Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutC-2316 - Oasis Park Grading & 5th Avenue Street Improvements between Jasmine & NarcissusI J i 1 1 1 1 1 1 11 E 1 [1 1 I H 1 1 z- i Draft EIR (Distributed Final EIR (Certified FOCUSED DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT OASIS PARK GRADING Draft EIR Prepared by: Culbertson, Adams and Associates, Inc. 27072 E1 Retiro Mission Viejo, CA 92692 (714) 643 -1622 (Contact Person: Andi Adams) City Project Manager: Fred Talarico, Environmental Coordinator (714) 640 -2197 Project Sponsor: City of Newport Beach Public Works Department (714) 640 -2281 (Contact Person: Lloyd Dalton) Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Planning Department 3300 W. Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, CA 92663 State Clearinghouse #: 82123106 i r 1 �r I i 1 I 11 i I TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER PAGE NO. SUMMARY OFIMPACTS I. INTRODUCTION II. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT A. PURPOSE B. LOCATION C. PROJECT DESCRIPTION D. PERMITS REQUIRED III. EXISTING CONDITIONS /POTENTIAL IMPACTS/ MITIGATION MEASURES A. LANDFORM AND TOPOGRAPHY B. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES C. WATER RESOURCES D. RELEVANT PLANNING E. SURROUNDING LAND USE F. SCHOOLS AND RECREATION IV. ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT V. CUMULATIVE IMPACTS VI. GROWTH INDUCING IMPACTS VII. EFFECTS FOUND NOT TO BE SIGNIFICANT VIII. AGENCIES AND PERSONS CONSULTED IX. BIBLIOGRAPHY/DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE APPENDIX A. INITIAL STUDY B. PALEONTOLOGICAL AND ARCHAEOLOGICAL GUIDELINES C. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PROGRAM D. MEMO FROM CITY TRAFFIC ENGINEER 1 -1 2 -1 2 -1 2 -2 2 -5 2 -8 3 -1 3 -1 3 -5 3 -9 3 -11 3 -14 3 -18 4 -1 5 -1 6 -1 7 -1 8 -1 9 -1 DATE March 8, 1983 TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN NOTICE OF COMPLETION FROM: CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING DEPARTMENT P.O. BOX 1768 3300 W. Newport Blvd. Newport Beach, CA 92663 -3884 DATE: March 7, 1983 PROJECT OASIS PARK GRADING TITLE: PROJECT LOCATION - SPECIFIC: North of 5th Avenue, Iris Avenue to Larkspur Avenue, Corona del Mar PROJECT LOCATION.- PROJECT LOCATION - CITY: Newport Beach COUNTY: Orange DESCRIPTION OF NATURE, PURPOSE AND BENEFICIARIES OF PROJECT: Extend Jasmine Creek Storm Drain 125 feet and construct new headworks; construct 375 lin. ft. of storm drain along 5th Avenue between Jasmine Creek and Larkspur Avenue; grade across Jasmine Gully with onsite stockpiled earth; construct sidewalk bike trail between Iris and Larkspur Avenues; remove excess stockpiled earth from site; and hydroseed. Disruption of riparian habitat; and earthwork. The City of Newport Beach is the Lead Agency for this project. A copy of the Draft Environmental Impact Report: Qis attached for your review ❑ .is available for review at the Planning Department 3300 West Newport Blvd. Newport Beach, CA 92663 -3884 REVIEW PERIOD: 30 DAYS ENDING ON: April 14, 1983 Draft EIR Environmental CONTACT PERSON: Fred Talarico TITLE: Coordination PHONE: (714)640 -2197 PROJECT CONTACT: Lloyd Dalton, Design Engineer (714) 640 -2281 y LIST OF FIGURES FIGURE PAGE NO. 1 • REGIONAL VICINITY MAP 2 -3 2 • LOCATION MAP 2 -4 3. PROPOSED PROJECT GRADING 2 -7 4. EXISTING TOPOGRAPHY 3 -2 5. SITE PHOTOS 3 -6 6. SURROUNDING LAND USE 3 -15 7. RELATIVE HEIGHT OF GRADING 3 -16 8• ALTERNATIVE 1 4 -3 9. ALTERNATIVE 2 4 -4 10. ALTERNATIVE 3 4 -6 il. ALTERNATIVE 3A 4 -8 .12. ALTERNATIVE 4 4 -9 13. CROSS SECTIONS 4 -10 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS I i U q E r r u Q C a ca. U E � r c m u y O N d r a w a m pap I i U q E F Q N a ca. E � q u a N C a w m pap A 1 7 m r r a I i U q E L O U q w pap a a 0 0 « � ro G U u u d z C.� 'Q L V L 'Q ✓ d a C m C? m .E U b m w a 9 m G .� w a w a u a a A« kro p �k m Fm m 'm w FU m w d rag ao .. uacL m p o0. oL'po ^y u� v c y �^ 'arum G N G «qro _ > Z °u a a A — E 2 z «9 C 0 wA 'V mm a �C d cm o >,wdm d =pA qp— —� wE v Nm ,T3 Y "+ma" H 3 mC'a0 co q N� 0.0 6 46 row O >.a«om ,CC �+O be > 0.d L cm._. OP wa .DO A a d .wLw� 0— LyN OO Imr� 0 .a+.p Na br Em^. Na �ytf aq CCMmN " 0 m"p> N ccw N_7m�UC C C0 a V c b d 9 a C C — C m u Ymq N O O' O = O O L "C o0C o 0 o o q P. 0. 0M 0,0 u swal 0 m Gv7 .o' , ua d <aq+C^ 40'O mc9 —m9 o�w+ d d 9Tj a C a C N�Smao C]U>.m 4�orvm av z z C p as z z ca. � V VO C y'N L u0 N 'ODm A $N E 0 _ a m _H q uaNw ,u TI as 0 c mo C Zi O" = 0n ar d a N m a C9 a w a m p % 8 N =?6 mama « 9 .o d U -G L y O �m N a N m 0.m f: N V _q� LE U m r� 9 m C N x 9 0 Q t p pC c qa 0" ai E ''wL m A u u p v aC c w C w a a s cq 9 m a 'C a L —w m o d > G 'p C q.m p o ` a 00 a o « T 4 m a O G , >. N 3 m y S 4 y T ro Oam a m x f" NG d L.m. V � m �4 I I 11 E CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION I I I I I I I I [1 I I jI. INTRODUCTION 1 This focused environmental impact report (EIR) has been submitted to the City of Newport Beach in order to evaluate the environmental consequences resulting from the grading performed for the develop- ment of Oasis Park, the construction of an associated bike trail connecting Fifth Avenue east of Jasmine Creek with Grant Howald Park, and grading for the future widening of Fifth Avenue between Larkspur and Jasmine Avenues. An Initial Study was performed in October, 1982, to evaluate the impact of the proposed project on the environment. It was deter- mined through this evaluation that the project may have a significant effect on existing landform and topography, hydrology, plant species, land use, pedestrian and bicyclist circulation, schools and parks, storm water drainage, and recreation (see Appendix for Initial Study). Pursuant to Section 15080(b)(3) of the State EIR Guidelines, this EIR will focus only on those impacts determined to be significant, and therefore may be referred to as a "focused EIR." ' Initially, four project alternatives were developed (numbered one through four). At the September 27, 1982, meeting of the Newport Beach City Council, another alternative was generated to address concerns of the City Council and the Corona del Mar Community Association (Alternative 3A). 1 -1 i In January, 1983, as a result of input by nearby property owners, another alternative was developed by the City Public Works Depart- ment which would provide grading to allow the widening of Fifth Avenue between Larkspur and Jasmine Avenues to allow two -way traffic. This alternative, Alternative 3B, is similar in all other respects to Alternative 3. On September 7, 1982 the Parks, Beaches and Recreation Commission voted unanimously to recommend Alternative 3. The Bike Trail Citizens' Advisory Committee has also voted to support the concept of a bike trail in this configuration. The elements of the project which these two groups support are retained in Alternative 3B. Because of this support and the support of the Public Works Depart- ment, Alternative 3B is represented here as the proposed project and is the subject of the detailed analysis contained in this EIR. The other alternatives mentioned above are discussed in the Alternatives section of this report in somewhat less detail. 1 -2 CHAPTER II DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT ! 1 1 ! 1 ! �t I t II. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT A. PURPOSE The Fiscal Year 1982 -83 budget includes appropriations totaling $90,000 to grade a portion of the City -owned parcel located northerly of Fifth Avenue between Iris and Marguerite Avenues and to extend the Jasmine Creek storm drain north of its current terminus at Fifth Avenue. The proposed grading and construction of the storm drain is being considered now because of this budgeted funding. Prepa- ration of the site at this time will allow for future park and street improvements to be implemented upon appropriation of funds. Such funds have been requested in the preliminary Fiscal Year 1983 -84 budget. 2 -1 i i B. LOCATION The project site is located northerly of Fifth Avenue between Larkspur and Iris Avenues in Corona del Mar in the City of Newport Beach. The site encompasses approximately 2 acres and is bounded by a public parking lot on the east, Fifth Avenue on the south, Grant Howald Park on the west, and Harbor View School and a vacant parcel of land designated for low density residential development on the north. (see Figures 1 and 2). 2 -2 I1 NORTH NO SCALE Culbertson Adams & v,a_- - Associates Regional Vicinity FIGURE 1 r �t t t t t t t t t t t t I� Culbertson Adams & Associates Project Location FIGURE 2 C. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The project consists of the grading for the proposed Oasis Park resulting in the filling of a portion of Jasmine Gully. This grading will provide a rough - graded site for the future park improvements. The work will also necessitate the extension of the 48 -inch- diameter Jasmine Creek storm drain by 125 feet upstream of its existing head - works. Additionally, a 375- foot -long, 24 -inch storm drain is proposed from the Jasmine Creek storm drain to an inlet structure easterly along Fifth Avenue. The grading will also provide for the future widening of Fifth Avenue between Larkspur and Jasmine Avenues to allow two -way traffic along this section of street. Currently this portion is improved to substan- dard conditions. This grading would allow for future improvements consisting of a 32 -foot road width and curb and gutter, providing one lane of traffic in each direction, parking on the southerly side of the street and parking restrictions on the northerly side of the street adjacent to the park site to promote the use of the adjoining public parking lot. A 12- foot -wide bike trail is proposed along the graded area extending from Fifth Avenue near Larkspur to the intersection of Fifth and Iris Avenues. The maximum grade for this bike trail is 6k percent (see Figure 3). The asphalt trail will be constructed upon completion of the grading of the site. 2 -5 No park improvements are proposed as part of this project, but are proposed in the Fiscal Year 1983 -84 budget. These improvements may closely follow the completion of grading of the proposed project. Funds are also being requested for the street improvements in the preliminary Fiscal Year 1983 -84 budget. 2 -6 a^ . ", ��,' iii ?t .• ,•. - � � i � F ; .-. CD ca n �/ 1' ,• i 3 iii , F W `O co a CL `'\•. s 31¢ 1 Nz`' �.. rfrsrl i `a ., CC I J r D. PERMITS REQUIRED Two types of permits are required for implementation of the proposed project. One is a Groundwater and Surface Water Runoff Clearance from the California Regional Water Quality Control Board, and the other is a 1601 (Stream or Lake Alteration) Permit from the California Department of Fish and Game. 2 -8 it '1 1 r r r 1 r r r r r r r �r r CHAPTER III EXISTING CONDITIONS /POTENTIAL IMPACTS/ MITIGATION MEASURES III. EXISTING CONDITIONS /POTENTIAL IMPACTS/MITIGATION MEASURES A. LANDFORM AND TOPOGRAPHY Existing Conditions The total project site area encompasses approximately 2 acres. Two contrasting physiographic features are evident on the site: Jasmine Gully transecting the western portion of the site in a generally north- south direction, and the disposal site located on the easterly portion of the site (see Figure 4). Site elevations range from 104 feet at the downstream end of Jasmine Gully to approximately 165 feet at the top of the disposal site adjacent to the parking lot. There is a swale along the northerly side of Fifth Avenue which drains toward Jasmine Creek. Potential Impacts Development of the proposed site will significantly alter the topo- graphy of the project area. The proposed grading will fill Jasmine Gully within the project area with compacted earth material. The topography will be altered to that of a gently sloping nature with the steepest slope not exceeding 3 horizontal feet for every 1 foot in vertical rise. The highest point will remain on the eastern portion of the site at 143 feet, with the lowest point still at 104 feet near the end of the alley between Jasmine and Iris Avenues. As shown on Figure 3, fill depths will reach up to 12 feet. The bike trail will form a "backbone" through the central and westerly portions of the site with the surrounding ground sloping 3 -1 L% cr ca CL CL I o cl CD LLJ q s y l i 1, �_ ��•.-r1( i�. Ay;' �.� I \ •' 1 /G: � j X 'r rr 1i ur I . r • _ _/ }°°°.iii"'' Sroi 1 I I: away from the trail in these locations. The maximum grade along the trail will be 611 percent. Additionally, the proposed grading for the widening of Fifth Avenue will require the construction of a crib wall at the intersection of Fifth and Jasmine Avenues. Approximately 10,500 cubic yards of earth fill will be required for this project, all of which will be available from the on -site disposal. Additionally, 5,000 cubic yards of earth material will be exported to another location. Possibilities for the disposal of this material include the Coyote Canyon land fill, the City corporation yard and in non- sensitive areas of the adjacent parcel of land immediately north of the project site. Mitigation Measures 1. Site preparation will be performed in accordance with the City's grading regulations using recommendations of the soils engineer and engineering geologist, with on -site inspections as required. 2. All slopes will be no steeper than a 3 -to -1 horizontal to vertical ratio. 3. If the site is to remain unimproved during the rainy season (October 15 -May 15), a program for erosion control will be required. This program will include types of ground cover, 3 -3 i 1 'i i :i i 1 1 1 1 �1 .1 �1 1 1 ,1 1 method of irrigation, slope treatments, and siltation control measures. Ground cover installed will provide a pleasing visual accent to the new slopes. 4. During grading, the site will be watered as a method of dust control. 5. Prior to grading, a plan will be developed to restrict truck traffic along residential streets and to confine the limits of grading to the project site. 6. All work shall be done in accordance with the City's Council Policies K -5 and K -6 relating to paleontological and archaeological procedures, respectively (see Appendix). 3 -4 i1 ' Although the site is fairly disturbed, the diversity of flora present on the Site, together with the presence of a permanent water supply, ' would be expected to provide a viable wildlife habitat.2 � 1 1Memo from Sandy Genis to Fred Talarico, October 12, 1982. ' 2Ibid. ' 3 -5 B. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES Existing Conditions The project site consists of a canyon and adjacent slopes which ' support a mixture of introduced and native species (see Figure 5). The slopes of the canyon are fairly disturbed and are, for the most part, covered in ice plant (Gasoul crystallinum), introduced grasses, and other adventitious species such as mallows (malva sp.), wild ' radish (Raphanus sativus), and morning glory (convulvulus). A i permanent stream and well - developed riparian community exist at the base of the canyon. Flora present include introduced species such as wild celery (Apium vul are) and native species such as Baccharis. The stream course itself is largely occupied by typical wetland ' associated species such as sedges (Carex sp. , Cyperus sp. ). The presence of pickleweed (Salicornia) and alkali heath (Frankenia ' grandiflora) approximately 50 feet north of the end of Jasmine Avenue ' are indicative of alkaline soil conditions in this area. The source of this alkalinity is not known. No species which are rare, endangered, ' or otherwise of high interest are known to exist on the site.l ' Although the site is fairly disturbed, the diversity of flora present on the Site, together with the presence of a permanent water supply, ' would be expected to provide a viable wildlife habitat.2 � 1 1Memo from Sandy Genis to Fred Talarico, October 12, 1982. ' 2Ibid. ' 3 -5 4A 4. 'ol 4��4,. 4A Potential Impacts The proposed grading of the project site would eliminate the existing vegetation in the project area and would eventually be replaced by introduced turf, shrubs, and trees appropriate for a passive recreational park site. Any wildlife in the project area will be displaced to the surrounding areas. Once the site is improved, some species may return to the ' area. Until that time, the higher concentrations of certain forms of wildlife may not be able to be supported by the surrounding ' vegetation, and consequently their numbers may be reduced. The permanent introduced park vegetation will require an irrigation system to be maintained as a viable park habitat. The development of the park site may encourage the reduction of similar riparian habitat upstream from the project site (see the Growth Inducing Impacts section of this report for a more detailed discussion of this). Mitigation Measures 7. The grading plan shall include a complete plan for temporary and ' permanent drainage facilities to minimize any potential impacts from silt, debris, and other water pollutants. 8. The grading specifications shall include a description of haul ' routes, access points to the site, watering, and a sweeping program designed to minimize the impact of haul operations. 3 -7 9. An erosion, siltation, and dust control plan shall be submitted and be subject to the approval of the California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Santa Ana Region. a:3 IC. Between the Harbor View Dam and the inlet structure of the storm WATER RESOURCES drain, runoff flows down Jasmine Creek for approximately 1,250 feet. Existing Conditions The has The project area is located within the 490 acres comprising the ' Jasmine Creek Storm Drain System drainage area.3 The drainage area flowing in it most of the year. During non - is bounded on the north by San Joaquin Hills Road, on the east by precipitation periods, Buck Gully, on the south by Seaview Drive, and on the west by the intersection of MacArthur Boulevard and Pacific Coast Highway. The down an unimproved swale located northerly of, and extending parallel Jasmine Creek Storm Drain System has been reconstructed since 1980 with a 48- inch - diameter pipe extending under the alley located Storm Drain Design Report, December, 1979. between Iris and Jasmine Avenues. This storm drain terminates at an 1 inlet structure approximately 60 feet northerly of Fifth Avenue. Most of the storm runoff northerly of Jasmine Creek is retained above the Harbor View Dam located at Harbor View Drive. During the iprojected 25 -year flood, peak outflow of 53 cubic feet per second will be experienced downstream of the dam.4 The existing storm drain facilities downstream of the dam are adequate to accommodate this 1 peak outflow. I Between the Harbor View Dam and the inlet structure of the storm drain, runoff flows down Jasmine Creek for approximately 1,250 feet. The has creek water flowing in it most of the year. During non - ' precipitation periods, this water is from landscape watering. Runoff on the site also flows down an unimproved swale located northerly of, and extending parallel to, Fifth Avenue. 3Jasmine Creek Storm Drain Design Report, December, 1979. 4Ibid. 3 -9 iI Potential Impacts 1 The proposed project consists of the extension of the existing 48- inch - diameter storm drain an additional 125 feet upstream from the existing inlet in Jasmine Creek. Also included in the project is a 375 -foot lateral storm drain extending along Fifth Avenue. This lateral is proposed to be constructed of 24- inch - diameter, reinforced concrete pipe (RCP). Both of these storm drain structures are ' deemed adequate to accommodate the 25 -year flood peak outflow. 1 Mitigation Measures 10. During grading of the site and prior to development of the park site, desiltation and erosion control measures must be imple- mented to reduce the impacts of erosion. I As the proposed storm drain improvements are adequate to accommo- date the 25 -year flood, no further mitigation measures are proposed. I I 1 3 -10 I The grading itself will alter the natural drainage of the site. Gener- ally, northerly of the proposed bike trail the site will drain toward the inlet structure located at the upstream terminus of the storm Idrain extension. Runoff southerly of the bike trail will flow toward the alley located between Iris and Jasmine Avenues. An inlet struc- ture will be required at the northerly end of this alley to intercept these flows. 1 Mitigation Measures 10. During grading of the site and prior to development of the park site, desiltation and erosion control measures must be imple- mented to reduce the impacts of erosion. I As the proposed storm drain improvements are adequate to accommo- date the 25 -year flood, no further mitigation measures are proposed. I I 1 3 -10 I I D. RELEVANT PLANNING Existing Conditions General Plan The Recreation and Open Space Element of the City of Newport Beach General Plan designates this area as a Neighborhood Park, and also ' designates Jasmine Creek as a Greenbelt area. The General Plan characterizes this area as an extension of Grant Howald Park, connecting the existing park with Marguerite Avenue. Neighborhood parks are part of the activity park system, typified by active park uses such as ball diamonds and tennis and basketball courts, etc. On the other hand, greenbelt areas are characterized by trails and passive recreation uses. The Parks, Beaches and Recreation Department has designated the project area for passive recreation uses because of its proximity to Grant Howald Park and Harbor View School, which provide activity- park-type forms of recreation. u The Recreation and Open Space Element also shows a secondary bikeway located along Fifth Avenue in the project area. The Land Use Element designates this area as Recreational and Environmental Open Space. Fifth Avenue is designated as a local street in the Circulation Element of the General Plan. No plans are proposed at this time of con - necting Fifth Avenue between Jasmine and Iris Avenues. j 3 -11 u II 1 Zoning Code The City of Newport Beach Zoning Code designates the project area northeasterly of the intersection of Jasmine and Fifth Avenues as open space. Northwesterly of this intersection the property is zoned R3 -B. R3 -B zoning allows residential uses consisting of single - family 1 dwellings to apartment houses with special "B" District regulations concerning lot size and frontage requirements. Uses subject to approval of a use permit include community centers, recreational 1 establishments and parking lots. ' Bikeways Design Criteria The CALTRANS document, "Planning and Design Criteria for Bike- ways in California," recommends a 12 -foot right -of -way (ROW) width for a 2 -way bike path and a maximum grade of 5 percent. The 12 -foot ROW includes an 8 -foot paved width (minimum) with a 2 -foot graded portion on either side. The proposed project is also consistent with the Land Use and Circulation Elements. r 3 -12 Potential Impacts General Plan 1 The proposed project is consistent with the Recreation and Open Space Element regarding the future projected use for the property. The passive park designation is in keeping with the Element relative to park and greenbelt uses. The location of a bike trail in this area Iis also consistent with the Recreation and Open Space Element. The proposed project is also consistent with the Land Use and Circulation Elements. r 3 -12 Zoning Code The proposed future intended use of the site is consistent with the Open Space and R3 -B designations in the zoning code. Depending on the facilities proposed for the site, a use permit may be required prior to their development. Bikeways Design Criteria The proposed bike trail is to be 12 feet wide per CALTRANS recom- mendations. The maximum grade for the proposed trail is 61t percent, which is slightly steeper than CALTRANS recommends. Mitigation Measures General Plan None are proposed as the project is consistent with the General Plan. Zoning Code None are proposed. CALTRANS None are proposed as the project is consistent with CALTRANS criteria. 3 -13 1I E. SURROUNDING LAND USE ' Existing Conditions to the south will be altered from those of a Northerly of the project area is a vacant parcel of land owned by The 1 Irvine Company, and is designated for low- density residential devel- of a gently opment. GPA 81 -2 proposes to redesignate this property to medium 1 density residential. No specific plans to develop the site have been on adjacent approved at this time. Northwesterly of the site are located Harbor sites to the north and west View School and the Community Youth Center. Grant Howald Park is the natural located westerly of the site with several duplexes and single - family landscapes of those areas during grading. Portions of the adjacent dwellings located southerly of the project area along Fifth Avenue and property to the north may at the northerly ends of Jasmine and Iris Avenues (see Figure 6). for material These residences are all two -story with views of the project area from 1 both floors. There is a public parking lot adjacent to the site on the will also be east, with Marguerite Avenue and the Oasis Senior Citizens' Center near grade with the existing beyond. 1 Views from the residences to the south will be altered from those of a natural stream gully with Potential Impacts of a gently sloping, landscaped earth The grading of the project area may have a minor impact on adjacent sites to the north and west as it may temporarily disrupt the natural landscapes of those areas during grading. Portions of the adjacent property to the north may be used as a disposal site for material ' exported during development of this project. The project will also be near grade with the existing parking lot to the east. 1 Views from the residences to the south will be altered from those of a natural stream gully with riparian vegetation to that of a gently sloping, landscaped earth fill (see Figure 7). Homes along Fifth 1 3 -14 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i t 1 '1 1 1 1 HARBOR VIEW DR i yo w ti HARBOR VIEW FUTURE ELEMENTARY RESIDENTIAL 1 SCHOOL EA' E DR PROJECT SITE OASIS GRANT PARKING HOWALD PARK LOT FIFTH AVE MEDIUM > DENSITY Q RES. ui > Q CC ~ Ir 0 > z d Q Cl) J FOB URTH AVE , FIGURE Culbertson Adams & Surrounding Land Use g Associates tit., t " ►g ' t. I 1 , Avenue will have views farther to the north as a result of the removal of the earth stockpile which exists on the site now. The residences located between Jasmine and Iris Avenues will have their i ' views to the north impacted by the proposed grading. The elevation to the north of these homes will be raised approximately 12 feet from ' the existing grade. Their views to the north will be impaired by this proposed fill, which will raise ground level to approximately the iheight of their second -story windows. This would also place the traffic along the bike trail at eye level with the second stories of these homes. 1 An analysis performed by the City Traffic Engineer indicates that the widening of Fifth Avenue will not cause any significant increase in traffic within the project area. Additionally, this widening will not create any significant impacts to existing noise levels and air quality of the surrounding area (see memo from the City Traffic Engineer in Appendix). The picnic area located adjacent to the project site in Grant Howald IPark could eventually be expanded as a result of this grading. 