT 1100 BRISTOL STREET THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF COSTA MESA HEREBY RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: WHEREAS, an application was filed Patrick Ganahl, representing the County of Orange, the property owner, requesting approval of the following: Planning Application PA -14-40: The proposed project involves the development of a 6.6 acre vacant lot to accommodate the relocation of the Costa Mesa Ganahl Lumber store to a site owned by the County of Orange and leased to Ganahl Lumber. The existing Costa Mesa Ganahl Lumber store is located on an adjacent property to the east and would be closed once the new store is completed. The development proposal includes the following.- 0 ollowing:• Development Review for the construction of a 65,263 square foot building materials retail store with administrative offices (Main Building A). A total of 286 parking spaces are proposed; 108 parking stalls would be provided on the roof of the retail building; and 178 at -grade parking stalls would be provided throughout the project site; • Variance from front setback requirement for the parking lot, B Shed and Mill Shed along Bristol Street (20 -foot setback required; 10 -foot setback proposed); • Variance from maximum building height for the solar photovoltaic canopy and elevator overrun on Main Building A (30 -foot maximum height allowed; 34 feet to the solar canopy and 41 feet to the top of the elevator proposed); • Variance from maximum building height for the B Shed (30 -foot maximum allowed; 34 feet proposed); • Conditional Use Permit for the proposed outdoor storage yard consisting of three sheds (B Shed, Mill Shed, and Pole Shed) totaling 40,925 square feet; and • Planned Signing Program to allow the proposed 24 -foot high freestanding sign (12 feet allowed, 24 feet proposed). WHEREAS, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), an Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared and circulated from January 23, 2015 to February 22, 2015 for public review and comment. WHEREAS, the City of Costa Mesa received written comments from the general public, government entities, and other interested parties during the public review period. WHEREAS, written comments received from the general public, government entities, and other interested parties were responded to, where appropriate, in the manner prescribed in California Code of Regulations Section 15073. WHEREAS, no significant new information has been added to the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration and no changes to the proposed project have occurred which would require recirculation of the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration under CEQA Guidelines Section 15073.5. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed all environmental documents comprising the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration and has found that the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration considers all environmental impacts of the proposed project and a reasonable range of alternatives, and the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration is complete, adequate, and fully complies with all requirements of CEQA, the CEQA Guidelines, and the City of Costa Mesa Environmental Guidelines. WHEREAS, the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for this project reflects the independent judgment of the City of Costa Mesa. WHEREAS, a duly noticed public hearing was held by the Planning Commission on February 23, 2015 with all persons having the opportunity to speak for and against the proposal. BE IT RESOLVED that, based on the evidence in the record and the findings contained in Exhibit A, and subject to the conditions of approval and mitigation measures indicated in the Mitigation Monitoring Program contained within Exhibits B and C, respectively, the Planning Commission hereby ADOPTS the Initial Study/Mitigated Declaration and APPROVES Planning Application PA -14-40. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Costa Mesa Planning Commission does hereby find and determine that adoption of this Resolution is expressly predicated upon the activity as described in the staff report for Planning Application PA -14-40 and upon the applicant's compliance with each and all of the conditions in Exhibits B, the ._ 1 -h - Mitigation Monitoring Program in Exhibit C, and compliance of all applicable federal, state, and local laws. Any approval granted by this resolution shall be subject to review, modification or revocation if there is a material change that occurs in the operation, or if the applicant fails to comply with any of the conditions of approval and/or mitigation measures. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that if any section, division, sentence, clause, phrase or portion of this resolution, or the documents in the record in support of this resolution, are for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining provisions. PASSED AND ADOPTED this 23rd day of February, 2015 �I Robert Dickson, Chair Costa Mesa Planning Commission -11,3- STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) ) ss COUNTY OF ORANGE ) I, Claire Flynn, Secretary to the Planning Commission of the City of Costa Mesa, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 15-11 was passed and adopted at a meeting of the City of Costa Mesa Planning Commission held on February 23, 2015 by the following votes: AYES: Dickson, Mathews, McCarthy, Sesler, Andranian NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None Claire L. Flynn, Secretary Costa Mesa Planning Commission I1q — EXHIBIT B CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Ping. 1. Planning Application PA -14-40 shall comply with the conditions of approval, code requirements, special district requirements, and mitigation measures of the IS/MND forthis project and as listed in the attached Mitigation Monitoring Program (Exhibit C). 2. The use shall be limited to the type of operation as described in the staff report. Any change in the operational characteristics including, but not limited to, the hours of operation indicated, shall require review by the Planning Division and may require an amendment to the conditional use permit, subject to either Zoning Administrator or Planning Commission approval, depending on the nature of the proposed change. The applicant is reminded that Code allows the Planning Commission to modify or revoke any planning application based on findings related to public nuisance and/or noncompliance with conditions of approval [Title 13, Section 13-29(0)]. 3 If parking shortages or other parking -related problems arise, the business operator shall institute whatever reasonable operational measures necessary to minimize or eliminate the problem. 4. The business operator shall install bike racks for employees on the site. This condition shall be completed prior to final occupancy/start of business, under the direction of the Development Services Department. 5. Mitigation measures from the IS/MND for this project have been included as Exhibit C. If any of these conditions are removed, the Planning Commission must make a finding that the project will not result in significant environmental impacts, that the conditions are within the responsibility of another public agency, or that specific economic, social, or other considerations make the mitigation measures infeasible. 6. The conditions of approval including Mitigation Measures incorporated by reference in these Conditions of Approval as Exhibit C, code requirements, and special district requirements of PA -14-40 shall be blueprinted on the face of the site plan as part of the plan check submittal package. 7. Prior to issuance of building permits, a final landscape plan indicating the landscape palette and the design/material of paved areas shall be submitted for review and approval by the Planning Division. 8. Landscaping and irrigation shall be installed in accordance with the approved plans prior to final inspection or occupancy clearance. 9. Landscaping along Bristol Street shall be planted with trees and vegetation. The landscape plan shall be approved prior to issuance of building permits and shall contain additional 24 -inch box trees above the minimum Code requirements to the satisfaction of the Development Services Director. Compliance with this requirement may include upgrading smaller sized trees to 24 -inch box trees or providing additional 24 -inch box trees. 10. Developer shall contact the City's Transportation Services Division and the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) to replace the chain link -- I So- fencing between the subject property and the Caltrans property abutting the 73 and 55 Freeways with a combination wrought iron fence with pilaster supports or other fence/barrier acceptable to both the City and Caltrans. The fencing shall be submitted for review and approval by the Planning Division. Issuance of certificate of occupancy shall not be withheld pending the completion of this condition; however, the applicant shall provide documentation of the progress and estimated time of completion of the condition prior to the issuance of the certificate of occupancy 11. No mechanical equipment or other rooftop appurtenances shall be located on the elevator overrun area of Main Building A above the approved 41 - foot height limit. 12. Future installation of rooftop solar canopies on the outdoor storage sheds (i.e. Pole Shed, Shed B, and Mill Shed) may be approved by the Development Services Director as an amendment to the Conditional Use Permit, provided that there are no adverse impacts (light, glare) to surrounding properties. 13. Final location of the gate and proper signage of the hours of operation at the gated entrance shall be approved by the Development Services Director and Transportation Services Manager to avoid customer confusion and circulation impacts on Bristol Street. 14. The business operator shall require that Ganahl Lumber employee vehicles be exclusively parked in the rooftop parking level in order to make the at -grade parking lot available for customers/contractors to the fullest extent possible. 15. Prior to issuance of building permits, developer shall contact the U.S. Postal Service with regard to location and design of mail delivery facilities. Such facilities shall be shown on the site plan, landscape plan, and/or floor plan. 16. No modification(s) of the approved building elevations including, but not limited to, change of architectural type, changes that increase the building height, removal of building articulation, or a change of the finish material(s), shall be made during construction without prior Planning Division written approval. Failure to obtain prior Planning Division approval of the modification could result in the requirement of the applicant to (re)process the modification through a discretionary review process or a variance, or in the requirement to modify the construction to reflect the approved plans. —1191— 17. No exterior roof access ladders, roof drain scuppers, or roof drain downspouts are permitted. This condition relates to visually prominent features of scuppers or downspouts that not only detract from the architecture but may be spilling water from overhead without an integrated gutter system which would typically channel the rainwater from the scupper/downspout to the ground. An integrated downspout/gutter system which is painted to match the building would comply with the condition. This condition shall be completed under the direction of the Planning Division. 18. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the applicant shall submit a Lighting Plan and Photometric Study for the approval of the City's Development Services Department. The Lighting Plan shall demonstrate compliance with the following: • All site lighting fixtures shall be provided with a flat glass lens. Photometric calculations shall indicate the effect of the flat glass lens fixture efficiency. • Lighting design and layout shall limit spill light to no more than 0.5 foot-candle at the property line of the surrounding properties, consistent with the level of lighting that is determined necessary for safety and security purposes on site. • Light standards located at the top level of the parking structure shall be a maximum of 15 feet in height, located and oriented in such a way as to minimize light spillage onto surrounding properties. Light standards shall be custom -fitted with glare shields to focus light spillage in the parking structure area to the fullest extent possible. 19. It is recommended that the project incorporate green building design and construction techniques where feasible. The applicant may contact the Building Safety Division at (714) 754-5273 for additional information. CAL Green Code or higher as determined by applicant. 20. Prior to issuance of grading permits, developer shall submit for review and approval a Construction Management Plan. This plan features methods to minimize disruption to the neighboring residential uses to the fullest extent that is reasonable and practicable. The plan shall include construction parking and vehicle access and specifying staging areas and delivery and hauling truck routes. The plan should mitigate disruption to residents during construction. The truck route plan shall preclude truck routes through residential areas and major truck traffic during peak hours. The total truck trips to the site shall not exceed 200 trucks per day (i.e., 100 truck trips to the site plus 100 truck trips from the site) unless approved by the Development Services Director or Transportation Services Manager. 21. The subject property's ultimate finished grade level may not be filled/raised in excess of 36 inches above the finished grade of any abutting property. If additional fill dirt is needed to provide acceptable on-site storm water flow to a public street, an alternative means of accommodating that drainage shall be approved by the City's Building Official prior to issuance of any grading or building permits. Such alternatives may include subsurface tie-in to public storm water facilities, subsurface drainage collection systems and/or sumps with mechanical pump discharge in -lieu of gravity flow. If mechanical pump method is determined appropriate, said mechanical pump(s) shall continuously be maintained in working order. In any case, development of subject property shall preserve or improve the existing pattern of drainage on abutting properties. 22. The applicant shall contact the Planning Division to arrange a Planning inspection of the site prior to the release of occupancy/utilities. This inspection is to confirm that the conditions of approval and code requirements have been satisfied. 23. Transformers, backflow preventers, and any other approved above- ground utility improvement shall be located outside of the required street setback area and shall be screened from view, under direction of Planning staff. Any deviation from this requirement shall be subject to review and approval of the Development Services Director. 24. A comprehensive sign program shall be submitted for all on-site signs (i.e., monument, directional, wall mounted) for review and approval of the Development Services Director prior to issuance of building permits. 25. The applicant shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City, its elected and appointed officials, agents, officers and employees from any claim, action, or proceeding (collectively referred to as "proceeding") brought against the City, its elected and appointed officials, agents, officers or employees arising out of, or which are in any way related to, the applicant's project, or any approvals granted by City related to the applicant's project. The indemnification shall include, but not be limited to, damages, fees and/or costs awarded against the City, if any, and cost of suit, attorney's fees, and other costs, liabilities and expenses incurred in connection with such proceeding whether incurred by the applicant, the City and/or the parties initiating or bringing such proceeding. This indemnity provision shall include the applicant's obligation to indemnify the City for all the City's costs, fees, and damages that the City incurs in enforcing the indemnification provisions set forth in this section. City shall have the right to choose its own legal counsel to represent the City's interests, and applicant shall indemnify City for all such costs incurred by City. Eng. 26. Maintain the public right-of-way in a "wet -down" condition to prevent excessive dust and promptly remove any spillage from the public right-of- way by sweeping or sprinkling. • Trans. 27. Design and construct the improvements required for providing a signalized access to the project site at the intersection of Bristol Street and Newport Boulevard Northbound. The applicant will be responsible for procuring all applicable permits and approvals from Caltrans and City of Costa Mesa prior to beginning of construction. Street 28. Trees within the 10 -foot landscape setback along the Bristol Street Trees frontage shall complement the tabebuia avellanedae street trees required to be planted within the public right-of-way per Code Requirement number 34. The applicant shall contact the City Arborist for preferred tree types and additional information. City 29. Prior to issuance of a building permit, applicant shall remit documentation Atty. verifying the approval of: (a) Required encroachment permit from the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) and (b) Ground lease from the Orange County Flood Control District. The Development Services Director may modify/extend the timing of the required submissions as necessary. Ping. 30. The applicant shall submit a transition management plan to the satisfaction Comm. of the Development Services Director that provides a cohesive plan for the closure of the existing operation and opening of the project prior to issuance of certificate of occupancy. 31. The applicant shall provide enhanced building treatment and materials on the B Shed and Mill Shed elevations facing Bristol Street, subject to review and approval by the Development Services Director. CODE REQUIREMENTS The following list of federal, state and local laws applicable to the project has been compiled by staff for the applicant's reference. Any reference to "City" pertains to the City of Costa Mesa. Ping. 1. All contractors and subcontractors must have valid business licenses to do business in the City of Costa Mesa. Final inspections, final occupancy and utility releases will not be granted until all such licenses have been obtained. 2. Address assignment shall be requested from the Planning Division prior to submittal of working drawings for plan check. The approved address of individual units, suites, buildings, etc., shall be blueprinted on the site plan and on all floor plans in the working drawings. 3. Prior to issuance of building permits, applicant shall contact the US Postal Service with regard to location and design of mail delivery facilities. Such facilities shall be shown on the site plan, landscape plan, and/or floor plan. 4. Hours of construction shall comply with Section 13-279, Title 13, of the Costa Mesa Municipal Code. • 5. Two (2) sets of detailed landscape and irrigation plans, which meet the requirements set forth in Costa Mesa Municipal Code Sections 13-101 through 13-108 and the City's Water Efficient Landscape Guidelines, shall be required as part of the project plan check review and approval process. Plans shall be forwarded to the Planning Division for final approval prior to issuance of building permits. 6. Two (2) sets of landscape and irrigation plans, approved by the Planning Division, shall be attached to two of the final building plan sets. 7. All on-site utility services shall be installed underground. 8. Installation of all utility meters shall be performed in a manner so as to obscure the installation from view from any place on or off the property. The installation shall be in a manner acceptable to the public utility and shall be in the form of a vault, wall cabinet, or wall box under the direction of the Planning Division. 9. Any mechanical equipment such as air-conditioning equipment and duct work shall be screened from view in a manner approved by the Planning Division. 10. Prior to approval of plans, the project shall fulfill the City of Costa Mesa Drainage Ordinance No. 06-19 requirements. Bldg. 11. Comply with the requirements of the 2013 California Building Code, 2013 California Residential Code, 2013 California Electrical Code, 2013 California Mechanical Code, 2013 California Plumbing Code, 2013 California Green Building Standards Code and 2013 California Energy Code (or the applicable adopted, California Building Code, California Electrical Code, California Mechanical Code, California Plumbing Code, California Green Building Standards, and California Energy Code at the time of plan submittal or permit issuance) and California Code of Regulations also known as the California Building Standards Code, as amended by the City of Costa Mesa. 12. Submit precise grading plans, an erosion control plan, and a hydrology study. 13. Submit a soils report for this project. Soil's report recommendations shall be blueprinted on both the architectural and grading plans. 14. On graded sites the top of exterior foundation shall extend above the elevation of the street gutter at point of discharge or the inlet of an approved discharge devise a minimum of 12 inches plus 2 percent. 2013 California Building Code Section 1808.7.4. 15. The ground immediately adjacent to the foundation shall be sloped away from the building at a slope of not less than 5% for a minimum distance of 10 feet measured perpendicular to the face of the wall per BCB Section 1804.3 Trans 16. All construction contractors shall comply with South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) regulations, including Rule 403, Fugitive Dust. All grading (regardless of acreage) shall apply best available control measures for fugitive dust in accordance with Rule 403. To ensure that the project is in full compliance with applicable SCAQMD dust regulations and that there is no nuisance impact off the site, the contractor would implement each of the following: a. Moisten soil not more than 15 minutes prior to moving soil or conduct whatever watering is necessary to prevent visible dust emissions from exceeding 100 feet in any direction. b. Apply chemical stabilizers to disturbed surface areas (completed grading areas) within five days of completing grading or apply dust suppressants or vegetation sufficient to maintain a stabilized surface. c. Water excavated soil piles hourly or covered with temporary coverings. d. Water exposed surfaces at least twice a day under calm conditions. Water as often as needed on windy days when winds are less than 25 miles per day or during very dry weather in order to maintain a surface crust and prevent the release of visible emissions from the construction site. e. Wash mud -covered tired and under -carriages of trucks leaving construction sites. f. Provide for street sweeping, as needed, on adjacent roadways to remove dirt dropped by construction vehicles or mud, which would otherwise be carried off by trucks departing project sites. g. Securely cover loads with a tight fitting tarp on any truck leaving the construction sites to dispose of debris. h. Cease grading during period when winds exceed 25 miles per hour, 17. Construct all proposed driveway approaches to comply with city standards. 18. Fulfill mitigation of off-site traffic impacts at the time of issuance of occupancy by submitting to the Planning Division the required traffic impact fee pursuant to the prevailing schedule of charges adopted by the City Council. The traffic impact fee is calculated including credits for all existing uses. NOTE: The Traffic Impact Fee will be recalculated at the time of issuance of building permit/certificate of occupancy based upon any changes in the prevailing schedule of charges adopted by the City Council and in effect at that time. 19. Fulfill San Joaquin Hills Transportation Corridor Fee Ordinance (if applicable) at the time of issuance of building permit by submitting the required fee to the Transportation Services Division. Note that the fee is subject to revision and possible increase July 1 of each year. 20. Close unused drive approaches, or portion of, with full height curb and gutter that comply with City Standards. 21. Delivery truck gate shall be designed to prevent trucks from backing up onto Bristol Street. Eng, 22. At the time of development submit for approval an offsite plan to the engineering division and grading plan to the building division that shows sewer, water, existing parkway improvements and the limits of work on the site, and hydrology calculations, both prepared by a registered civil engineer or architect. Cross lot drainage shall not occur. Construction access approval must be obtained prior to building or engineering permits being issued by the city of costa mesa. Pay offsite plan check fee per section 13-231 of the C.C.M.M.C. and an approved offsite plan shall be required prior to engineering permits being issued by the City Of Costa Mesa. 23. A construction access permit and deposit of $1,230.00 will be required by City of Costa Mesa, engineering division prior to start of any on-site work, necessary during construction for street sweeping and to guarantee replacement costs in case of damage to existing public improvements. 24. Obtain a permit from the City of Costa Mesa, engineering division, at the time of development and then construct P.C.C. driveway approaches per City Of Costa Mesa standards as shown on the offsite plan. Location and dimensions are subject to the approval of the transportation services manager. ADA compliance required for all new driveway approaches. 25. Obtain a permit from the City Of Costa Mesa, Engineering Division, at the time of development and then remove any existing driveways and/or curb depressions that will not be used and replace with full height curb and sidewalk. 26. Fulfill City Of Costa Mesa Drainage Ordinance No. 06-19 requirements prior to approval of plans. 27. Submit to the Engineering Division a storm runoff study showing existing and proposed facilities and the method of draining this area and tributary areas without exceeding the capacity of any street or drainage facility on- site or off-site to the satisfaction of the city engineer. If possible, drain the entire site directly to the flood control channel. Fire 28. Provide (4) Class A fire hydrants at the direction of the Fire Department. See Fire Prevention. 29. Flammable Fuel Storage and use shall comply with California Fire Code, 2013. 30. Provide fire sprinkler systems for all buildings per NFPA 13, 2013. 31. Provide Fire Department key access per CMFD standards. 32. Provide 12 inch address on building and at street. Address must be visible form the street and contrast in color with its background. —I99— 33. A Fire Master Plan shall be approved by CMFD prior to formal building submittal. Street 34. Create not more than fifteen (15) — 4'X4' tree wells adjacent to curb and Trees plant fifteen (15) 24" Box size Tabebuia avellanedae along Bristol Street. SPECIAL DISTRICT REQUIREMENTS The requirements of the following special districts are hereby forwarded to the applicant: Sani. 1. Applicant will be required to construct sewers to serve this project, at his own expense, meeting the approval of the Costa Mesa Sanitary District. 2. County Sanitation District fees, fixture fees, inspection fees, and sewer permit are required prior to installation of sewer. 3. Applicant shall submit a plan showing sewer improvements that meets the District Engineer's approval to the Building Division as part of the plans submitted for plan check. 4. The applicant is required to contact the Costa Mesa Sanitary District at (714) 754-5307 to arrange final sign -off prior to certificate of occupancy being released. 5. Applicant shall contact Costa Mesa Sanitary District at (949) 654-8400 for any additional district requirements. AQMD 6. Applicant shall contact the Air Quality Management District (AQMD) at (800) 288-7664 for potential additional conditions of development or for additional permits required by AQMD. Water 7. Customer shall contact the Mesa Water District — Engineering Desk and submit an application and plans for project review. Customer must obtain a letter of approval and a letter of project completion from Mesa Water District. School 8. Pay applicable Newport Mesa Unified School District fees to the Building Division prior is issuance of building permits. State 9. Comply with the requirements of the California Department of Food and Agriculture (CDFA) to determine if red imported fire ants (RIFA) exist on the property prior to any soil movement or excavation. Call CDFA at (714) 708- 1910 for information. EXHIBIT C MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM _ V- y GL— G r■ z 1 I E N ! J ?r ^ y J J � L N U T y G❑ -C r U 3 :J y y O � J v 1, G � d ^ � � � � •'`� ,b n � N 3 U >' '� ,� y .'ter b .�. .� U C ~ b 3 � �. � .U. � ��• � ,J. li , d '•-� ;d ' J � tiU" � n 13 75 M° 7 ° v � T '''"" � .Ur � U U • J � E � ; � .-y-^ , b �^',�. � �� y � U � 04 4 C ] A 7n v '•" •7 . G L" 'Yi a b '•+�. O -n+ .n v O O ,•+ .�. C C :J � � � n O > :� . � it O O 'C C+ «U+ � � ' v v + 3 ° 1) cd 44 C H ❑ y .U. ii ~ � U � U � 'd � l~i �. J n � {. a 4 30 In w a q b • b b A y .11 .O+ w �.. ' > • [ [ n n C cd H n :Lo ° .v+ 0 'j � 6,, p, '1�l d b b � :b a O U O ���//�I O � '��`''•+ . v � ' � j C p .vim � `0, v -� ,U � '� p J � � � � O :d O 'd O q 4 ri U p1— L -j qj I f i il II .y .— ...•� ^ 'J J I .f v it �- � • J f1J T 7II T• � � — � . � � � zo � �f. L E J .f •J. iJJ 'J 7J1 _ 'X. J � � � I J ^Z • J J f — .5 J� ...� =1J — — ,. — _ ._ �J'Sj y J — i J 'J• _ 'J. .., � rd 'I. iIl _ � JIJ — .. _ J — . � .� _ J r — — y il f J •-7 � � ' � f ! J U � J CI - J — 7t J 7� ill �J •. �. .— _ f G I 't _ — I I IN v n 1J n V I � v v cn O O n 5 J � Jd • H 5q s, b ' ,,� 7A � i _ A .a 5 . n C y �^. C � � i � y 0.r .-. y � � � . •,+ � 4 v r, vas m v �w 0'345 Q u ' y 'v r .'"'. IJ .U. r •fes, t u S+ tz = E U li J�'� n v U Y > > .Cy ri j Z o to 64 c O O 3 b y" 71 y. '� J "U'' � •� � 'd ? y Iry '� C �"v, � O L n 4 7 � .: '�0 � 0b���� U U �3 64 "'7 ~ O C f zi7- M3 3 roil zMz IN a 1s u 0 d Ed Id ad .. —1 --- -. - I ^_ J M= -f j 1 -7 = S 1 1 ^ i . 0 y =f1 1 7 I y � J l T P'� j 1 S 1 1 — LI 7.1 — J •- J I J� J J J - 1 ' T I J — _ _ _ 2'—~JI r — L. � .!4! 3 - L El M z M Z:M- J Z" I Y W � � Q 7 y Z IIII � e v [ T ; � n I b +••w .vr v ~ pf i O [ 73 c ao M� O � � r.. � .y o v � v ❑ I to L.v -. y y r. J ^" G, J�'.. A. v E O" u •-�. 3Iij nn U ti>y 7) q y v `j � R ci ELI[ a 0 y ,[ 0 U b 0 3 b v y b o v a, u q O u 5A n ll 4 v q o, y w n >> .Ly y n w q p a, o.tj cl 75 zn ¢ o o C r v 04 to d .� �[ -- o cr, ov y o •� a Z a o v -j O. O U y -g 50 n y i.. O :d b •� 4] q G Y q[ Q TyJ' J [ 7 .� >1.>. y U p ari 70 b q++ y b•' [ ^ ❑❑ G 11�y�{ Q p. y «'"+ a Ei y d �' • J > C1, '.a0 ^n C O 3 N :� Z -Q v C w Z ayi w v �1 a G G C O y y b A 7A O 'b W E �n Cz �n.� otLo 1) z z I ea on a. 4 z a tic W y -- f qS-•- U N d w N It r -r .J ylJ - -J �L . .J G • -`b L `fl J - J ! j .IJ J L r 77 — _ :J vlJ _Jl �- _ :;fl _ _ _ — _ `J l = � J - 75 _ _ _ 5 — _ r =— _ u _ J r• — _ _ y _ - zi _ _ _ i _ J 77, fj J �_ U �1 _ J •= -J J _- •J f C I r -r L n •� v JA � V n V b > J q v � '7 � b l � -• 3 3 ? C � � v a u n Z C �A > y ,•-, > .. ` n .-^, .tea. V >Z> •.� � � :J v 3 ? b ,�� n � r � ni � � n y n T y U n ^ T 7 v A y . > 1J > 77 U n y V ll 3 U > > > n > > > > v 3 nij 713 ---� ^�„ i' 7f C � � J O � •r+' � 71i �D �.' -�-r �7 31} ��il 74 U � y Jy b ^ ^ > y +y .�. •rte+ d> '^7 u L y+ =-• � � v y> b 4 3 3' . 3 w 3 b n d D> > > L y=- '.11 > n 3 • • r J1 +� ...I' L • i.+ b 'Q .� y ll ; 3] :d U i] :J .'7 C b Y CL y �24= CL a tj I + — 1 ^r)— ATTACHMENT 7 CORRESPONDENCE FROM PUBLIC -Iq$- Shorepoint Insurance Services 1120 Bristol Street, Costa Mesa, California 92626 • CA Lic 0247753 J (800) 350-5647 (714) 430-0035 • FAX (714) 430-0036 www. shorepointinsurance. com February 9, 2015 Claire Flynn Asst. Developmental Services Director City of Costa Mesa 77 Fair Dr. Costa Mesa CA 92628 Re: Ganahl Lumber proposed relocation to 1100 Bristol St. Planning Application No. PA -14-40 Dear Ms. Flynn: As the owner of both the building and business located at 1120 Bristol St., I object to the Ganahl Lumber store relocation based on the following: The addition of this busy retail/contractor business will add to the already terrible congestion on Bristol St. during the commute hours. It is nearly impossible to turn out of our driveway Northbound on Bristol. The noise of the large construction vehicles and equipment used to move lumber, will be disruptive to our business. The appearance/view of the facility with elevated parking and a 32' sign detracts from the quiet office park we purchased in 2004 and occupy. We hope that you will consider the impact this busy retail location will have on the neighbors and not grant this relocation. Very try yours, Ray W61ey, President Owner of Shorepoint Insurance Services Owner of 1120 Bristol, Costa Mesa —ICP — W -z 1072 Bristol Partners, LP 1072 Bristol Street, Suite 100 Costa Mesa, CA 92626 February 19, 2015 VIA E-MAIL & FACSIMILE Claire Flynn, Asst. Development Services Director City of Costa Mesa 77 Fair Drive Costa Mesa, CA 92628 Re: Comment to Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the proposed Ganahl Lumber Project Dear Ms. Flynn: I am an owner representative of the ownership of 1072 Bristol Street. Our property is across Bristol from the proposed Mega Ganahl Lumber project. We are not being provided with adequate information about this giant project right across the street. What is referred to as "The Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration" does not come close to addressing the many impacts of the Mega Ganahl. A great deal of it is false. What remains is inadequate. The "conclusions" asserted are not made in good faith. The "analysis" regarding land use is based on many wrong assumptions. A fundamental wrong assumption is that the Mega Ganahl is permitted under the City's zoning. It does not come close. The traffic "analysis" is also totally inadequate and seems to be purposefully so. It fails to address the traffic impacts on the south side of Bristol. 14604561 The aesthetics "analysis" is also not adequate. S' rely, Joseph E. Miller -200— ANGELO J. PALMIERI (19281990) ROBERT F. WALDRON (1927-1990) MICHAEL J. GREENE' DENNIS W. GRAN' DAVID D PARR' CHARLES H KANTER' PATRICK A HENNESSEY DON FISHER GREGORY N WEILER WARREN A. WILLIAMS JOHN R LISTER MICIIALL 1/ LFWF :,R. SCOTT R CARPENTER RICHARD A SALUS NORMAN J RODICH RONALD M COLE MICHAEL L D'ANGELO STEPHEN A SCHECK DONNA L SNOW RYAN M EASTER ELISE M KERN MELISA R. PEREZ MICHAEL L KEHOE CHADWICK C BUNCH ANISH J. BANKER RYAN M PRAGER ERIN BALSARA NADERI ERICA M. SOROSKY JERAD BELTZ CANDICEL LEE MICHAEL P BURNS JOSHUA MARX ERIN K. OYAMA STEVEN R. GUESS KATHERINE M HARRISON BRIAN GLICKLIN ALAN H WIENER', OF COUNSEL ROBERT C IHRKE, OF COUNSEL MICHAEL C CHO, OF COUNSEL JAMES E WILHELM RETIRED DENNIS G TYLER', RETIRED 'A PROFE9910NAL CURPORATION VIA E-MAIL Planning Commissioners City of Costa Mesa 77 Fair Drive Costa Mesa, CA 92628 2603 MAIN STREET EAST TOWER —SUITE 1 300 IRVINE, CALIFORNIA 92614-4261 (949) 851-9400 WWW.PtWWW.Com February 23, 2015 Re: Objection to the Proposed Ganahl Lumber Project Dear Honorable Members of the Costa Mesa Planning Commission: F H-7 PAL1%AIFRL P O BOX 19712 IRVINE, CA 926239712 WRITER'S DIRECT DIAL NUMBER (949) 851 7294 WRITER'S DIRECT FACSIMILE NUMBER (949)825-5412 FIRM'S DIRECT FACSIMILE NUMBERS (949)851-1554 (949) 757-1225 mleifer@ptwww.com REFER TO FILE NO 36650.003 This office represents the ownership of the 1072 Bristol Street property --1072 Bristol Street Partners, LP (1072 Bristol). 1072 Bristol objects to the proposed very large Ganahl Lumber Project directly across Bristol. We request that this letter be included in the administrative record for this project. The public has not been provided correct or adequate information about this mega - lumberyard project. In reviewing the Staff Report, the Staff Report omits material and fundamental information. Further, it lacks analysis and support. In many areas, the words that are strung together are bureaucratese. The mega Ganahl simply does not comply with the City's Zoning Code. This Planning Commission is required to apply the Zoning Code even if it receives an inadequate Staff report. The number of years a company has been in business is no 1461587.3 -2-01- PALMIERI, TYLER. WIENER, WILHELM &WALDRON Planning Commissioners February 23, 2015 Page 2 justification for non-compliance with a request to build a mega project (as the Staff Report ridiculously seems to suggest). Here, this applicant is seeking to be excused from compliance with nearly all of the requirements of the Zoning Code. The use is not permitted in the zone. The buildings proposed are far too big. There is woefully insufficient parking and the buildings are too close to the street. Staff seems to focus the Ganahl business as a justification for wholesale noncompliance with the City's code. There is no "likeability" exception. The City cannot award a privilege or series of privileges to the applicant. This applicant is requesting that the Planning Commission approve a project that requires the City to essentially disregard the Zoning Code, while there is a pretense of compliance. Based upon the actual requirements of the City's Zoning Code, this is not a close call. The proposed Ganahl mega lumber yard project should be denied. The lumber vard project does not comply with the City's C1 Zoning. Without any analysis, the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for this project and the Staff Report claim that the proposed lumber yard complies with the City's C 1 zoning. It does not even come close. This is a lumber yard. Ganahl Lumber is a lumber company. It is a lumber and building materials dealer. A significant component of the project is a request for a sawmill. A retail use under the zoning code does not include or allow lumber yards or sawmills. The Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration spins the project as a "hybrid" use. There is no "hybrid" use in the Municipal Code. At best, the Ganahl lumber yard mega project is a lumber yard with an ancillary retail use --not the other way around. This is evident by the proposed site configuration and design and the building layout. It is evident by the proposed location and distribution of parking. Retail uses do not provide a significant number of parking spaces behind guard gates or on a roof of a 1461587.3 - 20Z- PALM IERI.TYLER, WIENER. WILHELM &WALDRON!; Planning Commissioners February 23, 2015 Page 3 building. There are less than 50 surface parking spaces that are not behind guard gates for a 65,263 square -foot "retail" building. That is a parking ratio of .75 spaces for every 1,000 square -feet of the "retail" building --a far cry from the City's 4 spaces for every 1,000 square -feet of retail requirement (this ratio is even more egregious when considering the rest of the proposed buildings in the calculation). Further, the Staff Report admits that the City's Municipal Code does not provide a parking requirement for lumber yards. (Staff Report, p. 13.) This proves that this is not retail --this is a lumber yard. A lumber yard is not permitted. 2. The 'Staff Report does not inform the Plannin Commission of the proposed modifications to be made to Bristol that will impact access to the properties on the south side of Bristol. One of the aspects of Ganahl's mega lumber yard project that is completely absent from the Staff Report (and the conditions of approval) are the proposed changes to be made to Bristol. The Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration provides some information regarding the modifications. Even then, the information provided lacks detail and analysis. From the little information provided, the Ganahl lumber yard project will make significant modifications to Bristol in order to accommodate the two new entrances to the Ganahl property. Instead of taking access from the existing curb -cut at the middle of the property, Ganahl is proposing two new access points on Bristol. To provide access to those two new proposed access points, there will be modifications made to Bristol (changes to the Newport Blvd./Bristol intersection and a dedicated left -turn in to the new driveway at the east end of the property from Bristol). Those modifications will negatively impact access to the properties on the south side of Bristol including the 1072 Bristol property for vehicles travelling west on Bristol. Yet, no information was provided in the Staff Report of these modifications and neither 14615873 -203- PALM IERI, TYLER, WIENER, WILHELM &WALDRON� Planning Commissioners February 23, 2015 Page 4 the Staff Report or the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration analyze or discuss the impacts to the properties opposite the proposed Ganahl lumber yard site. 3. The proposed building setback variance does not comply with the Zoniny. Code requirements for a variance. This project requests a very large variance from the building setback requirements in the Zoning Code. The variance is not justified. There are no special circumstances to justify this significant of a variance. Approving a variance here would provide a privilege to Ganahl. The proposed variance is inconsistent with other properties in the area. As such, the Planning Commission cannot make the required findings. The Staff Report attempts to justify the variance from the setback requirements by comparing the proposed project to the 1072 Bristol property and the property located at 1182 Bristol Street claiming that both of these properties have less than the 20 foot landscape requirement. (Staff Report, p. 10.) The comparison fails for a number of reasons. One of the more significant reasons is the amount of building that is being proposed in the setback area. The comparison properties (1072 and 1182) each have less than 50 lineal feet of building in the required setback area. The Ganahl project plans to put nearly 450 lineal feet of building (without any break), a building that is already oversized (proposed with an objectionable height variance), in the required setback area. Allowing a height variance and a setback variance for a building with a use not allowed by the C-1 zoning, spanning nearly four - and -a -half football fields of frontage on Bristol is not comparable to the 1072 and 1182 Bristol properties. 4. The Proposed height variance does not comply with the Zoning Code requirements for a variance. The requested variance from the height standards is not justified. There are no special circumstances requiring the variance. Rather, the "special circumstance" cited by the Staff Report is the use that is not permitted by the Zoning Code. 1461587.3 PALM IERI, TYLER, WIENER, WILHELM &WALDRON-'I Planning Commissioners February 23, 2015 Page 5 Further, the condition of approval that provides that the B -shed, that requires a height variance, can later install "rooftop solar canopies" that will increase the height of the B -Shed even further, through a simple approval from the Development Services Director is also not supported. Approval of the signage that doubles the height allowed by the Zoning Code provides a privilege to Ganahl. There is no justification for the Planned Sign Program that proposes to approve a 24 -foot high freestanding sign --a 100 percent increase from what is allowably by the City Code. The Staff Report's claim that the approval "will not constitute a grant of special privilege or allow substantially greater overall visibility" is without support. 6. The Staff Report does not explain what the CUP is re uired for. There is no evidence to support the approval of the proposed CUP. Generally, a Staff Report will clearly state what use requires a CUP. Here, the Staff Report makes no such statement. The use proposed for the CUP is not permitted in the C 1 zone. There is no analysis of the "CUP" sought. There are no real conditions of approval being applied to the use proposed. 7. The parking analysis does not make sense. As discussed above, the parking discussion demonstrates that the proposed use is a lumber yard --not retail. If this was a retail use, the parking requirements would be much greater -4 parking spaces for every 1,000 square -feet of building. Further, the discussion of the number of parking spaces provided on-site is misleading. While the project proposes 286 parking spaces, there is no discussion of the location of those spaces. For example, it appears that nearly 60 spaces are behind gates, 108 of the spaces are on the roof of the building. As a condition of approval, the employees are to exclusively use the roof parking. (Staff Report, p. 13.) Elsewhere the Staff Report discusses that the "proposed facility would employ approximately 120 1461567.3 -2V'S PALMIER!. TYLER, WIENER, WILHELM &WALDRON � Planning Commissioners February 23, 2015 Page 6 employees at full capacity..." (Staff Report, p. 7.) This means that all of the roof parking would be taken by employees with some spilling over to the surface parking spaces. As discussed above, that means that there are really less than 50 parking spaces available for customers for the 99,516 square -feet of building in this project. 8. The Ganahl Proiect does not comply with the FAR requirements of the Zoning Code. The proposed project does not comply with the FAR requirements. In an attempt to claim the project complies, the Staff Report includes a footnote explaining that the FAR calculation does not include the 6,672 square -foot "Pole Shed" because the "Pole Shed" is not an enclosed buildings. The Zoning Code does not provide such an exception to the FAR calculation. 9. The Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration does not consider the real impacts of the Proiect. The Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration is deficient. Its analysis is premised on the application of an incorrect zoning assumption --that the proposed project complies with the C-1 zoning. It does not consider the impacts to access to properties on the south side of Bristol caused by the project's proposed modifications to Bristol. It does not consider the light and glare impacts caused by the numerous reflective surfaces being added. 10. Conclusion. To approve this proposed project would relieve Ganahl lumber of virtually all of the requirements of the Zoning Code that are applied, on a regular basis, to other property owners and users. The Ganahl lumber yard project cannot exist here. It is too big. It is too close to the street. There is no evidence to support the deviation from the Zoning Code. 1461587.3 -20(o- PALMIERI, TYLER. WIENER, WILHELM &WALDRON � Planning Commissioners February 23, 2015 Page 7 1072 Bristol Partners requests that the Planning Commission not adopt the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration and deny the Ganahl Lumber application. Very trlyl� yours, MHL:ebn CC' Brenda Green, City Clerk Mel Lee, Senior Planner 1461587.3 —2o9-- County of Orange California James Campbell Land Development Manager County Executive Office 333 W. Santa Ana Blvd. Suite 144 Santa Ana, California 92701-4062 Tel: (714) 227-1011 Web: www.ocgov.com March 6, 2015 Mr. Gary Armstrong Economic and Development Services Director City of Costa Mesa 77 Fair Drive Costa Mesa, CA 92626 Subject: County's Selection of Ganahl for Lease and Development of 1100 Bristol Dear Mr. Armstrong: We wanted to provide to the City a history of the County's selection process and how we selected Ganahl Lumber Company ("Ganahl") as the primary for the lease and development of 1100 Bristol Street. You will notice that the selection process took time, was thorough, and our selection of Ganahl was based on a number of factors that we feel made their proposal the most suitable for the community and existing surrounding uses. On April 15, 2013, OC Public Works/Real Estate Services, on behalf of the District, released a Request for Proposals ("RFP") to lease and develop the Property. The RFP was presented as a two-step process with step one (1) being a review and scoring of all proposals by an evaluation panel to establish a set of finalists, and step two (2) being a detailed analysis of those selected projects. On September 17, 2013, the County Board of Supervisors ("Board") selected the finalists to be further evaluated for the leasing and development of the Property. The finalists were asked to provide supplemental information related to project development, financial data, and projected revenue. Those evaluations allowed staff to review and compare the proposed projects to determine the one most compatible with the Orange County Flood Control District's ("District") flood control operations while also maximizing lease revenue and minimize risk for the District. On October 23, 2013, four supplemental proposals were submitted to the Clerk of the Board as requested in step two of the RFP process. During step two of the selection process, a six member evaluation panel reviewed and rated the supplemental proposals based on their responsiveness to the following criteria: Development Plan, Financial Viability and Background Data, Projected Revenue and Modifications to the Option Agreement and Lease. Interviews with all four (4) finalists were held on November 13, 2013. The evaluation panel scored Ganahl and Lyon significantly ahead of the two (2) hotel developers based on the scored criteria. On December 17, 2013, the Board selected Ganahl as the primary and Lyon -NCA Bristol Venture, LLC as the alternate for the lease and development of the Property. The evaluation panel rated Ganahl the highest of the proposals for a number of reasons, some of which were based on their proposal involving less entitlement risk and a less restrictive lease compared to the other bidders. Lyon -NCA Bristol Venture, LLC's proposal was selected as the alternate. Lyon proposed to develop 207 luxury apartments with an attractive rent structure, including a value appreciation incentive to the District. The proposal by Lyon would require a zone change and a general plan amendment by the City, thus the County recognized that this involves more entitlement risk compared to Ganahl's proposal. - Z0- Gary Armstrong, Economic and Development Services Director March 6, 2015 Page 2 of 2 Additionally, Ganahl currently has an existing and permitted operation immediately adjacent to the District's property. The County felt that this only contributed to Ganahl's proposal being the least risky of the four proposals. On April 29, 2014, the Board approved an Option Agreement between the County and Ganahl. Since last April, Ganahl has been working diligently with the County, the City, and Caltrans to ensure that their proposal is satisfactory to all agencies involved. Ganahl and the County continue to coordinate with Caltrans to address their requested improvements, particularly related to fencing around the perimeter of the project site. We believe Ganahl's proposed project is the most suitable for the site given the site's land use designation and zoning and that it would be the least intense development of the four proposals that the County received. Please feel free to contact Channary Gould at 714-559-8461 or me at 714-227-1011 if you have any questions. Zame Is Campbell Land Development Manager c: Claire Flynn, Assistant Development Services Director, City of Costa Mesa Mel Lee, Senior Planner, City of Costa Mesa ATTACHMENT 8 EXISTING SETBACKS AND SIGNAGE ON BRISTOL -210- BRISTOL STREET SETBACK SURVEY -Z12- FREESTANDING SIGN SURVEY ALONG BRISTOL STREET West Side of Bristol south of Highway 55 Agape Wellness Center 1182 Bristol St, Costa Mesa Sign Height: 22'-0" Permit Number: PA -99-0128 Animal Hospital 1206 Bristol St, Costa Mesa Appx. Sign Height: 15 feet —21�— Extra Storage 1250 Bristol Street, Costa Mesa Sign Height: 25'-0" Permit Number: SB086771 Acapulco Restaurant 1262 Bristol St, Costa Mesa Sign Height: 19'-6" Permit Number: 50199-200 Travelodge 1400 Bristol Street, Costa Mesa Sign Height: 20'-0" Permit Number: ZE-79-194 Unknown Sign Appx. Sign Height: 15-18 feet -215- East Side of Bristol St. south of Highway 55 Bills Burgers 1476 Bristol Street, Costa Mesa Sign Height: 16'-0" Permit Number: SB071483 Bristol Village 270 Bristol Street, Costa Mesa Sign Height: 25'-0" Permit Number: SB80937 -21(A- East Side of Bristol St. north of Highway 55 West Side of Bristol St. north of Highway 55 Car Wash 2770 Bristol Street, Costa Mesa Sign Height: 24'-0" Permit Number: SBE63725 Bristol Design Center 2777 Bristol Street, Costa Mesa Sign Height: 25'-0" Permit Number: SB02-00149 -219 G NAH i1i %' !- li �—low"_ put,rlwwt • •� w FYI (;ANAlII regf f t 4 lyra lMMI6 I MMI kifll'F1`fFl1'f{ if�',.� *aeam SO iG�II P IMINE■ ■ 4 ........... ............... . __.. . ... .......: -' ... _..:.. i S Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Ganahl Lumber Hardware Store and Lumber Yard 1100 South Bristol Street Lead Agency: City of Costa Mesa Development Services 77 Fair Drive Costa Mesa, California 92626 (714) 754-5245 Claire L. Flynn, AICP, Assistant Development Services Director Me] Lee, AICP, Senior Planner Prepared by: LSA Associates, Inc. 20 Executive Park, Suite 200 Irvine, California 92614-4731 (949)553-0666 Ryan Bensley, Senior Environmental Planner Ashley Davis, Principal in Charge January 2015 This page intentionally left blank NOTICE O INTEN`I" I'O ADOPT A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION To: X X From: Office of Planning and Research County Clerk City of Costa Mesa ° sw 1400 Tenth Street, Room 121 County of Orange Development Services Sacramento, CA 95814 P. O. Box 22013 77 Fair Driver ' Santa Ana, CA 92702 Costa Mesa, CA 92626 �a* Date: January 22, 2015 TO: Interested Agencies, Organizations, and Individuals NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that pursuant to Section 15072 of the State CEQA Guidelines, the City of Costa Mesa hereby gives notice that a Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) for the Ganahl Lumber Costa Mesa Relocation Project is available for review and comment. PROJECT TITLE: Ganahl Lumber Costa Mesa Relocation Project (Planning Application No. PA -14-40). PROJECT LOCATION: 1100 South Bristol Street in the City of Costa Mesa on the south side of the juncture of State Route 55 (SR -55) and State Route 73 (SR -73). The proposed project site is not on a list compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The proposed project involves the development of a 6.6 acre vacant lot to accommodate the relocation of the Costa Mesa Ganahl Lumber store to a site owned by the County of Orange and leased to Ganahl Lumber. The development proposal includes the following: (1) Construction of a 65,263 square foot building materials retail store with administrative offices (Main Building A) at a maximum height of 41 feet as measured to the highest point of the proposed elevator equipment structure for the Ganahl Lumber Company; (2) A proposed outdoor storage yard consisting of three sheds (B Shed, Mill Shed, and Pole Shed) totaling 40,925 square feet (sf); (3) Provision of a total of 286 parking spaces on the project site; 108 parking stalls would be provided on the roof of the retail building; and 178 at -grade parking stalls would be provided throughout the project site; (4) Solar photovoltaic panels would be installed on the roof of the retail building at maximum height of 34 feet. (5) Freestanding monument signage at a height of 25 feet. The existing Costa Mesa Ganahl Lumber store is located on an adjacent property to the east and would be closed once the new store is completed. Required discretionary approvals from the City of Costa Mesa include: Development Review and Conditional Use Permit; Variance from front setback requirement (20 -foot setback required; 10 -foot setback proposed); Variances from maximum building height for the solar canopy, elevator overrun, B -Shed, and roofdeck parking; and Planned Signing Program. PROJECT IMPACTS: The Initial Study/MND was completed in accordance with the Lead Agency's Guidelines implementing the California Environmental Quality Act. The Initial Study/MND found that the environmental effects from the project would be less than significant with the incorporation of standard conditions and mitigation measures. PUBLIC REVIEW PERIOD: Begins: January 23, 2015 Ends: February 22, 2015 PUBLIC HEARING: A public hearing will be held before the Costa Mesa Planning Commission on February 23, 2015, at 6 p.m. in the City Council Chambers at Costa Mesa City Hall, 77 Fair Drive, Costa Mesa. The Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration is being circulated for public review and comment for a period of 30 days, Any person may submit written comments to the Planning Division of the City's Development Services Department before the end of the review period. If you challenge the City's action in court you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised in written correspondence delivered to the Planning Division prior to the end of the review period. Comments may be sent by mail, or faxed to the following address: Claire Flynn, Asst. Development Services Director Phone: (714) 754-5278 City of Costa Mesa FAX: (714) 754-4856 77 Fair Drive claire.flynn@costamesaca.gov Costa Mesa, CA 92628 LOCATION WHERE DOCUMENT CAN BE REVIEWED: The Initial Study, Draft MND and supporting documents are available for review and comment during normal business hours at the following locations: (a) City of Costa Mesa, Public Counter, 77 Fair Drive, Costa Mesa, CA, (b) Mesa Verde Library, 2969 Mesa Verde Drive, East, (c) Costa Mesa/Donald Dungan Library, 1855 Park Avenue. January 19, 2015 1, 6,t 7G ,/ _ Date Claire L. Flynn Assistant Development Services Director City of Costa Mesa TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION........................................................................................................................ 1 1.1 PURPOSE OF THE INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION.................................................................................................. I.............. 1 1.1.1 Proposed Project..................................................................................................... 1 2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION........................................................................................................... 3 2.1 PROJECT LOCATION AND ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING ........................................ 3 2. 1.1 Surrounding Land Uses........................................................................................... 3 2.1.2 Existing Site............................................................................................................ 3 2.2 PROJECT DETAILS...................................--................................................................ 9 2.2.1 Project Background................................................................................................. 9 2.2.2 Project Purpose and Need....................................................................................... 9 2.2.3 Project Characteristics............................................................................................ 9 2.2.4 Operation and Maintenance ................... ............................................................... 35 2.2.5 Project Timing..................................................................................................... 38 2.2.6 Regulatory Requirements, Permits, and Approvals .............................................. 38 3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED .............................................. 41 3.1 AESTHETICS....................................................................................................................45 3.1.1 Environmental Setting.......................................................................................... 45 3.1.2 Impact Analysis.................................................................................................... 45 3.2 AGRICULTURE AND FOREST RESOURCES.............................................................. 49 3.2.1 Impact Analysis......................•..............................---.................................... .. 49 3.3 AIR QUALITY.................................................................................................................. 51 3.3.1 Introduction........................................................................................................... 51 3.3.2 Environmental Setting........................._..----.......................................................... 51 3.3.3 Impact Analysis.................................................................................................... 51 3.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES........................................................................................... 59 3.4.1 Introduction .................................... . . . .................................................................... 59 3.4.2 Environmental Setting.......................................................................................... 59 3.4.3 Impact Analysis.................................................................................................... 61 3.5 CULTURAL RESOURCES.............................................................................................. 65 3.5.1 Introduction........................................................................................................... 65 3.5.2 Impact Analysis.................................................................................................... 65 3.6 GEOLOGY AND SOILS................................................................................................... 69 3.6.1 Introduction........................................................................................................... 69 3.6.2 Impact Analysis.................................................................................................... 69 3.7 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS.................................................................................. 73 3.7.1 Technical Background.......................................................................................... 73 3.7.2 Impact Analysis.................................................................................................... 76 3.8 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS.............................................................. 81 3.8.1 Introduction........................................................................................................... 81 3.8.2 Environmental Setting.......................................................................................... 81 3.8.3 Impact Analysis.................................................................................................... 82 3.9 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY....................................................................... 89 3.9.1 Impact Analysis.................................................................................................... 90 3.10 LAND USE/PLANNING.................................................................................................. 97 PACC'.M1401 \Draft TSMNT)\Thaft TSMND.docx ((01/21/15>> 1 APPENDICES (Included on CD) A: AIR QUALITY AND GLOBAL CLIMATE CHANGE IMPACT ANALYSIS REPORT B: BIOLOGICAL TECHNICAL REPORT C: CULTURAL REPORTS D: GEOTECHNICAL REPORT E: PHASE I ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT F: PRELIMINARY WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PLAN G: NOISE IMPACT ANALYSIS STUDY H: TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY ii PACCM1401\Draft ISMND\Draft ISMND.docx «01/21/15» 3. 10.1 Impact Analysis..................................................................................................... 97 3.11 MINERAL RESOURCES................................................................................................103 3.11.1 Impact Analysis...................................................................................................103 3.12 NOISE..............................................................................................................................105 3.12.1 Introduction.........................................................................................................105 3.12.2 Environmental Setting........................................................................................105 3.12.3 Impact Analysis...................................................................................................108 3.13 POPULATION AND HOUSING....................................................................................113 3.13.1 Impact Analysis...................................................................................................113 3.14 PUBLIC SERVICES.......................................................