1 Mitigation Measures 11. Landscaping of all graded areas will ultimately reduce the visual impact of the project from the surrounding properties. 1 12. The landscape palette will consist of plant species which will Iprovide an enhanced natural appearance in the project area. I 3 -17 I I' Construction of the proposed bike trail may increase the amount of F. SCHOOLS AND RECREATION providing easier access to Grant 1 Howald Park, Harbor View School, Existing Conditions Upon develop- ment of the site as a park, its use as a recreational Presently, the is little, if project site vacant and offers any, oppor- Mitigation Measures tunity for recreational activity. There is an existing bike trail on None are proposed. the site with grades in excess of 19 percent. Because of these 1 severe grades, the trail is seldom used, with cyclists and pedestrians preferring to use Fourth Avenue between Jasmine and Iris Avenues, where no established trail exists. Potential Impacts 1 Construction of the proposed bike trail may increase the amount of traffic across this parcel of land, providing easier access to Grant 1 Howald Park, Harbor View School, and Oasis Center. Upon develop- ment of the site as a park, its use as a recreational area may also increase. 1 Mitigation Measures None are proposed. 11 I I I 3 -18 i I I 1 P CHAPTER IV ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT I I I 1! I I I 'l ,l 1 I IV. ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT Presented in this section are six project alternatives, each designed 1 to alleviate an identified environmental problem, or specifically requested for consideration prior to preparation of the EIR. Each of the alternatives has been measured against the project objectives ' stated in the Project Description of this EIR. 1 No Project If the No Project alternative is undertaken, the adverse impacts associated with the proposed project, including landform alteration and deletion of wildlife habitat, would not occur. It is the intent of this chapter to present all alternatives requested to date or appropriate at this point to provide a strong foundation for ' discussion. Within discussion, it is explained why the be created. public each 1 City Public Works Department is rejecting the alternative. The Newport Beach City Council will need to explain the reasons for its rejection of the alternatives (if such an event occurs) prior to decision - making on the project in order to take advantage of all public comments. 1 No Project If the No Project alternative is undertaken, the adverse impacts associated with the proposed project, including landform alteration and deletion of wildlife habitat, would not occur. 1 4 -1 i 1 Jasmine Creek would remain in its present state and the existing delapidated bike trail would continue to be sparsely used. The disposal material adjacent to the Oasis parking lot would also remain in its present location and no passive park site would be created. 1 4 -1 i 1 U Fifth Avenue in this location would continue to be utilized under substandard width and site - distance conditions. I This alternative was rejected for the same reasons as the No Project alternative in that it does not provide for any recreational oppor- tunities, or convenient access to adjacent recreational and educational facilities. Alternative 2 ' This alternative would require minimal earth fill across Jasmine Gully and would not disrupt major portions of the riparian habitat (see Figure 9). It would provide a new bike trail across Jasmine Gully at a maximum grade of 10 percent and would involve the removal of the 4 -2 Because of the site's potential as a recreational area and as a link across Jasmine Gully for pedestrian and bicycle access to Oasis 1 Center, Harbor View School and Grant Howald Park, as well as the remaining substandard condition of Fifth Avenue, the No Project alternative was rejected by the City Public Works Department. Alternative 1 This alternative would require no earth fill across Jasmine Gully and would simply reconstruct the existing bike trail between Larkspur and Iris Avenues (see Figure 8). This concept would still include the 375 -foot lateral extension of a 24- inch - diameter RCP along Fifth ' Avenue. Further, approximately 6,000 cubic yards (CYS) of stockpile material would be removed from the site. This alternative was rejected for the same reasons as the No Project alternative in that it does not provide for any recreational oppor- tunities, or convenient access to adjacent recreational and educational facilities. Alternative 2 ' This alternative would require minimal earth fill across Jasmine Gully and would not disrupt major portions of the riparian habitat (see Figure 9). It would provide a new bike trail across Jasmine Gully at a maximum grade of 10 percent and would involve the removal of the 4 -2 I I I I I , CO Ar ( ? bneSWNI as Al lzzz- `I t1 • \ ����� Z t c _ er 4.i cc Z„ CL '� -. ]AV3, sill 4 41 4J J 002, cc 0 rn air rr�nm tt V zo !I Leo I 1 ' stockpile material. Additionally, the Fifth Avenue storm drain would be constructed. While this alternative would preserve the natural ' integrity of the creek, it would also place the bike trail closer to the ' adjacent homes at an elevation similar to the proposed project alternative. Alternative 2 was rejected because it does not provide for adequate useable area for passive park purposes, nor does it provide a bike trail with acceptable grades, or the improvements to Fifth Avenue. ' Alternative 3A Alternative 3A was requested by the Corona del Mar Community Association and the City Council. This alternative is similar to the proposed project; however, it would require considerably more earth ' fill along Jasmine Gully and would consequently raise the height of the fill an additional 5 feet at the bike trail (see Figure 10). This would reduce the grade of the trail, but would create more of a view impairment for adjacent homes and would not provide for the future widening of Fifth Avenue. This proposal was rejected by the Public Works Department because of the extent of the grading involved, the height of the bike trail, and 4 -5 I I This grading would be level with the Community Youth Center parking lot on the west and would cover the existing picnic area there. The intent was to make the site useable for active recreational ' purposes in the future (i.e., tennis courts, pool, etc.). This proposal was rejected by the Public Works Department because of the extent of the grading involved, the height of the bike trail, and 4 -5 I I Efw Lp -- ; � E uo U<c 3AI U) -J LO W Lp -- ; � E uo U<c 3AI it because of the close proximity to existing active recreational areas (Grant Howald Park and Harbor View School). Additionally, because of budget limitations, funding is not available for construction of an ' active recreational facility in this location. Alternative 3 This alternative is identical to the proposed project except that it ' does not provide grading to allow the future widening of Fifth Avenue (see Figure 11). Alternative 3 was rejected by the Public Works Department because Fifth Avenue would remain improved to substandard conditions in the area adjacent to the project. ' Alternative 4 A minimal amount of grading is required by this alternative, preserv- ing much of the natural integrity of Jasmine Gully. However, it also utilizes a 100 - foot -long bridge across Jasmine Gully to accommodate the bike trail. Trail grades would be approximately 10 percent with ' this concept (see Figure 12). This alternative was rejected because of the absence of a passive park site, and the excessive cost of constructing the bridge. 1 ' ' 4 -7 I I 'r 1 I I J I I I i I Ir 'r I f i CHAPTER V CUMULATIVE IMPACTS ii 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 ,1 1 V. CUMULATIVE IMPACTS Should the proposed project be implemented, it would further reduce the length of Jasmine Creek to be retained in its natural state. This would leave only approximately 1,100 feet of natural creek, which is flanked on the east by residentially designated property and on the west by the Newport Mesa Unified School District. The Irvine Company property is part of General Plan Amendment 81 -2 and is proposed to be changed from a low- density to medium - density residential land use designation. The development of the proposed project and the future development of the Irvine Company parcel may further impact the existing riparian habitat within Jasmine Creek, through treatment similar to that undertaken for the proposed project. 5 -1 �1 1 i 't i i 1 1 1 �i 1 CHAPTER VI GROWTH INDUCING IMPACTS VI. GROWTH INDUCING IMPACTS Basically, there are no growth inducing impacts from this project in the traditional sense. However, as noted in Chapter V, the project would only leave 1,100 feet of Jasmine Creek undeveloped. Imple- mentation of this project may undermine future efforts to preserve the remaining portion of Jasmine Creek. The 1,100 feet left would be difficult to retain in a natural state because of transitions from the developed area to the north, and to the park area contemplated in this proposal. As a consequence, retention of this last segment of Jasmine Creek may prove infeasible. 6 -1 r r r r 1 r r r r r r r ,i i r CHAPTER VII EFFECTS FOUND NOT TO BE SIGNIFICANT ,1 �r �1 i :r r �r �1 r �1 r r I �r r i r VII. EFFECTS FOUND NOT TO BE SIGNIFICANT The City of Newport Beach Public Works Department conducted an initial study in October, 1982, to determine the significant effects of the proposed project, and the scope of this focused EIR. In the course of their evaluation, they considered certain aspects to be insignificant. They are: 1. Alteration of geologic substructure or erosion patterns. 2. Deterioration of air quality or alteration of air movement. 3. Alteration to the quality or flow of surface water or ground water. 9. Reduction of the numbers of any agricultural crop or rare or endangered plant species. 5. Change in the diversity of any animal species. 6. Increase in existing noise levels. 7. Increase in the rate of use of any natural resource. 8. Increased risk of upset. 7 -1 f 1 i i 9. Changes in population or housing demand. 10. Increase in vehicular movement, parking requirements, or hazardous traffic conditions (see Appendix D). 11. Change in need for fire or police protection, maintenance of public facilities or other governmental services. 12. Use of substantial amounts of fuel or energy. 13. Impact to utilities, including: power or natural gas, communi- cations systems, water, sewer or septic tanks, and solid waste disposal. 19. Creation of any health hazard. 15. Creation of an aesthetically offensive site or obstruction of any scenic vista or view open to the public. 16. Alteration of any significant archaeological or historical site. These impacts were considered to be insignificant because of the absence of certain project characteristics producing effects of that type. 7 -2 r '1 �1 II �1 r �1 r r CHAPTER VIII ORGANIZATIONS AND PERSONS CONSULTED VIII. ORGANIZATIONS AND PERSONS CONSULTED The following persons and organizations were contacted during the preparation of this report: Fred Talarico Environmental Coordinator City of Newport Beach Planning Department 3300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, CA Lloyd Dalton City of Newport Beach Public Works Department 3300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, CA Ron Whitley City of Newport Beach Parks, Beaches and Recreation Department 3300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, CA Rich Edmondston City of Newport Beach Traffic Engineering 3300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, CA RE Pat Temple City of Newport Beach Planning Department 3300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, CA Sandy Genis City of Newport Beach Planning Department 3300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, CA Chris Gustin City of Newport Beach Planning Department 3300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, CA Jim Lorman City of Newport Beach Building Department 3300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, CA i 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 i 1 1 t �1 CHAPTER IX BIBLIOGRAPHY/ DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE i , IX. BIBLIOGRAPHY /DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE ' The documents cited below were researched and relied upon during the preparation of this EIR. They have been incorporated into this document by reference consistent with Section 15149 of the CEQA Guidelines (Cal. Admin. Code, Title 14, Section 15000 et, seq.). These documents are available for public review at the offices of the City of Newport Beach Planning and Public Works Departments, 3300 ' West Newport Boulevard, P.O. Box 1768, Newport Beach, California, 92663 -3884, (714) 640 -2197 or 640 -2281. 1. Jasmine Creek Storm Drain Design Report; Alderman, Swift and Lewis, Consulting Engineers; 1979. 2. Planning and Design Criteria for Bikeways in California; CALTRANS; 1978. 3. Draft EIR prepared for General Plan Amendment 81 -2; Phillips Brandt Reddick, Inc.; 1982. IBibliography City of Newport Beach. Circulation Element, City of Newport Beach General Plan, March, 1975. ' City of Newport Beach. Land Use Element, City of Newport Beach General Plan, December, 1978. 9 -1 IJ City of Newport Beach. Recreation and Open Space Elements, City of Newport Beach General Plan, July, 1975. City of Newport Beach. Zoning Code, January, 1981. 9 -2 +I I , 1 i i i i i i 1 �i �1 1 �i APPENDIX i 1 i APPENDIX A INITIAL STUDY I ' OASIS PARK GRADING INITIAL STUDY BY PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ' A. ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM The attached Environmental Checklist Form has been completed as a portion of ' this study. The following statements, referenced to questions presented on the checklist, explain all "yes" and "maybe" answers: II. 1. b. Earth will be removed from an onsite stockpile (north of Larkspur & c. Avenue) and will be cut onsite (generally below the stockpile, i.e., between Jasmine Creek gully and OASIS parking lot west). Earth will be placed in compacted fill across Jasmine Creek gully, such fill slopes to be constructed entirely on property owned by the City of Newport Beach. Surplus earth (if any) will be trans- ported offsite for disposal. ' The fill will be designed to satisfy the following parameters: (1) Fill slopes will be no steeper than 3 horizontal to 1 verti- cal, with slope rounding at the tops of all fills. (2) Fill slopes will join the perimeter of an existing picnic area located between the parking lot to Grant Howald Park ' and Jasmine Creek gully. (3) The existing bike -walk crossing Jasmine Creek gully will be ' reconstructed atop the earth fill with minimal steepness to permit maximum usage by bicyclists or pedestrians. ' (4) The existing Jasmine Creek storm drain pipe and headworks structure will be extended (reconstructed) northward in Jasmine Creek gully to satisfy parameters (1) and (3) above. (5) The maximum fill height will be approximately 12 feet. II. 3. b. Jasmine Creek storm drain may be extended no more than 125 feet & c. upstream from its present terminus north of 5th Avenue produced in Jasmine Gully. Surface runoff from the portion of fill easterly of Jasmine Creek ' gully will be conveyed in portland cement concrete drainage swales along the new bike -walk to inlets into the Jasmine Creek storm drain. Surface runoff from the portion of fill westerly of Jasmine Creek gully will be conveyed in portland cement concrete drainage ' swales along the bike -walk and at the bottom of the southerly fill slope to inlets into the storm drain. (Present surface runoff ' OASIS Park Grading Initial Study (cont'd) Page 2 from the fill area flows overground toward the headworks ' structure or toward the storm drain grating located in the alley between Iris and Jasmine Avenues.) II. 4. a. Portions of the easterly and westerly slopes of Jasmine Creek ' gully within City property will be cleared of native shrubs and grasses prior to grading. II. 8. The proposed project will alter land use from an undeveloped ' parcel to a graded site for future park improvements, in con- formance with the City's General Plan. ' II. 13. d. Reconstruction of the bike -walk crossing atop the earth fill may generate increased bicycle and pedestrian use of the trail. Any such increased use of the trail may result in decreased bike and pedestrian flow across Jasmine Creek gully at 4th Avenue. II. 14. c. The proposed project will provide ease of access across Jasmine Creek for students of Harbor View Elementary School. ' II. 14. d. The proposed project will provide a rough - graded site for future park improvement and ease of access across Jasmine Creek for Senior citizens utilizing OASIS Center. II. 16. e. The gully fill proposal may necessitate the construction of as much as a 125 -foot extension to the 48 -inch diameter Jasmine ' Creek storm drain, plus a new headworks structure (see items II. 1. b. and c. above). The proposal will necessitate the construction of a 375 - foot -long by 24 -inch diameter storm drain lateral eastward from the Jasmine Creek storm drain to an inlet ' structure along 5th Avenue. The storm drain extension and laterals will convey storm runoff ' which presently flows in unimproved drainage ditches. II. 19. The proposal will enhance utilization of existing community recreation and school facilities. The proposal will provide ' basic site grading for future development of a passive park on the site. ' B. CONCLUSION Although review of the Environmental Checklist does not necessarily disclose any significant environmental impacts resulting from the proposed project, it ' is felt that potential effects on the existing disturbed riparian habitat area along the base of the ravine warrant preparation of a focused environmental impact report. ' LD:rb Benjamin B. Nolan ' 11/5/82 Public Works Director ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM I I. Background '1. Name of Proponent 2. Address and Phone Number of Proponent JYX Nj wpid& 014, 1 ,N�.,vcr -t BeQCh , ca 9tGG3 _ �7J.L1 G40 -ZZ41 3. Date of Checklist Submission QGf hier zo. %faz ' 4. Agency Requiring Checklist Ci f aft AlAQWrt 5. Title of Project OML4 Park G H4 (C'23110 J II. Environmental Impacts (Explanations of all "yes" and "maybe" answers are required on attached sheets.) ' YES MAYBE NO 1. Earth. Will the proposal result in: ' a. Unstable earth conditions or in changes in geologic substructures? X b. Disruptions, displacements, ' compaction or overcovering of the soil? X ' C. Change in topography or ground surface relief features? d. The destruction, covering or ' j modification of any unique geologic or physical features? X e. Any increase in wind or water erosion X of soils, either on or off the site? f. Changes in deposition or erosion of 1 beach sands, or changes in siltation, deposition or erosion which may modify the channel of a river or stream or ' the bed of the ocean or any bay, inlet or lake? _ (L 1 YES MAYBE NO g. Exposure of people or property to geological hazards such as earth- , quakes, landslides, mudslides, ground failure, or similar hazards? X 2. Air, Will the proposal result in: a. Substantial air emissions or deterioration of ambient air quality? X b. The creation of objectionable odors? X _ c. AlterdLion of air movement, moisture 1 or temperature, or any change in climate, either locally or regionally? X r3. Water. Will the proposal result in: a. Changes in currents, or the course or direction of water movements, in either ' marine or fresh waters? X b. Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the rate and amount of surface runoff? k C. Alterations to the course of flow of flood waters? d. Change in the amount.of surface water ' in any water body? X' e. Discharge into surface waters or in ' any alteration of surface water quality, including but not limited to temperature, dissolved oxygen or ' turbidity? X f. Alteration of the direction or rate of flow of ground waters? .Y g. Change in the quantity of ground waters, either through direct addi- tions or withdrawals, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations? h. Substantial reduction in the amount of water otherwise available for public water supplies? X ii. Exposure of people or property to water related hazards such as flooding or tidal waves? X I I I L 1 i i 1 I ' YES MAYBE NO 4. Plant Life. Will the proposal result in: a. Change in the diversity of species, or number of any species of plants (including trees, shrubs, grass, crops, and aquatic plants)? b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species of plants? C. Introduction of new species of plants into an area, or in a barrier to the normal replenishment of existing species? X d. Reduction in acreage of any agricultural crop? N 5. Animal Life. Will the proposal result in: a. Change in the diversity of species, or numbers of any species of animals (birds, land animals including reptiles, fish and shellfish, benthic organisms, or insects)? X b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species of animals? C. Introduction of new species of animals into an area, or result in a barrier to the migration or movement of animals? /t d. Deterioration to existing fish or wildlife habitat? X 6. Noise. Will the proposal result in: a. Increases in existing noise levels? �t b. Exposure of people to severe noise levels? 1. Light and Glare. Will the proposal produce new igh� t or glare? 8. Land Use. Will the proposal result in a substantial alteration of the present or planned land use of an area? X 9. Natural Resources. Will the proposal result in: a. Increase in the rate of use of any natural resources? b. Substantial depletion of any non- renewable natural resource? 10. Risk of Upset. Does the proposal involve a risk of an explosion or the release of hazardous substances (including, but not limited to, oil, pesticides, chemicals or radiation) in the event of an accident or upset conditions? 11. Population. Will the proposal alter the location, distribution, density, or growth rate of the human population of an area? 12. Housing. Will the proposal affect existing housing, or create a demand for additional housing? 13. Transportation /Circulation. Will the proposal result in: a. Generation of substantial additional vehicular movement? b. Effects on existing parking facilities, or demand for new parking? C. Substantial impact upon existing transportation systems? d. Alterations to present patterns of circulation or movement of people and /or goods? e. Alterations to waterborne, rail or air traffic? f. Increase in traffic hazardous to motor vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians? 14. Public Services. Will the proposal have an effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered governmental services in any of the following areas: YES MAYBE NO M le X X X _ X X X X r r YES MAYBE NO a. Fire protection? Ay_ b. Police protection? X ' c. Schools? _ Y _ d. Parks or other recreational facilities? -y re. Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? f. Other governmental services? _1[_ 15. Energy. Will the proposal result in: a. Use of substantial amounts of fuel or energy ?_ b. Substantial increase in demand upon existing sources of energy, or require the development of new sources of energy? if 16. Utilities. Will the proposal result in a ' need for new systems, or substantial alterations to the following utilities: a. Power or natural gas? Ole rb. Communications systems? X ' c. Water? X d. Sewer or septic tanks? O_ e. Storm water drainage? X f. Solid waste and disposal? X 17. Human Health. Will the proposal result in: a. Creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard (excluding mental health)? �( b. Exposure of people to potential health hazards? 18. Aesthetics. Will the proposal result in the obstruction of any scenic vista or view open ' to the public, or will the proposal result in the creation of an aesthetically ' offensive site open to public view? r r I MAYBE NO e X X V J YES ' 19. Recreation. Will the proposal result in an impact upon the.quality or quantity of existing recreational opportunities? X 20. Archeolo ical /Historical. Will the proposa resu t in an alteration of a significant archeological or historical — site, structure, object or building? 21. Mandatory Findings of Significance. a. Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self- sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? b. Does the project have the potential to ' achieve short -term, to the disadvantage of long -term, environmental goals? (A short -term impact on the environment is one which occurs in a relatively brief definitive period of time while long- term impacts will endure well into the future.) c. Does the project have impacts which are individually limited, but cumu- latively considerable? (A project may impact on two or more separate resources where the impact on each resource is relatively small, but where the effect of the total of those impacts on the environment is significant.) I d. Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, ' either directly or indirectly? — I MAYBE NO e X X V J I 't L I1 1 1 i U i i I >U Date Filed Sep. 3o, tziF,2 Environmental Information Form (To be completed by applicant) GENERAL INFORMATION 1. Name and address of developer or project sponsor: c.:. no 13L... vv 2. Address of project: Q � Potter (,rad,.r�. ( c .7,31`) Assessor's Block and Lot Puum er 3. Name, address, and telephone number of person to be contacted concerning this project: \.,\e"d1 R. 01A IQ wl ��%A) (04e -LZB� 4. Indicate number of the permit application for the project to which this form pertains: )li q 5. List and describe any o her related permits and other public approvals required for this project, including those required by city, reggional, state and federal agencies: VJg&ce Gluslf#v L�,l 9A. 6. Existing zoning district: 7. Proposed use of site (Protect for which this form ie filed): 9,&k, C_ �ac_1s aNc� Ci.�.�c1e TcciJ _ PROJECT DESCRIPTION 8. Site size. t2Q. LA1ar 9. Sqaare footage. 110,000 Spy. IU. Number of floors of construction .WO, 11. Amount of off'- street parking providcd.U/dt 1 Attach plans. Y, Q 1 t. Proposed scheduling. SpcVn�83 111. Associated protects. YL Ir. Anticipated Sncreaental development. ji, 2 . H2 16. If residential, include the number of units, schedule of unit sizes, range of sale prices or rents, and type of household size expected. N Ilp 17. If commercial, Indicate the type, whether neighborhood, city or regionally oriented, square footage of sales area, and loading facilities. NI a 18. If industrial, indicate type, estimated employment per shift, and loading tacilities.NItz� 19. If institutional, indicate the major function, estimated employment per shift, estimated occupancy, loading facilities, and community benefits to be derived from the project. 1 k. ocs+actad. 20. If the project involves a variance, conditional use or rezoning application, state this and indicate clearly why the application 1e required. )J i,% Are the following items applicable to the project or its effects? Discuss below all items checked yes (attach additional sheets as necessary). YES NO ' 21. Change in existing features of any bays, tidelands, beaches, lakes or hills, or substantial alteration of ground contours. 22. Change in scenic views or vistas from existing residential areas or public lards or roads. 3 23. Change In pattern; scale or character of general area of project. _ 24. Significant amounts of solid waste or litter. 25. Change in dust, ash, smoke, fumes or odors In vicinity. 26. Change in ocean, bay, lake, atream or ground water ' quality or quantity, or alteration of existing drainage patterns. 27. Substantial change In existing noise or vibuation ' levels In the vicinity. _ 28. Site on filled land or on slope of 10 percent or mode. 29. Use of disposal of potentially hazardous materlals, such as toxic substances, flammables or explosives. J rJ t 11 j if 3 ya_. NO 30. Substantial change In demand for municipal services (police, fire, water, sewage, etc.). 31. Substantially increase fossil fuel consumption I (electricity, oil, natural gas, etc.). 32. Relationship to a larger project or series of projects. ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING 33. Describe the project site as it exists before the project, 1 Including information on topography, soil stability, plants and animals, and any cultural, historical or scenic aspects. Describe any existing structures.on the site, and the use of the structures. Attach photographs of the site. Snapshots or polaroid photos will be accepted. Snc. 4?\qN. 34. Describe the surrounding properties, including information on plants and animals and any cultural, historical or scenic aspects. Indicate the type of land use (residential, commercial, cts.), intensity of land use (one - family, apartment houses, shops, department stores, etc.), and scale of development (height, frontage, set -back, rear yard, etc.). Attach photographs of the ' vicinity. Snapshots or polaroid photos will be accepted. Sec, CVMC4 L. C\ 6TAev eeQ%c' &M *�O\ a(Z, lez CERTIFICATION: I hereby certify that the statements furnished above 5tU in the attached exhibits presei,t the data and infor- mation required for this initial evaluation to the best of my ability, and that the facts, statements, and information presented are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. tpate 1a \kbl a- pa L \oy A \toN�e s��N EN�.v�C' Por 'Qo.10 \ti. VJoc�cs �cpa�cMc�✓�' 11 19. The park site is to be graded and improved with a minimum slope sidewalk -bike I trail. Existing sidewalk -bike trail maximum slopes across Jasmine Gully are 1 19% and 24% -- much too steep for use by senior citizens and elementary school children. The proposed sidewalk bike trail is to be constructed in close ' conformance with state criteria for the development of bikeways, with a maximum slope of &2 %. The new sidewalk bike trail will permit increased community access ' to adjacent public school and recreational facilities. A second community benefit is derived from the development of the site as a passive park. Trees, grass, beaches, picnic facilities and pathways will be incorporated into the park site development, tentatively scheduled for FY 1983 -84. 21. The park site grading will substantially alter ground contours across Jasmine rGully. The surface across the bottom of the gully will be filled approximately I 12' maximum at midsite. The fill will be rounded, sloping at 3 horizontal to 1 vertical maximum to meet existing contours at adjoining private properties. The ' fill is approximately 190' wide at its base. 1 22. Two private residences, fronting on Jasmine and Iris Avenues and adjacent to the park site, are adjacent to the proposed fill. The garage floor levels of the residences are at the bottom of gully elevation approximately. The second floor levels, presumed to be living areas, are 4 feet below the top of maximum fill elevation approximately. Since fill sideslopes are at 3 horizontal to 1 vertical and are rounded, and since the maximum fill elevation will be 110 feet away from the residences, approximately, the fill slopes will impair sideyard views below a horizontal plane originating from second floor level windows. 1 -- LI The third floor (main floor) levels of the two residences front onto Jasmine and Iris "Avenues. The proposed fill will not impair sideyard views from these levels. 28. The westerly half of the park grading site is transected by Jasmine Gully. Existing side slopes of Jasmine Gully vary in steepness, with a maximum slope of 31 degrees from horizontal. 32. The site has been designated as a "passive park "'in the adopted master plan for OASIS Senior Citizens' Center. Construction funds for the passive park development are tentatively scheduled to be requested for FY 1983 -84. Also, the site encompasses a portion of a secondary bikeway route as established by the City's "Master Plan of Bikeways ". That portion of the route is to be constructed in conjunction with the park site grading. Future segments of the bikeway are to be completed simultaneously with construction of other public or private improvements along the bikeway. APPENDIX B PALEONTOLOGICAL AND ARCHAEOLOGICAL GUIDELINES PALEONTOLOGICAL GUIDELINES K -5 I. GENERAL POLICY. The policies set forth below shall be used to guide the development or redevelopment of lands within the City: ' .A. The City shall, through its planning policies and permit conditions, insure the preservation of paleontological resources and require that the impact caused by any development be mitigated in accordance with the California Environmental quality Act of 1970. B. The City shall prepare and maintain sources of information regarding paleontological sites and the names and addresses of responsible organizations and qualified individuals who can analyze, classify, record, and preserve paleontological findings. C. It shall be the responsibility of a landowner or developer prior to the commencement of land development to cause the proposed site to be examined to determine the existence and extent of paleontological resources. The examination shall be by qualified observers, approved by the City. The observers shall prepare and submit to the City a written report describing findings and making recommendations for further action. The report shall discuss both positive and negative aspects of the effects of the proposed development on paleontological resources. D. Based on the report and recommendations of the observers, the City shall take such steps as are necessary to assure that any findings or sites are recorded, preserved and protected. These steps may include requiring the landowner or developers to incur reasonable expenditures of time or money, encouraging the involvement of appropriate volunteer or non - profit organizations or acquisition of the sites by public or private agencies. Provision shall be made for the deposit of scientifically valuable paleontological materials which are removed from the site with responsible public or private institutions. In all cases, the City shall seek responsible scientific advice and make the necessary decisions consistent with the public interest. i II. DETAILED PROCEDURES. The following procedures shall be used in exam- ' ining and reporting on possible paleontological sites. A. The site examination shall consist of: 1. A walk -over site survey. 2. Review of publications and reports on the geology or paleontology of the area. 3. Analysis of all available soils information. 4. Examination of the relationship of the proposed development site to known or potential fossil producing areas identified in available records. A PALEONTOLOGICAL GUIDELINES -- Page 2 K -5 ' B. Prior to the commencement of any land alterations, the City shall determine whether a pre - grading conference is required. This determination shall be based on an analysis of the potential of a paleontological discovery occurring as follows: 1. If the City determines that it is unlikely to ' assume any paleontological discovery would occur, a pre - grading conference may be waived. 2. Otherwise, the pre - grading conference shall be ' required. C. During the pre - grading conference, the City shall insure the following: 1. That a responsible organization, e.g., the Natural ' History Foundation of Orange County, is notified and that a qualified representative is authorized to participate in the conference. ' 2. That the grading schedule provides for identifi- cation and avoidance of resource discoveries to Callow their immediate recovery. 3. That a qualified observer or collector is available to monitor the site during grading operations. 4. That a copy of the grading schedule is available to the appropriate parties, including the on -site observer. 5. That the observer has adequate authority to insti- tute temporary delays or alterations in the grading ' schedule to allow collection of paleontological material. 6. That the grading contractor clearly understands the observer's role and authority. ' 7. That the responsible parties are notified and ready on a 24 -hour notice to respond if a ' resource discovery is uncovered. B. That adequate insurance has been provided for protection of the observer, the property owner, and the developer. 9. :hat, in the event any paleontological materials ' having scientific value are discovered, reasonable provisions are made for extraction and preservation. ' Adopted - August 26, 1974 /i 1 I i L I U I ARCHAEOLOGICAL GUIDELINES K -6 1/27/75 GENERAL POLICY. The policies set forth below shall be used to guide the development or redevelopment of lands within the City: A. The City shall, through its planning policies and permit conditions, insure the preservation of significant archaeological resources and require that the impact caused by any development be mitigated in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970. B. The City shall prepare and maintain sources of informa- tion regarding archaeological sites and the names and addresses of responsible organizations and qualified individuals who can ahalyze, classify, record, and preserve archaeological findings. C. It shall be the responsibility of a landowner or developer prior to the commencement of land development to cause the proposed site to be examined to determine the existence and extent of archaeological resources. The examination shall be by qualified observers, approved by the City. The observers shall prepare and submit to the City a written report describing findings and making recommendations for further action. The report shall discuss both positive and negative aspects of the effects of the proposed development on archaeological resources. D. Based on the report and recommendations of the observers, the City shall take such steps as are necessary to assure that any findings or sites are recorded, and where appropriate, preserved and protected. These steps may include requiring the landowner or developers to incur reasonable expenditures of time or money, encouraging the involvement of appropriate volunteer or non - profit organizations or acquisition of the sites by public or private agencies. Provision shall be made for the deposit of scientifically valuable archaeological materials which are removed from the site with responsible public or private institutions. In all cases, the City shall seek responsible scientific advice and make the necessary decisions consistent with the public interest. II. DETAILED PROCEDURES. The following procedures shall be used in examining and reporting on possible archaeological sites. There shall be a walk -over site survey and, if warranted, a pregrading conference prior to the commencement of any land alterations. A. Procedures and Findings: 1. Records: Demonstration shall be made that a records check was completed and the results stated in the text of the final report. ARCHAEOLOGICAL GUIDELINES - Page 2 B. 2. Background: Background information shall be Provided summarizing the significance of scientific, cultural and historical perspec- tives to the project area. Sources must be referenced. 3. On -Site Survey: The following descriptions shall be made in sufficient detail to allow verification of work: a) Methods of reconnaissance: 1) surface 2) sub- surface b) A list of personnel and affiliation. c) Date and location of research. d) Condition of area surveyed which may have effect on archaeological findings. e) Observations and data - description of archaeological resources found. f) Location of material and data collected. g) Notification of professionals in related disciplines where necessary, such as historians and paleontologists. 4. Evaluation of impact (direct and indirect): a) Description of impacts b) Significance of impacts Development Alternatives: 1. Methods to achieve site preservation: a) Revision of construction or development plans in the event of exceptional site, worthy of preservation and /or nomination to the National Registry (Historic Pres- ervation Act of 1966). b) In the event that development ensues in areas adjoining the site that would involve potential impact by virture of this proximity, steps should be taken to: K -6 1/27/75 I ARCHAEOLOGICAL GUIDELINES - Page 3 1) protect the site by adequate means, such as fencing or other approved measures. t2) stabilize where indicated 3) restore damage occurring as a result of proximity of the source of impact. ' c) Restoration where applicable. 2. Archaeological excavation: a) Full- scale, research - oriented excavation, properly planned and organized, adequately funded, and with sufficient time, is the ' preferred method of partial mitigation. The consultant's proposal to the City, included in the EIR, should contain, in ' detail, costs, procedures, time required and a statement of the importance of the work to be performed. This proposal may then be included in a conditional permit or be required prior to the issuance of a permit. ' b) Emergency salvage excavation is the least preferred method of partial mitigation. The result of poor planning, salvage techniques of excavation constitute an adverse impact of archaeological resources and represent the irreplace- able loss of a site. ' C. Qualifications of Consultants: PIMA 1/27/75 Provisional to professional licensing, minimum qualifications for consulting archaeologists shall be satisfied by their listing in the Directory of Archaeological Consultants, available from the Society for California Archaeology. ' Verification regarding qualifications shall be made by the Director of Community Development. 1 Adopted January 13, 1975 APPENDIX C PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PROGRAM DATE: TO NOTICE OF PREPARATION OF A DRAFT EIR FROM: Planning Department City of Newport Beach 3300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, CA 92663 PLEASE RETURN THIS NOTICE WITH YOUR AGENCY'S COMMENTS DATE MAILED BY LEAD AGENCY: DATE RECEIVED BY RUPONSIBLE AGENCY: DATE RESPONSE RECEIVED BY LEAD AGENCY; PROJECT TITLE: OASIS Park Grading PROJECT LOCATION: North of 5th Avenue, Iris Avenue to Larkspur Avenue; Corona del Ma > V DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT AND MAJOR LOCAL ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES: Z . W Extend Jasmine Creek Storm Drain 125 feet & construct new headworks; construct 375 Zlin. ft. of storm drain along 5th Avenue between Jasmine Creek & Larkspur Avenue; W J grade across Jasmine Gully with onsite stockpiled earth; construct sidewalk bike a trail between Iris and Larkspur Avenues; remove excess stockpiled earth from site; o and hydroseed. Disruption of riparian habitat; and earthwork. Q w J C [=ACi PLKSUN: 11ILL: PHONE: Lloyd Dalton Design Engineer (714) 640 -2281 DATE MAILED BY LEAD AGENCY: DATE RECEIVED BY RUPONSIBLE AGENCY: DATE RESPONSE RECEIVED BY LEAD AGENCY; DESCRIBE SPECIFIC PERMIT AUTHORITY OF YOUR AGENCY RELATED TO THIS PROJECT; LIST SPECIFIC ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS: (Use additional pages as necessary) > V Z . W U' Q W J O] N Z O N W C [—CONTACT PERSON: TITLE: PHONE: DATE MAILED BY LEAD AGENCY: DATE RECEIVED BY RUPONSIBLE AGENCY: DATE RESPONSE RECEIVED BY LEAD AGENCY; .�; _ '.�` `:! ' y ; !gip >'• C >: I.I � , n ., ` ' ''�\ te'aa�ila' �w'wl yle sl zl ail sl `I. r A . � /! a /' HEL /OTROPE— AYENUEt I I � I � �5 %• ty _ m i rS I 1 I � n O � � I 2 A m � 2 � �i .TASOME g � ; • tili�: aIC.4 � � ° ♦ x. ` Iw a!a w�alal 1 I c.a ♦R Fit � LdRR 5PUl4 •ISI, .6 u{ w w o p ..d.g..'i''`i ♦ w.O.a... Y.2.S ` 3 4: �._ — .MAR /!aOLO A✓E.W/E e i 2i iti I ''�+ I^-! oJ6�',�N wl Sl nin k „iYlw loloiol C�,i o���ti I ;j f ' _ e•'� "! ilalai. ( .'` „I— i_i_i:.'.. .i: " ,ip' =+-lyl a�- ��.���l:�`. I`I __ •.� .. dvENUE t r---- _ :'��c ici ai:A �..e•..._J I I .Ia1.I c'I. �zi2j> dYENUE " .Tiiw olalx�x II I I � � I Iaai: ,i. wl. asl ICY :la: ckidal; l>> r A cn �..e•..._J ^d'S dYENUE " .Tiiw olalx�x II I I � � I Iaai: l>> r A cn ^d'S .Tiiw olalx�x II I I � � I Iaai: l>> r A cn ^d'S II I I � � I �xurvnr L le yi o � I:i S c Via+ a 1, 8; L ail is i S r . 2: a " � !fit ", Se Qi , .• .', L Y i'a ' L Dept. of Water Resources State Clearinghouse Attn: Ken Fellows Office of Planning & Research 1416 Ninth Street 1400 Tenth St., Room 250 Sacramento, CA 95814 Sacramento, CA 95814 California Div. of Mines & Geology Attn: Perry Amimoto 1416 Ninth Street Sacramento, CA 95814 1State of California State Lands Commission Attn: Ted Fukushima 1807 13th Street Sacramento, CA 95814 Department of Health Attn: Harvey Collins 714 P Street, Room 430 Sacramento, CA 95814 State Water Resources ControlBd Attn: John Huddleson, Region #8 1416 Ninth Street Sacramento, CA 95814 1Dept. of Housing & Community Air Resources Board Development Attn: Michael D. Redemer, Mgr. Attn: Dave Williamson 1102 Q Street 921 Tenth St., 6th Floor Sacramento, CA 95814 ISacramento, CA 95814 Federal Highway Administration IAttn: Ray Okinaga P.O. Box 1915. Sacramento, CA 95809 U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Attn: Jack Fancher 24000 Avila Road Laguna Niguel, CA 92677 ,Dept. of Conservation Attn: Rick Mevis, Env. Cons. Program Coordinator I1416 Ninth Street, Room 1354 Sacramento, CA 95814 Dept. of Fish & Game Fred A. Worthley, Jr., Reg.Mgr.t 350 Golden Shore ,Long Beach, CA 90802 Dept. of Parks & Recreation Attn: James Tryner 1220 K Street, Third Floor Sacramento, CA 95814 iU.S. Army Corps of Engrs. Environmental Resources Attn: Sid Levenson P.O. Box 2711 Los Angeles, CA 90053 'Cal. Regional Water Quality Control Board Attn: Gordon Anderson 6809 Indianap Riverside, CA 2966 G),K DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY LOS ANGELES DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS P. O. BOX 2711 LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 90053 January 31, 1983 Planning Department City of Newport Beach 3300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, California 92663 ATTN: Messrs. Talarico and Dalton IGentlemen: We would be happy to review and comment on the proposed documents when they are issued. Sincerely, Carl F. Enson Acting Chief, Planning Division r v FEgl_ 1983p' ' CAN 4. LF c2 This is in response to letters from your office concerning Notices of Preparation of Draft Environmental Impact Reports for the proposed "Oasis Park Grading, Corona del Mar," and "Four Seasons Hotel, Newport Beach, projects. Our specific responsibilities include, but are not limited to, inves- tigation, design, operation and maintenance of water resources projects, including preparation of environmental guidelines in the fields of flood control, navigation and shore protection; also administration of laws and regulations for the protection and preservation against pollution of the waters of the United States. We believe that the forthcoming documents should address environmental impacts pertinent to those of our responsi- bilities enumerated above. Please feel free to contact this office for any data that might assist you in preparation of the forthcoming documents. The contact person for these projects is Mr. Sidney Levenson, tele- phone (213) 688 -5500. We would be happy to review and comment on the proposed documents when they are issued. Sincerely, Carl F. Enson Acting Chief, Planning Division r v FEgl_ 1983p' ' CAN 4. LF c2 '1 I P I I I I I I u z u °c J 901 d 1 G N c� o BOIL ON1OU `N N ,O z > °w o p, P •01 W d YRO J L � � y T d N U'O r C 2 yy M O 6 COY-✓ N L Y W Or C W 6 hN�N 1 NONSTATUTORY ADVISEMENT File No. To: From: PLEASE RETURN THIS NOTICE WITH YOUR COMMENTS PROJECT TITLE: OASIS Park Grading PROJECT LOCATION: North of 5th Avenue, Iris Avenue to Larkspur Avenue, Corona del Mar DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT AND MAJOR LOCAL ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES Extend Jasmine Creek Storm Drain 125 feet 8 construct new headvorks; construct 375 lin. ft. of storm drain along 5th Avenue between Jasmine Creek 8 Larkspur Avenue; grade across Jasmine Gully with onsite stockpiled earth; construct sidewalk bike trail between Iris and Larkspur Avenues; remove excess stockpiled earth from site; and hydroseed. Disruption of riparian habitat; and earthwork. DESCRIBE SPECIFIC PERMIT AUTHORITY OF YOQR AGENCY RELATED TO THIS PROJECT 1 LIST SPECIFIC ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS: .(USE ATiDTiTDHAL PAGES AS NECESSARY): CONTACT PERSON TITLE .PHONE DATE MAILED BY DATE RECEIVED BY RESPON- DATE RECEIVED BY DATE RESPONSE LEAD AGENCY SIBLE AGENCY WHERE APPLICABLE INTERESTED.PARTY RECEIVED BY THE LEAD AGENCY CONTACT PERSON: Lloyd Dalton, Design Engineer, (714) 640 -2281 DESCRIBE SPECIFIC AREA OF EXPERTISE /INTEREST: .. 4{ LIST SPECIFIC ENVIRONMENTAL CONC €RNS (USE ADDTTIDNAL PAGES AS NECESSARY): W 4 / W N W z CONTACT PERSON TITLE PHONE DATE MAILED BY DATE RECEIVED BY RESPON- DATE RECEIVED BY DATE RESPONSE LEAD AGENCY SIBLE AGENCY WHERE APPLICABLE INTERESTED.PARTY RECEIVED BY THE LEAD AGENCY CONTACT PERSON: Lloyd Dalton, Design Engineer, (714) 640 -2281 '70 - E11j, I TI 7I N; 1171 Z m - ------- T-7 ,TA 5411,Vc AYEV41P. C. .7 - - - - T I ZI -- i ♦ 1: I .. \ qr �,4 - �zta l - � a ANEW t TlZ Iv. I =lz Ilb' SPON - c/o Jean Watt Resident 4 Harbor Island Drive 700 Heliotrope Ave. Newport Beach, CA 92660 Corona del Mar, CA 92625 League of Women Voters, D.C. Resident Heliotrope Ave. Newport Beach, CA 92660 C,zy, Corona del Mar, CA 92625 i Audubon Society -Sea & Sage Cp' Resident P. 0. Box 1779 1 706 Heliotrope Ave. Santa Ana, CA 92702 Corona del Mar, CA 92625 I So. Calif. Edison Co. Julie H. Driver Attn: W. E. Guffey Gilbert A. Mitchell 7333 Bolsa Ave. 1617 E. Balboa Blvd. Westminster, CA 92683 Balboa, CA 92661 r n e CCo. Flood Control Robert C. Mister tn9 Mr, runner 705 Iri Avenue 5400 Civic Cntr. Dr. Corona del Mar, CA 92625 anta Ana, CA 92702 Ross E. Morgan 3411 E. Coast Hwy Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Thomas J. Viola 980 Hampton Rd. Arcadia, CA 91006 Georgia H. Hovis 709 Iris Ave. Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Harlan W. Hoyt 708 Heliotrope Ave. Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Michael Dingillo 1811 W. Bay Ave. Newport Beach, CA 92663 Robert G. Monger 710 Heliotrope Ave. Corona del Mar, CA 92625 James M. Melbon 1807 Port Abbey P1. Newport Beach, CA 92660 Resident 715 Iris Ave. Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Resident 717 Iris Ave. Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Resident 716 Heliotrope Ave. Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Resident 718 Heliotrope Av . Corona del Mar, C�1 92625 Club - Orange Cty.Grp. Resident 'Sierra P. 0. Box 1033 1 707 Iris Ave. Garden Grove, CA 92642 Corona del Mar, CA 92626 Friends of Irvine Coast Resident P. 0. Box 714 I 702 Heliotrope Ave. Corona del Mar, CA 92625 i Corona del Mar, CA 92625 I Sutton News Group Resident 2721 East Coast Hwy. 711 Iris Ave. Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Steve Marvel - Daily Pilot Frank Simon P. 0. Box 1560 701 Iris Ave. Costa Mesa, CA 92626 Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Newport -Mesa Unfd Sch. Dist. ; Fred Sotomayer 1857 Placentia Avenue 700; Heliotrope Ave. Costa Mesa, CA 92627 Corona del Mar, CA 92625 So. Calif. Gas Co. Harvey R. Paeden Attn: W. R. Perkins 703 Iris Ave. P. 0. Box 3334 Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Anaheim, CA 92803 So. Calif. Edison Co. Julie H. Driver Attn: W. E. Guffey Gilbert A. Mitchell 7333 Bolsa Ave. 1617 E. Balboa Blvd. Westminster, CA 92683 Balboa, CA 92661 r n e CCo. Flood Control Robert C. Mister tn9 Mr, runner 705 Iri Avenue 5400 Civic Cntr. Dr. Corona del Mar, CA 92625 anta Ana, CA 92702 Ross E. Morgan 3411 E. Coast Hwy Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Thomas J. Viola 980 Hampton Rd. Arcadia, CA 91006 Georgia H. Hovis 709 Iris Ave. Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Harlan W. Hoyt 708 Heliotrope Ave. Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Michael Dingillo 1811 W. Bay Ave. Newport Beach, CA 92663 Robert G. Monger 710 Heliotrope Ave. Corona del Mar, CA 92625 James M. Melbon 1807 Port Abbey P1. Newport Beach, CA 92660 Resident 715 Iris Ave. Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Resident 717 Iris Ave. Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Resident 716 Heliotrope Ave. Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Resident 718 Heliotrope Av . Corona del Mar, C�1 92625 Resident Carlton J. Smith 701 Jasmine Ave. ( 23811 Via Fabricante Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Mission Viejo, CA 92691 i Resident John A. Allard 700 Iris Ave. P. 0. Box 134 Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Resident 703 Jasmine Ave. Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Resident 702 Jasmine Ave. Corona del Mar, CA 92625 i Resident 1 705 Jasmine Ave. Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Janis Stieber 712 Heliotrope Ave. Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Ronald L. Carl 13134 Highwood Houston, Tex. 77079 Donald LeFever 715 Heliotrope Ave. Corona del Mar, CA 92625 James Allen 522 E1 Modena Ave. Newport Beach, CA 92663 Weir G. Smith P. 0. Box 67 Stratford, CA 93266 E. W. Robinson' 30631 Marilyn Dr. South Laguna, CA 92677 John Bellamy 144 Jasmine Creek Dr. Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Douglas B. Bynon 12 Hidalgo Irvine, CA 92625 Resident 708 Jasmine Ave. Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Resident 715 Jasmine Ave. Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Resident 714 Iris Ave. Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Resident 717 Jasmine Ave. Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Resident 719 Jasmine Ave. Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Mabel McKay . 707 Jasmine Ave. Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Jeffrey Cunningham 706 -A Iris Ave. Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Wayne J. Laurent P. 0. Box 67836 Los Angeles, CA 90067 Lawrence A. Jordan 711 JasmineAve. Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Ann Lessig Corzine 710 Iris Ave. Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Dennis E. Casino 713 Jasmine Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Wallace Calderhead 712 Iris Ave. Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Ione Wade 484 Del Rosa Dr. Pasadena, CA 92625 Robert J. Sunderland 3601 Seabreeze Lane Corona Del Mar, CA 92625 Jerome P. Tripoli P. 0. Box 192 Corona del Mar, CA 92625 ��yllri S ith Ramona R. Host oroIr c�e� Mear, CA 92625 704 -A Iris Ave. Patricia pZ. Hicks Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Corona �el %r, CA 92625 Roger G. Byron.__ 13422'Nawport Ave. -=ton - Crt. r Resident ` 717 Larkspur Ave. Tustin, CA 92680 er - =each, CA 92663 Corona del Mar, CA 92625 i Resident a—. -- I. Melanson Resident 718 Iris Ave. _, __ Ave 716 Jasmine Ave. 1 Corona del Mar, CA 92625 - = L1 Mar, CA 92625 Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Resident -e-e' E. Weiss, Resident 720 Iris Ave. 7i ;m ine Ave. 720 Jasmine Ave. Corona del Mar, CA 92625 el Mar, CA 92625 Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Resident _. - ! Ginter '- Jerry Taylor 701 Larkspur Ave. - yapple Way 711 Larkspur Ave. Corona del Mar, CA 92625 =-c rte_ :A 92715 Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Resident a =- R. Armstrong -22 Arvo E. Haapa 700 Jasmine Avenue ,mine Ave. 710 Jasmine Ave. Corona del Mar, CA 92625 el Mar, CA 92625 Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Resident :ar- ='. Sullivan Larkspur Road Associates 703 Larkspur Ave. �ti :- =del Way 713 Larkspur Ave. Corona del Mar, CA 92625 e--.o, CA 95825 j Corona del Mar, CA j 92625 Resident ;&-=- =. Tardie George B. Farrell 705 Larkspur Avenue = `. =ide P_ 0. Box 282 Corona del Mar, CA 92625 = -. :. �-A 92714 Corona del Mar, CA 92625 I Resident - - __ :effrey William F. Agee 704 Jasmine Ave. Corona del Mar, CA 92625 _ —i <spur - :el Mar, CA 92625 715 Larkspur Ave. Corona del Mar, CA 92625 �t Resident 709 = uffman - " Marguerite Dalziel Larkspur Ave. Corona del Mar, CA 92625 = = ine Ave. :el Mar, CA 92625 714 Jasmine Ave. _--_ Corona del Mar, CA 92625 ' Jon M. Jarvis -- — :. Campagna Hugo Di Lonardo 37 St. Tropez Newport Beach, CA 92660 -= :r :eaf Ave. -- :el Mar, CA 92625 9532 Via Salerno _ Burbank, CA .92625 Elizabeth A. Trotter 721 Jasmine Ave. __ -line Ave. Richard C. Hunsaker Corona del Mar, CA 92625 _ a :el Mar, CA 92626 3572 Ocean Blvd. Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Charles Newton Larl Liegler Robert-Searles r 701 Marguerite Ave. 719 Larkspur Avenue I Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Chase 0. Sanderson 1 718 Jasmine Ave. Corona del Mar, CA 92625 John D. Allen 721 Larkspur Corona del Mar, CA 92625 1 Johanna Ventre 7201-2 Jasmine Avenue Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Resident 705 Marguerite Avenue Corona del Mar, CA Resident 702 Larkspur Avenue Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Resident 709 Marguerite Ave. Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Resident 708 Larkspur Avenue Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Resident 711 Marguerite Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Robert John 700 Larkspur Ave. Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Willis E. Nielsen 707 Marguerite Ave. Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Alice J. Chambers P. 0. Box 306 Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Peter G. Leider 704 Larkspur Ave. Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Calvin P. Pierce 706 Larkspur Ave. Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Lawrence V. Harison 2515 E. Coast Hwy Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Stephen F. Piper 2524 Ocean Blvd. Corona del Mar, CA 92625 I. Moreno 2613 Via Olivera Palos Verdes Estates, CA 90274 Gerhard N. Rostvold P. 0. Box 188 Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Resident 715 Marguerite Ave. Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Resident 717 Marguerite Ave. Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Resident 716 Larkspur Ave. Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Richard P. Succa 7152 Marguerite Ave. Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Charles Solari Maurine Wilson 714 Larkspur Ave. Corona del Mar, CA 92625 W. Moseley P. 0. Box 312 Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Helen C. Long 1561 Mesa Dr. # 32 Santa Ana, CA 92625 Frank A. Williams 719 Marguerite Ave. Corona del Mar, CA 92625 ' Resident John A. Allard Joseph Gallo 710 Larkspur Ave. 2515 E. Coast Hwy 718 Larkspur Ave. Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Resident Gerald Obert John H. Marshall 712 Lardpur.AveCA 92625 713 Marguerite Ave. 721 Marguerite Ave. i Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Corona del Mar, CA 92625 i `P%M% _Fxi:: " -... .a' +.s.;y.� IV•'�lei .. .w$+ _ °�' ^"3'- � r E (y'� irNr ,�(QQii Robert G. Wolff 720 Larkspur Ave. Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Corona del Mar Comm. Assoc. Mr. Richard Nichols, Pres. C? P. 0. Box 516 Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Irvine Co. of W. Va 550 Newport Center Dr. Newport Beach, CA 92660 i ,1. • I I ri I i i I r i i LA a u W J O M W 8 V- N N t Nyou i N - Qe m n u o .+ =' c z o o v d -• •� W OM T W C f N N F NONSTATUTORY ADVISEMENT C File No. To: From: PLEASE RETURN THIS NOTICE WITH YOUR COMMENTS BY PROJECT TITLE: OASIS Park Grading PR03ECT LOCATION: North of 5th Avenue, Iris Avenue to Larkspur Avenue, Corona del Mar Extend Jasmine Creek Storm Drain 125 feet & construct new headworks; construct 375 lin, ft. of storm drain along 5th Avenue between Jasmine Creek & Larkspur Avenue; grade across Jasmine Gully with onsite stockpiled earth; construct sidewalk bike trail between Iris and Larkspur Avenues; remove excess stockpiled earth from site; and hydroseed. Disruption of riparian habitat; and earthwork. DESCRIBE SPECIFIC PERMIT AUTHORITY OF IR AGENCY RELATED TO THIS PROJECT 1 4 LIST SPECIFIC ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS: .(USE ADDITIONAL PAGES AS NECESSARY): CONTACT PERSON TITLE .PHONE DATE MAILED BY DATE RECEIVED BY RESPON- GATE RECEIVED BY DATE RESPONSE LEAD AGENCY SIBLE AGENCY WHERE APPLICABLE INTERESTED PARTY RECEIVED BY TFi ' LEAD AGENCY t2 -2lo CONTACT PERSON: Lloyd Dalton, Design Engineer 9 9 (714) 840 -2287 VV i rP/MrR� DESCRIBE SPECIFIC AREA OF EXPERTISE /INTEREST: L/}n/OSG1rj�- �Qf- HYT�G%dKE � E7�/�QQ!�+M EN%XFt- LIST SPECIFIC E14VIRCHMENTAL CONCERNS (USE ADDITIONAL PAGES S NECESSARY): j �4Pe4S�D mix CGMP+rA -614,/ w diT7v/c.4Ll7-{ VC'G�TRi7oN � EX?S�/� mP Fij�025�E�DiLN�t 0 6R40/M6 aYvr-/6UA0"7oN 40-d o o�r-x � sirs- Exis nmw 62AO1� ,ois2v M/!3 Sfc��t/� /G� (JSGl7°6 440 839 W i CONTACT PERSON TITLE /7�r PHONE "7 - 94-71 DATE MAILED BY DATE RECEIVED BY RESPON- GATE RECEIVED BY DATE RESPONSE LEAD AGENCY SIBLE AGENCY WHERE APPLICABLE INTERESTED PARTY RECEIVED BY TFi ' LEAD AGENCY t2 -2lo CONTACT PERSON: Lloyd Dalton, Design Engineer 9 9 (714) 840 -2287 VV i rP/MrR� I I Zipf , -ell �- I_! 1 I 11 I I CITY OF NEWPORT I3EACH October 4, 1982 P.O. BOX 1768, NEU'PORT BEACH, CA 92663-3f384 PLANNING DEPARTMENT (714) 640 -2197 Bernard Maniscalco The Irvine Company 500 Newport Center Drive P.O. Box 1 Newport Beach, CA 92663 SUBJECT: OASIS PARK GRADING r1 I It would be greatly appreciated if you would as soon as possible evaluate the proposed grading concept as it may effect your property and your future development plans. We presently anticipate completing our Initial Study on the project by October 19, 1982 and would appreciate your comments prior to that date. I look forward to discussing this project with you. Very truly yours, PLANNING DEPARTMENT JAMES D. HEWICKER, Director By Fred Talarico, Environmental Coordinator FT:tn 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach A F C E 1 V L® 0 C T 0 1 1982 THE IRVINE COMPANY Dear Bernard: The Newport Beach City Council at its September 27, 1982 meeting directed staff to proceed with the preparation of an environmental document for the Oasis Park Grading. The grading concept selected by the City Council for consideration (Alternative 3A) provides for filling Jasmine Creek to join existing parking lot grades at CYC. It 1 appears the reason for adding Alternative 3A is to explore the possibility of constructing an athletic field on the site at a future date. ' The Public Works Department has requested that the Planning Department as rapidly as practicable complete the environmental document for this project. The Irvine Company owns property immediately adjacent to the ' proposed project. r1 I It would be greatly appreciated if you would as soon as possible evaluate the proposed grading concept as it may effect your property and your future development plans. We presently anticipate completing our Initial Study on the project by October 19, 1982 and would appreciate your comments prior to that date. I look forward to discussing this project with you. Very truly yours, PLANNING DEPARTMENT JAMES D. HEWICKER, Director By Fred Talarico, Environmental Coordinator FT:tn 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach A F C E 1 V L® 0 C T 0 1 1982 THE IRVINE COMPANY I� In ^ 107. \ • \JNI\ -. V IIJ1'(�y' ..,I \ �a •'� � �) 1 � �' �. � '•LI IlJrllll � nl Y9 4l %z �•�� ��._, � _ 'Ilia aK� �' / \ OC CC 1 i L i I i 11 L_ I' ' I 11 ,I THE IRVINE COMPANY 550 Newport Center Drive, P.O. Box i Newport Beach, California 92660 -9959 (714) 720 -2000 October 19. 1982 Mr. Fred Talarico Environmental Coordinator City of Newport Beach 3300 Newport Boulevard P.O. Box 1768 Newport Beach, CA 92663 -3884 RE: OASIS PARK GRADING Dear Fred: The proposed grading does not appear to limit the development potential on the attached Irvine Company property. Any filling operation of the canyon is viewed as an acceptable method to increasing the useable acreage along Jasmine Creek. If the City fills the canyon as proposed, we hope the City would look favor- ably upon similar type grading of Jasmine Creek along the school district and The Irvine Company property line. I greatly appreciate your willingness to keep us informed of City activities adjoining Irvine Company properties. Sincerely, Bernard A. Maniscalco Manager of Community Development BAM /dv Attachments cc: C. Keith Greer 1� 2419��' ' OCj c "Al 1� I i '1 �1 APPENDIX D MEMO FROM CITY TRAFFIC ENGINEER L u L 1 u FEBRUARY 28, 1983 TO: ENVIRONMENTAL COORDINATOR FROM: Traffic Engineer SUBJECT: TRAFFIC IMPACT OF ALTERNATIVE 3B FOR OASIS PARK GRADING Alternative 3B in the Oasis Park Grading EIR would provide grading to allow the widening of Fifth Avenue between Larkspur and Jasmine Avenues. This segment of Fifth Avenue is currently wide enough for only one lane of traffic even though it provides two -way circulation. The proposed widening would be wide enough to allow two travel lanes and parking along the southerly side only. The narrowness of the existing segment of Fifth Avenue is a traffic safety concern; especially as it forces westbound drivers to drive on what would normally be the wrong side of the street as they approach the corner at Jasmine Avenue. This concern has been expressed in a petition submitted by residents of Jasmine Avenue and recognized by the City Council on January 24, 1983, when they voted to post cautionary signs at each end of this segment. The proposed widening will significantly improve the safety of motorists using this local street without inducing additional traffic. The widening will provide for a separate lane for each direction of travel and will increase the sight distance at the intersection of Fifth and Jasmine Avenues. This portion of Fifth Avenue provides traffic service only to residents along Jasmine and Larkspur Avenues living between Fourth and Fifth Avenues. This is not expected to change as a result of the proposed widening. Currently less than 250 vehicles a day are using this segment of Fifth Avenue. This is consistent with a local street that provides primary access to low density residential land use. The proposed widening of this existing segment without extending it to connect with Iris Avenue should have no impact on the desires of non - residents to use this local street. Richard M. Edmonston Traffic Engineer RME /jp CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH l.ry Z OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK (714) 640 -2251 C,9C/ Fp RNvP., . Mayor Evelvn R. Hart Mayor Pro Tern Philip R. Maurer Council Members Bill Agee John C. Cox Jr. Jackie Heather Ruthelvn Plummer Donald A. Strauss April 6, 1984 Gillespie Construction 3004 Deodar, Suite D Costa Mesa, CA 92626 Subject: Surety:. Bonds No.: Project: Contract No.: Firemans Fund Insurance Co. 7124296 Oasis Park Grading & C -2316 5th Av. Street Impvmt The City Council on February 27, 1984 accepted the work of subject project and authorized the City Clerk to file a Notice of Completion and to release the bonds 35 days after the Notice has been recorded. The Notice was recorded with the Orange County Recorder on March 6, 1984, Reference No. 84- 093513. Please notify your surety company that the bonds may be released 35 days after this recording date. Sincerely, z44elo-- Wanda E. Andersen CITY CLERK WEA:lr cc: Public Works City Hall • 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach, California 92663 Please return to: City Clerk City of Newport Beach 3300 Newport Blvd. P.O. Box 1768 Newport Heath, CA 92663 -3884 un NU 'i ULW�� `°"� °' 84- 093513 EXEMPT RECOP.DED IN OFFICIAL RECORDS Of OkAlNt COUNTY, CAUFNNIA C2 NOTICE. OF COMPLETION �I`90 PM MAR 6'84 PUBLIC WORKS 10 All Laborers and Material Men and to Every Other Person Interested: YOU WILL PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that on February 27. 1984 —,_` the Public Works project consisting of Oasis Park Grading and 5th Avenue Street _ Improvement between Jasmine & Narcissus Avenue (C -2316) on whi ie Construction, 3004 Deodar; Suite D. Costa Mesa, CA 92626 was n r and Fireman's Fund Insurance Co. P.O. Box 1975 Santa Ana CA 92702 W t e su(+ety, W ompleted. NEV — APR _,.i,..o. CI PO 13 ACH s 1984- ! R*CF.1VM �� s ClT ";r '' u lic Works Director VERIFICATION I, the undersigned, say: I am the Public Works Director of the City of Newport Beach; the foregoing Notice of Completion is true of my own knowledge. I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on March 2, 1984 at Newport e� , Crnia. r*= Public Works Director VERIFICATION OF CITY CLERK 1, the undersigned, say: I am the City Clerk of the City of Newport Beach; the City Council of said City on February 27, 1984 accepted the above described work as completed and ordered that a Notice of Completion be filed. I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on March 2, 1984 at Newport Beach, California. City Clerk March 2, 1984 Lee A. Branch County Recorder P.O. Box 238 Santa Ana, CA 92702 Dear Mr. Branch: CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK (714)640.2251 Attached for recordation are 4 Notices of Completion of Public Works projects consisting of: 1. Oasis Park Grading & 5th Avenue St. Improvement between Jasmine & Narcissus Ave...a(C7-2316), on which Gillespie Construction was the contractor and Fireman's Fund Insurance Co., was the surety. 2. Installation of Traffic Signals & Safety Lighting at the intersection of Hospital Road & Placentia Ave. (C- 2376), on which Paul Gardner Corp. was the contractor and United Pacific Insurance Co. was the surety. 3. Storm Drain Improvement Program for 1983 -84 (C- 2380), on which Gillespie Construction was the contractor and Fireman's Fund Insurance Co., was the surety. 4. Desilting Basin at Big Canyon Reservoir (C- 2384), on which Capistrano Construction Co. was the contractor and The Ohio Casualty Insurance Co. was the surety. Please record and return to us. Sincerely, Wanda E. Andersen City Clerk PRA.lii: Attachments (4) City Hall • 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach, California 92663 TO: CITY COUNCIL FROM: Public Works Department BY THE CITY COUNCIL CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH FEB 2 71984 APPROVED February 27, 1984 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM N0. SUBJECT: ACCEPTANCE OF OASIS PARK GRADING AND 5TH AVENUE STREET IMPROVEMENT BETWEEN JASMINE AND NARCISSUS AVENUES (C -2316) RECOMMENDATIONS: 1. Accept the work. 2. Authorize the City Clerk to file a Notice of Completion. 3. Authorize the City Clerk to release the bonds 35 days after Notice of Completion has been filed. DISCUSSION: The contract for the construction of the subject project has been completed to the satisfaction of the Public Works Department. The bid price was $ 243,074.50 Amount of unit price items constructed 251,037.05 Amount of change orders 6,286.28 Total contract cost 257,323.33 During construction it was found that to achieve a smooth join with the existing pavement it was necessary to remove and reconstruct more of the existing pavement than had been anticipated. This additional work was the primary cause of the increase in the amount of unit price items constructed. Three change orders were issued. The first, in the amount of $2,190.65, provided for the re- location of the sewer lateral serving the Oasis Center to clear the new storm drain. The second, in the amount of $2,325.33, provided for an additional concrete storm drain collar, excavation and delay caused by a telephone conduit interferring with the new storm drain. The third, in the amount of $1,770.30, provided for construction of a block retaining wall at the intersection of Jasmine and Fifth Avenues. Funds were budgeted in the General Fund. The design engineering was performed by Jack P. Norris. The contractor is Gillespie Construction, Costa Mesa. The contract date of completion was January 11, 1984. The contractor was delayed 15 days due to inclement weather. All work was completed January 23, 1998. Benjamin B. Nolan Public Works Director GPD:do certificate of insurar# NAME AND ADDRESS OF AGENCY 4 COMPANIES AFFORDING COVERAGES FRIIS & COMPANY, INC. P.O. BOX 20086 LETTERNY A GREAT AMERICAN INS. RIVERSIDE, CA 92516 -- TEL. 714 -787 -8730 COMPANY B HUDSON INSURANCE LETTER NAME AND ADDRESS OF INSURED COMP /1NY ' LETTER C AETNA CASUALTY & 3JRETY GILLESPIE CONSTRUCTION - -- -- - -- - -- 3004 DEODOR, SUITE D COMPANY D COSTA MESA, CA 92626 LETTER - -- — — COMPANY C LETTER C This is to cenifY (hat Poaoies of insurance listed below hir a beQ Ssued to the insured nanledaboveand are 'in force at this hme Nolivilhslan Cin9 ally r¢QwrQmenL t¢tm or contli0on of any contractor dire' document with +esF¢C\ to whicfi \his Ce':iticale may he nscoo, <.r may relish, the"sufantadatto'ded by the policies des" IUed pe.elr a subject :o all the tel exclusrons and cdCdiOOds It soch Policies. J Limits of Liabilltv in Thousands (000) COMPANY LETTER TYPE OF INSURANCE POLICY NUMBER POLICY ATE EACH AGGREGATE OCCURRENCE. IS E , GENERAL LIABILITY BoDILV INJURY A COMPREHENSIVE FORM IPREMISES— OPERATIONS BP2193381 p '' 11/10/83 PROPERTY DAMAGE $ I $ EXIPAOAON AND COLLAPSE 11/10/84 �— I UNOERGROLLID HAZARD I PRODUCTS,COMPLETED 1 OPERATIONS HAZARD BODILY INJURY AND CONTRACTUAL INSURANCE I PROPERTY DAMAGE E 500 ` $ SOO BROAD FORM PROPERTY ! COMBINED DAMAGE I INDEPENDEN *CONTRACTORS $ 500 PERSONAL INJURY I I PERSONAL INJURY 1 AUTOMOBILE LIABILITY ' BODILY INJURY $ A I (EACH PERSON) nCOMPREHENSIVE FORM BA3768071 11/10/83 ROOJLY INJURY IS OWNED 11/10/84 (EACH ACCIDENT; I� HIRED PROPERTYRTY DAMAGE�4_ �j NON-OWNED �u BODILY INJURY AND $ 5500 PROPERTY DAMAGE COMBINED EXCESS LIABILITY��� B UMBRELLA FORM j /lO /H3 ! BODILY INJURY AND PROPERTY DAMAGE $ {I $ pOTHER THAN UMBRELLA HLO1540 111 11/10/84 COMBINED 1F 000 I I! 1,000 FORM WORKERS' COMPENSATION STATUTORY C and 86CK957856CPA 11/1/83 $ EMPLOYERS' LIABILITY D•�fl- OTHER i DESCRIPTION OF OPERATIONS /LOCATIONSNEIRICLES OASIS PARK GRADING & 5TH AVE STREET IMPROVEMENTS BETWEEN JASMINE AND NARCISSUS AVE CONTRACT #2316 Cancellation: Should any of the above described policies be cancelled before the expiration date thereot, the issuing company will "PtI Ri}5ai1 -I days written notice to the below named certificate holder, hui.taWi v =ma d suGFUIDtiGe ShaWtDp.QSCRD.4!2!l9 4CRaWlaWWi 1Qf :iE=LPmI}ICMEVZ -W NAME AND ADDRESS OF CERTIFICATE HOLDER DATE ISSUED: -- f I CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH FRIIS &.COMPANY, INC. 3300 NEWPORT BLVD. ` NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92663 BY JAUTH R E REM VENItTIVE n CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH P.U. BOX 1768, NENIPORT BEACH, CA 92663 -3884 OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK (714) 640 -2251 f TO: FINANCE DIRECTOR PUBLIC WORKS FROM: CITY CLERK DATE: October 6, 1983 SUBJECT: Contract No. C -2316 Description of Contract Oasis Park Grading and 5th Avenue Street Improvement between Jasmine and Narcissus Avenues Effective date of Contract October 6,1983 Authorized by Minute Action, approved on September 12, 1983 Contract with Address Gillespie Construction 1055 E1 Camino Drive Costa Mesa, CA 92626 Amount of Contract $243,074.50 Wanda E. Andersen City Clerk WEA:lr attach. 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach "I am aware of and will comply with Section 3700 of the Labor Code, requiring every employer to be insured against liability for.Workers' Compensation or to undertake self- insurance before commencing any of the work." ?_'5'd � Date CONSTRUCTION CO. Oasis Park Grading and 5th Avenue Street between Jasmine and Narcissus Avenues Contract 2316 t A � CITY CLERK NOTICE INVITING BIDS Sealed bids may be received at the office of the City Clerk, 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach, CA 92663 until 11:00 A. M. on the 31st day of August 1983, at which time such bids shall be opened and read for — OASIS PARK GRADING AND 5TH AVENUE STREET IMPROVEMENT BETWEEN JASMINE AND NARCISSUS AVENUES e 2316 Contract No. $330,000 Engineer's Estimate • • • 4 .• Approved by the City Council this 88th -day of August � �, 1983 &l— /1GC�i1� Wanda E. Andersen City Clerk Prospective bidders may obtain one set of bid documents at no cost at the office of the Public Works Department, 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach, CA 92663. For further information, call Lloyd R. Dalton at 640 -2281. Project Engineer 4' f 0 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT PROPOSAL OASIS PARK GRADING AND FIFTH AVENUE STREET IMPROVEMENT BETWEEN JASMINE AND NARCISSUS AVENUES CONTRACT NO. 2316 To the Honorable City Council City of Newport Beach 3300 Newport Boulevard P.O. Box 1768 Newport Beach, CA 92663 -3884 Gentlemen: Pr la The undersigned declares that he has carefully examined the location of the work, has read the Instructions to Bidders, has examined the Plans and Special Provisions, and hereby proposes to furnish all materials and do all the work required to complete Contract No. 2315 in accordance with the Plans and Special Provisions, and will take in full payment therefor the following unit prices for the work, complete in place, to wit: ITEM QUANTITY ITEM DESCRIPTION UNIT ZOTAL NO. AND UNIT UNIT PRICE WRITTEN IN WORDS PRICE PRICE 1. Lump Sum MOBILIZATION, CLEARING AND GRUBBING, REMOVING, SALVAGING AND RELOCATING @ Twenty -five Thousand. Dollars and No Cents S 25,000.00 S 25,000.00 2. Lump Sum EARTHWORK 3. 315 Square Feet 4. 1 Each @ Fifty -three Thousand Dollars and No Cents CONST. CRIB WALL $ 53,000.00 $ 53,000.00 @ Fourteen Dollars and No Cents $ 14.00 Per Square Foot PROTECT LIGHT STANDARD Four Hundred Dollars and No Cents $ 400.00 $ 4,410.00 $ 400.00 { j • • Pr lb ITEM QUANTITY C)O. AND UNIT ITEM DESCRIPTION UNIT PRICE WRITTEN IN WORDS CONST. 4" A.C. BIKE TRAIL UNIT i PRICE PRICE 5. Lump Sum CONTROL TRAFFIC @ On! Thmand Dollars and NO Cents S 1.000.00 $ 19000.00 6. 209 CONST. 4" A.C. BIKE TRAIL Tons @ Thirty -Rill! Dollars and NO Cents $ 39.00 $ 8,151.00 Per Ton 7 258 CONST. 3" A.C. PAVEMENT Tons T R'� @ hirty - Dollars NO Ceenntts $ WOO $ 10.062.00 Per Ton 8. 637 CONST. AGGREGATE BASE Tons TIQ1r! @ Dollars and No Cents $ 12.00 $ 79644.00 Per Ton 9. 1248 CONST. TYPE "A" P.C.C. CURB AND Lineal Feet G�1_TTFR W' C.F..) @ Sxl� Dollars No Ceents $ 7.00 $ 8.726.00 Per Lineal Foot 10• 32 CONST. SPECIAL P.C.C. CURB AND GUTTER Lineal Feet T!R @ Dollars and 10.00 M.00 Cents S $ Per Lineal Foot 11. 60 CONST. VARIABLE HEIGHT PCC CURB Lineal Feet @ T!R Dollars ' and NO Cents $ 10.00 $ 600.00 Per Lineal Foot i ♦ + • Pr 1c I11>1 QUANTITY ITEM DESCRIPTION UNIT 7W A1, NO. I AND UNIT UNIT PRICE WRITTEN IN WORDS PRICE PRICE 12. 6120 CONST. P.C.C. SIDEWALK AND ACCESS Square Feet RAMPS @ One Dollars and Sixty Cents S 1.60 $ 9.792.00 Per Square Foot 13. 906 CONST. P.C.C. DRIVE APPROACH Square Feet @ Two Dollars and Twanty -fl" Cents S 2.25 5 2.038.60 Per Square Foot 14, 250 RECONSTRUCT P.C.C. ALLEY APPROACH Square Feet WITH CURB RETURNS @ Two Dollars and fifty Cents S 2.50 $ 623.00 Per Square Foot 15. 1 ADJUST M.H. FRAME & COVER TO GRADE Each @ Thr" Modl+ad Dollars and No Cents $ 300.00 $ 300.00 16. 1 REMOVE AND REPLACE SURVEY MONUMENT Each @ gam liwwred Fifty Dollars and No Cents $ 750.00 S 750.00 17. 170 LOWER 12" AC WATER MAIN Lineal Feet @ Thirty Dollars No Ceents S 30.00 S 5.100.00 Per Lineal Foot 18. 5 ADJUST WATER VALVE BOX TO GRADE Each On Mwdf*d Fifty @ Dollars and NO Cents $ 150.00 $ 750.00 Each �— 14 • • Pr Id ITDI QUANTITY ITEM DESCRIPTION UNIT iC7I NO. AND UNIT UNIT PRICE WRITTEN IN WORDS PRICE PRICE 19. 77 CONST. 4' C.L. FENCE Lineal Feet 20 . 53 Lineal Feet 21 1 Each 22. Lump Sum 23 . 24 @ Nine Dollars and No Cents $ 9.00 $ 693.00 Per Lineal Foot CONST. STANDARD STREET BARRICADE @ Thirty -five Dollars and No Cents $ 35.00 $ 1,855.00 Per Lineal Foot REINSTALL "GRANT HOWALD PARK" SIGN @ One Hundred Dollars and No Cents $ 100.00 $ 100.00 GUARD UNDERGROUND CONSTRUCTION @ One Thousand Dollars and No Cents $_1,O00.00 $ 1,000.00 132 INSTALL 48" RCP (1800 -D) Lineal Feet @ One Hundred Twenty Dollars and No Cents Per Lineal Foot 720 INSTALL 24" RCP (2000 -D) Lineal Feet @ Fifty -two Dollars and No Cents' Per Lineal Foot 25• 526 INSTALL 24" RCP (1250-D) Lineal Feet @ Forty -three Dollars and No Cents Per Lineal Foot $ 120.00 $ 15,840.00 $ 52.00 S 37,440.00 $. 43.00 S 22,618 `, • • Pr le ITEM QUANTITY ITEM DESCRIPTION UNIT NO. AND UNIT UNIT PRICE WRITTEN IN WORDS PRICE PRICE 26. 23 INSTALL 12" ACP (2500 -D) Lineal Feet @ Fifty Dollars and No Cents $ 50.00 $ 11150.00 Per Lineal Foot 27. 1 INSTALL 18" CMP WITH MORTARED Each CONNECTION TO RCP @ Four Hundred Dollars and No Cents S 400.00 $ 400.00 28. 1 CONST. INLET PER SHEET 2, PLAN Each D- 5145 -S @ Seven Thousand Dollars and No Cents S 7,000.00 $ 7,000.00 • 29. 1 CONST. CURB INLET TYPE OL -A, L =7' Each i @ Two Thousand Two Hundred Dollars and No Cents $ 2,200.00 $ 2,200.00 30. 2 CONST. CURB INLET TYPE OS, H =8' OR MORE Each @ One Thousand Eight Hundred Dollars and No Cents $ 1,800.00 $ 3,600.00 Each 31. 1 CONST. CURB INLET TYPE OS, H= LESS THAN 8' Each @ One Thousand Five Hundred _Dollars and No Cents S inn on S i,son nn 32. 2 CONST. JUNCTION STRUCTURE NO. 2 Each @ One Thousand Five Hundred Dollars and No Cents $ 1,500.00 $ 3,000.00 Each j i v E • Pr if .. ITEM QUANTITY ITEM DESCRIPTION UNIT Al, i(71 NO. AND UNIT UNIT PRICE WRITTEN IN WARDS PRICE PRICE 33. 