•................................................115 3.14.1 Impact Analysis...................................................................................................115 3.15 RECREATION.................................................................................................................117 3.15.1 Impact Analysis...................................................................................................117 3.16 TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC.............................I.......................................................119 3.16.1 Introduction......................................................................................................119 3.16.2 Environmental Setting........................................................................................119 3.16.3 Impact Analysis...................................................................................................121 3.17 UTILITIES/SERVICE SYSTEMS...................................................................................127 3.17.1 Impact Analysis...................................................................................................127 3.18 MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE.......................................................... 131 3.18.1 Impact Analysis...................................................................................................131 4.0 MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM...........................................135 4.1 MITIGATION MONITORING REQUIREMENTS ........................................................135 4.2 MITIGATION MONITORING PROCEDURES............................................................136 5.0 REFERENCES..,.......................................................................................................................145 6.0 PREPARERS.............................................................................................................................149 APPENDICES (Included on CD) A: AIR QUALITY AND GLOBAL CLIMATE CHANGE IMPACT ANALYSIS REPORT B: BIOLOGICAL TECHNICAL REPORT C: CULTURAL REPORTS D: GEOTECHNICAL REPORT E: PHASE I ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT F: PRELIMINARY WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PLAN G: NOISE IMPACT ANALYSIS STUDY H: TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY ii PACCM1401\Draft ISMND\Draft ISMND.docx «01/21/15» FIGURES AND TABLES FIGURES Figure 2.1: Existing Land Uses................................................................................... Figure 2.2: Land Ownership........................................................................................ Figure2.3: Site Plan.................................................................................................... Figure 2.4a: Building A Floor Plans ........................................................................... Figure 2.4b: Building A Floor Plans ........................................................................... Figure 2.4c: Building A Floor Plans........................................................................... Figure 2.4d: Building A Floor Plans........................................................................... Figure 2.4e: Building A Floor Plans........................................................................... Figure 2.5: Building A Elevations............................................................................... Figure 2.6: Building A Cross Sections........................................................................ Figure 2.7: 3D Perspectives........................................................................................ I- d Fl P1 ........................... 5 .......................... 7 ......................... 11 ......................... 13 ......................... 15 ......................... 17 ................ I........ 19 ......................... 21 ......................... 23 Figure2.8. B S e oor ans............................................................................................ Figure 2.9: B Shed Elevations.............................................................................................. TABLES 27 29 31 33 Table 2.A: Project Site Ownership and Area......................................................................................... 9 Table 2.B: Gross Square Footage......................................................................................................... 10 Table 2.C: Roof Area Square Footage................................................................................................. 36 Table 3.3.A: Construction Related Regional Criteria Pollutant Emissions .......................................... 55 Table 3.3.B: Operational Criteria Pollutant Regional Air Emissions .................................................. 55 Table 3.3.0 Local Construction Emissions at the Nearest Receptor .................................................... 57 Table 3.7.A Project Related GHG Emissions...................................................................................... 78 Table 3.10.A: Zoning Ordinance Development Standards Consistency Analysis ............................... 99 Table 3.12.A: Land Use Compatibility for Exterior Community Noise ............................................ 107 Table 3.12.B: Ambient Noise Levels................................................................................................ 107 Table 3.12.0 Typical Construction Equipment Noise Levels............................................................109 Table 3.12.1): Construction Equipment Vibration Source Levels ...................................................... 111 Table 3.16.A: Existing Peak Hour Intersection Capacity Analysis .................................................... 120 Table 3.16.B: Existing Plus Proposed Project's Peak Hour Intersection Capacity Analysis ............. 122 Table 3.16.C: Year 2016 Peak Hour Intersection Capacity Analysis ................................................123 Table 4.A: Mitigation and Monitoring Reporting Program...............................................................137 PACCM1401\Draft ISMND\Draft ISMND.docx a01/21/15» iii This page intentionally left blank 1V PACCM1401 Oraft ISMND\Draft ISMND.docx «01/21/15» LSA ASSOCIATES, INC, JANUARY 2015 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION CANAHL HARDWARE STORE AND LUMBER YARD INITIAL STUDY/ MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 1. FILE NUMBERM: Ganahl Hardware Store and Lumber Yard Planning Application No. PA -14-40 2. NAME AND ADDRESS OF APPLICANT: Ganahl Lumber Company 1220 East Ball Road Anaheim, CA 92805 3. PROJECT LOCATION.: 1100 South Bristol Street, Costa Mesa, CA 92626 Assessor Parcel Number 427-363-01 4. GENERAL PLAN: The 6.6 -acre project site is designated as General Commercial on the City's General Plan Land Use Map (2004). The General Commercial land use designation allows a Floor Area Ratio (FAR) between 0.20-0.75 for high to very low traffic uses, respectively. Based on the uses proposed by the Applicant, the maximum FAR for the project site is 0.35. Specified outdoor material storage structures are not included in the FAR calculation for zoning purposes. Allowable uses within the General Commercial designation include a combination of junior department stores and retail clothing stores, theaters, restaurants, hotels and motels, automobile sales and service establishments, markets, drug stores, retail shops, financial institutions, service establishments and support office uses. 5. ZONING: The 6.6 -acre project site has a zoning designation on the City's Zoning Map (2007) of C1 -Local Business. The C1 -Local Business zoning designation allows a FAR between 0.20-0.75 for high to very low traffic uses, respectively. Based on the uses proposed by the Applicant, the maximum FAR for the project site is 0.35. 6. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The Proposed Project includes development of a 6.6 -acre vacant lot located at 1100 Bristol Street with a new lumberyard consisting of three sheds (B Shed, Mill Shed, and Pole Shed) totaling 40,925 square feet (sf), a 134 sf Control Building (Security Shack), and a 65,263 sf building materials retail store and offices (Building A) for the Ganahl Lumber Company. A total of 286 parking spaces would be provided on the project site; 108 parking stalls would be provided on the roof of the retail building; and 178 at -grade parking stalls would be provided throughout the project site. Solar photovoltaic panels would be installed on the roof of the retail building. The existing Costa Mesa Ganahl Lumber store is located on an adjacent property to the east and would be closed once the new store is completed. PACCM1401Traft ISMND\Draft ISMND.docx «01/21/15» v INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION LSA ASSOCIATES. INC. GANAHL HARDWARE STORE AND LUMBER YARD JANUARY 2015 7. SURROUNDING LAND USES AND SETTING: The Proposed Project site is located at 1100 South Bristol Street in the City of Costa Mesa on the south side of the juncture of State Route 55 (SR -55) and State Route 73 (SR -73) (see Figure 2. 1, Existing Land Uses, located in Section 2.0 of this IS/MND). The 6.6 -acre project site is currently vacant, and does not have any existing structures. The site has been improved with a concrete wall, asphalt -paved entrance area, and associated landscaping. The majority of the project site lot is unpaved and is covered with gravel. The Santa Ana Delhi Channel runs underground beneath the central and eastern portion of the project site. Most of the project site is owned by the Orange County Flood Control District (OCFCD), and would be leased by Ganahl Lumber Company. In the past, the County of Orange (County) has used the project site for storage and staging and as an annex area to the nearby County Fairgrounds. The project site is located on Bristol Street, a main arterial tying in major cultural, commercial office, and shopping districts throughout the community. The total area of the project site is 287,696 sf (6.6 acres). The site includes three -parcels-uwiied-by-the-OGFCD—and-two parcels awned by the-State--of-Califomia-Depa`tmnt-of Transportation (Caltrans) as shown in Table 2.1, Project Site Ownership and Area. Surrounding land uses include: the SR -73 and SR -55 interchange and a Caltrans maintenance facility to the north; SR -73 and the existing Ganahl Lumber Costa Mesa store to the east; commercial (storage facility, restaurant) and multifamily residential land uses to the south; and commercial (offices), single-family residential, and recreation (Santa Ana Country Club) land uses to the west. The existing Ganahl Lumber facility in Costa Mesa was originally part of Barr Lumber, purchased in 1998. It is located immediately to the east of and adjacent to the project site at 1275 Bristol Street. It has a total of 55,540 sf of building/shed area consisting of a 35,650 sf building materials retail store and a 1,637 sf will call storage shed, a 15,905 sf storage shed, and a 2,348 sf mill shed. Access to the existing Ganahl Lumber facility is currently provided via two unsignalized full access driveways along Bristol Street. 8. OTHER PUBLIC AGENCIES WHOSE APPROVAL IS REOUIRED: City of Costa Mesa Planning Commission Orange County Flood Control District (OCFCD) California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) vi PACCM1401\Draft ISMND\Draft ISMND.docx «01/21/15» LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. JANUARY 2015 MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION GANAHL HARDWARE STORE AND LUMBER YARD 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 PURPOSE OF THE INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION This purpose of this Initial Study (IS)/Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) is to evaluate the potential environmental impacts that would occur as a result of construction and the subsequent operation of the Ganahl Hardware Store and Lumber Yard (Proposed Project). The 6.6 -acre project site on which the Proposed Project would be built is located at 1100 Bristol Street in the City of Costa Mesa (City), as shown on Figure 2. 1, Existing Land Uses, in Section 2 of this IS/MND. 1.1.1 Proposed Project The Proposed Project is considered a project per the State California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines. The City of Costa Mesa is the Lead Agency for the Proposed Project, and as such, is responsible for the Proposed Project's environmental review and approval of the Proposed Project. Further, Section 21067 of the Public Resources Code defines a Lead Agency as the public agency responsible for carrying out or approving a project that may have potentially significant environmental impacts on the environment. The project Applicant is Ganahl Lumber Company. As part of the environmental review process for the Proposed Project, the City has authorized the preparation of an IS/NIND to assess the project's environmental impacts. The primary purpose of this IS/MND is to disclose the environmental implications of the Proposed Project to the City's decision - makers and to the public. Although this IS/MND has been prepared with the assistance of a consultant, the analysis, conclusions, and findings herein are representative of the City's position, in its capacity as the Lead Agency for the Proposed Project. Based on the IS/MND, the City has determined that with the incorporation of mitigation, the Proposed Project will not have a significant effect on the environment. This IS/MND and an associated Notice of Intent (NOI) will be forwarded to all applicable responsible agencies, trustee agencies, and the public for review and comment for a period of 30 days to allow these entities and other parties to comment on the Proposed Project and the findings in the IS/MND. PACCM1401Draft ISMND\Draft ISMND.docx «01/21/15» MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION GANAHL HARDWARE STORE AND LUMBER YARD This page intentionally left blank LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. JANUARY 2015 PACCM1401\Draft ISMND\Draft ISMND.docx u01/21/15» LSA ASSOCIATES. INC. JANUARY 2016 MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION GANAHL HARDWARE STORE AND LUMBER YARD 2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION 2.1 PROJECT LOCATION AND ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING 2.1.1 Surrounding Land Uses The project site is located at 1100 South Bristol Street in the City of Costa Mesa (City) on the south side of the juncture of State Route 55 (SR -55) and State Route 73 (SR -73). Refer to Figure 2. 1, Existing Land Uses, for the location of the project site. The project site is located on Bristol Street, a main arterial tying in major cultural, commercial office, and shopping districts throughout the community. Surrounding land uses include: the SR -73 and SR -55 interchange and a State of California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) maintenance facility to the north; SR -73 and the existing Ganahl Lumber Costa Mesa store to the east; commercial (storage facility, restaurant) and multifamily residential land uses to the south; and commercial (offices), single-family residential, and recreation (Santa Ana Country Club) land uses to the west. 2.1.2 Existing Site The project site totals 6.6 acres and is currently vacant. The project site does not currently have any existing built structures. The site has been improved with a concrete wall, asphalt -paved entrance area, and associated landscaping. The majority of the project site lot is unpaved and is covered with gravel. The Santa Ana Delhi Channel runs underground beneath the central and eastern portion of the project site. Most of the project site is owned by the Orange County Flood Control District (OCFCD), and would be leased by Ganahl Lumber Company. In the past, the County of Orange (County) has used the project site for storage and staging and as an annex area to the nearby County Fairgrounds. The total area of the site is 287,696 square feet (sf) (6.6 acres). The site includes three parcels owned by the OCFCD and two parcels owned by Caltrans as shown in Table 2.A, Project Site Ownership and Area, and Figure 2.2, Land Ownership. The existing Ganahl Lumber facility in Costa Mesa was originally part of Barr Lumber, purchased in 1998. It is located immediately to the east of and adjacent to the project site at 1275 Bristol Street. It has a total of 55,540 sf of building/shed area consisting of a 35,650 sf building materials retail store and a 1,637 sf will call storage shed, a 15,905 sf storage shed, and a 2,348 sf mill shed. Access to the existing Ganahl Lumber facility is currently provided via two unsignalized full access driveways along Bristol Street. PACCM 1401 Draft ISMND\Draft ISMND.docx «01/21/15» MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION GANAHL HARDWARE STORE AND LUMBER YARD This page intentionally left blank LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. JANUARY 2015 PACCM1401\Draft ISMND\Draft ISMND.docx «01/21/15» L S A LEGEND ® Project Site Existing Land Use* N Single Family Residential a 250 500 Multi -Family Residential FEET Public and Services SOURCE: Bing Maps (2013); SCAG (2008) MCCM 1401 \GIS\EXLU. mxd (1/20/2015) Facilities Industrial Open Space and Recreation Vacant *Note: Revised based on aerial photography taken in April 2014. =9100;wl Ganahl Hardware Store and Lumber Yard Existing Land Uses MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION GANAHL HARDWARE STORE AND LUMBER YARD This page intentionally left blank LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. JANUARY 2016 PACCM1401\Draft ISMND\Draft ISMND.docx x01/21/15» 1 1� MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION GANAHL HARDWARE STORE AND LUMBER YARD This page intentionally left blank LSA ASSOCIATES. INC. JANUARY 2015 PACCM 1401 \Draft ISMND\Draft ISMND.docx «01/21/15» LSA ASSOCIATES. INO. JANUARY 2015 Table 2.A: Project Site Ownership and Area MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION GANAHL HARDWARE STORE AND LUMBER YARD OwnershiR Parcel Square Feet s Orange County Flood Control District A B C 186,352 72,200 20,199 State of California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) A B 2,777 21,832 Subtotal 303,360 Future City Street Dedication (15,695) TOTAL 287,696 Source: Onyx Architects (November 25, 2014). 2.2 PROJECT DETAILS 2.2.1 Project Background Ganahl Lumber Company is the oldest lumberyard in California. In 1884, an Austrian immigrant named Christian Ganahl and his brother Frank moved to Los Angeles from St. Louis. Christian Ganahl purchased a lumber company and named it the C. Ganahl Lumber Company. Eventually there were several lumber yards located throughout the Los Angeles area, including one C. Ganahl opened in Anaheim in 1904. In the 1930s, the inventory of the lumber business continued to change with the addition of hardware. In the late 1940s, there was a growing interest in millwork products so Ganahl opened a mill division. Through the years, the company has acquired additional locations throughout the Counties of Orange, Los Angeles, and Riverside, making the company the nine -store business it is today. The Costa Mesa store was opened in 1998. 2.2.2 Project Purpose and Need Ganahl Lumber is proposing to relocate its Costa Mesa facility due to uncertainty with its current lease agreement, size constraints, and energy and maintenance requirements of the current facility. Relocating the store would allow Ganahl Lumber to execute a lease that would allow them to do business adjacent to their existing Costa Mesa location for the next 63 years, and result in the construction of a larger store and storage areas that would support a greater inventory and product mix, be more energy efficient, and require less maintenance. Additionally, the new hardware store would provide an opportunity to expand the home design showroom space. 2.2.3 Project Characteristics The Proposed Project includes the construction and operation of a new lumberyard and building materials retail store for the Ganahl Lumber Company. The existing Costa Mesa Ganahl Lumber store is located on an adjacent property to the east and would be closed once the new store is completed. The Proposed Project seeks to establish a variety of simple design details and materials, reflecting the values of Ganahl Lumber Company and the City of Costa Mesa. This would be accomplished by PACCM1401\Draft ISMND\Draft ISMND.docx a01/21/15» 9 MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION GANAHL HARDWARE STORE AND LUMBER YARD LSA ASSOCIATES. INC. JANUARY 2016 providing durable and sustainable design, arranged in a way that would provide for a state-of-the-art building materials facility, while adhering to the City's General Plan intent. Building A and Sheds. The new facility would include one main building and three sheds: Building A, B Shed, Mill Shed, and Pole Shed. Total gross square footage (gsf) and features for these structures are listed in Table 23. A Site Plan is included as Figure 2.3. Table 2.13: Gross Square Footage Source: Onyx Architects (November 25, 2014). Because it is not an enclosed building, the square footage of the pole shed is not included in the total square footage for purposes of calculating the allowable Floor Area Ratio (FAR) for the site as described in the following paragraph. The total area of the project site is 287,696 sf (6.6 acres). In accordance with General Plan Policy LU-lRl(a), the Proposed Project is subject to a maximum floor area ratio (FAR) of 0.35. Because the FAR for the Proposed Project would be 0.346, excluding the Pole Shed as noted above, the Proposed Project would comply with the City's FAR requirements. The proposed use(s) of Building A and the sheds are described below. 10 Building A: Building A would house two principal functions: retail sales and large volume distribution operations. This building would include a complete hardware store, a doors and windows showroom and sales department, hardwood and molding display areas, as well as sales and customer service areas. Delivery and receiving activity would be scheduled and conducted in the northeast office of the building. The structure would be 65,263 gsf in size and would also include a control room, mezzanine, rooftop parking, as well as structural support for a solar photovoltaic (PV) system overhead of the parking surface. Figures 2.4a through 2.4e, Building A Floor Plans, provide the proposed floor plans for the first floor, mezzanine, and roof parking deck of Building A. The rooftop parking would be accessed via a ramp located on the north side of the building. The sales area would feature large amounts of glass. As shown in Figure 2.5, PACCM1401\Draft ISMND\Draft 1SMND.docx a01/21/15» Gross Square Feet Structure (gst)_ Building A: 65,263 • Main Store Sales • Doors and Windows • Sales Offices/Counters • Mezzanine • Control Room • Will -Call Storage • (storage/operations offices) 30,262 B Shed 3,991 Mill Shed Pole Shed 6,672 Control Building (Security Shack) 134 TOTAL BUILDING A AND SHEDS 106P332 Source: Onyx Architects (November 25, 2014). Because it is not an enclosed building, the square footage of the pole shed is not included in the total square footage for purposes of calculating the allowable Floor Area Ratio (FAR) for the site as described in the following paragraph. The total area of the project site is 287,696 sf (6.6 acres). In accordance with General Plan Policy LU-lRl(a), the Proposed Project is subject to a maximum floor area ratio (FAR) of 0.35. Because the FAR for the Proposed Project would be 0.346, excluding the Pole Shed as noted above, the Proposed Project would comply with the City's FAR requirements. The proposed use(s) of Building A and the sheds are described below. 10 Building A: Building A would house two principal functions: retail sales and large volume distribution operations. This building would include a complete hardware store, a doors and windows showroom and sales department, hardwood and molding display areas, as well as sales and customer service areas. Delivery and receiving activity would be scheduled and conducted in the northeast office of the building. The structure would be 65,263 gsf in size and would also include a control room, mezzanine, rooftop parking, as well as structural support for a solar photovoltaic (PV) system overhead of the parking surface. Figures 2.4a through 2.4e, Building A Floor Plans, provide the proposed floor plans for the first floor, mezzanine, and roof parking deck of Building A. The rooftop parking would be accessed via a ramp located on the north side of the building. The sales area would feature large amounts of glass. As shown in Figure 2.5, PACCM1401\Draft ISMND\Draft 1SMND.docx a01/21/15» zo clq w t3 13 '4 IYZ3 12 MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION GANAHL HARDWARE STORE AND LUMBER YARD This page intentionally left blank LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. JANUARY 2015 PACCM 1401 \Draft ISMND\Draft 1SMND.docx A1/21/15» .4 < � 5 6 PAINT DOOR + BACKROOM WINDOWS 4/1 A-121 BACKROOM 0 TOOLS 0 0 ------- ----- A-1 19 --------- mlll�.— A-120 ------ ------ - ---------- -- ---------------- A-IS2 ii I ®IT- � tHra� i r—Q ME ASI 16�OOM-"' STAIS (D • WOMEN'S ROOM A-117 ------ ...... ......... DOOR 1, ELEVATOR WINDOWS j A-1.EV2 MANAGER I A -116I CASH 0 DEPARTMENT A-112 A-111 STORAGE D A-110 L--------------------- ----- ------ GENERAL MANAGER A-109 CREDIT MANAGER 0 L A-108 ci CD a) WILL -CALL SALES STORAGE OFFICE 0 A-101 A-122 A-102 SALES SUPPORT i 11.284 SF 04 0 0 0 Bi 0 1CONFERENCE y (D ROOM A-105 po I SALES MANAGER A-106 (D --------- -- • . . ... . . . . STAIR 43 M.TOILFT W.TOILET STAIR# 4 A -1S3 A-125 A-126 A -1S4 L ........... 0 (D (OD - J.CLST A-124 0 0 OFFICE OPERATION OPERATIONS ,A A-103 CENTER MANAGER 0 0 0 (D A-113 00 A 123 zz I:\CCM1401\G\BuildingAFloorPlans_11x17-5pg.cdr [Page I of5] (1/20/15) 1J FA 0 32 64 FEET SOURCE: ONYX Architects L S A FIGURE 2.4a Ganahl Hardware Store and Lumber Yard Building A Floor Plans - First Floor Plan KEYNOWS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 (D (D (D (F) CD (D 6) OD (D 0 32 64 FEET SOURCE: ONYX Architects L S A FIGURE 2.4a Ganahl Hardware Store and Lumber Yard Building A Floor Plans - First Floor Plan MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION GANAHL HARDWARE STORE AND LUMBER YARD 14 This page intentionally left blank LSA ASSOCIATES. INC. JANUARY 2015 PACCM1 401 \Draft ISMND\Draft ISMND.docx «01/21/15» _ . - — L\CCM1401\G\BuiIdingAFloorPlans_llxl7-5pg.cdr [Page2of5] (1/20/15) J1 s 4 1 / 2 3 4.1 �. Q �� Q 0 ... ... .. ,r. .. .Ei .� ai.,. Q <M RAMP SURFACE (OUTSIDE) TFU STAIR K1 Ni'�r tF.VERS Af.:; c_'F"xr 5: A -2S1 J srtic TURr mr,i sjs�C?lDvO LI 117.-•; Ni,-Niclt a I'Dr,RE 5Uf'rK5.1-6 S.E•F�AS �TTr�Erz.-.r cFn �cr. UNISEX A-214 / , _ PPER ARE D _a 1 = ROOMS BE Q OPEN TO BELOW C1 C —A-162—.—.—.—. —. —. —. - - 1 B1 i - Q i UiISEx BAT ROOM 3 ELEVATOR L 215 B A 9pI i a� a • � a ._ .� • � = i A•1 EV2 Q UNISSHOWER EX IT OFFICE I s j 2 A-209 (D -212 Q _ . - — L\CCM1401\G\BuiIdingAFloorPlans_llxl7-5pg.cdr [Page2of5] (1/20/15) J1 s N 0 32 64 FEET SOURCE: ONYX Architects L c A FIGURE 2.4b Ganahl Hardware Store and Lumber Yard Building A Floor Plans - Mezzanine Plan 4 0 .... ... .. . ..... . . . . 4.1 �. ©�_x, 0 ... ... .. ,r. .. .Ei .� ai.,. Q <M TFU UNISEX Ni'�r tF.VERS Af.:; c_'F"xr 5: _ff 5S LAIV-)Ee I'MEER rxIIzxJ: uE BATHROOM srtic TURr mr,i sjs�C?lDvO LI 117.-•; Ni,-Niclt a I'Dr,RE 5Uf'rK5.1-6 S.E•F�AS �TTr�Erz.-.r cFn �cr. UNISEX A-214 PPER ARE SOF — BATHROOM 1 ROOMS BE OW © A-213 STAIR M2 —A-162—.—.—.—. —. —. —. i - UiISEx BAT ROOM 3 ELEVATOR L 215 1 A 9pI A•1 EV2 UNISSHOWER EX IT OFFICE I s j 2 A-209 (D -212 IT I IIA UNISEX SHOWER A-208 I 1 1 SECURITY ® ` A-211 ® I A-207 ( . II D : BR6AK ROOM j ` lo,-z9c r HALL © A-202 I MEETING AREA M I C1 j A-205 1 j f m I i i C j r j► O B1 CPNFECSRENCE R j CIRCULATION j A 204 j A-201 © r OPEN TO BELOW F---� I ELEC DIST. RM A-203 i L--------- --- - STAIR 07 A-2EV3 Q 139 SF �._--..—.—..—.—. MEZ}ANINE I 1 q A-217 1 MEZZANINE LEVEL I OPERATIONS AREA Q x.: `v N 0 32 64 FEET SOURCE: ONYX Architects L c A FIGURE 2.4b Ganahl Hardware Store and Lumber Yard Building A Floor Plans - Mezzanine Plan KEYNOTES 0 .... ... .. . ..... . . . . ©�_x, 0 ... ... .. ,r. .. .Ei .� ai.,. TFU Ni'�r tF.VERS Af.:; c_'F"xr 5: _ff 5S LAIV-)Ee I'MEER rxIIzxJ: uE srtic TURr mr,i sjs�C?lDvO LI 117.-•; Ni,-Niclt a I'Dr,RE 5Uf'rK5.1-6 S.E•F�AS �TTr�Erz.-.r cFn �cr. ® n;..•Fr .Fs —410 5S S ti N 0 32 64 FEET SOURCE: ONYX Architects L c A FIGURE 2.4b Ganahl Hardware Store and Lumber Yard Building A Floor Plans - Mezzanine Plan MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION GANAHL HARDWARE STORE AND LUMBER YARD This page intentionally left blank LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. JANUARY 2015 16 PACCM1401\Draft ISMND\Draft 1SMND docx «01/21/15» 1'.1 0 A I ,6 i 6 MEZZANINE 1 I@5 SF STAIR N4 A.2S3 231 SF I I I 0 ENLARGED WILL -CALL STORAGE MEZZANINE 51 O I _ O ENLARGED OPERATIONS FLOOR PLAN ._. L\CCM1401\G\BuildingAFloor Plans_11x17-5pg.cdr [Page3of5] (1/20/15) I N 0 7s 15 I SOURCE: ONYX Architects L C A FIGURE 2.4c Ganahl Hardware Store and Lumber Yard Building A Floor Plans - Will -Call Storage Operations Plan i.!I.S��W�IJ ::�ASi_l.iln'•. I.:.; O0..�M:ii.�M'.�IEAA G�5lE 1.11•Ji �r cv�Fgl;n! S�FEI 9LII Ir is R,:le.: 111:l LiI G.VS 11vuSVMLiuFH�':l 11:-, - V,ALLSVi,T�IFATTERI,FD5rn�iLi :':�. Ai WEl ':iAr L'i ®SIE.ELL'41&LS y,SFCICE�ARTS EIA IliRE S52'R rp:•„' 55 4 ES5'^-5” 5� 1R000N s'td cr,crr �I $N FI ^cRs IROO HS1! &11-1 RCLLFf. n.1S[ N 0 7s 15 I SOURCE: ONYX Architects L C A FIGURE 2.4c Ganahl Hardware Store and Lumber Yard Building A Floor Plans - Will -Call Storage Operations Plan MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION GANAHL HARDWARE STORE AND LUMBER YARD In This page intentionally left blank LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. JANUARY 2015 PACCM140 I \Draft ISMND\Draft ISMND.docx u01/21/15» -- ,.1 41 UNISEX 5 BATHROOM 3 UNISEX A-215 STAIR 02 BATHROOM 1 A -1S2 A-213 UNISEX A' SI 222 SF B1 SF BATHROOM 2 14 _ a7 SP B7 SF E i c 1 E B1 61 HALLWAY A, 116 CONFERENCE RM A 204 A-210 214 SF 099 SF 146 SF 5 ■ T ELEC DIST. RM A 203 JAN ELEVATOR 750 Sr \ ., A-216 A -I EV2TA ® 26 5F B 94 SF HALL E 1 1 2 UNISEXSHOWER 2 IT OFFICE 40SF + A 212 A 200 A-IS2 93 SF SF ^ + 222 SF 1 IDM f 1 •Y + IT 1 UNISEX SHOWER q A -20B . ELEVATOR 1 94 SF 1 A211 m + BREAM ROOM 9, SF 71 A 20G 665 SF rnrn rY �94SF a)1 SECURITY A 207 I 102 SF 1 D D I CASH A-112 CIRCULATION + A 201 140 SF 632 SF 1 MEETING AREA A-205 C1 125 SF C1 u c i c 1 WOMEN'S ROOM B1 61 A, 116 CONFERENCE RM A 204 214 SF 099 SF 41/� 5 ■ ELEC DIST. RM A 203 — 750 Sr \ ., B f� B STAIR R3 A 2EV3 134 SF 41 (. 5 r ENLARGED BUILDING A - MEZZANINE PLAN L\CCM1401\G\B6ldingAFloor Plans_11x17-5pg.cdr (Page4of5] (1/20/15) 4.1 + 5 <ti ENLARGED BUILDING A - SALES FLOOR PLAN KEYNOTES © O w _ r:oc .vs �bJantii 1113 ® G'FF, 'A'.1 '.s/.T :,FT ,';a 15 •• N 0 10 20 FEET SOURCE. ONYX Architects L c A FIGURE 2.4d Ganahl Hardware Store and Lumber Yard Building A Floor Plans - Enlarged Sales + Mezzanine Plan MEN'S ROOM WOMEN'S ROOM A, 116 A 117 214 SF :14 SF 41/� 5 \ ., O E 1 1 1'1 E STAIR 02 tT� A-IS2 + 222 SF 1 + 1 q ELEVATOR 1 A-IEV2 E=j rnrn rY �94SF a)1 I 1 V CASH A-112 + 140 SF fD D x D ® " CREDIT STORAGE 1 DEPARTMENT A 110 • + A - III 174 SF } 466 Sr GENERAL MANAGER ® A-079 CREDIT MANAGER ITO SF ® . A 100 206 SF I 1 1 1 o, 1 C1 { 1 ' I C1 m SALES SUPPORT h 104 I-946 SF 1 1 \ m B1 I B1 1 1 m CONFERENCE ROOM SALES MANAGE" + ,11p6 A 195 + 285 $F I Ha SF Al Cts rn + 4.1 + 5 <ti ENLARGED BUILDING A - SALES FLOOR PLAN KEYNOTES © O w _ r:oc .vs �bJantii 1113 ® G'FF, 'A'.1 '.s/.T :,FT ,';a 15 •• N 0 10 20 FEET SOURCE. ONYX Architects L c A FIGURE 2.4d Ganahl Hardware Store and Lumber Yard Building A Floor Plans - Enlarged Sales + Mezzanine Plan MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION GANAHL HARDWARE STORE AND LUMBER YARD 20 This page intentionally left blank LSA ASSOCIATES, INC JANUARY 2015 P:\CCM1401\Draft ISMND\Draft ISMND,docx «01/21/15» >/ <., 5 -------•—•---------- •—•—•—•—•--- ......... — — —.—.—•.0--._41. ..,.�.—.—.—,L._. .—.._._.. ^1 • j �.. O m j j • j P j - RAMP - i © © i j i m M m m m ® m j OD O D ♦ m m Q� .5 . • i 6 / . m I �q , ' m m m m m B �L CD m A [JAN r.Vr I ® OD 0 ® 4% \`4 1 i lACCM1401\G\BuildingAFloor Plans_ 11x17-5pg.cdr [Page5of5] (1/20/15) Ij \ c KEYNOTES ONEW RAMP 111 PARK 1116 DEl Ir ©BUILDING JONTT BETWEEN R<M' STR1;1 TuRE AND BUILDING STRUCTURE L?1 CONCRETE DECK MITI- ELASTCMERII. NP COATING SYSTEM t METAL BUILDING STRU-TURE WITH PV SYSTEM ABOVE NEW EMERGENCY EGRESS STMR ® RDOF SUN SPADE SYSI FM FOR (A A/INC, BEL ON 14EW VENTILATION FAN UNIT ® NEW 1 -NAC PACKAGE i4IT 11 VAC SPLIT STSIEM ®' VERTICAL ACCESS V/AY FROM SOLAR PANEL CCNDUIT5 1:1 A:^ FSSF.Ir-rTRrAI RAITTNMF?7ANI1.JF N 0 32 64 FEET SOURCE: ONYX Architects L C A FIGURE 2.4e Ganahl Hardware Store and Lumber Yard Building A Floor Plans - Roof Plan 22 MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION GANAHL HARDWARE STORE AND LUMBER YARD This page intentionally left blank LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. JANUARY 2015 PACCM 140 ] \Draft ISMND\Draft ISMND.docx <<01/21/15>) 5 10. PARKING SLAB MINE it FIRST FLOOR 01-61 NORTH ELEVATION ROOFCAN V 9� T.O. PARKING - SLAB 23. ftmw MEIIATVINE R$T FLOOR & o.-0•• ".Jr EAST ELEVATION ROOF CANOPY i0 33' - 9" TO PARKING SLA_ MEZZANINE . _ 4 FIRST FLOQR ff 0-0" i T7w SOUTH ELEVATION ,j 2 E Di T A F ROOF CANOPY " 33'-9" T.O. PARKING SLAB MEZZANINE A10 1161, -15., . . FIRST FLOOR WEST ELEVATION L S A jI SOURCE: ONYX Architects I:\CCM1401\G\Building Elevations edr (1/19/14) VTr'T TT? P I '; Ganahl Hardware Store and Lumber Yard Building A Elevations A., ItR.?0,�,9ANOPY 3 Anuwnvuol T 0- PARKING SLA13 EW EOFDE EDGEOF OLUSI MEZZANINE OUTSIDE CORNER COIRINEr L FIRST FLOOR o.-0. F11 FVATION EAST 2 3 5 10. PARKING SLAB MINE it FIRST FLOOR 01-61 NORTH ELEVATION ROOFCAN V 9� T.O. PARKING - SLAB 23. ftmw MEIIATVINE R$T FLOOR & o.-0•• ".Jr EAST ELEVATION ROOF CANOPY i0 33' - 9" TO PARKING SLA_ MEZZANINE . _ 4 FIRST FLOQR ff 0-0" i T7w SOUTH ELEVATION ,j 2 E Di T A F ROOF CANOPY " 33'-9" T.O. PARKING SLAB MEZZANINE A10 1161, -15., . . FIRST FLOOR WEST ELEVATION L S A jI SOURCE: ONYX Architects I:\CCM1401\G\Building Elevations edr (1/19/14) VTr'T TT? P I '; Ganahl Hardware Store and Lumber Yard Building A Elevations MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION GANAHL HARDWARE STORE AND LUMBER YARD This page intentionally left blank LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. JANUARY 2015 24 PACCM 1401 \Draft 1SMNMDraft ISMND.docx ((01/21/15)) LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. JANUARY 2015 MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION GANAHL HARDWARE STORE AND LUMBER YARD Building A Elevations, and Figure 2.6, Building A Cross Sections, Building A would be 23 feet, 9 inches in height, with the roof canopy and solar PV panels extending an additional 10 feet above the height of the building. As shown in Figure 2.5 and 2.6, the elevator and stairwell towers providing access to the roof top parking deck above Building A would be 40 feet, 5 inches in height. Three-dimensional renderings of the Proposed Project as viewed from the southeast corner of the project site along Bristol Street and from Newport Boulevard across Bristol Street are provided in Figure 2.7, 3D Perspectives. Retail business hours would be 6:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., Monday through Friday; 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. on Saturdays; and 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. on Sundays. In addition, some staff would arrive a half hour to an hour prior to opening to prepare the store for customers. A night shift would be scheduled to work in Building A until 11:00 p.m. and may work longer as needed depending on work load. After-hours activities would include replenishment, cleaning, and order pulling for the next day. The service and building materials stock areas (sheds) would be located at the back of the site. This area would be designed to be functional and attractive, yet would be screened from public view by a new fencing system. The fence is proposed to extend to a 16 -foot height at the back portion of the site. The sheds are described below. B Shed: The 30,262 gsf B Shed would be used to store lumber and wood products and includes a small area for custom cutting and bundling. This shed would not be permanently staffed. Employees and customers would come and go as stored product is sold or replenished in the regular sales cycle. Products located in this building would include building materials, drywall, panels, and lumber. Figure 2.8, B Shed Floor Plans, provides the proposed floor plan for B Shed. As shown in Figure 2.9, B Shed Elevations, the B Shed would include a rooftop solar PV system and would be 34 feet, 1 inch in height. Mill Shed: The Mill Shed would encompass a 3,991 gsf area for lumber milling of wood products. The mill would typically have three to four employees working from 7:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m., Monday through Friday. The mill operation consists of cutting and sizing wood products to meet customer needs. There would be no wood finishing or painting activities in this facility. The Mill Shed would include a sawdust collection system that would comply with South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) Rule 1137, which requires woodworking facilities to completely vent their sawdust emissions via a pneumatic conveyance system to a baghouse system and ensure that there are no visible emissions existing from external ductwork and the baghouse system at any time, with the exception of the initial 15 minutes after startup and the final 15 minutes prior to shutdown. Pole Shed: The pole shed is not an enclosed building and is not included for FAR calculation purposes. The pole shed on the north perimeter of the project site would be used for outdoor storage of back stock of products in the yard as well as products designated for the B Shed. Those products consist of lumber, plywood, and other panel products. Outgoing loads for deliveries would also be stored in this shed. A diesel fueling station for use by Ganahl Lumber trucks and yard vehicles would be located at the west end of the pole shed. During operation of the Proposed Project, the diesel fueling station would be enclosed within integrated containment vessels, and would be required to be operated in compliance with all applicable State and federal regulations governing the handling of diesel fuels. In addition, the diesel fueling station would meet all best management practice (BMPs) and City code requirements, including a roof shed above the PACCM 140 1 \Draft ISMND\Draft ISMND.docx «01/21/15» 25 MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION GANAHL HARDWARE STORE AND LUMBER YARD 26 This page intentionally left blank LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. JANUARY 2015 PACCM1401\Draft ISMND\Draft ISMND.docx <<01/21/15)) 1 l 1 ( l -- L'\CCM1401\G\BuildingAX-Sections,cdr (1/20/15) j I CONFERENCE RM HALL BREAK ROOM A 209 A M2 A 20N A-20- 94 SF 402 IF Fr15 SF 6 2 5 ev s1 ` 4 3 2 1 ) 41 �... 41 r SOLAR PANS DECK SOLAR PANEL DEIX ✓ - PAIOONG LEVEL I 1 1 (I PARKING - — NO« C.ANOPY 2.rSLAB 1 r t I 31' 9 AV 1 - PARKING LEVEL1 F. 1 n PARKING I [ k 1 I l I I I I - , SLAB ,1 13. 9- f I I I } k I [ I 11TUyANINE 0 FIRST F soap SF WILL -CALL CONFERENCE SALES MANAGER SALES STORAGE ROOM A-105 A 101 A. 122 11 2M SF A-106 IAN 5r 35,01 SIF 205 SF 1 l 1 ( l -- L'\CCM1401\G\BuildingAX-Sections,cdr (1/20/15) j I SALES WILL -CALL A101 STORAGE A. 122 35 VA SF 12N4 SF STAIR FJ ELEC DIST RM CONFERENCE RM MEETING AREA HALL STAIR 52 A -2M A203 Ai04 B1 A-205 ci ti2.2 AIS2 :30 SF 15', SF OY, SF 125 SF 402 SF 222 51 A B c D E SOLAR PANEL DELL 5r 7ZI C R(,0q A,OP' I'33' 9'� PARKING LEVET 10IPANKING RAMP SLAB 23' 9' PAZZANINE a, . i I; _. _--. _.`__ .. _ _.. �_�__ ' IIT '__ t • �I 10, Ir FIRI FLOOR GENERAL SALES SALES MANAGER SALES SUPPORT MANAGER STORAGE CASH SALES TOOLS A 101 A.105 AW4 AIN ,110 1112 ,101 A120 35 1,N0 SF INR SF 1045 SF 114 SF 17A SF 140 SF IS V,. SF 153 SF („ B1 C1 ) A B C D E R:70i r ANOPY Ap 33' 9- PAFWJNGLEVEL - PARKING ,ST—T— ....`.T_-. T( ,1J I'll INNI11 RAW 0' 0 7 FIR51 FLOOR SALES A 101 15 049 SF SECTION EN 1 1 v16^ • 1�.0� . SECTI0N/1E/W 2 2 SECTION N!--1 3 N NO SCALE'. SOURCE: ONYX Architects L C A FIGURE 2.6 Ganahl Hardware Store and Lumber Yard Building A Cross Sections R OFFICE HALL BREAK ROOM A 209 A M2 A 20N 94 SF 402 IF Fr15 SF 2 3 4 5 �... 41 SOLAR PANS DECK f - PAIOONG LEVEL I 1 1 (I PARKING _.1 2.rSLAB 1 r t I iAIL),J%J,111 F. I I I I FIRST FLOUR 9 01 SALES WILL -CALL A101 STORAGE A. 122 35 VA SF 12N4 SF STAIR FJ ELEC DIST RM CONFERENCE RM MEETING AREA HALL STAIR 52 A -2M A203 Ai04 B1 A-205 ci ti2.2 AIS2 :30 SF 15', SF OY, SF 125 SF 402 SF 222 51 A B c D E SOLAR PANEL DELL 5r 7ZI C R(,0q A,OP' I'33' 9'� PARKING LEVET 10IPANKING RAMP SLAB 23' 9' PAZZANINE a, . i I; _. _--. _.`__ .. _ _.. �_�__ ' IIT '__ t • �I 10, Ir FIRI FLOOR GENERAL SALES SALES MANAGER SALES SUPPORT MANAGER STORAGE CASH SALES TOOLS A 101 A.105 AW4 AIN ,110 1112 ,101 A120 35 1,N0 SF INR SF 1045 SF 114 SF 17A SF 140 SF IS V,. SF 153 SF („ B1 C1 ) A B C D E R:70i r ANOPY Ap 33' 9- PAFWJNGLEVEL - PARKING ,ST—T— ....`.T_-. T( ,1J I'll INNI11 RAW 0' 0 7 FIR51 FLOOR SALES A 101 15 049 SF SECTION EN 1 1 v16^ • 1�.0� . SECTI0N/1E/W 2 2 SECTION N!--1 3 N NO SCALE'. SOURCE: ONYX Architects L C A FIGURE 2.6 Ganahl Hardware Store and Lumber Yard Building A Cross Sections MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION GANAHL HARDWARE STORE AND LUMBER YARD This page intentionally left blank LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. JANUARY 2015 28 PACCM 140 1 \Draft ISMND\Draft ISMND.docx «01/21/15» D J m H 0 IL z 2 0 LL W W a w IL 0 M Q N O tl 7 Ri N N N fi V v J ) J � C M C fi C Q a X Y z o G U ^ V v J ) J U � O V U :J MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION GANAHL HARDWARE STORE AND LUMBER YARD 30 This page intentionally left blank LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. JANUARY 2015 PACCM140 I Oraft ISMND\Draft 1SMND.docx «01/21/15» 7-1 19 18 15 14 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 m m I I I A L CUSTOMER I O 1R-102 (E O ; I B ' 1 113 SF i I B -SHED I I B 101 B MILL 1 26 776 51 I 9 103 1 I 3 596 SF O 0 U O 11 c I B -SHED -ROOF 21 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 { O m m I I I I CUSTOMER I SERVICE MILL 1R-102 (E ; I B ' 1 113 SF i I B -SHED I I B 101 I MILL 1 26 776 51 I 9 103 1 1 3 596 SF 1 HILI OFFICE • B I0a (D 120 SF F100�1 ..-- -- -- '— - --- TOILETIJC t O I 9,105 94 SF -I L\CCM 1401\G\B Shed Floor Plans (1/20/15) i i KEYNOTES OPRE MANVFACTVREDB'JILDING S151E1.1 C'OMRONENTS INCLUDE Sr RUCTURAL SYSTEM RREFIFaSHED ME TAIL SIDING WALL SYSTEM (REFINISHED METAL ROOF SYSTEM !JTERIOR AND£XTERIOR LIGHTING. NINDO*S DOORS VEN7ILATIONSYSIEM 'nNCRETF FLOOR r N19H © R SERVIC- MI. © LULL LHh O © TQ01 STORACF. RA; K. 1140,YORK BENCH v1.141SE1 I�_� LT R4.)',1 OELK TRICAL T;ONfRD', PANELS Orr-I oyp n. IST �O: i EC rnR SYSTEM OrIF,RS"R,:_ 11i11i lE'JT'LA'IDN ti r5TEM RA( K,tNr. B STORAL& SYSTEM I,In4, EI r —i IN L 1 -1 -.RL' N 0 32 64 FEET SOURCE: ONYX Architects L C A FIGURE 2.8 Ganah/ Hardware Store and Lumber Yard B Shed Floor Plans MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION GANAHL HARDWARE STORE AND LUMBER YARD This page intentionally left blank LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. JANUARY 2015 32 PACCM 140 1 \Draft ISMND\Draft ISMND.docx Al/21/15» 71 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 O O O 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00❑0000 00000 00000 00000 ❑Q❑❑❑ 0000000 00000 S SHLD-ROOF r • 24' A" 7 B•SHE13-FIRST FLOOR ao a 0' B -§HED - NORTH , C A 8 O B SHED ROOF 1 24 0' � , • 1 r •�Im B SIZED FIRST 1 T FLOOR n 0- B -8 H ED - B-8HED - EAST 21 1116" 1'-0" 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 B 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 O O S 00000 0000000 ❑❑00C]� 00000 ❑❑0013 0013❑❑ 0000000 00000 00000 00000 00000 130000 , . fti o;IlEo rifi:Il i U z e o O O O'. I� , 65HE FLOOFLOO 1 R Air 0' 0 B -SHED - SOUTH 3 A C • r �► 3<FIF I)ROUF 'ti Z4' 0 m 4 1 1 r 1 3SHB FLOOR AL � u 1:\CCM1401\G\BShed Elevations (1/20/15) JJ KEYNOTES PRE-MAIJUFACTIJREDBUILDIIIGSrSrEM O. COMPONENTS INCLUDE STRUCTURAL SYSTEM PREFINISHED METAL SIDING WALL SYSTEM PREF INISHED METAL ROOF SYSTEM INTERIOR AND E%TEFLOR tIGH. NG WIIJDOWS, DOORS VENTILA''0N SYSTEM ::ONCRETE F1 OCR r-PIISH © r USTOMER 6FRINGF.. FAIL © MILL LIIF OOFFICE © 1 WL STORAGE RACK AND WORK RENCI OUNISEX TOILET ROOM OELECTRICAL CONTROL PANELS OC -1 -0 -IF DUST COL I ECI OR SYSTEM OCI EARSTORY LIGW F AILD VF.NTILAT OII SVSTEI.I GI RACCI1118 STORAGE SYSTEM ID MA N ELEC I PANEL ROA4D NO SCALE SOURCE: ONYX Architects L S A FIGURE 2.9 Ganahl Hardware Store and Lumber Yard B Shed Elevations MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION GANAHL HARDWARE STORE AND LUMBER YARD This page intentionally left blank LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. JANUARY 2015 34 PACCM 140 1 \Draft ISMND\Draft ISMND.docx Al/21/15» LSA ASSOCIATES. INC. MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION JANUARY 2015 GANAHL HARDWARE STORE AND LUMBER YARD fueling area. The existing Ganahl Lumber facility has a similar fueling station on the existing site located directly above the Delhi Channel. The fuel area would be built to comply with all cover and containment requirements. A trash bin enclosure used for the disposal of trash created by the facility would also be located on the west end. This shed would be 6,672 gsf in size. Yard: The facility would support seven to ten trucks for deliveries to customers. The on-site fleet would consist of 10 wheel, bobtail, and box trucks. Customer deliveries per day would typically number from 20 to 40 stops compared to 20 to 35 at the existing facility. Receiving will typically handle 20 to 30 incoming vendor trucks supplying material for replenishment of inventory. All receiving would take place during regular business hours. All Ganahl Lumber trucks and vendor deliveries coming into the facility would enter at a non -customer approach located at the east end of the project site. All Ganahl Lumber and vendor trucks would exit at the proposed signalized exit at the west end of the project site. Approximately 15 to 20 material handling vehicles would be used to stack, load, and unload product at the yard. Storage in the yard would consist of lumber and building materials located in covered racking and storage sheds as described above. The racking would vary to match the products stored. Pallet racks, cantilever racks, and custom racks for storing doors and windows would be incorporated in the layout of the yard. Customer traffic into the yard area would enter and exit through a controlled and guarded point located in front of Building A. This gate guard building would be staffed during all business hours and would have closed and secured gates when the business is closed to customers. Employees: The employee count at the new facility is expected to start at 90 to 100 people compared to the current facility count of 80 people. The proposed facility would employ approximately 120 employees at full capacity, dependent on economic conditions and the construction market. Typically 80 percent of the employees would work in Building A. The balance of employees would move around the site to fill customer orders and prepare orders for delivery. 2.2.4 Operation and Maintenance The Proposed Project would operate under a 21 -year lease term with six additional 7 -year extensions from the Orange County Flood Control District (OCFCD). An encroachment permit would be required for the Caltrans property. Ongoing Orange County Flood Control District Maintenance. As described above in Section 2. 1, the Santa Ana Delhi Channel runs underground beneath the central and eastern portion of the project site, with the majority of the project site owned in fee by the OCFCD. The OCFCD provides regular inspections of the Santa Ana Delhi Channel and when needed, may conduct maintenance activities that involve, but are not limited to: regular inspections of the triple reinforced concrete box, removing debris or potential sediment buildup, repair and/or reinforcement of the channel (including the walls and soffit), and graffiti clean-up. Most of these activities would occur below the ground elevation in the channel underneath a portion of the project site. However, in some instances the activities may require use of a maintenance access hatch located to the rear of the of the project site. As shown on Figure 2.3, the site plan for the Proposed Project includes a 20 -foot wide access road that would allow the OCFCD to access the maintenance access hatch. Upon entering into a Lease Agreement with the OCFCD, the Ganahl Lumber Company will be responsible for site maintenance through the duration of the lease term and the OCFCD will continue to maintain the underground channel. PACCM1 40 1 \Draft ISMND\Draft ISMND.docx «01/21/15» 35 MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION GANAHL HARDWARE STORE AND LUMBER YARD LSA ASSOCIATES. INC. JANUARY 2015 Parldng and Access. The Proposed Project would provide a total of 286 parking spaces: 108 on the roof of Building A and the remainder at grade (including handicap accessible stalls and walkways) available to employees and customers. Building A would include a covered roof deck for additional parking with a solar PV system. The covered roof deck would provide natural ventilation and shade the building to provide cost savings in energy use. A ramp on the north side of Building A would provide access to the roof deck. The roof deck area square footage is as shown below in Table 2.C, Roof Area Square Footage. A focused Traffic Impact Study for Ganahl Lumber Costa Mesa Relocation Project was completed for the Proposed Project by Linscott, Law, & Greenspan, Engineers (LLG 2014) based on an evaluation of the trip generation studies conducted at the existing Ganahl Lumber facility located at 1275 Bristol Street. As indicated in the traffic impact study, traffic counts were collected at the two existing driveways that provide access to j the existing site on Tuesday, February 11, 2014, Wednesday, February 12, 2014 and Thursday, February 13, 2014. From the results of the trip generation studies, LLG calculated the existing parking accumulation of the Ganahl Lumber facility by comparing inbound vehicles vs. outbound vehicles at the bvo driveways that now sser,re the site. Table 2.C: Roof Area Square Footage Building A Roof Area: Gross Square Feet (gsf) Roof Deck Slab Area 58,033 Covered Roof Deck (solar panels) 35,585 Source: Onyx Architects (November 25, 2014). 1 Access to the site would be provided by two driveways on Bristol Street. To minimize turning conflicts on the existing two-way left -turn median lane on Bristol Street along the Project frontage, primary access is proposed via a fall access signalized driveway along Bristol Street to be constructed opposite northbound Newport Boulevard (Driveway No. 1), with secondary access to be provided via a proposed unsignalized driveway on Bristol Street that is located at the eastern edge of the project site (Driveway No. 2). The locations of the Proposed Project's two driveways are shown in Figure 2.3. Driveway No. 1, which requires utilization of a Caltrans easement, would provide access to customer, employee, and contractor -related traffic, while Driveway No. 2 is proposed as a "truck - only entry" driveway (no exit) for truck -related traffic; trucks would exit the site at Driveway No. 1. Improvements to be completed as a part of the Proposed Project at the Bristol Street/Northbound Newport Boulevard intersection, subject to the approval of the City of Costa Mesa and access across the Caltrans easement, include: • Modification of the existing median on Bristol Street to provide a dedicated eastbound left- turn lane; • Restriping the northbound approach to provide one left -tum lane, an option left-turn/through lane, and a separate right -tum lane; 36 PACCM 1401 \Draft ISMND\Draft 1SMND.docx «01/21/15» LSA ASSOCIATES. INC, JANUARY 2015 MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION CANAHL HARDWARE STORE AND LUMBER YARD • Construction of the new site driveway to provide a southbound (outbound) left -turn lane and southbound (outbound) right -turn lane and one departure (inbound) lane; and • Modification of the existing traffic signal, to include split phase operation on Northbound Newport Boulevard/Driveway No. 1. Landscaping. Approximately 15,748 sf of landscaping would be included as part of the Proposed Project. The front landscape setback along Bristol Street is proposed at a depth of 10 feet. Landscape features would be used in an integrated way to reflect the history of the site and help with site stormwater management. The project site is located across the street from an open tributary to the Newport Back Bay. The Santa Ana Delhi Channel runs beneath the site and serves as a physical connection to the bay within the Newport Bay Watershed. The project is located approximately one mile from the Upper Newport Bay Nature Preserve and approximately five miles from the Pacific Ocean. Therefore, the landscape concept for the site is Tidal. Coastal native trees and shrubs would be used and tidal patterns would be reflected in the paving, planting, and built forms. The Proposed Project includes the use of regenerative design principles and aesthetics as part of the landscape plan. The plan includes the use of signatures trees, the Ganahl Lumber rickshaw sculpture, wood fencing, nature pattern pavement (permeable), planting areas, bioswale, roof planters, and green walls (vines on cables). The Proposed Project would be designed to capture rain water from the roof system and store it in five aboveground cisterns for later use in landscape areas (based on 12 inches of average rainfall per year). The cisterns would be 18 feet in diameter and 10.75 feet high and could store approximately 100,000 gallons of rainwater. It is anticipated that the landscaping would require up to 112,000 gallons per year. Rainwater at grade would be treated and eventually filtered into the ground, replenishing the water table. Native and drought tolerant plants that thrive in extended periods of drought with seasonal floods would be used. Sustainability Features. The Proposed Project would use passive energy and resource saving features through its rainwater runoff system, heating, ventilation and air conditioning (HVAC) system, power consumption, permeable paving, and other design features on site. As appropriate, these systems would be featured in an aesthetically pleasing way, appropriate to the functional design. These built-in features include: • Use of sun shading and natural day -lighting to diminish heat gain and decrease the need for artificial lighting during daylight hours such as: o Building overhangs provided over glazing areas and over portions of the building as a whole. These overhangs are either solid to shade the masonry walls or are louvered over glazing areas to harness the natural light while blocking solar gain and glare from the direct light. o Light shelves provided at the glass curtain walls in order to bring indirect light into the interior of the building. o Roof shading covering provides a mounting surface for solar PV panels and blocks solar radiation from hitting the main roof plane (the upper part of the main building envelope); prevailing winds continually blow away accumulated heat that collects under this shade, lowering the temperature of the air immediately above the main roof. The solar PV system of PACCM1401\Draft ISMND\Draft ISMND.docx «01/21/15» 37 MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION LSA ASSOCIATES. INC. GANAHL HARDWARE STORE AND LUMBER YARD JANUARY 2015 the roofs of Building A and the B Shed would produce approximately 40 kilowatts of electricity. The Proposed Project would also include four 5 kilowatt fuel cell modules (20 kilowatt maximum). • The enclosed building would employ natural ventilation to maintain a comfortable temperature, while minimizing the use of air conditioning. The building envelope incorporates a controlled wall louver system to catch prevailing winds in lieu of air conditioning during much of the day and during most days of the year. This ventilation would be mechanically augmented, as needed. • All passive systems would be integrated into the facility's active control systems: o As more natural lighting comes into the store, artificial lighting would be dimmed accordingly. o As the various solar shading and ventilation systems maintain a temperate environment in the store, air conditioning and heating systems would be kept at idle, and not used until necessary (a fraction of a typical commercial facility). These passive conservation elements would exceed what is currently prescribed in the State's Title 24 Energy Code. 2.2.5 Project Timing The project site is under contract with the Orange County Flood Control District (property owner) for a limited duration; therefore, there is interest to proceed with project implementation closely following the approval of land use entitlements. The Proposed Project would start construction in summer 2015 and would take approximately 12 months to complete. Project construction activities would be limited to the hours and days listed in the City of Costa Mesa Noise Ordinance (7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. on Mondays through Fridays, 9:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. on Saturdays, excluding Sundays and federal holidays). The existing store would remain open during construction. Once construction of the new Ganahl Lumber store is complete, the existing store would close permanently; there are no plans to reuse or continue to operate the existing site once the new store is operational. 2.2.6 Regulatory Requirements, Permits, and Approvals The City of Costa Mesa is the primary approval authority and the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Lead Agency for the Proposed Project. Because the Proposed Project would be located on property owned by the OCFCD and Caltrans, the OCFCD and Caltrans would serve as a Responsible Agencies. Additional subsequent approvals and other permits may be required from other local, regional, state, and federal agencies. Permits required for the Proposed Project include, but are not limited to, the following: City of Costa Mesa o Discretionary Permits to be approved by Planning Commission (Conditional Use Permit, Development Review, Variances, Planned Signing Program) o Grading Permit 38 _ P:\CCM1401\Draft ISMND\Draft ISMND.docx «01/21/15» LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. JANUARY 2015 MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION GANAHL HARDWARE STORE AND LUMBER YARD o Building Permit o Fire Department Permit • Orange County Flood Control District (OCFCD) o Lease Agreement • California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) o Encroachment Permit • South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) o Permit for sawdust collection system • State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) o National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) General Construction Stormwater Permit or Waiver (for construction) Required Discretionary Approvals by the City. The following discretionary approvals are required: • Conditional Use Permit for Hardware Store and Outdoor Lumber Yard; • Development Review for new construction of 65,263 sf store and associated outdoor material storage structures and mill shed; • Variances from building height from 34 to 41 feet for the solar roof canopy, elevator oven -an, B - shed, and roof -deck parking level; • Variance from front setback requirement (20 feet required, 10 feet proposed); and • Planned Signing Program for freestanding signs up to 25 feet in height (12 feet allowed). Other Ministerial City Actions. Ministerial permits/approvals (e.g., grading permits and building permits) would be issued by the City to allow site preparation, curb cuts, and connections to the utility infrastructure. PACCM1 40 1 \Draft ISMND\Draft ISMND.docx u01/21/15» 39 MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION GANAHL HARDWARE STORE AND LUMBER YARD This page intentionally left blank LSA ASSOCIATES. INC. JANUARY 2015 40 PACCM 140 1 \Draft 1SMND\Draft 1SMND.docx «01/21/15» LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION JANUARY 2015 GANAHL HARDWARE STORE AND LUM35ER YARD 3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. ❑ Aesthetics ❑ Agriculture & Forest Resources ❑ Air Quality ❑ Biological Resources ❑ Cultural Resources ❑ Geology/Soils ❑ Greenhouse Gas Emissions ❑ Hazards & Hazardous Materials ❑ Hydrology/Water Quality ❑ Land Use/Planning ❑ Mineral Resources ❑ Noise ❑ Population/Housing ❑ Public Services ❑ Recreation ❑ Transportation/Traffic ❑ Utilities/Service Systems ❑ Mandatory Findings of Significance DETERMINATION. On the basis of this initial evaluation: 1. I find that the proposed project could not have a significant effect on the environment, and a ❑ NEGATIVE DECLARATION would be prepared. 2. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. 3. I find the proposed project may have a significant effect on the environment, and an ❑ ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. 4. I find that the proposed project may have a "potentially significant impact" or "potentially ❑ significant unless mitigated impact" on the environment, but at least one effect (1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and (2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. 5. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, ❑ because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or Negative Declaration pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or Negative Declaration, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required. P � ct Planner &Vk / ^-- Assistant Development Services Director - I /Zl Date January 19, 2015 Date PACCM1401\Draft ISMNDOraft ISMND.docx «01/20/15» 41 MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION GANAHL HARDWARE STORE AND LUMBER YARD EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. JANUARY 2015 1. A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact" answers that are adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question. A "No Impact" answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved (e.g., the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A "No Impact" answer should be explained where it is based on project -specific factors as well as general standards (e.g., the project would not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project -specific screening analysis). 2. All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off-site as well as on-site, cumulative as well as project -level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts. 3. Once the lead agency has determined that a particular physical impact may occur, then the checklist answers must indicate whether the impact is potentially significant, less than significant with mitigation, or less than significant. "Potentially Significant Impact" is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect may be significant. If there are one or more "Potentially Significant Impact" entres when the determination is made, an EIR is required. 4. "Negative Declaration: Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated" applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact" to a "Less Than Significant Impact." The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level (mitigation measures from earlier analyses may be cross-referenced, as discussed below). 5. Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063 (c) (3) (D). In this case, a brief discussion should identity the following: a. Earlier Analysis Used. Identify and state where they are available for review. b. Impacts Adequately Addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis. c. Mitigation Measures. For effects that are "Less Than Significant with Mitigation Measures Incorporated," describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site-specific conditions for the project. 6. Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources for potential impacts (e.g., general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared or outside document should, where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated. 7. Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached, and other sources used or individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion. 8. This is only a suggested form, and lead agencies are free to use different formats; however, lead agencies should normally address the questions from this checklist that are relevant to a project's environmental effects in whatever format is selected. 42 PACCM1401\Draft ISMND\Draft ISMND.docx 41/21/15» LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. JANUARY 2015 MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION GANAHL HARDWARE STORE AND LUMBER YARD 9. The explanation of each issue should identify: a. The significance criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate each question; and b. The mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less than significant. PACCM1401Draft ISMND\Draft ISMND.docx «01/21/15» 43 MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION GANAHL HARDWARE STORE AND LUMBER YARD This page intentionally left blank LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. JANUARY 2015 ........... ._ 44 PACCM 1401 \Draft ISMND\Draft ISMND.docx A1/21/15» LSA ASSOCIATES. INC. JANUARY 2015 MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION GANAHL HARDWARE STORE AND LUMBER YARD 3.1 AESTHETICS Less Than Significant Potentially With Less Than Would the Significant Mitigation Significant No project: Impact Incor orated Impact Impact (a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? ❑ ❑ ❑ (b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 highway? (c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? s? ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ (d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? ❑ C] 3.1.1 Environmental Setting The City of Costa Mesa (City) encompasses 16 square miles, and is located in central Orange County. The City is bordered by the cities of Santa Ana, Irvine, Newport Beach, Huntington Beach, and Fountain Valley. The City is a commercial and industrial center serving areas beyond Orange County. Costa Mesa offers 28 parks, a municipal golf course, 20 public schools, and three libraries (City of Costa Mesa 2014c). The Proposed Project is located within the City of Costa Mesa on the south side of the juncture of State Route -55 (SR -55) and State Route -73 (SR -73). The Santa Ana Country Club is located approximately 600 feet southwest of the project site. The existing Ganahl Lumber yard is located directly to the southeast of the project site. The Proposed Project is surrounded by general commercial, transportation, and residential land uses (Google Maps 2014). Access to the project site is currently provided by one driveway along Bristol Street. The project site currently contains a concrete wall, an asphalt paved entrance area, landscaping along the Bristol Street frontage, and an underground concrete flood channel (Santa Ana Delhi Channel) located beneath the project site. 3.1.2 Impact Analysis (a) No Impact. The project site is surrounded primarily by roadways and commercial and residential development. The Proposed Project would be built directly south of the SR -55 and SR -73 junction, and would not obstruct long distance views from any public viewing areas. The City's General Plan does not designate any aesthetic or visual resources on or within the vicinity of the project site (City of Costa Mesa 2000). Variances are, required for the overall building height to account for the roof canopy (34 feet), elevator overrun (approximately 40 feet), B Shed, and roofdeck parking. The maximum building height allowed in this commercial zone is 2 stories/30 feet. Therefore, no impacts to scenic vistas would occur. Mitigation Measures: No mitigation would be required. (b) No Impact. The California Department of Transportation's (Caltrans) Landscapc Architccture Program administers the Scenic Highway Program, contained in Streets and Highways Code Sections 260-263. State Highways are classified as either Officially Listed or Eligible. SR -55 and SR -73, which are located adjacent to the project site, are not identified as eligible or State - designated Scenic Highways (Caltrans 2014). Therefore, the Proposed Project does not have the potential to damage resources within a State -designated scenic highway. In addition, there are no PACCM1401\Draft ISMND\Draft ISMND.docx x01/21/15» 45 MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION GANAHL HARDWARE STORE AND LUMBER YARD LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. JANUARY 2015 existing aesthetic or visual resources located on the project site or in the surrounding vicinity of the project site that have been designated in the City's General Plan (City of Costa Mesa 2000). Therefore, no impacts related to scenic resources would occur. Mitigation Measures: No mitigation would be required. (c) Less Than Significant Impact. The Proposed Proiect would be located within a primarily commercial area adjacent to SR -55 and SR -73 that includes the existing Ganahl Lumber Store. The project site is an empty lot designated for general commercial land use (City of Costa Mesa 2004). The Proposed Project is designed to be consistent with the architecture of the existing commercial buildings along Bristol Street and its buildings would be similar in size and scale to other buildings in the vicinity of the project, including the buildings on the existing Ganahl Lumber Store adjacent to the project site. Landscaping for the Proposed Project is designed to be visually pleasing and would reflect the project site's coastal location. Refer to Figures 2.4 and Figure 2.5 for elevations of Building A and architectural renderings of the Proposed Project, respectively. The Proposed Project would not create shade/shadow effects on the neighboring land uses because no adjacent land uses are located in close enough proximity to the Proposed Project to experience shade and shadow impacts from the structures associated with the Proposed Project. Therefore, the Proposed Project would not degrade the existing character or quality of the site and its surroundings. No impact would occur. Mitigation Measures: No mitigation would be required. (d) Less than Significant Impact. The Proposed Project would include light fixtures for parking lots, pedestrian pathways, building entries, and landscaping. These light fixtures would provide increased visibility and highlight elements of buildings and trees. Light fixtures at the edge of the project site would be shielded and directed downward to avoid spillover effects on surrounding properties. Impacts from lighting would be less than significant. The reflection of sunlight is the primary potential producer of glare from glass and metallic surfaces. The Proposed Project would have the potential to produce glare from glass and metallic materials used on its buildings and from the proposed solar photovoltaic (PV) system. The reflection of light is an optical phenomenon governed by the law of reflection. This law states that the direction of incoming light (incident ray) and the direction of the outgoing light reflected (reflected ray) make the same angle with respect to the surface normal, thus the angle of incidence equals the angle of reflection. The law of reflection shows how light responds when it contacts a truly spectral surface like a mirror. The sales area of Building A would feature glass on its south and west facades to allow for a visual connection of the materials in the inside of the store and the materials on the outside. There is a potential for glare from sunlight reflecting off the glass surfaces. However, glare from glass surfaces of Building A would be partially shielded by other structures on the site (B Shed) and trees planted as part of the landscaping plan. Building overhangs that are louvered over glazing areas would be used to harness the natural light while blocking solar gain and glare from direct sunlight. Furthermore, the height (single story) and orientation of Building A would minimize the amount of glare that could potentially result from sunlight reflecting from glass surfaces. 46 PACCM1401Draft ISMND\Draft 1SMND.docx ((01/21/15» LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. JANUARY 4015 MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION GANAHL HARDWARE STORE AND LUMBER YARD A solar PV system would be built on the roofs of Building A and the B Shed. The solar panel deck is proposed at height of 33 feet 9 inches from grade. A solar panel differs from a truly spectral surface in that it has microscopically irregular surface designed to trap the incident rays of sunlight with the intention of generating additional photon collisions and energy production. Any incident radiation, if not absorbed or transmitted, would be reflected. With the current advancements in PV technology, a typical untreated silicon solar cell absorbs two-thirds of the sunlight reaching the panel's surface, meaning only one-third of the sunlight reaching the surface of the panel would be reflected. Recent improvements in PV technology have led to even greater light absorption efficiency through the use of nanoengineered anti -reflective materials applied directly to solar cells that allow the cells to absorb light from virtually the entire solar spectrum. The intent of solar technology is to increase the efficiency by absorbing as much light as possible which further reduces reflection and glare. Most solar glass sheets (the glass layer that covers the PV panels) are typically tempered glass that is treated with an anti -reflective or diffusion coating that further diffuses (scatters) the intensity of glare produced. This type of diffused glare loses intensity as the distance from the reflection source increases. As such, the proposed PV system is not expected to generate substantial glare. Impacts would be less than significant. Mitigation Measures: No mitigation would be required. I PACCM1 401 \Draft ISMND\Draft ISMND.docx «01/21/15» 47 MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. GANAHL HARDWARE STORE AND LUMBER YARD JANUARY 2015 This page intentionally left blank 48 PAC.CM1401\Draft ISMND\Draft ISMND.docx «01/21/15» LSA ASSOCIATES. INC JANUARY 2015 MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION CANAHL HARDWARE STORE AND LUMBER YARD 3.2 AGRICULTURE AND FOREST RESOURCES Less Than Significant Potentially With Less Than Would the ro"ect: Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Im aM (a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared ❑ El 11pursuant ED to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use? (b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson ® E] ElAct contract? (c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code section 4526), or timberland ❑ ❑ El 0 zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code section 51104(g))? (d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non- El 1:1 Elforest use? (e) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to ❑ ❑ ❑ Z non-agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non -forest use? 3.2.1 Impact Analysis (a) No Impact. The Proposed Project is not located within any farmland uses (City of Costa Mesa 2004). The project area is not identified as Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (California Department of Conservation 2010). No impact would occur. Mitigation Measures: No mitigation would be required. (b) No Impact. The project site is not zoned for agricultural use or is it subject to a Williamson Act contract (City of Costa Mesa 2000; Department of Conservation 2004). No impact would occur. Mitigation Measures: No mitigation would be required. (c) No Impact. The project site is not zoned for forest land, timberland, or timberland production (City of Costa Mesa 2000). No impact would occur. Mitigation Measures: No mitigation would be required. (d) No Impact. The project site is located in a developed area with commercial land uses. There are no forest land uses in the vicinity of the project site. No impact would occur. Mitigation Measures: No mitigation would be required. (e) No Impact. The project site and the surrounding properties are not currently used for agriculture or considered forest land. No impact would occur. Mitigation Measures: No mitigation would be required. PACCM1401\Draft ISMND\Draft ISMND.docx a01/21/15» 49 MITI GATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. GANAHL HARDWARE STORE AND LUMBER YARD JANUARY 2 01 5 This page intentionally left blank 50 PACCM 140 1 \Draft ISMND\Draft ISMND.docx «01/21/15» LSA ASSOCIATES. INC. JANUARY 2015 MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION GANAHL HARDWARE STORE AND LUMBER YARD 3.3 AIR QUALITY Less than Significant Potentially with Less Than Would the project: Significant Impact Mitigation Incorporated Significant Impact No impact (a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air ❑ ❑ ❑ _ qualityplan? (b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to ❑ ❑ ® ❑ an existing or 12roiected air quality violation? (c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is nonattainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality ❑ ❑ ❑ standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? ❑ ❑ ❑ (d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? ❑ ❑ (e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of ❑ people? 3.3.1 Introduction An air quality and global climate change impact analysis report (Appendix A) was completed for the Proposed Project by Kunzman Associates, Inc. (Kunzman 2014a). The findings of this report are summarized in the following sections. 3.3.2 Environmental Setting The project site is located within the South Coast Air Basin (SCAB), and is within the jurisdiction of the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). The SCAB has been designated by the California Air Resources Board (ARB) as a nonattainment area for ozone (03), particulate matter of 10 microns or less in diameter (PMJo), and particulate matter of 2.5 microns or less in diameter (PM2.5). Currently, the SCAB is in attainment with the ambient air quality standards for carbon monoxide (CO), lead, sulfur dioxide (SO2), nitrogen dioxide (NO2), and sulfates and is unclassified for visibility -reducing particles and hydrogen sulfide (Kunzman 2014a). 3.3.3 Impact Analysis (a) No Impact. An Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP) describes air pollution control strategies to be taken by a city, county, or region classified as a nonattainment area. The main purpose of an AQMP is to bring the area into compliance with federal and State air quality standards. California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires that certain projects be analyzed for consistency with the AQMP. A project should be considered to be consistent with the AQMP if it furthers one or more policies and does not obstruct other policies. The SCAQMD CEQA Handbook identifies two key indicators of consistency: (1) Whether the project will result in an increase in the frequency or severity of existing air quality violations or cause or contribute to new violations, or delay timely attainment of air quality standards or the interim emission reductions specified in the AQMP. PACCMI 401 \Draft ISMND\Draft ISMND.docx «01/21/15» 51 MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION GANAHL HARDWARE STORE AND LUMBER YARD LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. JANUARY 2015 Because of California's nonattainment status for 03, PM2.5, and PMIo, if project -generated emissions of the 03 precursor pollutants (i.e., reactive organic gases [ROG] and nitrogen oxides NOx), PM2.5, or PMIo would exceed the SCAQMD's significance thresholds, then the project would be considered to conflict with the AQMP. However, short term construction impacts and long term operation impacts were found to be below thresholds of significance. Therefore, the Proposed Project is not projected to contribute to the exceedance of any air pollutant concentration standards and is found to be consistent with the AQMP for the first criterion. ` (2) Whether the project will exceed the assumptions in the AQMP in 2010 or increments based on the year of project buildout and phase. Consistency with the AQMP assumptions is determined by performing an analysis of the Proposed Project with the assumptions in the AQMP. The emphasis of this criterion is to ensure that the analyses conducted for the Proposed Project are based on the same forecasts as the AQMP. The Regional Comprehensive Plan and Guide (RCP&G) consists of three sections: Core Chapters, Ancillary Chapters, and Bridge Chapters. The Growth Management, Regional Mobili Ly, Air Quality, Nater ,1ua.ity, anu Haza-A us Waste Management chapters cons," Lu. Core Chapters of the document. These chapters currently respond directly to federal and state requirements placed on the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG). Local governments are required to use these as the basis of their plans for purposes of consistency with applicable regional plans under CEQA. For the Proposed Project, the City of Costa Mesa General Plan defines the assumptions that are represented in the AQMP. The project site is zoned "Cl Local Business" and has a land use designation of "General Commercial" in the City of Costa Mesa Zoning Map and General Plan Land Use Map, respectively. Based on the City of Costa Mesa Industrial Development Standards, the project site could be developed with up to 193,700 square feet (sf) of "mini -warehouse" floor area. Therefore, the Proposed Project is not anticipated to exceed the AQMP assumptions for the project site and is found to be consistent with the AQMP for the second criterion. In addition, the Proposed Project would exceed Title 24 requirements and the Mandatory Measures outlined in the California Green Building Standards Code (Cal Green Code) intended to improve air quality. Based on the above, the Proposed Project would not result in an inconsistency with the SCAQMD AQMP. No impact would occur. Mitigation Measures: No mitigation would be required. (b) Less Than Significant Impact. The Proposed Project's air quality impacts are attributable to construction and operation activities that have the potential to generate air emissions, toxic air contaminant emissions, and odor impacts. Air pollutant emissions for both the construction and operational phases of the Proposed Project were estimated using the CaIEEMod program (Version 2013.2.2) (Kunzman 2014a). Construction Impacts. Emissions associated with construction would include the following: emissions of fugitive dust from surface disturbance activities, emissions of combustion pollutants from heavy construction equipment, emissions of combustion pollutants from worker vehicles, 52 PACCM1401\Draft ISMND\Draft ISMND.docx «01/21/15» LSA ASSOCIATES. INC. JANUARY 2015 MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION GANAHL HARDWARE STORE AND LUMBER YARD and emissions of combustion pollutants from heavy-duty vehicles transporting construction materials and equipment to the site. The following emissions could result from construction activities associated with the Proposed Project: Construction Emissions. There would be emissions from soil disturbance (fugitive dust), architectural coating application, and equipment exhaust during construction of the Proposed Project. Fugitive Dust. Blowing dust, combined with engine emissions, produces airborne matter referred to in air quality studies as PM10, PM2.5, or fugitive dust. Fugitive dust emissions are generally associated with land clearing, exposure, and cut -and -fill operations. Once construction activities are complete, no further fugitive dust emissions occur. Dust generated daily during construction would vary substantially, depending on the level of activity, the specific operations, and weather conditions. Nearby sensitive receptors and on-site workers may be exposed to blowing dust, depending upon prevailing wind conditions. Fugitive dust would also be generated as construction equipment or trucks travel on unpaved areas of the construction site. Compliance with SCAQMD Rules 402 and 403 would ensure that fugitive dust (PM10 and PM2.5) generation would be less than significant. Architectural Coatings. Architectural coatings contain volatile organic compounds (VOCs) that are similar to ROGs and are part of the 03 precursors. Odors. Heavy-duty equipment in the project area during construction would emit odors. However, the construction activity would cease to occur after individual construction is completed. No other sources of objectionable odors have been identified for the Proposed Project. SCAQMD Rule 402 regarding nuisances states: "A person shall not discharge from any source whatsoever such quantities of air contaminants or other material which cause injury, detriment, nuisance, or annoyance to any considerable number of persons or to the public, or which -' endanger the comfort, repose, health or safety of any such persons or the public, or which cause, or have a natural tendency to cause injury or damage to business or property." The proposed uses are not anticipated to emit any objectionable odors. Therefore, objectionable odors posing a J health risk to potential on-site and existing off-site uses would not occur as a result of the Proposed Project. Naturally Occurring Asbestos. The Proposed Project is located in Orange County, which is not among the counties that are found to have serpentine and ultramafic rock in their soils. In addition, no serpentine or ultramafic rock has been found in the project vicinity in the past 10 years. Therefore, the potential risk for naturally occurring asbestos (NOA) during project construction is small and less than significant. Equipment Exhaust and Related Construction Activities. Construction of would include the following tasks: grading, building, and paving. While both the site preparation and grading phases involve heavy-duty diesel -powered equipment and both activities generate large amounts of fugitive dust, the grading phase typically generates greater overall emissions due to the larger equipment needed for earthmoving. PACCM1401\Draft ISMND\Draft ISMND.docx «01/21/15» 53 MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION GANAHL HARDWARE STORE AND LUMBER YARD LSA ASSOCIATES. INC. JANUARY 2015 To evaluate potential impacts related to construction activities, specific criteria are used. The criteria include daily emissions thresholds, compliance with State and national air quality standards, and conformity with the existing State Implementation Plan (SIP) or existing air quality attainment plans. Specific criteria for determining whether the potential air quality impacts of a project are significant are set forth in the SCAQMD CEQA Air Quality Handbook. Thresholds for Construction Emissions. The following daily thresholds for construction emissions have been established by the SCAQMD and are used in the analysis of air quality impacts for the Proposed Project: 75 pounds per day (lbs/day) of ROG 1001bs/day of NOx • 550 lbs/day of carbon monoxide (CO) 150 lbs/day of PM10 55 lbs/day of PM2.5 150 lbs/day of sulfur oxide (SOx) Projects in the SCAB with construction -related emissions that exceed any of the emission thresholds above are considered potentially significant by the SCAQMD. Table 3.3.A shows estimated construction -related pollutant emissions associated with the Proposed Project. As shown in Table 3.3.A, none of the analyzed criteria pollutants would exceed the regional emissions thresholds. Therefore, a less than significant regional air quality impact would occur from construction of the Proposed Project. Operational Impacts The ongoing operation of the Proposed Project would result in a long-term increase in air quality emissions. This increase would be mainly due to emissions from the project generated vehicle trips and through operational emissions from the ongoing use of the Proposed Project. The Proposed Project would result in net increases in both stationary- and mobile -source emissions. The stationary -source emissions would come from many sources, including the use of consumer products, landscape equipment, general energy consumption, and solid waste. Mobile sources include emissions from vehicle trips and associated miles traveled generated by the Proposed Project. The worst-case summer or winter volatile organic compounds (VOC), nitrogen oxides (NOx), CO, SO2, PMIo, and PM2.5 emissions created from the Proposed Project's long-term operations have been calculated and are summarized below in Table 3.3.13. 54 PACCM 1401 \Draft ISMND\Draft ISMND.docx «O1/21/15» LSA ASSOCIATES, INC - JANUARY 1015 MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION GANAHL HARDWARE STORE AND LUMBER YARD Table 3.3.A: Construction Related Regional Criteria Pollutant Emissions Activity VOC NOx CO Pollutant Emissions(pounds/day) s0 PM PM Gradin 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 Energy Usage On -Site 3.87 41.10 26.75 0.00 0.03 4.83 3.48 Off -Site 0.06 0.08 1.00 2.41 0.00 0.17 0.05 Total 3.93 41.18 27.76 SCAQMD Thresholds Exceeds Threshold? I 0.03 5.00 3.53 lBuilding Construction 1_50_ _ No 55 No On -Site 3.87 31.25 18.93 0.03 2.23 2.10 Off -Site 0.89 5.28 11.74 0.02 1.49 0.46 Total 4.75 36.53 30.67 0.05 3.72 2.56 Paving On -Site 2.79 25.18 14.98 0.02 1.41 1.30 Off -Site 0.06 0.07 0.91 0.00 0.17 0.05 Total 2.84 25.25 15.88 0.02 1.58 1.35 Architectural Coating On -Site 18.20 2.57 1.90 0.00 0.22 0.22 Off -Site 0.08 0.10 1.21 0.00 0.23 0.06 Total 18.28 2.67 3.11 0.01 0.45 0.28 Total of overlapping hases 26 64 50 0 6 4 SCAQMD Thresholds 75 100 550 150 150 55 Exceeds Thresholds I No No No No No No Source: Kunzman (2014a). CO = carbon monoxide NOx = nitrogen oxide PMIa = particulate matter less than 10 microns in size PM2 5 = particulate matter less than 2.5 microns in size SO2 = sulfur dioxide SCAQMD = South Coast Air Quality Management District Table 3.3.B: Operational Criteria Pollutant Regional Air Emissions Activity VOC Pollutant Emissions(pounds/day) NOx CO SO PM10 PM"5 Area Sources 5.56 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 Energy Usage 0.00 0.04 0.04 0.0_0 0.00 0.00 Mobile Sources 6.81 11.52 56.68 0.12 8.67 2.41 Total Emissions 12 12 57 0 9 2 SCAQMD Thresholds Exceeds Threshold? I 55 No 55 1 No I 550 No 150 No 1_50_ _ No 55 No Source: Kunzman (2014a). CO = carbon monoxide NOx = nitrogen oxide PMIO =particulate matter less than 10 microns in size PM2s= particulate matter less than 2.5 microns in size SO2 = sulfur dioxide SCAQMD = South Coast Air Quality Management District Projects in the SCAB with operations -related emissions that exceed any of the emission thresholds are considered potentially significant by the SCAQMD. Because none of the modeled emissions associated with the Proposed Project's ongoing operations activities would exceed the ra P:\CCM140ADraft ISMND\Draft ISMND.docx «01/21/15» 55 I MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION LSA ASSOCIATES. INC. GANAHL HARDWARE STORE AND LUMBER YARD JANUARY 2015 SCAQMD regional thresholds of significance, the Proposed Project would result in less than significant regional air quality impacts during operations. CO Hot -Spot Analysis. There is a direct relationship between traffic/circulation congestion and CO impacts since exhaust fumes from vehicular traffic are the primary source of CO, a localized gas that dissipates very quickly under normal meteorological conditions. Therefore, CO concentrations decrease substantially as the distance from the source (intersection) increases. The highest CO concentrations are typically found in areas directly adjacent to congested roadway intersections. These areas of vehicle congestion have historically had the potential to create pockets of elevated levels of CO that are called "hot spots." however, with the turnover of older vehicles, introduction of cleaner fuels, and implementation of control technology on industrial facilities, CO concentrations in the project vicinity have steadily declined. (State of California Air Resources Board [ARB]). Micro -scale air quality impacts have traditionally been analyzed in environmental documents for which the region was a nonattainment area for CO. However, the SCAQMD has demonstrated in the CO attainment re -designation request to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) that there are no "hot spots" a.:ywhere 'm SouI-- Cal.forn.'a, even at it- sections 'ay.*l, m'wch higher volumes, much worst congestion, and much higher background CO levels than anywhere in the vicinity of the project site. If the worst-case intersections in the SCAB have no "hot spot" potential, any local impacts near the project site would be well below thresholds with an even larger margin of safety. Therefore, no project -specific CO hot -spot analysis was conducted. Construction and operation of the Proposed Project would not violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation, and therefore, a less than significant impact would occur. Mitigation Measures: No mitigation would be required. (c) Less Than Significant Impact. As noted earlier, the project site is in an area considered a nonattainment area for ozone, PMIo, and PM2.5. As described in the response to question 3.3 (b) of this Initial Study, neither short-term construction of the Proposed Project nor long-term operation of the Proposed Project would exceed significance thresholds for ozone, PMIo, and PM2.5. Because the Proposed Project is not considered to result in a significant impact, the Proposed Project is not considered to result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of ozone, PMIo, and PM2.5 emissions. Impacts would be less than significant. Mitigation Measures: No mitigation would be required. (d) Less Than Significant Impact. For air quality analysis purposes, the nearest sensitive receptors to the project site are the apartments located across Bristol Street from the existing Ganahl Lumber facility, southeast of the project site, at a distance of approximately 313 feet from the project boundary. Table 3.3.0 shows the on-site phases and the localized significance threshold (LST) emissions thresholds. W PACCM 1401 Traft ISMND\Draft ISMND.docx (401/21/15» LSA ASSOCIATES. INC. JANUARY 2015 MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION GANAHL HARDWARE STORE AND LUMBER YARD Table 3AC Local Construction Emissions at the Nearest Receptor Phase On -Site Pollutant Emissions ounds/da NOX CO Pmle PM Grading 41.10 26.75 4.83 3.48 Building Construction 31.25 18.93 2.23 2.10 Paving 25.18 14.98 1.41 1.30 Architectural Coating 2.57 1.90 0.22 0.22 SCAQMD Threshold for 50 meters 164 feet 128 1,089 21 7 Exceeds Threshold? No I No No _ No Source: Kunzman (2014a). The estimated distance from the project site to the nearest sensitive receptor (apartments) located southeast of the project site is 313 feet (95 meters). As the distance is less than 100 meters, the 50 meter thresholds were used. CO = carbon monoxide NOx = nitrogen oxide PMIO = particulate matter less than 10 microns in size PM2 S = particulate matter less than 2.5 microns in size SO2 = sulfur dioxide SCAQMD = South Coast Air Quality Management District The data provided in Table 3.3.0 shows that none of the analyzed criteria pollutants would exceed the local emissions thresholds at the nearest sensitive receptors. During construction, contractors would be required to implement measures to reduce or eliminate emissions by following SCAQMD standard construction practices. During operation, the proposed Mill Shed would include a SCAQMD compliant sawdust collection system that would reduce air quality impacts to nearby sensitive receptors. Therefore, a less than significant impact would occur. Mitigation Measures: No mitigation would be required. (e) Less Than Significant Impact. Construction Impacts Potential sources that may emit odors during constriction activities include the application of materials such as asphalt pavement and diesel exhaust emissions. The objectionable odors that may be produced during the construction process are short term in nature and the odor emissions are expected cease upon the drying or hardening of the odor producing materials. Due to the short term nature and limited amounts of odor producing materials being utilized, a less than significant impact related to odors would occur during constriction of the Proposed Project. Operational Impacts Potential sources that may emit odors during the ongoing operations of the Proposed Project would include odor emissions from diesel truck emissions and trash storage areas. Due to the distance of the nearest receptors from the project site and through compliance with SCAQMD's Rule 402, no significant impact related to odors would occur during the ongoing operations of the Proposed Project. Mitigation Measures: No mitigation would be required. PACCM 140 1 \Draft ISMND\Draft ISMND.docx a01/21/15» 57 MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION GANAHL HARDWARE STORE AND LUMBER YARD This page intentionally left blank LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. JANUARY 2015 58 P:\CCM1401\Draft ISMND\Draft ISMND.docx 41/21/15» LSA ASSOCIATES. INC. MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION JANUARY 4015 GANAHL HARDWARE STORE AND LUMBER YARD 3.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES Less Than Significant Potentially with Less Than Would the project:_ Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated _ Impact Impact (a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or ❑ a 0 ❑ regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? (b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, E] 1:1 E]policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? (c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as d defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not ❑ ❑ El to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interni tion, or other means? (d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident ❑ ❑ El migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? (e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological ❑ El Elresources, 12 such as a tree reservation policy or ordinance? (f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved ❑ ❑ [] local, regional, or state habitat conservation elan? 3.4.1 Introduction A biological technical report (see Appendix B) was prepared for the Proposed Project by ECORP Consulting Inc. (ECORP 2014a). The purpose of the assessment was to document the existing biological resources, to assess the habitat for its potential to support sensitive plant and wildlife species, and to determine whether project implementation would impact sensitive biological resources, as required under California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (ECORP 2014a). A biological reconnaissance survey was performed by ECORP biologists on May 23, 2014. Prior to conducting the biological reconnaissance survey, ECORP biologists performed a literature search using the California Department of Fish and Wildlife's (CDFW) Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) and United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) species lists to determine the special -status species that have been documented in the project vicinity. Using this information and observations in the field, a list of special -status plant and animal species that may have the potential to occur within the project site was generated. A follow-up visit was conducted on December 15, 2014, to confirm site conditions, including the presence of potential areas subject to United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) jurisdiction pursuant to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act and CDFW jurisdiction pursuant to Section 1602 of the State of California Fish and Game Code. The Biological Technical Report is summarized below. 3.4.2 Environmental Setting Vegetation Communities. The project site is currently composed of disturbed or developed areas and ornamentals plant species. Plant species observed within these land cover types include ornamental PACCM1401\Draft ISMND\Draft 1SMND.docx «01/21/15» 59 MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. GANAHL HARDWARE STORE AND LUMBER YARD JANUARY 2015 trees and herbaceous plants and non-native or invasive weedy species. Ornamental vegetation includes eucalyptus (Eucalyptus sp.), California fan palm (Washingtonia filifera), crimson bottlebrush (Callistemon citrinus), and Asiatic lily (Lilium sp.). Non-native and invasive weedy species include bromes (Bromus sp.), black mustard (Brassica nigra), and yellow star thistle (Centaurea solstitialis). Of the 27 plant species observed on the project site a total of 7 species are native and the other 20 are exotic species (ECORP 2014a). Special -Status Plants. The literature search documented 37 special -status plant species (five federally and/or state listed) in the project vicinity. The follow-up visit conducted by ECORP biologists on December 15, 2014, confirmed site conditions, including lack of habitat for the special - status plant species. Given the site conditions (historical and present), the general lack of vegetation/cover, soil conditions, special -status plant species that had been previously recorded in nearby locations, such as southern tarplant (Centromadia parryi ssp. australis), all were determined to be presumed absent. The age of the CNDDB records were also considered when determining potential. A complete list of the 37 special -status plant species, with details regarding blooming periods, habitat requirements, and potential for occurrence designations can be found in the Biological Technical Report (ECORP 2014a). Wildlife. The project site provides habitat for species adapted to high levels of disturbance and urban environments. Thirteen wildlife species were observed during the reconnaissance visit. Common species observed included western fence lizard (Sceloporus occidentalis), house finch (Haemorhous mexicanus), and Bottae's pocket gopher (Thomomys bottae). Two red-tailed hawks (Buteo jamaicensis) had been observed during a previous site visit on February 13, 2014 (ECORP 2014a). A complete list of wildlife species observed or detected during the survey in and adjacent to the project site can be found in the Biological Technical Report. Other common species expected to occur in and adjacent to the project site include side -blotched lizard (Uta stansburiana), common raven (Corvus corax), Anna's hummingbird (Calypte anna), and California ground squirrel (Spermcphilus beecheyi) (ECORP 2014a). Special -Status Wildlife. The literature search documented 33 special -status wildlife species (16 federally and/or state -listed species) in the vicinity of the project site. Three of these wildlife species were determined to have a low to moderate potential to occur on the project site; the American badger (Taxidea taxus), the Western yellow bat (Lasiurus xanthinus), and the white-tailed kite (Elanus leucurus). The remaining 30 species were presumed to be absent from the project site. None of the special -status wildlife species with a potential to occur in the area were observed during the reconnaissance survey (ECORP 2014a). A complete list of the 33 special -status wildlife species, with details regarding habitat requirements and potential for occurrence designations can be found in the Biological Technical Report. Soils. Soil types on the project site were determined using the Natural Resources Conservation Service (MRCS) Web Soil Survey. Soils within the project site consist entirely of Myford sandy loam, 2 to 9 percent slopes (ECORP 2014a). The soils of the Myford Series are deep, moderately well drained soils formed on terraces. Principal vegetation associated with this soil are annual grasses and forbs with some scattered low -growing brush. Potential Waters of the United States. As described above, the project site was examined to identify potential USACE jurisdiction pursuant to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA) and CDFW 60 PACCM1 401 \Draft ISMND\Draft ISMND.dom 41/21/15» LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. JANUARY 2015 MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION GANAHL HARDWARE STORE AND LUMBER YARD jurisdiction pursuant to Section 1602 of the State of California Fish and Game Code. The survey of the project site identified two features that are potentially jurisdictional to the USACE, CDFW, and the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board (SARWQCB): the Santa Ana Delhi Channel and a small drainage ditch located in the northern portion of the project site that parallels the transition ramp from northbound SR -55 to southbound SR -73 (ECORP 2014a). Wildlife Movement Corridors. The project site is heavily disturbed and contains very little cover that would only allow for limited movement of smaller resident populations of wildlife. Furthermore, the entire project site is cut off from any large blocks of habitat that would allow the movement of wildlife species. Although the project site is within one mile of the Santa Ana Country Club and within two miles of the Upper Newport Bay Nature Preserve, there is no connecting corridor between the project site and these areas (ECORP 2014a). 3.4.3 Impact Analysis (a) Less than Significant Impact. The project site is located in an urbanized area characterized by land that is developed or highly disturbed and that support non-native vegetation communities and ornamental landscaping. None of the 37 special -status plant species or 33 special -status wildlife species identified in the literature search were observed on the project site (ECORP 2014a). As such, the project site does not contain any habitat that would support a candidate, sensitive, or special -status plant species. While no special -status wildlife or plant species were observed during the field surveys, there is a potential for the project area to support nesting birds in small patches of vegetation and structures adjacent to the project site. Nesting birds are protected under both the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) and the California Fish and Game Code (Sections 3503, 3503.5, 3513, and 3800) and cannot be subjected to take (as defined in California Fish and Game Code) during the bird breeding season, which typically runs from February 15 through August 31. If construction of the Proposed Project occurs during the bird breeding season, ground -disturbing construction activities could indirectly affect native and nongame birds and their nests through increased noise disturbances. Impacts would be less than significant with the implementation of Condition of Approval B-1. Condition of Approval: B-1: Compliance with Migratory Bird Treaty Act. If construction activities occur within the bird breeding season (February 15 through August 31), the Applicant (or its contractor) shall retain a qualified biologist to conduct a pre -construction nesting bird survey no more than 30 days prior to the start of construction. The nesting survey shall include the Project site and areas immediately adjacent to the site that could potentially be affected by Project activities such as noise, human activity, and dust, etc. If active bird nests are found within 100 feet of the designated construction area on the project site, the qualified biologist will establish an appropriate buffer zone around the active nestsProject activities shall be avoided within the buffer zone .' until the nest is deemed no longer active by the biologist. Prior to commencement of grading activities and issuance of any building permits, .1 the City of Costa Mesa Director of Community Development, or designee, shall verify that all project grading and construction plans include specific documentation regarding the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) requirements for a nesting bird _1 i PACCM1 40 1 \Draft ISMND\Draft ISMND.docx «01/21/15» 61 MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION GANAHL HARDWARE STORE AND LUMBER YARD LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. JANUARY 1015 survey should construction or grading occur from February 15 through August 31, that preconstruction surveys have been completed and the results reviewed by staff, and that the appropriate buffers (if needed) are noted on the plans and established in the field with orange snow fencing. Mitigation Measures: No mitigation would be required. (b) No Impact. The project site is located in an urban area that does not contain native habitat. Sensitive habitats include those vegetation communities which are considered rare within the region, are considered sensitive by the State of California, and are listed as sensitive under local conservation plans. The project site supports no riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community (ECORP 2014a). No impact would occur. Mitigation Measures: No mitigation would be required. (c) Less than Significant Impact. The project site is located in an urban area that does not contain wetlands or native habitat; however, two potential jurisdictional water features (drainages) are present on the project site: the Santa Ana Delhi Channel and a small drainage ditch located in the northern portion of the project site (ECORP 2014a). The Proposed Project would not remove, fill, or otherwise interrupt the Santa Ana Delhi Channel, as it would be intentionally avoided per project plans; no impact would occur. However, the drainage ditch may be impacted by construction of the Proposed Project. Mitigation Measure B-2 would require the Applicant to verify USACE jurisdiction over the drainage ditch and, if necessary, obtain a CWA Section 404 permit from the USACE and implement any associated permit conditions. Mitigation Measure 13- 2 would also require the Applicant to submit a Streambed Alteration Notification to CDFW to facilitate its determination of the drainage as a "streambed" regulated by Section 1602 of the California Fish and Game Code. In addition, Condition of Approval B-2 would require the Applicant to obtain a Water Quality Certification or waiver pursuant to Section 401 of the CWA from the SARWQCB if the USACE determines that a CWA Section 404 permit would be required. With implementation of Condition of Approval B-2, impacts would be less than significant. Condition of Approval: B-2: Permitting for Drainage Impacts. Prior to the commencement of grading activities that may result in the placement of fill material into the potentially jurisdictional drainage feature on the northern portion of the project site, the Applicant shall prepare and submit to the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) for verification a "Preliminary Delineation Report for Water of the United States" and a Streambed Alteration Notification package to the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) for the drainage feature. If these agencies determine that the feature is not regulated under their jurisdiction, then no further mitigation is necessary. However, if the USACE considers the feature to be jurisdictional, then a Clean Water Act Section 404 permit shall be obtained from the USACE, and any permit conditions shall be agreed to, prior to the start of grading activities in the affected area. If the CDFW determines that the drainage is a regulated "streambed," then a Streambed Alteration Agreement shall be entered into with the CDFW and any 62 PACCM1 40 1 \Draft ISMND\Draft 1SMND.docx «01/21/15» LSA ASSOCIATES. INC.. JANUARY 2015 MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION GANAHL HARDWARE STORE AND LUMBER YARD associated conditions shall be agreed to prior to the start of grading activities in the affected area. If the USACE considers the feature to be jurisdictional, the Applicant shall obtain a Water Quality Certification or waiver pursuant to Section 401 of the CWA from the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board prior to the start of grading activities in the affected area. (d) Less than Significant Impact. The project site is located in an urban area that does not contain native habitat, and is not located near a native wildlife nursery site. The project site is located in an area characterized by commercial uses and does not connect significant open spaces; therefore, it does not function as a major wildlife movement corridor. All native birds, including raptors, are protected under California Fish and Game Code and the Federal MBTA. As previously stated in the response to question 3.4 (a), prior to commencing ground disturbing activities during the nesting bird season, Condition of Approval B-1 shall be implemented to ensure that there are no impacts to nesting birds. With implementation of Condition of Approval B-1, impacts would be less than significant. Mitigation Measures: No mitigation would be required. Conditions of Approval: Refer to Condition of Approval B-1 above. (e) No Impact. The Proposed Project would not disturb any riparian areas. The proposed landscape concept plan is subject to compliance with the City's landscape standards for commercial zones. Therefore, no conflicts with local ordinances would occur. No impact would occur. Mitigation Measures: No mitigation would be required. (f) No Impact. The project site is not located within a "Habitat Reserve System" or is any vegetation type on the project site designated a "Covered Habitat" as identified by the Central and Coastal Subregion Natural Community Conservation Plan/ Habitat Conservation Plan (NCCP/HCP) (County of Orange 1996). Therefore, no impact would occur. Mitigation Measures: No mitigation would be required. PACCM 140 1 \Draft ISMND\Draft ISMND.docx «01/21/15» 63 MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION GANAHL HARDWARE STORE AND LUMBER YARD This page intentionally left blank LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. JANUARY 2015 64 PACCM 1401 \Draft ISMND\Draft ISMND.docx «01/21/15» LSA ASSOCIATES. INC. JANUARY 2015 MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION CANAHL HARDWARE STORE AND LUMBER YARD 3.5 CULTURAL RESOURCES Less Than Significant Potentially with Less Than Would the project: significant Impact Mitigation Incorporated Significant Impact No Impact (a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ resource as defined in §15064.5? (b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an ❑ 0 ❑ archaeological resource pursuant to § 15064.5? (c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? (d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of ❑ ❑ 0 El formal cemeteries? 3.5.1 Introduction A cultural resources survey was conducted by ECORP Consulting, Inc. in July 2014 for the Proposed Project (Appendix C). The purpose of the investigation was to identify cultural resources that could be affected by the Proposed Project (ECORP 2014b). A paleontological records search was completed by the Vertebrate Paleontology Section of the Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County (ECORP 2014c). A cultural resources records search was conducted at the South Central Coastal Archaeological Information Center (SCCIC) and it indicated that the project area has not been previously surveyed and that there are no previously recorded cultural resources in the project area (ECORP 2014b). A search of the Sacred Land File of the Native American Heritage Commission did not indicate the presence of any Native American cultural resources in the immediate area of the project site (LSA Associates, Inc. [LSA] 2014). The Cultural Resource Survey, the Paleontological Records Search, and the Sacred Lands File Search are all included in Appendix C. In addition, letters were sent to Native American groups to inform them of the project and to ask for their input. An intensive field survey was conducted on June 25, 2014, by ECORP. The project site is mostly paved with asphalt and in some places hard packed gravel. There are no buildings or structures on the site. Three concrete pads that served as foundations for small buildings are present. No prehistoric or historical archaeological material was observed on the project site (ECORP 2014b). California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (Title 14, California Code of Regulations [CCR], Article 5, Section 15064.5) applies to cultural resources of the historical and prehistoric periods. Any project with an effect that may cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a cultural resource, either directly or indirectly, is a project that may have a significant impact on the environment. As a result, such a project would require avoidance or mitigation of impacts to those affected resources. Significant cultural resources must meet at least one of four criteria that define eligibility for listing on either the California Register of Historical Resources (California Register) (Public Resources Code [PRC] Section 5024.1, Title 14 CCR, Section 4852) or the National Register of Historic Places (National Register) (36 CFR 60.4). Cultural resources eligible for listing on the National Register are considered Historic Properties under 36 CFR Part 800 and are automatically eligible for the California Register. Resources listed on or eligible for inclusion in the California Register are considered Historical Resources under CEQA. 3.5.2 Impact Analysis (a) Less than Significant Impact. The cultural resources records search indicated that the project area has not been previously surveyed and that there are no previously recorded historical PACCMI 401 \Draft ISMND\Draft 1SMND.docx «01/21/15» 65 MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION GANAHL HARDWARE STORE AND LUMBER YARD LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. JANUARY 2015 resources in the project area (ECORP 2014b). The project site is currently vacant. The intensive field survey conducted for the Proposed Project did not discover any historical resources on the project site. Therefore, impacts to historic resources as a result of the Proposed Project would be less than significant. Mitigation Measure: No mitigation would be required. (b) Less than Significant. No archaeological resources have been previously recorded on the site and none were recorded during the field survey (ECORP 2014b). Further, no Native American cultural resources have been identified in the immediate area of the project site (LSA 2014). However, there remains the possibility that the Proposed Project may impact unknown buried archaeological resources as a result of ground disturbing construction activities. Therefore, Condition of Approval CR -1 has been proposed, which requires the City to retain a qualified archaeologist to establish, in cooperation with the Applicant and the City, procedures for temporarily halting or redirecting work to facilitate evaluation of cultural resources that may be discovered during construction activities. With the implementation of Conditions of Approval CR -1, impacts to unknown archaeological resources during construction would be les- than significant. At the completion of project construction, the Proposed Project would not result in further disturbance of native soils on the project site and, therefore, operation of the Proposed Project would not result in a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archeological resource as defined in Section 15064.5 of the State CEQA Guidelines. Therefore, operation of the Proposed Project would not cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of any known archaeological resource. Conditions of Approval: CR -1: Archaeological Monitors. Prior to issuance of grading permits, and in adherence to the recommendations of the cultural resources survey, the Applicant shall retain a qualified archaeological monitor, subject to review and approval by the City of Costa Mesa (City) Community Development Director, or designee. This monitor shall be present at the pregrade conference in order to explain the cultural mitigation measures associated with the Proposed Project. The monitor, in conjunction with the City and the Applicant will prepare a plan that includes: (1) a description of circumstances that would result in the halting of work at the project site (e.g., what is considered a "significant" archaeological site); (2) a description of procedures for halting work on site and notification procedures; and (3) a description of monitoring reporting procedures. If any significant historical resources, archaeological resources, or human remains are found during monitoring, work shall stop within the immediate vicinity (precise area to be determined by the archaeologist in the field) of the resource until such time as the resource can be evaluated by an archaeologist and any other appropriate individuals. Project personnel shall not collect or move any archaeological materials or human remains and associated materials. To the extent feasible, project activities shall avoid these deposits. Where avoidance is not feasible, the archaeological deposits shall be evaluated for their eligibility for listing in the California Register of Historic Places. If the deposits are not eligible, avoidance is not necessary. If the deposits are eligible, adverse effects on the deposits must be 66 PACCM 140 1 \Draft ISMND\Draft ISMND.docx A1/21/15» LSA ASSOCIATES, INC, JANUARY 2015 MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION GANAHL HARDWARE STORE AND LUMBER YARD avoided, or such effects must be mitigated. Mitigation can include, but is not necessarily limited to, the following: excavation of the deposit in accordance with a data recovery plan (see California Code of Regulations Title 4(3) Section 5126.4(b)(3)(C)) and standard archaeological field methods and procedures; laboratory and technical analyses of recovered archaeological materials; production of a report detailing the methods, findings, and significance of the archaeological site and associated materials; curation of archaeological materials at an appropriate facility for future research and/or display; an interpretive display of recovered archaeological materials at a local school, museum, or library; and public lectures at local schools and/or historical societies on the findings and significance of the site and recovered archaeological materials. (c) Less than Significant. A paleontological records search was completed by the Vertebrate Paleontology Section of the Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County (ECORP 2014c). Shallow deposits in the project area consist of marine younger Quaternary Terrace deposits. These deposits typically do not contain significant vertebrate fossils. The marine younger Quaternary Terrace has a low potential to contain fossil resources. The marine younger Quaternary Terrace deposits overlie older Quaternary deposits in the subsurface which has high potential to contain significant vertebrate fossils. Fossils recovered from these sediments in the project vicinity include fossil sea turtle (Cheloniidae), camel (Camelidae), and mammoth (Mammuthus sp.) bones. It is estimated that the older Quaternary deposits begin at a depth of about 10 feet below surface in the project area. Therefore, if project excavation extends below 10 feet there is a potential for unknown buried paleontological resources to be affected. With implementation of Condition of Approval CR -2, which requires the preparation of a program to mitigate impacts to paleontological resources if excavation activities extend below 10 feet, impacts to unknown paleontological resources would be less than significant. At the completion of project construction, the Proposed Project would not result in further disturbance of native soils on the project site and, therefore, operation of the Proposed Project would not result in a substantial adverse change in the significance of a paleontological resource as defined in Section 15064.5 of the State CEQA Guidelines. Condition of Approval: CR -2: Paleontological Resources Impact Mitigation Program. If excavation activities associated with the Proposed Project are expected to extend below 10 feet, the Applicant shall retain a qualified paleontologist, subject to the review and approval of the City of Costa Mesa's (City) Community Development Director, or designee, to prepare a Paleontological Resources Impact Mitigation Program (PRIMP) for the Proposed Project prior to issuance of any grading permits. The PRIMP shall be consistent with the guidelines of the Society of Vertebrate Paleontology (SVP) and shall include, but not be limited to, the following: The paleontologist, or his/her representative, shall attend a preconstruction meeting. • A qualified paleontological monitor working under the direction of an Orange County certified paleontologist shall "spot check" grading within the project site. Initially, spot checks are recommended for 2 to 3 hours twice per week during grading. If fossil resources are noted during the spot check, the monitoring level shall be increased to full time for the remaining duration of the grading. PACCM 140 1 \Draft ISMND\Draft ISMND.docx Al/21/15» 67 MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION LSA ASSOCIATES. INC. GANAHL HARDWARE STORE AND LUMBER YARD JANUARY 2015 • In the event that paleontological resources are encountered when a paleontological monitor is not present, work in the immediate area of the find shall be redirected and the paleontologist contacted to assess the find for scientific significance. The paleontologist shall make recommendations as to whether monitoring shall be required in these sediments on a full-time basis. • Collected resources shall be prepared to the point of identification and permanent preservation. This includes washing and picking of mass samples to recover small vertebrate and invertebrate fossils and removal of surplus sediment around larger specimens to reduce the storage volume for the repository and the storage cost for the Applicant. • Any collected resources shall be cataloged and curated into the permanent collections of an accredited scientific institution. • At the conclusion of the monitoring program, a report of findings with an appended inventory of specimens shall be prepared. When submitted to the City, the report and inventory shall signify completion of the program to mitigate impacts to paleontological resources. (d) Less than Significant. No formal cemeteries arc located in or near the project area and no human remains have been reported in the project vicinity, based on the records search from SCCIC (ECORP 2014b). Most Native American human remains are found in prehistoric archaeological sites. No prehistoric archaeological sites have been recorded within 0.5 mile of the project area (ECORP 2014b). Further, no Native American cultural resources have been identified in the immediate area of the project site (LSA 2014). Therefore, the Proposed Project has little potential to disturb human remains. However, as a preventative measure, Condition of Approval CR -3 has been proposed to address the potential discovery of unknown human remains. Impacts to unknown resources would be less than significant with the implementation of Condition of Approval CR -3. Condition of Approval: CR -3: Human Remains. If human remains of any kind are found during construction, the requirements of California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Section 15064.5(e) and Assembly Bill (AB) 2641 shall be followed. According to these requirements, all construction activities must cease immediately and the Orange County Coroner and a qualified archaeologist must be notified. The Coroner s h a 11 examine the remains and determine the next appropriate action based on his or her findings. If the Coroner determines the remains to be of Native American origin, he or she shall notify the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) within 24 hours. The NAHC shall then identify the most likely descendants (MLD) to be consulted regarding treatment and/or reburial of the remains. If an MLD cannot be identified, or the MLD fails to make a recommendation regarding the treatment of the remains within 48 hours after gaining access to them, the Native American human remains and associated grave goods shall be buried with appropriate dignity on the property in a location not subject to further subsurface disturbance. 68 PACCM14010raft ISMND\Draft ISMND.docx «01/21/15» LSA ASSOCIATES. INC JANUARY 2015 MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION GANAHL HARDWARE STORE AND LUMBER YARD 3.6 GEOLOGY AND SOILS Less Than Significant Potentially with Less Than Would theproject: Significant Impact Mitigation Incorporated Significant Impact No Impact (a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial ❑ ❑ ® ❑ evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? ❑ ® ❑ ❑ iii) Seismic -related ground failure, including liquefaction? ❑ ® ❑ [] iv) Landslides? ❑ ❑ ❑ (b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? ❑ (c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in ❑ IR ❑ 0 on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? (d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or ❑ Z ❑ ❑ property? (e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not ❑ ❑ ❑ available for the disposal of wastewater? 3.6.1 Introduction A geotechnical investigation of the project site was conducted by G.A. Nicoll and Associates, Inc. to obtain soil and geotechnical report (see Appendix D), and to provide preliminary design parameters and recommendations to the Proposed Project (G.A. Nicoll 2014). 3.6.2 Impact Analysis (a) i) Less than Significant Impact. The nearest known earthquake faults to the project site are the active San Joaquin Hills Blind Thrust Fault, which is located approximately 1.5 miles to the south of the site, and the active Newport -Inglewood fault zone, which is located approximately 4.6 miles west of the site (United States Geological Survey [USGS], 2013a). The project site is not located within an Alquist-Priolo earthquake fault zone. Furthermore, ground rupture is not considered to be a constraint within the project area. No known faults traverse the project site or are located adjacent to the project site that may rupture during seismic activity (G.A. Nicoll 2014). A less than significant impact would occur. Mitigation Measures: No mitigation would be required. (a) ii) Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. Similar to most of Southern California, the project site is located in a seismically active region. In addition, the project site lies in relatively close proximity to several active faults that have historically generated moderate to occasionally high levels of ground motion. Therefore, in the event of an earthquake strong ground shaking is expected to occur on the project site. The Proposed PACCM1 40 1 \Draft ISMND\Draft ISMND.docx «01/21/15» MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION CANAHL HARDWARE STORE AND LUMBER YARD LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. JANUARY 2015 Project would not expose people or structures to strong seismic ground shaking greater than what currently exists. Design and construction would comply with current building codes and standards, which would reduce the risk of loss, injury, or death resulting from strong ground - shaking. Mitigation Measure GEO-1 requires the Applicant to comply with the recommendations of the Geotechnical Investigation Report, which stipulates appropriate seismic design provisions that would be implemented with project design and construction. With imnlementation of Mitigation Measure CTFO-1 _ notential imnacts related to seismic ground shaking would be reduced to a less than significant level. Mitigation Measure: GEO-1: Incorporation of and Compliance with the Recommendations in the Geotechnical Report. During project construction activities, the City of Costa Mesa (City)'s Community Development Director, Director of Public Works, or designee, shall ensure that all grading operations and construction are conducted in conformance with the recommendations included in the Geotechnical Report prepared for the Proposed Project that has been prepared by G.A. Nicoll., titled Geotechnical Investigation Report (June i3, 2014). The Applicant shall require the project geotechnical consultant to assess whether the requirements in the Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation need to be modified or refined to address any changes in the project that occur prior to the start of grading. If the project geotechnical consultant identifies modifications or refinements to the requirements, the Applicant shall require appropriate changes to the final project design and specifications and shall submit any revised geotechnical reports to the Land Development Section of the Engineering Division, or designee, for approval prior to issuance of any grading or construction permits. The Development Review Section of the Engineering Division, or designee, shall review grading plans prior to the start of grading to verify that the requirements developed during the geotechnical design evaluation have been appropriately incorporated into the project plans. Design, grading, and construction shall be performed in accordance with the requirements of the City's Building Code and the California Building Code (CBC) applicable at the time of grading, as well as the recommendations of the project geotechnical consultant as summarized in a final report subject to review by the City's Building Official, or designee, prior to the start of grading activities. On-site inspection during grading shall be conducted by the project geotechnical consultant and the Development Review Section of the Engineering Division to ensure compliance with geotechnical specifications as incorporated into project plans. (a) iii) Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. Liquefaction is a phenomenon where water -saturated granular soil loses shear strength during strong ground shaking produced by earthquakes. The loss of soil strength occurs when cyclic pore water pressure increases below the groundwater surface. Potential hazards due to liquefaction include the loss of bearing strength beneath structures, possibly causing foundation failure and/or significant settlements. The project site is located within the liquefaction potential 70 PACCM1 40 1 \Draft ISMND\Draft ISMND.docx «01/21/15» LSA ASSOCIATES, INC.. JANUARY 2015 MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION GANAHL HARDWARE STORE AND LUMBER YARD zone as shown on the State of California Seismic Hazard Zone Map, for the Newport Beach Quadrangle. However, based on the results of the site-specific geotechnical investigation, potential for liquefaction of soils present at the project site is very low (G.A. Nicoll 2014). Although the risk of liquefaction on the project site is low, measures included in the Geotechnical Investigation Report would serve to further reduce any potential liquefaction impacts. With implementation of Mitigation Measure GEO-1, potential impacts related to liquefaction would be reduced to a less than significant level. Mitigation Measure: Refer to Mitigation Measure GEO-1 above. (a) iv) No Impact. Seismically induced landslides and other slope failures are common occurrences during or soon after earthquakes in areas with significant ground slopes. The Proposed Project is not located within an area designated as having a potential for earthquake -induced land sliding, and the project site is relatively flat (G.A. Nicoll 2014). No impacts would occur. Mitigation Measures: No mitigation would be required. (b) Less than Significant Impact. Implementation of the Proposed Project would require ground -disturbing activities, such as grading, that would result in soil exposure that could potentially result in soil erosion or loss of topsoil. Additionally, during a storm event, soil erosion could occur at an accelerated rate. As discussed in Section 3.9, Hydrology and Water Quality, construction of the Proposed Project would be required to comply with the Construction General Permit, either through a waiver or through preparation and implementation of a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP). Best Management Practices (BMPs) included in the SWPPP would minimize soil erosion during construction. The Proposed Project's grading plan would also ensure that the proposed earthwork and storm water structures are designed to avoid soil erosion. Impacts would be less than significant. Mitigation Measures: No mitigation would be required. (c) Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. Strong ground shaking can cause settlement, lateral spreading, or subsidence by allowing sediment particles to become more tightly packed, thereby reducing pore space. According to the Geotechnical Investigation Report, the project site is underlain by firm to very stiff, sandy clay and medium dense to dense, silty and clayey sand, and silty sand with gravel ranging from approximately 6 to 25 feet in thickness. A thin layer of alluvium comprised of soft, silty clay overlies the marine terrace deposits. As discussed above, the potential for a landslide, lateral spreading, liquefaction, or collapse at the project site is very low (G.A. Nicoll 2014). Furthermore, the soft/loose existing fill would be removed below the proposed buildings and compacted. Although the risk of settlement, lateral spreading, or subsidence on the project site is low, measures included in the Geotechnical Investigation Report would serve to further reduce any potential settlement, lateral spreading, or subsidence impacts by incorporating building construction and design standards that would mitigate the impact of any strong ground shaking experienced on the project site. Incorporation of Mitigation Measure GEO-1 would reduce impacts from unstable soils to a less than significant level. PACCM1 40 1 \Draft ISMND\Draft ISMND.docx «01/21/15» 71 MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION GANAHL HARDWARE STORE AND LUMBER YARD Mitigation Measure: Refer to Mitigation Measure GEO-1 above. LSA ASSOCIATES. INC. JANUARY 2015 (d) Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. Expansive soils contain types of clay minerals that occupy considerably more volume when they are wet or hydrated than when they are dry or dehydrated. Volume changes associated with changes in the moisture content of near-cnrface exnancive. cnilc can canoe rinlift nr heave of the Qrnnnd when them become wet or, less commonly, cause settlement when they dry out. The project site contains approximately 6 to 25 feet of fill that covers mostly Pleistocene -age terrace deposits. Fill material consists predominantly of thick layers of firm to very stiff, moist to saturated sandy clay, and medium dense to dense, moist to saturated silty and clayey sand (G.A. Nicoll 2014). These soils are considered to have a medium expansion potential (G.A. Nicoll 2014). Although the risk of soil expansion on the project site is low, measures included in the Geotechnical Investigation Report would serve to further reduce any potential soil expansion by incorporating building construction and design standards that would mitigate the impact of any soil expansion experienced on the project site. Incorporation of Mitigation Measure GEO-1 would reduce impacts to a less than significant level. Mitigation Measure: Refer to Mitigation Measure GEO-1 above. (e) No Impact. The Proposed Project does not include the construction of, or connections to a septic system or alternative waste water disposal system. Therefore, the Proposed Project would not result in impacts related to the soil's capability to adequately support the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems, and no impacts would occur. Mitigation Measures: No mitigation would be required. 72 PACCM14010raft ISMND\Draft ISMND.docx 41/21/15» LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. JANUARY 2015 MITIGATEDNEGATIVE DECLARATION GANAHL HARDWARE STORE AND LUMBER YARD 3.7 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS Less than Significant Potentially With Less Than Would the r*ct: Significant -impact Mitigation Incorporated Significant Impact No Impact (a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the ❑ ❑ ® ❑ environment? (b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ greenhouse gases? 3.7.1 Technical Background Global climate change (GCC) is the observed increase in the average temperature of the Earth's atmosphere and oceans along with other significant changes in climate (such as precipitation or wind) that last for an extended period of time. The term "global climate change" is often used interchangeably with the term "global warming," but "global climate change" is preferred to "global warming" because it helps convey that there are other changes in addition to rising temperatures. The prevailing scientific opinion on climate change is that "most of the warming observed over the last 50 years is attributable to human activities (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [IPCC])." Increased amounts of carbon dioxide (CO2) and other greenhouse gases (GHGs) are the primary causes of the human -induced component of warming. The observed warming effect associated with the presence of GHGs in the atmosphere (from either natural or human sources) is often referred to as the greenhouse effect.' GHGs are present in the atmosphere naturally, are released by natural sources, or are formed from secondary reactions taking place in the atmosphere. The gases that are widely seen as the principal contributors to human -induced GCC include the following:2 a) CO2 b) Methane (CH4) c) Nitrous oxide (N20) d) Hydrofluorocarbons (IACs) e) Perfluorocarbon (PFCs) f) Sulfur hexafluoride (SF6) The temperature on Earth is regulated by a system commonly known as the "greenhouse effect." Just as the glass in a greenhouse allows heat from sunlight in and reduces the amount of heat that escapes, greenhouse gases like carbon dioxide, methane, and nitrous oxide in the atmosphere keep the Earth at a relatively even temperature. Without the greenhouse effect, the Earth would be a frozen globe; thus, although an excess of greenhouse gas results in global warming, the naturally occurring greenhouse effect is necessary to keep our planet at a comfortable temperature. The greenhouse gases listed are consistent with the definition in Assembly Bill (AB) 32 (Government Code 38505), as discussed later in this section. PACCM1401\Draft ISMND\Draft ISMND.docx A1/21/15» 73 MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION LSA ASSOCIATES. INC. CANAHL HARDWARE STORE AND LUMBER YARD JANUARY 2015 In June 2005, Governor Schwarzenegger established California's GHG emissions reduction targets in Executive Order (EO) S-3-05. The EO established the following goals for the State of California: GHG emissions were to be reduced to 2000 levels by 2010; GHG emissions should be reduced to 1990 levels by 2020; and GHG emissions should be reduced to 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050. California's major initiative for reducing GHG emissions is outlined in Assembly Bill (AB) 32, the "Global Warming Solutions Act," passed by the California State legislature on August 31, 2006. AB 32 requires the California Air Resources Board (ARB) to: • Establish a statewide GHG emissions cap for 2020, based on 1990 emissions, by January 1, 2008; • Adopt mandatory reporting rules for significant sources of GHG emissions by January 1, 2008; • Adopt an emissions reduction plan by January 1, 2009, indicating how emissions reductions would be achieved via regulations, market mechanisms, and other actions; and • Adopt regulations to achieve the maximum technologically feasible and cost-effective reduction of GHGs by January 1, 2011. To assist public agencies in the mitigation of GHG emissions or analyzing the effects of GHGs under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), including the effects associated with transportation and energy consumption, Senate Bill (SB) 97 (Chapter 185, 2007) required the Governor's Office of Planning and Research (OPR) to develop CEQA guidelines on how to minimize and mitigate a project's GHG emissions. The OPR was required to prepare, develop, and transmit these guidelines on or before Tuly 1, 2009, and the Resources Agency was required to certify and adopt them by January 1, 2010. On January 8, 2009, the OPR released preliminary draft CEQA guideline amendments. The Natural Resources Agency adopted the CEQA Guidelines Amendments and transmitted them to the Office of Administrative Law (OAL) on December 31, 2009. On February 16, 2010, the OAL approved the Amendments and filed them with the Secretary of State for inclusion in the California Code of Regulations (CCR). The Amendments became effective on March 18, 2010. The Amendments encourage Lead Agencies to consider many factors in conducting a CEQA analysis, but preserve the discretion granted by CEQA to Lead Agencies in making their determinations. State CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.4 states: (a) The determination of the significance of greenhouse gas emissions calls for a careful judgment by the lead agency consistent with the provisions in Section 15064. A lead agency should make a good -faith effort, based on available information, to describe, calculate, or estimate the amount of greenhouse gas emissions resulting from a project. A lead agency shall have discretion to determine, in the context of a particular project, whether to: (1) Use a model or methodology to quantify greenhouse gas emissions resulting from a project, and which model or methodology to use. The lead agency has discretion to select the model it considers most appropriate provided it supports its decision with substantial evidence. The lead agency should explain the limitations of the particular model or methodology selected for use; or 74 PACCM1 40 1 \Draft ISMND\Draft ISMND.docx «01/21/15» LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION JANUARY 2015 GANAHL HARDWARE STORE AND LUMBER YARD (2) Rely on a qualitative analysis or performance based standards. (b) A lead agency may consider the following when assessing the significance of impacts from greenhouse gas emissions on the environment: (1) The extent to which the project may increase or reduce greenhouse gas emissions as compared to the existing environmental setting. (2) Whether the project emissions exceed a threshold of significance that the lead agency determines applies to the project. (3) The extent to which the project complies with regulations or requirements adopted to implement a statewide, regional, or local plan for the reduction or mitigation of greenhouse gas emissions. Such regulations or requirements must be adopted by the relevant public agency through a public review process and must include specific requirements that reduce or mitigate the project's incremental contribution of greenhouse gas emissions. If there is substantial evidence that the possible effects of a particular project are still cumulatively considerable notwithstanding compliance with the adopted regulations or requirements, an EIR must be prepared for the project. State CEQA Guidelines Section 15064(b) provides that the "determination of whether a project may have a significant effect on the environment calls for careful judgment on the part of the public agency involved, based to the extent possible on scientific and factual data," and further states that an "ironclad definition of significant effect is not always possible because the significance of an activity may vary with the setting." As such, currently neither the CEQA statutes, OPR guidelines, nor the State CEQA Guidelines prescribe specific quantitative thresholds of significance or a particular methodology for performing an impact analysis. As with most environmental topics, significance criteria are left to the judgment and discretion of the lead agency. The recommended approach for GHG analysis included in the Governor's OPR June 2008 Technical Advisory (TA) is to: (1) identify and quantify GHG emissions, (2) assess the significance of the impact on climate change, and (3) if significant, identify alternatives and/or mitigation measures to reduce the impact below significance (State of California OPR). The June 2008 OPR guidance provides some additional direction regarding planning documents as follows: "CEQA can be a more effective tool for GHG emissions analysis and mitigation if it is supported and supplemented by sound development policies and practices that would reduce GHG emissions on a broad planning scale and that can provide the basis for a programmatic approach to project -specific CEQA analysis and mitigation. For local government lead agencies, adoption of general plan policies and certification of general plan EIRs that analyze broad jurisdiction -wide impacts of GHG emissions can be part of an effective strategy for addressing cumulative impacts and for streamlining later project -specific CEQA reviews." SI3 375, signed into law on October 1, 2008, is intended to enhance the ARB's ability to reach AB 32 goals by directing the ARB to develop regional GHG emissions reduction targets to be achieved within the automobile and light truck sectors for 2020 and 2035. On December 5, 2008, the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) adopted an interim quantitative GHG PACCM1 401 \Draft ISMND\Draft ISNM.docx «01/21/15» 75 MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION GANAHL HARDWARE STORE AND LUMBER YARD LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. JANUARY 2015 Significance Threshold for industrial projects where the SCAQMD is the lead agency of 10,000 metric tons (MT) of CO2 equivalent/year (CO2e/yr). The SCAQMD has not adopted any other GHG Significance Thresholds; however, it has proposed a screening level threshold of 3,000 MT of CO2eq/yr for residential and commercial sector projects. Therefore, this analysis uses compliance with the 3,000 MT CO2e annual screening level as a threshold in determining if the Proposed Project's contribution of GHGs is a considerable contribution to global warming impacts. For the purpose of this technical analysis, the concept of CO2e is used to describe how much global warming a given type and amount of GHG may cause, using the functionally equivalent amount or concentration of CO2 as the reference. Individual GIIGs have varying global warming potentials and atmospheric lifetimes. The CO2e is a consistent methodology for comparing GHG emissions since it normalizes various GHG to the same metric. The reference gas is CO2, which has a global warming potential equal to 1. The equation below provides the basic calculation required to determine CO2e from the total mass of a given GHG using the global warming potentials published by the IPCC. Tolmes (Metric Tons) of CO2e = Tonnes (Metric Tons) of GHG x GWP Where: CO2e = carbon dioxide equivalent GHG = greenhouse gas GWP = global warming potential This method would be used to evaluate GHG emissions during construction and operation of the Proposed Project. For this analysis only, CO2, CH4, and N20 are considered. This is due to the relatively large contribution of these gases in comparison to other GHGs expected to be produced during the project construction and operation phases. An individual project cannot generate enough GHG emissions to significantly influence climate change, but individual projects can incrementally contribute toward the potential for the cumulative emissions driving GCC. This analysis analyzes whether the project's contribution to the impact is "cumulatively considerable." The Proposed Project is anticipated to generate GHG emissions from area sources, energy usage, mobile sources, waste, water, and construction equipment. The CalEEMod Version 2013.2.2 was used to calculate the GHG emissions from the Proposed Project. CalEEMod stands for "California Emissions Estimator Model," and is an air quality modeling program that estimates air pollution emissions in pounds per day (lbs/day) or tons per year (tpy) for various land uses, area sources, construction projects, and project operations. CalEEMod estimates a project's CO2i N20, and CH4 emissions from area and mobile sources, energy and water consumption, and waste generation. Mitigation measures can also be specified to analyze the effects of mitigation on project emissions. 3.7.2 Impact Analysis (a) Less Than Significant Impact. Construction GHG emissions associated with the Proposed Project would include those emissions generated during development of the project site with the proposed Ganahl Lumber retail store and lumber storage yard. Operation emissions include those project -related GHG emissions associated with the operation of the proposed Ganahl Lumber retail store and lumber storage yard. The generation of new GHG emissions associated with development on the project site would occur from energy consumption (and associated GHG 76 PACCM1 401 \Draft ISMND\Draft ISMND.docx x01/21/15)) LSA ASSOCIATES, INC.. MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION JANUARY 2015 GANAHL HARDWARE STORE AND LUMBER YARD emissions generation) occurring during the project's operation. Typically, more than 80 percent of total energy consumption takes place during the use of buildings, and less than 20 percent is consumed during construction (United Nations Environment Programme 2007). Overall, the following activities associated with the Proposed Project could directly or indirectly contribute to the generation of GHG emissions: 1. Construction Activities: During construction of the project, GHGs would be emitted through the operation of construction equipment and from worker and builder supply vendor vehicles, each of which typically uses fossil -based fuels to operate. The combustion of fossil - based fuels creates GHGs such as CO2, CH4, and N20. 2. Gas, Electricity, and Water Use: Natural gas use results in the emissions of two GHGs: CH4 (the major component of natural gas) and CO2 (from the combustion of natural gas). Electricity use can result in GHG production if the electricity is generated by combusting fossil fuel. California's water conveyance system is energy -intensive. Approximately one- fifth of the electricity and one-third of the nonpowerplant natural gas consumed in California are associated with water delivery, treatment, and use (ARB 2010). 3. Solid Waste Disposal: Solid waste generated by the Proposed Project could contribute to GHG emissions in a variety of ways. Landfilling and other methods of disposal use energy for transporting and managing the waste, and they produce additional GHGs to varying degrees. Landfilling, the most common waste management practice, results in the release of C114 from the anaerobic decomposition of organic materials. C114 is 25 times more potent a GHG than CO2. However, landfill CHL can also be a source of energy. In addition, many materials in landfills do not decompose fully, and the carbon that remains is sequestered in the landfill and not released into the atmosphere. 4. Motor Vehicle Use: Transportation associated with the Proposed Project would result in GHG emissions from fuel combustion in daily automobile and truck trips, CO2 is the most significant GHG emitted by vehicles, but lesser amounts of CHL and N20 are also emitted in vehicle exhaust. Construction GIIG Emissions. GIIG emissions associated with the Proposed Project would occur over the short term from construction, consisting primarily of emissions from equipment exhaust. As discussed below, there would also be long-term regional emissions associated with project -related vehicular trips and stationary source emissions such as natural gas used for heating. GHG emissions generated from construction of the Proposed Project would predominantly consist of CO2. In comparison to criteria air pollutants such as ozone (03) and particulate matter less than 10 microns in size (PMIo), CO2 emissions persist in the atmosphere for a substantially longer period of time. While emissions of other GHGs such as CH4 are important with respect to GCC, emission levels of other GHGs are less dependent on the land use and circulation patterns associated with the proposed land use development project than are levels of CO2. Construction activities produce combustion emissions from various sources such as site grading, utility engines, on-site heavy-duty construction vehicles, equipment hauling materials to and from PACCM14010raft JSMNT)\Thaft J,SMND rinrx «01/21/15» 77 MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION GANAHL HARDWARE STORE AND LUMBER YARD LSA ASSOCIATES. INC. JANUARY 2515 the site, asphalt paving, and motor vehicles transporting the construction crew. Exhaust emissions from on-site construction activities would vary daily as construction activity levels change. Operational GHG Emissions. Long-term operation of the Proposed Project would generate GHG emissions from the proposed Ganahl Lumber retail store and lumber storage yard, area and mobile sources, and indirect emissions from stationary sources associated with energy consumption. The existing emissions are added to the Proposed Project emissions as the combination represents the total project emissions when the project is complete. Mobile -source emissions of GHGs would include project -generated vehicle trips associated with mixed-use on- site facilities and customers/employees/deliveries to the project site. Area -source emissions would be associated with activities such as landscaping and maintenance of proposed land uses, natural gas for heating, and other sources from the existing uses on site. Increases in stationary source emissions would also occur at off-site utility providers as a result of demand for electricity, natural gas, and water by the proposed uses. Table 3.7.A provides the estimated GHG emissions for the Proposed Project. Table 3.7.A Project Related GHG Emissions Category Greenhouse Gas Emissions(Metric Tons/Yea! Bio -CO2 NonBio-COZ CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Area Sources 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Energy Usa a 0.00 343.55 343.55 0.02 0.00 344.91 Mobile Sources 0.00 1,684.76 1,684.76 0.07 0.00 1,686.27 Solid Waste 177.96 0.00 177.96 10.52 0.00 398.83 Water and Wastewater 1.86 33.23 35.09 0.19 0.00 40.62 Construction 0.00 1 14.77 14.77 0.00 0.00 14.82 Total Emissions 179.82 2,076.31 2,256.13 10.80 0.01 2 485.46 SCA MD Draft Screening Threshold 3,000 Exceeds Threshold? No Source: Kunzman (2014a). Bio -CO2 = CIS = methane CO2 = carbon dioxide CO2e = carbon dioxide equivalent N20 = Nitrous oxide Non Bio -CO2 The project's opening year (2016) emissions would be 2,485.46 MT Of CO2e and would not exceed the SCAQMD draft screening threshold of 3,000 MT of CO2e per year for GHG emissions for all uses (see Table 3.7.A). Impacts are considered less than significant. Mitigation Measures: No mitigation would be required. (b) Less than Significant Impact. The City of Costa Mesa does not currently have a Climate Action Plan; therefore, GHG emissions have been compared to the ARB Scoping Plan. Scoping Plan. The ARB Board approved a Climate Change Scoping Plan in December 2008. The Scoping Plan outlines the State's strategy to achieve the 2020 GHG emissions limit. The Scoping Plan "proposes a comprehensive set of actions designed to reduce overall greenhouse gas 78 P:\CCM1401\Draft ISMND\Draft ISMND.docx «01/21/15» LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. JANUARY 1015 MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION GANAHL HARDWARE STORE AND LUMBER YARD emissions in California, improve our environment, reduce our dependence on oil, diversify our energy sources, save energy, create new jobs, and enhance public health." This Scoping Plan calls for an "ambitious but achievable" reduction in California's GHG emissions, cutting approximately 30 percent from business as usual emission levels projected for 2020, or about 10 percent from today's levels. On a per -capita basis, that means reducing annual emissions of 14 tons of carbon dioxide for every man, woman, and child in California down to about 10 tons per person by 2020. The Proposed Project would include passive energy conservation features as described in Section 2.2.4, Project Characteristics, of this Initial Study to meet applicable strategies of the plan. The Proposed Project is consistent with the applicable strategies resulting in a less than significant impact. The Proposed Project's operational GHG emissions do not exceed the draft SCAQIm threshold for all land uses. Although the Proposed Project would generate GHG emissions, these emissions would not have a significant impact on the environment. PACCM 140 1 \Draft ISMNDOraft ISMND.dom «01/21/15» 79 MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION GANAHL HARDWARE STORE AND LUMBER YARD This page intentionally left blank LSA ASSOCIATES. INC. JANUARY 1015 80 PACCM1401\Draft ISMND\Draft ISMND.docx «01/21/15» LSA ASSOCIATES, INC JANUARY 1015 MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION CANAHL HARDWARE STORE AND LUMBER YARD 3.8 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS Less Than Significant Potentially With Less Than Would theproject: Significant Impact Mitigation Incor orated Significant Impact No Impact (a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through E] ® E]❑ the routine transport, use or disposal of hazardous materials? (b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonable foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the ❑ 19 ❑ ❑ release of hazardous materials into the environment? (c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing ❑ ❑ Z ❑ or proposed school? (d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites complied pursuant to Government Code Section ❑ ❑ ❑ 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or to the environment? (e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a _ ~� plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or ❑ ❑ ® ❑ public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? (fl For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the ❑ ❑ ❑ project area? _ ❑ (g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted E] El response plan or emergency evacuation plan? _ (h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are ❑ El❑ adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? 3.8.1 Introduction A Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (Phase I ESA) (Appendix E) was completed for the Proposed Project by AEI Consultants (AEI Consultants 2014). The purpose of the Phase I ESA was to identify the presence of any hazardous substances or petroleum products on the project site that may indicate an existing release, a past release, or a material threat of a release of any hazardous substance or petroleum product into the soil, groundwater, or surface water of the project site. The Phase I ESA results are summarized below. 3.8.2 Environmental Setting The project site currently contains a concrete wall, an asphalt paved entrance area, landscaping along the Bristol Street frontage, and an underground concrete lined flood channel (Santa Ana Delhi Channel). Previous land uses of the project site were determined using historical aerial photographs, historic city directories, Sanborn fire insurance maps, and agency records. From at least 1927 through 1947, the project site appeared to be undeveloped, contained agricultural land uses, and had a drainage ditch running through it. From 1952 to 1993, the project site appeared to be vacant land, had a drainage ditch running through it, and contained soil stockpiles. From 1994 through 2008, the project site was PACCM1401\Draft ISMND\Draft ISMND,doex «01/21/15» 81 MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION GANAHL HARDWARE STORE AND LUMBER YARD LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. JANUARY 2015 developed with Bristol Street Mini Storage and Recreational Vehicle (RV) Storage. The project site has been vacant since 2009 (AEI Consultants 2014). The Phase I ESA identified two environmental issues within the project site that were not expected to represent a significant environmental concern. Environmental issues associated with the project site are described below: Based on a review of aerial photographs, there is a potential that portions of the project site were historically used for agricultural purposes. There is a potential that agricultural chemicals, such as pesticides, herbicides and fertilizers, were used on site, and that the project site has been affected by the use of such agricultural chemicals. In general, historical agricultural use is not the subject of environmental enforcement actions by regulatory agencies, and therefore, could be considered a de minimis condition. As described above, the project site was previously developed with an RV and self -storage facility from 1994 until 2008. Development of this facility likely involved grading activities that would have likely removed or disturbed near surface soils. When this RV and self -storage facility was demolished, additional grading/earthmoving activities likely occurred that would have further reduced the potential for residual agricultural contaminants (AEI Consultants 2014). The underground Santa Ana Delhi Channel was observed bisecting the project site. No hazardous materials or petroleum products were observed stored on the project site, or near the Santa Ana Delhi Channel traversing the project site. Therefore, these areas are not expected to represent a significant environmental concern (AEI Consultants 2014). No recognized environmental conditions (RECs), controlled recognized environmental conditions (CRECs), or historical recognized environmental conditions (HRECs) were found to affect the project site (AEI Consultants 2014). Although not considered a REC, there is the potential to encounter aerially -deposited lead (ADL) in shallow soil within 50 feet of Bristol Street. Based on the fact that the site has been unpaved until 1994 and its location adjacent to a major road and freeways, there is the potential for ADL in shallow soil along this roadway. According to the Phase I ESA and records maintained by the Orange County Solid Waste Local Enforcement Agency (LEA), a closed solid waste disposal site, Newport Avenue Station No. 1 (Solid Waste Disposal System Number 30 CR -0071), is located approximately 700 feet northwest of the project site at the northwest comer of Newport Boulevard and Bristol Street. This closed disposal site is inspected by the LEA on a quarterly basis. Although no combustible gas studies or monitoring reports were on file in the CalRecycle Solid Waste Information System (SWIS) for the Newport Avenue Station No. 1 closed disposal site, LEA has indicated that methane gas generated by decomposing refuse buried at the closed disposal site could possibly migrate toward the project site. 3.8.3 Impact Analysis (a) Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. Hazardous materials are chemicals that could potentially cause harm during an accidental release or mishap, and are defined as being toxic, corrosive, flammable, reactive, an irritant, or strong sensitizer. Hazardous substances include all chemicals regulated under the United States Department of Transportation 82 P:\CCM1401\Draft ISMND\Draft ISMND.docx «01/21/15» LSA ASSOCIATES. INC. JANUARY 2015 MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION GANAHL HARDWARE STORE AND LUMBER YARD "hazardous materials" regulations and the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) "hazardous waste" regulations. Hazardous wastes require special handling and disposal because of their potential to damage public, health and the environment. The probable frequency and severity of consequences from the use, transport, or disposal of hazardous materials is affected by the type of substance, quantity used or managed, and the nature of the activities and operations. Construction. During construction activities for the Proposed Project, there is a possibility of generating small quantities of hazardous materials. Construction activities would also use a limited amount of hazardous and flammable substances/oils during heavy equipment operations for site grading and construction. The amount of hazardous chemicals present during construction is limited and would be in compliance with existing government regulations to ensure the amounts of these materials present during construction would be limited and would not pose a significant adverse impact to workers or the environment. Furthermore, the construction contractor would be required to implement standard best management practices regarding hazardous materials storage, handling, and disposal during construction in compliance with the State Construction General Permit to protect water quality (refer to Section 3.9, Hydrology and Water Quality). Any associated risk would be adequately reduced to a level that is less than significant through compliance with these standards and regulations; thus, the limited use and storage of hazardous materials during construction of the Proposed Project would not pose a significant hazard to the public or the environment. Accordingly, the potential for the release of hazardous materials during project construction would be low and, even if a release would occur, it would not result in a significant hazard to the public, surrounding land uses, or environment due to the small quantities of these materials associated with construction, and no mitigation would be required. The Phase I ESA did not identify any properties adjacent to the project site that were anticipated to have adversely impacted conditions at the project site. However, in the unlikely event that unknown hazardous materials are discovered during construction activities, the project contractor would be required to comply with a Contingency Plan developed and approved prior to the commencement of grading activities. As stated in Mitigation Measure HAZ-1, in the event that construction workers encounter underground tanks, gases, odors, uncontained spills, or other unidentified substances, the Contingency Plan requires the contractor to stop work, cordon off the affected area, and notify the Costa Mesa Fire Department (CMFD). The CMFD responder shall determine the next steps regarding possible site evacuation, sampling, and disposal of the substance consistent with local, State, and federal regulations. In addition, the California Department of Transportation, the California Highway Patrol, and local police and fire departments are trained in emergency response procedures for safely responding to accidental spills of hazardous substances on public roads, further reducing potential impacts to a less than significant level. With implementation of Mitigation Measure HAZ-1, potential risks associated with encountering unknown hazardous wastes during construction would be reduced to a less than significant level. With implementation of Mitigation Measure HAZ-1, construction of the Proposed Project would not create a significant hazard to the public or to the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials. PACCM 1401 Draft ISMND\Draft ISMND.docx Al/21/15» 83 MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION CANAHL HARDWARE STORE AND LUMBER YARD 84 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. JANUARY 2015 Operation. Long-term operational activities typical of the proposed retail and lumber storage yard uses, such as landscape and building maintenance, would occur on the project site. Maintenance activities related to landscaping include the use of fertilizers and light equipment (such as lawn mowers and edgers). These types of activities do not involve the use of a large or substantial amount of hazardous materials. The proposed retail and lumber storage yard uses would involve the use and storage of small quantities of potentially hazarcdnuR materials in the form of c1P.aninu RnlventR and nedicirdeR. However. Ruch materials -_---- ------------- — -- ---- -- --- o --- ---- -- r --------- --- - - . --� ------------ would be contained, stored, and used in accordance with manufacturers' instructions and handled in compliance with applicable standards and regulations. During operation of the Proposed Project, the diesel fueling station would be enclosed within integrated containment vessels, and would be required to be operated in compliance with all applicable State and federal regulations governing the handling of diesel fuels. In addition, the station would meet all best management practice (BMPs) and City code requirements, including a roof shed above the fueling area. The existing Ganahl Lumber facility has a similar fueling station on the existing site located directly above the Delhi Channel. Any associated risk would be adequately reduced to a less than significant level through compliance with these standards and regulations.The Proposed Project would relocate the existing Ganahl Lumber store located adjacent to the project site; therefore, operational impacts would be the same as the existing conditions for the existing Ganahl Lumber store next door. Thus, potential impacts from the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials resulting from operation of the Proposed Project would be less than significant, and no mitigation would be required. As indicated by the LEA, it is possible that methane gas from the nearby closed disposal site may be migrating toward the project site and could concentrate beneath the Proposed Project's structures resulting in health and safety hazards. Mitigation Measure HAZ-2 would address these potential hazards by requiring that a soil gas investigation be conducted on the project site prior to the issuance of grading permits to evaluate whether combustible landfill gas concerns exist and, if necessary, that appropriate building design measures be incorporated into the Proposed Project to protect against the accumulation of methane beneath structures. With implementation of Mitigation Measure HAZ-2, operation -related impacts would be reduced to a less than significant level. Mitigation Measures: RAZ -1: Contingency Plan. Prior to commencement of grading activities, the Director of the Orange County Environmental Health Division, or designee, shall review and approve a contingency plan that addresses the procedures to be followed should on-site unknown hazards or hazardous substances be encountered during demolition and construction activities. The plan shall indicate that if construction workers encounter underground tanks, gases, odors, uncontained spills, or other unidentified substances, the contractor shall stop work, cordon off the affected area, and notify the Costa Mesa Fire Department (CMFD). The CMFD responder shall determine the next steps regarding possible site evacuation, sampling, and disposal of the substance consistent with local, State, and federal regulations. PACCM1401\Draft ISMND\Draft ISMND.docx «01/21/15» LSA ASSOCIATES. INC. MITIGATEDNEGATIVE DECLARATION JANUARY 2015 GANAHL HARDWARE STORE AND LUMBER YARD HAZ-2: Protection Against Landfill Gas Hazards. Prior to the issuance of any grading permits, the Applicant shall conduct a soil gas investigation on the project site in accordance with the Orange County Fire Authority's Combustible Gas Hazard Mitigation Guidance to evaluate whether combustible landfill gas concerns exist on the project site. If the investigation concludes that such concerns do not exist, no further mitigation is necessary. If the investigation concludes that combustible landfill gases are present beneath the project site, the Applicant shall coordinate with the Orange County Solid Waste Local Enforcement Agency (LEA) to determine appropriate mitigation to protect the Proposed Project's structures from combustible landfill gases, which may include the installation of systems designed to protect against the accumulation of methane beneath structures, which may include passive ventilation systems, flexible building membrane liners, landfill gas alarms, or other measures listed per Section 20939, Title 27 California Code of Regulations in accordance with LEA recommendations. If mitigation is required, the City of Costa Mesa's Building Official, or designee, shall review the building and grading plans prior to the start of grading to verify that the mitigation developed as a result of the combustible landfill gas evaluation has been appropriately incorporated into the project plans. On-site inspection during grading and construction shall be conducted by the City of Costa Mesa's Building Official, or designee, to ensure compliance with the mitigation specifications, if any are required to be incorporated into project plans. (b) Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. During construction, some hazardous materials, such as diesel fuel, would be used. A Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP), listing Best Management Practices (BMPs) to prevent construction pollutants and products from violating any water quality standard or waste discharge requirements would be prepared for the Proposed Project (refer to Standard Condition WQ-1 in Section 3.9, Hydrology and Water Quality). The release of any spills would be prevented through the implementation of BMPs listed in the SWPPP. In addition, Mitigation Measure HAZ-1, which outlines the requirements for a contingency plan, would reduce impacts related to the possible discovery of unknown wastes or suspect materials during construction activities to a less than significant level. The Proposed Project would relocate the existing Ganahl Lumber store next door to the project site. Operation of the Proposed Project would result in similar hazard conditions as the existing hazard conditions associated with the current Ganahl Lumber store. Daily operation of the new lumber store would not result in a new hazard to the public or the environment. During operation of the Proposed Project, the diesel fueling station would be enclosed within integrated containment vessels, and would be required to be operated in compliance with all applicable State and federal regulations governing the handling of diesel fuels. In addition, the diesel fueling station would meet all best management practice (BMPs) and City code requirements, including a roof shed above the fueling area. The existing Ganahl Lumber facility has a similar fueling station on the existing site located directly above the Delhi Channel. Further, the WQMP contains BMPs to prevent the release of fuel into the environment (refer to Standard Condition WQ-2 in Section 3.9, Hydrology and Water Quality). Therefore, with adherence to Standard Condition WQ-2, the Proposed Project would result in a less than significant impact during operation. PACCM1401\Draft ISMND\Draft ISMND docx «01/21/15» 85 MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION GANAHL HARDWARE STORE AND LUMBER YARD Mitigation Measures: Refer to Mitigation Measure HAZ-1 above. LSA ASSOCIATES. INC. JANUARY 2015 Standard Conditions: Refer to Standard Conditions WQ-1 and WQ-2 in Section 3.9, Hydrology and Water Quality. (c) Less than Significant Impact. There are no schools within one-quarter mile of the project site. Hnwever_ there are ten schools within a nne-mile vicinity of the nroiert site- Mariners Christian School, Sonora Elementary School, Pacific Coast High School/Community Home Education Program (CHEP), Vineyard Christian School, Montessori Christian School, Back Bay Montessori, Saint John the Baptist Catholic School, Access County Community School, Costa Mesa High School, and Davis Magnet School. Impacts would be less than significant. (d) No Impact. The Phase I ESA included a search of the Regional Water Quality Control Board's (RWQCB) online GeoTracker database, which resulted in no information indicating any recorded release of hazardous materials on the project site. A search of the Department of Toxic Substances Control's (DTSC) Hazardous Waste Tracking System (HWTS) database resulted in one record indicating that the project site generated 0.8000 ton of methyl ethyl ketone. The project site was not listed in the regulatory database as a Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) generator, and as such, it is presumed that the wastes generated would have been in quantities which did not trigger RCRA reporting requirements. Therefore, the recorded wastes are not expected to represent a significant environmental concern (AEI Consultants 2014). The project site was identified in the regulatory database as a Clandestine Drug Labs (CDL) site and a Facility and Manifest Data (HAZNET) site. AEI interviewed Mr. Adam Palmer of the DTSC Emergency Response Program for more information regarding the database CDL Listing. According to Mr. Palmer, the DTSC was called on January 7, 1998 to remove drug lab equipment from a storage container related to the previous storage use of the project site. The items were removed from the site and the case was both opened and closed on January 7, 1998. No release case was listed. Due to the items being removed and the demolition of the former storage facility structures this listing is not likely to represent a significant environmental concern (AEI Consultants 2014). No significant hazard to the public or the environment is expected from implementation of the Proposed Project. A less than significant impact would occur. Mitigation Measures: No mitigation would be required. (e) Less than Significant Impact. The project site is located approximately 0.5 miles west of John Wayne Airport, and is within the land use planning area managed by the Airport Environs Land Use Plan for John Wayne Airport (AELUP) (ALUC 2008). The project site is located within the 60 decibels (dB) Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL) contour (ALUC 2008). Commercial land uses exposed to noise levels of 60 dB CNEL are considered "Normally Consistent" (conventional construction methods used, no special noise reduction requirements) by the AELUP (ALUC 2008). The project site is located within Safety Compatibility Zone 6 (Traffic Pattern Zone) for runway 1L and 19R (ALUC 2008). Zone 6 has the following basic compatibility qualities: • Allow residential land uses; 86 PACCM1401Draft ISMND\Draft ISMND.docx «01/21/15» LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. JANUARY 1015 MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION GANAHL HARDWARE STORE AND LUMBER YARD • Allows most nonresidential uses (prohibits outdoor stadiums and similar uses with very high intensities; and Avoid children's schools, large day care centers, hospitals, and nursing homes (ALUC 2008). The Proposed Project would not result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the vicinity of the project site because it would relocate the existing Ganahl Lumber store from the parcel adjacent to the project site. No new or incompatibility conflicts would result because similar commercial land uses already exist in the area. Impacts would be less than significant. Mitigation Measures: No mitigation would be required. (f) No Impact. There are no private airstrips within the vicinity of the project site, and as a result, the Proposed Project would not result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the vicinity of the project site. Therefore, no impact would occur. Mitigation Measures: No mitigation would be required. (g) Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. The City of Costa Mesa has an Emergency Operations Plan that identifies the City's planning, organization, and response policies and procedures during an emergency (City of Costa Mesa 2013). Construction of the Proposed Project would require construction to occur within Bristol Street and would result in temporary construction truck traffic which has the potential to interfere with emergency response access to areas near the project site. With implementation of Mitigation Measure HAZ-3, which requires that the Applicant prepare a construction staging and traffic control plan that would ensure that emergency vehicles would be able to navigate through streets adjacent to the project site, impacts to emergency access would be less than significant. Construction. Construction may result in increased travel time due to flagging or stopping of traffic to accommodate trucks entering and exiting the project site. While it is unlikely that such activities would result in complete closure of Bristol Street, they may temporarily close a single travel lane. The development of a Construction Staging and Traffic Control Plan, as required by Mitigation Measure HAZ-3, would ensure that emergency vehicles would be able to navigate through streets adjacent to the project site. Traffic management personnel (flagpersons) required as part of the Congestion Staging and Traffic Management Plan would be trained to assist in emergency response by restricting or controlling the movement of traffic that could interfere with emergency vehicle access. With implementation of the Construction Staging and Traffic Control Plan, it is not anticipated that construction of the Proposed Project would impede any passing emergency vehicles or impair any emergency evacuation plans. Therefore, impacts to emergency response and evacuation plans associated with construction of the Proposed Project would be reduced to a less than significant level with implementation of Mitigation Measure HAZ-3. Operation. Operation of the Proposed Project would not physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan. The Proposed Project would be developed in accordance with the City Emergency Operations Plan. Access to, from, and on site for emergency vehicles would be reviewed and approved by the Costa Mesa Fire Department (CMFD) prior to project construction. The Proposed Project would also be required to comply with all applicable codes and ordinances for emergency vehicle access, which would ensure PACCM1401\Draft ISMND\Draft ISMND.docx «01/21/15» 87 MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION GANAHL HARDWARE STORE AND LUMBER YARD LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. JANUARY 5015 adequate access to, from, and on site for emergency vehicles. Therefore, operation of the Proposed Project would not impair implementation of, or physically interfere with, an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan. Potential project impacts would be less than significant, and no mitigation would be required. Mitigation Measures: HAZ-3: Construction Staging and Traffic Control Plan. Prior to the issuance of any grading permits, the Applicant (or its contractor) shall prepare a Construction Staging and Traffic Control Plan for approval by the City of Costa Mesa (City) Transportation Services Manager, or designee, to ensure proper access to residences and businesses in the area by emergency vehicles during construction and to maintain traffic flow prior to any lane closures. The Construction Staging and Traffic Control Plan shall also include the name and phone number of a contact person who can be reached 24 hours a day regarding construction traffic complaints or emergency situations. In addition, the Construction Staging and Traffic Control Plan shall take into account and be coordinated with other Construction Staging and Traffic Control Plans that are in effect or have been proposed for other projects in the City of Costa Mesa. The Construction Staging and Traffic Control Plan shall include, but not be limited to, the following: • All emergency access to the project site and adjacent areas shall be kept clear and unobstructed during all phases of constriction. Flag persons shall be provided in adequate numbers to minimize impacts to traffic flow and to ensure safe access into and out of the site. • Flag persons shall be trained to assist in emergency response by restricting or controlling traffic movements that could interfere with emergency vehicle access. • Construction vehicles, including construction personnel vehicles shall not park on public streets. • Construction vehicles shall not stage or queue where they would interfere with pedestrian and vehicular traffic or block access to nearby businesses or residential areas. • If feasible, any traffic lane closures would be limited to off-peak traffic periods, as approved by the City Transportation Services Department. (h) No Impact. The Proposed Project is located in a developed area of the City of Costa Mesa, and is bounded by commercial, residential, and transportation uses. There are no wildlands in the vicinity, and therefore, the Proposed Project would not expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires. No impact would occur. Mitigation Measures: No mitigation would be required. 88 PACCM1401\Draft ISMND\Draft ISMND.docx «01/21/15» LSA ASSOCIATES. INC. JANUARY 2015 3.9 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY Would the vroiect: MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION GANAHL HARDWARE STORE AND LUMBER YARD Less Than Significant PoteoliallyWith Significant Mitigation Impact Incorporated Less Than Significant No Impact Imnact (a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ requirements? (b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level ❑ ❑ Z ❑ (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? (c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in ❑ ❑ ❑ a manner which would result in a substantial erosion or siltation on - or off-site? (d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or ❑ ❑ ❑ substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site? (e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned storm water drainage systems or provide ❑ ❑ ® ❑ substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? (f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? ❑ ❑ Z ❑ (g) Place housing within a 100 -year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or ❑ ❑ ❑ Z other flood hazard delineation map? (h) Place within a 100 -year flood hazard area structures which would ❑ ❑ ❑ impede or redirect flood flows? (i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure ❑ ❑ ❑ of a levee or dam? (j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? ❑ ❑ ❑ (k) Potentially impact storm water runoff from construction activities? ❑ ❑ ® ❑ (1) Potentially impact storm water runoff from post -construction ❑ ❑ ® ❑ activities? (m) Result in a potential for discharge of storm water pollutants from areas of material storage, vehicle or equipment fueling, vehicle or equipment maintenance (including washing), waste handling, ❑ ❑ ❑ hazardous materials handling or storage, delivery areas, loading docks or other outdoor work areas? (n) Result in potential for discharge of storm water to affect the ❑ ❑ Z ❑ beneficial uses of the receiving waters? (o) Create the potential for significant changes in the flow velocity or ❑ ❑ volume of storm water runoff to cause environmental harm? _ (p) Create significant increases in erosion of the project site or ❑ ❑ ® ❑ surrounding areas? PACCM 1401 \Draft ISMND\Draft ISMND.docx «01/21/15» 89 MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION GANAHL HARDWARE STORE AND LUMBER YARD 3.9.1 Impact Analysis LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. JANUARY 2015 (a) Less than Significant Impact. During construction of the Proposed Project, water quality impacts could occur without proper controls. Soils loosened during grading, spills of fluids or fuels from vehicles and equipment or miscellaneous construction materials and debris, if mobilized and transported offsite in overland flow, could degrade water quality. Therefore, the Proposed Project would be required to comply with all pertinent requirements of the National rTollutant Discharge Eii'_u__u'-iiation S_y_s_ate_m kNITMTS[1\).Tl 1- __. 1• fie first requirement involves compliance with the State Water Resources Control Board's NPDES General Permit for Storm Water Discharges Associated with Construction and Land Disturbance Activities (Order No. 2009- 0009-DWQ, NPDES No. CAS000002) (Construction General Permit) (Standard Condition WQ-1). Because the Proposed Project would disturb greater than 1 acre of soil during construction, the project must comply with the requirements of the Construction General Permit, including the preparation of a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) and implementation of the construction Best Management Practices (BMPs) detailed in the SWPPP during construction activities. Construction BMPs would include, but not be limited to, Erosion Control and Sediment Control BMPs designed to minimise erosion and retain sediment on site and Good Housekeeping BMPs to prevent spills, leaks, and discharge of construction debris and waste into receiving waters. To comply with the requirements of the Construction General Permit, the Applicant must ensure that the Permit Registration Document, including a SWPPP and Notice of Intent, are filed with the State Water Resources Control Board prior to issuance of a grading permit. In addition, a Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) (see Appendix F) has been prepared for the Proposed Project to comply with the requirements of the local NPDES Stormwater Program (Joseph C. Truxaw and Associates, Inc. 2014b). As described in Standard Condition WQ-2, a Final WQMP that includes design features and BMPs to target pollutants of concern in stormwater runoff from the project site will be prepared and approved prior to issuance of a grading permit. Proposed BMPs include rainwater capture and storage, planter boxes, and bioswales. During operation, expected pollutants associated with the commercial and industrial uses on the project site include suspended solids/sediments, nutrients, pathogens (bacteria/virus), pesticides, oil and grease, and trash. The project site was previously fully developed with a storage facility with approximately 13 percent pervious surfaces and 87 percent impervious surfaces. Post- project conditions would result in 7.5 percent pervious surfaces and 92.5 percent impervious surfaces (Joseph C. Truxaw and Associates, Inc. 2014b).With adherence to the aforementioned requirements, outlined below as Standard Conditions WQ-1 and WQ-2, potential impacts related to waste discharge requirements would be less than significant. Standard Conditions: WQ-1 Construction General Permit. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the Applicant shall demonstrate to the City of Costa Mesa (City) Public Works Department that coverage has been obtained under California's General Permit for Storm Water Discharges Associated with Construction and Land Disturbance Activities (Construction General Permit) by providing a copy of the Notice of Intent (NOI) submitted to the State Water Resources Control Board and a copy of the subsequent notification of the issuance of a Waste Discharge Identification (WDID) Number or other proof of filing. A copy of the current Storm Water 90 PACCM 140 1 Traft ISMND\Draft ISMND.docx «01/21/15» LSA ASSOCIATES. INC. MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION JANUARY 2015 GANAHL HARDWARE STORE AND LUMBER YARD Pollution Prevention Program (SWPPP) required by the General Permit shall be kept at the project site and be available for review by City representatives upon request. WQ-2 Final Water Quality Management Plan. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the Applicant shall submit a Final Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) to the City Public Works Department for review and approval. Both Source Control best management practices (BMPs) and Site Design BMPs designed to reduce impacts to water quality from operation of the Proposed Project shall be identified in the Final WQMP. Mitigation Measures: No mitigation would be required. (b) Less than Significant Impact. The project site is currently vacant, and contains a mixture of impervious and pervious surfaces. As described above, the Proposed Project would result in an increase in the amount of impervious surfaces on the project site. Even though the pervious surfaces of the project site would allow groundwater recharge during storm events it would not allow groundwater recharge to occur at rates that would significantly affect groundwater levels due to its size. Operation of the Proposed Project would not require groundwater extraction. Furthermore, the project site is not located in a designated recharge area. According to the Geotechnical Investigation Report prepared for the Proposed Project, groundwater was encountered in several borings and stabilized at depths ranging from 23.5 to 244.5 feet below the existing ground surface (bgs) and 10.7 to 12 feet above mean sea level (amsl) (G.A. Nicoll and Associates 2014). Based on the depth of excavation required for the Proposed Project, it is not anticipated that groundwater would be encountered during construction; therefore, groundwater dewatering would not be required. The Proposed Project would have additional water needs resulting from the operation of a store of a larger size and other new operational needs including the cleaning of solar panels compared to the existing Ganahl Lumber Costa Mesa store. However, the Proposed Project would incorporate various water capture and conservation measures that would reduce water requirements and offset any reduction in infiltration that results from the increase in impervious surface area on the project site. For example, the Proposed Project would be designed to capture rain water from the roof system and store it in five aboveground cisterns for later use in landscape areas. The cisterns could store approximately 100,000 gallons of rainwater. The landscaping plan also includes the use of permeable pavers and bioswales to allow for groundwater recharge and native and drought tolerant plants that thrive in extended periods of drought with seasonal floods. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant. Mitigation Measures: No mitigation would be required. (c) Less than Significant Impact. The Proposed Project would require grading of the project site, which would affect the drainage patterns of the site and expose soil that could result in an increased potential for soil erosion and siltation compared to existing conditions. Additionally, during a storm event, soil erosion and siltation could occur at an accelerated rate. As discussed above in the response to question 3.9 (a) above and specified in Standard Condition WQ-1, the Construction General Permit requires preparation of a SWPPP to identify Construction BMPs to be implemented as part of the Proposed Project to reduce impacts to water quality during w� PACCM1 401 \Draft ISMND\Draft TSMND.docx 01/21/15» 91 MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION CANAHL HARDWARE STORE AND LUMBER YARD LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. JANUARY 2015 construction, including those impacts associated with soil erosion and siltation. In addition, the Proposed Project's drainage plan would be designed by a registered civil engineer to safely retain, detain, and/or convey stormwater runoff. Drainage patterns would remain similar to existing conditions. No streams or rivers would be altered; the Santa Ana Delhi Channel would not be affected by the Proposed Project. Implementation of BMPs would minimize the potential erosion or siltation from the project site. A less than significant impact would occur. Mitigation Measures: No mitigation would be required. (d) Less than Significant Impact. Please see the response to question 3.9. (c) above. As a result of the increase in impervious surface area on the project site, the Proposed Project is anticipated to incrcase the peak flow of runoff during storm events. However, the Proposcd Projcct includes infiltration BMPs to offset any increase in stormwater runoff that would result from the increase in impervious surface area on the project site. With implementation of infiltration BMPs as part of the project design, impacts related to the alteration of the existing drainage pattern in a manner that would result in on- or off-site flooding would be less than significant. Mitigation Measures: No mitigation would be required. (e) Less than Significant Impact. The landscaping plan includes the use of permeable pavers to allow water infiltration on site and bioswale features to help treat stormwater runoff. Stormwater that is not retained on site would be directed to the existing Santa Ana Delhi Channel and Bristol Street, and would be accepted by the existing public storm drain system. Calculations of pre - development and post development runoff from the project site show that the Proposed Project would result in an approximately 13.8 percent decrease in runoff from the project site for the 10 - year storm frequency, and an approximately 13.6 percent decrease in runoff from the project site for the 25 -year and 100 -year storm frequencies (Joseph C. Truxaw and Associates, Inc. 2014a). Therefore, impacts to the existing stormwater drainage system would be less than significant. Mitigation Measures: No mitigation would be required. (f) Less than Significant Impact. Please refer to the response to question 3.9 (a) above. A Preliminary WQMP has been prepared for the Proposed Project to comply with the requirements of the local NPDES Stormwater Program (Joseph C. Truxaw and Associates, Inc. 2014b). The Applicant would implement a SWPPP for the Proposed Project listing BMPs to prevent construction pollutants and products from violating any water quality standards. A less than significant impact would occur. Mitigation Measures: No mitigation would be required. (g) No Impact. The Proposed Project does not include housing. No impact would occur. Mitigation Measures: No mitigation would be required. (h) Less than Significant Impact. Areas adjacent to Santa Ana Delhi Channel are located within both the 100 -year and 500 -year flood zone (City of Costa Mesa 2000). The Ganahl Lumber store 92 PACCM1401Draft ISMND\Draft ISMND.docx «01/21/15» LSA ASSOCIATES. INC. JANUARY 2015 MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION GANAHL HARDWARE STORE AND LUMBER YARD would be designed such that flood flows would not be impeded or redirected to create hazards in an area that currently does not have flooding hazards. A less than significant impact would occur. Mitigation Measures: No mitigation would be required. (i) No Impact. Only a small portion of the City of Costa Mesa is located within the dam inundation area of Prado Dam, and that portion is limited to the area closest to Newport Bay. The project site is not located in the Prado Dam inundation area. No impact would occur. Mitigation Measures: No mitigation would be required. (j) No Impact. The project site and surrounding area are relatively flat; therefore, the Proposed Project would not be built in an area subject to mudflows. The project site is located approximately five miles from the Pacific Ocean. Due to the distance to the ocean, the project site would not be subject to inundation from seiches or tsunamis. No impact would occur. Seiching is a phenomenon that occurs when seismic ground shaking induces standing waves (seiches) inside water retention facilities such as reservoirs and water tanks. Such waves can cause retention structures to fail and flood downstream properties. Because there are no water retention facilities located in close proximity to the project site, the risk associated with possible seiche waves is, therefore, not considered a potential constraint. No impact would occur. Mitigation Measures: No mitigation would be required. (k) Less than Significant Impact. Please refer to the response to question 3.9 (a) above. During construction of the Proposed Project, water quality impacts could occur without proper controls and compliance with regulations pertaining to the protection of water quality. However, the Proposed Project would be subject to the requirements of the statewide NPDES stormwater permit for construction activity (Standard Condition WQ-1), and implementation of the construction Best Management Practices (BMPs) detailed in the SWPPP during construction activities. To comply with the requirements of the Construction General Permit, the Applicant must ensure that the Permit Registration Document, including a SWPPP and Notice of Intent, are filed with the State Water Resources Control Board prior to issuance of a grading permit. Therefore, a less than significant impact would occur with adherence to Standard Condition WQ-1. Mitigation Measures: No mitigation would be required. (1) Less than Significant Impact. Please refer to the response to question 3.9 (a) above. During operation, expected pollutants associated with the proposed retail and lumber sales and storage uses on the project site include suspended solids/sediments, nutrients, pathogens (bacteria/virus), pesticides, oil and grease, and trash and debris. A Preliminary WQMP has been prepared for the Proposed Project to comply with the requirements of the local NPDES Stormwater Program (Joseph C. Truxaw and Associates, Inc. 2014b). The Final WQMP will include design features and BMPs to target pollutants of concern in stormwater runoff from the project site (Standard Condition WQ-2). The Proposed Project would include design features that improve water quality. Roof cisterns installed on the roof of the Proposed Project would store approximately 100,000 gallons of rainwater, and thereby reduce stormwater runoff from the project site. The PACCM140BDraft ISMND\Draft ISMND.docx 41/21/15» 93 MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION GANAHL HARDWARE STORE AND LUMBER YARD LSA ASSOCIATES. INC. JANUARY 2015 landscaping plan for the Proposed Project also includes the use of permeable pavers and bioswales to allow for groundwater recharge that would reduce stormwater runoff. With implementation of the measures included in the WQMP and the additional design features associated with the Proposed Project operational water quality impacts as a result of the Proposed Project would be less than significant. Mitiontinn MPacnrPc• Nn mitiantinn wnnlrl hi-. rPrnlirari (m) Less than Significant Impact. Please refer to the response to question 3.9 (a) above. Although the Proposed Project would involve operational activities associated with lumber sales and storage, including but not limited to material storage, vehicle or equipment fueling, vehicle or equipment maintenance (including washing), delivery areas, loading docks and other outdoor work areas, the Proposed Project would be expected to comply with the NPDES permit, WQMP, and SWPPP prepared for the Proposed Project. As specified in Standard Condition WQ-2, a variety of BMPs would also be implemented on site to reduce stormwater runoff and increase infiltration. Compliance with these plans and measures would reduce impacts to a less than significant level. Mitigation Measures: No mitigation would be required. (n) Less than Significant Impact. The Proposed Project is part of the Newport Bay Watershed (Environmental Protection Agency [EPA] 2009), and is located across the street from an open tributary to Upper Newport Bay. Runoff from the project site drains to the existing Santa Ana Delhi Channel beneath the project site and Bristol Street, which both drain to the Newport Bay Watershed. The Newport Bay Watershed eventually drains to the Upper Newport Bay Preserve located approximately one mile from the project site and the Pacific Ocean located approximately five miles from the project site. The Newport Bay Watershed is currently listed as impaired by a variety of pollutants (EPA 2009). Runoff from the project site would not substantially impact the Newport Bay Watershed, Upper Newport Bay Preserve, or the Pacific Ocean given the size and scale of the Proposed Project. In addition, the Proposed Project would be required to conform to the NPDES permit and implement measures from the SWPPP and WQMP, including BMPs. The Proposed Project would not interfere with the beneficial uses of aforementioned bodies of water. Therefore, impacts to water bodies that serve as drainage for the Proposed Project would be less than significant. Mitigation Measures: No mitigation would be required. (o) Less than Significant Impact. Grading on the project site would affect drainage patterns and expose soil that could result in an increased potential for soil erosion and siltation compared to existing conditions. However, grading on the project site and changes in drainage would not result in a significant change in the flow or velocity of stormwater runoff. The site's drainage plan would be designed by a registered civil engineer to safely retain, detain, and/or convey stormwater runoff. According to the Preliminary Drainage Study prepared for the Proposed Project, drainage patterns on and surrounding the project site would remain similar to existing conditions (Joseph C. Truxaw and Associates, Inc. 2014a). As described in the response to question 3.9 (e) above, the Proposed Project would result in decreases in runoff from the project 94 PACCM1401\Draft ISMND\Draft ISMND.docx «01/21/15» LSA ASSOCIATES. INC - JANUARY 2015 MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION GANAHL HARDWARE STORE AND LUMBER YARD site for the 10 -year, 25 -year, and 100 -year storm frequencies. Therefore, a less than significant impact would occur. Mitigation Measures: No mitigation would be required. (p) Less than Significant Impact. Grading on the project site would affect drainage patterns and expose soil that could result in an increased potential for soil erosion and siltation compared to existing conditions. As discussed above in the response to question 3.9 (a) and specified in Standard Condition WQ-1, the Construction General Permit requires preparation of a SWPPP to identify Construction BMPs to be implemented as part of the Proposed Project to reduce impacts to water quality during construction, including those impacts associated with soil erosion and siltation. Through compliance with Standard Condition WQ-1, a less than significant impact would occur. Mitigation Measures: No mitigation would be required. PACCM 1401 \Draft ISMND\Draft ISMND.docx «01/21/15» 95 MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION GANAHL HARDWARE STORE AND LUMBER YARD This page intentionally left blank LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. JANUARY 2015 96 PACCM1401Draft ISMND\Draft ISMND.docx «01/21/15» LSA ASSOCIATES. INC. JANUARY 2015 MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION GANAHL HARDWARE STORE AND LUMBER YARD 3.10 LAND USE/PLANNING Less Than Significant Potentially With Less Than Would the Significant Mitigation Significant No project: Impact Incorporated ITpact Impact (a) Physically divide an established community? Q (b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or El zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? (c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? 3.10.1 Impact Analysis (a) No Impact. The Proposed Project is located in an area zoned for local business uses and has a general commercial land use designation (City of Costa Mesa 2004; City of Costa Mesa 2007). The project site previously served as a self -storage site. The Proposed Project is located directly south of the SR -55 and SR -73 juncture, and would not divide any established communities. Therefore, no impact would occur. Mitigation Measures: No mitigation would be required. (b) Less than Significant Impact. Land uses on and around the project site are regulated by the City of Costa Mesa's (City's) General Plan and Zoning Ordinance. General Plan. The Costa Mesa General Plan (2000) is the City's most fundamental planning document. The General Plan establishes a vision for the City's future growth and change and provides a blueprint for development throughout the community. The project site is designated for General Commercial land uses by the City's General Plan. Allowable uses within the General Commercial General Plan land use designation include a combination of junior department stores and retail clothing stores, theaters, restaurants, hotels and motels, automobile sales and service establishments, markets, drug stores, retail shops, financial institutions, service establishments and support office uses. The General Commercial land use designation allows a Floor Area Ratio (FAR) between 0.20-0.75 for high to very low traffic uses, respectively. Because the proposed hardware store and outdoor lumber yard contains both a commercial use (retail store, office mezzanine) and industrial use (material storage structures, mill shed), a 0.35 maximum FAR is applied. The Proposed Project would be subject to a maximum FAR of 0.35 in accordance with General Plan Policy LU-1E.1(a). The FAR calculated for the Proposed Project is 0.346, and therefore, the Proposed Project would comply with the City's FAR requirements. Title 13 of the Costa Mesa Zoning Code allows the exclusion of outdoor, unenclosed storage sheds from the FAR calculation, as well as allowances for the outdoor material storage uses as low traffic generators. In this case, the unenclosed pole shed was not calculated in the FAR ratio. The Proposed Project would not conflict with any applicable land use plans or policies; therefore, no impacts would occur. Zoning Ordinance. The City's Zoning Ordinance is the primary implementation tool for the City's General Plan Land Use Element and the goals and policies contained therein. For this reason, the Zoning Map must be consistent with the General Plan Land Use Map. The General PACCM1401 \Draft ISMND\Draft ISNM.docx «01/21/15» 97 MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION LSA ASSOCIATES, INC, GANAHL HARDWARE STORE AND LUMBER YARD JANUARY 2015 Plan Land Use Map indicates the general location and extent of future land use in the City. The Zoning Ordinance, which includes the Zoning Map, contains more detailed information about permitted land uses, building intensities, and required development standards. The Zoning Ordinance designation for the project site is C1 (Local Business). The C1 zoning designation allows a FAR between 0.20-0.75 for high to very low traffic uses, respectively. As indicated nreviously_ the Pmnosed Proiect would be subiect to a maximum FAR of 0.15. Because the Proposed Project's FAR would be 0.346, the Proposed Project would comply with the City's FAR requirements. The following discretionary approvals are required: • Conditional Use Permit for Hardware Store and Outdoor Lumber Yard; • Development Review for new construction of 65,263 sf store and associated outdoor material storage structures and mill shed; • Variances from building height from 34 to 41 feet for the solar roof canopy, elevator overrun, B -shed, and roof -deck parking level; • Variance from front setback requirement (20 feet required, 10 feet proposed); and • Planned Signing Program for freestanding signs up to 25 feet in height (12 feet allowed; 25 feet proposed) Approval of the Proposed Project would require a variance to allow a maximum height of 41 feet for the Proposed Project. Code establishes a maximum height limit of two stories/30 feet in the commercial zone. The following building heights are proposed from grade level: • Elevator/Stairwell Overrun: 41 feet • Solar Panel Deck: 34 feet • Shed B: 34 feet • Roof Level Parking In addition, a Planned Sign Program would be required to allow a proposed sign height of 25 feet, which is higher than the maximum 12 -foot height allowed by the development standards contained in the City's Zoning Ordinance. Table 3.10.A, Zoning Ordinance Development Standards Consistency Analysis, provides a list of applicable development standards and an evaluation of the Proposed Project's consistency with each standard. As described in Table 3.10.A, the Proposed Project would require variances related to the building heights and the front setback along Bristol Street. With approval of such variances, the Proposed Project would be consistent with the City's Zoning Code. 98 PACCM1 40 1 \Draft ISMND\Draft ISMND.docx «01/21/15» LSA ASSOCIATES. INC. JANUARY 2015 MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION GANAHL HARDWARE STORE AND LUMBER YARD Table 3.10.A: Zoning Ordinance Development Standards Consistency Analysis City of Costa Mesa Development Standards for Cl (Local Business) Zone' Prgjcct Consistency Analysis Minimum Lot Area: 12,000 square feet (116m) Consistent. The lot size for the Proposed Project is 6.6 ac, or 287,696 sf. Minimum Lot Width for Newly Subdivided Lots: 120 Consistent: The lot width for the project site is feet approximately 1,127 feet. Minimum Lot Width: 60 feet Consistent: The lot width for the project site is approximatel 1,127 feet. Maximum Floor Area Ratio: 0.35 Consistent: The Proposed Project's FAR would be 0.346. Maximum Building/Structure Height: 2 stories/30 feet Variances Required. With the solar roof canopy, the proposed height for Building A would be approximately 34 feet, with the exception of the elevator and stairwell providing roof access for Building A, which would be 41 feet. The B Shed would be 34 feet tall. Roof level parking is proposed. All other structures on site would be less than 30 feet in height, and would therefore comply with the maximum building height specified in the City's Zoning Code. With approval of a height variance for Building A and B Shed, the Proposed Project would be consistent with the City's Zoning Code. Minimum Setbacks 0 Front: 10 feet. Variance Required. • Front: 20 feet Side (Interior): Consistent. • Side (Interior): 15 feet on one side and 0 feet on the • Rear (Interior): Consistent. other side. Exception: If the side property line is adjacent to a residential zone, all buildings shall maintain a side setback from the residential property line of 2 times the building height at all locations. • Rear (Interior): 0 feet Consistent. The Proposed Project would not Maximum Projections Depth include any roof eaves, awnings, or open, • Roof or Eaves Overhang; Awning: 2 feet 6 inches unenclosed stairways into the required setback into required side setback. 5 feet into required front or area for the project site. rear setback. • Open, Unenclosed Stairways: 2 feet 6 inches into required setback area. Parking: 2.5 spaces per 1,000 sf (239 spaces) Consistent. The Proposed Project would provide 286 spaces in the form of both at -grade and roof- top parking stalls. Consistent. The Proposed Project would provide Landscaping: 5% of total site area 15,748 sf of landscaping, a surplus of 1,363 sf over the required 14,385 sf. PACCM1 40 1 \Draft ISMND\Draft ISMND.docx «01/21/15» 99 MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION GANAHL HARDWARE STORE AND LUMBER YARD LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. JANUARY 2015 Table 3.10.A: Zoning Ordinance Development Standards Consistency Analysis City of Costa Mesa Development Standards for C1 (Local Business Zonel Project Consistency Analysis Signs Consistent (Maximum Area). The Proposed Project would be allowed 1,329 sf of signage, but • Maximum Area: 0.5 sf per lineal foot of building proposes only 1,293 sf of signage. frontage facing the street, with a maximum of 75 sf per tenant Consistent (Maximum Height): 25 feet. • Maximum Height: 12 feet Planned Signing Program Required. Planned Signing Program: Required. Conditional Use Permit, Variances, Development Review: Required. The final review authority is the Planning Commission. Uses Underroof: All uses shall be conducted underroof except as allowed by a minor conditional use permit or as permitted elsewhere in this Zoning Code. Exception: Sidewalk and parking lot sales may be allowed for a maximum of 4 sales per fiscal year with a maximum length of 3 days per sale and subject to obtaining a business permit. Outdoor Storage: Permitted when: Storage does not interfere with required parking or vehicular access; storage is not in required setback area abutting a public right-of- way; storage does not decrease required landscaping; storage is completely screened from view from street or adjacent properties; storage complies with all applicable codes and regulations including, but not limited to, the Uniform Fire Code. Shipping containers shall also comply with setback requirements for structures, floor area ratio standards, and parking requirements. A permanent foundation shall be required for shipping containers. Storage not meeting these criteria requires approval of a minor conditional use permit. The Proposed Project would require a Planned Sign Program (PSP) for a proposed sign height of 25 feet. With approval of a PSP for the proposed signage, the Proposed Project would be consistent with the Citv's Zonine Code. Consistent. The Proposed Project would implement al�anned signage program. _ Consistent. The Proposed Project would be considered by the Planning Commission. Consistent. The Proposed Project would comply with zoning code requirements to maintain all operations underroof, except as allowed in the outdoor lumber yard area by CUP. Consistent. The Proposed Project would comply with all outdoor storage requirements as allowed by CUP. Source: City of Costa Mesa. Costa Mesa Municipal Code Commercial Development Standards, as amended. 1 City of Costa Mesa. Costa Mesa Municipal Code, as amended. 2 Parking as determined by LLG study dated December 18, 2014. ac = acres ft = foot/feet sf = square feet 100 PACCM 1401 \Draft ISMND\Draft ISMND.docx «01/21/15» LSA ASSOCIATES. INC. JANUARY 2015 MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION GANAHL HARDWARE STORE AND LUMBER YARD The Proposed Project would be a compatible use subject to a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) that would allow for a hardware store and outdoor storage yard in an area zoned for commercial uses. With approval of the CUP and Development Review, the Proposed Project would be consistent with applicable goals and policies outlined in the City's Gcneral Plan and development standards outlined in the City's Zoning Code. Therefore, implementation of the Proposed Project would not result in conflicts with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation applicable to the project. Mitigation Measures: No mitigation would be required. (c) No Impact. The project site is not located within a "Habitat Reserve System" or a "Covered Habitat" area as identified by the Central and Coastal Subregion Natural Community Conservation Plan/Habitat Conservation Plan (NCCP/HCP) (County of Orange 1996). No impact would occur. Mitigation Measures: No mitigation would be required. PACCM1401\Draft ISMND\Draft ISMND.docx 4112.111 5o 101 MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION GANAHL HARDWARE STORE AND LUMBER YARD This page intentionally left blank LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. JANUARY 2015 102 PACCM 1401 \Draft ISMND\Draft ISMND.docx «01/21/15» LSA ASSOCIATES, INC.. JANUARY 2015 MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION GANAHL HARDWARE STORE AND LUMBER YARD 3.11 MINERAL RESOURCES Less Than Significant Potentially With Less Than Would the Significant Mitigation Significant No nject: Impact_ Incorporated Im act_ Impact (a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that ® ® ❑ would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? (b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally -important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific ❑ ❑ ❑ plan or other land use plan? 3.11.1 Impact Analysis (a) No Impact. No known mineral resources are present on the project site (City of Costa Mesa 2000). There are no oil wells located in, or immediately adjacent to, the Proposed Project site according to the State of California Department of Conservation Regional Wildcat District W 1-6 Map (California Department of Conservation 2008). The Proposed Project is not located in a Significant Mineral Aggregate Resource Area (SMARA), and no mining activity has been conducted on site (California Department of Conservation). Therefore, the Proposed Project would not result in the loss of a valuable commercial or locally important mineral resource. No impacts would occur. Mitigation Measures: No mitigation would be required. (b) No Impact. The project area is not located within a locally -important mineral resource recovery site (City of Costa Mesa 2000). No impacts would occur. Mitigation Measures: No mitigation would be required. PACCM 1401 \Draft ISMND\Draft ISMND.docx «01/21/15» 103 MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION GANAHL HARDWARE STORE AND LUMBER YARD This page intentionally left blank LSA ASSOCIATES. INC. JANUARY 2015 104 PACCM14010raft IShM\Draft ISNM.docx a01/21/15» 111MIE] LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. JANUARY 2015 MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION GANAHL HARDWARE STORE AND LUMBER YARD 3.12 NOISE Less than Significant Potentially With Less Than Would the project result in: Significant Impact Mitigation Incorporated Significant Impact No Impact (a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local General Plan or noise ❑ ❑ ® ❑ ordinance or applicable standards of other agencies? (b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive ❑ ❑ ❑ groundbome vibration or groundborne noise levels? (c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in E]❑ El project vicinity above levels existing without the project? (d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the ❑ ❑ project? _ (e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people ❑ ❑ ® ❑ residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? (f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area ❑ ❑ ❑ to excessive noise levels? 3.12.1 Introduction A noise impact analysis study (see Appendix G) was performed by Kunzman Associates, Inc. to address the possibility of significant impacts due to noise (Kunzman 2014b). The findings of this study are summarized in the following sections. 3.12.2 Environmental Setting Sensitive Receptors. Some land uses are considered more sensitive to intrusive noise than others due to the amount of noise exposure and the types of activities typically involved at the receptor location. Noise exposure at these sensitive receptors is predicated on the magnitude and frequency of said noise event, exposure duration, and exterior -to -interior sound attenuation. Residences, schools, motels and hotels, libraries, religious institutions, hospitals, nursing homes, and parks are generally more sensitive to noise than commercial and industrial land uses. For purposes of the noise analysis, the nearest sensitive receptors to the project site are single family residential units located west of Bristol Street approximately 335 feet southwest of the proposed Ganahl Lumber facility on Master's Circle. These sensitive receptors would have direct line of sight exposure to the noisiest activities associated with the construction of the Proposed Project. City of Costa Mesa General Plan Noise Element. The City of Costa Mesa (City) aims to protect its citizens and property from injury, damage, or destruction from noise hazards and to work towards improved noise abatement. Objectives and policies applicable to the Proposed Project are presented below: • Objective N -IA: Control noise levels within the City for the protection of residential areas and other sensitive land uses from excessive and unhealthful noise. o Policy N-lA.l : Require, as apart of the environmental review process, that full consideration be given to the existing and projected noise environment. PXCM 1401 \Draft ISMND\Draft ISNM,docx A1/21/15» 105 MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. GANAHL HARDWARE STORE AND LUMBER YARD JANUARY 2015 The Noise Element also establishes the noise/land use compatibility criteria to be used in determining whether a new use is appropriate within a given noise environment. The proposed land use can be considered both an industrial land use (outdoor mill and wood processing yard) and a commercial land use (retail store) for purpose of determining noise impacts. Industrial land uses are considered to be normally acceptable in environments with noise levels of up to 70 A -weighted decibels (dBA) community noise equivalent (CNEL) and conditionally acceptable in environments with noise levels r ori ♦ rn �r+r n � or up to 75 d1BA ONIEL. Commercial lana uses are considered normally acceptable in environments with noise levels of up to 67.5 dBA CNEL and conditionally acceptable in environments with noise levels of up to 77.5 dBA CNEL. City of Costa Mesa Municipal Code. The City's Municipal Code provides standards for both exterior and interior noise levels in Section 13-280 and 13-281, respectively (City of Costa Mesa as amended). These regulations are meant to prevent excessive noise levels in the City. Throughout the City, it is unlawful to create noise levels that will affect residential properties that exceed: (1) The noise standard for a cumulative period of more than thirty (30) minutes in any hour; (2) The noise standard plus five (5) dB(A) for a cumulative period of more than fifteen (15) minutes in any hour; (3) The noise standard plus ten (10) dB(A) for a cumulative period of more than five (5) minutes in any hour; (4) The noise standard plus fifteen (15) dB(A) for a cumulative period of more than one (1) minute in any hour; or (5) The noise standard plus twenty (20) dB(A) for any period of time. In addition, Section 13-283, Loud, Unnecessary Noise, of the City's Municipal Code addresses other noise impacts that may be considered a nuisance. Industry Accepted Standards. It is generally recognized that in an urban noise environment, a 3 dBA increase in noise level is considered to be barely perceptible, while an increase of 5 dBA would be clearly perceptible. An increase above ambient noise levels between 3 dBA and 5 dBA would result in an adverse, but not significant impact, while an increase in noise level of 5 dBA or more would be considered a significant impact. These guidelines are commonly used in acoustics and noise impact assessments to address increases in noise levels. Table 3.12.A provides land use compatibility standards for exterior noise levels. Ambient Noise Measurements. Noise measurements were taken on-site at the existing Ganahl Lumber Facility between 11:53 a.m. and 12:33 p.m. on March 18, 2014. Noise sources included traffic from State Route 73 (SR -73) and Bristol Street, trucks, forklifts, and other lumberyard operations. Please see Table 3.12.B, Ambient Noise Levels, below for the ambient noise levels at the existing Ganahl Lumber Facility and the nearest sensitive receptors to the project site. 106 _ PACCM1401\Draft ISMND\Draft ISMND.docx «01/21/15» LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. JANUARY 2015 MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION CANAHL HARDWARE STORE AND LUMBER YARD Table 3.12.A: Land Use Compatibility for Exterior Community Noise Land Use Category Noise Range (Ld I 1I or CN_EL , dB III I IV Passively used open spaces _ Auditoriums, concert halls, amphitheaters 50-70 N/A _ 70-80 50-70 80-85 N/A N/A 70-85 Residential—low-density single-family, duplex, mobile homes 50-60 60-70 70-75 75-85 Residential—multifamily 50-65 65-70 70-75 75-85 Transient lod in —motels, hotels 50-65 65-70 70-80 80-85 Schools, libraries, churches, hospitals, nursing homes 50-60 60-65 65-80 80-85 Actively used open spaces—plggrounds, neighborhood parks 50-67.5 N/A 67.5-75 1 75-85 Golf courses, riding stables, water recreation, cemeteries 50-70 N/A 70-80 80-85 Office buildings, business commercial, and professional 50-67.5 67.5-7.5 77.5-85 N/A Industrial, manufacturing, utilities, aghculture 50-70 70-80 1 80-85 N/A Source: Modified from U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development Guidelines and State of California Standards and the City of Costa Mesa General Plan. Notes: Noise Range I—Normally Acceptable: Specified land use is satisfactory, based upon the assumption that any buildings involved are of normal conventional construction, without any special noise insulation requirements. Noise Range II—Conditionally Acceptable: New construction or development should be undertaken only after a detailed analysis of the noise reduction requirements is made and needed noise insulation features are included in the design. Conventional construction, but with closed windows and fresh air supply systems or air-conditioning, would normally suffice. Noise Range III—Normally Unacceptable: New construction or development should generally be discouraged. If new construction or development does proceed, a detailed analysis of the noise reduction requirements must be made and needed noise insulation features included in the design. Noise Range IV—Clearly Unacceptable: New construction or development should generally not be undertaken. d13 = decibels CNEL = community noise equivalent level L& = day -night average level N/A = not applicable Table 3.12.B: Ambient Noise Levels Source: Kunzman (2014b). PACCM1401\Draft ISMND\Draft ISMND.docx «01/21/15u 107 Time Measurement ExistingAmb_ fent Noise Levels dBA L. L,,,a,I L2 L L15 L50 Name Land Use Period Period NMI Existing 11:53 AM- 15 minutes 70.3 86.6 79.8 74.2 68.3 65.7 Ganahl 12:08 PM Lumber Facility _ 15 minutes 63.9 82.2 73.9 65.6 59.9 57.7 NM2 Single- 12:18 PM- Family 12:33 PM Residential Source: Kunzman (2014b). PACCM1401\Draft ISMND\Draft ISMND.docx «01/21/15u 107 MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION GANAHL HARDWARE STORE AND LUMBER YARD 3.12.3 Impact Analysis (a) Less than Significant Impact LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. JANUARY 4015 Construction Impacts. Construction -related short-term noise levels would be higher than existing ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project site, but would no longer occur once construction of the Proposed Project is complete. For purposes of the noise impact analysis, sensitive receptors that may be affected by project construction include the single-family detached residential dwelling units located southwest of the Proposed Project and west of Bristol Street on The Masters Circle. The closest single-family detached residential dwelling unit to the project site is approximately 335 feet to the southwest. Construction noise varies depending on the construction process, type of equipment involved, location of the construction site with respect to sensitive receptors, the schedule proposed to carry out each task (e.g., hours and days of the week), and the duration of the construction work. The initial phase of construction would involve mass grading of the site, along with site development activities, including construction of internal roadways which involves fine grading, trenching, and paving activities. Following site preparation activities, the Proposed Project would include construction of buildings. Construction of the buildings would require the following phases: site development (fine grading, trenching, and paving), building construction, architectural coatings application, and paving associated with buildings. Mass site grading is expected to produce the highest construction noise levels. Grading of the site is estimated to require a grader, backhoe, dozer, excavator, and water truck (modeled as a dump truck). Typical noise sources and noise levels associated with the site grading phase of construction are shown in Table 3.12.C, Typical Construction Equipment Noise Levels. A worst case construction scenario was conducted to estimate construction noise at the closest sensitive receptors using the Road Construction Noise Model (RCNM) provided by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). Project construction noise levels may reach 64.3 dBA average noise levels (Leq) and up to 65.0 dBA maximum noise level (L.,,,) at the nearest sensitive receptor located southwest of the project site. It should be noted that there is a six foot concrete barrier along the northeastern boundary of the potentially affected single family neighborhood. This barrier can be expected to reduce construction noise at back yards and first floor rooms by 5 dBA. Project construction activities could temporarily increase ambient noise levels at the nearest sensitive receptor by less than 1 dB during daytime hours. This increase would not result in an audible change. As long as project construction activities adhere to Standard Condition NOISE -1 described below, which limits construction noise to the hours and days exempt from the City's Noise Ordinance, impacts would be less than significant. Operation Impacts. On -Site Operational Noise. As stated previously, for purposes of the noise impact analysis, the nearest sensitive receptors to the project site are the single-family detached residential dwelling units located approximately 335 feet southwest of the project site. 108 PACCM 140 1 \Draft ISMND\Draft ISMND.docx «01/21/15» 11 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. JANUARY 2015 MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION GANAHL HARDWARE STORE AND LUMBER YARD Table 3.12.0 Typical Construction Equipment Noise Levels Type of Equipment Range of Maximum Sound Levels Measured dBA at 50 ft Suggested Maximum Sound Levels for Analysis dBA at 50 ft)_ Rock Drills 83-99 96 Jack Hammers 75-85 82 Pneumatic Tools 78-88 85 Pumps 74-84 80 Dozers 77-90 85 Scrapers 83-91 87 Haul Trucks 83-94 88 Cranes 79-86 82 Portable Generators 71-87 80 Rollers 75-82 80 Tractors 77-82 80 Front -End Loaders 77-90 86 Hydraulic Backhoe 81-90 86 Hydraulic Excavators 81-90 86 Graders 79-89 86 Air Com ressors 76-89 86 Trucks 81-87 86 Source: Kunzman (2014b). dBA = A -weighted decibels ft = foot/feet Representative operational noise measurements were taken in the existing lumber yard at the adjacent Ganahl Lumber facility. Average hour noise sources were comprised of trucks, backhoes, wood processing and loading equipment. Measured noise levels reached 70.3 dBA Leq and 86.6 dBA L.,.. The above noise source levels were assigned to the project site approximately 80 feet northeast of Bristol Street to represent noise associated with the Proposed Project. This noise was then projected to the nearest sensitive receptors (approximately 335 feet to the southwest) where it is expected to reach 44.6 dBA Leq and 60.9 dBA Lmax• Project operational noise would not be discernible over existing daytime ambient noise levels (63.9 dBA Leq and 82.2 dBA L.x) at sensitive receptors. The Proposed Project would also include employee and visitor parking areas. Typical noises that may be generated by the proposed parking lot include landscaping maintenance, conversations and/or yelling in parking lots, vehicle doors closing, and car alarms. These types of activities can generate noise levels between 49 dBA (tire squeals) and 74 dBA (car alarms) at 50 feet and would attcnuatc to 32.6 dBA and 57.6 dBA at the nearest sensitive receptor to the proposed parking lot (approximately 330 feet). Noise associated with parking lot activities would not be discernible over existing ambient noise levels at the nearest sensitive receptors. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant. P:\CCM1401\Draft ISMND\Draft 1SMND.docx «01/21/15» 109 MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION CANAHL HARDWARE STORE AND LUMBER YARD LSA ASSOCIATES. INC. JANUARY 2015 Project Generated Traffic Noise Impacts to Sensitive Receptors. In order to determine if the project generated vehicle traffic would result in substantial increases in ambient noise levels at sensitive receptors along Bristol Street, Existing and Existing Plus Project vehicle noise were modeled utilizing trip generation provided in the traffic study prepared for the Proposed Project (LLG 2014). The existing average daily traffic (ADT) along the affected portion of Bristol Street is 22,800. The Proposed Project would add approximately 2,287 ADT. Modeled Existing noise levels at a distance of 100 feet from the centerline are 69.3 dBA CNEL; and modeled Existing Plus Project traffic noise levels at 100 feet from the centerline are 69.5 dBA CNEL. The Proposed Project would result in an increase of approximately 0.2 dBA CNEL and would not result in a substantial increase in ambient noise levels. Impacts would be less than significant. Traffic Noise Impacts to the Proposed Project. The City of Costa Mesa Noise Element establishes the noise/land use compatibility criteria to be used in determining whether a new use is appropriate within a given noise environment. As described above, industrial land uses are considered to be normally acceptable in environments with noise levels of up to 70 dBA CNEL and conditionally acceptable in environments of up to 80 dBA CNEL. Commercial land uses are considered normally acceptable in environments with noise levels of up to 67.5 dBA CNEL and conditionally acceptable in environments with noise levels of up to 77.5. Noise levels associated with SR -73, the dominant noise source at the project site, are expected to reach up to 74.7 dBA CNEL at the lumber yard and 72.6 at the exterior of the proposed retail store. As shown in Table 3.12.A, Land Use Compatibility for Exterior Community Noise, these noise levels are considered to be conditionally acceptable according to the City of Costa Mesa's Noise Element, which means that new construction or development should be undertaken only after a detailed analysis of the noise reduction requirements is made and needed noise insulation features included in the design. Mitigation Measure NOISE -1 would require Building A to be designed to include closed windows and air conditioning, which would reduce potential noise impacts on the retail portion of the Proposed Project. The Ganahl Lumber facility would be subject to Section 1910.95(b)(1) of State of California Code Regulations, which establishes noise level exposure criteria at which employees must utilize personal protective equipment. With implementation of Mitigation Measure NOISE -1, noise impacts during operations would be less than significant. Standard Conditions: NOISE -1: Short -Term Construction Related Noise Impacts. The following standard conditions are required of all development within the City of Costa Mesa (City) and would reduce short-term construction related noise impacts resulting from the Proposed Project: • The Applicant's construction contractor shall limit all construction - related activities to between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m., Monday through Saturday. No construction activities shall be permitted outside of these hours or on Sundays and federal holidays. 110 PACCM1401\Draft ISMND\Draft ISMND.docx a01/21/15» LSA ASSOCIATES. INC. JANUARY 2015 Mitigation Measure: MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION GANAHL HARDWARE STORE AND LUMBER YARD NOISE -1: Noise Reduction Features. Prior to the issuance of building permits for Building A, the Applicant shall submit the building plans for review and approval by the City of Costa Mesa (City) Building Official, or designee, to ensure the building will be designed with closed windows and an air conditioning system to reduce noise levels associated with traffic noise to an acceptable level. (b) Less Than Significant Impact. Groundborne vibration is an oscillatory motion that is often described by the average amplitude of its velocity in inches per second or more specifically, peak particle velocity (ppv). Groundborne vibration is much less common than airborne noise; the ambient peak particle velocity of a residential area is commonly .0003 inches per second or less, well below the threshold of human perception of .0059 inches per second. Nonetheless, human reactions to vibration are highly subjective, and even levels below the threshold can cause minor annoyances like rattling of dishes, doors, or fixtures. Table 3.12.1) shows the peak particle velocities of some common construction equipment and haul trucks (loaded trucks). The must vibration causing piece of equipment that would likely be used on the site is the vibratory roller. This machine can cause vibration strong enough to annoy people over 100 feet away. However, there are no sensitive receptors located within 100 feet of the project site; therefore, there would not be an impact. Table 3.12.1): Construction Equipment Vibration Source Levels Equipment Peak Particle Velocity in inches per second at 25 ft at 50 ft at 100 ft Clam Shovel Drop (slurry wall) 0.202 0.071 0.025 Vibratory Roller 0.210 0.074 0.026 Hoe Ram 0.089 0.031 0.011 Large Bulldozer 0.089 0.031 0.011 Caisson Drilling 0.089 0.031 0.011 Loaded Trucks 0.076 0.027 0.010 Jackhammer 0.035 0.012 0.004 Small Bulldozer 0.003 0.001 0.0004 Source: Kunzman (2014b). Haul trucks would not be anticipated to exceed 0.10 inch/second ppv at 10 feet (Kunzman 2014b). Predicted vibration levels at the nearest off-site structures, which are located in excess of 25 feet from the Bristol Street and Newport Boulevard roadway segments in the vicinity of the project site, would not be anticipated to exceed even the most conservative threshold of 0.2 inch/second ppv. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant. Mitigation Measures: No mitigation would be required. PXCM1401\Draft ISMND\Draft ISMND.docx «01/21/15» 111 MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. GANAHL HARDWARE STORE AND LUMBER YARD JANUARY 2015 (c) Less Than Significant Impact. As previously stated in the response to question 3.12 (a) above, operational noise would not be discernible over existing daytime ambient noise levels (63.9 dBA Leq and 82.2 dBA I.) at sensitive receptors. Furthermore, noise associated with parking lot activities would not be discernible over existing ambient noise levels at the nearest sensitive receptors. Impacts would be less than significant. Mitigation Measures: No mitigation would be required. (d) Less than Significant Impact. As previously stated in the response to question 3.12 (a) above, construction activities could temporarily increase ambient noise levels at the nearest sensitive receptor by less than 1 dB during daytime hours. This increase would not result in an audible change. With adherence to Standard Condition NOISE -1, which limits construction noise to the hours and days exempt from the City's Noise Ordinance, impacts would be less than significant. Mitigation Measures: No mitigation would be required. (e) Less than Significant Impact. The project site is located approximately 0.5 mile to the west of the John Wayne Airport and is within the land use planning area managed by the Airport Environs Land Use Plan for John Wayne Airport (AELUP) (ALUC 2008). The project site is located within the 60 dB Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL) contour (ALUC 2008). Commercial land uses exposed to noise levels of 60 dB CNEL are considered "Normally Consistent" (conventional construction methods used, no special noise reduction requirements) by the AELUP (ALUC 2008). Impacts would be less than significant. Mitigation Measures: No mitigation would be required. (f) No Impact. There are no private airstrips within the vicinity of the project site. No impact would occur. 112 Mitigation Measures: No mitigation would be required PACCM1 401 \Draft ISMND\Draft ISMND.docx «01/21/15» LSA ASSOCIATES. INC.. JANUARY 2 01 5 MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION GANAHL HARDWARE STORE AND LUMBER YARD 3.13 POPULATION AND HOUSING Less Than Significant Potentially With Less Than Would theproject: Significant Im act Mitigation Incorporated Significant Impact No Impact (a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ exam le, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? (b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the ❑ ❑ ❑ construction of replacement housing elsewhere? (c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the ❑ ❑ ❑ construction of replacement housing elsewhere? 3.13.1 Impact Analysis (a) Less than Significant Impact. The Proposed Project would replace the existing Ganahl Lumber store located adjacent to the project site with a new Ganahl Lumber store. Initially, the new store would employ 90 to 100 people, an increase of approximately 10 to 20 employees over the existing Ganahl Costa Mesa store. At full capacity, the store would employ approximately 120 employees, an increase of 40 employees. Because all of the additional employees would be able to be hired from the existing local labor pool, the Proposed Project would not substantially increase the employment opportunities in the area capable of inducing population growth. A less than significant impact would occur. Mitigation Measures: No mitigation would be required. (b) No Impact. The Proposed Project would not displace housing. The project site is located on a vacant lot adjacent to the existing Ganahl Lumber store. No impact would occur. Mitigation Measures: No mitigation would be required. (c) No Impact. The Proposed Project would not remove housing; therefore, it would not displace people. No impact would occur. Mitigation Measures: No mitigation would be required. P:\CCM1401\Draft ISMND\Draft ISMND.docx «01/21/15» 113 MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION CANAHL HARDWARE STORE AND LUMBER YARD 114 This page intentionally left blank LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. JANUARY 1015 PACCM1401Oraft ISMND\Draft ISMND.docx «01/21/15» LSA ASSOCIATES. INC. JANUARY 2015 MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION CANAHL HARDWARE STORE AND LUMBER YARD 3.14 PUBLIC SERVICES Less Than Significant Potentially With Less Than Would theproject: Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Im act Im act (a) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of or need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services: i) Fire Protection? ❑El ❑ ii) Police Protection? ❑ El M ❑ iii) Schools? El iv) Parks? ❑ ❑ 0 v) Other public facilities? ❑ ❑ EK 3.14.1 Impact Analysis (a) i) Less than Significant Impact.. The City of Costa Mesa (City) Fire Department is located less than two miles southwest of the project site and provides fire services to the project site (City of Costa Mesa 2014b). The Proposed Project would not create a substantial new fire hazard. At full capacity, the store would employ approximately 120 employees, an increase of 40 employees over the existing Ganahl Costa Mesa store. These employees would be hired from the local labor pool. Therefore, the Proposed Project would not result in the need for new or physically altered government facilities or affect response time or other performance objectives. The Proposed Project includes construction of a new Ganahl Lumber retail store and lumber storage yard that would replace the existing Ganahl Lumber store on the property adjacent to the project site. The Proposed Project would result in an increase in the total square footage of the retail store and lumber storage yard; however, this increase in size would not result in a significant increase in demand for fire protection services. Because the Proposed Project involves relocation of an existing use that has been anticipated by the City's General Plan, impacts to fire protection services would be less than significant. Mitigation Measures: No mitigation would be required. (a) ii) Less than Significant Impact. The City of Costa Mesa Police Department is located less than two miles southwest of the project site and provides police services to the project site (City of Costa Mesa 2014a). As discussed above, the new store would employ approximately 120 employees, an increase of 40 employees over the existing Ganahl Costa Mesa store.These employees would be hired from the local labor pool. Therefore, the Proposed Project would not result in the need for new or physically altered government facilities or affect response time or other performance objectives. The Proposed Project includes construction of a new Ganahl Lumber retail store and storage yard that would replace the existing Ganahl Lumber store on a property adjacent to the project site. Because the Proposed Project involves relocation of an existing use that has been anticipated by the City's General Plan, and no increase in police protection services is expected, a less than significant impact to police protection services would occur. Mitigation Measures: No mitigation would be required. PACCM1401\Draft ISMND\Draft ISNIND.docx «01/21/15» 115 1 MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. GANAHL HARDWARE STORE AND LUMBER YARD JANUARY 2015 (a) iii) No Impact. There are ten schools in the vicinity of the project site: Mariners Christian School, Sonora Elementary School, Pacific Coast High School/Community Home Education Program (CHEP), Vineyard Christian School, Montessori Christian School, Back Bay Montessori, Saint John the Baptist Catholic School, Access County Community School, Costa Mesa High School, and Davis Magnet School. All schools are located within one mile of the project site, but are physically separated from the project site by State Route (SR -55) or State Route 73 (SR -73). The Proposed Project would generate between 10 and 40 new employees, which would be able to be hired from the local labor pool. This increase in employment would not be growth -inducing; therefore, there would not be a substantial demand for schools, parks, or other public facilities. No impact would occur. The Applicant would pay applicable development impact fees as determined by the Newport -Mesa Unified School District. The Proposed Project includes construction of a new Ganahl Lumber retail store and lumber storage yard that would replace the existing Ganahl Lumber store on the property adjacent to the project site. Because the Proposed Project involves relocation of an existing use anticipated by the City's General Plan, and no increase in demand for public schools is expected, no impacts to schools would occur. Mitigation Measures: No mitigation would be required. (a) iv) No Impact. The City of Costa Mesa operates 30 parks within its City boundaries. Bark Park and Tewinkle Park located at 890 and 970 Arlington Drive, respectively, are located within 0.5 miles of the project site. The Proposed Project would generate between 10 and 40 new employees, which would be able to be hired from the local labor pool. This increase in employment would not be growth -inducing; therefore, there would not be a substantial demand for schools, parks, or other public facilities. Because the Proposed Project involves relocation of an existing use anticipated by the City's General Plan, no increase in demand for parks is expected. Therefore, no impact would occur. Mitigation Measures: No mitigation would be required. (a) v) No Impact. The Proposed Project would generate between 10 and 40 new employees, which would be able to be hired from the local labor pool. This increase in employment would not be growth -inducing; therefore, there would not be a substantial demand for other public facilities. The project would not result in the need for new or physically altered government facilities or affect response time or other performance objectives. Because the Proposed Project involves relocation of an existing use anticipated by the City's General Plan, and no increase in demand for government facilities is expected, no impacts to other government facilities would occur. 116 Mitigation Measures: No mitigation would be required. PACCM1 40 1 \Draft ISMND\Draft ISMND.docx «01/21/15» LSA ASSOCIATES. INC. JANUARY 2015 MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION GANAHL HARDWARE STORE AND LUMBER YARD 3.15 RECREATION Less Than Significant Potentially with Less Than Would theproject: Significant Impact Mitigation Incor orated Significant Impact No Impact (a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial Cl ❑ physical deterioration of the faciliLy would occur or be accelerated? (b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 have an adverse physical effect on the environment? 3.15.1 Impact Analysis (a) No Impact. The Proposed Project does not involve residential uses and would not cause a direct } increase in the population of the City or surrounding areas. At full capacity, the new store would employ approximately 120 employees, an increase of 40 employees over the existing Ganahl Costa Mesa store. No substantial increase in demand, or use of, existing parks or recreational r facilities would result from the implementation of the Proposed Project. Mitigation Measures: No mitigation would be required. (b) No Impact. The Proposed Project would not include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities that might have an adverse effect on the environment. No impact would occur. Mitigation Measures: No mitigation would be required. PACCM1401\Draft ISMND\Draft ISNM.docx «01/21/15» 117 MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION GANAHL HARDWARE STORE AND LUMBER YARD 118 This page intentionally left blank LSA ASSOCIATES. INC. JANUARY 1015 PACCM 1401 Oraft ISMND\Draft ISMND.docx «01/21/15» LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. JANUARY 2015 MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION GANAHL HARDWARE STORE AND LUMBER YARD 3.16 TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC Less Than Significant Potentially with Less Than Would theproject: Significant im act Mitigation Incorporated Significant Impact No Impact (a) Conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance or policy establishing measures of effectiveness for the performance of the circulation system, taking into account all modes of transportation including mass transit and non -motorized travel and relevant components of the ❑ ❑ ® ❑ circulation system, including but not limited to intersections, streets, highways and freeways, pedestrian and bicycle paths, and mass transit? (b) Conflict with an applicable congestion management program, including, but not limited to level of service standards and travel E] El 21 Eldemand measures, or other standards established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? (c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 risks? (d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e. g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm ❑ ❑ ❑ equipment)? (e) Result in inadequate emergency access? ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ (f) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs regarding public transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities, or otherwise decrease the ❑ ❑ Elperformance or safety of such facilities supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? 3.16.1 Introduction A focused traffic impact study (see Appendix H) was completed for the Proposed Project by Linscott, Law, & Greenspan, Engineers (LLG 2014). The focused traffic impact study evaluated three key study intersections in the vicinity of the project site which included: 1. Southbound Newport Boulevard at Bristol Street (signalized); 2. Northbound Newport Boulevard at Bristol Street (signalized); and 3. Red Hill Avenue/Santa Ana Avenue at Bristol Street (signalized). These key locations were selected for evaluation based on discussions with City of Costa Mesa (City) staff and in consideration of the Orange County Congestion Management Program (CMP). The Level of Service (LOS) analysis at these key locations were used to evaluate the potential traffic related impacts associated with area growth, cumulative projects, and the Proposed Project. The findings of this investigation are summarized in the following sections. 