1 CONST. JUNCTION STRUCTURE #1 WITH Each DOMED GRATE AND FRAME @ Two Thousand Dollars and No Cents $ 2,000.00 $ 2,000.00 34. 2 CONST. GRATE INLET CATCH BASIN Each @ Three Hundred Dollars and No Cents $ 300.00 $ 600.00 Each 35. 1 CONST. JUNCTION STRUCTURE BODY ONLY Each OF MANHOLE #2 @ One Thousand Four Hundred Dollars and No Cents $ 1,400.00 $ 1,400.00 36. 1. CONST. CONCRETE PIPE COLLAR Each @ Five Hundred Dollars and No Cents $ 500.00 $ 500.00 37, 1 CONST. A.C. TRANSITION Each @ Fnur Hundred Dollars and No Cents $ 400.00 $ 400.00 38. 1 REPLACE M.H. COVER WITH DOMED Each GRATE, ADJUST TO GRADE @ Three Hundred Dollars No Cents $ 300.00 $ 300.00 39. 2 EXTEND, LOWER AND CONNECT EXIST. 4" Each AND 8" ABS PIPES TO STORM DRAIN @ Four Hundred Dollars and No Cents $ 400.00 $ 800.00 Each 6 TOTAL PRICE WRITTEN IN WORDS TWO HUNDRED FORTY -THREE THOUSAND SEVENTY -FOUR Dollars and FIFTY Cents $ 243.074.50 Contractor's License No. A381371 GILLESPIE CONSTRUCTION (Bidder's Name) Date August 31, 1983 S /Steven M. Murow, Manager (Authorized signature /Title) Bidder's Address 1055 E1 Cami'no Drive Costa Mesa CA 92626 i Bidder's Telephone No. (7141 957 -0233 7 0 Page 2 INSTRUCTIONS TO BIDDERS The following contract documents shall be completed, executed and received by the City Clerk in accordance with NOTICE INVITING BIDS: 1. PROPOSAL 2. INSTRUCTIONS TO BIDDERS 3. DESIGNATION OF SUBCONTRACTOR(S) 4. BIDDER'S BOND (sum not less than 10% of total bid price) 5. NON- COLLUSION AFFIDAVIT 6. STATEMENT OF FINANCIAL RESPONSIBILITY 7. TECHNICAL ABILITY AND EXPERIENCE REFERENCES except that cash, certified check or cashier's check (sum not less than 10% of the total bid price) may be received in lieu of the Bidder's Bond. The title of the project and the words SEALED BID shall be clearly marked on the outside of the envelope containing the bid. Bids shall not be received from bidders who are not licensed in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 9, Division III of the Business and Professions' Code. The low bidder shall also be required to possess a City of Newport Beach business license prior to execution of contract. Bids shall be submitted on the attached PROPOSAL form. The additional copy of the PROPOSAL form may be retained by the bidder for his records. The estimated quantities indicated in the PROPOSAL are approximate, and are given solely to allow the comparison of bid totals. Bids are to be computed upon the estimated quantities indicated in the PROPOSAL multiplied by unit price submitted by the bidder. In the event of dis- crepancy between wording and figures, bid wording shall prevail over bid figures. In the event of error in the multiplication of estimated quantity by unit price, the correct multiplication will be computed and the bids will be compared with correctly multiplied totals. The City shall not be held responsible for bidder errors or omissions in the PROPOSAL. Contract documents shall bear signatures and titles of persons authorized to sign on behalf of the bidder. For corporations, the signatures shall be of the President or Vice President. For partnerships, the signatures shall be of a general partner. For sole ownership, the signature shall be of the owner. In accordance with the California Labor Code (Sections 1770 et seq.), the Director of Industrial Relations has ascertained the general prevailing rate of per diem wages in the locality in which the work is to be performed for each craft, classification, or type of workman or mechanic needed to execute the con- tract. A copy of said determination is available in the office of the City Clerk. All parties to the contract shall be governed by all provisions of the California Labor Code relating to prevailing wage rates (Sections 1770 -7981 in- clusive). The Contractor shall be responsible for compliance with Section 1777. of the California Labor Code for all apprenticeable occupations. A381371 GILLESPIE CONSTRUCTION Contr's Lic. No. & Classification Bidder � August 31, 1983 S/_ tS even M. Murow, Manager Date Authorized Signature /Title • 0 Page 3 DESIGNATION OF SUBCONTRACTOR(S) The undersigned certifies that he has used bid(s) of the following listed subcontractor(s) in making up his bid,and that the subcontractor(s) listed will be used for the work for which they bid, subject to the approval of the Engineer and in accordance with the applicable provisions of the Specifications. No change of subcontractor may be made except with the prior approval of the Engineer and as provided by State law. Item of Work Subcontractor Address 1. AC All American Asphalt Corona 2. Concrete Nazaroff Const. Norwalk 3. Structures Llanza Const. Riverside 4, Surveying Research Ent. Santa Ana 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. GILLESPIE CONSTRUCTION Bidder I 4n can 5 /Steven M. Murow, Manager Authorized Signature /Title ORIGINAL SEE CITY CLERK'S FI000PY Page 4 BIDDER'S BOND KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS, That we, GILLESPIE CONSTRUCTION CO. , as bidder, and FIREMAN'S FUND INSURANCE COMPANY , as Surety, are held and firmly bound unto the City of Newport Beach, California, in the sum of TEN PERCENT OF THE AMOUNT BID Dollars ($ 10% ), lawful money of the United States for the payment of which sum well and truly to be made, we bind ourselves, jointly and severally, firmly by these presents. THE CONDITION OF THE FOREGOING OBLIGATION IS SUCH, That if the proposal of the above bounden bidder for the construction of OASTS PARK GRADING AND FIFTH AVENUE STREET IMPROVEMENTS 2316 Title of Project Contract No. in the City of Newport Beach, is accepted by the City Council of said City, and if the above bounden bidder shall duly enter into and execute a contract for such construction and shall execute and deliver the "Payment" and "Faithful Performance" contract bonds described in the Specifications within ten (10) days (not including Saturday, Sunday, and Federal holidays) from the date of the mailing of a notice to the above bounden bidder by and from said City that said contract is ready for execution, then this obligation shall become null and void; otherwise it is and shall remain in full force and effect, and the amount specified herein shall be forfeited to the said City. In the event that any bidder above named executed this bond as an indi- vidual, it is agreed that the death of any such bidder shall not exonerate the Surety from its obligations under this bond. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, we hereunto set our hands and seals this 30th day Of A ngimt , 19.u. (Attach acknowledgement of Attorney -in -Fact) S /Jelaire Pearson Notary Public Commission expires 3/27/87 GILLESP4 CONSTRUCTION CO. Bidder y / er D. Gillespie Authorized Signature /Title S /William R. Friis Surety BY FIREMAN'S FUND INSURANCE COMPANY Title S /William R. Friis • • Page 5 NON- COLLUSION AFFIDAVIT The bidder, by its officers and agents or representatives present at the time of filing this bid, being duly sworn on their oaths, say that neither they nor any of them have, in any way, directly or indirectly, entered into any arrange- ment or agreement with any other bidder, or with any public officer of such CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH whereby such affiant or affiants or either of them, has paid or is to pay to such bidder or public officer any sum of money, or has given or is to give to such other bidder or public officer anything of value whatever; or such affiant or affiants or either of them has not directly or indirectly, entered into any arrangement or agreement with any other bidder or bidders, which tends to or does lessen or destroy free competition in the letting of the contract sought for by the attached bids; that no bid has been accepted from any subcontractor or materialman through any bid depository, the bylaws, rules or regulations of which prohibit or prevent the bidder from con- sidering any bid from any subcontractor or materialman which is not processed through said bid depository, or which prevent any subcontractor or materialman from submitting bids to a bidder who does not use the facilities of or accept bids from or through such bid depository; that no inducement of any form or character other than that which appears upon the face of the bid will be sug- gested, offered, paid or delivered to any person whomsoever to influence the acceptance of the said bid or awarding of the contract; nor has the bidder any agreement or understanding of any kind whatsoever with any person whomso- ever to pay, deliver to, or share with any other person in any way or manner, any of the proceeds of the contracts sought by this bid. Subscribed and sworn to before me this 31st day of August 19 83. My commission expires: June 21, 1987 GILLESPIE CONSTRUCTION CO. Bidder A kyet 1 )Mu 74"t4* ge S/ teven Murow, Manager Authorized Signature/Title S /Linda I. Adams Notary Public FOR ORICOL SEE CITY CLERK'S FILE COPY • Page 6 STATEMENT OF FINANCIAL RESPONSIBILITY The undersigned submits herewith a statement of his financial responsibility or agrees to submit a statement within 1 work day after the bid opening if the undersigned is the apparent low bidder. GILLESPIE CONSTRUCTION CO. Bidder ti te�Nr'Murow . M - uthorized Signature /Title • • Page 7 TECHNICAL ABILITY AND EXPERIENCE REFERENCES The undersigned submits herewith a statement of the work of similar character to that proposed herein which he has performed and successfully completed. Year Completed For Whom Performed (Detail) Person to Contact Telephone No 1993 City of San ,loan Capistrano Smokev Lohnes 493 -1711 1981 Knnttq .ffl Mike Butte 827-1776 Also, please see attached. Rick Hauser 830 -5050 GILLESPI_E CONSTRUCTION CO. Bidder S/S even M. Murow, Manager uthorized Signature /Title G L IL. t.•i. J,% 111; 1 General Engineering Contractor 1055 El Camino Drive • Suite F • Costa Mesa, Caiitornia 92626 • Phone {714) 9570233 & 739 -4852 COMPLETED PROJECTS City of Huntington Park 213 -582 -6161 6550 Miles Avenue Huntington Park, CA 90255 Senior Citizens Park 5 18,642_ ' City of Compton -Parks and Recreation 213 - 537 -8000 600 N. Alameda Compton, CA 90224 Wilson Park 28,000. (Joint - venture /G &G Contractors) West Park. 75,000. I Tragnetir Park 130,000, California State Department of Parks and Recreation 2422 Arden Way, Suite A -1 Sacramento, CA 916 -9c0 -6819 E1 Pescador Park,Malibu 65,000. City of Newport Beach 714- 640 -2281 3300 Newport Blvd. Newport Beach, CA 92663 Old Newport Blvd, Drainage Improvements 85,000. City of Upland 714- 982 -2517 460 N. Euclid Avenue Upland, CA 91786 Street Improvements 57,600. City of San Clemente 714- 492 -5101 100 Avenida Presidio San Clemente, CA 92672 Cazador Lane 30,160. County of Los Angeles 550 S. Vermont Avenue Los Angeles, CA 90020 Lennox Sheriff Station, 42,524. Orange County Sanitation District 1 P. 0. Box 8127 Fountain Valley CA 92708 Dover Street Sewer 35,400, I•< 1 • . General Enginee(ing Contractor 1055 El Carniro Drive • Suite F . Costa f;1esa, California 92626 • Phone (7 14) 057 -0233 & 739 •1;',; 2 City of Anaheim 714 -999 -5126 200 S. 'Anaheim Blvd. Anaheim, CA Lakeview- l.aPalma Storm Drain S 11,500. Walnut Creek Storm Drain & 52,000. Sewer Los Alisos Water District 714- 830 -0580 P. 0. Box 699 E1 Toro, CA Grading and Site Improvements 95,000. L.A. County Road Department 213- 226 -8111 1540 Alca2ar St Los Angeles, CA 90033 Rambla Pacifico Storm Drain 36,555 California Department of Transportation 714- 997 -5971 District: 7 758 N. :Batavia St Orange, CA 92668 Del Mar Drainage Improvements 32,000. Drainage Improvements in Rt 60 20,070. City of San Juan Capistrano 714- 493 -1171 32400 Paseo Adelanto San Juan Capistrano, CA 92675 Sunhollow Improvements 163,263. P i .t • ,.. �: sa. •.rue..." • • Page 8 NOTICE The following are samples of contract documents which shall be completed and executed by the successful bidder after he receives a letter of award from the City of Newport Beach: PAYMENT BOND (pages 9 & 10) FAITHFUL PERFORMANCE BOND (pages 11 & 12) CERTIFICATE OF INSURANCE & ENDORSEMENTS (pages 13, 14, 15) CONTRACT (pages 16 & 17) Since the City of Newport Beach will not permit a substitute format for these contract documents, bidders are advised to review their content with bonding, insuring and legal agents prior to sub- mission of bid. BONDING COMPANIES shall be acceptable as sureties in accordance with the latest revision of Federal Register Circular 570. INSURANCE COMPANIES shall be assigned Policyholders' Rating B (or higher) and Financial Size Category Class VII (or larger) in accordance with the latest edition of Best's Key Rating Guide_: vided Property- Casualty. Coverages shall be pro for all TYPES —OF INSURANCE checked on the CERTIFICATE OF INSURANCE. All costs associated with the specifications of these contract documents shall be absorbed in the bid. Such specifications shall include those contained in (1) each contract document and (2) the Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction.(latest edi- tion adopted for use in the City of Newport Beach), except as supplemented or modified by the Special Provisions for this project. EXECUTED IN THREE COUNTERPF1R TS . • BOND No. PREMIUM 7124296 -NIL- Page 9 PAYMENT BOND KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS, That WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Newport Beach, State of California, by motion adopted September 12, 1983, has awarded to GILLESPIE CONSTRUCTION CO. hereinafter designated as the "Principal ", a contract for OASIS PARK GRADING AND FIFTH AVENUE STREET IMPROVEMENT BETWEEN JASMINE AND NARCISSUS AVENUES (C -2316) in the City of Newport Beach, in strict conformity with the Drawings and Specifications and other contract documents on file in the office of the City Clerk of the City of Newport Beach; WHEREAS, said Principal has executed or is about to execute said contract and the terms thereof require the furnishing of a bond with said contract, providing that if said Principal or any of his or its subcontractors, shall fail to pay for any materials, provisions, provender, or other supplies or teams used in, upon, for, or about the per- formance of the work agreed to be done, or for any work or labor done thereon of any kind, the Surety on this bond will pay the same to the extent hereinafter set forth: NOW, THEREFORE, We GILLESPIE CONSTRUCTION CO. as Principal, 'S FUND INSURANCE COMPANY as Surety, are held firmly bound unto the City of Newport Beach, in the sum of ONE HUNDRED TWENTY -ONE THOUSAND FIVE HUNDRED THIRTY -SEVEN AND 25/loo ----------------------------------------------- Dollars ($ 121,537.25 said sum being one -half of the estimated amount payable by the City of Newport Beach under the terms of the contract, for which payment well and truly to be made we bind ourselves, our heirs, executors and administrators, successors, or assigns, jointly and severally, firmly by these presents. THE CONDITION OF THIS OBLIGATION IS SUCH, that if the above bounden Principal or his subcontractors, fail to pay for any materials, provisions, provender, or other supplies or teams, used in, upon, for, or about the performance of the work contracted to be done, or for any other work or labor thereon of any kind or for amounts due under the Unemployment Insurance Code with respect to such work or labor, that the Surety or Sureties will pay for the same, in an amount not exceeding the sum specified in the bond, and also, in case suit is brought upon the bond, a reasonable attorney's fee, to be fixed by the Court as required by the provisions of Section 3250 of the Civil Code of the State of California. ' This bond shall inure to the benefit of any and all persons, companies, and corporations entitled to file claims under Section 3181 of the California Civil Code so as to give a right of action to them or their assigns in any suit brought upon 9 Payment Bond (Continued) • Page 10 this bond, as required by the Provisions of Sections 3247 et. seq. of the Civil Code of the State of California. And said Surety, for value received, hereby stipulates and agrees that no change, extension of time, alterations or additions to the terms of the contract or to the work to be performed thereunder or the specifications accompanying the same shall in any wise affect its obligations on this bond, and it does hereby waive notice of any such change, extension of time, alterations or additions to the terms of the contract or to the work or to the specifications. In the event that any principal above named executed this bond as an individual, it is agreed that the death of any such principal shall not exonerate the Surety from its obligations under this bond. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this instrument has been duly executed by the Principal and Surety above named, on the 23RD day Of SEPTEMBER , 19 g . A thori e ignature and Title FIREMAN'S FUND INSURANCE COMPANY (Seal) Name of Surety P.O. BOX 1975 SANTA Address f urety� ' WmAtttorney� fo Signature and Title o Authorized Agent WILLIAM R. FRIIS, ATTORNEY -IN -FACT p ` dress of Agent 71 - 7- elephone No. of Agent , @ » � \ . a ' E t \§ {e ` � |& \m3 § B § /7(} r §( §ƒA \• z � ■EE2 [ -2 ; (J ■)Ef ]^ E� I & m k 0 &m /] �� ; kR2� Sr -'E -m z ¥ } ° 2 @ ) \} � }es | $(§ { �mon $ ®. [| §Bƒ �! $n - \� �L . EXECUTED IN THREE. COUNTERPARTS BOND NO. 7124296 • PREMIUM $2,917.00 Page 11 FAITHFUL PERFORMANCE BOND KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS, That WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Newport Beach, State of California, by motion adopted 12. 1983 has awarded to GILLESPIE CONSTRUCTION CO. hereinafter designated as the "Principal ", a contract for OASIS PARK GRADING AND FI AVENUE STREET IMPROVEMENT BETWEEN JASMINE AND NARCISSUS AVENUES (C -2316) in the City of Newport Beach, in strict conformity with the Drawings and Specifications and other contract documents on file in the office of the City Clerk of the City of Newport Beach; WHEREAS, said Principal has executed or is about to execute said contract and the terms thereof require the furnishing of a bond for the faithful performance of said contract; NOW, THEREFORE, We, GILLESPIE CONTSTRUCTION CO. as Principal, and FIREMAN'S FUND INSURANCE COMPANY as Surety, are held and firmly bound unto the City of Newport Beach, in the sum of TWO HUNDRED FORTY -THREE THOUSAND SEVENTY -FOUR AND 50/100----- - Dollars ($ 741,n7a_sn ). said sum being equal to 100% of the estimated amount of the contract, to be paid to the said City or its certain attorney, its successors, and assigns; for which payment well and truly to be made, we bind ourselves, our heirs, executors and administrators, successors or assigns, jointly and severally, firmly by these presents. THE CONDITION OF THIS OBLIGATION IS SUCH, that if the above bounden Principal, his or its heirs, executors, administrators, successors, or assigns, shall in all things stand to and abide by, and well and truly keep and perform the covenants, con- ditions, and agreements in the said contract and any alteration thereof made as therein provided on his or their part, to be kept and performed at the time and in the manner therein specified, and in all respects according to their true intent and meaning, and shall indemnify and save harmless the City of Newport Beach, its officers and agents, as therein stipulated, then this obligation shall become null and void; otherwise it shall remain in full force and virtue. And said Surety, for value received, hereby stipulates and agrees that no change, extension of time, alterations or additions to the terms of the contract or to the work to be performed thereunder or to the specifications accompanying the same shall in any wise affect its obligations on this bond, and it does hereby waive notice • • Page 12 k Faithful Performance Bond (Continued) of any such change, extension of time, alterations or additions to the terms of the contract or to the work or to the specifications. In the event that any principal above named executed this bond as an individual, it is agreed that the death of any such principal shall not exonerate the Surety from its obligations under this bond. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this instrument has been duly executed by the Principal and Surety above named, on the 23RD day of SEPTEMBER , 1983 • -• ♦ • GILLESPIE CONSTRUCTION CO. Vw Authorized Signature and Title FIREMAN'S FUND INSURANCE COMPANY (Seal) Name of Surety P.O. BOX 1975 SANTA ANA, CA 92702 Address of Surety BY! " '/ Signature and Title of Authorized Agent WILLIAM R. FRIIS, ATTORNEY -IN -FACT P.O. BOX 20086, RIVERSIDE, CA 92516 Address of Agent 714 - 787 -8730 Telephone No. of Agent @ » } \ �! & § \o \ § « \C:m $ { \\ a [§ m z 2E;: I ■\° i "ro �)s] \ E «� � mel £ CD 6 @[2} q0 ]9�E 2, // �~ § r " ®( /�§ ® \ - \§ mr m tr §La A) 2 & t■ 4 ��§ § �E# `km; OQ $ E � ƒ\ GENERAL ►OVER OF ATTORNE3 OEMAN'S FUND INSURANCE C0 0ANY Y.NOIA ALL MEN a\ THESE ►RESENTS: That FIREMAN'S FUND INSURANCE COMPANY. a Corporation duty organised and existing under the laws of the State of California. and having its principal office in the City and County of San Francisco. in said State . has made. constituted and appointed. and does by these presents make. constitute and appoint WILLIAM R. FRIIS, DAVID L. CULBERTSON and CAROL E. MUNARETTO jointly or severally its true and lawful Allormy(s) -in -Fact, with full power and authority hereby conferred in its name, place and stead. to execute. seal, ackw% ledge and deliver any and all bonds, undertakings. recognizances or other written obligations in the nature thereof --------------------- - - - - -- and to bind the Corporation thereby as fully and to the same extent as if such bonds were signed by the Presiden(, sealed with the corporate seal of the Corporation and duly attested by its Secretary, hereby ratifying and confirming all that the said Attorney(s)- in-Fact may do in the premises. This power of attorney is granted pursuant to Article VIII. Section 30 and 31 of By -laws of FIREMAN'S FUND INSURANCE COMPANY now in full force and effect. "Article VII L Appointment and Aurhorir) Assistant secretaries, and Auornrp -in -Farr and Agents to accept Legal Process and Afal a .Appearan: es. Section 30, Appointment. The Chairman of the Board of Directors, the President, any Vice- President or any other person authorised by the Board of Directors, the Chairman of the Board of Directors, the President or any Vice- President, mar, from time to time, appoint Resident Assistant Secretaries and Attorneys -in -Fact to represent and act for and on behalf of the Corporation and Agents to accept legal process and mate appearances for and on behalf of the Corporation. Section 31, Amhorip. The Aurhorin of such Resident A,sistant Secretaries..Anorne, -in -Fact, and Agents shall be as prescribed in the instrument evidencing :heir appointment, and am such appointment and all amhorm granted thereby mace be retiked at any time by the Board of Director, of by any person empowered to make such appointment." This power of attorney is signed and sealed under and by the authority of the following Resolution adopted ray the Board of Directors of FIREMAN S FUND INSURANCE COMPANY at a meeting duly called and held on the 15th day of Jul). 1966, and said Resolution has not been amended or repeated: 'RESOLVED, that the signature of any Vice President. Assistant Secretary. and Resident Assistant Secretnn of this Corporation, and the seal of ihn Corporation may he affixed or primed tin any power M anorney. on any relocatior. of any power of attorney, or on any certificate felaiing therein. by facsimile. and any power of attorney. any relocation of any power of attorney. or certificate bearing such facsimile signature or facsimile sea) shall he valid and binding upon the Corporation. IN \1lTNESS WHEREOF. FIREMAN S FUND INSURANCE COMPANY" has caused these presents to he signed by its Vice - president. and its corporate sea! ro be hereunto affixed this 21St day of December , 19 BI •'tat ,+`''- By STATE OF CALIFORNIA. CITY AND COUNT% OF SAN FRANCISCO sit. FIRF.M.4N'S FUND INSURANCE COMPANY \.,r Peadrm On this 21st day of December , 19 81 . before me personally came Richard Williams to me known, who, being b\ me duh sworn, did depose and say: that he is \'ice. President of FIRE \IAN'S FL ND INSL RA -,( E (OyIP ANy. Ihv ( or potation described in and which eNecuted the above instrument; that he knows the seal of said Corporation; that the seal affixed to the satd msuumrnt is such corporate seal, that it was so affixed b� order of the Board of Directors of said Corporation and that he signed his name thereto by tike ordef . IN WITNESS WHEREOF. I hale hereunto set ms hand and affixed my official seal. the day and \ear herein first abo \e \triuen. ee11e1xeYINYMN44MMIMeellt1et11e1a111a /a1e11116 0 OFFICIAL SEAL y/CJ/jfA SUSIE K. GILBERT NOTUY PORK • CALIFORNIA %o wan„ CM A (OlartT OF SAt ItaRCisco My'.ommss.or E.pres Nc+ Ii 198, CERTIFICATE Iwesas�aarass STATE OF CALIFORNIA. CITN AND COL NTY OF SAN FRANCISCO ( ss I. the unde,signed, Rcs dent .ASS?s:ani Secrnary of FIREMAN'S FL NU INSL RAN( F ((y \1PANY, a CAI If ORNIA Co%poiatron. DO HE REBI CERTIFY that the fo,rli ng and anached POv, ER OF ATTORNEY remains to full fora and ha, not been rewted: and furthermote Ihit Aru;le \ III, Sections 30 and 31 of the B)-lawe of the Corporation, and the Resolution of the Board of Directors. set forth In the Power of Attorney, are now In force. Signed and sealed al the City and County of San Francisco. Dated the 2313r1 day of QpPTRMRVR 19 - U11. ,ss 380711-FF -d-d1 test /entA tamSrrrrtan City of Newport Beach 3300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, CA 92663 ISSUED IN FOUR COUNTERPARTS CEP'IF:CATE L" INSjRANCE Ak Page 13 P + + .dm "PY any A AMERICAS' NATIONAL FIRE INSURANCE I NAME ANJ ADDRESS OF LNSUpED :Letter ''Y XETY Company r GILLESPIE CONSTP.UCTION Letter AMERICAN EXCESS INSURAN 1055 EL CAMINO DR. , SUITE F ompany D Letter ompany r COSTA MESA. CA. 92626 en This is to certify that policies of insuran_e listed below have been issued to the insured named above and are in force at this time, including arached endorserrent(s). NOTE: The Comprehensive General Liability and Automotive Liability policies are endorsed with the attached City of Newport Beach Endorsements. CANCELLATION: Should any of the acve described policies be cancelled or coverage reduced before the expir;-ic'� . date hereof. the Irsurance Company affording c.',verage s ^alt provide 30 -,v5' ac,an =e notice to the City of Nevt.�rt Beacn Ly reg''. °te,ed mall., -- tentlen: PuDI is 'dorks E'e.�irt'er.t. CO. gv: yj,/za;� � // • �lj Qi, agency: FRIIS & COMPANY, INC. Au- "orized Repr sentEtti'.e T— 9 -1 S -R ; /rlw_ _WILLIAM R. FRIIS �F De,' cridtion of dperz.'' ^_cs: xr. nS ,.:ties Alt o'er-'=ors _be _:.y c` ._ _.. 6ec Gh .