3.16.2 Environmental Setting The principal local street network serving the project site includes Bristol Street, Red Hill Avenue, and Newport Boulevard. The following discussion provides a brief synopsis of these key area streets. Bristol Street is generally a six -lane roadway, divided with a two-way left turn pocket, oriented in the east -west direction. The existing two-way left -turn along the project site's frontage and the PACCM1 40 1 \Draft ISMND\Draft ISMND.docx a01/21/15» 119 MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION GANAHL HARDWARE STORE AND LUMBER YARD LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. JANUARY 2015 existing Ganahl Lumber store now serves to provide left -turn ingress and egress to the existing development along the south side as well as the development on the north side. It is classified as a Major Arterial in the City of Costa Mesa Circulation Element. The posted speed limit on Bristol Street is 45 miles per hour (mph). On -street parking is not permitted along this roadway in the vicinity of the project site. Traffic signals control the study intersections of Bristol Street at Newport Boulevard (southbound), Newport Boulevard (northbound), and Red Hill Avenue. Bristol Street borders the project site to the south. Red Hill Avenue is generally a four -lane, divided roadway, oriented in the north -south direction. The posted speed limit on Red Hill Avenue is 50 mph. On -street parking is not permitted along this roadway in the vicinity of the project site. Red Hill Avenue is classified as a Major Arterial in the City of Costa Mesa Circulation Element. Newport Boulevard is a one-way, two-lane roadway oriented in the north -south direction. The Newport Boulevard frontage road parallels the Costa Mesa Freeway (State Route 55 [SR -55]) and provides local access to the development that straddles the freeway on both sides. The posted speed limit on Newport Boulevard is 45 mph. On -street parking is not permitted along this roadway in the vicinity of the project site. Existing a.m. and p.m. peak hour operating conditions for the three key study intersections were evaluated using the Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) methodology for signalized intersections (LLG 2014). Table 3.16.A summarizes the existing peak hour LOS for the three key study intersections based on existing traffic volumes and current street geometrics. It should be noted that the existing traffic volumes include traffic that is now generated by the existing Costa Mesa Ganahl Lumber store and current LOS are representative of this condition. Table 3.16.A: Existing Peak Hour Intersection Capacity Analysis Key Intersection Time Period Jurisdiction Control Tye ICU LOS Newport Boulevard (SB) at Bristol Street AM City of Costa Mesa 3 Phase Signal 0.233 A — PM 0.492 A Newport Boulevard (NB) at Bristol Street AM City of Costa Mesa 2 Phase Signal 0.276 A PM 0.415 A Red Hill Avenue at Bristol Street AM City of Costa Mesa 8 Phase Signal 0.409 A PM 0.287 A Source: Unscott, Law, & Greenspan, Engineers (2014). ICU = Intersection Capacity Utilization LAS = level of service SB = southbound NB = northbound 120 P:\CCM1401\Draft ISMND\Draft ISMND.docx «01/21/15» s; LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. JANUARY 2015 3.16.3 Impact Analysis MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION GANAHL HARDWARE STORE AND LUMBER YARD (a) Less than Significant Impact. The City of Costa Mesa's General Plan Circulation Element identifies and establishes the City's policies governing the system of roadways, intersections, bike paths, pedestrian ways, and other components of the circulations system, which collectively provide for the movement of persons and goods throughout the City (City of Costa Mesa 2000). The Circulation Element includes two goals: • Goal CIR-1: Transportation — It is the goal of the City of Costa Mesa to provide for a balanced, uncongested, safe, and energy-efficient transportation system, incorporating all feasible modes of transportation; and • Goal CIR-2: Transportation System Management — It is the goal of the City of Costa Mesa to provide for standard service levels at signalized intersections by constructing capacity improvements for all various modes of circulation, adopting land use intensities commensurate with planned circulation improvements and implementing traffic demand reduction programs, thereby creating a more energy efficient transportation system. The Circulation Element also lists several objectives and policies to achieve the City's circulation goals. Construction Impacts The Proposed Project would generate short-term construction related vehicle trips. However, traffic generated by construction of the Proposed Project would be temporary and would not conflict with the City of Costa Mesa's Circulation Element. Impacts would be less than significant. Operational Impacts The traffic impacts of the Proposed Project during the a.m. peak hour and p.m. peak hour were evaluated based on analysis of future operating conditions at the three key study intersections and the two future site driveways. The future volume -to -capacity relationships and service level characteristics at each study intersection were analyzed. The significance of the potential impacts of the Proposed Project at each key intersection was then evaluated using the following traffic impact criteria. Impact Criteria and Thresholds Per the City of Costa Mesa guidelines, LOS D is the minimum acceptable level of service that should be maintained during the weekday a.m. peak hour and weekday p.m. peak hour. Per the City's criteria, the Proposed Project is considered to have a significant impact if the following criteria are met: For signalized intersections: • The ICU value under "with the Proposed Project" conditions is 0.91 or greater (LOS E or F); and • The ICU increase attributable to the Proposed Project is 0.01 or greater. PACCM1401\Draft ISMND\Draft ISMND.docx 41/21/15» 121 MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION GANAHL HARDWARE STORE AND LUMBER YARD For unsignalized intersections: LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. JANUARY 2015 • The estimated delay under "with the Proposed Project" conditions is 35.1 seconds/vehicle (s/v) or greater (LOS E or F). Traffic Impact Analysis Scenarios The following scenarios are those for which volume/capacity calculations have been performed at the three key intersections for existing plus project and near-term (Year 2016) traffic conditions: A. Existing Traffic Conditions; B. Existing Plus Proposed Project Traffic Conditions; C. Scenario (B) with Improvements, if necessary; D. Near -Term (Year 2016) Cumulative Traffic Conditions; E. Near -Term (Year 2016) Cumulative plus Project Traffic Conditions; F. Scenario (E) with Improvements, if necessary. Existing Plus Proposed Project Analysis Table 3.16.13 summarizes the peak hour LOS results for existing plus project traffic conditions at the three key study intersections using the ICU methodology and the Proposed Project's unsignalized driveway using the methodology outlined in Chapter 17 of the Highway Capacity Manual 2000 (HCM 2000). Table 3.16.11: Existing Plus Proposed Project's Peak Hour Intersection Capacity Analysis Key Intersection Time Period Existing Traffic Conditions Existing Plus Project Traffic Conditions Significant Im act ICU/ LOS ICM/ LOS HCM HCM Yes/No Newport Boulevard (SB) at -Bristol Street AM 0.233 A 0.233 A _ No No PM 0.492 A 0.492 A Newport Boulevard (NB)/Driveway 1 at Bristol Street AM 0.276 A 0.426 A No PM 0.415 A 0.444 A No Red Hill Avenue at Bristol Street AM 0.409 A 0.409 A _ No PM 0.287 A 0.287 A No Driveway 2 (truck -entry only) at Bristol Street AM -- -- 8.3 s/v A No PM -- -- 13.3 s/v B No Source: Linscott, Law, & Greenspan, Engineers (2014). HCM = Highway Capacity Manual ICU = Intersection Capacity Utilization LOS = level of service NB = northbound SB = southbound s/v = seconds per vehicle -- = intersection is part of Proposed Project and does not currently exist 122 PXCM1401\Draft ISMND\Draft ISMND.docx «01/21/15» .q. _J LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. JANUARY 2015 MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION GANAHL HARDWARE STORE AND LUMBER YARD Table 3.16.B indicates that traffic associated with the Proposed Project would not have an impact at any of the key study locations when compared to the LOS standards and significance impact criteria. As shown, the key study intersections, inclusive of the site driveways, are forecast to operate at LOS B or better during the weekday a.m. and p.m. peak hours. Year 2016 Traffic Conditions. Table 3.16.0 summarizes the peak hour LOS results at the three key study intersections and site driveway for the Year 2016 horizon year. Table 3.16.C: Year 2016 Peak Hour Intersection Capacity Analysis Source: Unscott, Law, & Greenspan, Engineers (2014). HCM = Highway Capacity Manual ICU = Intersection Capacity Utilization LAS = level of service NB = northbound SB = southbound s/v = seconds per vehicle -= intersection is part of Proposed Project and does not currently exist ti Year 2016 Cumulative Traffic Conditions. An analysis of future (Year 2016) cumulative traffic conditions indicates that the addition of ambient traffic growth and related projects traffic would not impact any of the key study intersections. All three locations are projected to continue to operate at LOS A during the weekday a.m. and p.m. peak hours. Year 2016 Cumulative Plus Proposed Project Conditions. Table 3.16.0 indicates that traffic associated with the Proposed Project would not impact any of key study intersections. All study intersections are forecast to operate at an acceptable service level (LLG 2014). Operational impacts would be less than significant. Therefore, increases in traffic related to the Proposed Project would be less than significant, and are not anticipated to result in conflicts with an applicable plan, ordinance, or policy establishing measures of effectiveness for the performance of the circulation system. Mitigation Measures: No mitigation would be required. P:\CCM1401\Draft ISMND\Draft ISMND.docx «01/21/15» 123 Year 2016 Year 2016 Existing Traffic Cumulative Cumulative Plus Significant Key Intersection Time Period Conditions Traffic Conditions Project Traffic Conditions Impact ICU/ HCM LOS ICU/ HCM LOS ICU/ HCM LOS Yes/No Newport Boulevard (SB) AM 0.233 A 0.246 A 0.246 A No at Bristol Street PM 0.492 A 0.506 A 0.506 A No Newport Boulevard AM 0.276 A 0.289 A 0.447 A No (NB)/ Driveway 1 at Bristol Street PM 0.415 A 0.436 A 0.467 A No Red Hill Avenue at AM 0.409 A 0.426 A 0.426 A No PM 0.287 A 0.301 A 0.301 A No Bristol Street Driveway 2 (truck -entry AM -- -- -- -- 8.4 s/v A No PM -- -- I -- I -- 13.9 s/v B No only) at Bristol Street Source: Unscott, Law, & Greenspan, Engineers (2014). HCM = Highway Capacity Manual ICU = Intersection Capacity Utilization LAS = level of service NB = northbound SB = southbound s/v = seconds per vehicle -= intersection is part of Proposed Project and does not currently exist ti Year 2016 Cumulative Traffic Conditions. An analysis of future (Year 2016) cumulative traffic conditions indicates that the addition of ambient traffic growth and related projects traffic would not impact any of the key study intersections. All three locations are projected to continue to operate at LOS A during the weekday a.m. and p.m. peak hours. Year 2016 Cumulative Plus Proposed Project Conditions. Table 3.16.0 indicates that traffic associated with the Proposed Project would not impact any of key study intersections. All study intersections are forecast to operate at an acceptable service level (LLG 2014). Operational impacts would be less than significant. Therefore, increases in traffic related to the Proposed Project would be less than significant, and are not anticipated to result in conflicts with an applicable plan, ordinance, or policy establishing measures of effectiveness for the performance of the circulation system. Mitigation Measures: No mitigation would be required. P:\CCM1401\Draft ISMND\Draft ISMND.docx «01/21/15» 123 MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. CANAHL HARDWARE STORE AND LUMBER YARD JANUARY 2015 (b) Less than Significant Impact. The analysis completed in the focused traffic impact study (LLG 2014) is consistent with the requirements and procedures outlined in the current Orange County CMP. The CMP requires that a traffic impact analysis be conducted for any project generating 2,400 or more daily trips, or 1,600 or more daily trips for projects that directly access the CMP Highway System. Per the CMP guidelines, this number is based on the desire to analyze any impacts that will be three percent or more of the existing CMP highway system facilities' capacity. The Proposed Project is expected to generate 2,287 daily trips; howcvcr, Bristol Street and the portion of Newport Boulevard in the vicinity of the project site are not part of the County's designated CMP Highway System (the nearest CMP roadway is Harbor Boulevard, , approximately 1.7 miles to the west of the project site). Therefore, the Proposed Project does not meet the criteria required for a CMP traffic analysis. Therefore, it is concluded that the Proposed Project would not have any significant traffic impacts on the CMP Highway System. It is noted that the three key study intersections along Bristol Street are forecast to continue to operate at acceptable service levels with the Proposed Project (LLG 2014). Impacts would be less than significant. Mitigation Measures: No mitigation would be required. (c) No Impact. The Proposed Project would be in compliance with the AELUP for John Wayne Airport, located approximately 2.7 miles from the project site, as demonstrated in the response to question 3.8 (e). The Proposed Project would not include structures or operational conditions that would require a change of air traffic patterns or increase traffic levels or a change in location that would result in substantial safety risks. No impact would occur. Mitigation Measures: No mitigation would be required. (d) No Impact. The Proposed Project would relocate the existing Costa Mesa Ganahl Lumber store to an adjacent parcel. The Proposed Project would have two driveways along Bristol Street that would be designed to allow for a safe and efficient movement of traffic to and from the project site. The internal circulation of the Proposed Project's site plan has been reviewed by LLG and was determined to be adequate to accommodate service/delivery trucks (SU -30), fire trucks, and large trucks (WB -62). No impact would occur. Mitigation Measures: No mitigation would be required. (e) Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. Temporary impacts to emergency access may occur during construction. Implementation of Mitigation Measure HAZ-3, which requires the development of a Construction Staging and Traffic Control Plan that would ensure that emergency vehicles would be able to navigate through streets adjacent to the project site, would reduce impacts to emergency access to a less than significant level. Mitigation Measures: Refer to Mitigation Measure HAZ-2 above. (f) No Impact. The Orange County Transit Authority (OCTA) provides public transit service throughout the City and in proximity to the project site (i.e., Bristol Street and Red Hill Avenue). Approximately six OCTA bus stops are located within 0.5 mi of the project site. The Proposed Project would not affect existing transit service (i.e., bus stops or routes), or conflict with public 124 PACCM1401\Draft ISMND\Draft ISMND.docx «01/21/15» r LSA ASSOCIATES. INC. JANUARY 201 S MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION GANAHL HARDWARE STORE AND LUMBER YARD transportation programs, plans, or policies. Traffic could increase during construction, but would be temporary (see response to question 3.16 (a) above. During operation, traffic would be similar as the current conditions and transportation facilities would continue to perform as they do currently. No impact would occur. Mitigation Measures: No mitigation would be required. 1 PACCM1 401 \Draft 1SMND\Draft ISMND.docx x01/21/15» 125 x MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION GANAHL HARDWARE STORE AND LUMBER YARD 126 This page intentionally left blank LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. JANUARY 2015 PACCM 1401 \Draft ISMND\Draft ISMND.docx «01/21/15» LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. JANUARY 2015 MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION GANAHL HARDWARE STORE AND LUMBER YARD 3.17 UTILITIES/SERVICE SYSTEMS Less Than Significant Potentially With Less Than Would_ the rgject: Significant Impact Mitigation Incor orated Significant Impact No Impact (a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable El❑ 19 11 Regional Water Quality Control Board? (b) Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment or collection facilities or expansion of existing facilities, ❑ ❑ ® ❑ the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? (c) Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of ❑ ❑ ❑ which could cause significant environmental effects? (d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded ❑ ❑ ® ❑ entitlements needed? (e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity ❑ ❑ ❑ to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? (f) Be served by a landfill with insufficient permitted capacity to ❑ ❑ ® ❑ accommodate theproject's solid waste disposal needs? (g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related ❑ ❑ ❑ z to solid wastes. (h) Would the project include a new or retrofitted storm water treatment control Best Management Practice (e.g. water quality treatment basin, constructed treatment wetlands), the operation of ❑ ❑ ❑ which could result in significant environmental effects (e.g. increased vectors and odors? 3.17.1 Impact Analysis (a) No Impact. Costa Mesa Sanitary District (CMSD) provides sewer services to the City of Costa Mesa and the project site (CMSD 2014a). The CMSD maintains 224.2 miles of gravity sewer mains. CMSD has 20 sewer pumping stations located within the collection system to convey flow from low lying areas to higher elevations (CMSD 2014b). The CMSD conveys wastewater to the Sanitation Districts of Orange County plants for treatment and disposal. Wastewater is treated at treatment plants in Fountain Valley and Huntington Beach. Combined effluent treated at both plants in the years 2004 and 2005 totaled on average 244 million gallons daily (OCSD 2014). The Proposed Project would not include any industrial uses that would be subject to an individual permit with specific treatment requirements from the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB). Sewage would be discharged to the CMSD for treatment at one of the wastewater treatment plants operated by the Sanitation Districts of Orange County. Any increase in wastewater generation as a result of the Proposed Project would not be considered substantial because the Proposed Project is consistent with the General Plan land use designation for the project site and, therefore, would Tint exceed the capacity of the wastewater treatment plants serving the CMSD. Therefore, no impact would occur, and no mitigation is required. PACCM 1401 \Draft ISMND\Draft ISMND.ducx «01/21/15» 127 MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION LSA ASSOCIATES. INC. GANAHL HARDWARE STORE AND LUMBER YARD JANUARY 2015 Mitigation Measure: No mitigation would be required. (b) Less than Significant Impact. Mesa Water District (MWD) provides the City of Costa Mesa (City), including the project site, with water services. MWD's water is a blend of local groundwater from the Lower Santa Ana River Basin managed by the Orange County Water District (OCWD) and water from the Municipal Water District of Orange County imported from northern California and the Colorado River. MWD pumps groundwater from Orange County's groundwater basin using eight wells. The groundwater is replenished by water from the Santa Ana River, and imported water purchased from the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (MWD 2014). The estimated capacity is more than adequate to meet the current water demand for the project site (MWD 2011). The Proposed Project would not create the need for new water or wastewater treatment facilities because the Proposed Project would not substantially increase the amount of water needed or wastewater generated compared to the existing conditions at the adjacent Ganahl Lumber store. Once the Proposed Project is built, the existing Ganahl Lumber Store would close. The Proposed Project would have additional water needs resulting from the operation of a store with larger square footage and other new operational needs, including the cleaning of solar panels. However, the Proposed Project would incorporate various water conservation measures that would reduce water requirements. For example, the Proposed Project would be designed to capture rain water from the roof system and store it in five aboveground cisterns for later use in landscape areas. The cisterns could store approximately 100,000 gallons of rainwater. Any increase in water demand or wastewater generation as a result of the Proposed Project would not be considered substantial because the Proposed Project is consistent with the General Plan land use designation for the project site. General Plans are used to determine future water demands within the service area for Mesa Water (MWD 2011) and are used for issuance of NPDES wastewater discharge permits. Because the Proposed Project is consistent with the General Plan land use designation, the Proposed Project would also be consistent with the water demand anticipated for the project site and would not exceed the capacity of the wastewater treatment plants serving the CMSD. Therefore, a less than significant impact would occur. (c) No Impact. The City is served by the Orange County Flood Control District (OCFCD), which operates and maintains regional and municipal storm drainage facilities. The Proposed Project would not require or result in the construction or expansion of stormwater drainage facilities because the Proposed Project would not substantially increase the amount of stormwater generated compared to the conditions at the existing Ganahl Lumber store. Stormwater runoff either percolates through pervious surfaces on the site or is conveyed to nearby drainage facilities along Bristol Street. The Proposed Project would implement a construction Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP), which includes Best Management Practices (BMPs). The landscaping plan for the Proposed Project would include permeable pavement and bioswales that would treat stormwater on the site and allow groundwater percolation to occur. No impact would occur. 128 Mitigation Measures: No mitigation would be required. PACCM1 401 \Draft ISMND\Draft ISMND.docx «01/21/15)) LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION JANUARY 2015 GANAHL HARDWARE STORE AND LUMBER YARD (d) Less than Significant Impact. As previously stated, Mesa Water District (MWD) provides the City of Costa Mesa, including the project site, with water services. The estimated capacity for MWD is more than adequate to meet the current water demand for the project site (MCWD 2011). The Proposed Project would not substantially increase the demand for water compared to existing conditions at the current Ganahl Lumber Costa Mesa store. As stated in the response to question 3.17 (b) above, the Proposed Project would have a slight increase in operational water needs. However, the Proposed Project would be designed to capture rain water from the roof system and store it in five aboveground cisterns for later use in landscape areas, and the Proposed Project is consistent with the water demand anticipated by the General Plan land use designations for the project site. Therefore, a less than significant impact would occur. Mitigation Measures: No mitigation would be required. (e) No Impact. The Proposed Project would not increase the demand for wastewater treatment because the Proposed Project would not generate additional wastewater over existing conditions at the current Ganahl Lumber store. The Proposed Project would replace the existing Ganahl Lumber store; therefore, the wastewater treatment needs would remain similar. Furthermore, the Proposed Project is consistent with the General Plan land use designation for the project site, and General Plans are used for issuance of NPDES wastewater discharge permits. Please see response to question 3.17 (b) above. No impact would occur. Mitigation Measures: No mitigation would be required. (f) Less than Significant. The City of Costa Mesa is in the CMSD, which is serviced by CR&R for residential curbside refuse and recycling collection. The CMSD is one of the few agencies in Orange County that offer co -mingled trash and recycling services (CMSD 2014c). Any construction waste would be disposed of at the Frank R. Bowerman Landfill which is owned and operated by OC Waste and Recycling (OCWR). This landfill is a Class III landfill permitted to accept all types of nonhazardous municipal solid waste for disposal, including commercial and construction waste up to approximately 11,500 tons of solid waste per day (tpd). The anticipated closure date for the landfill is 2053 (County of Orange Waste & Recycling May 2013). The small increase in waste as a result of the Proposed Project would not be expected to affect the permitted capacity of such landfills. The Proposed Project would replace the existing Ganahl Lumber store; therefore, the operational waste generation for the Proposed Project would remain similar. Therefore, a less than significant impact would occur. Mitigation Measures: No mitigation would be required. (g) No Impact. The California Integrated Waste Management Act (Assembly Bill [AB] 939) changed the focus of solid waste management from landfill to diversion strategies such as source reduction, recycling, and composting. The purpose of the diversion strategies is to reduce dependence on landfills for solid waste disposal. AB 939 established mandatory diversion goals of 25 percent by 1995 and 50 percent by 2000. According to the CMSD, Costa Mesa currently has a diversion rate of 57 percent (CMSD 2014d). The City provides curbside recycling for both residential and commercial uses, which counts toward the City's solid waste diversion rate. The City also collects curbside residential green waste, which also counts toward the City's diversion rate. The Proposed Project would comply with existing and future statutes and regulations, PACCM1401Draft ISMND\Draft 1SMND.docx «01/21/15» 129 MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION CANAHL HARDWARE STORE AND LUMBER YARD LSA ASSOCIATES. INC. JANUARY 2015 including waste diversion programs mandated by City, State, or federal law. In addition, as discussed above, the Proposed Project would not result in an excessive production of solid waste that would exceed the capacity of the existing landfill serving the project site. Therefore, the Proposed Project would not result in an impact related to federal, State, and local statutes and regulations related to solid wastes. Mitigation Measures: No mitigation would be required. (h) Less than Significant Impact. In order to comply with the SWPPP, the Proposed Project would be required to implement Best Management Practices (BMPs). In addition, during construction activities, the Proposed Project would be expected to comply with the requirements of the NPDES permit. The Proposed Project would be designed to capture rain water from the roof system and store it in five aboveground cisterns for later use in landscape areas (based on 12 inches of average rainfall per year). The cisterns would be 18 feet in diameter and 10.75 feet high, and could store approximately 100,000 gallons of rainwater. At -grade rain water would be treated and eventually filtered into the ground, replenishing the water table. Native and drought tolerant plants that thrive in extended periods of drought with seasonal floods would be used. ; However, none of these design features or BMPs would result in significant vectors or odors, and therefore, a less than significant impact would occur. G Mitigation Measures: No mitigation would be required. 130 PACCM 1401 Draft ISMND\Draft ISMND.docx «01/21/15» LSA ASSOCIATES, INC, JANUARY 1015 MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION GANAHL HARDWARE STORE AND LUMBER YARD 3.18 MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE Less Than Significant Potentially with Less Than Would the 1'rtject: Significant Impact Mitigation InEER2rated Significant Impact _ No Impact (a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife e species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self- sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal E) ❑ ® ❑ community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? (b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when ❑ [l Z ❑ viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable futureprojects?) (c) Does the project have environmental effects which would cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or ❑ M ❑ ❑ indirectly? 3.18.1 Impact Analysis (a) Less than Significant. The project site is located in a fully developed urban environment characterized by a variety of residential, commercial, and transportation land uses. Based on the project description and the preceding responses, development of the Proposed Project does not have the potential to degrade the quality of the natural environment. Additionally, due to the developed nature of the site in an urbanized location, there are no rare or endangered plant or animal species on the project site. Existing landscaping may, however, provide suitable habitat for nesting birds. Disturbing or destroying active nests is a violation of the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA). In addition, nests and eggs are protected under Fish and Game Code Section 3503. The project site contains two potentially jurisdictional drainage features: the Santa Ana Delhi Channel and a small drainage ditch in the northern portion of the project site. The Proposed Project is not anticipated to remove, fill, or otherwise interrupt the Santa Ana Delhi Channel; however, the drainage ditch may be impacted by construction of the Proposed Project. Condition of Approval B-1 would ensure that the Proposed Project adheres to the MBTA. Condition of Approval B-2 would require the Applicant to coordinate with the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) and the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) to verify their jurisdiction and, if necessary, obtain permits related to potential impacts to the drainage ditch. Compliance with Conditions of Approval B-1 and B-2 would reduce potential project impacts related to biological resources to a less than significant level. It is not anticipated that the Proposed Project would eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory because the project site has been previously developed, and the likelihood of encountering significant historic or prehistoric artifacts during grading, excavation, and site development activities would be minimal. However, if any archaeological or paleontological resources are discovered during grading and construction activities, in accordance with Conditions of Approval CR -1 and CR -2, work in the area would cease and deposits would be treated in accordance with federal, State, and local guidelines, including those set forth in California Public Resources Code (PRC) Section 21083.2. In addition, if it is determined that an P:\CCM1401\Draft ISMND\Draft ISMND.docx x01/21/15» 131 MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION GANAHL HARDWARE STORE AND LUMBER YARD LEA ASSOCIATES. INC. JANUARY 2016 archaeological site is a historical resource, the provisions of Section 21084.1 of the PRC and California Environmental Quality Act (state CEQA) Guidelines Section 15064.5 would be implemented. Therefore, with the conditions of approval described in this Initial Study, the Proposed Project would not have a significant impact on fish and wildlife species or their habitat or eliminate important examples of major periods of California history or prehistory. Conditions of Approval: Refer to Conditions of Approval B-1, and CR -1 and CR -2 above. Mitigation Measures: No mitigation would be required. (b) Less than Significant. The project site is located in a fully developed urban environment characterized by a variety of residential, commercial, and transportation land uses. In the existing condition, the project site is currently vacant, and does not have any existing structures. The project site has been improved with a concrete wall, asphalt -paved entrance area, and associated landscaping. The majority of the project site is unpaved and covered with gravel_. As discussed further in Section 3. 10, Land Use, with approval of the requested variances and conditional use permit, the Proposed Project would be consistent with the City of Costa Mesa's (City) land use and zoning designations for the project site. As discussed above in response to question 3.16 (a), with the addition of cumulative project traffic, all study area intersections would continue to operate at acceptable LOS (LOS D or better) during the a.m. and p.m. peak hours. Therefore, with the addition of project traffic, the Proposed Project was determined to have a less than significant cumulative effect related to traffic and circulation in the area surrounding the project site, and no mitigation would be required. As discussed above in response to questions 3.7 (a) and (b), the Proposed Project would generate 2,485.46 metric tons per year (MT/yr) of carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2e) emissions under the cumulative project scenario, which would be below the 3,000 tons per year (tpy) threshold recommended by the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) for commercial development projects. Therefore, the Proposed Project would result in a less than significant impact related to greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and would not impede or interfere with achieving the State's emission reduction objectives in Assembly Bill (AB) 32 (and Executive Order [EO] S-03-05). As a result, the Proposed Project would not result in or substantially contribute to cumulatively considerable GHG emissions, and no mitigation would be required. As discussed above in response to question 3.3 (b), the Proposed Project would not exceed any of the established SCAQMD thresholds for pollutant emissions under the cumulative project scenario. Therefore, because the Proposed Project would not exceed the SCAQMD's localized and significance thresholds and would be consistent with the SCAQMD Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP), the Proposed Project would not result in cumulative air quality impacts that would be considered cumulative considerable, and no mitigation would be required. The Proposed Project would not have any impacts related to agricultural and mineral resources and would, therefore, not have any cumulatively significant impacts related to these topics. 132 PACCM1401\Draft ISMND\Draft ISMND.docx «01/21/15» LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. JANUARY 2015 MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION GANAHL HARDWARE STORE AND LUMBER YARD Impacts from the Proposed Project related to aesthetics, biological resources, cultural resources, geology and soils, hazards or hazardous materials, hydrology and water quality, noise, public services, recreation, or utilities/service systems are less than significant or can be reduced to a less than significant level with mitigation. Therefore, the Proposed Project would not cumulatively contribute to significant impacts related to any of these environmental topics. In summary, the Proposed Project would rely on and can be accommodated by the existing road system, public services, and utilities. Therefore, impacts from the Proposed Project would not be cumulatively considerable. Mitigation Measures: No mitigation would be required. (c) Less than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated. The project site is located in a fully developed urban environment characterized by a variety of residential, commercial, and transportation land uses. In the existing condition, the project site is currently vacant, and does not have any existing structures. The project site has been improved with a concrete wall, asphalt - paved entrance area, and associated landscaping. The majority of the project site is unpaved and covered with gravel. As discussed further in Section 3.4, Air Quality, the Proposed Project would not result in an inconsistency with the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP), violate any air quality standards, contribute to an air quality violation or expose sensitive receptors to an exceedance of local emissions thresholds. ,. As described in Section 3.12, Noise, the Proposed Project is not expected to result in excessive noise or vibration levels or result in a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project site that could not be mitigated to a less than significant level. As described in Section 3.6, Geology and Soils, the Proposed Project would not result in any impacts related to geologic hazards that could not be mitigated to a less than significant level. Similarly, as stated in Section 3.8,Hazards and Hazardous Materials, implementation of the Proposed Project would not result in any impacts related to hazards or hazardous materials that could not be mitigated to a less than significant level. Therefore impacts related to the Proposed Project would be less than significant. Mitigation Measures: Refer to Mitigation Measures GEO-1, HAG -1, HAG -2, HAZ-3, and NOSE -1. PACCM1401\Draft ISMND\Draft ISMND.docx «01/21/15» 133 MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION GANAHL HARDWARE STORE AND LUMBER YARD 134 This page intentionally left blank LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. JANUARY 2015 P:\CCM1401\Draft ISMND\Daft ISMND.docx ((01/21/15)) LSA ASSOCIATES. INC. JANUARY 2015 MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION GANAHL HARDWARE STORE AND LUMBER YARD 4.0 MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM 4.1 MITIGATION MONITORING REQUIREMENTS Public Resources Code (PRC) Section 21081.6 (enacted by the passage of Assembly Bill (AB) 3180) mandates that the following requirements shall apply to all reporting or mitigation monitoring programs: The public agency shall adopt a reporting or monitoring program for the changes made to the project or conditions of project approval in order to mitigate or avoid significant effects on the environment. The reporting or monitoring program shall be designed to ensure compliance during project implementation. For those changes which have been required or incorporated into the project at the request of a Responsible Agency or a public agency having jurisdiction by law over natural resources affected by the project, that agency shall, if so requested by the Lead Agency or a Responsible Agency, prepare and submit a proposed reporting or monitoring program. The Lead Agency shall specify the location and custodian of the documents or other material which constitute the record of proceedings upon which its decision is based. A public agency shall provide the measures to mitigate or avoid significant effects on the environment that are fully enforceable through permit conditions, agreements, or other measures. Conditions of project approval may be set forth in referenced documents which address required mitigation measures or in the case of the adoption of a plan, policy, regulation, or other project, by incorporating the mitigation measures into the plan, policy, regulation, or project design. Prior to the close of the public review period for a draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) or Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND), a Responsible Agency, or a public agency having jurisdiction over natural resources affected by the project, shall either submit to the Lead Agency complete and detailed performance objectives for mitigation measures which would address the significant effects on the environment identified by the Responsible Agency or agency having jurisdiction over natural resources affected by the project, or refer the Lead Agency to appropriate, readily available guidelines or reference documents. Any mitigation measures submitted to a Lead Agency by a Responsible Agency or an agency having jurisdiction over natural resources affected by the project shall be limited to measures which mitigate impacts to resources which are subject to the statutory authority of, and definitions applicable to, that agency. Compliance or noncompliance by a Responsible Agency or agency having jurisdiction over natural resources affected by a project with that requirement shall not limit that authority of the Responsible Agency or agency having jurisdiction over natural resources affected by a project, or the authority of the Lead Agency, to approve, condition, or deny projects as provided by this division or any other provision of law. PACCM1 40 1 Draft ISMND\Draft ISMND.docx «01/21/15» 135 MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION GANAHL HARDWARE STORE AND LUMBER YARD 4.2 MITIGATION MONITORING PROCEDURES LSA ASSOCIATES. INC. JANUARY 2015 The mitigation monitoring and reporting program has been prepared in compliance with PRC Section 21081.6. It describes the requirements and procedures to be followed by the City of Costa Mesa to ensure that all standard conditions, conditions of approval, and mitigation measures adopted as part of the Proposed Project would be carried out as described in this Initial Study (IS)/Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND). Table 4.A lists each of the standard conditions, conditions of approval, and mitigation measures specified in this IS/MND and identifies the party or parties responsible for implementation and monitoring of each condition or measure. 136 PACCM 1401 \Draft ISMND\Draft ISMND.docx a01/21/15» �a x 19 as p� o a C .U' 4, +� U A a a>i ACOo O 0 Ub 0 'd O o 0 U `--qdyy cd cid .'oo o o cd U as a) q b a L, cd cd b Y �wQ33 p � N 4a O 4. O v w 3 's 80 b, - bo 0 M °0Cd E'c ° ° a ou o aC, �o w b ca cd cd b N O d .0 N O mb +° )> co r.� ate: to �' •b �' 4, .r. -0bA N ' bQ �' bwA U " y cd0 ya) q O o 0 0 .' aq o a� 42 y R; — 0 00 3 q � 4�) + w, fl c� o *�y o '' a� q •� w a� cr cdca ami a� b o o aiw°` v a� U- >,- cd cd 0 o bb caoron�vA � a O` 0 o 0 N o �, 0 y U Q) U ou bo cs a) to (u q U Q q b o b a) o° 0 = to s..i v v, U b a� epa LOT - ,Cd . cd P > w a) °� >, •^ bA •, �� aUi , w +. -00 3 0 °o 'o 'o b �- b0 00 1 A q .t7 .� — w o '0 'o ° cd °? v y v `per b b 4 bq w > 0 0 N •� U� 0 co is v �'2 g N gop oNN a P. ca •Ncd b0 0 v, U w z bo icd 7 0 0 cd O bbN yqq cd 0 W O G N wO� •b U Cd Lo .2 OUas - cEn 51 a d Q q6 N'a O O cd U aGq cc Cd ppP4 O J] ;. � .@) d V)oN a) 64 N N ..+ {y+ v� co 'y a) cd a > > > bj).b U°°dN G) Q OGL A6 ' 0 ro o. 'l El PO. qQ� ^ 4•0 O o. aa % COo � U �— gipw CdUm >, 4o4 bU b cnUnU iQd [d 7 [�N 0 .> cd N b bNU cd a O O „� N e,)4" 00 O In w> cv N twV bv«U7� cv'Q,�� ~ wN to A ed 0 0 In o is w 04 aq bo o V.o. , ° wU. U o 0.� o O UO —N N— U 0 5 En WQ wcyq.d. � U O Cw N co �0 U 'o -y 11 co O�q°) 10 Wpwi ° Lo ocd qo . 5 O p d 0-0 M N Lf) 'S ° o � 00Ca"L LTr 779 O U O QaU p A , 'n ";% y w V N )U C" cd .b:3 iO•d t , °) i q b Ld 0 Qy w c«: w o o� b "�U o O 0 o cd o o on a• � ° bo cao � vptl� U o0 b +:°� >, o A �'a'bO y , °p U cC v aUoHos ya>� U V) Cda.•w co Od °v' U��~�a b 3w Ga.a•o�ate°° �v�� U b�. -�Cd9o. —rJ) p d' v d' a W 4 .. (Ztnz rll O !4 O z el O z'ipa tir '~ N pq a y 0 a X4-1 0 y 0 y to o' N 0 � q o 0 yL,' ° u 0 o adi U U A 0 0 co ° cd . a, Fy o to o 'd F' a C0 cd cd u cd OV a� .0 o _UD 7..�C's o cd N d) ' G '++ Q, bo U(u Cd -:� N 4: O+ cd •o O o Y o .'". 6�'. U .� h bq :b bp >> cd cd >, •0 U o ^C7 O !+; U U pd L1, C], Q N o O D U td O C U h N U y - 'a+ ^ 9 • bo O cd fd > N Gr ° -fl y O cd N y U U .� N O a. o b -0 ° ' I P, cd cud U c� '+� .c CO .55 P4 o o a w '' 04 °' a M c° 0 U P4 2° b 3 i a� ;; 0 u sr 3 0 U o fl O 0 0 b 3 a b4 N b rs ' b4 `s °�' oa rn- � o N cd �•' 0 bq k, b U cd y O y • A ..i cd cd O O x, Nto cd N U". p o N id N M vi ,A O >, 'o O 4, N ��r cn +r N O cd U ' cd o .9 U .�-+4 J." V .may • � cUd '+Ui cOd+'�"J w a UEn ., a o 'moi, o ° K o Cd UaOi0 o Cd u b �0�° �°°�-0o� uoob o 0 v U Uc .2 0 o0 Cd cd w 3}pp 0 �0 a 0 >104H' C ob > c'm L14 ob oU N q U O ii y w Cd N bo -+ cd U N :; q N c>d N°' o CIS .cd3 0 w 0 bao � aUi � � � � a � � M � 0) . (QU � 0 - p, '0 w 0 � aco 0 Cd r4 v a n `d U V�° a i b e D d bp ° o U .� vqi .?; y cd - b >, b L7 U b ,� cy U R o cd M rn o 0 ° fr �Ny L� j7 11 ca0 (r, U y o N U U 0 Enui U y° LL 64 w �+1) 0 . Cd Cd M 00• ca 4>'' U U Tr N •" � VI 1r •� U U V � 0 U tyd � N V � U U j ' Q p, ° q o~ u 0 oy A >$ O o a� C 'ti E _ U� c>d f1, vi bq N +� '2 3 $ a� vcd a v o,�'� o •� a � �; rn ami o .� o P. •a, °° " y id ° ,� a is ° 'bo U °''ono 'b4 *i� bo 'b0 U Q U O y o to�N� .bo w.' U O c4a' � o t-� O 0 4. o U 3 A •~ 6 °' ° 0 °D � 05 ren -0 0 `�' m `�'" ,>, V •.0 �d cd :l r,t~2 N co .� cUd `d .b U rUy ;o fpy � � b Nw, Uv " (U° 0 0 cc � yce�+ (�j (C �N N �U -q d a) $ ►, � rnd cd . ya� U p cd � Gc,0 °Oo i� [ oy y ai qO ooi0 cc0wo^ U 5 q °o ' CIO s�N°. w� P. .� y w w kAa rs U Vl N 00 m z oa as aw O2 W 'a Q ^� wo �z F aw 0.4 w0 zF a� wa Fa v3 [- a za X 5 a� aA a� y a0 a LI -4 o s. a.ogn 'n 4)4, O °' O � & U U A (,.., p 0 A � cd O ' ,�, 0 F. A O U O > Q a U U A o w p q U pAp q cd A .2 O cd y vi U wO .a U y 0 q O a N + N O r" ,y .O N q O� ~ qO E" O a U 4n U U v o`"n Cd o ° o v y N q u cd O p, y ou0 O O 4= a O y O .� U U 'O� � aUwp 0 J or. id w e O+WNO t0 to O y U 4) .+ y y 0 O b q U0h, tOcdy cd 0O aay� a� Cd U cdU O Uw N ga C� O t� '� V cd n bypOy cpy bU yd Nd+ y 0 O Cd Al V Q' EEn dq¢,O 5 U U g U ~oA O 'A0 U. 7> � ba G. 0245 U N o . a cd -0 �' o eo ., ca „o�u 4-4 o °' �� �� o b s ba�0 40^� o o 3 o q w^ °° o b S �' U 4 W w U v o p w p 9 j o Q, El a oo a Pi q 40 N N O .o cd -)i 4 rU3ya� O ° a o c� v oy . qbo `~qQ00 o w o aa°i� w ca o o b o ° O .a y ¢' ao,n °U °o a sa,S $ .NtU oN O O N CM A Op0 40 w c�•: z c� W C3 on O 007ti O °--'N O > W�� YvqU �:tl o O t 0c1 a) t_ cd C,4 o :% ons .e ° o 'or. '� m 0� q � '0r. 0a r.0-0 �0°'e° n p. 0 pa^q $1� C. O •d � +•„ wW 4Q0 = v.y" cc 0 0.4 w q 0 10, ci -0 �'�" p y��+ '�"yO"' U >O; v aiv to a vO O :sLc�qO ' o cd . 15 Cd C a H o'.°�yP. °o O>, o ,W nm o —Cd rA cd '06 oq aa U �Up> ❑U 0 cd U w 44O Q o ►ZqIqQy 'w U '� U U a\ M E q a a� o Cd • u vA o �3 O � o Y u vA o �3 o 10 0 i4 a- ° ✓, co 75 eo 3 O > 4 ca a� E" ® m2' o: a m P- Cd 3 ti" b o (uCIS �? a; _ ro b [d fn �� vJ � /�'o� ° u❑❑ O^ t, ,0 w U o � d) o wcoo 0 CA cd CL O 4-a ,� ° O �y+,: +� .Ui V 0 ,N O Icor r U U U U ° n° GJ W a� �j ¢� w U N N 00 A o bUco 0 0¢ cd O. 0 1-4 >' O o 0 0 bay b b ���,U°°3 ,�•.,� b b U N N co cd �; °' °° ° U ° to Cd R7 N Cd .� or. �8�q did o00 �. A C7 spy Q +bo b i-, 5�i 1 '. d "a A +U.+ o H U V N i�w Mei o.� o `° �� UP-, r °°33 Cl. ° m3 Z b o b z_ as o° o U o U a.—Cda a a C7 o a m n cca 0 3� C. ". a a 3 on n ed ca o U o CO ° mo w p -0 ° 0 w w� Q. Q o ..r O W ani b - N a ° —.2 wo a' W > _ v z G U N �R+! o •, oo� w w ,� o �•� o G4 Ce ed to o. o �a 4 ��� 4.':° 4 cd �o °°A Doti aw co" oma b o°°o� o �. o °S � a � �a � W "o 9 0'�3 >� o. o �+ N cid cd cd v u d 0 b m N U 0 00 o o $ � °x r o e ll� z 0� NQ zb �� ��� m o wA� O � o �� o o' � oo U� ° cd �O °o � � b cd b o 1 F4 .d o z 3 °�' U b U P. f�i A o 0 n. co ,. -o p °-d.y o U cd ✓� cd a b y, � � � W � � ri N a � ire.► cYd r- c, :rl tiQ viz&izfli O ° ac y 3 ri- vz o Ili ° z 0 i. a� E GL p w o ° U � A a, � y > � A ° a� - o ° w a; cr ti Cd 0 3 3 E -H q 61, '� C Cr 0 3 9 z 0 •;� � °: � b b o ° ro a� .xl 0 LOD 72 CQ > O0 ° O O 00 rn N 'b U 0U aS .2 � 42 z b b cd �y O vi w O 0 O O U U 3 ,~7sE oCd C' °�' w 2 2 °�' o"mon -n cd Cd .0 U 3 tea+ W o o -q) a-) v o 0 0 0 o o " >, o � M m a L� a o o o ro -o o U. °: P. �' o n y 4] G75 5 7i GJ -4 Y_' .4 N +C5 :-y O E E3 C r~ H V. co al 0 ttU7 �+ U >� c� F NTo :fr"Il -0 b41 L1A URq rr G �Cd q° `�� - tp V b b b b b 61 U U O O zabb in N m 0 N ° N N ca 0 MISr+i cd cd o 0 0 0 0 m cnej 4, al w 03 caw tal .04 w >~ o w w w w w o o.w o: o. y N O q O lu C1 Q O q OO 2 n o 2 ++ C.' 14 2 2 1w, o w o 0 o O 4-4 0 4 :+; o o o o o 0 0 .. o U N Ln co^UUi c3yy..� ^ NCd rpi C/0 tO. U • O u Ln O v OQ D J1 0 ,� ll Po y, Ci. �' L� V. w C7 7 b t8 l•. b b t� b p. rUn O y O v O ... v O 7; 0 f7 �' rj '�7r .L^ '� r.7 ci 'd 'b��y" c� 'b p �' q+ u ..r lr O - �. ''� C4 O •1.+ Q W V] •�+ F+� Fes" +� L�CA �" N CA a C Ry %3 .�O,r ++ ++ w lf7 co �. ++ VJ @ Pr Cl r 1 A4 cri z rr, z r,, z tfii z r*i z f* z E s. aI o p :.d N N � b'G 0 0 44 cd ° •U r. .AWA O U co q N N N O o o 4 na 4. N •Cd a 0. w m o [� ob O .b 7 tp7 O �' bo Q b cd bo v� G •.. m p °' .� o p q q q' 'd N s. ° • q 10, N H � U cd .� o •� o o -. o o � .—. ° aA ci—csN co •b U N O � �' N ca o �O Cd i..i ° ° m M 0 N NN U Li O O. J: {C� u ,a~+ ° N ¢' •� b m • O Cd y > N .��. aNi ' d ° -�y •° ~ � 0 c� U rA 04 U 6' v, O0 >❑, �n y °'0 -ami o�n ° ° a ° bo H o .r o byy En EN+.b cd i0.d N + 3 "N� Qp 4+ —bN N+c",N o q ° -S ° ° U obU m q U ooqs U o > ° (L) • °(UoU • U c O Arl N NO (D0 di 4y bo . Aa Uobo 0" o U q aN eo y .h$ "a; o w o ❑A bbD N 4°4 0 [d O o"ow N cd N m O A r°j OU N > —0 y .o0 .o y° b °: aNi o s~ N A rn +" �� o `� ani 0 N b a`"i •o y ccs O O -� ' o Nidw 4� d N— y(aV" 0 U >m U O N cc --� °� .40 +o N(L) 0� V 0 4y mo i cd°'a�Y o� aA o�" -0 oN� O �°�ai U bo U w Cw �p r p m NX 0 O w" N o , 0 rA b y v -0 U° U0 14 0. xN V v Q a; ° vOp "N +�N3 OU .n O>> U ..� N O N b U m yw p;C in s" bcG°d N oKN pC�id+ m`' el m > o- N 0ipoN. . to 4. dbA m0 cd ax .pr w _i+e�•s w 0U ° �A a -o a.:. a� 'o U• o s: o � v0 � w.� b N p 3 0 Cd m v 4) A (Jvj C4 i�.i O 'y C7 CL N U Cd N N bD U p �, bo�" Q O cd N0 N q A a N Ub NA co '.0 .p � W4Nda ~G°N . > o° 5 "= ab Cd ob � aN N N ►L�r 4; oZ ° b4Q CO A O b o" C"Uacd ooCO U N of O t P2•. ; N z oa er as aw U � w7 W A >z aw 0 P w0 z� Qw Wa Fa UQ Fa 19 aco : O wj iYEi C;3 4) o .. ° ° - bi) 14 U0 cd a) cc.. O U to p y 0 N Oy a,Up �3 U o •.. Av°)w bo�0 cd rA ' n" e o 'd o o o vqa Cu ca cd UFS q 0 0 0 99 . y b0 N bq •„ ;�n•I O � O }O O O p� O '' cr N q 0y t. to Io 0 4) cab4 0 O Q p> O y a) El 0. O U H w c0 'b in aN N ^' c" p p, U pE6 4) o bq N O bD 'd H 0 �' ..U. a) U 4cCi ' a) -0 •b 0' U U W Q • 'd 0 1--1 N j E•� bo U 'b a) • 7 a) cd .0 �•, Q" ld �" o bq O bQ 4 cocn �Q f". . bq 0. OU +-+ p bq o4 'd . ra ��' s7 ° a+ b 'b a) 'C '.� 00 U O b o 0 0 U w '� 4' U a) N W d U ^� O "00 0 U tO+ ��. 4r N N t� .0+ • b U y 'Ci bA • �.J' !�'i ~ •L% b N 'O •--� c�d W O a� p v'+o .ya.OUP. m p id cd w m m 0 a o �' 0 U � U.rY ' o .. w m c�oa ca aqui a' o o o ,, �• '� 'L7 > a' F o w �a 0 o a' ° U °, q w o ca U c o o 10 o w lu ca 04.0 r4 ?? a w o Q m o .cl bo «3 a) U r, r cd ., = �' p 0 o o m 0 t: 2-S b CU a s p Ib aAi 0 m 4: o w cd � 0 b S a p cd 0 b o a. °? fe o •d U o b P4 -S b p o w aa)i P. -0 o •° a U U m c.. •v v� bD w N b �� as o. . 0 ., •b '0 `�'°� U 0 U V � w � 0 yap) > O bA cd O q O p . O 0 0 0 V U� p c O O . p > 40 0 ,a�d,_s��'•'o' a) cd f3 o U � " w mo U c �9 a�0.i�0bwer m co'Ao mo to - 0 0 0 cGd. 4.4 bo bN y O 0 ca wby q p. p mq0o cbo 'O NU Gbmn� p, 0 ed0w. o ucd Q to a)o od •U aJ 'd o "0 ¢ b0 d pQi 'N+. a kQaO•+ 'a U w + 0E p o p cd 'd �0Nw aak�i) .,i�d, d :Go ) ° q 0 bb Q.•����q-1" cd r p >, mm. UU C G" op to UA UmU +U s 0O 3p Obo G 2 .v� o ou -z; U° �o r,)cm0 0 o 44 o a U -o rb 0 � WOoU 0cd wo1 U9a o> v g a U �. • N lM d d as x a S � =: a � N a� q U •o chi, ° co o O w ou o .b U W � •c o ) a) bA o• at b y - "Cl 71 p � o b ) 3 ° Om 0 o 0 bio Cd En o Z �; 3 0 ,. O o 3U.. �' U �o~� ,� V) 0 01) o a o 0 N co Pq U C4 U N U U G O v cn49 Cd U O cd `n U V1 Lb �i 3 O Q) O Y O Y O Y O> cd O Y O Y O Y O Y i/ N O N > O G1 04 >O O � N Y N Y fl) Y Q' O� ^ �"� O N Y C) Y N Y N Y Ln °� .� .� cd ca �d C', 3 � In b ani ami a .o cid mCd4.4 .00 q � `�° a a 3 o 9 Ei W 3 ° Y °' ° 0� cd En UO bUq u, r cd cd cd y p o cd cd cd cd U cd a� -a 0 0 2 co o a cn C V E Y m Cys cd U Cd Am o U a o' O U U w.. • N o 6)+ U U H ' .si N + Fri fU. SUi .w iUi 0� 6� IU -i iUi WD pF," �" w O N O 0 ° O b b b idbl, C', aU a b N N v N?* O O O h b Ci O o O s� Cd O LO) � � -> 4° 2 ns O O 3 J' 3 U yc 3 •j y� Y^�y y� = fYi cV W pg 3 � 3 3 3 a v, •Z .-. ,.eo O S:I. a4 U P P P CZ3 PL4 �a 6 0 0 •a © a`'s � � • • `� a � o � a � � '� o ci � .r a .): r..+ � r -i. Q r• .� . .•M .�: .UG' "'� N rw ,� e► Ht+iHenHr6lz coiH Ht•iH ."fir r �in]H It It LSA ASSOCIATES, INC, JANUARY 2015 AEI Consultants MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION GANAHL HARDWARE STORE AND LUMBER YARD 5.0 REFERENCES 2014 Phase I Environmental Site Assessment. April 24. Airport Land Use Commission 2008 Airport Environs Land Use Plan for John Wayne Airport. Available at http://www.ocair.com/commissions/aluc/does/HeliportAELUP-June-19-2008.pdf. California Department of Transportation 2014 California Scenic Highway Mapping System. Available at http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/LandArcIVscenic—highways/ (accessed on May 20, 2014). California Department of Conservation 2014 Office of Mine Reclamation. Mines On Line (MOL). Available at: http://maps.conservation.ca.gov/mol/mol-app.html. (accessed on November 24, 2014). 2010 Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program. Available at: ftp://ftp.consrv.ca.gov/pub/dlrp/FMMP/pdf/2010/oral0.pdf (accessed on May 20, 2014). 2008 District 1 Wild Cat Maps Available at: ftp://ftp.consrv.ca.gov/pub/oil/maps/distI/Distl fields.pdf (accessed on November 24, 2014). 2004 Agricultural Preserves 2004, Williamson Act Parcels, Orange County, California. Available at: ftp://ftp.consrv.ca.gov/pub/dhp/wa/Orange_WA_03_04.pdf (accessed on May 20, 2014). City of Costa Mesa 2000 The City of Costa Mesa General Plan. 2004 City of Costa Mesa General Plan Land Use Map. July 2004. 2007 Zoning Map. 2013 City of Costa Mesa Emergency Operations Plan. 2014a City of Costa Mesa Police: Hours and Location. Available at: http://www.costamesaca.gov/index.aspx?page=1079 (accessed on June 2, 2014). PACCM14010raft ISMND\Draft ISMND.docx x01/21/15» 145 MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION LSA ASSOCIATES. INC. GANAHL HARDWARE STORE AND LUMBER YARD JANUARY 2015 2014b Costa Mesa Fire Department. Available at: http://www.costamesaca.gov/index.aspx?page=81 (accessed on June 2, 2014). 2014c City of Costa Mesa. About Costa Mesa. Available At: http://www.costamesaca.gov/index.aspx?page=2 (accessed on December 3, 2014). Costa Mesa Sanitary District 2014a Costa Mesa Sanitary District Service Area Boundaries Map. Available at: http://www.crosdca.gov/images/sewer/BoundaryMapFINAL051214.pdf (accessed on June 10, 2014). 2014b Sewer System. Available at: http://www.crosdca.gov/index.php?option7--com content&view=article&id=117&Ite mid=451 (accessed on June 10, 2014). 2014c Solid Waste. Available at: http://www.crosdca.gov/index.php?option7--com content&view=article&id=118&Ite mid=452 (accessed on June 10, 2014). 2014d Home Page. Available at: http://crosdca.gov/ (accessed on December 1, 2014). County of Orange 1996 Central and Coastal Subregion Natural Community Conservation Plan/ Habitat Conservation Plan. 2013 Frank R. Bowerman Landfill. Available at: http://oclandfills.com/civicax/filebank/blobdload.aspx?blobid=29056 (May 2013). Environmental Protection Agency 2009 Newport Bay I UC12 Watersheds. ECORP Consulting, Inc. 2014a Biological Technical Report Ganahl Lumber Costa Mesa Relocation Project (December 2014). 2014b Cultural Resources Survey for the Ganahl Lumber Relocation Project Costa Mesa, Orange County, California (July). 2014c Ganahl Lumber Costa Mesa Property, Paleontology Assessment (July). G.A. Nicoll and Associates, Inc. 2014 Geotechnical Investigation Report (June 13). 146 PACCM1401\Draft ISMND\Draft ISMND.docx «01/21/15» LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. JANUARY 1015 MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION GANAHL HARDWARE STORE AND LUMBER YARD Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. 2011 Climate Change 2007: Working Group I: The Physical Science Basis. Available at: http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/wgl/en/contents.html (accessed on July 26, 2014). Joseph C. Truxaw and Associates, Inc. 2014a Preliminary Drainage Study Ganahl Lumber Company 1100 Bristol Street Costa Mesa, California. September 9. 2014b Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) Project Name: Ganahl Lumber, Costa Mesa. September 11. Kunzman Associates, Inc. 2014a Ganahl Lumber Costa Mesa Relocation Project Air Quality and Global Climate Change Impact Analysis. December 5. 2014b Ganahl Lumber Costa Mesa Relocation Project Noise Impact Analysis. June 25, as revised December 5. Linscott Law & Greenspan Engineers 2014 Focused Traffic Impact Study Ganahl Lumber Costa Mesa Relocation Project. November 18. LSA Associates, Inc. 2014 Sacred Lands File Search for the Ganahl Lumber Project, City of Costa Mesa, Orange County, California. December. Mesa Consolidated Water District 2011 2010 Urban Water Management Plan. Available at: http://www.mesawater.org/pdf/Mesa°/G20Consolidated%20WD%202010°/`20UWMP, pdf. June 10, 2014. Mesa Water District 2014 History and Purpose. Available at: http://www.mesawater.org/about_mesa_water.php June 10. OC Sanitation District 2014 General Information: Facilities. Available at: http://www.ocsd.com/about- ocsd/general-information/facilities. November 30. Santa Ana Unified School District 2009 High School Attendance Areas. Accessed at: file:///C:/Users/egraf/Downloads/fhgh_attendance boundaries.pdf. June 3, 2014. PACCM1401\Draft 1SMND\Draft ISMND.docx «01/21/15» 147 MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION CANAHL HARDWARE STORE AND LUMBER YARD LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. JANUARY 2015 State of California Air Resources Board 2010 Economic Sectors Portal. Available at: www.arb.ca.gov/cc/ghgsectors/ ghgsectors.htm. January 5. 2014 The California Almanac of Emissions and Air Quality. Available at: http://www.arb.ca.gov/agd/almanac/almanac.htm. December 1. State of California Governor's Office of Planning and Research 2008 CEQA and Climate Change: Addressing Climate Change Through California Environmental Quality Act Review. June 19. United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) 2007 Buildings and Climate Change: Status, Challenges and Opportunities, Paris, France. United States Geological Survey (USGS) 2013a 2008 National Seismic Hazard Maps -Fault Parameters; http://geohazards.usgs.gov/ efusion/hazardfaults search/hf search main.efin. 148 PACCM1401\Draft ISMND\Draft ISMND.docx «01/21/15) LSA ASSOCIATES. INC. JANUARY 7010 6.0 PREPARERS Ganahl Lumber Company Project Management/Construction Management Patrick Ganahl, Project Manager Brad Satterfield, General Manager Onyx Architecture Project Management/Construction Management Dale Brown, AIA, Principal Robert Carpenter, Project Architect Doug Joyce, AIA, ARA, Associate Principal Jacob Deveau, Architect LSA Associates, Inc. Project Management/Environmental Documentation Ashley Davis, Principal In -Charge Ryan Bensley, Project Manager Hilary Haskell, Assistant Planner MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION CANAHL HARDWARE STORE AND LUMBER YARD PACCM1401\Draft ISM Graft ISMND.docx «O1/21115o 149 LITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION GANAHL HARDWARE STORE AND LUMBER YARD This page intentionally left blank LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. JANUARY 7015 P:\CCM1401\Draft ISMND\Draft ISMND.docx «01/21/15» Cl T Y COUNCIL A GENDA REPORT MEETING DATE: MARCH 17, 2015 ITEM NUMBER: IVB -1 SUBJECT: PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT FOR THE UPDATE OF THE OPEN SPACE MASTER PLAN OF PARKS AND RECREATION DATE: MARCH 5, 2015 FROM: PUBLIC SERVICES DEPARTMENT PRESENTATION BY: ERNESTO MUNOZ, PUBLIC SERVICES DIRECTOR FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: FARIBA FAZELI, CITY ENGINEER, (714) 754-5378 RECOMMENDATION: 1. Award a contract to RJM Design Group, 31591 Camino Capistrano, San Juan Capistrano, CA 92675 in the amount of $161,270.00 for professional services for the update of the Open Space Master Plan of Parks and Recreation. 2. Authorize the Mayor and the City Clerk to execute the Professional Services Agreement (Attachment 1). 3. Provide Direction to Staff as to the Status of the Fairview Park Citizens Advisory Committee. BACKGROUND: The City's Open Space Master Plan of Parks and Recreation was adopted by the City Council in 1996 and an update was approved on January 21, 2003. The Master Plan is a guide for the orderly development and management of the City's recreation facilities and programs. ANALYSIS: In coordination with staff from various departments in the City, a scope of work for the update of the City's Open Space Master Plan of Parks and Recreation was developed, and a Request for Proposals (RFP) was issued to qualified consultants. The scope of work under this contract requires that the selected consultant complete the following: ■ Conduct various public community meetings, focus groups and stakeholder interviews to receive public input on recreational needs. ■ Attend various commission and council meetings. ■ Perform a city-wide community needs assessment. ■ Compile an inventory of existing services and facilities. ■ Rank and prioritize demand and opportunities. ■ Analyze existing programs and services. ■ Incorporate the Fairview Park Master Plan, TeWinkle Park Master Plan and Brentwood Master Plan into the updated Open Space Master Plan. ■ Develop and finalize an updated Master Plan document. In response to the City's RFP, four proposals were received on November 6, 2014. A panel of City staff has carefully reviewed the proposals and found that RJM Design Group is well qualified 1 to perform the required professional services. Proposals were reviewed for compliance with the City's Request for Proposals; project understanding and scope of work; related experience; experience of project team; and associated issues. During the evaluation process, RJM Design Group presented their firm as having a thorough understanding of the project; and demonstrated substantial experience and technical ability to perform the outlined scope of work. RJM Design Group also prepared the Master Plan update in 2003. They have indicated that a total of twelve months is required to complete the work. In view of the possible award of a contract for the update of the Open Space Master Plan of Parks and Recreation which includes tasks related to community surveys and public workshops to determine current demand for recreation facilities and programs, it is recommended to consider if the work of the Fairview Park Citizens Advisory Committee is premature to proceed without having the results of the community survey. In addition, since the only items left to be considered by the Committee are the possible addition of athletic facilities in the southeast quadrant of Fairview Park, the Committee's overall task is essentially completed and the remaining items, which are also being considered in the scope of work of the Master Plan update, may be a duplication of effort. ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED: An alternative to this Council action would be to not award a professional services contract for the stated project and provide further direction to staff. FISCAL REVIEW: Funding for the Open Space Master Plan Update is included in the 2014-2015 Capital Improvement Fund budget. The City Attorney has reviewed and approved the Professional Services Agreement as to content and form. CONCLUSION: It is recommended that the City Council award the design services contract to RJM Design Group in the amount of $161,270.00 for professional services for the update of the Open Space Master Plan of Parks and Recreation; and provide direction to staff as to the status of the Fairview Park Citizens Advisory Committee. ERNESTO MUNOZ FARIBA FAZELI Public Services Director City Engineer ATTACHMENT: 1- Professional Service Agreement DISTRIBUTION: Development Services Director City Attorney Parks Project Manager Contract Administrator City Clerk File ATTACHMENT 1 CITY OF COSTA MESA PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH RJM DESIGN GROUP THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into this 1st day of March, 2015 ("Effective Date"), by and between the CITY OF COSTA MESA, a municipal corporation ("City"), and RJM DESIGN GROUP, INC., a California corporation ("Consultant"). WITNESSETH: A. WHEREAS, City proposes to utilize the services of Consultant as an independent contractor to provide master planning services, as more fully described herein; and B. WHEREAS, Consultant represents that it has that degree of specialized expertise contemplated within California Government Code Section 37103, and holds all necessary licenses to practice and perform the services herein contemplated; and C. WHEREAS, City and Consultant desire to contract for the specific services described in Exhibit "A" (the "Project") and desire to set forth their rights, duties and liabilities in connection with the services to be performed; and D. WHEREAS, no official or employee of City has a financial interest, within the provisions of Sections 1090-1092 of the California Government Code, in the subject matter of this Agreement. NOW, THEREFORE, for and in consideration of the mutual covenants and conditions contained herein, the parties hereby agree as follows: 1.0. SERVICES PROVIDED BY CONSULTANT 1.1. Scope of Services. Consultant shall provide the professional services described in the City's Request for Proposal ("RFP"), attached hereto as Exhibit "A," and Consultant's Response to City's RFP (the "Response") attached hereto as Exhibit "B," both incorporated herein by this reference. 1.2. Professional Practices. All professional services to be provided by Consultant pursuant to this Agreement shall be provided by personnel experienced in their respective fields and in a manner consistent with the standards of care, diligence and skill ordinarily exercised by professional consultants in similar fields and circumstances in accordance with sound professional practices. Consultant also warrants that it is familiar with all laws that may affect its performance of this Agreement and shall advise City of any changes in any laws that may affect Consultant's performance of this Agreement. 1.3. Performance to Satisfaction of City. Consultant agrees to perform all the work to the complete satisfaction of the City and within the hereinafter specified. Evaluations of the work will be done by the City's Chief Executive Officer ("City CEO") or his or her designee. If the quality of work is not satisfactory, City in its discretion has the right to: (a) Meet with Consultant to review the quality of the work and resolve the matters of concern; (b) Require Consultant to repeat the work at no additional fee until it is satisfactory; and/or (c) Terminate the Agreement as hereinafter set forth. 1.4. Warranty. Consultant warrants that it shall perform the services required by this Agreement in compliance with all applicable Federal and California employment laws, including, but not limited to, those laws related to minimum hours and wages; occupational health and safety; fair employment and employment practices; workers' compensation insurance and safety in employment; and all other Federal, State and local laws and ordinances applicable to the services required under this Agreement. Consultant shall indemnify and hold harmless City from and against all claims, demands, payments, suits, actions, proceedings, and judgments of every nature and description including attorneys' fees and costs, presented, brought, or recovered against City for, or on account of any liability under any of the above-mentioned laws, which may be incurred by reason of Consultant's performance under this Agreement. 1.5. Non-discrimination. In performing this Agreement, Consultant shall not engage in, nor permit its agents to engage in, discrimination in employment of persons because of their race, religion, color, national origin, ancestry, age, physical handicap, medical condition, marital status, sexual gender or sexual orientation, except as permitted pursuant to Section 12940 of the Government Code. 1.6. Non -Exclusive Agreement. Consultant acknowledges that City may enter into agreements with other consultants for services similar to the services that are subject to this Agreement or may have its own employees perform services similar to those services contemplated by this Agreement. 1.7. Delegation and Assignment. This is a personal service contract, and the duties set forth herein shall not be delegated or assigned to any person or entity without the prior written consent of City. Consultant may engage a subcontractor(s) as permitted by law and may employ other personnel to perform services contemplated by this Agreement at Consultant's sole cost and expense. 1.8. Confidentiality. Employees of Consultant in the course of their duties may have access to financial, accounting, statistical, and personnel data of private individuals and employees of City. Consultant covenants that all data, documents, discussion, or other information developed or received by Consultant or provided for performance of this Agreement are deemed confidential and shall not be disclosed by Consultant without written authorization by City. City shall grant such authorization if disclosure is required by law. All City data shall be returned to City upon the termination of this Agreement. Consultant's covenant under this Section shall survive the termination of this Agreement. 2.0. COMPENSATION AND BILLING 2.1. Compensation. Consultant shall be paid in accordance with the fee schedule set forth in Exhibit "C," attached hereto and made a part of this Agreement (the "Fee Schedule"). Consultant's total compensation shall not exceed One Hundred Sixty-one Thousand, Two Hundred Seventy Dollars ($161,270.00). 2.2. Additional Services. Consultant shall not receive compensation for any services provided outside the scope of services specified in the Consultant's Proposal unless the City or the Project Manager for this Project, prior to Consultant performing the additional services, approves such additional services in writing. It is specifically understood that oral requests and/or approvals of such additional services or additional compensation shall be barred and are unenforceable. 2 RJM Design Group 2.3. Method of Billing. Consultant may submit invoices to the City for approval on a progress basis, but no more often than two times a month. Said invoice shall be based on the total of all Consultant's services which have been completed to City's sole satisfaction. City shall pay Consultant's invoice within forty-five (45) days from the date City receives said invoice. Each invoice shall describe in detail, the services performed, the date of performance, and the associated time for completion. Any additional services approved and performed pursuant to this Agreement shall be designated as "Additional Services" and shall identify the number of the authorized change order, where applicable, on all invoices. 2.4. Records and Audits. Records of Consultant's services relating to this Agreement shall be maintained in accordance with generally recognized accounting principles and shall be made available to City or its Project Manager for inspection and/or audit at mutually convenient times for a period of three (3) years from the Effective Date. 3.0. TIME OF PERFORMANCE 3.1. Commencement and Completion of Work. The professional services to be performed pursuant to this Agreement shall commence within five (5) days from the Effective Date of this Agreement. Said services shall be performed in strict compliance with the Project Schedule approved by City as set forth in Exhibit "D," attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. The Project Schedule may be amended by mutual agreement of the parties. Failure to commence work in a timely manner and/or diligently pursue work to completion may be grounds for termination of this Agreement. 