`.y G" JE'._ ., c c� �.; _'F ^- t' :-iec.'Gr "S OASIS PARK GRADING AND 5TH AVENUE ST FFT I PROVFME T- BETWEEN JASMINE AND k- reject Title aoG Coctrsct auraer, NARCISSUS AVENUES CONTRACT a='....,: ir,r ^zz -.,. -. ar,- - - ---� :��i,� r : -_;,es .c., -- 2316 ex -end aitrr t o cove,o;e df £_r'P iLP pol c;&, Yliste' reielr, stand : nc_ ary re.o- -'iert, to gin^ :, or cc io'.io of any c -.,act cr o'her &cu -er. i th respe-t to write 'hiS ce,ti`,cate or veri`ica t nr of insura:%ce may be issued o, - Y pertain, the ors. --,ce afforaed by the policies described herein is subject to c'l the tarrs, excl'usi u!s and corL- ,"Dr.S cf Saco polirieS, including attached endorsements. -_ A 1 Policy L. MITS F L' BILITY IN THOUSANDS COMPANY TYPES OF INSURANCE policy Exp. a. r occ s/ LETTER COVERAGE REQUIRED No. Date Each Completed Occurrence Operations .GENERAL LIABILITY 1 -10 8B�dily Injury $ $ A x Coprehensive Form BP219 381 Premises - Operations Property Damage $ $ X Explosion 8 Collapse Hazard Underground Hazard X P- oducts /Completed Operations Bodily Injury Hazartl arc. Pro _only i x .ontraclual ra,erarce ( Oaragc ttr.t.r.ed 5 500 s 500 V Broad FGrn, Fr,.�;, ry ua.nege ! h Independent Cortractors - Personal Injury Marine Personal Iniury i$ 500 v Aviation A'w7oMOTi. -E LIABILI -Y I 1-10.183 A 7, Gamprenensive Form BA376 071 Bodily !rjury S Each Person) O- amerce; Fired r r ';..•ar' ilyt anc '.dl :n'�ry anG'' Npn-Dw'ned I :'rOpB rev Dd and Ge I 500 nod S L_LC1'. i -c.5 Li�•BILi'Y Ei:Cc. i I � C IX L- tre'la Fcrm ULP58 8321 Bodil,v Injury Other tear. Umbrella Form 11 10 -81 and Property Damage Conbined 8., 000 S 1,000 — 'oc'KNEnS i;u;= E "bATIUN Stat.aory 1 �_ach and 86CK9 7025 PA B EM'LOYER'S :.]ABILITY 1111-83 / 000 Accident) NOTE: The Comprehensive General Liability and Automotive Liability policies are endorsed with the attached City of Newport Beach Endorsements. CANCELLATION: Should any of the acve described policies be cancelled or coverage reduced before the expir;-ic'� . date hereof. the Irsurance Company affording c.',verage s ^alt provide 30 -,v5' ac,an =e notice to the City of Nevt.�rt Beacn Ly reg''. °te,ed mall., -- tentlen: PuDI is 'dorks E'e.�irt'er.t. CO. gv: yj,/za;� � // • �lj Qi, agency: FRIIS & COMPANY, INC. Au- "orized Repr sentEtti'.e T— 9 -1 S -R ; /rlw_ _WILLIAM R. FRIIS �F De,' cridtion of dperz.'' ^_cs: xr. nS ,.:ties Alt o'er-'=ors _be _:.y c` ._ _.. 6ec Gh .`.y G" JE'._ ., c c� �.; _'F ^- t' :-iec.'Gr "S OASIS PARK GRADING AND 5TH AVENUE ST FFT I PROVFME T- BETWEEN JASMINE AND k- reject Title aoG Coctrsct auraer, NARCISSUS AVENUES CONTRACT a='....,: ir,r ^zz -.,. -. ar,- - - ---� :��i,� r : -_;,es .c., -- 2316 ex -end aitrr t o cove,o;e df £_r'P iLP pol c;&, Yliste' reielr, stand : nc_ ary re.o- -'iert, to gin^ :, or cc io'.io of any c -.,act cr o'her &cu -er. i th respe-t to write 'hiS ce,ti`,cate or veri`ica t nr of insura:%ce may be issued o, - Y pertain, the ors. --,ce afforaed by the policies described herein is subject to c'l the tarrs, excl'usi u!s and corL- ,"Dr.S cf Saco polirieS, including attached endorsements. -_ A 1 ISSUED IN FOUR COUNTERPARTS • Page 14 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH AUTOMOTIVE LIABILITY INSURANCE ENDORSEMENT It is agreed that: 1. With respect to such insurance as is afforded by the policy for Bodily Injury and Property Damage Liability, the City of Newport Beach, its officers and employees are additional insureds but only with respect to liability for damages arising out of the ownership, maintenance or use of automobiles (or autos) used by or on behalf of the r,ae+eo insured in connection with the contract designated below. The insurance extended by this endorsement to said additional insured does not apply to bodily injury or property damage arising out of automobiles (1) owned by or registered in the name of an additional insured, or (2) leased or rented by an additional insured, or (3) operated by an additional insured. The insurance afforded the additional named insured(s) shall apply as primary insurance and no other insurance maintained by the City of Newport Beach will be called upon to contribute with insurance provided by this policy. 2. The policy includes the following provision: "The insurance afforded by the policy applies separately to each insured who is seeking coverage or against whom a claim is made or suit is brought, except with respect to the limits of the Insurance Company's liability." 3. The limits of liability under this endorsement for the additional insureds named in paragraph 1 of this endorsement shall be the limits indicated below for either Multi- ple Limits or Single Limit, whichever is indicated by the letter X in the appropria'`e box. ( ) Maniple Limits Bodily Injury Liability S each occurrence Property Damage Liability S• each occurrence (g ) Single Limit Bodily ]njury Liability 5_500L_000 - each occurrence and Property D>_rage Liability Lnaoired 'he limits pf V ability as stated �n paragraph 3 of this endorsement shall not in- crease the total Iiatility of t. -.e Insurance Con:pary for all damages as the result of any one accident or occurrence in excess of the limits of Liability stated in the policy as applicatle to A•,;tonobile Liability Insurance, 4. Should the policy be cancelled or coverage reduced before the expiration date thereof, the Insurance Company shall provide 30 days' advance notice to the City of Newport Beach by registered mail, Attention: Public Works Department. 5. Designated Contract: OASIS PARK GRADING AND 5TH AVENUE STREET This en.dorsemer.t is effective 9-15-83 at 12:01 A.M. and fo,ms a part of Polity No. BA3768071 GILLESPIE CONSTRUCTION BAP #4 Named 'r,; urcd o '• Entl rseent Ka. IMPROVEMENT 2316 AtMERIC� WaTI0 'FIRE FRIIS & COMPANY INC. Name of Insurance ompany N eampktiy By Authorized Represents ive WILLIAM R. FRIIS ISSUED IN FOUR COUNTERPARTS • 16 Page 15 CITY OF REW ?OP.T BEACH COMPREHENSII'E GENERAL LIABILITY INSURANCE ENDORSEMENT It is agreed that: 1. With respect to such insurance as is afforded by the policy for Comprehensive General Liability, the City of Newport Beach, its officers and employees are additional in- sures but only with respect to liability arising out of operations performed by or on befr;lf the named insured in connection with the contract designated below or acts and omissions of the City of Newport Beach in connection with its general supervision of such operations. The insurarce afforded said additional insured shall apply as primary insurance and no other insurance maintained by the City of Newport Beach will be called upon to contribute with insurance provided by this policy. 2. The policy includes the following provision: "The insurance afforded by the policy applies separately to each insured against whom claim is made or suit is brought, except with respect to the limits of the Insurance Company's liability." 3. The insurance afforded by the policy for Contractual Liability Insurance (subject to the terms, conditions and exclusions applicable to such insurance) includes liability assumed by the named insured under the indemnification or hold harmless provision con- tained in the written contract, designated below, between the named insured and the City of Newport Eeach. 4. With rescect to such insurance as is afforded by this policy, the exclusions, if any, pertaining to the explosion hazard, collapse hazard and underground property hazard (cornonly referred to as "XCU "hazards) are deleted. 5. The limits of liability under this endorsement for the additional insured named in parag,aph 1 of this endorsement shall be the limits indicated below for either Multiple Limits or Single Limit, whichever is indicated by the letter X in the appropriate box. ( ) Multiple Limits , Bodily lrjcry Liatility 5 each occurrence Property Damage Liability S each occurrence (Xi Single Limit Bodily Injury L13bil1ty $ 500,000. each occurrence and Property 0arage Liability Comcineo The applicable limit of the insurance Company's liability for the insurance afforded for contractual Liability shall be reduced by any amount paid as damages under this endorsement in behalf of the additional insureds. The limits of liability as stated in this endorsement shall not increase the total liability of the Insurance Company for all damages as the result of any one occurrence in excess of the limits of liability stated in the policy as applicable to Comprehen- sive General Liability Insurance. 6. Should the policy be cancelled of coverage reduced before the expiration date thereof, . the lns.;rance Corpary shall p -once 30 days' advance notice to the City of Newport Beach hi. registered nail, Attention: Public Works Department OASIS PARK GRADING AND 5TH AVENUE STREET IMPROVEMENT 7. Designated Contract: TRACT #: 2316 I reject Title and Contract No. This erdorseren.- effective 9-15-83 at 12:07 A.M. and forms a part of Policy No. BP2193381 'lamed fr.!-,red GILLESPIE CONSTRUCTION `indorsement No. SLP #4 AMERICAN NATIONAL FIRE INSUR4NgE COMPANY,(FR,I COMPANY, INC.) Name of 'ns,;lance Co',ary By_ Author;zec Represertzt;re � WILLIAM R. FRIIS • • Page 16 CONTRACT THIS AGREEMENT, entered into this 4 ay of 4 _ , 19 by and between the CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, hereinafter "City," and GILLESPIE CONSTRUCTION CO. , hereinafter "Contractor, "is made with reference to the following facts: (a) City has heretofore advertised for bids for the following described public work: OASIS PARK GRADING AND FIFTH AVENUE STREET IMPROVEMENT BETWEEN JASMINE AND NARCISSUS AVENUES 2316 Title of Project Contract No. (b) Contractor has been determined by City to be the lowest responsi- ble bidder on said public work, and Contractor's bid, and the compensation set forth in this contract, is based upon a careful examination of all plans and specifications by Contractor, NOW, THEREFORE, the parties hereto agree as follows: 1. Contractor shall furnish all materials and perform all of the work for the construction of the following described public work: OASIS PARK GRADING AND FIFTH AVENUE STREET IMPROVEMENT BETWEEN JASMINE AND NARCISSUS AVENUES 2316 Title of Project Contract No. which project is more fully described in the contract documents. Contractor shall perform and complete this work in a good and workmanlike manner, and in accordance with all of the contract documents. 2. As full compensation for the performance and completion of this work as prescribed above, City shall pay to Contractor the sum of Two Hundred Fortv -three Thousand Seventv -four & 50 /100 Dollars (S 243.074.50 )• This compensation includes (1) any loss or damage arising from the nature of the work; (2) any loss or damage arising from any unforeseen difficulties or obstruc- tions in the performance of the work; (3) any expense incurred as a result of any suspension or discontinuance of the work; but excludes any loss resulting from earthquakes of a magnitude in excess of 3.5 on the Richter Scale and tidal waves, and which loss or expense occurs prior to acceptance of the work by City. 3. All of the respective rights and obligations of City and Contractor are set forth in the contract documents. The contract documents are incorporated herein by reference as though set out in full and include the following: (a) Notice Inviting Bids (b) Instruction to Bidders and documents referenced therein (c) Payment Bond (d) Faithful Performance Bond (e) Certificate of Insurance and endorsement(s) i (f) Plans and Special Provisions for e (g) This Contract. • Page 17 LADING AND FIFTH AVENUES (C -2316) Contract No. 4. Contractor shall assume the defense of, and indemnify and hold harmless, City and its officers, employees and representatives from all claims, loss or damage, except such loss or damage proximiately caused by the sole negligence of City or its officers, employees and representatives. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this contract to be executed the day and year first above written. CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH By ayor ATTEST: A City Cl erk APPROVED AS TO FORM: CITY By Its CONTRACTOR n U r1 u CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT OASIS PARK GRADING AND FIFTH AVENUE STREET IMPROVEMENT BETWEEN JASMINE AND NARCISSUS AVENUES CONTRACT NO. 2316 INDEX TO SPECIAL PROVISIONS SECTION PAGE I. SCOPE OF WORK 1 II. AWARD AND EXECUTION OF THE CONTRACT 1 III. BEGINNING OF WORK AND TIME OF COMPLETION 1 IV. PAYMENT 2 V. TRAFFIC CONTROL AND ACCESS 2 VI. GUARDING UNDERGROUND CONSTRUCTION 2 VII. PERMITS 2 VIII. WATER 3 IX. CONSTRUCTION DETAIL 3 A. CLEARING AND GRUBBING 3 B. EARTHWORK 3 C. CRIB WALL 4 D. ASPHALTIC CONCRETE PAVEMENT 4 E. STORM DRAIN 4 F. PROTECT LIGHT STANDARD 5 G. LOWERING AND ENCASING WATER MAIN 5 H. CONSTRUCTION SURVEY 6 I. SIDEWALK 6 I. II III 0 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT SPECIAL PROVISIONS SP 1 of 6 OASIS PARK GRADING AND FIFTH AVENUE STREET IMPROVEMENT BETWEEN JASMINE AND NARCISSUS AVENUES CONTRACT NO. 2316 SCOPE OF WORK The work to be done under this contract consists of grading a park site; constructing street and storm drain improvements, a crib -type retaining structure, and a bike trail; and incidental work including removing existing improvements and lowering a water main. All work necessary for the proper completion of the contemplated improvements shall be done in accordance with (1) these Special Provisions, (2) the Plans (Dwg. No's. M- 5229 -5, D- 5145 -5, R- 5280 -5), (3) the City's Standard Special Provisions and Standard Drawings for Public Works Construction (1982 edition), (4) the Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction (1982 edition), including supplements to date, and the City's Grading Ordinance. Copies of the City's Standard Special Provisions and Standard Drawings may be purchased at the Public Works Department for five dollars ($5.00). Copies of the Grading Ordinance may be purchased from the Building Department for $2.00. Bidders shall satisfy themselves by personal examination of the location of the proposed work and by such other means as they may prefer as to the actual conditions and requirements of the work, and shall not at any time after submission of the bid dispute, complain, or assert that there was any misunderstanding in regard to the nature or amount of work to be done. AWARD AND EXECUTION OF THE CONTRACT The bidder's attention is directed to the provisions of Section 2 -1, of the Standard Special Provisions and Standard Drawings for Public Works Construction for requirements and conditions concerning award and execution of the contract. BEGINNING OF WORK AND TIME OF COMPLETION The Contractor shall complete all work within one - hundred - twenty (120) calendar days following the date of award of this contract. Upon commencement of work, the Contractor shall complete all work within ninety (90) consecutive calendar days. • SP 2 of 6 IV. PAYMENT All incidental items of work not separately described in the proposal shall be included in the unit price bid for the various items of work, and no additional compensation shall be made. The substitution of securities for any payment withheld in accordance with Section 9 -3.2 of the Standard Specifications is permitted pursuant to Government Code Sections 4590 and 14402.5. V. TRAFFIC CONTROL AND ACCESS The Contractor shall provide for street closure, traffic control and access in accordance with Section 7 -10 of the Standard Special Provisions and Standard Drawings for Public Works Construction and with the standards contained in the Work Area Traffic Control Handbook (WATCH), published by Building News, Inc. Fifth Avenue from Larkspur Avenue east and Marguerite Avenue shall remain open to traffic with at least one lane in each direction at all times. Fifth Avenue between Jasmine and Larkspur Avenues shall not be closed for more than 25 calendar days. Access into OASIS facility and parking lots off of Fifth Avenue shall be maintained at all times. VI. GUARDING UNDERGROUND CONSTRUCTION The Contractor shall obtain a permit to perform excavation or trench work from the Division of Industry Safety (DIS), State of California, prior to any construction. The Contractor shall also submit drawings to the Engineer in accordance with Sections 7 -10.4 and 2 -5.3 of the Standard Specifications. All costs incurred to obtain in the DIS permit, to comply with the provisions of such permit, and to obtain the Engineer's approval shall be included in the lump sum price bid for guarding underground construction. VII. PERMITS In addition to obtaining the DIS permit mentioned above, the Contractor shall make arrangements for disposal of removals and excess earth. Orange County EMA (Mike Miller 834 -3505) has indicated that for a limited time certain materials may be disposed of free of charge at Coyote Canyon Landfill. The Contractor shall notify the Engineer two (2) days prior to adjusting the Orange County Sanitation District's manhole on Fifth Avenue between Jasmine and Larkspur Avenues. Although an OCSD permit is not required for this item of work, all work shall be performed to OCSD satisfaction in accordance with their specifications. 9 LJ VTIT. WATER • SP 3, of, 6 Water will be provided by the City at no charge. To make arrangements, contact the City's Utilities Superintendant, Mr. Gil Gomez, at (714) 640 -2221. IX. CONSTRUCTION DETAIL, supplemental to the Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction. A. CLEARING AND GRUBBING Construction note #1 on the Plans, "REMOVE ", includes removing the existing A.C. pavement, P.C.C. storm drain inlet, grate inlets, curbs, redwood headers, P.C.C. alley approach, C.M.P. culverts, railroad ties, trees, signs, and other objects necessary for the construction of the project, while protecting other improvements, utilities and features, and all private property. The relocation (horizontal and /or vertical) of power /telephone poles and guys will be performed by the utility companies. The existing lawn sprinkler system in the north side of the Fifth Avenue right of way shall be removed by the Contractor and later replaced by the City. Fencing and signs to be removed shall be salvaged and delivered to the City's Corporation Yard at Superior Avenue and Industrial Way. The existing Rainbird lawn sprinkler system to be removed shall be salvaged and stockpiled on the lawn out of the work area. Salvage of Jasmine Creek inlet grate and riprap is discussed elsewhere in these Special Provisions. Removal of the CMP culvert across Marguerite Avenue (3" AC /8" AB) includes trench resurfacing per STD - 105 -L. In lieu of removing CMP culverts the Contractor may fill them with sand and plug the ends with concrete. There shall be no voids. Concrete plugs shall extend 12" minimum into the pipe.' B. EARTHWORK The Soils Report by Moore and Taber entitled "GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION, Oasis Park Grading C -2316, Newport Beach, California" dated June 10, 1983, are attached hereto and shall be considered an integral part of these Standard Specifications. It will be necessary to do a portion of the grading work prior to installing the storm drain. Refer to subsection E below. The Contractor shall submit a map of his proposed haul routes for exporting excess soil and other material from the site, and a plan showing his intended points of access to the site. The haul route shall be swept at the end of each day's hauling operation. Dust shall be controlled by sweeping and /or watering. N C D_ E. 0 0 SP 4 of 6 Temporary facilities for erosion control and desiltation shall be installed and maintained between October 15 and April 15th. The Contractor shall submit his plan for approval by the California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Santa Ana Region, 6809 Indiana Avenue, Suite 200, Riverside, California 92506, Attn: Gary D. Stewart, Phone (714) 684 -9330. Earthwork volume for the entire project, including pavement removal volume, shrinkage, subsidence and pipe bedding, is estimated as follows: Cut 23,300 cy, Fill 15,200 cy, Excess 8,100 cy. CRIB WALL The crib -type retaining structure (crib wall) shall be either (a) "Criblock" as manufactured by Retaining Walls Co., P. 0. Box 2129, Escondido, California 92025, phone (619) 489 -1108 and (213) 792 -5828, (b) Caltrans Std. C7 -A, Type A, (c) other approved equal crib wall, or (d) a retaining wall of split -face concrete block. Alternates (c) or (d) must be submitted for approval in accordance with Sections 2 -5.3 and 4 -1.5 of the Standard Specifications. The crib wall base members shall be firmly founded on undisturbed natural ground or compacted fill, or on a 4" sand blanket, without voids between the subgrade and members. Cell fill shall be placed as specified in the Soils Report. Cell fill material shall be from the existing stockpile on the eastern portion of the park site above elevation 145, or other approved material with a sand equivalent of at least 20 and cohesion of at least 50 psf. ASPHALTIC CONCRETE PAVEMENT Asphaltic concrete for motor vehicle use shall be Type III- C3- AR4000 Asphaltic concrete for the bike trail shall be Type III- D- AR4000. Asphaltic concrete for the temporary storm drain transition at Narcissus Ave. may be either. Prime coat shall be liquid asphalt, Grade SC -250, applied at a rate between 0.10 and 0.25 gallons per square yard. Final pavement marking and re- marking will be done by the City. STORM DRAIN Jasmine Creek: Prior to installation of the storm drain pipe fill shall be placed to a depth of "C" above the top of the pipe. (Refer to the detail on sheet 1 of Dwg. No. D- 5145 -5). The distance "C" shall be sufficient to prevent damage to the pipe from construction equipment and compaction operations, but shall be not less than 24 ". The trench shall then be excavated into the compacted fill /natural ground. Bedding A shall be composed of 1" gravel. Bedding B shall be composed of sand. Bedding and backfill shall be compacted to a relative compaction of not less than 90 percent. F. G 6 a SP 5 of 6 The grate on the existing Jasmine Creek storm drain inlet shall be salvaged and reused on the new inlet. At least 70% of the rock riprap material at the existing inlet shall be placed around the new inlet and covered with at least 18" of compacted fill as shown on the plans. Any existing 48" RCP (1500 -D) pipe sections dislodged by the removal of the inlet shall be replaced with 1800 -D pipe. The 1500 -D pipe, if undamaged, may be reused adjacent to the new inlet structure. The Contractor shall submit his plan for diversion of Jasmine Creek during grading and pipe installation operations in accordance with 2 -5.3 of the Standard Specifications. Construction during rainy season: The Contractor assumes full responsibility for damages to public and /or private property and /or to his own operations, and for preventing mud or silt from entering storm drains or leaving the site, arising from construction during the rainy season, and shall hold the City and its consultants harmless in any such event. The Contractor shall place appropriate protective devices at the end of each working day whenever the National Weather Service's 5 -day rain - probability forecast exceeds 40 %. Fifth Avenue: Bedding and backfill for the 24" STD - 106 -L. Payment for this item pavement across Marguerite Avenue STD - 105 -L. PROTECT LIGHT STANDARD and smaller pipes shall be per includes removal of 3" AC /8 "AB and trench resurfacing per Construction note #7 on the plans, sheet 1 of M- 5229 -S, "PROTECT LIGHT STANDARD ", may be accomplished by either (a) relocating, (b) surrounding with a retaining wall as graphically indicated on the plans, or (c) other approved means. The method shall be submitted for approval in accordance with section 2 -5.3 of the Standard Specifications. The proposed adjacent cut slope, which will cause the requirement of this protective work, shall not be steepened above the planned 3:1 (horizontal to vertical) slope ratio. LOWERING AND ENCASING WATER MAIN A reach of existing 12" ACP water main under approximately 30 inches of cover must be lowered to obtain 30 inches of cover below finished grade or finished surface, or 12" below crib wall base, as applicable, between (approximately) stations 6 +65 and 8 +35; and bridged under the crib wall. The actual limits and depths of pipe lowering will be determined by the Contractor during construction and approved by the Engineer. The Engineer will arrange to shut off water pressure to this reach. • • SP 6 of 6 The Contractor may lower the main intact. He shall submit his proposed method for approval by the Engineer. The Contractor may instead remove the water main, deepen the trench, reinstall the pipe, pressure test and chlorinate the main, all in accordance with the City's Standard Special Provisions and Standard Drawings for Public Works Construction. This 12" main was installed in 1982 and can be assumed to be in excellent condition. Pipeline materials damaged by the Contractor shall be replaced with new materials by the Contractor at his expense. Bridging shall extend 4 feet outside the crib wall in both directions. H. CONSTRUCTION SURVEY Field surveys for control of construction shall be the responsibility of the Contractor. All such surveys, including construction staking, shall be under the supervision of a California registered civil engineer or licensed surveyor. Staking shall be performed on all items ordinarily requiring grade and alignment at intervals normally accepted by the agencies and trades involved. Payment for construction survey staking shall be considered as included in the various items of work and no additional allowance will be made therefor. I. SIDEWALK Prior to sidewalk construction the Contractor shall coordinate with the Engineer on providing for future sign installation. The Engineer will designate locations for the Contractor to block out holes in the sidewalk. 7 # il OTHER OFFlCES: WEST SACRAMENTO SANTA ROSA is 0 M O O R E & TA B E R CONSULTING ENGINEERS AND GEOLOGISTS 4530 EAST LA PALMA AVENUE • ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA 92807 • (714) 779 -2591 GE<YPE-MICAL INVESTIGATION Oasis Park Grading C -2316 Newport Beach, California Client Jack P. Norris, WE Job No. 183 -041 June 10, 1983 M O O R E & TA B E R CONSULTING ENGINEERS AND GEOLOGISTS Table of Contents GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION Page Scope. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Developmental considerations . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Field Investigation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Site Conditions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Soil Testing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 AND RECOM4ENDATIONS General Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 StormDrain . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 Settlement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 Bearing Capacity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 Corrosion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 Bedding Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 Trench Backfill . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 Dewatering . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 Excavation Difficulty . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 Terrporary Construction Slopes. . . . . . . . . . 8 Shoring . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 Crib Wall Foundation Preparation . . . . . . . . . 11 B ack f i l l . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 Active Lateral Forces . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 Vertical Bearing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 Lateral Resistance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 Grading Requirements rements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 General Conditions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 Appendix A - Field Exploration . . . . . . . . . . A -1 Appendix B - Laboratory Testing. . . . . . . . . . B -1 Job No. 183 -041 - June 10, 1983 -i- M O O R E& TA B E R CONSULTING ENGINEERS AND GEOLOGISTS GEOTBCHNICAL INVESTIGATION This report presents the results and recommendations for the proposed improvements of Oasis Park, which is to be located northeasterly of the present intersection of Jasmine and Fifth Avenues in Newport Beach, California. Pre- sent plans include extension of the existing Jasmine Avenue storm drain, place- ment of up to fifteen (15) feet of compacted fill in Jasmine Creek, and construc- tion of a crib -type retaining wall at the north corner of Jasmine and Fifth Avenues. Also included, though not addressed by this report, is construction of a new 24 -inch storm drain lateral, grading along future Fifth Avenue, and construction of a 12 -foot wide bike path at the top of the fill. The purpose of the study was to determine general soil conditions at the site and provide recoimiendations to aid in the design and construction of the storm drain, crib wall and compacted fill. The investigation included site inspection, test borings, laboratory testing, and engineering calculations. Developmental Considerations Based on preliminary grading plans and discussions with the design en- gineers, it has been determined that the current development concept will necessitate extensive grading for this site. It is our understanding that the proposed 48 -inch diamter storm drain will be located in, or directly adja- cent to, the existing drainage course and will be covered with approximately 5 to 20 feet of fill. Fill material will be obtained from the cut and stock pile located on high ground to the south of the existing stream gully. Job No. 183 -041 - June 10, 1983 -2- M O O R E & TA B E R CONSULTING ENGINEERS AND GEOLOGISTS The proposed crib -type retaining wall is shown on the plan (Alternative 3B, City of Newport Beach, Public Fbrks Department, undated) located at the northerly edge of the corner of 5th and Jasmine Avenues. The wall will be founded on a layer of fill material varying from approximately one foot to fourteen feet above present natural grade. The height of the wall will be from one to fourteen feet above the adjacent lowest grade and will support fill soils underlying 5th Avenue. Field Investigation The field investigation was completed in May, 1983, and included dril- ling of three 8 -inch diameter flight auger borings to a depth of 15 feet. No appreciable caving was experienced in the borings. Groundwater was encountered in Boring 1 at a depth of six feet, approximately one foot below the bottom of the existing channel. Additional details of the boring operations are given on the Test Boring Logs, pages A -2 through A -4 in Appendix A. Boring locations are shown on the attached plan, page A -1. Both bulk and undisturbed samples were obtained from the borings for laboratory testing. The undisturbed samples were obtained by driving a 2.5- inch I.D., thin wall sampler with a 140 -pound weight dropping approximately 30 inches. The drilling and sampling operations were performed under the direct supervision of an engineering geologist, who also logged the borings and pre- pared the samples for subsequent laboratory testing and reference. Boring elevations were obtained from an undated topographic map prepared by the City of Newport Beach. Site Conditions At the time of our investigation, the site was essentially vacant and supported a considerable growth of weeds, bamboo and scattered trees. Jasmine Job No. 183 -041 - June 10, 1983 -3- M O O R E & TA B E R CONSULTING ENGINEERS AND GEOLOGISTS creek, a major local drainage course, flows southwesterly in a channel eroded approximately twenty -five feet below the adjacent natural park grades. To the southeast of the creek, a considerable stock pile of uncompacted fill was observed. In the vicinity of boring 1, an existing concrete and rip -rap inlet structure intercepts the surface grater flow and channels it into the existing Jasmine Creek storm drain. The only other improvement noted in the immediate vicinity was an over- head electric transmission line which runs along the south side and parallel to the creek. The proposed area of improvement is bounded by existing Grant Howald Park to the northwest, residential improvements to the southwest and generally urwr>proved terrain to the northeast and southeast. Earth materials encountered in Borings 1 and 2 consisted of silty clay and silty sand with scattered gravel overlying siltstone of the late Miocene Nbnterey Formation. Boring 3 encountered approximately nine feet of clayey sand fill in the stock pile area and overlays Pleistocene clayey sand terrace deposits. Groundwater was encountered in Borings 1 and 2 at approximately six feet. Groundwater was not encountered in Boring 3. Soil Testing Earth materials were visually classified in the field according to the Unified Soil Classification System by a careful examination of the samples and a continuous observation of the boring returns. A description of this classification system is given at the front of the appendix. In the laboratory, samples taken from borings were tested to determine moisture content, dry density, shear strength, consolidation characteristics, sulphate content, and corrosivity. The results of the moisture- density tests Job No. 183 -041 - June 10, 1983 lY -4- M O O R E• A B E R CONSULTING ENGINEER•ND GEOLOGISTS I1 are shown on the Test Boring Logs, while the remainder are given in Appendix B. Briefly, these tests were conducted as follows. Strength characteristics of the foundation, soils were determined in the laboratory by direct shear tests performed on three samples. The sam- ples were saturated and tested under several different normal loads in a 2.5 -inch I.D. circular shear box, using a controlled displacement rate of 0.04 -inch per minute. Settlement characteristics of five representative samples were evalua- ted by means of laboratory consolidation tests. These samples were tested in a floating ring consolidometer using a dead weight lever system for load application. Test results are shown on the "Consolidation Test - Pressure Curves." Corrosion potential of the on -site soils was evaluated by corrosivity performed on two representative samples. These tests were conducted in ac- cordance with Test Method California 643 C. The concentration of soluble sulphates was determined for a representa- tive sample of on -site soils in accordance with Test Method California 417, Job No. 183 -041 - June 10, 1983 -5- M O O R E & TA B E R CONSULTING ENGINEERS AND GEOLOGISTS CONCLUSIONS AND RECONMENDATIONS General Conclusions Conclusions in this report are derived from the results of the field investigation and laboratory data. Recommendations are based on this data and the considerations discussed in the initial sections of this report. It must be emphasized that the placement of fill on this site, particu- larly at the location of the proposed storm drain extension, could cause some consolidation of the underlying soils, thereby resulting in differential settle- ment between the existing storm drain and the new extension. Some special sta- bilization measures are therefore recommended to alleviate this condition. The proposed crib wall will be founded on fill soils which vary in thick- ness. To minimize the potential for excessive differential settlement below the proposed wall, fill placed below the wall should be carpacted to a minimum relative campaction of 958. Storm Drain Rock Stabilization - Based on the preliminary grading plan, approximately five to fifteen feet of fill will be placed along the drain alignment. We also understand that the existing storm drain is founded on approximately twenty inches of rock stabilization fill. In order to reduce the potential for excessive differential movement between the existing and new pipe, it is reccmTended that the new pipe be placed on a stabilization blanket similar to that under the existing storm drain. Consequently, the new pipe should be placed on.at least 20 inches of gravel or crushed rock. Job No. 183 -041 - June 10, 1983 / V � M O O R E S TA B E R CONSULTING ENGINEERS AND GEOLOGISTS a Bearing Capacity - Laboratory strength tests indicate that the natural soils have adequate bearing capacity to support the proposed strom drain and appurtenant structures. Manholes and other appurtenant structures associated with the storm drain may be designed for an allowable bearing pressure of 1500 psf. No significant settlement is anticipated with this bearing pressure. Corrosion - Laboratory tests indicate only a slight concentration of soluble sulphates within the on -site soil. Consequently, no special cement need be utilized in the concrete that canes in contact with on -site soils. on the other hand, the on -site clayey soils exhibit a low resistivity, which combined with poor drainage characteristics, creates a severely corrosive environment for buired metal conduit. Consequently, a corrosion specialist should be consulted regarding suitable types of conduit or any necessary pro- tective measures. Trench Backfill - All excavated soils less than 6 inches in diameter may be used for backfill. Fill should be placed in accordance with the require- ments presented in the section of this report entitled "Grading Requirements ". The fill should be brought up on each side of the piep simultaneously to avoid unbalanced loads. . Dewatering - Cue to the relatively shallow groundwater level within the project area, temporary dewatering measures will be required during construc- Job No. 183 -041 - June 10, 1983 -7- MOORE S TABER LE CONSULTING ENGINEERS AND GEOLOGISTS tion of the proposed pipeline and any underground vaults. The dewatering system should be selected and implemented by the contractor. F�c, no Difficulty - Consequently, no No hard drilling was encountered in the borings. significant difficulty is anticipated with excavation opera- tions. However, the materials below the water level may be susceptible to some caving, which could be troublesome during excavation. Teq�)Orary Construction Slopes - Temporary construction slopes should be graded no steeper than 1.5:1 within saturated alluvial soils; local sloughin should be anticipated for g exposed slopes left standing at this angle for long Periods. Differences in moisture, cohesive characteristics, coarseness of the deposits or fracturing may require slope flattening, or conversely, per_ mit steepening at sane locations. Shoring - The remanded lateral earth pressure against cantilevered or braced sheeting can be determined from Figures 1 and 2. In addition, any surcharge (live or dead load) located within a 1:1 plane drawn up from the base of the shoring should be added to the indicated earth pressures. The necessary depth of penetration Of isolated soldier piles or solid sheet piles to resist the lateral loading on sheeting can be determined from the expressions presented in Table 1. Table 1. Ultimate Passive Resistance Against Isolated Soldier Piles or Solid Sheet Piles Type of Pile Water Conditions Balanced Below Unbalanced Above Piles (psf) ---�. Bottom of Piles (psf) Isolated Soldier 90OZ + 300 Solid Sheet 4502 + 300 3002 + 100 150Z + 100 Where Z = Depth below trench bottom in feet. Job No. 183 -041 - June 10, 1983 -8- MooRE S T• ER lGNS U; 'Ih� FN ::INfFRS �ry�fv Figure 1. 1 iDC(Y9`IIS7DFZ EARM PRESSURE AGkINST rANTII t 4HpRING 40H1 a) Balanced Hater Condition Of she (Groundwater below bottan Job No. 183 -041 - June 10, 1983 Not to scale b) 82 40H Unbalanced Water Condition Of Water above bottcm sheeting) -9- MOORE S TABER Figure 2. Pw( MNDID FA911 -, PRI-SSLW, AGAINST MULTI - BRACED SHEETIN. NOT i`0 SCALE 27H1 a) Balanced Water Condition (Groundwater below bottom of sheeting) Job No. 183 -041 - June 10, 1983 62H2 14H2 27H1 b) Unbalanced Water Condition (Groundwater above bottan of sheeting) -10- • f." I NF.f'. RS -NL If .)v -b'I Figure 2. Pw( MNDID FA911 -, PRI-SSLW, AGAINST MULTI - BRACED SHEETIN. NOT i`0 SCALE 27H1 a) Balanced Water Condition (Groundwater below bottom of sheeting) Job No. 183 -041 - June 10, 1983 62H2 14H2 27H1 b) Unbalanced Water Condition (Groundwater above bottan of sheeting) -10- M O O R E& TA B E R CONSULTING ENGINEERS AND GEOLOGISTS Since the expressions presented in Table 1 are based on the ultimate shear strength of the soil, an appropriate safety factor (mininnm 1.5) should be incorporated into the design. It should be noted that design lateral pressures are given for both balanced and unbalanced water conditions. The balanced condition assumes that the vicinity of the excavation has been adequately dewatered such that free water levels during construction are kept below the bottom of the shoring and pore water pressures in potential failure zones are not positive. The unbalanced condition assumes that water levels are higher outside than within the excavation and includes hydrostatic pressure acting on the shoring. with unbalanced water levels, the adverse effects of pore water pressure, seepage and uplift on the soil should be considered. Upward flow into the base of the excavation -is of particular concern becuase of the tendency to reduce effective vertical soil stresses, thereby reducing the available passive re- sistance of the soil. Shoring systems should meet applicable provisions of all State and Federal health and safety regulations. Crib Wall Foundation Preparation Because both the crib wall height and depth of fill below the wall will vary substantially, differential settlement of the wall could prove problema- tic. In order to minimize the potential for excessive differential settle- ment, a minimtm relative compaction of 95% (AS24 D- -1557) is reconmended for granular fill soils which should be placed within a 1.1 plan projecting down from the outside edge of the wall footing. Backfill The backfill behind the wall should consist of well- drained, nonexpan- sive granular material placed in accordance with the recommendations set forth in the subsequent section of this report entitled "General Grading Reconmendations." For design purposes, the unit weight of non - expansive gra- nular backfill may be taken as 115 pcf. 1 Job No. 183 -041 - June 10, 1983 -11- 0 0 M O O R E S TA B E R CONSULTING ENGINEERS AND GEOLOGISTS Active Lateral Forces - Provising the backfill recommendations are followed, the retaining structures can be designed for an active earth pres- sure of 30 psf /ft of depth. This pressure is based on well- draining material with no hydrostatic pressure buildup behind the structure. The resultant force cn the wall may be assumed to act through the lower third point and may be directed downward at an angle of 32 degrees from the horizontal. Vertical Bearing - The allowable bearing at the base of the foundation depends upon the depth of embedment, the width of the footing, the slope of the adjacent ground, and the location where the resultant force crosses the base. If the structure is founded adjacent to essentially level ground and the resultant falls within the middle third, the allowable vertical bearing Pressure at the toe is 1000 psf for each foot of vertical embedment, plus 350 psf for each foot of footing width. If the structure is founded adjacent to a sloping 2.5:1 slope, the allow- able vertical bearing pressure at the toe is 350 psf for each foot of vertical embedment, plus 120 psf for each foot of footing width. Lateral Resistance - The applied (active) lateral forces on the retaining structure must be opposed by the sliding resistance acting along the base and /or by passive pressure at the toe. The allowable sliding resistance may be based on a coefficient of friction of 0.40. The allowable passive lateral bearing against level properly compacted fill soils can be taken as an equivalent hydrostatic fluid pressure of 200 psf per foot of embedment at the toe. The allowable passive lateral bearing against sloping 2.5:1 properly compacted fill soils can be taken as an equiva- lent hydrostatic fluid pressure of 80 psf per foot of embedment. Miere base sliding and passive lateral bearing are combined in design, we recomriend that the passive lateral bearing be reduced 50 percent. Job No. 183 -041 - June 10, 1983 .a -12- MOORE & TABER Grading Requirements 0 CONSULTING ENGINEERS ANO GEOLOGISTS The following requirements should be furnished to the grading contractor, who is responsible for notifying the governrental agency, as required, and for notifying the soil engineer (a) at the start of site cleanup, (b) the start of grading operations, and (c) any time that grading operations are resumed after an interruption. Each step of the operations described below must be approved in a specific area by the soil engineer and, where required, by the appropriate governmental agency or agencies before proceeding with subsequent work. All site cleanup and grading will be subject to the approval of this office and must conform to the requirements of the City of Newport Beach and the following recamendations. (1) Prior to the start of grading, all vegetation, trash, surface obstructions, and debris resulting from demolition should be removed and disposed of off -site. Any existing irrigation, drainage or utility lines or other abandoned subsurface structures should be removed, destroyed or abandoned in compliance with specifications of the appropriate Building Official and recamiendations of this office. (2) All existing fill should be removed in areas to receive new fill. Subsequent to cleanup operations, and prior to initial grading operations, a reasonable search should be made for subsurface obstructions and /or possible loose fill, or detrimental soil types. This search should be conducted at the discretion of and under the supervision of the soil engineer with the use of on -site equipment. (3) The resulting clean natural ground surface should be scarified, brought to about optimlmlmoisture.content, and compaction to a minimum of 90% relative compaction for a depth of eight inches below the existing or stripped surface, unless otherwise noted. Job No. 183 -041 - June 10, 1983 -13- M O O R E S TA B E R CONSULTING ENGINEERS AND GEOLOGISTS (4) Fill should consist of approved earth material free of trash or debris, roots, vegetation, or other deleterious material. All fill should be spread in G to 8 inch lifts, brought to about optin n moisture, and compacted to at least 90% of maximum density as determined by AS'IM 1557 -70. Job No. 183 -041 - June 10, 1983 Z L -14- 7_i MOORE & TABER General Conditions 0 CONSULTING ENGINEERS AND GEOLOGISTS This report is based on the project as described and the geotechnical data obtained from the field tests performed at the locations indicated on the plan. The conclusions and reccmTendations do not reflect any variations which may occur between the field tests. Our firm should be notified of any pertinent change in the project plans or if foundations conditions are found that differ from those described in this report, since this may require a revaluation of the recommendations. This report has not been prepared for use by parties or projects other than those named or described above. It may not contain sufficient information for other parties or other purposes. This report has been prepared in accordance with generally accepted gectechnical practices, and makes no other warranties either expressed or im- plied as to the professional advice or data included in it. MOORE 6 TABER Robert N. Hawk Geologist RNH /JJW:te (6) Copies to Client Job No. 183 -041 - June 10, 1983 � SZ' viewed by s J. Weaver Registered Civil Engineer 32316 -15- Job No. 183 -041 - June 10, 1983 A -1 M V V K G. • I H M G" •• IN .I Ii I IN., 1 N -IN I 1.4N1 —t 11 1. ;, UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION pt OH ICH JMH 10L ICL IML SC SM SP SW GC IGM GP JGW 0 -5 Very loose Very soft Sends with fines Clean sands Gra vets with tines Clean gravels Highly Silts and cloys Silts and cloys }12%ftnes <5 %fines X12 %lines <5 %fines Sands -more than 50 %of coarse Gravels. more than 50°/ of coarse organic soils Liquid llmitgreater than 50 Liquld limit less than 50 - - >70 Very dense fraction is smaller than NQ sieve. fraction is larger than N44 sieve. Fine grained soils Coarse grained soils (More than 50% is smaller than NQ 200 sieve ) ( More than 50% is larger than NQ 200 sieve) x w 0 i z r r N Q a - @mks MATERIAL SYMBOLS CONSISTENCY CLASSIFICATION Grovel N Peat or organic matter FOR SOILS According to the Standard Penetration Test LSand Fill material N2 of blows Granular Cohesive Silt ®Shale 0 -5 Very loose Very soft ® Clay Sandy cloy or clayey sand Sandstone Limestone C, Loose Semicompact Compact Soft Stiff Very stiff Sandy silt or �' ®Metamorphic 36-70 Dense rd an rock o- - --- - -- p -4 _... B.PF. Silty clay or rAcloyey slit - - >70 Very dense Very hard LEGEND OF BORING ILEGEND OF PENETRATION TEST ha mer wit 10 Graphic representation t 30 drop= O driving rate. ft/ Ib b w) on LABORATORY CLASSIFICATION CRITERIA z GW and SW- C = 0 6IL greater than 4 for IS a 6 for SW; C _ (D 30)between I a 3• u Die c De x 060 GPond Sp- Clean gravel or sand not meeting requirements for GIN and SW. GMand SM-Atterberg limits below `A7 line or P.1. less than 4. GC and SC-Atterberg limits above "A' line with P. I. greater than 7. Fines (silt or clay Fine Medium Coarse Fine Coarse Cobbles Boulders sand sand Isandl gravel grovel Sieve sizes g g °— • n �^ 0 to 20 30 ao 00 60 >9 LIQUID LIMIT ep gD pp Classification of earth materials shown on this sheet is based on field inspection and should not be construed to imply laboratory analysis unless so stated. MATERIAL SYMBOLS CONSISTENCY CLASSIFICATION Grovel N Peat or organic matter FOR SOILS According to the Standard Penetration Test LSand Fill material N2 of blows Granular Cohesive Silt ®Shale 0 -5 Very loose Very soft ® Clay Sandy cloy or clayey sand Sandstone Limestone 6 -10 11 -20 21-35 Loose Semicompact Compact Soft Stiff Very stiff Sandy silt or �' ®Metamorphic 36-70 Dense Hard silty sand rock o- - --- - -- p -4 _... B.PF. Silty clay or rAcloyey slit I neous rock g >70 Very dense Very hard LEGEND OF BORING ILEGEND OF PENETRATION TEST Bulk sample Drive samplE 1 C?W- Casing set K 3 2 Uzi IS 24 30 35 II 1I� i G.W.S. 5 27 IIJ 11FITIFIOT11 .. N 38 _ LEI 48 3 2 Uzi IS 24 30 35 II i G.W.S. 5 27 38 48 -t - o- - --- - -- p -4 _... B.PF. BI s per -- -- Usng I lo b ha mer wit 10 Graphic representation t 30 drop= O driving rate. ft/ Ib b w) tf I M OO R FW TA B E R CONSULTING ENGIN S AND GEOLOGISTS T FST RORI NG TYPE 6" Hollow Stem Auger JELEVATION 109 IBORING B -1 95 15.9 23 2.5 1 FILL: intermixed brown SILTY SAND and 2 :k CLAYEY SILT with scattered wood Bag SM and asphalt fragments 5 101 20.6 16 2.5 3 Bag '. L ALU5VIUM: gray -black SILTY CLAY with 91 30.0 14 2.5 5 some SAND Bag 6 . ... decreased SAND 90 30.4 25 2.5 7 10 Cl Si 85 32.5 BEDROCK: Brawn mottled gray CLAYEY g y i1 32 2.5 8 15 ,to S2 30.4 SILTSTONE lie Notes: 1) No caving 2) Groundwater level at approximately 6' after two hours. 3) Boring backfilled 5/9/83. 4) Boring elevation taken from plan provided by the client. O ~ W O,� N .. O THIS BORING LOG SUMMARY APPLIES ONLY AT THE TIME AND LOCATION INDICATED. SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS F o id o y n o n i i F W uy u MAY DIFFER AT OTHER LOCATIONS AND TIMES. WO LOGGED BY RNFi DATE 5 /9/83 -? Job No. 1.83 -041 - June 11, 1983 I M V V H* 0. 1 A IJ t F< CONSULTING ENGI EIRS AND GEOLOG15TS TEST BORING L TYPE 6" Hollow Stem Auger JELEVATION ti110 BORING B -2 :•.: FILL: Brown SILTY SAND with AC frag- Bag 1 R4 70 36.4 6 2.5 2 ments, scattered Gravel L ALLUVIUM: Black SILTY CLAY with some 5 SAND 85 35.5 6 2.5 3 — Dark bray fine CLAYEY SAND Bag 4 89 33.3 5 2.5 5 1 105 27.6 26 2.5 6 BEDROCK: yellow -brown SILTSTONE 15 81 43.5 30 2.5 7 Notes: 1) No caving 2) Groundwater encountered at approxi- mately 7 feet. 3) Boring backfilled 5/9/83. 4) Boring elevations taken from plan provided by the client. W ' �N THIS BORING LOG SUMMARY APPLIES ONLY AT THE TIME L A a _ ° '� W <o AND LOCATION INDICATED. SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS Flo as v N _ de n i W WE W j MAY DIFFER ATOTHER LOCATIONS AND TIMES. LOGGED BY RNH DATE 5/9/83 `, Job No 183 -041 - June 10, 1983 -3 M O O R W TA B E R CONSULTING ENGIN RS AND GEOLOGISTS TEST BORING L0 TYPE 8" Hollow Stem Au er JELEVATION 145' IBORING B -3 107 6.4 15 2.5 1 FILL: Brown fine CLAYEY SAND BaS 2 1- SC minor scattered Gravel 5 102 10.3 31 2.5 3 •' .4i 107 10.5 3 2.5 4 Bag 5 ; 112 10.0 68 2.5 6 1 ^ SC NATIVE: Brown CLAYEY SAND ML is- '. Brown SILT — u 5 2. 7 P Tan fine - medium SAND with scattered coarse eases Notes: 1) No caving. 2) No groundwater encountered. 3) Boring backfilled 5/9/83. 4) Boring elevation taken from plan provided by the client. zo [ u c U w •-. a o THIS BORING LOG SUMMARY APPLIES ONLY AT THE TIME o� ,n yj z z a m,p AND LOCATION INDICATED, SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS 2 MAY DIFFER AT OTHER LOCATIONS AND TIMES. n Q u m o , LOGGED BY RN[i DATE 5/9/83 `y Job No. 183 -041 - June 10, 1983 A -4 V V LL F V. LL H U li cr C C 29 Job No. 183 -041 - June 10, 1983 B -1 Uai r`�vj rn o I I i d °ml a v~ � aI m i Qi Lr) ': Ln, I j \ Ul jI ro W of N 1-4 m rl M i O Q m m o rI o rl H O to O ; I 1 Lr o r Lr {O 'D o f O o) Cq N In r o rl In r r 1 4 r i M r \O N O N �x( N C f r-1 n � O C Ln rl r-I Q O In N O � l0 LI Or 1-1 Or r-A j I-I rl rl� r�l rN-I C: ONi Lr)' i I tr+l o Y YI Y v v Y v- Y 4- 3Y ✓ w S2 +� i\� w P d o 1 j O ¢ LL C C I x W f ¢ •-� ¢ J V) W O, Q1 w O L', U• ,n i wi w V)i W m G T in C N L H N UJ C L I X I w � 41 In N O Cl O O L s F- E E r� ul 4' O V1 w 11 -'� K .-+ . -1 ,n C v L O �Ji v �,I c 1- O 4. x �� C C, C � w i ¢ X 2 o X Y �O ,a� U) m m o o I--- a w¢ u W 29 Job No. 183 -041 - June 10, 1983 B -1 M O O R E S T E R CONSULTING ENGINEERS A EOLOGISTS CONS(�IATmN TFST — PRFSSLJR�CURVFS ' :. . - Elev. 102 s. 1.00 99 • ■ ■ -} —� mill ■ ■ ■ ■. ■ .98 f �� ■■■ ■� - N r . ■ ■�■M■■■■i ■■ ■ ■■■ ■ ■i ■ Lim■ ■■ - ■ ■■_ ■■ ■ ■ ■i .. (D ■ �'. �■ ■■■N �i , MEN = 95 CD w -- ■ -- ■ ■■�. ■ ■ ■ ■� ■ ■i uj ■ ■ - — - ■ " ■ ■ ■■■ ■■i -- �■ -- a .93 rn .92 - IMWII -- -- -- ME .9 ■ =� M�5■■i \i• t■■ ■u ■� ■i ■�■ .■■ ■■r III n ■■■� ■�■ Md■■i � lino i� CONSOLIDATION TFST — PRFSSURF CLIRVFS Bor. /Sample N2 2 5 Elev. 102 Date 5/19/83 1.00 99 G OVERBURDEN PRESSURE ■ INITIAL MOISTURE • NATURAL MOISTURE o SAMPLE SUBMERGED -} .98 - N r .97- c - = 95 CD w -- -- _ - — - .94 w -- -- a .93 rn .92 - -- -- -- 91 _ .90 -544-- _. II _ - 0.125 0.25 0.5 1 2 4 a 16 PRESSURE (tons /sq.ft.) I Joh No. 183 -041 - June 10, 1983 2& m M O O R E WABER CONSULTING ENGINEE * 0 GEOLOGISTS CONS01 IDATION TFST — PRFc;'.;URF CURVES rnN,;ni inATmN TFc;T— PRF-c;ql]PF r.i]RVF.1; Bor./Sample N2 1/7 1Elev. 99, IDate 5/20/83 1.0 .9 A OVERBURDEN PRESSURE 0 INITIAL MOISTURE 0 NATURAL M OISTURE R 0 SAMPLE SUBMEGED NO ON In Nil m AN oil 110 101 ■ice ONE C m: .9 2 .97-- lion INN iii ■ ■ 0 w On w 94 IN a. 