3.2. Excusable Delays. Neither party shall be responsible for delays or lack of performance resulting from acts beyond the reasonable control of the party or parties. Such acts shall include, but not be limited to, acts of God, fire, strikes, material shortages, compliance with laws or regulations, riots, acts of war, or any other conditions beyond the reasonable control of a party. 4.0. TERM AND TERMINATION 4.1. Term. This Agreement shall commence on the Effective Date and continue for a period of 36 months, ending on March 1, 2018, unless previously terminated as provided herein or as otherwise agreed to in writing by the parties. 4.2. Notice of Termination. The City reserves and has the right and privilege of canceling, suspending or abandoning the execution of all or any part of the work contemplated by this Agreement, with or without cause, at any time, by providing written notice to Consultant. The termination of this Agreement shall be deemed effective upon receipt of the notice of termination. In the event of such termination, Consultant shall immediately stop rendering services under this Agreement unless directed otherwise by the City. 4.3. Compensation. In the event of termination, City shall pay Consultant for reasonable costs incurred and professional services satisfactorily performed up to and including the date of City's written notice of termination. Compensation for work in progress shall be prorated based on the percentage of work completed as of the effective date of termination in accordance with the fees set forth herein. In ascertaining the professional services actually rendered hereunder up to the effective date of termination of this Agreement, consideration shall be given to both completed work and work in progress, to complete and incomplete drawings, and to other documents pertaining to the services contemplated herein whether delivered to the City or in the possession of the Consultant. 3 RJM Design Group 4.4. Documents. In the event of termination of this Agreement, all documents prepared by Consultant in its performance of this Agreement including, but not limited to, finished or unfinished design, development and construction documents, data studies, drawings, maps and reports, shall be delivered to the City within ten (10) days of delivery of termination notice to Consultant, at no cost to City. Any use of uncompleted documents without specific written authorization from Consultant shall be at City's sole risk and without liability or legal expense to Consultant. 5.0. INSURANCE 5.1. Minimum Scope and Limits of Insurance. Consultant shall obtain, maintain, and keep in full force and effect during the life of this Agreement all of the following minimum scope of insurance coverages with an insurance company admitted to do business in California, rated "A," Class X, or better in the most recent Best's Key Insurance Rating Guide, and approved by City: (a) Commercial general liability, including premises -operations, products/completed operations, broad form property damage, blanket contractual liability, independent contractors, personal injury or bodily injury with a policy limit of not less than One Million Dollars ($1,000,000.00), combined single limits, per occurrence. If such insurance contains a general aggregate limit, it shall apply separately to this Agreement or shall be twice the required occurrence limit. (b) Business automobile liability for owned vehicles, hired, and non -owned vehicles, with a policy limit of not less than One Million Dollars ($1,00.0,000.00), combined single limits, per occurrence for bodily injury and property damage. (c) Workers' compensation insurance as required by the State of California. Consultant agrees to waive, and to obtain endorsements from its workers' compensation insurer waiving subrogation rights under its workers' compensation insurance policy against the City, its officers, agents, employees, and volunteers arising from work performed by Consultant for the City and to require each of its subcontractors, if any, to do likewise under their workers' compensation insurance policies. (d) Professional errors and omissions ("E&O") liability insurance with policy limits of not less than One Million Dollars ($1,000,000.00), combined single limits, per occurrence and aggregate. Architects' and engineers' coverage shall be endorsed to include contractual liability. If the policy is written as a "claims made" policy, the retro date shall be prior to the start of the contract work. Consultant shall obtain and maintain, said E&O liability insurance during the life of this Agreement and for three years after completion of the work hereunder. 5.2. Endorsements. The commercial general liability insurance policy and business automobile liability policy shall contain or be endorsed to contain the following provisions: (a) Additional insureds: "The City of Costa Mesa and its elected and appointed boards, officers, officials, agents, employees, and volunteers are additional insureds with respect to: liability arising out of activities 4 RJM Design Group _•• _ . - - a..,. —lf -: .— — -- .w-aat_ ..--- - ------ performed by or on behalf of the Consultant pursuant to its contract with the City; products and completed operations of the Consultant; premises owned, occupied or used by the Consultant; automobiles owned, leased, hired, or borrowed by the Consultant." (b) Notice: "Said policy shall not terminate, be suspended, or voided, nor shall it be cancelled, nor the coverage or limits reduced, until thirty (30) days after written notice is given to City. (c) Other insurance: "The Consultant's insurance coverage shall be primary insurance as respects the City of Costa Mesa, its officers, officials, agents, employees, and volunteers. Any other insurance maintained by the City of Costa Mesa shall be excess and not contributing with the insurance provided by this policy." (d) Any failure to comply with the reporting provisions of the policies shall not affect coverage provided to the City of Costa Mesa, its officers, officials, agents, employees, and volunteers. (e) The Consultant's insurance shall apply separately to each insured against whom claim is made or suit is brought, except with respect to the limits of the insurer's liability. 5.3. Deductible or Self Insured Retention. If any of such policies provide for a deductible or self-insured retention to provide such coverage, the amount of such deductible or self-insured retention shall be approved in advance by City. No policy of insurance issued as to which the City is an additional insured shall contain a provision which requires that no insured except the named insured can satisfy any such deductible or self-insured retention. 5.4. Certificates of Insurance. Consultant shall provide to City certificates of insurance showing the insurance coverages and required endorsements described above, in a form and content approved by City, prior to performing any services under this Agreement. The certificates of insurance shall be attached hereto as Exhibit "E" and incorporated herein by this reference. 5.5. Non -limiting. Nothing in this Section shall be construed as limiting in any way, the indemnification provision contained in this Agreement, or the extent to which Consultant may be held responsible for payments of damages to persons or property. 6.0. GENERAL PROVISIONS 6.1. Entire Agreement. This Agreement constitutes the entire agreement between the parties with respect to any matter referenced herein and supersedes any and all other prior writings and oral negotiations. This Agreement may be modified only in writing, and signed by the parties in interest at the time of such modification. The terms of this Agreement shall prevail over any inconsistent provision in any other contract document appurtenant hereto, including exhibits to this Agreement. 6.2. Representatives. The City CEO or his or her designee shall be the representative of City for purposes of this Agreement and may issue all consents, approvals, directives and agreements on behalf of the City, called for by this Agreement, except as otherwise expressly provided in this Agreement. 5 RJM Design Group Consultant shall designate a representative for purposes of this Agreement who shall be authorized to issue all consents, approvals, directives and agreements on behalf of Consultant called for by this Agreement, except as otherwise expressly provided in this Agreement. 6.3. Prosect Managers. City shall designate a Project Manager to work directly with Consultant in the performance of this Agreement. Consultant shall designate a Project Manager who shall represent it and be its agent in all consultations with City during the term of this Agreement. Consultant or its Project Manager shall attend and assist in all coordination meetings called by City. 6.4. Notices. Any notices, documents, correspondence or other communications concerning this Agreement or the work hereunder may be provided by personal delivery, facsimile or mail and shall be addressed as set forth below. Such communication shall be deemed served or delivered: a) at the time of delivery if such communication is sent by personal delivery; b) at the time of transmission if such communication is sent by facsimile; and c) 48 hours after deposit in the U.S. Mail as reflected by the official U.S. postmark if such communication is sent through regular United States mail. IF TO CONSULTANT: RJM Design Group, Inc. 31591 Camino Capistrano San Juan Capistrano, CA 92675 Tel: (949) 493-2600 Fax: (949) 493-2690 Attn: Robert Mueting IF TO CITY: City of Costa Mesa 77 Fair Drive Costa Mesa, CA 92626 Tel: (714) 754-5291 Fax: (714) 754-5330 Attn: Baltazar Mejia 6.5. Drug-free Workplace Policy. Consultant shall provide a drug-free workplace by complying with all provisions set forth in City's Council Policy 100-5, attached hereto as Exhibit "F" and incorporated herein by reference. Consultant's failure to conform to the requirements set forth in Council Policy 100-5 shall constitute a material breach of this Agreement and shall be cause for immediate termination of this Agreement by City. 6.6. Attorneys' Fees. In the event that litigation is brought by any party in connection with this Agreement, the prevailing party shall be entitled to recover from the opposing party all costs and expenses, including reasonable attorneys' fees, incurred by the prevailing party in the exercise of any of its rights or remedies hereunder or the enforcement of any of the terms, conditions, or provisions hereof. 6.7. Governing Law. This Agreement shall be governed by and construed under the laws of the State of California without giving effect to that body of laws pertaining to conflict of laws. In the event of any legal action to enforce or interpret this Agreement, the parties hereto agree that the sole and exclusive venue shall be a court of competent jurisdiction located in Orange County, California. 6.8. Assignment. Consultant shall not voluntarily or by operation of law assign, transfer, sublet or encumber all or any part of Consultant's interest in this Agreement without City's prior written consent. Any attempted assignment, transfer, subletting or encumbrance shall be void and shall constitute a breach of this Agreement and cause for termination of this Agreement. Regardless of City's consent, no subletting or assignment shall release Consultant 6 RJM Design Group of Consultant's obligation to perform all other obligations to be performed by Consultant hereunder for the term of this Agreement. 6.9. Indemnification and Hold Harmless. Consultant agrees to defend, indemnify, hold free and harmless the City, its elected officials, officers, agents and employees, at Consultant's sole expense, from and against any and all claims, actions, suits or other legal proceedings brought against the City, its elected officials, officers, agents and employees arising out of the performance of the Consultant, its employees, and/or authorized subcontractors, of the work undertaken pursuant to this Agreement. The defense obligation provided for hereunder shall apply without any advance showing of negligence or wrongdoing by the Consultant, its employees, and/or authorized subcontractors, but shall be required whenever any claim, action, complaint, or suit asserts as its basis the negligence, errors, omissions or misconduct of the Consultant, its employees, and/or authorized subcontractors, and/or whenever any claim, action, complaint or suit asserts liability against the City, its elected officials, officers, agents and employees based upon the work performed by the Consultant, its employees, and/or authorized subcontractors under this Agreement, whether or not the Consultant, its employees, and/or authorized subcontractors are specifically named or otherwise asserted to be liable. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Consultant shall not be liable for the defense or indemnification of the City for claims, actions, complaints or suits arising out of the sole active negligence or willful misconduct of the City. This provision shall supersede and replace all other indemnity provisions contained either in the City's specifications or Consultant's Proposal, which shall be of no force and effect. 6.10. Independent Contractor. Consultant is and shall be acting at all times as an independent contractor and not as an employee of City. Consultant shall have no power to incur any debt, obligation, or liability on behalf of City or otherwise act on behalf of City as an agent. Neither City nor any of its agents shall have control over the conduct of Consultant or any of Consultant's employees, except as set forth in this Agreement. Consultant shall not, at any time, or in any manner, represent that it or any of its or employees are in any manner agents or employees of City. Consultant shall secure, at its sole expense, and be responsible for any and all payment of Income Tax, Social Security, State Disability Insurance Compensation, Unemployment Compensation, and other payroll deductions for Consultant and its officers, agents, and employees, and all business licenses, if any are required, in connection with the services to be performed hereunder. Consultant shall indemnify and hold City harmless from any and all taxes, assessments, penalties, and interest asserted against City by reason of the independent contractor relationship created by this Agreement. Consultant further agrees to indemnify and hold City harmless from any failure of Consultant to comply with the applicable worker's compensation laws. City shall have the right to offset against the amount of any fees due to Consultant under this Agreement any amount due to City from Consultant as a result of Consultant's failure to promptly pay to City any reimbursement or indemnification arising under this paragraph. 6.11. PERS Eligibility Indemnification. In the event that Consultant or any employee, agent, or subcontractor of Consultant providing services under this Agreement claims or is determined by a court of competent jurisdiction or the California Public Employees Retirement System (PERS) to be eligible for enrollment in PERS as an employee of the City, Consultant shall indemnify, defend, and hold harmless City for the payment of any employee and/or employer contributions for PERS benefits on behalf of Consultant or its employees, agents, or subcontractors, as well as for the payment of any penalties and interest on such contributions, which would otherwise be the responsibility of City. Notwithstanding any other agency, state or federal policy, rule, regulation, law or ordinance to the contrary, Consultant and any of its employees, agents, and subcontractors 7 RJM Design Group providing service under this Agreement shall not qualify for or become entitled to, and hereby agree to waive any claims to, any compensation, benefit, or any incident of employment by City, including but not limited to eligibility to enroll in PERS as an employee of City and entitlement to any contribution to be paid by City for employer contribution and/or employee contributions for PERS benefits. 6.12. Cooperation. In the event any claim or action is brought against City relating to Consultant's performance or services rendered under this Agreement, Consultant shall render any reasonable assistance and cooperation which City might require. 6.13. Ownership of Documents. All findings, reports, documents, information and data including, but not limited to, computer tapes or discs, files and tapes furnished or prepared by Consultant or any of its subcontractors in the course of performance of this Agreement, shall be and remain the sole property of City. Consultant agrees that any such documents or information shall not be made available to any individual or organization without the prior consent of City. Any use of such documents for other projects not contemplated by this Agreement, and any use of incomplete documents, shall be at the sole risk of City and without liability or legal exposure to Consultant. City shall indemnify and hold harmless Consultant from all claims, damages, losses, and expenses, including attorneys' fees, arising out of or resulting from City's use of such documents for other projects not contemplated by this Agreement or use of incomplete documents furnished by Consultant. Consultant shall deliver to City any findings, reports, documents, information, data, in any form, including but not limited to, computer tapes, discs, files audio tapes or any other Project related items as requested by City or its authorized representative, at no additional cost to the City. 6.14. Public Records Act Disclosure. Consultant has been advised and is aware that this Agreement and all reports, documents, information and data, including, but not limited to, computer tapes, discs or files furnished or prepared by Consultant, or any of its subcontractors, pursuant to this Agreement and provided to City may be subject to public disclosure as required by the California Public Records Act (California Government Code Section 6250 et seq.). Exceptions to public disclosure may be those documents or information that qualify as trade secrets, as that term is defined in the California Government Code Section 6254.7, and of which Consultant informs City of such trade secret. The City will endeavor to maintain as confidential all information obtained by it that is designated as a trade secret. The City shall not, in any way, be liable or responsible for the disclosure of any trade secret including, without limitation, those records so marked if disclosure is deemed to be required by law or by order of the Court. 6.15. Conflict of Interest. Consultant and its officers, employees, associates and subconsultants, if any, will comply with all conflict of interest statutes of the State of California applicable to Consultant's services under this agreement, including, but not limited to, the Political Reform Act (Government Code Sections 81000, et seq.) and Government Code Section 1090. During the term of this Agreement, Consultant and its officers, employees, associates and subconsultants shall not, without the prior written approval of the City Representative, perform work for another person or entity for whom Consultant is not currently performing work that would require Consultant or one of its officers, employees, associates or subconsultants to abstain from a decision under this Agreement pursuant to a conflict of interest statute. 6.16. Responsibility for Errors. Consultant shall be responsible for its work and results under this Agreement. Consultant, when requested, shall furnish clarification and/or explanation as may be required by the City's representative, regarding any services rendered under this Agreement at no additional cost to City. In the event that an error or omission attributable to Consultant occurs, then Consultant shall, at no cost to City, provide all necessary design g RJM Design Group drawings, estimates and other Consultant professional services necessary to rectify and correct the matter to the sole satisfaction of City and to participate in any meeting required with regard to the correction. 6.17. Prohibited Employment. Consultant will not employ any regular employee of City while this Agreement is in effect. 6.18. Order of Precedence. In the event of an inconsistency in this Agreement and any of the attached Exhibits, the terms set forth in this Agreement shall prevail. If, and to the extent this Agreement incorporates by reference any provision of any document, such provision shall be deemed a part of this Agreement. Nevertheless, if there is any conflict among the terms and conditions of this Agreement and those of any such provision or provisions so incorporated by reference, this Agreement shall govern over the document referenced. 6.19. Costs. Each party shall bear its own costs and fees incurred in the preparation and negotiation of this Agreement and in the performance of its obligations hereunder except as expressly provided herein. 6.20. No Third Party Beneficiary Rights. This Agreement is entered into for the sole benefit of City and Consultant and no other parties are intended to be direct or incidental beneficiaries of this Agreement and no third party shall have any right in, under or to this Agreement. 6.21. Headings. Paragraphs and subparagraph headings contained in this Agreement are included solely for convenience and are not intended to modify, explain or to be a full or accurate description of the content thereof and shall not in any way affect the meaning or interpretation of this Agreement. 6.22. Construction. The parties have participated jointly in the negotiation and drafting of this Agreement. In the event an ambiguity or question of intent or interpretation arises with respect to this Agreement, this Agreement shall be construed as if drafted jointly by the parties and in accordance with its fair meaning. There shall be no presumption or burden of proof favoring or disfavoring any party by virtue of the authorship of any of the provisions of this Agreement. 6.23. Amendments. Only a writing executed by the parties hereto or their respective successors and assigns may amend this Agreement. 6.24. Waiver. The delay or failure of either party at any time to require performance or compliance by the other of any of its obligations or agreements shall in no way be deemed a waiver of those rights to require such performance or compliance. No waiver of any provision of this Agreement shall be effective unless in writing and signed by a duly authorized representative of the party against whom enforcement of a waiver is sought. The waiver of any right or remedy in respect to any occurrence or event shall not be deemed a waiver of any right or remedy in respect to any other occurrence or event, nor shall any waiver constitute a continuing waiver. 6.25. Severability. If any provision of this Agreement is determined by a court of competent jurisdiction to be unenforceable in any circumstance, such determination shall not affect the validity or enforceability of the remaining terms and provisions hereof or of the offending provision in any other circumstance. Notwithstanding the foregoing, if the value of this Agreement, based upon the substantial benefit of the bargain for any party, is materially 9 RJM Design Group impaired, which determination made by the presiding court or arbitrator of competent jurisdiction shall be binding, then both parties agree to substitute such provision(s) through good faith negotiations. 6.26. Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in one or more counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original. All counterparts shall be construed together and shall constitute one agreement. 6.27. Corporate Authority. The persons executing this Agreement on behalf of the parties hereto warrant that they are duly authorized to execute this Agreement on behalf of said parties and that by doing so the parties hereto are formally bound to the provisions of this Agreement. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed by and through their respective authorized officers, as of the date first above written. CITY OF COSTA MESA, A municipal corporation Date: Mayor CONSULTANT Date Signature Name and Title Social Security or Taxpayer ID Number ATTEST: City Clerk and ex -officio Clerk of the City of Costa Mesa APPROVED AS TO FORM: Date: 10 RJM Design Group City Attorney APPROVED AS TO INSURANCE: Date: Risk Management APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: Date: Baltazar Mejia, Project Manager DEPARTMENT HEAD APPROVAL Date - Ernesto Munoz, Public Services Director 11 RJM Design Group EXHIBIT A REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS 12 RJM Design Group i9, October 2, 2014 CITY OF COSTA MESA P.O. BOX 1200 • 77 FAIR DRIVE • CALIFORNIA 92628-1200 FROM THE DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SERVICES/ENGINEERING DIVISION SUBJECT: REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS (RFP's) FOR THE UPDATE OF THE OPEN SPACE MASTER PLAN OF PARKS AND RECREATION. Dear Consultant: The City of Costa Mesa is interested in receiving proposals for the update of the Open Space Master Plan of Parks and Recreation. The anticipated schedule of events to complete the professional services for the project is as follows: EVENTS TO COMPLETE WORK DATE 1. Proposal Received by City 10/30/2014 2. Selection of Consultanf 11/21/2014 3. City Council Award 01/06/2015 4. Kick-off Conference 01/12/2015 5. Final Submittal/Completion of Work 01/22/2016 Enclosed is a Request for Proposals (RFP's) to furnish professional services for the subject project. Selection of a consultant team will follow the "One Step RFP" method as outlined in the California Department of Transportation Local Assistance Procedures Manual. The minimum requirements for qualifications and the necessary professional services required by the City are stated within the RFP's. City of Costa Mesa Contact Person Baltazar Mejia, Parks Project Manager, (714) 754-5291, is the sole contact person for this project. Respondents are not to contact other staff members in conjunction with this RFP's prior to the announcement of the award. PHONE: (714) 754-5335 FAX: (714) 754-5028 TDD: (714) 754-5244 www.costamesaca.gov RFP — Open Space Master Plan Update Required Copies of Request for Proposals on Due Date Five (5) copies of the project proposal and one copy of the fee proposal must be received by the City no later than 3:00 p.m. on Thursday, October 30, 2014. All proposals shall be delivered to: Mr. Baltazar Mejia, P.E. City of Costa Mesa Public Services/Engineering 77 Fair Drive P.O. Box 1200 Costa Mesa, CA 92628-1200 cerel ' Fariba Fazeli, P.E. City Engineer Attachments c: Ernesto Munoz, Public Services Director Gary Armstrong, Economic & Development Director/Deputy CEO Baltazar Mejia, Parks Project Manager F REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS (RFP's) FOR THE UPDATE OF THE OPEN SPACE MASTER PLAN OF PARKS AND RECREATION I. INTRODUCTION The Open Space Master Plan of Parks and Recreation was adopted by the City Council in 1996 and an update approved on January 21, 2003. It is a guide for the orderly development and management of recreation facilities and programs for the City. The updated Master Plan consists of an analysis of the community, a needs assessment, facility and program recommendations, and concept recommendations for individual facilities The purpose of this Request for Proposals (RFP's) is to solicit proposals from qualified park planning/urban design firms for a new update of the current Master Plan. The final master plan is expected to meet the City's recreational needs, while at the same time addressing the needs and concerns of the adjacent residents and community organizations. A. General Goals: The City of Costa Mesa is seeking a consultant with a strong background in park planning and urban design that has successfully completed similar projects and has extensive experience in the master planning of parks in urban communities. The selected consultant will be responsible for the completion of public workshops; concept plans (color display boards and electronic formats); public presentations to community organizations, Commissions, and the City Council; and the preparation of the final master plan document. B. Minimum Consultant Qualifications: The key project staff, furnished by the consultant and sub -consultants, must have at least five years prior experience on similar types of projects. All consultants responding to this Request for Proposals (RFP's) will be evaluated on the basis of their expertise, prior experience on similar projects, demonstrated competence, ability to meet the project schedule, adequate staffing, understanding of the project, and responsiveness to the needs and concerns of the City of Costa Mesa. II. CONTENT OF PROPOSAL In order to maintain uniformity with all proposals furnished by consultants, the proposals shall be limited to a maximum of 30 pages (excluding front and back covers, section dividers, and resumes) and to include the following: A. A statement of project understanding containing any suggestions to improve or expedite the project or special concerns of which the City should be made aware of. The project approach shall contain clarifications or additional scope of work that you feel are necessary for the successful completion of the project. B. A project team organization chart, identifying those who will perform the work, and a brief resume of each team member (including a list of similar type projects in which they have been directly involved) is required. Identify the Project Manager (PM) proposed for this project. The PM will be the primary contact person to represent your firm and will be the person to conduct the presentation, if invited for an interview. Sub -consultants, if any, shall be identified with the same requirements as the main consultant. C. A list of similar projects that your firm has completed within the last five years. Information should include: project description, agency or client name, along with the person to contact and the telephone number(s), year completed, and project cost. D. A proposed schedule indicating stages of work, time frames, and ability to perform the required services in a timely manner. E. Fee proposal in a separately sealed envelope containing the following: 1. Cover letter stating the total lump sum fee. 2. A spreadsheet with a detailed fee schedule of the proposed costs. Each fee schedule shall depict individual project tasks and number of hours assigned for specific personnel, along with their fully -burdened hourly rates. The fully -burdened hourly rates shall include direct salary costs, employee benefits, overhead and profit. Travel time will not be allowed. The fee proposal shall reflect all anticipated fee increases during the contract duration. Please submit five hard copies and one PDF file of the project proposal, and one copy of the fee proposal. III. CONSULTANT SELECTION COMMITTEE The City of Costa Mesa Public Services Department has established a Consultant Selection Committee consisting of at least four members who have acted in the capacity of Project Manager. The Consultant Selection Committee will evaluate the consultant on their ability to do the following: Produce an innovative and detailed master plan, including conceptual plans, exhibits, and renderings. 2. Have the vision to create realistic concepts and programs that can be readily implemented. 3. Provide the City with adequate tools in order to allow for the proper planning and development of these facilities. IV. ESTABLISHMENT OF FEES The fee proposal will not be opened until the Proposal Selection Committee has evaluated all of the Consultants' proposals. In conformance with the Mini -Brooks Act, the City will select the Consultant based on qualifications, and then negotiate a contract price based on available funding and a further breakdown of the "lump sum" fee submitted in the fee proposal. V. PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT A sample of the required Professional Services Agreement is available upon request. The RFP and the consultant's proposal will be attached to and become part of the executed agreement as exhibits. 2. No reduction of professional services, as stated in both the City's RFP and the consultant's submitted proposal, will be allowed. VI. INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS Please refer to the sample agreement for the necessary amounts of general liability insurance, automotive, worker's compensation, and professional liability insurance. The appropriate endorsements are also shown within the sample contract agreement. VII. SCOPE OF CONSULTANT SERVICES The City of Costa Mesa Open Space Master Plan of Parks and Recreation was originally adopted by the City Council in 1996 and updated on January 21, 2003. A copy of the updated Master Plan is available on the City's website (http://Costarnesaca.govlmodules/showdoctimerit.aspx?documeiitid=71&E). It is a guide for the orderly development and management of recreation facilities and programs for the City. The Master Plan has served well, but the demand for facilities and the addition of sports and activities that did not exist eleven years ago or that were not as popular as they are now, plus the availability of new census data are clear indicators that the Master Plan needs to be updated. It is anticipated that the same general scope utilized in the last update will be incorporated into this scope of work with a few revisions. The City's General Plan is currently being updated. Included in the scope of work for the update of the General Plan is the update of the Open Space and Recreation element, the module that outlines the City's goals and objectives for the current and future open space and recreational long-term community needs. The selected consultant will be required to coordinate with the consultant retained to update the General Plan, fully understand the work already done, and complete the work under this contract without duplicating efforts. In addition, the City Council reconvened the Fairview Park Citizens Advisory Committee to evaluate the current Master Plan and make recommendations to the Parks and Recreation Commission and the City Council for changes to the Master Plan. The selected consultant will be required to incorporate the most current Fairview Park Master Plan, the process by which it was last reviewed/revised, and new regulatory updates. Extensive documentation is available on the City's website(http://costamesaca.gov/index.aspx?page-9619). Other approved Master Plans that will need to be incorporated into the new Open Space Master Plan of Parks and Recreation are: 1. TeWinkle Park Master Plan (include in the scope of work revising the Master Plan document and graphics with previously -approved revisions and completed elements). A copy of this Master Plan is available on the City's website (http://Costamesaca gov/modules/showdoctrrnerit.aspx?documentid=7988) 2. Brentwood Park Master Plan. The proposed Scope of Consultant Services includes, but shall not be limited to, all of the following: A. Public Process: • Identify, describe and implement a comprehensive strategy and methodology for citizen involvement in this Master Plan development process. • Assure residents, user groups, associations and other stakeholders that they are provided with an opportunity to participate in the development of this plan. • Conduct various public community meetings, focus groups and individual stakeholder interviews. • Attend various commission and City Council meetings to provide progress reports. • Act as professional facilitators to gather specific information about services, use, preferences and strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and constraints. • Provide well -organized and directed activities, techniques and formats that will ensure that a positive, open and proactive public participation process is achieved. • Provide written reports and summaries of the results of all public meetings. t Solicit input from as many people as possible, including users and non-users of the services and facilities. This may include intercept surveys to determine utilization of parks by Costa Mesa residents. B. Statistically -Valid Survey • Develop a city-wide community needs assessment survey to identify community needs and issues related to recreation/park programs and facilities. The survey should accurately represent a sampling of the community population, with a return rate sufficient to provide statistically -valid results. C. Existing and Future Facilities — Analysis of Level of Services. • Compile an inventory and assessment of the existing parks/recreation programs, services and facilities. The assessment will include a comparative analysis to communities of similar size and density within the region, and use nationally accepted standards. The analysis should consider not only the capacity of each amenity found within the system (playgrounds, ball fields, trails, natural areas, special facilities, etc.) but also address functionality, accessibility, condition, comfort and convenience. D. Community Needs Assessment - Rank and Prioritize Demand and Opportunities • Review pertinent data provided by the City of Costa Mesa and its consultants. • Survey user groups, including sports organizations, within the City of Costa Mesa. • Determine local recreation patterns of residents and estimate the type and number of facilities necessary to satisfy those preferences. • Develop alternatives to maximize field use. • Prioritize recommendations for needs regarding land acquisition, the development of parks, trails, and open space and recreation facilities. • Develop a set of prioritized recommendations for maintenance and renovation of parks, trails and recreation facilities. E. Analysis of Programs and Services • Provide an assessment and analysis of the Recreation Services Division's current level of recreation programs and services. • Provide a user fee analysis for facilities, programs and services. F. Progress Reporting • The consultant and the City's Project Manager shall hold progress meetings as often as necessary. The consultant shall supply the City's Project Manager with at least one (1) copy of all completed or partially completed reports, studies, forecasts, maps or plans as deemed necessary by the City Project Manager at least three (3) working days prior to the progress meeting. The City's Project Manager shall schedule the meetings, as necessary. G. Master Plan Document • Based on previously completed tasks, develop a draft Master Plan Document. • Following City staff review, prepare draft versions for general public distribution and consideration at formal public meetings. • Attend public hearings. Anticipate three Parks and Recreation Commission meetings (one Study Session and two public hearings) and two City Council meetings (one Study Session and one regular Council meeting). • After City Council action, prepare a finalized document that incorporates Council -directed changes. H. Action Plan • Collect and analyze demographic information for the community. • Collect and analyze information on participation, needs, desires, operations, programming, land use trends and make recommendations. • Identify areas of service shortfalls and projected impact of future trends. • Develop recommendations for operations, staffing, maintenance, programming and funding needs. • Provide a clear plan for development of programming based on current park standards and citizen demand analysis. • Develop a definitive program for the acquisition and development of parkland, recreational facilities, open space and trails. • Project the anticipated costs for park maintenance and administration of facilities for the future. • Identify opportunities for available funding and acquisition alternatives. • Develop an action plan which includes strategies, priorities and an analysis of budget support, funding mechanisms for the short term, mid-term and long term for the park system, open space, trails and recreation programs and services. Development of Final Plans and Supporting Materials • The Master Plan must include written goals, plans, objectives and policy statements that articulate a clear vision or "road map," and model for the City's future. • A summary of existing conditions, inventories and Level of Service analysis. • Charts, graphs, maps and other data as needed to support the plan and its presentation to the appropriate audiences. • A Financial Plan. • An Action Plan. • A minimum of one (3) meetings with the Parks and Recreation Commission leading to the recommendation to the City Council to adopt the proposed Master Plan. • A minimum of two (2) meetings with the City Council, one (1) to present the draft Master Plan and one (1) to consider the adoption of the final Master Plan. • A color version of the draft Master Plan document consisting of one (1) printed and bound color copy and an electronic copy in a format compatible with the City's software. • A color version of the final Master Plan document consisting of one (1) printed and bound color copy and an electronic copy in a format compatible with the City's software. • A color version of the final Executive Summary consisting of one (1) printed copy and an electronic version in a format compatible with the City's software. J. Miscellaneous • Develop a plan and project schedule. • Attend, lead and facilitate community meetings as necessary. • Develop and manage the tools necessary to collect community input and data. • Prepare an executive summary that includes statistics and trends addressing recreation and leisure needs in Costa Mesa for the future. • Incorporate 2010 U.S. Census data as it pertains to the City of Costa Mesa. • Articulate themes identified through the data -gathering process into goals and strategies. • Identify how individuals access recreation and leisure services in the City of Costa Mesa. • Other work items as necessary. K. Products • One (1) draft Master Plan Document (hard copy and electronic files) • One (1) camera-ready copy of the Final Plan. • Original graphics. • One (1) copy of text on computer disk. VIII. CITY RESPONSIBILITIES The City of Costa Mesa will be responsible for providing all available maps, plans, reports, and records on file. IX. ASSESSMENT OF WORK EFFORT PRIOR TO SUBMITTING REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS Each consultant must inform themselves fully of the conditions relating to the project and the employment of labor thereon. Failure to do so will not relieve a successful consultant engineer of the obligations to carry out the provisions of the contract. X. RIGHT TO REJECT ALL PROPOSALS The City of Costa Mesa reserves the right to reject any or all proposals submitted, and/or to delete any portion(s) of the submitted proposal. No representation is made hereby that any contract will be awarded pursuant to this RFP's or otherwise. All costs incurred in the preparation of the proposal, the submission of additional information, and/or any aspect of a proposal, prior to award of a written contract will be borne by the respondent. The City will provide only the staff assistance and documentation specifically referred to herein and will not be responsible for any other cost or obligation of any kind, which may be incurred by the respondent. All proposals and documents submitted to the City of Costa Mesa become the City's property for its own use as deemed necessary. XI. SUMMARY Your participation is greatly appreciated by the City. It is the intent of this RFP's to establish the minimum consultant services required by the City. To assist in your preparation, this RFP's was categorized into sections stating the specific requirements of the City. It is the intent of the City to select a consultant and award a contract. All insurance documents must be submitted and approved prior to the award of the contract. EXHIBIT B CONSULTANT'S PROPOSAL 13 RJM Design Group • l «• 0 �J m k «,y'T • S. Tw rte' i.c s' • .r , -.•Mrs— �' = vw - _..y�� � y!�am,•,-y - _ r �.;. �" .. ,, � _ 7 � "•mow , .r �� �'r� � f �' -� �,y' T t ..� i . �.�' ' '� ' � -_ ,,�•r.' -....� "- y� ,� '•"' �----fes--mac- _q� -�7'G'.:. '. � �r,•��,+ i" � � " , 1a' �y-.1�':N ,�- ,ice �' `i"r -_ r ^. r.r W410 ,. r w l+ Ir r -- w w. r ^. r.r W410 ,. r w l+ Ir r !] j 0-ly of Costa Mesa - Update of Open Space Master Plan of Parks & Recreation Cover Letter 31591 Camino Capistrano San Juan Capistrano, CA 92675 wwwAJMdesigngroup,com [9491493-2690 fax [9491493-2600 Wlwne November 6, 2014 Mr. Baltazar Mejia, P.E. City of Costa Mesa Public Services/Engineering 77 Fair Drive Costa Mesa, CA 92628-1200 1h Commanfty Inspired Spam M, RJMMUP RE: Proposal for Professional Services to prepare the Update of Open Space Master Plan of Parks and Recreation for the City of Costa Mesa Dear Mr. Mejia: RJM Design Group is pleased to submit our qualifications and proposal to the City of Costa Mesa. Our community- wide Parks and Recreation Master Plans are based on a process of community involvement resulting in statistically valid solutions which articulate and reinforce a sense of place, that are responsive to the community's goals and policies, anticipate market conditions and future trends, and ultimately create healthy and happy communities: Based upon your RFP, our experience on the City's 2003 Master Plan Update, as well as our experience on similar projects, we have developed a planning process with a "community driven" input methodology, and comprehensive scope of services. We anticipate a close working relationship with the City staff, members of the community, and various stakeholders because we believe they provide a forum in working together to arrive at planning and design solutions, which are truly remarkable and insightful. RJM understands the outcome of the Open Space Master Plan of Parks and Recreation Update will include an inventory of recreation facilities, parks; mapping exhibits; program inventory; community wide needs assessment (including quantifiable recreation facility needs), as well as recommendations and opportunities for parks, facilities, and recreation programs in Costa Mesa. I will be serving as the Principal for this project and have 30 years of experience in the preparation, processing, and management of a wide range of community based, recreation -planning projects. Our team includes specialty consultants with stellar qualifications and the technical expertise in various disciplines to provide a focused direction relative to the specific requirements for this project. Our team has worked together in the successful completion of many Master Plan projects. RJM's Team has available and qualified staff to begin work on this project immediately. We are interested in this assignment and eagerly look forward to working with the City of Costa Mesa. Should you have any questions or require clarification or supplemental information, please contact our office. Thank you in advance for your consideration. Design Grou), Inc. Robert Mueti g, incipal Email: rjm @+ 'm signgro Cil y .= f Costo Meso • Update of Open Space Master Plan of Parks & Recreation Table of Contents Community Inspired Spaces DESIGN RJ M GROUP ------------ Heller Park in Costa Mesa Cover Letter Project Understanding.................................................. 1 a. Firm's Qualifications b. Detailed Scope of Work ProjectTeam,,...............................................................11 a. Team Organizational Chart b. Resumes of Key Personnel Similar Projects..............................................................17 a. Team's Experience on Similar Projects b. Project Experience and References Project Schedule..........................................................27 a. Proposed Schedule & Summary of Deliverables Fee Proposal (submitted under separate cover) SAN JUAN CAPISTRANO • SACRAMENTO www.RJMdesigngroup.com • [9491493-2600 �Q� Community Inspired Spaces DESIGN RJ M GROUP City of Costa Mesa • Update of Open Space Master Plan of Parks & Recreation Project Understanding Costa Mesa's local economy relies heavily on retail and services. South Coast Plaza is among the highest volume regional shopping centers in the nation. SAN JUAN CAPISTRANO • SACRAMENTO www.RJMdesigngroup.com • [949] 493-2600 �:ity of Costo Meso • lJpdale of Open space Master Plan of Parks & Recreation Project Understanding a. Firm's Qualifications Firm Legal Name: RJM Design Group, Inc. Established in 1987, RJM Design Group has evolved into a multi -disciplinary landscape architectural, planning and design firm committed to serving the needs of cities, public agencies, and organizations throughout California. RJM is comprised of talented individuals with varied backgrounds and interests. Among these dynamic professionals are licensed landscape architects, architects and planners, survey specialists, recreation specialists and economists. Each person brings a unique, yet complementary experience and passion to the firm. Legal Entity Type: California Corporation Year Established: 1987 Principal Contact: Robert J. Mueting Office Locations: San Juan Capistrano, CA Sacramento, CA Firm Size: 20 Personnel Principal Landscape Architects 3 Licensed Landscape Architects/ Project Managers 8 Technical Support 5 Administrative Support/Accounting 4 Firm Qualifications and Approach During our 27 years of preparing Parks and Recreation Master Plans, we have continually evaluated and analyzed our process and products to better- address our client's needs. The most significant improvement in our process that sets the RJM team apart from all others is: We provide a Defensible Needs Assessment (DNA)© that accurately reflects the unique recreation characteristics and collaborative vision identified for your community. Fi Community Inspired Spaces A. DESIGN RJ M GROUP The accuracy of our needs assessment approach is primarily due to the collection of actual recreation activity participation and the identification of facility needs based on those levels of participation. By analyzing recreation activity, we are able to identify demographic variables that are predictors of future recreation activities. This analysis enables us to model the community for the future as the population changes due to growth, aging, ethnic change, or other characteristics. This forecast of needs for the future becomes vital in malting decisions for today. Contemplation of major capital expenditures for facilities must take into account not only today's needs but the needs of the future community as well. Our methodology provides the only recreation facility needs assessment that can accurately reflect the specific recreation needs of all residents, not just those residents who choose to be active in the public meeting process. Our needs assessment approach does not simply parrot National, State, or "similar" Community Standards. There are no similar communities to the City of Costa Mesa because each community presents a unique demographic profile, unique availability of facilities and programs, unique proximity to major recreational opportunities, unique weather conditions, and unique socio -demographic or lifestyle characteristics. The community, residents, and recreation facilities are distinctive and unique to the City of Costa Mesa's population. Project Management Services Our project management starts with the basic building block of good communication. We provide an excellent method of tracking project progress by keeping the scope of work integrated with the project schedule. Our clients often become our friends, and in many cases this results in future collaboration. Therefore we look forward to opportunities to meet and discuss the work in progress. We believe in creating a better environment for future generations to come. SAN JUAN CAPISTRANO • SACRAMENTO www,RJMdesigngroup.com • [9491493-2600 City,of Co!� Io Meso • Update of Open Space Master Plan of Parks & Recreation Community Inspired s Spaces ® � DESIGN �Icjec.t Understanding RJ M GROUP b. Detailed Scope Of Work i We understand that the City of Costa Mesa is looking to update the current Parks and Recreation Master Plan. RJM Design Group has successfully completed over 25 Park and Recreational Needs Assessments and Master Plans for various public and private agencies.After reviewing the City's current documentation, existing planning efforts, as well as our conversations we have prepared a scope of work with a phased project approach. We welcome the opportunity to review this scope of services with the City to better accommodate any additional needs. 4 Phase I Background Research / Existing Conditions: RJM will meet with City representatives to review the scope of services, as well as research the available background documentation including updating the City's program and facility inventories. -� Phase II Community Outreach will consist of reaching out to the public, civic organizations, and sports organizations to solicit their input on the parks and recreation facilities. 4 Phase III Needs Analysis will outline the opportunities, funding strategies, recommendations as well as related cost estimates, and identify the City's surplus and/or deficit of recreation facilities. 4 Phase IV Master Plan Document will be a summary of research, in an easy to read meaningful document, illustrating the Park and Recreation Master Plan for Costa Mesa. Phase I - Background Research / Existing Conditions Task 1 - Work plan: RJM will conduct an initial kick-off meeting with the City to confirm and clarify the scope of services and project parameters, project background and objectives, product deliverables, methodology, schedule, as well as identify roles and responsibilities. Task 2 - Review of Existing Documents: RJM will coordinate document collection and review related documents pertinent to the development of the Park and Recreation Master Planning effort. With this information we will generate a database of existing resources to be referred to in subsequent tasks. This will help ensure that the final planning document coincides with the city's current General Plan. Our team will review, the original 1996 and subsequently updated 2003 Master Plan, current progress on the General Plan update, Fairview Park Master Plan, TeWinkle Park Master Plan, Brentwood Park Master Plan, as well as well as other relevant documents. After assembling the city planning documents RJM will conduct a meeting with City Staff to review current park conditions, maintenance practices, recreation programming as well as city standards and policies. Task 3 - Demographics: Understanding the recreation needs and preferences of City residents first depends upon an understanding of the population and its demographic characteristics. Steps in this process involve a review of data regarding the City's population base as defined in the 2000 and 2010 Censuses as well as the most recent 2 SAN JUAN CAPISTRANO • SACRAMENTO www.RJMdesigngroup,com • [9491493-2600 City ,=f Coq*-.) Meso - [.Jpdate of Open Space Master Flan of Parks & Recreation AN msA spaces a aces 'ANi Y DESIGN Project Understanding RJ M GROUP American Community Survey. Current estimates of key variables can also be obtained from the California Department of Finance. As available, demographic data regarding age, household size, ethnic profile and income characteristics will be used in the analysis. Trends in these measures, that tend to be highly correlated with recreation patterns, will be examined. Today's decisions regarding recreation facilities and programs need to accommodate both population growth as well as change in demography. The historic data will be analyzed and projections of future population will be prepared using information and input from other agencies and City staff. This evaluation will provide estimates of the current population base and projections of future growth. Detailed demographic data regarding such variables as age, presence of children, ethnicity, household size, and income characteristics will be analyzed in order to identify special populations such as seniors, teens, preschoolers, etc. for use in the recreation facility demand analysis. Special attention will be given to any sub -groups of the population that show unusual trends of change. This evaluation will provide estimates of the current population base and projections of future growth over the next 10-15 years. Task 4- Park and Recreation Facilities Inventory: Our team will inventory and the current conditions of all of Costa Mesa Parks and associated recreation facilities. An importantpart of the database of existing information forthe City is a thorough documentation of park and recreation facilities existing and planned that are available for use in the City, including providers other than the City of Costa Mesa such as the Unified School Districts fields and courts. Consultant will conduct a city-wide tour, with City Staff and individually, to inventory and assess the recreation facilities, including joint -use facilities. This will assist in the development of a report that identifies supply of park and recreation facilities available to residents, an assessment of current conditions, quality, and functionality for each facility, and identification of opportunities and deficiencies for future park and recreation programs and services. A facility inventory matrix will be developed to catalog the number of facilities by type and the amenities associated with each. The assessment of current conditions of each facility will include a list of any maintenance or rehabilitation efforts that may be needed to bring each facility to a good state of repair or to meet Federal and state requirements. Existing maintenance and operation standards, maintenance cycles, sustainability practices, contractual arrangement and staffing levels will be reviewed in order to determine the existing levels of service and support, and identify shortfalls. RJM will review available documentation on maintenance, operations, and sustainability from the City and conduct in-depth interviews with Parks and Recreation staff. Findings will be synthesized regarding current maintenance and operations practices for the City of Costa Mesa Parks and Recreation operations. Task 5- Recreation Programs Inventory: Our team will conduct a community -wide inventory of recreation programs and services offered by the City of Costa Mesa and by other area providers within the last two years. This inventory may include SAN JUAN CAPISTRANO • SACRAMENTO 3 www.RJMdeslgngroup.com • [949] 493-2600 City of Cool: , Mesa • Update of Open Space Master Plan of Parks & Recreation Community Inspired Spaces Q, DESIGN Pr©jecl- Understanding Rj M GROUP program offerings and uses of recreation facilities and will identify other service providers that also meet the recreation needs of City residents and to identify those recreational areas that are lacking or not being served in Costa Mesa. Data collected on recreation programs, if available, can include: frequency, ages served, attendance and other pertinent details. Task b - Park and Facility Gap Analysis: With an updated inventory, the information will be analyzed by service area to identify underserved neighborhoods or community planning areas. Finally, a mapping analysis will also be developed to form a foundation to determine the distribution of types of recreation facilities throughout the City, an analysis that aids in the identification of recreation facility gaps. Phase II - Community Outreach In order to determine the current and forecast needs for Parks, Recreation Facilities, and Open Space within the City, it is first necessary to define the recreation usage patterns and resulting recreation facility usage of the residents of the City. Several sources of information and community outreach methods will be used to fully identify the needs and priorities for parks and facilities in the City. The National Recreation and Park Association in their 1983 update to the publication Recreation, Park and Open Space Standards and Guidelines stated: "Park and recreation services are community services. Ideally, the national standards should stand the test in communities of all sizes. However, the reality often makes it difficult or inadvisable to apply national standards without question to specific locales. The uniqueness of every community, due to differing geographical, cultural, climatic, and socioeconomic characteristics, makes it imperative that every community develop its own standards for recreation, parks and open space." The following techniques described below will generate current and forecast participation rates that are specific to the residents of the City of Costa Mesa. These rates will then be used to determine a defensible and statistically valid recreation needs assessment unique to the City of Costa Mesa. Task 1 - Executive interviews: One-on-one interviews with City -selected stakeholders such as City Councilmen, Parks and Recreation Commissioners, School District Supervisors, and City Staff. These one-on-one interviews provide the opportunity to seek insight into the City's values, strengths, weaknesses, and distinctive competencies as well as to identify any private sector and/or non-profit organizations and their capabilities to compete or collaborate with the City in delivery of services. These interviews lay the ground work for an engaging and active public planning process. Consultants will work with staff to identify interviewees. Estimate twelve (12) interviews to be conducted during one day. Task 2 - Sports organization questionnaire: Soliciting the attitudes and perceived needs of community stakeholders is an essential element in the 4 SAN JUAN CAPISTRANO • SACRAMENTO www.RJMdesigngroup.com • [9491493-2600 City of Costa Mesa - Update of Open Space Master Plan of Parks & Recreation Pr'Jed Understandn hk Community Inspired Spaces A. DESIGN RJ M GROUP process. A sport organization survey can not only achieve the objective of outreach to these community stakeholders, it further provides valuable information regarding facility usage, team size, recreation seasonality, and player volume that is most important in the foundation of the facility needs calculation. The consultants will provide a survey form containing questions relevant to the usage of City recreation facilities by sports organizations in the City. It is expected that the City will take responsibility for distributing these forms to the organized sports groups within the City and following up to assure that each group returns a completed survey. The results will then be tabulated and used to verify and update the participation rates in these sports for use in the demand analysis. Task 3 - Community -wide Telephone Survey: We recommend random sample telephone interviewing as the most effective and statistically reliable method to generate unbiased, detailed and accurate data regarding the true current demand for recreation facilities and programs specific to the City. The ability of the telephone survey to represent the current recreation needs of the City's residents is the result of the design of a custom survey questionnaire for the City of Costa Mesa. The subject areas of this survey will be developed through conversations with Staff, and/or community stakeholders. Questionnaire topics may include, but are not limited to, selected demography and attitudes regarding recreation and current usage patterns of community/neighborhood parks and recreation facilities and programs. Profiles of users and non-users can also be developed and reasons for non-use explored. Most importantly, respondents can be questioned regarding how frequently they, and all members of their household, participate in the various activities that most commonly occur in local parks. For the telephone survey, we recommend completion of 400 questionnaires among a random sample of City resident households, yielding an error margin of ± 5% at a 95% confidence level City-wide. The scope assumes a questionnaire length of 12 minutes with a maximum of five questions containing open end/other specify opportunities. This scope assumes that 95% of completed interviews will be completed in English while the remainder will be conducted in Spanish. All interviews will be conducted via land -line telephones. This work effort will facilitate an understanding of the differences in recreation attitudes, patterns, Task 4 - Public workshops: An integral component in the creation of a collaborative vision and mission for the Plan is our utilization of an innovative public workshop process. The community will be offered a series of opportunities to participate and will be informed of the Plan's process. The community feedback from the workshops will provide important input to prioritization of future parks, recreation, trails, and open space development in the City. RJM shall plan and conduct three (3) community workshops to allow maximum community participation. This workshop process will clarify and augment the identified desires of the community developed through other public planning methods. Most importantly, the workshop method is designed to arrive at consensus regarding the priorities perceived by the public for improvements to the Park System. SAN JUAN CAPISTRANO - SACRAMENTO 5 www.RJMdesigngroup.com • [949] 493-2600 City of C:oslo Meso - Update of Open Space Master Plan of Parks & Recreation Community Inspired acesA. A P IF DESIGN DESIGN Project Understanding RJ M GROUP Each workshop includes up to a three-hour session, inclusive, for up to 50 participants. We propose to work closely with City Staff to organize and further define the approach to be used in this process. City staff will be responsible for the promotion of the workshops, facility and equipment coordination, and provision of staff to assist with the workshops. RJM will provide staff training on how to work within groups as a scribe and/or facilitate individual groups. Number of staff needed is coordinated with consultant team no less than two (2) weeks prior to the workshop. A. Community Workshop #1: The first public workshop will focus on what the public sees as community recreation characteristics, issues, and current opportunities and constraints to address the community's issues. B. Community Workshop #2: The second workshop will focus on special interests (i.e. sports groups, seniors, etc.) and their experiences with the recreation programs and facilities in the City. C. Community Workshop #3: The final workshop will reflect the citizen input from the first two workshops, summarize the needs assessment process, and seek public comment regarding prioritization of needs. Phase III - Needs Analysis Task 1 - Community Issues and Recreation Trends Analysis: RJM will determine the community's interests and needs for enhancements to the park system through the master plan process. This will analyze the community meetings, outreach, surveys, and include research of trends and issues information relevant to the City of Costa Mesa through resources such as American Demographics, Institute of the Future, CPRS, NRPA, Outdoor Industry Association Surveys and others to complete an issues, trends, and implications report. This analysis may include conclusions regarding impacts to the City's provision of future recreation services as well as the City's role in addressing these impacts. Task 2- Demand and Needs Assessment: The results of the community -wide survey regarding the level of participation in a comprehensive variety of recreation activities by the residents of the City will be calculated and arrayed as a starting point in the analysis. Using a statistical analysis technique that the Consultants have developed for more than fifty California communities previously, the participation rates will be converted into peak day demand estimates for each of the types of recreation activities. By applying design standards, developed in conjunction with the City staff, an estimate of the number of facilities of each type required to satisfy the current and projected demand will be determined. These relationships can be converted into facility 6 SAN JUAN CAPISTRANO - SACRAMENTO www.RJMdesigngroup,com • [949] 493.2600 City of Costo Meso • UY P A pdate of Open Space Master Plan of Parks & 1?ecreation Communis Inspired Spaces19. ,, DESIGN Project Understanding - RJ M GROUP level of service standards or "facility need ratios" that correlate specifically to the City. They will take the format of one facility rewired For every X thousand population and will be specific to a menu of different types of recreation facilities. These measures of facility demand will be used to determine how many of each type of facility (e.g., ball fields by type, tennis courts, picnic tables, etc.) are required both currently and projected into the future as the population of the City grows and changes. This analysis represents a unique methodology that has been tested by the Consultant in park and recreation needs studies throughout the State and provides facility standards that are specific to the residents of the City. The approach used follows the most recent recommendations of the National Recreation and Park Association as determined by their Standards Revision Task Force and utilizes participation data unique to the community being studied. Considerations such as seasonality, design day (or peak day usage), design capacity, and turnover rates are all incorporated into this advanced approach to determining facility need. The facility standards based on the results of the analysis will be compared to those developed elsewhere and to other information collected during the course of the study to test for reasonableness and applicability to conditions in the City. If indicated, adjustments will be made to the demand estimates. These demand estimates will be evaluated in light of the current inventory of recreation facilities to identify surpluses and deficiencies in existing parks and recreation -related facilities to serve the population base as it exists now and with projections into the future. The degree of need will be used as one criterion to help establish priorities in developing the capital improvements plan. One of the primary advantages to this methodology for determining need is that it provides a quantitative, unbiased evaluation of the surpluses and deficits in the City's park and recreation facilities, both currently and in the future. Thereby, special interest group needs are exhibited in the context of the entire spectrum of recreation needs and consensus is more readily obtained. Task 3- Benchmarking/Analysis of Levels of Service: With the City facility standards (1 facility per X,000 population) developed in Task 2 above as the City benchmark, we will prepare a comparison for context that will include the following: • Existing City levels of service and demographic characteristics, • Existing levels of service and demography from four communities of similar size and density within the region (communities to be agreed upon by City staff.) • Available State and National Standard/Level of Service norms. SAN JUAN CAPISTRANO • SACRAMENTO www,RJMdesigngroup,com • [949] 493.2600 Cit �� f C o,to Mesa - Update of Open Space Master Plan of Parks & Recreation A City K K CommunitylnspiredSpaces ,RIF ProRI DESIGN I�rC�jeI [ JSiC�IdC GROUP M 'ki ject Standards/level of service and demography will be reviewed and analyzed to provide a context of understanding regarding the City facility standards developed through this work effort. Task 4 - Identification of Core Services and Pricing Strategies: Resources for all agencies today are precious. In analyzing what the City Of Costa Mesa and others provide to the community, duplication of programs or facilities by public or other organizations does not effectively utilize precious resources and, more importantly, may result in community needs being unmet. The Consultant will develop an overall operational assessment for efficiencies and best management practices that can be employed to guide the organization including an analysis and identification of core recreation services, effective resource allocation, cost recovery, and pricing strategies that take into consideration community wide benefits vs. individual benefits. Recommended broad strategies for improvement or elevation of current operations to a best practice level will be presented that will apply to: Pricing strategies for facilities and programs Staffing standards for recreation services used by the community Inventory of potential community partnerships and outside providers Task 5 - Maintenance and Operations Analysis: RJM will prepare recommendations for maintenance and operations standards needed to meet the current and future program and facilities needs of the City. This report will include prioritized recommendations based on the City's needs (inventory, demographic projections, and community needs assessments), National Recreation and Park Association (NRPA) guidelines for Mode II maintenance level, sustainability practices, and best professional practices. Recommendations will be prepared for policies, maintenance standards and levels of service for each type of facility and program, including a summary of key findings related to maintenance, operations and sustainability practices. Task 6 - Opportunities Feasibility Analysis: After the facility needs, community priorities, and public consensus are defined, we will discuss and evaluate with City Staff the short-term, intermediate and long-term opportunities to create new community recreation facilities. This opportunities analysis may include evaluation of areas such as abandoned rights-of-way, drainage or flood control sites, vacant land, or reuse of existing parks lands as well as potential new or enhanced partnerships to maximize the communities existing resources. Task 7 - Cost Estimates: Construction cost estimates for development of new parks and/or facilities as well as recommended improvements at existing sites will be identified and presented. The Consultant Team will identify any property acquisition necessary to implement the recommended improvements. Costs associated with current facility deficiencies will be segregated from those necessitated by growth from new development or those that may be the result of increasing existing standards. 8 SAN JUAN CAPISTRANO • SACRAMENTO www.RJMdesigngroup.com • [949] 493-2600 f7Ll City of Collo Mesa • Update of Open Space Master Plan of Parks & Recreation Community Inspired Ins Spaces IF DESIGN DESIGN Project Understanding RJ M GROUP Task 8 - Capital Improvement Plan: Our Team will prepare a Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) to include recommendations for acquisitions, development, and preservation or rehabilitation projects. The CIP plan will identify and prioritize projects to be incorporated into a short-term, mid-term, and long-term (2025) capital improvement program time table. For each project, the anticipated year of implementation and funding opportunities would be identified. The CIP can provide options for single year and multiple year funding scenarios based on priorities developed in the community needs assessment phase of the planning process. The sequencing of the recommended projects in the CIP will be coordinated with realistic time frames to put the recommended funding options into place and incorporate them into the City's annual budgeting process. For example, projects with dedicated funding sources may be incorporated into the CIP prior to projects that may have been a higher priority according to the community needs assessment, but do not have a dedicated funding source. Task 9 - Financial Strategies and Plan: Our Team will anticipate costs for park maintenance and administration for the future (up to 20 years) based on the development of sustainability and potential modifications/changes in operations and maintenance practices. In conjunction with this data, cost for recommended capital improvements for existing parks, recommended development cost of new parks and facilities, and the cost of each site identified for acquisition, our team can then perform an analysis of possible funding and acquisition alternatives and provide potential implementation strategies. This will include strategies, priorities and an analysis of budget support, funding mechanisms for the short-term to long-term. The funding strategies analysis will also consider at a minimum, single and bundled grant opportunities, including matching grants; city capital improvement funds (park funds, development impact fees, general fund, etc.); park bonds, revenue bonds, and lease purchase financing coupled with revenue alternatives; collaborative funding opportunities with other public and nonprofit agencies; asset management opportunities (naming rights, advertising programs, concessions, leases and rentals); establishment of enterprise funds if users can be charged; and, private foundation, sponsor and donation options for funding. All financial strategies and recommendations will be developed as a collaborative effort of the project team and City Staff. The political, financial, administrative and legal feasibility of each funding resource or mechanism for each possible type of park or recreation program and facility can be assessed through discussions with staff and other knowledgeable authorities. In addition, the analysis will include the following: Fiscal Capacity of Parks • Develop budgets for the creation of new park development, maintenance of existing parks, and operating programs. SAN JUAN CAPISTRANO • SACRAMENTO 9 www,RJMdesigngroup.com • [949] 493.2600 City of Costo Mesa - UY Inspired SPpdate of Open Space Master Plan of Parks & Recreation Communis aces ', �, DESIGN Project derstandngRJ GROUP • Identify resources needed to operate and maintain future parks and recreation programs based on past funding, operating, and maintenance trends. • Based on the park user profile and community needs assessment, identify funding resources that would be required to meet park and recreation needs. Project costs for the next 20 years. Alternative Funding • Determine best alternative funding sources for the City such as assessment districts; recommend options to address any funding gaps; and identify best funding practices in other cities that can be explored by the City of Costa Mesa. Phase IV - Master Plan Document Task 1 - Screen Draft: Based on previously outlined tasks, RJM Design Group, Inc. and our team shall develop a draft Parks and Recreation Master Plan Document and submit (4) administrative copies to City for review. RJM will conduct a meeting with City staff to review and discuss refinements to the administrative draft comment. Upon receipt of one set of non -conflicting comments from the City, we will revise the document as appropriate. The City will review the administrative draft documents and provide all requested refinements necessary to develop a final camera ready document. Task 2 - Final Document and Presentation: Draft Final documents will include recommendations specific to parks, recreation and open space, and all summaries related to the development of the findings such as the workshop summary, inventories, prioritization matrix, recently completed studies, and questionnaires. The final master plan will be submitted in one digital and one hard copy for review. RJM will be available to present the findings to the Parks and Recreation Commission and City Council. 10 SAN JUAN CAPISTRANO • SACRAMENTO www.RJMdesigngroup.com - [949] 493-2600 Community Inspired Spaces qqlr a DESIGN RJ M GROUP GROUP City of Costa Mesa • Update of Open Space Master Plan of Parks & Recreation Project Team Costa Mesa offers 26 parks, a municipal golf course, 26 public schools and 2 libraries SAN JUAN CAPISTRANO • SACRAMENTO www.RJMdesigngroup.com • [949] 493-2600 City of Cost,) Mesa • Update of Open Space Master Plan of Parks & Recreation Community Inspired aces A P AN DESIGN DESIGN Project Team RJ M GROUP a1eam Organizational Chart We select a team who has proven qualifications in their specialty and project type. We hold high standards for ourselves and high expectations of subconsultants. Relationships with our subconsultants are long- term with clear coordination and collaboration. Key Team Members - Contact List Project Principal: Robert J. Mueting RA, AIA, ILA, ASLA, LEED AP BD+C - RJM Design Group, Inc. office: (949) 493-2600 rjm@rjmdesigngroup.com Project Manager: Zachary Mueting, ILA, CPSi, LEED AP BD+C - RJM Design Group, Inc. office: (949) 493-2600 zach@rjmdesigngroup.com Programming, Operations & Maintenance: Tim Gallagher - RJM Design Group, Inc. tim@rjmdesigngroup.com Survey Specialist: Pam Wooldridge - RJM Design Group, Inc. pamw@rjmdesigngroup.com Economist: Christine Coman - RJM Design Group, Inc. ccoman@aol.com SAN JUAN CAPISTRANO • SACRAMENTO www.RJMdeslgngroup.com • [9491493-2600 City of Costa Meso •Update of Open Space Master Plan of Parks & Recreation Project Team b, Resumes of Key Personnel Robert J. Mueting AIA, ASLA, LEED AP Priricipakh-Charge RJM Design Group, Inc.. k Community Inspired Spaces a' DESIGN RJ M GROUP Robert J. Mueting is the founder and principal of RJM Group, Inc. Mr. Mueting has over 20 years of experience directing Parks, Recreation, and Open Space Master Plans for communities throughtout California. He is a specialist in community facilitation and consensus building; his expertise in the areas of creative group dynamics and facilitation, programming and conceptual design, as well as strategies and processes for design innovation contribute to each project. Robert's background in planning, architecture and landscape architecture, has given him a strong emphasis on integrating human needs into the built environment. This emphasis is combined with knowledge of history and tradition, with an understanding of contemporary needs, mastery of construction, attention to detail and achievement of appropriate design solutions that create community. Registrations Landscape Architecture/CA/2055 Architecture/CA/C012928 LEED Accredited Professional Education Bachelor of Architecture, University of Nebraska Masters of Landscape Architecture, University of Michigan Related Project Experience PROJECTS IN COSTA MESA Tewinkle Park, Costa Mesa, CA 17th Street Streetscape, Costa Mesa, CA 1000 Bristol Street Site Park Development Concepts, Costa Mesa, CA Open Space Master Plan of Parks and Recreation Update, Costa Mesa, CA CITYWIDE MASTER PLANNING Parks and Recreation Master Plan, Jurupa Community Services District Parks Recreation Master Plan, Banning, CA Parks and Recreation Master Plan Update, Murrieta, CA Parks, Trails, Open Space and Recreation Master Plan Update, San Bernardino, CA Parks, Recreation, and Open Space MasterPlan Update, Santa Clarita, CA Recreation Needs Assessment for PCM, Inc., Laguna Woods Village, CA 12 1 SAN JUAN CAPISTRANO • SACRAMENTO www.RJMdesigngroup,com • [949] 493-2600 Related Project Experience (continued) Parks, Recreation and Open Space Master Plan Update, Chino Hills, CA Recreation, Parks, Green Space and Family Services Master Plan, Azusa, CA Master Plan of Parks and Recreation, Laguna Hills, CA Aliso Viejo Streets & Trails Amenities Master Plan, Aliso Viejo, CA Aliso Viejo Community Association Parks and Recreation Master Plan, Aliso Viejo, CA Master Plan of Park, Recreation, Trails, and Open Space, Dana Point, CA Senior Facilities Study for North Area of Irvine, Irvine, CA Green Space/ Recreation Element and Recreation & Parks Master Plan, Pasadena, CA Parks and Recreation Master Plan, Yucaipa, CA Parks and Recreation Master Plan, Sacramento, CA Recreation Needs Assessment, West Hollywood, CA Parks and Recreation Master Plan, La Quinta, CA Parks and Recreation Master Plan, Norwalk, CA City of Costa Mesa • Update of Open Space Master Plan of Parks & Recreation Projedt Team Zachary Mueting LLA ASLA LEED AP (BD+C) Project Manag6r/Landscape Architect RJM Design Group, Inc, hk Community Inspired Spacesa' DESIGN RJ M GROUP Zachary Mueting has been with RJM Design Group for 15 years. Zachary is a landscape architect, LEED accredited professional with a strong background in recreation planning and design with an emphasis on sustainability. Starting as a draftsman, Zachary has worked his way up to his current position as project landscape architect. His experience is unique having developed proficiency in all areas of RJM's business capacity as well as park inventory and analysis. Zachary's experience, education, professional accreditation, and publications enables him to fulfill his role the development of the City's facility assessment. Zach will be your day to day contact, assist with budget and schedule control, inventory, focus groups and report preparation. Related Project Experience Parks and Recreation Master Plan, Huntington Beach, CA Parks and Recreation Master Plan, Goleta, CA Jurupa Community Services District Parks and Recreation Master Plan San Bernardino Parks, Recreation, Trails, and Open Space f Master Plan Update, San Bernardino, CA Santa Clarita Parks, Recreation, Trails, and Open Space Master Plan Update, Santa Clarita, CA OC Zoo General Development Plan, OC Parks Parks and Recreation Master Plan, Murrieta, CA Parks and Recreation Master Plan, Banning, CA Chino Hills Parks & Recreation Open Space & Trails Master Plan Update, Chino Hills, CA Aliso Viejo Community Association Parks & Recreation Master Plan, Aliso Viejo, CA Central Park Family Aquatic Center, Rancho Cucamonga, CA Southwest Community Park Master Plan, Rancho Cucamonga, CA Ambrose Park Master Plan, Ambrose Parks and Recreation District, Pittsburgh, CA Proposition 84 Grant Applications (4 Parks), San Bernardino, CA Registrations/Licenses Landscape Architect/ CA 5731 LEED AP Building Design + Construction (BD+C) Education Masters Degree/ Landscape Architecture/California Polytechnic State University/Pomona, CA Bachelor of Science/Information Technology/Colorado Technical University, CO Bachelor of Science/Information Systems Management/Colorado Technical University, CO Professional Affiliations American Society of Landscape Architects (ASLA) California Parks & Recreation Society (CPRS) National Recreation and Parks Association (NRPA) Publications Consensus vs. Coercion: Authoritative Influences During the Collaborative Workshop Process in Landscape Architecture - California State Polytechnic University, Pomona, 2008 Speaking Engagements Effective Workshop Techniques, Educational Session at CPRS Conference and Expo 2012 SAN JUAN CAPISTRANO • SACRAMENTO 13 www.RJMdesigngroup.com • [9491493-2600 City,, -..,f Cos.Is) Meso • Update of Open Space Master Plan of Parks & Recreation Community Inspired aces A P ,R, ,r-��J- T - - _ - DESIGN PrC�Je`il I �i� �RJ M GROUP Timothy A. Gallagher Programming and O&M Analysis I,JM Design Group, Inc. Timothy A. Gallagher has considerable expertise in parks and recreation management gleaned from more than thirty-five years of public agency management experience and numerous Board positions with industry associations and interest groups. Tim will spearhead many of the tasks outlined in our scope of work including the review of currentpracticesand policies, operations and maintenance evaluation, identifyingbest management practices, and developing the new policies for the City. — As a Manager or Department head for Parks and Recreation agencies in Seattle, Washington and Los Angeles County Director of Parks and Recreation, Tim had responsibility for long-range planning, park and facility development, program development and operations, and maintenance of parks and community facilities. This experience includes leadership of the development of Strategic Action Plans for Los Angeles County Department of Parks and Recreation and the City of Seattle Department of Parks at'rd Recreation. Tim's agency experience has also provided him the opportunity to gain familiarity with various funding and financing tools, as well as processing Plans for approval and successful submission of grant requests. Related Project Experience Parks and Recreation Master Plan, Huntington Beach, CA Parks and Recreation Master Plan, Goleta, CA Livermore Maintenance Evaluation, included in Recreation and Parks District, Parks and Recreation Master Plan, Livermore, CA Jurupa Community Services District Maintenance Evaluation, included in Parks and Recreation Master Plan Jurupa Community Services District, Maintenance and Operations Manual Pleasant Hill Park Maintenance Fiscal Evaluation as part of the Strategic Business Plan 2012/2013 Pleasanton Parks and Recreation Master Plan included Maintenance Evaluation, Pleasanton, CA Santa Maria Leisure Needs Assessment and Action Plan Update, included Park Maintenance Evaluation and Sustainability Plan, Santa Maria, CA State of Oregon Statewide Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plan—Development of chapter on Sustainability in Parks and Recreation Strategic Action Plan, Seattle, WA Pro Parks and Green Spaces Levies Management, Seattle Strategic Action Plan, Los Angeles County, CA Hollywood Bowl Renovation, Los Angeles San Luis Obispo County Open Space Trails Plan 4 SAN JUAN CAPISTRANO • SACRAMENTO www.RJMdesigngroup,com • [949] 493-2600 Education M.A. Parks & Recreation Administration, CSU Chico B.A. Sociology / UC Los Angeles Professional and Civic Positions Board Member, California Council of Land Trusts Legislative Chair—California Parks & Recreation Society Legislative Committee. 2000-2005 Instructor, Cal Poly San Luis Obispo City of Cos ;a Meso • Update of Open Space Master Plan of Parks & Recreation Project Team Pamela Wooldridge Survey Specialist RJM Design Group, Inc, Pamela Wooldridge will assist in the development of the phone survey and will be responsible for summarizing the sports organization survey and preparing the facility demand and needs exhibits. Pam has prepared community survey research aimed at Parks, Recreation and Open Space Plans or Recreation Needs Assessments for more than fifty public agencies. Related Project Experience Parks and Recreation Master Plan, Huntington Beach, CA Parks and Recreation Master Plan, Goleta, CA Parks and Recreation Master Plan, Jurupa Community Services District (JCSD), Eastvale, CA Parks and Recreation Master Plan Update, Banning, CA Parks and Recreation Master Plan Update, Murrieta, CA Parks, Trails, Open Space and Recreation Master Plan Update, San Bernardino, CA Parks, Recreation, and Open Space Master Plan Update, Santa Clarita, CA Aliso Viejo Community Association Parks and Recreation Master Plan and Updates, Aliso Viejo, CA Recreation Needs Assessment for PCM, Inc., Laguna Woods Village, CA Parks, Recreation and Open Space Master Plan Update, Chino Hills, CA Recreation, Parks, Green Space and Family Services Master Plan, Azusa, CA Master Plan of Parks and Recreation, Laguna Hills, CA Master Plan of Park, Recreation, Trails, and Open Space, Dana Point, CA Open Space Master Plan of Parks and Recreation Update, Costa Mesa, CA Green Space/Recreation Element and Recreation & Parks Master Plan, Pasadena, CA Recreation Needs Assessment, San Juan Capistrano, CA Parks and Recreation Needs Assessment, Chula Vista, CA Community Inspired Spaces DESIGN RJ M GROUP Christine Coman Economist RJM Design Group, Inc, Chris Coman has participated in numerous feasibility studies for mass spectator and recreation -oriented facilities including stadiums, civic centers, convention/exhibition halls, OHV parks theme parks, visitor centers and other public facilities. These studies involved recreational, cultural, and entertainment events. Chris has also developed techniques used to determine recreation needs and convert these to facility and land requirements as input to the preparation of local and regional park master plans. Another of her areas of specialization is evaluation of financing techniques for recreation facilities. Related Project Experience The following selected relevant experienced represents recent Team efforts with RIM Design Group, Inc.: Parks and Recreation Master Plan, Huntington Beach, CA Parks and Recreation Master Plan, Goleta, CA Parks and Recreation Master Plan Update, Murrieta, CA Parks, Recreation, and Open Space Master Plan, Dana Point, CA Recreation and Parks Master Plan, Pasadena, CA Recreation Needs Assessment, San Juan Capistrano, CA Parks, Recreation and Open Space Master Plan Update, Chino Hills, CA Parks, Recreation and Open Space Master Plan Update, Santa Clarita, CA Parks, Recreation, Trails, and Open Space Master Plan Update, San Bernardino, CA Recreation Needs Assessment for Laguna Woods Village, PCM, Inc. Open Space Master Plan of Parks and Recreation Update, Costa Mesa, CA SAN JUAN CAPISTRANO • SACRAMENTO 15 www.RJMdesigngroup.com • [9491493-2600 Community Inspired Spaces a' R M DESIGN GROUP City of Costa Mesa • Update of Open Space Master Plan of Parks & Recreation Similar Projects Orange County Fairgrounds, which hosts one of the largest fairs in California SAN JUAN CAPISTRANO • SACRAMENTO www.RJMdesigngroup.com • [949] 493-2600 ;ily of Costa Meso • Update of Open Space Master Plan of Parks & Reoreoflon Community InspiredSpaces A f R M DESIGN Si m I I a �� Projects GROUP a,Team's Experience on Similar Projects RJM Design ��� V Groups oNa �o M �a Experience w 0 v 0 � zz Ca t(Id C o ° a Ln U C itf cd >, ) u" p A"' �n 0 -� �n 0 E is � 0 U o PROJECT NAME CLIENT NAME N a Parks and Recreation Master City of Pleasanton X X X X X X X X X X Plan** Parks and Recreation Master Jurupa Community X X X X X X X X X X X Plan** Services District Parks and Recreation Master City of Murrieta X X X X X X X X Plan Update* Parks, Trails, Open Space City of San X X X X X X X X X X X X and Recreation Master Plan Bernardino Update* Parks, Recreation, and Open City of Santa Clarita X X X X X X X X X Space Master Plan Update* Parks, Recreation and Open City of Chino Hills X X X X X X X X X X X X Space Master Plan Update* Green Space/Recreation City of Pasadena X X X X X X X X X X X Element and Recreation & Parks Master Plan* Master Plan of Park, City of Dana Point X X X X X X X X X Recreation, Trails, and Open Space* Open Space Master Plan of City of Costa Mesa X X X X X X X X X X Parks and Recreation Update* *PROJECTS with RJM DESIGN GROUP'S TEAM: Robert J. Mueting - Principal, Zachary Mueting - Project Mgr, Pam Wooldridge - Survey, and Chris Coman - Economist **Projects with above Team plus Tim Gallagher - Programming/O&M/Funding COPIES OF ALL REPORTS AVAILABLE UPON REQUEST. FLASH DRIVE WITH PDF FILES CAN BE DELIVERED AT CITY'S REQUEST. SAN JUAN CAPISTRANO • SACRAMENTO 17 www,RJMdesigngroup.com • [9491 493-2600 City of Colo Meso • Update of Open Space Master Plan of Parks & Recreation CommunityInspired aces19. Ins P A IF DESIGN + DESIGN Similar Projects GROUP b. Project Experience and References RJ i - +Aleslr7Tinctrk - LEGEND ®PARKS yr • ■ i Parks W Com. ty PA, © JJa�i ■ + ll ...■ Mid -.,r .i. ....•� ek �l i•.11 .i r ; � ��--i�. � � s 1 � �Neignhborhood Parks •� �Aeyio al PaAs R COMMUNITY FACILITIES '. tiJ n` <D 6 �- e MID + •. 'VL,.' R ` + Parks and Recreation Master Plan Huntington Beach, CA 18 SAN JUAN CAPISTRANO • SACRAMENTO www.RJMdesigngroup,com • [9491493-2600 Project Summary Nicknamed "Surf City" for its beautiful wide beaches and consistently breaking surf, The City of Huntington Beach has a large and well-established park system with over seventy five parks and numerous community recreation buildings. The City contracted RJM Design Group to update its existing Parks and Recreation Master Plan. The first phase of the project included a background review of the demographics and community trends and their impact on the park system. The second phase involved a detailed inventory of the facilities and programs currently provided in the City, as well as a gap analysis of the existing facilities to determine locations where recreational opportunities are needed. The third phase included a thorough public involvement process including executive interviews, sports organization questionnaire, telephone survey, and public workshops. The fourth phase looked at the demand and needs for facilities based on the inventory of existing facilities and the data derived from the prior phases. Recommendations will include an opportunities feasibility analysis, acquisition plan, cost estimates, capital improvement plan, and sustainable practices/maintenance and operations management plan. City 'd Costo Meso • Update of Open Space Master Plan of Parks & Recreation similar Projects i Community Inspired Spaces A. DESIGN RJ M GROUP A. I • r `1 , 1 ++ V,1 •� '•"! yy_� .Lpr rVrWnleP F n 5 p 1: �`` �'+ �•��;R3/!► � �,. � � .-may, � .,., ' � + rJ ' ..- l ■ Irk -IM a-. �/�AiAI. �.�lfR �! '.� eA ! 1 1 ���* r �nre@.la nAr oar •� ^ I � L = ..•., ,� m�V of r,Nilanin �% ,yw, ••.ru of •5enhr Oaror� Recreation Needs Assessment Golelo, CA Project Summary LEGEND (D EXISTING PARKS � �g� eeea Nelynngrr NelghM.-M Park! Com quo ly P .k' aec�eVa`I A NalPralA IG be s OX OPPORTUNITY SITES Floored Nor Oes gnM Nel9; E°..mod Pagk s, e r r"oammeewliir FP=k.,a�e n re.i2i MarmayAr_ easi Grrenbells -U.PlanredV -Shea The City of Goleta is a recently incorporated City (2002) in Santa Barbara County with over 20 park facilities. The City contracted RJM Design Group to prepare a Recreation Needs Assessment in order to carefully guide the development of parks and recreation facilities for the City. The Recreation Needs Assessment includes an inventory of existing recreation facilities and a review of the current and project demographics of the community. Community Outreach tasks provided for a clear understanding of the needs of the community, and included Stakeholder Interviews, a Telephone Survey, Community Workshops and an Online Survey. This data will be used to develop the Needs Analysis and specific recommendations to direct the future of parks and recreation in the City of Goleta. SAN JUAN CAPISTRANO • SACRAMENTO 19 www.RJMdesigngroup.com • [949] 493-2600 City of CuaaI'o Mesa • Update of Open Space Master Plan of Parks & Recreation 5irnibr Projects Parks and Recreation Master Plan —,, —.0 Fe~ FUN FNM Tru Gve.y co—ty rm p•o;9vae 5 C 5 Ee�e�.T.e ..• _ Win. lwTv�'.P�.9 Yrery �� ;.,.._...'......ter hk Community Inspired Spaces ;, DESIGN RJ M GROUP I ✓� Parks and Recreation Master Plan Jurupa Community Services District (JCSD); Eastvale, CA Project Summary In 2012, RJM Design Group completed a Parks and Recreation Master Plan for the Jurupa Community Services District (JCSD) Parks and Recreation Department, which provides services in northwestern Riverside County within the boundary of the City of Eastvale. The Master Plan serves as a guide and implementation tool for the management and development of parks and recreational facilities and programs and is part of the defined strategy of the JCSD Parks and Recreation Department to achieve its objective of providing high quality parks, facilities and recreation programs which meet the needs of the community through a process that engages, community leaders and civic organizations. RJM utilized methods of community involvement including a telephone survey, stakeholder interviews, community workshops, and workshop attendee questionnaires, which provided an understanding of community issues, recreational facility and program usage patterns, and community needs for parks and recreation facilities and programs. RJM provided recommendations for programs and facilities, facility costs, and opportunities for potential funding sources. 20 SAN JUAN CAPISTRANO • SACRAMENTO www.RJMdesigngroup.com • [949] 493-2600 City of Colto Mesa • Update of Open Space Master Plan of Parks & Recreation Similar Projects I� City of Banning a I�. Parks and Recreation Master Plan rol Parks and Recreation Master Plan Banning, CA Project Summary EMONG PARKS Uysed Park Lions Park RepPIW Park Richard Sanchez Perk RaosFvelt YroI Pak Syhm Pak ' 112 Wo U.,w RMPA 0 T.?Llrm. Gap Radius k Community Inspired Spaces ;` DESIGN RJ M GROUP CTTT OF PANNING OPPMFUNR'f NTT$ FUTURE CITY FACILITIES a- +G.kN.h Perk OannMplrghkh+d 4+ya�Jm � GAwnlNrnrtAan[h Fark. Fuecml Gaaaa.,nerv'�r nMranMka MJdN.1�fl«nHap,r.Ne FIJI URL ACCIUISITIGIF;NT 74Uautth C—pury NW.Owned Park GAP AREAS • Weslor H1ghlard I4,w Asad • Bcrw RapPikr Park&Sylvan Park • Northo(WrOWPark _CBy Boundary Banning has a diverse population. A large portion of the population (25%) is over 65 years of age, compared to 11% in the County of Riverside. There are over 10 private, gated, age -restricted communities; the largest is Sun Lakes Country Club which provides many recreational opportunities for those living inside the gate. The distinct demographics and recreation trends set the baseline for the Master Plan needs assessment. The recreation needs assessment for Banning included a statistically valid phone survey of 200 residents, focus group, interviews, and sports organization questionnaire. A community wide workshop was conducted to prioritize the identified parks and recreation needs in the City. A demand and needs analyses was also included which provides quantifiable facility needs for the current population, as well as future needs based on changing trends and demographics. The key issues identified through the Master Plan process were 1) new park development to satisfy parkland acreage goals and identified recreation needs in the community; 2) develop a multi -use trail system for bikes, horses and hikers; and 3) evaluate the Department's budget and structure to maximize quality service, programs, and facilities. Specific facility and program recommendations are identified with an implementation plan including cost estimates for new facilities. i i SAN JUAN CAPISTRANO a SACRAMENTO 21 www.RJMdesigngroup.com a [9491493-2600 Ci -y of Co lto Meso • Update of Open Space Master Plan of Parks & Recreation Communityaces Inspired A SP IRIF DESIGN RJ M GROUP Similar Projects Parks and Recreation Master Plan Update Murrieta, CA Project Summary_ The updated Master Plan set the framework for decision makers in the planning and rehabilitation of the City's parks and recreation facilities as well as a planning tool that established park and facility standards for the next ten years. Furthermore, the updated Master Plan provided a systematic and prioritized approach to the implementation of needed parks and facilities. The finished update included three main components: (1) a needs assessment and gap analysis, (2) recommended modifications to parks and facilities to meet current and future needs, and (3) a financial implementation plan. The main challenge for Murrieta in the coming years will be expanding its physical facilities to meet currently underserved recreation needs of its 28,000 residents. The community has expressed a need for additional facilities such as tennis courts, BMX, equestrian amenities, sports fields, and aquatics. Meeting these needs will be a challenge due to the current depressed economy and the corresponding decrease in developer funding to provide forthese facilities, This updated MasterPlan recommended innovative strategies to provide for the recreation needs expressed by the community. Just as important, the plan offered recommendations on trail connectivity and park enhancements, which are highly valued by Murrieta residents, 22 SAN JUAN CAPISTRANO • SACRAMENTO www.RJMdesigngroup,com • [9491493-2600 City of Cot to Meso • Updote of Open Space Master Plan of Parks & Recreation Community A area Ins ' r '.� is� Simile Projects DESIGN -- - - RJM GROUP Parks, Recreation, Trails and Open Space Master Plan San Bernardino, CA Project Summary The development of the Master Plan was built upon community input. Hundreds of residents of all ages participated in the planning process. This included community workshops, a staff focus group, stakeholder interviews, workshop surveys, sports organization surveys, and a community wide telephone survey. Additionally, community data from the 2005 General Plan was also utilized. Key issues identified through the needs assessment process included parks maintenance, safety and crime, lack of funding for the Department, need for a trail system, increased park acreage, and the need for more community centers, swimming pool, baseball fields, soccer fields, and indoor basketball courts, A detailed Strategic Plan was also prepared in conjunction with the Master Plan Update. The Strategic Plan analyzed the current maintenance and operations for the parks and recreation facilities, and included a comparison of other cities budgets. Funding sources and opportunities were outlined for the improvements identified in the Master Plan. SAN JUAN CAPISTRANO • SACRAMENTO 23 www.RJMdeslgngroup.com • [9491493-2600 City of Costo Mesa • Update of Open Space Master Plan of Parks & Recreation CommunityInspired aces ', P SP Sirrillar Projects DESIGN Rj M GROUP Parks, Recreation, Trails and Open Space Master Plan Update Santa Clarita, CA 24 SAN JUAN CAPISTRANO • SACRAMENTO www.RJMdesigngroup.com • [9491493-2600 Project_ Summary The Parks, Recreation & Open Space Master Plan Update for the City of Santa Clarita identified the recreational needs in the City based on information gathered from an active and broad-based public involvement program that included a community -wide telephone survey, sports organization questionnaires, public workshops, focus groups, interviews, as well as related documents and information provided by the City of Santa Clarita and the region. An evaluation of the current neighborhood park service areas and a city-wide park acreage analysis helped to identify service area gaps and parkland acreage deficiencies within the community. The Master Plan also included an evaluation and recommendations pertaining to the maintenance and operations of the City's recreation facilities, trails, and open space. This Master Plan serves as a guide for the development and management of parks and recreation, open space, public services and facilities in the City of Santa Clarita. In addition, the compilation of research, data, evaluation and recommendations for the Parks, Recreation and Open Space Master Plan Update will be an invaluable resource for the future preparation of the Regional General Plan "One Valley, One Vision" - a collaborative effort between the City of Santa Clarita and the County of Los Angeles. City of C010ca Mesa e Update of Open Space Master Plan of Parks & Recreation Similar Projects 11, Community Inspired Spam ;� DESIGN RJ M GROUP Parks, Recreation, Trails and Open Space Master Plan Chino Hills, CA Project _Summary- abl@4L4MW • C--hy Perk O Nephbod.W Paik —Fe y >lap.ral.nwwYraf aaewu . Cdlealar Sln<I (E laneal S1I"Y-CWN4ALL£ ,CREATION FACILITIES/ �pEjY 'fAAL01N05 GaNa.wara't 1/r Cb b W ban i hbuaMn {s nl r NartC{arnfY.l Ursyryleallaa Sr..aky I Wl�g omlun�cnLnrlaEEruuwnesuFn rarruruauc�cbuwnuw ®Chliw Mlls Aele Park ®las Snnnos Goll Cawu BCounnytlub FUNDED FACWfMiULkYTy F3lLLY FUNDED FACILITIlS - BirJ Farm PaM1 - GraiM Panty Park hudnyla<emenll • Richland Pinehurst Sne •Torrey Pines N*( com—HyNdg) VNkno Palk - Nla Bodes PdA Chino Hills is a unique city recognized for its open space, diverse housing options, neighborhood orientation, and rural character. The City's General Plan, first adopted in 1994, established a vision for the City that is well on its way to fulfilment. In 1994 RJM Design Group prepared the City's first Parks, Recreation and Open Space Master Plan and was hired to update the master plan as the City has experienced rapid growth and development over the last decade. The Master Plan process included a public outreach program that facilitated the development of a collaborative vision and mission for the City based on resident involvement. The community wide needs assessment determined that the greatest facility and program needs in the City include; an aquatic facility and programming, indoor basketball courts and a gymnasium, senior programming, and a community center that includes a senior component. Concept plans for existing park improvements as well as 19 new sites for recreation opportunities were produced and included in the Master Plan. Analysis and recommendations were provided to determine funding sources that could be accessed to support these recommended park system improvements. Linkages to other regional providers of services and facilities were examined and included in the assessment of needs and opportunities. SAN JUAN CAPISTRANO a SACRAMENTO 25 www.RJMdesigngroup.com • [9491493-2600 C ity f Costa Mesa • Update of Open Space Master Plan of Parks & Recreation S,i r r i & Projects i 4 I � T V O F P A S A D E N .�r w CM RECREATION AND PARKS MASTER PLAN i Community Inspired SpaCes a' DESIGN Rj M GROUP Recreation and Parks Master Plan, Green Space/Recreation Element of General Plan Pasadena, CA Project Summary As the City nears it's build out population, Pasadena faces a number of challenges in the provision of open spaces and facilities. The City has a variety of parks and open spaces that serve a huge range of activities and user groups, including not only Pasadena residents but regional user groups as well. As community demand for recreation types changes over time, facilities attempt to keep pace with this demand. Partially in response to changes in community demand, Pasadena has evolved with a rich and varied range of private institutions, public and private schools, and non-profit organizations that offer recreation facilities and programs to residents of the area. In recent years, the City has experienced new challenges stemming from substantial new growth in the Central District and an influx of housing stock much different than historical suburban development. In addition, the Northwest region of the City is increasingly dense, with a high concentration of children, and access to parks and green spaces is a key issue in this area. For all of these reasons, the City of Pasadena must look to creative means to provide open spaces and recreational programs and facilities to its evolving population. 26 SAN JUAN CAPISTRANO • SACRAMENTO www.RJMdesigngroup,com • [9491493-2600 h Community Inspired Spaces a' R M DESIGN GROUP City of Costa Mesa • Update of Open Space Master Plan of Parks & Recreation Project Schedule RJM Completed Costa Mesa's 2002 Master Plan Report SAN JUAN CAPISTRANO • SACRAMENTO www.RJMdesigngroup.com • [949] 493-2600 P P Mesu - Updde of open Spoc'�e Mosler Plan of Po ks & IP2CfeCltion Community y Inspired aces '" IIF DESIGN Proje(CI Schedde RJ GROUP a. Proposed Schedule & Summary of Deliverables Project Summary & Schedule (10-12 Months) Phase Meetings Deliverables Kick -Off Kick Off Meeting with City project manager Preliminary scoping budget Meeting with City to review current park conditions, Database of Existing Resources maintenance practices, recreation programming and Demographic Profile City standards and policies Parks and Recreation Facility Background City wide tour of parks and facilities with City staff (1/2 Inventory Matrix day) Research N Findings on Operation and / Existing r Interviews with City O& M Staff Maintenance Pratices Conditions Findings on current park conditions Inventory of programs and services offered Service area gap map exhibit Stakeholder Interviews (1 day) Stakeholder Interview Summary Community Workshops (3) Sports Organization Community Questionnarie Summary Outreach co Telephone Survey Summary Workshop Agenda and Summaries Meeting with City to review facility needs, community Issues, Trends and Implications priorities, and public consensus - as well as short -mid- Report and long-term opportunities Facility Demand and Needs Exhibits Comparison of Facility Needs Ratios Needs 3 Operational Assessment Analysis Maintance and Operations Analysis/Summary of Key Findings Cost Estimates for Recommended Improvements Funding Sources Summary and Report Meeting with City to review and discuss refinements to Screen Draft Report Screen Draft Report Final Master Plan Report Document and Meeting/Presentation to Parks and Recreation Report Summary Presentation Presentations Commission and City Council SAN JUAN CAPISTRANO - SACRAMENTO 27 www.RJMdesigngroup.com - [949] 493-2600 Knowledge inspires us to create spaces in natural harmony with our environment. Upon analyzing the sequence of numbers 1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 13, 21, 34, 55, 89, 144, 233, the 13th -century Italian mathematician Fibonacci realized that each number was the sum of the two preceding numbers. Divide a Fibonacci number after the 14th number in the sequence by the next highest number, and the quotient is .618034 times as large as the number that follows. This natural equation is used in art and architecture and is the basis for the shape of playing cards, The Parthenon, sunflowers, nautilus shells, and the great spiral galaxies of outer space. The Greeks called it "The Divine Proportion". RJM Design Gr 31591 Camino San Juan Capi rjm@rjmdesigr www.RJMdesie [9491493-2690 fax [9491493-2600 phone Community Inspired Spaces r .618034 of KRKO 0 0 w •i..y,: f 1 ti L .�. a �( a K r � ",,r .�- `}-.�. . �' • � � �' rte•, � a. V-0 - _ 40 ' � � . .%#• -. - 'WA dft r w r Ono - " Y' r }= ` 3 �. ���"'�'"�' ,wr�� c� ._ �, . x . � ^'• tet'— •i..y,: f 1 ti L .�. a �( City of Costa fi eso (Jiodate of Open Space Master Plan of Parks & Recreation �l� Fee Proposal 31591 Camino Capistrano San Juan Capistrano, CA 92675 www.RJMdesigngroup.com [9491493-2690 fax [9491493-2600 phone January 1, 2015 Mr. Baltazar Mejia, P.E. City of Costa Mesa Public Services / Engineering 77 Fair Drive, P.O. Box 1200 Costa Mesa, CA 92628-1200 Community Inspired:Spaces a' DESIGN Rj M GROUP RE: Fee Proposal for Professional Services to prepare the Update of Open Space Master Plan of Parks and Recreation for the City of Costa Mesa Dear Bart: We wish to express our appreciation for this opportunity to provide a scope and fee that will meet the City's needs. Please find the following fee proposal for professional planning services to prepare the Update of the Open Space Master Plan of Parks and Recreation, based upon our proposal dated November 6, 2014 (under separate cover) shall be a fixed fee of $151,270.00, plus estimated reimbursable allowance of $10,000.00. We are excited to work with the City of Costa Mesa, and have prepared our fee in order to accommodate the City's needs. Should you have any questions regarding our fee proposal, please do not hesitate to call. Thank you. Sincerely, RJM Design Group, Inc. Robert Mueting, Principal Email: rjm@rjmdesigngroup.com SAN JUAN CAPISTRANO • SACRAMENTO www.RJMdesigngroup.com • [9491493-2600 City of Costa Masa • Upc'ote of Open Space Moster Plan of Parks & Recreation Communis A Y Ins P ireds Paces Mir DESIGN Fee Proposal RJ MGROUP It is the objective of our Team to provide the most comprehensive, yet efficient, approach to the development of Costa Mesa's Update of the Open Space Master Plan of Parks and Recreation. This fee includes all costs to be incurred by RJM Design Group, Inc. with the exception of reimbursable expenses. Fees for the outlined scope of services are as follows: Phase I Background Research/Existing Conditions: $ 27,680.00 Phase II Community Outreach $ 51,070.00 Phase III Needs Analysis $ 36,880.00 Phase IV Documentation and Presentations $ 35,640.00 Total Fee: $151,270.00 REIMBURSABLE EXPENSES (Estimated Allowance $10,000.00) When incurred, the following project expenses will be billed at cost plus 15% administrative fee in addition to the above fee proposal: • Printing, plotting, copying, scanning, photography, graphic expenses • Delivery and handling of documents, shipping • Permits, plan chuck, and inspection fees Cit yy business license • Soils testing PAYMENTS Payments are due and payable on a monthly basis following the completion of any substantial phase of work. Carrying charges for overdue accounts beyond 30 days of billing date are charged at 1.5% of the amount due, compounded monthly. ADDITIONAL. SERVICES Professional services not specifically identified in the scope of work will be considered additional services and may be perfortned at Client's request, reimbursable at consultant's standard hourly rates. Additional services may include, but are not limited to: • Additional meetings, presentations, or site visits beyond those identified in the scope of work. • Exhibit preparation beyond that identified in the scope of work. • Revisions to documents required as a result of changes in Client's direction and/or subsequent to Client's approval, or changes in governmental regulations. • Design of improvements beyond the designated project site, or due to changes in project llahas ink schedule. • Specialized billingg or accounting forms, invoices, spreadsheets. • Engagement of other consultants not specifically identified below. SAN JUAN CAPISTRANO • SACRAMENTO 2 www.RJMdesigngroup.com • [949] 493.2600 h, City of Costa Mesa • Update of Open Space Master Plan of Parks & Recreation Community Inspired Ins Spaces DESIGN Fee Proposal Rj M GROUP CONSULTANTS'HOURLY RATES Compensation For additional services will be billed hourly at our standard rates below: RIM DESIGN GROUP, INC. Principal Landscape Architect Senior Associate Associate Landscape Architect Landscape Architect Job Captain / Landscape Designer CADD Technician Draftsperson Word Processor $145 - $165 per hour $130 - $145 per hour $130 - $140 per hour $115 - $125 per hour $100 - $110 per hour $ 85 - $ 95 per hour $ 70 - $ 80 per hour $ 55 - $ 65 per hour Billings for all time and materials and contract extension work shall be in accordance with the level of work performed based on the categories listed above. Hourly rates will be escalated each August 1st in accordance with any increase in the Consumer Price Index or other mutually agreed upon cost index, beginning with August 1, 2015. Provisions for fee escalation pertain to all contract extensions and additional work. SAN JUAN CAPISTRANO • SACRAMENTO 3 www.RJMdesigngroup.com • [949] 493-2600 lal EXHIBIT C FEE SCHEDULE 14 RJM Design Group 01y of Costo M,eso • Upoote of Open Space Moster Plan of Parks & �ecreation Fee Proposal Community Inspired Spaces DESIGN RJ M GROUP NOTE: The following amounts are hourly estimates only. This projectwill be billed as a percentage complete of the fixed fee for each project phase based upon actual hours worked. Phase / Tasks Description Principal $ 165 RIM Design Group Project Senior Senior Manager Associate Associate $ 140 $ 145 $ 130 Word Processor $ 65 Phase I - Background Research / Existing Conditions Task 1- Work Plan 8 8 20 12 Task 2 - Sports Organization Questionnaire 8 Task 2 - Review of Existing Documents 8 8 10 10 8 Task 3 - Demographics 2 2 24 15 PHASE II HOURS: 10 PHASE II SUBTOTAL: $1,650.00 'Task 4- Park and Recreation Facilities Inventory 2 24 32 4 16 Task 5 - Recreation Program Inventory 2 4 30 4 4 Task 6 - Park and Facility Gap Analysis 2 8 4 2 PHASE I HOURS: 24 PHASE I SUBTOTAL: $3,960.00 54 $7,560.00 72 $10,440.00 25 $3,250.00 38 $2,470.00 PHASE I TOTAL: $27,680.00 PHASE II TOTAL: $51,070.00 1 62 1 32 1 26 OutreachPhase 11 - Community Task 1 - Executive Interviews 2 24 20 12 Task 2 - Sports Organization Questionnaire 2 6 27 Task 3 - Community Wide Telephone Survey 3 6 227 8 Task 4 - Public Workshops (3 Total) 3 40 24 4 PHASE II HOURS: 10 PHASE II SUBTOTAL: $1,650.00 76 $10,640.00 20 254 44 $2,900.00 $33,020.00 1 $2,860.00 PHASE II TOTAL: $51,070.00 PHASE III TOTAL: $36,880.00 Task 1 - Screen Draft 24 1 62 1 32 1 26 1 32 Task 2 - Final Document and Presentation 24 Phase III - Needs Analy�;is Task 1 - Community Issues and Recreation Trends Analysis 4 8 8 PHASE IV HOURS:48 8 Task 2 - Demand and Needs Assessment 4 8 PHASE IV SUBTOTAL: 16,920.00 55 8 Task 3 - Benchmarking/Analysis of Levels of Service 2 4 40 2 Task 4 - Identification of Core Services and Pricing Strategies 2 4 8 2 Task 5 - Maintenance and Operations Analysis 2 4 16 2 Task 6 - Opportunities Feasibilit Anal si's 4 1 2 Task 7 - Cost Estimates 2 6 2 Task 8- Capital Improvement Plan 4 4 20 2 Task 9 - Financial Strategies and Plan 4 4 32 2 PHASE III HOURS: 24 PHASE III SUBTOTAL: $3,960.00 46 $6,440.00 84 $12,180.00 95 $12,350.00 30 $1,950.00 PHASE III TOTAL: $36,880.00 Task 1 - Screen Draft 24 1 62 1 32 1 26 1 32 Task 2 - Final Document and Presentation 24 24 8 18 32 PHASE IV HOURS:48 86 40 1 44 64 PHASE IV SUBTOTAL: 16,920.00 $12,040.00 $5,800.00 $5,720.00 $4,160.00 PHASE IV TOTAL: $35,640.00 Base Fee Total $ 151,270 Reimbursable $ 10,000 Grand Total $ 161,270 SAN JUAN CAPISTRANO • SACRAMENTO www.RJMdesigngroup.com • [949] 493.2600 N EXHIBIT D PROJECT SCHEDULE 15 RJM Design Group ;,Nk Community Inspired Spaces DESIGN RJ M GROUP City of Costa Mesa • Update of Open Space Master Plan of Parks & Recreation Project Schedule RJM Completed Costa Mesa's 2002 Master Plan Report SAN JUAN CAPISTRANO • SACRAMENTO www.RJMdesigngroup.com • [949] 493-2600 i, _;i[y .-t C,��.A;Ic� Mese • 11�_ d0]e of omen S[DCJae Mosher Plan of Parks & Rec,�reation Community Inspired spaces" _�' v��1N DESIGN Project So, heduleR M GROUP a, Proposed Schedule & Summary of Deliverables SAN JUAN CAPISTRANO • SACRAMENTO 27 www.RJMdesigngroup.com • [9491493-2600 Phase Meetings Deliverables Kick -Off Kick Off Meeting with City project manager Preliminary scoping budget Meeting with City to review current park conditions, Database of Existing Resources maintenance practices, recreation programming and Demographic Profile City standards and policies Parks and Recreation Facility Background City wide tour of parks and facilities with City staff (1/2 Inventory Matrix day) Research 3 Findings on Operation and Existing r Interviews with City O& M Staff Maintenance Pratices Conditions Findings on current park conditions Inventory of programs and services offered Service area gap map exhibit Stakeholder Interviews (1 day) Stakeholder Interview Summary Community Workshops (3) Sports Organization Community � Questionnarie Summary Outreach Telephone Survey Summary Workshop Agenda and Summaries Meeting with City to review facility needs, community Issues, Trends and Implications priorities, and public consensus - as well as short -mid- Report and long-term opportunities Facility Demand and Needs Exhibits Comparison of Facility Needs Ratios Needs3 Operational Assessment Analysis Maintance and Operations Analysis/Summary of Key Findings Cost Estimates for Recommended Improvements Funding Sources Summary and Report Meeting with City to review and discuss refinements to Screen Draft Report Screen Draft Report Final Master Plan Report Document and Meeting/Presentation to Parks and Recreation Report Summary Presentation Presentations Commission and City Council SAN JUAN CAPISTRANO • SACRAMENTO 27 www.RJMdesigngroup.com • [9491493-2600 EXHIBIT E CERTIFICATES OF INSURANCE 16 RJM Design Group -� 1 0 CERTIFICATE OF LIABILITY INSURANCE DATE (MMIDD/YYYY) 11/28/2015 THIS CERTIFICATE IS ISSUED AS A MATTER OF INFORMATION ONLY AND CONFERS NO RIGHTS UPON THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER. THIS CERTIFICATE DOES NOT AFFIRMATIVELY OR NEGATIVELY AMEND, EXTEND OR ALTER THE COVERAGE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES BELOW. THIS CERTIFICATE OF INSURANCE DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A CONTRACT BETWEEN THE ISSUING INSURER(S), AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE OR PRODUCER, AND THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER. IMPORTANT: If the certificate holder is an ADDITIONAL INSURED, the policy(les) must be endorsed. If SUBROGATION IS WAIVED, subject to the terms and conditions of the policy, certain policies may require an endorsement. A statement on this certificate does not confer rights to the certificate holder in lieu of such endorsement(s). PRODUCER Dealey, Renton &Associates P. O. Box 10550 Santa Ana CA 92711-0550 CONTACT _NAME: PHONE C Noi-714:427-6818 EEWC.MAldy ADDRESS-. INSURERS AFFORDING COVERAGE NAIC # IIAMATURENTED I E Ea rrenc $1,000.000 INSURER A :Tla_Veje rS PrDpej' y _C.asiaty—Go Of A 67-4 INSURED INSURER B -.T. ra.y ersCaLsL alty —&B-u-rel4-CcQ_ A171P 1.1 94 RJM Design Group, Inc. INSURER C: 31591 Camino Capistrano San Juan Capistrano CA 92675 INSURER D: INSURER E INSURER F: COVERAGES CERTIFICATE NUMBER: R9499gfi39 REVISION NUMBER: THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE POLICIES OF INSURANCE LISTED BELOW HAVE BEEN ISSUED TO THE INSURED NAMED ABOVE FOR THE POLICY PERIOD INDICATED. NOTWITHSTANDING ANY REQUIREMENT, TERM OR CONDITION OF ANY CONTRACT OR OTHER DOCUMENT WITH RESPECT TO WHICH THIS CERTIFICATE MAY BE ISSUED OR MAY PERTAIN, THE INSURANCE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES DESCRIBED HEREIN IS SUBJECT TO ALL THE TERMS, EXCLUSIONS AND CONDITIONS OF SUCH POLICIES. LIMITS SHOWN MAY HAVE BEEN REDUCED BY PAID CLAIMS. INSR I TYPE OF INSURANCE I POLICY EFF POLICY EXP LTR R WV POLICY NUMBER 1 MWDDIYYYY) (MM)00flfyYY1 LIMITS A GENERAL LIABILITY P. O. BOX 1200 / 77 Fair Drive 6805D390306 ,x.00/2014 1/30/2015 EACH OCCURRENCE $2.000.000 IIAMATURENTED I E Ea rrenc $1,000.000 X COMMERCIAL GENERALLWBILITY CLAIMS -MADE 1•' 1 OCCUR MED EXP Any one person $10.000 PERSONAL & ADV INJURY $2,000.000 X Contractual GENERAL AGGREGATE $4,000,,000 Liability GEN'L AGGREGATE LIMIT APPLIES PER: PRODUCTS - COMPIOP AGG $4,000,000 $ POLICYFX PR LOC A AUTOMOBILE LIABILITY BA5D394305 _ )/30/2014 1/30/2015 (Ea acddanl $11,000,000 BODILY INJURY (Per person) $ ANY AUTO BODILY INJURY (Per accident) $ ALL OWNED SCHEDULED AUTOS AUTOS NON -OWNED X HIRED AUTOS X AUTOS PROPERTY DAMAGE $ Per adenl UMBRELLA LIAB OCCUR EACH OCCURRENCE $ EXCESS LIAB CLAIMS -MADE AGGREGATE $ DED I I RETENTION $ $ ,A WORKERS COMPENSATION AND EMPLOYERS' LIABILITY ANY PROPRIETOR/PARTNER/EXECUTIVENIA UB413OT960 5/30/2014 r)/30/2015 X 7 STATULLM - OTH- -'� E. L. EACH ACCIDENT $1000,000 OFFICER/MEMBER EXCLUDED? (Mandatory in NH) E. L. DISEASE - EA EMPLOYE $1,000,000 E L DISEASE - POLICY LIMIT $1,000,000 If yes, describe under DESCRIPTION OF OPERATIONS below IB Professional Liability Claims Made 105991919 10/1/2014 1110/1/2015 Per Claim $1,000,000 Annual Aggr $2,000,000 DESCRIPTION OF OPERATIONS I LOCATIONS I VEHICLES (Attach ACORD 101, Additional Remarks Schedule, if more space is required) General Liability policy excludes claims arising out of the performance of professional services. Re: Update of the Open Space Master Plan of Parks and Recreation project, Costa Mesa, CA. rF1l:?rtFlr`ATF Hnl nFR CANCELLATION 30 Davl10 Dav Notice for Non-Pavment ©1988-2010 ACORD CORPORATION. All rights reserved. ACORD 25 (2010/05) The ACORD name and logo are registered marks of ACORD SHOULD ANY OF THE ABOVE DESCRIBED POLICIES BE CANCELLED BEFORE THE EXPIRATION DATE THEREOF, NOTICE WILL BE DELIVERED IN City of Costa Mesa ACCORDANCE WITH THE POLICY PROVISIONS. Attn: Baltazar Mejia P. O. BOX 1200 / 77 Fair Drive AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE Costa Mesa CA 92628 ©1988-2010 ACORD CORPORATION. All rights reserved. ACORD 25 (2010/05) The ACORD name and logo are registered marks of ACORD EXHIBIT F CITY COUNCIL POLICY 100-5 17 RJM Design Group SUBJECT POLICY EFFECTIVE PAGE NUMBER DATE DRUG-FREE WORKPLACE 100-5 8-8-89 1 of 3 KGROUND Under the Federal Drug -Free Workplace Act of 1988, passed as part of omnibus drug legislation enacted November 18, 1988, contractors and grantees of Federal funds must certify that they will provide drug-free workplaces. At the present time, the City of Costa Mesa, as a sub -grantee of Federal funds under a variety of programs, is required to abide by this Act. The City Council has expressed its support of the national effort to eradicate drug abuse through the creation of a Substance Abuse Committee, institution of a City-wide D.A.R.E. program in all local schools and other activities in support of a drug-free community. This policy is intended to extend that effort to contractors and grantees of the City of Costa Mesa in the elimination of dangerous drugs in the workplace. PURPOSE It is the purpose of this Policy to: 1. Clearly state the City of Costa Mesa's commitment to a drug-free society. 2. Set forth guidelines to ensure that public, private, and nonprofit organizations receiving funds from the City of Costa Mesa share the commitment to a drug-free workplace. POLICY The City Manager, under direction by the City Council, shall take the necessary steps to see that the following provisions are included in all contracts and agreements entered into by the City of Costa Mesa involving the disbursement of funds. 1. Contractor or Sub -grantee hereby certifies that it will provide a drug-free workplace by. a. Publishing a statement notifying employees that the unlawful manufacture, distribution, dispensing, possession, or use of a controlled substance is prohibited in Contractor's and/or sub -grantee's workplace, specifically the job site or location included in this contract, and specifying the actions that will be taken against the employees for violation of such prohibition; 8 RJM Design Group SUBJECT POLICY EFFECTIVE PAGE NUMBER DATE DRUG-FREE WORKPLACE 100-5 8-8-89 2 of 3 b. Establishing a Drug -Free Awareness Program to inform employees about: 1. The dangers of drug abuse in the workplace; 2. Contractor's and/or sub -grantee's policy of maintaining a drug-free workplace; 3. Any available drug counseling, rehabilitation and employee assistance programs; and 4. The penalties that may be imposed upon employees for drug abuse violations occurring in the workplace; c. Making it a requirement that each employee to be engaged in the performance of the contract be given a copy of the statement required by subparagraph A; d. Notifying the employee in the statement required by subparagraph 1 A that, as a condition of employment under the contract, the employee will: 1. Abide by the terms of the statement; and 2. Notify the employer of any criminal drug statute conviction for a violation occurring in the workplace no later than five (5) days after such conviction; e. Notifying the City of Costa Mesa within ten (10) days after receiving notice under subparagraph 1 D 2 from an employee or otherwise receiving the actual notice of such conviction; f. Taking one of the following actions within thirty (30) days of receiving notice under subparagraph 1 D 2 with respect to an employee who is so convicted: 1. Taking appropriate personnel action against such an employee, up to and including termination; or 2. Requiring such employee to participate satisfactorily in a drug abuse assistance or rehabilitation program approved for such purposes by a Federal, State, or local health agency, law enforcement, or other appropriate agency; 19 RJM Design Group SUBJECT POLICY EFFECTIVE PAGE NUMBER DATE DRUG-FREE WORKPLACE 100-5 8-8-89 3 of 3 g. Making a good faith effort to maintain a drug-free workplace through implementation of subparagraphs 1 A through 1 F, inclusive. 2. Contractor and/or sub -grantee shall be deemed to be in violation of this Policy if the City of Costa Mesa determines that: a. Contractor and/or sub -grantee has made a false certification under paragraph 1 above; b. Contractor and/or sub -grantee has violated the certification by failing to carry out the requirements of subparagraphs 1 A through 1 G above; Such number of employees of Contractor and/or sub -grantee have been convicted of violations of criminal drug statutes for violations occurring in the workplace as to indicate that the contractor and/or sub -grantee has failed to make a good faith effort to provide a drug-free workplace. 3. Should any contractor and/or sub -grantee be deemed to be in violation of this Policy pursuant to the provisions of 2 A, B, and C, a suspension, termination or debarment proceeding subject to applicable Federal, State, and local laws shall be conducted. Upon issuance of any final decision under this section requiring debarment of a contractor and/or sub -grantee, the contractor and/or sub -grantee shall be ineligible for award of any contract, agreement or grant from the City of Costa Mesa for a period specified in the decision, not to exceed five (5) years. Upon issuance of any final decision recommending against debarment of the contractor and/or sub -grantee, the contractor and/or sub -grantee shall be eligible for compensation as provided by law. 20 RJM Design Group