'NIMMONS MEIN ■ .94-- w J < .92 .91 .90 .89 O + 0.5 PRESSURE j 1 2 (tons/sq.ft.) t -4- 8 16 ME I'M ----- - < .9 Em 0 14- ENO 4 0.125 0.25 ■IN I Me a — MORIN mom"1111M rnN,;ni inATmN TFc;T— PRF-c;ql]PF r.i]RVF.1; Bor./Sample N2 1/7 1Elev. 99, IDate 5/20/83 1.00-4 46OVERBURDEN PRESSURE ■ INITIAL MOISTURE • NATURAL MOISTURE 0 SAMPLE SUBMERGED .97-- 0 w .94-- w J < .92 .91 .90 .89 + 0.5 PRESSURE j 1 2 (tons/sq.ft.) t -4- 8 16 ----- - 14- 4 0.125 0.25 Job No. 183-041 - June 1.0, 1983 B-3 BY THE CITY COUNCIL September 12, 1983 J CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH CITY COUNC AGEN A SEP 121983 ITEM NO. ` TO: CITY COUNCIL FROM: Public Works DepartmentV SUBJECT: OASIS PARK GRADING AND 5TH AVENUE STREET IMPROVEMENT BETWEEN JASMINE AND IRIS AVENUES (C -2316) — RECOMMENDATION: Award Contract No. 2316 to Gillespie Construction for the total price bid of $243,074.50, and authorize the Mayor and the City Clerk to execute the contract. DISCUSSION: AT 11:00 A.M. on August 31, 1983, the City Clerk opened and read the following bids for this project: Bidder low Gillespie Construction $242,674.50* 2 Fleming Engineering, Inc. 248,338.50 3 Ianco 255,675.25 4 Clarke Contracting Corporation 293,181.00 5 Griffith Company 329,477.45 * Corrected total price bid is $243,074.50 The low total price bid is 26% below the Engineer's estimate of $330,000. Funds are appropriated in the following accounts for the project: Description Budget No. Amount Extend Jasmine Creek Storm Drain 02- 3497252 28,413.96 Grade City Parcel N/0 Fifth Ave. 02- 3397 -258 49,000.00 SB 821 Bicycle Trails Program 02- 7697 -191 16,000.00 Fifth Ave. St. Impr. Jasmine /Narcissus 02- 3397 -275 72,000.00 Fifth Ave. Storm Drain " 1. 02- 3497 -273 77,660.54 Gillespie Construction, the low bidder, is a well qualified general contractor who has successfully performed recent contract work for the City. The contract provides for: (1) extending the 48 -inch diameter Jasmine Creek storm drain to the Newport -Mesa Unified School District property line, where a new inlet structure will be built; (2) constructing a 24 -inch diameter storm drain from the Jasmine Creek storm drain easterly along 5th Avenue; (3) grading stockpiled earth from City property north of 5th Avenue at Larkspur Page 2 September 12, 1983 Subj: Oasis Park Grading and 5th Avenue Street Improvement Between Jasmine and Iris Avenues (C -2316) Avenue across Jasmine Creek to a maximum fill height of approximately 12 feet; (4) grading along 5th Avenue between Jasmine and Larkspur Avenues to provide for a 32 -foot road width improvement; and (5) constructing a 12 -foot wide bike trail atop the Jasmine Creek fill to a maximum grade of 631 percent between Iris and Larkspur Avenues; all as shown on the attached sketch "Pro- posed Project Grading." Contract No. 2316 also provides for (1) extension of the 5th Avenue storm drain to the City property line easterly of OASIS Senior Citizens Center, and (2) construction of 5th Avenue street improvement; both as shown on the attached sketch "Proposed 5th Avenue Street and Storm Drain Improvements ". All work under this contract should be completed by January 15, 1983. Plans and specifications for the work outlined above have been completed by consultant Jack P. Norris, R.C.E. Funds were appropriated in the FY 1983 -84 budget to provide for design and construction of landscaping upon the OASIS Park parcel. Such design is underway and will soon be completed so that landscaping may immedi- ately follow completion of the grading work. The grading should be completed by December 1, 1983. Benjamin B. Nolan Public Works Director L RD: rb Att. I+I t\ 1 e I• J it y1d5MlAl ® 'iyY tlS�511tlY1 =z �w N O w S2 M LL O) ` C m U N O CL` v 0 O a ^^O (L �EE0 con �\� .. I_ \ •tip ' .� �� � �` �' .a., . _ -`` �?� .• C. �. &.... �.. _ u � / ?ri _— ....ate J y CK` Q \'\ k cc �dl I - --- — I'7y�_sro, ��iill / 1 1 ii � •� Ins, � -t ' I' 'ss S2 M LL O) ` C m U N O CL` v 0 O a ^^O (L �EE0 con �\� .. I_ \ •tip ' .� �� � �` �' .a., . _ -`` �?� .• C. �. &.... �.. _ u � / ?ri _— ....ate J y CK` Q \'\ k cc �dl I - --- — I'7y�_sro, 1 � Y I I rc i F I I ' H o I � a I I l r-- 1 I `'1 I -1 L L__1 11 1 y 1 1 1 / i .o 0 I. W J t N y 0 snimlf r---- -- - - - --I I o I I = I Y I I ° o W w to J i 3 I I a ' o Y cr- Q a rn Q 0 I3rld Mvva waois M313 3NNSW '6113 r sev snssl�ara I I I� I I I I I I I' it I •3� aw9lar,w -IF I' i �I 11 �I1 II it L_- xv andsaar3 n^'3er awlwsrt W Z o' �a — Z W0y Q z K 10 N > r: 00 0 Z WQa 3x 0W� zff C) `$ sz M h Fo U CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT PROPOSAL OASIS PARK GRADING AND FIFTH AVENUE STREET IMPROVEMENT BETWEEN JASMINE AND NARCISSUS AVENUES CONTRACT NO. 2316 To the Honorable City Council City of Newport Beach 3300 Newport Boulevard P.O. Box 1768 Newport Beach, CA 92663 -3884 Gentlemen: Pr la The undersigned declares that he has carefully examined the location of the work, has read the Instructions to Bidders, has examined the Plans and Special Provisions, and hereby proposes to furnish all materials and do all the work required to complete Contract No. 2315 in accordance with the Plans and Special Provisions, and will take in full payment therefor the following unit prices for the work, complete in place, to wit: ITEM QUANTITY ITEM DESCRIPTION UNIT i'OTAL NO. AND UNIT UNIT PRICE WRITTEN IN WORDS PRICE PRICE 1. Lump Sum MOBILIZATION, CLEARING AND GRUBBING, REMOVING, SALVAGING AND RELOCATING @ j-yJy ri UC `jTj1)L97t10 Dollars and of) Cents s 2 5400.00 s 75�CVQ- 2. Lump Sum EARTHWORK @ Yhi'( 6 TA- JOOS"j? Dollars and Cents $ 53,000 . oo s 53: 000 — 3. 315 CONST. CRIB WALL Square Feet @ F0 'j 8'M Dollars and NC7 Cents $ ,OO s 44on— Per Square Foot 4. 1 PROTECT LIGHT STANDARD Each @ F0jP__ �b Dollars NO and Cents $ 400— s-4 -oo // «- a O + • Pr lb ITEI QUANTITY ITEM DESCRIPTION UNIT RIUDT NO. AND UNIT UNIT PRICE WRITTEN IN WORDS PRICE PRICE 5. Lump Sum CONTROL TRAFFIC @ 0M IWOSAW Dollars and �0 Cents $ 1000- $ (000— 6. 209 CONST. 4" A.C. BIKE TRAIL Tons @ T4tgy Dollars and �1 O Cents $ 39.00 $ Per Ton 7 258 CONST. 3" A.C. PAVEMENT Tons @ LFaly N 1 NE Dollars and � 1 U Cents $ ST Q 0 $ j 0 0(9>-z - Per Ton 8. 637 CONST. AGGREGATE BASE Tons @ TW EU) 6 Dollars and A Cents $ 1Z.00 S 764-4--- Per Ton 9. 1248 CONST. TYPE "A" P.C.C. CURB AND Lineal Feet GUTTER (6" C.F..) @ SC1)E N Dollars BYO and Cents S -7.00 S -7 Per Lineal Foot 10. 32 CONST. SPECIAL P.C.C. CURB AND GUTTER Lineal Feet @ -TI�N Dollars NO Ce ts' $ 10 -00 $ 32o- Per Lineal Foot 11. 60 CONST. VARIABLE HEIGHT PCC CURB Lineal Feet @ -T-ctj Dollars and Po Cents $. 1p,00 $ ( oo — - Per Lineal Foot i � s • 11 Pr lc ITLM NO. QUANTITY AND UNIT ITEM DESCRIPTION UNIT PRICE WRITTEN IN WORDS UNIT PRICE . N. PRICF• 12. 6120 CONST. P.C.C. SIDEWALK AND ACCESS Square Feet RAMPS @ 0ot Dollars and S iXT`( Cents S (w() Per Square Foot 13. 906 CONST. P.C.C. DRIVE APPROACH Square Feet @ Tv\) 0 Dollars TWtNly and 1'tS FIVE Cents $ $ Per Square Foot 19. 250 RECONSTRUCT P.C.C. ALLEY APPROACH Square Feet WITH CURB RETURNS @ -pjj D Dollars F 1 F (Y and Cents $ j- i;-D Per Square Foot 15. 1 ADJUST M.H. FRAME & COVER TO GRADE Each Dollars Nu cents $ 16. 1 REMOVE AND REPLACE SURVEY MONUMENT Each @ �+JNDQ,0 FfFTr Dollars I� z% and Cents $ 5a- 17. 170 LOWER 12" AC WATER MAIN Lineal Feet @ `Tib i .;" Dollars and Cents' °- Per Lineal Foot 18. 5 ADJUST WATER VALVE BOX TO GRADE Each @ 601✓ HtWD(Lk6b FIFTY Dollars and ND Cents $ 15 — $ 15� Each ■ 0 Pr 1d I=1 QUANTITY ITEM DESCRIPTION UNIT TOT NO. AND UNIT UNIT PRICE WRITTEN IN WORDS PRICE PRICE. 19. 77 CONST. 4' C.L. FENCE Lineal Feet @ n tA)9- Dollars >y () Cents s oo Per Lineal Foot 20• 53 CONST. STANDARD STREET BARRICADE Lineal Feet @ TWi( -rY Five Dollars and Po Cents $ 35.00 Per Lineal Foot 21. 1 REINSTALL "GRANT HOWALD PARK" SIGN Each @ ON e Dollars and N 0 Cents $ 100-00 22. Lump Sum GUARD UNDERGROUND CONSTRUCTION s 1855 — $ 100 — @ 6Nlt� `fl ) J SOLI) o Dollars MD Ceents $ 000.00 $ 1000 - 23. 132 INSTALL 48" RCP (1800 -D) Lineal Feet @ UNIL;` twooRVD tyelVal( Dollars N o Cents S rZO. 00 $ 15, 240-= Per Lineal Foot 24 720 INSTALL 24" RCP (2000 -D) Lineal Feet @ F'1 FT`( Ty o _Dollars IJ 0 and , Cents S 5Z o U s 37, +40= Per Lineal Foot 25• 526 INSTALL 24" RCP (1250 -D) Lineal Feet @ F6up_" -rfteE Dollars No and and 43:00 s. s Per Lineal Foot • • • Pr le ITEM QUANTITY ITEM DESCRIPTION UNIT AL NO. AND UNIT UNIT PRICE WRITTEN IN WORDS PRICE PRICK 26• 23 INSTALL 12" ACP (2500 -D) Lineal Feet @ FI Fri Dollars 1 0 and Cents $ Per Lineal Foot 27. 1 INSTALL 18" CMP WITH MORTARED Each CONNECTI N TO RCP @ jjJ� /hJ ONJ Dollars IUD and Cents 00 $ 4 .00 $n 28 1 CONST. INLET PER SHEET 2, PLAN Each D- 5145 -S @ 56yev 77fOd5A-m0 Dollars Ala Ce nts $ 000.00 $ "1000 -- 29. 1 CONST. CURB INLET TYPE OL -A, L =7' Each @ _TJ0 THOJSMJ61NO f} ODP-" Dollars �r ry and Cents $ 22 DD . DO $ Z200 — 30, 2 CONST. CURB INLET TYPE OS, H =8' OR MORE Each @ 00e 71k'Okb"D t;'16qr 4VNWt0 Dollars 00 Cen s $ 1900.00 $ 3 6 001 Each 31. 1 CONST. CURB INLET TYPE OS, H= LESS THAN 8' Each @ I� /.wkb�0) Q � C i �WJSlhJD � Dollars and J 00 Cents' $ 1 500.00 $ 15,00.0 p 32. 2 CONST. JUNCTION STRUCTURE NO. 2 Each @ 00t TROUS O1 FIJI N'UN bjWT Dollars and 15oo.oa 3000.06 A[n Cents $ $ Each Pr if ITFM QUANTITY NO. AND UNIT ITEM DESCRIPTION UNIT PRICE WRITTEN IN WORDS GRATE INLET CATCH BASIN UNIT PRICE ,UrAL PRICE 33, 1 CONST. JUNCTION STRUCTURE #1 WITH Each DOMED GRATE AND FRAME Dollars @ ( WO lwos"'b Dollars $ 600— Each and 35. 1 CONST. 0 p Cents $2600 -00 $ "2-000 34. 2 CONST. GRATE INLET CATCH BASIN Each @ Tw"y Dollars d and Cents $ 300.00 $ 600— Each 35. 1 CONST. JUNCTION STRUCTURE BODY ONLY Each OF MANHOLE #2 @ %N L� T! tDO5H1�iD �W (Z hiU ND(LFriDol Lars 1J b and Cents $ 14 -00.00 5 400 36. 1- CONST. CONCRETE PIPE COLLAR Each @ FjVC IOAD{ -p Dollars and - - -- NO Cents $ 50.00 S S-00— 37. 1 CONST. A.C. TRANSITION Each 1- @_ I�vdR- Dollars and IJ Cents $ 0• o0 S 00 — 38. 1 REPLACE M.H. COVER WITH DOMED Each GRATE, ADJUST TO GRADE @- 141 R F� F�UN9R �—D Dollars �b C and Cents $ '300-00 $ 300" 39. 2 EXTEND, LOWER AND CONNECT EXIST. 4" Each AND S" ABS PIPES TO STORM DRAIN @ FOU(L FtUIgDM Dollars and 110 Cents $ 0(00 $ HO= Each to :J • • TOTAL PRICE WRITPEN IN WORDS 'rvJo NvjJDtcD fOPY'TWO,T*()Sftl) S X N�oP Dollars and Y cents Contractor's License No. Q3 $t 31 Dateq S #Z.4Zi 674.5-0 &a.t,ESc'i6 CONsMOC-TJOA� (Bidder's Name) n1-Yvvt4,w , Mme✓ (Authorized signature /'7'it e) Bidder's Address 1055 e- (AU✓tI+UD DP-, Loses kEsh, CA II L (o Bidder's Telephone No. j14- 951-0233 . I . .1 1 1, -y • 0 Page 2 INSTRUCTIONS TO BIDDERS The following contract documents shall be completed, executed and received by the City Clerk in accordance with NOTICE INVITING BIDS: 1. PROPOSAL 2. INSTRUCTIONS TO BIDDERS 3. DESIGNATION OF SUBCONTRACTOR(S) 4. BIDDER'S BOND (sum not less than 10% of total bid price) 5. NON- COLLUSION AFFIDAVIT 6. STATEMENT OF FINANCIAL RESPONSIBILITY 7. TECHNICAL ABILITY AND EXPERIENCE REFERENCES except that cash, certified check or cashier's check (sum not less than 10% of the total bid price) may be received in lieu of the Bidder's Bond. The title of the project and the words SEALED BID shall be clearly marked on the outside of the envelope containing the bid. Bids shall not be received from bidders who are not licensed in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 9, Division III of the Business and Professions' Code. The low bidder shall also be required to possess a City of Newport Beach business license prior to execution of contract. Bids shall be submitted on the attached PROPOSAL.form. The additional copy of the PROPOSAL form may be retained by the bidder for his records. The estimated quantities indicated in the PROPOSAL are approximate, and are given solely to allow the comparison of bid totals. Bids are to be computed upon the estimated quantities indicated in the PROPOSAL multiplied by unit price submitted by the bidder. In the event of dis- crepancy between wording and figures, bid wording shall prevail over bid figures. In the event of error in the multiplication of estimated quantity by unit price, the correct multiplication will be computed and the bids will be compared with correctly multiplied totals. The City shall not be held responsible for bidder errors or omissions in the PROPOSAL. Contract documents shall bear signatures and titles of persons authorized to sign on behalf of the bidder. For corporations, the signatures shall be of the President or Vice President. For partnerships, the signatures shall be of a general partner. For sole ownership, the signature shall be of the owner. In accordance with the California Labor Code (Sections 1770 et seq.), the Director of Industrial Relations has ascertained the general prevailing rate of per diem wages in the locality in which the work is to be performed for each craft, classification, or type of workman or mechanic needed to execute the con- tract. A copy of said determination is available in the office of the City Clerk. All parties to the contract shall be governed by all provisions of the California Labor Code relating to prevailing wage rates (Sections 1770 -7981 in- clusive). The Contractor shall be responsible for compliance with Section 1777.5 of the California Labor Code for all apprenticeable occupations. A - 5btYl1 Contr's Lic. No. & Classification NOG 31 , l Ifi3 Date LLB VI i✓ coU gT?_L�CTI er Authorized Signature/Title � • Page 3 DESIGNATION OF SUBCONTRACTOR(S) The undersigned certifies that he has used bid(s) of the following listed subcontractor(s) in making up his bid,and that the subcontractor(s) listed will be used for the work for which they bid, subject to the approval of the Engineer and in accordance with the applicable provisions of the Specifications. No change of subcontractor may be made except with the prior approval of the Engineer and as provided by State law. Item of Work Subcontractor Address 1. kc al)- avMica, �SVj� c 2. CONC Nalaio �[ C(A'4 pay 3. STROCIOPLES 04OZcr C005i' %J ✓�s�'�% 4. 61 '1 VA s. 9. 10. 11. 12. (VA67Puc77&,/ Bidder YYJ YruA4,iA-w, / un Authorized Signature /Title P ® FIREMAN'S FUND INSURANCE COMPANY • ❑ THE AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY ❑ NATIONAL SURETY CORPORATION FRE34 M FUIM ❑—II ASSOCIATED INDEMNITY CORPORATION DUNRUM '$ 0 AMERICAN AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS: That We, GILLSEPIE CONSTRUCTION CO. BID OR PROPOSAL BOND BOND NO. 7124277 PREMIUM —NIL— (hereinafter called the principal), as principal, andFIREMAN 1 S FUND INSURANCE COMPANY . a corporation organ- ized and doing business under and by virtue of the laws of the State of CALIFORNIA , and duly licensed for the purpose of making, guaranteeing or becoming sole surety upon bonds or undertakings required or authorized by the laws of the Slate ofCALIFORNIA as Surety, are held and firmly bound unto CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH (hereinafter called the Obligee) in the just and full sum of TEN PERCENT OF THE AMOUNT BID Dollars ($ 10% ) lawful money of the United States of America, for the payment of which, well and truly to be made, we hereby bind ourselves and our and each of our successors and assigns, jointly and severally, firmly by these presents. THE CONDITION OF THIS OBLIGATION IS SUCH THAT, WHEREAS, the above bounden principal as aforesaid, is about to hand in and submit to the obligee a bid or proposal for the OASIS PARK GRADING AND 5TH AVENUE STREET IMPROVEMENTS m accordance with the plans and specifications filed in the office of the obligee and under the notice inviting proposals therefor. NOW, THEREFORE, if the bid or proposal of said principal shall be accepted, and the contract for such work be awarded to the principal thereupon by the said obligee, and said principal shall enter into a contract and bond for the completion of said work as required by law, then this obligation to be null and void, otherwise to be and remain in full force and effect. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, said Principal and said Surety have caused these presents to be duty signed and sealed this 30TH day of 3460277--4-81 AUGUST 19 83 __GTT T FSPTF ('LNCI:Z�PP T(- PT0T B j FIREMAN_' S FUND k SSI P nIC^ rnMPANV B Y /�� AM s %c .._� _..�._.. Attorney -in -Fact LLI R. FRIIS 0 z O O 0 z 03 x Y' M O 6 0 ro x O ro O ca r m O C U UP ❑ono❑ _a4 as 7 80 mo S F-z eb p;" © o a &[ 2@ 2 E0 ] \ 2 k } «fir \2 \ ?! tr /@ ch k \) la. / } � SE ;B ew a. ) i { 0 m rb k I � kE 00 CL ■ ! |2; k\� � ` |CL °GElR.RAL POWER OF ATTORNEY MAN'S FUND INSURANCE CO NY KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS: That FIREMAN'S FUND INSURANCE COMPANY. a Corporation duly organized and existing under the laws of the State of California, and having its principal office in the City and County of San Francisco, in said State. has made. constituted and appointed. and does by these presents make. constitute and appoint WILLIAM R. FRIIS, DAVID L. CULBERTSON and CAROL E. MUNARETTO Jointly or severally its true and lawful Attorneys) -in -Fact, with full power and authority hereby conferred in its name. place and stead. to execute, seal. acknowledge and deliver any and all bonds. undertakings, recognizanas or other written obligations in the nature thereof --------------------- - - - - -- and to bind the Corporation thereby as fully and to the same extent as if such bonds were signed by the President. sealed with the corporate seal of the Corporation and duly attested by its Secretary, hereby ratifying and confirming all that the said Attorneyfsl -in -Fact may do in the premises. This power of attorney is granted pursuant to Article Vlll. Section 30 and 31 of By -laws of FIREMAN'S FUND INSURANCE COMPANY now in full face and effect. "Article VIII, Appointment and Authoriy Assistant secretaries, and Anornep -in -Fact and Agents to accept Legal Process and AiraA a Appearances. Section 30, Appointment. The Chairman of the Board of Directors, the President, any Vice- President or any other person authorized by the Board of Directors, the Chairman of the Board of Directors, the President or any Vice - President, may, from time to time, appoint Resident Assistant Seotta ic, and Attorneys -in -Fact to represent and act for and on behalf of the Corporation. and Agents to accept legal process and make appearance for and on behalf of the Corporation. Section 31, Authority. The Authority of such Resident Assistant Seilenaries. Atttne,,-in -Fan, and Agents .hall be a. pre,cribed in the InstTomem evidencing their appointment, and any such appointment and all authority granted thereby may be re,iked at am time by the Board of Director, or by any person empowered to make such appointment." This power of attorney is signed and sealed under and by the authority of the following Resolution adopted by the Board of Directors of FIREMAN 'S FUND INSURANCE COMPANY at a meeting duly called and held on the 15th day of July. 1966, and said Resolution has not been amended or repealed: "RESOLVED. that the signature of any Vice - President. Assistant Secretary. and Resident Assistant Secretary of this Corporation, and the seal of this Corporation may be afiked or printed on any power of attorney. on any revocation of any power of attorney. or on any certificace relating thereto. by facsimile. and any power of attorney, any revocation of any power of attorney. or certificate bearing such facsimile signature or facsimile seal shall he valid and binding upon the Corporation.' IN WITNESS WHEREOF. FIREMAN'S FUND INSURANCE COMPANY has caused these presents to he signed by its Vice - President. and its corporate seal to be hereumoaffixed this 21st day of December , 19 81 MO.': By STATE OF CALIFORNIA, 7 ss. CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO FIREMAN "S FUND INSURANCE COMPANY On this 21st day of December . 19 81 , before me per.onally came Richard Williams to me known, who, being by me duly sworn, did depose and say: that he i, Vice - Pre,ident of FIRE \IAN'S FUND INSL RANC'E COxIPANy, the (or. potation described in and which executed the above instrument. that he knows the seal of •aid Corporation: that the ,eal affixed to the ,aid in,frumeot is such corporate seal, that it was so affixed by order of the Board of Directors of said Corporation and that he,iened hi. name Chet eto by life order. IN WITNESS WHEREOF- 1 have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official waL the day and year herein tint abov e w ritren. wasusarsasnwasunnawrunmunnnnsrum■ y// ', OFFICIAL SEAL SUSIE K. 61lBERi NOTARY K%X • CALIFORNIA .,,i.,, Wei, an i CONRT OF SM IRM(tSCO My Commission E.pires Nov 17, 199a CERTIFICATE twsw STATE OF CALIFORNIA. CITY ANDCOLNT) OF SAN FRANCISCO 1 xs I, the undersigned, Resident .Assistant Secr iarx of FIREMAN'S FL ND I.NSL'R ANCE COxIPANY, a CALIFORNIA Corporaton. DO HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing and atached POWER OF .ATTORNEY remain• in full force and ha, not been revoked: and furl he rmnre that .Ar[Oc \ III. Sections 30 and 31 of the By -laws of the Corporation, and the Resolution of the Board of Director,, set forth in the Power of Auornay. are nos, in F. . Signed and scaled at the City and County of San Francisco. Dated the 7BDm -FF441 30TH dasof AUGUST 19 83 Re•iMm Av.i,tant Svvrtraq �— NON- COLLUSION AFFIDAVIT 0 Page 5 The bidder, by its officers and agents or representatives present at the time of filing this bid, being duly sworn on their oaths, say that neither they nor any of them have, in any way, directly or indirectly, entered into any arrange- ment or agreement with any other bidder, or with any public officer of such CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH whereby such affiant or affiants or either of them, has paid or is to pay to such bidder or public officer any sum of money, or has given or is to give to such other bidder or public officer anything of value whatever; or such affiant or affiants or either of them has not directly or indirectly, entered into any arrangement or agreement with any other bidder or bidders, which tends to or does lessen or destroy free competition in the letting of the contract sought for by the attached bids; that no bid has been accepted from any subcontractor or materialman through any bid depository, the bylaws, rules or regulations of which prohibit or prevent the bidder from con- sidering any bid from any subcontractor or materialman which is not processed through said bid depository, or which prevent any subcontractor or materialman from submitting bids to a bidder who does not use the facilities of or accept bids from or through such bid depository; that no inducement of any form or character other than that which appears upon the face of the bid will be sug- gested, offered, paid or delivered to any person whomsoever to influence the acceptance of the said bid or awarding of the contract; nor has the bidder any agreement or understanding of any kind whatsoever with any person whomso- ever to pay, deliver to, or share with any other person in any way or manner, any of the proceeds of the contracts sought by this bid. Subscribed and sworn to before me this 31 day of Augud-t , 19 83 . My commission expires: June 21. 1987 ORM UAL 1 tWA L AMPS II Nmury Wdk - CO miA 6AAAft com Aty Canmissia Evk" ,Am 21, 1967 61w -spiE Gys�xnor� Bidder VN(VIM� , Authorized Signature Tit] STEVEN M. MUROW, MANAGER ot LINDA I.NADAh1S Public • Page 6 STATEMENT OF FINANCIAL RESPONSIBILITY The undersigned submits herewith a statement of his financial responsibility or agrees to submit a statement within l work day after the bid opening if the undersigned is the apparent low bidder. CAN' ROGTI� Bidder 'Authorized Signature /Title "• Page 7 TECHNICAL ABILITY AND EXPERIENCE REFERENCES The undersigned submits herewith a statement of the work of similar character to that proposed herein which he has performed and successfully completed. Year Completed For Whom Performed (Detail) Person to Contact Telephone No. jj( ^; L ITY O F 5 A+,) V (WIWOOO 4$x,000- 4pe-,5y (DNTI�?S -¢°t3 ll1 i M -� kA)O-rS bCaY FfieA1 jqiKe- 6JTit� 927 -1776 #450,000 - hucc) k1tr, n 83�-SVSv 4-�O, Mo- h CL'i,691C CoNsT. Bidder thorized SignaturejTitle—— General Engineering Contractor 1055 EI CamiFo Drive • Suite F . Costa Clesa, California 92626 • Ptiiune (714) 9157 0233 K 739.1;;')2 City of Anaheim 714- 999 -5126 200 S. 'Anaheim blvd. Anaheim, CA Lakeview- I.aPalma Storm Drain 4 11,500. Walnut Creek Storm Drain & 52,000. Sewer i Los Alisos Water District P. 0. Box 699 El Toro, CA L.A. County Road Department 1540 Alcazar St Los Angeles, CA 90033 714- 830 -0580 Grading and Site Improvements 95,000. 213- 226 -8111 Rambla Pacifico Storm Drain 36,555. California Department of Transportation 714- 997 -5771 District 7 758 N. Batavia St Orange, CA 92668 Del Mar Drainage Improvements 32,000. Drainage Improvements in Rt 50 20,00. City of San Juan Capistrano 714- 493 -1171 32400 Paseo Adelanto San Juan Capistrano, CA 92675 Sunhollow Improvements 163,263. 0 General Engineering Contractor 1055 E! Camino Drive • Suite F • Costa Mesa, Cal fornia 92626 • Phone (714) 957 -0233 & 739 4852 COMPLETED PROJECTS City of Huntington Park 213 -582 -6161 6550 Miles Avenue Huntington Park, CA 90255 Senior Citizens Park 5 18,642. City of Compton -Parks and Recreation 213 - 537 -8000 600 N. Alameda Compton, CA 90224 Wilson Park 28,000. (Joint venture /GSG Contractors) West Park. 75,000. Iragnew Park 130,000. California State Department of Parks and Recreation 2422 Arden Way, Suite A -1 Sacramento, CA 916- 920 -6619 El Pescador Park,Malibu 65,000. City of Newport Beach 714- 640 -2281 3300 Newport Blvd. Newport Beach, CA 92663 Old Newport Blvd, Drainage Improvements City of Upland 714- 982 -2617 460 N. Euclid Avenue Upland, CA 91786 Street improvements City of San Clemente 100 Avenida Presidio San Clemente, CA 92672 714 -492 -5101 Cazador Lane County of Los Angeles 550 S. Vermont Avenue Los Angeles, CA 90020 Lennox Sheriff Station Orange County Sanitation District , P. 0. Box 8127 Fountain Valley CA 92708 Dover Street Sewer 85,000. 57,600. 30,160. 42,524. 35,400. Authorized to Publish Advertisements of all kinds including public notices by Decree of the Superior Court of Orange County, California Number A -6214, dated 29 September, 1961, and A- 24631, Gated 11 June, 1963. STATE OF CALIFORNIA County of Orange Pubbc Nouce Adverbshhg coveted by this adldevlt Ia sal in ) polnl wllh 10 pica column v,ldlh 1 am a Citizen of the United States and a resident of the County aforesaid; I am over the age of eighteen years, and not a party to or interested in the below entitled matter. I am a principal clerk of the Orange Coast DAILY PILOT, with which is combined the NEWS - PRESS, a newspaper of general circulation, printed and published in the City of Costa Mesa, County of Orange, State of California, and that a Notice of Inviting bids CITY OF NF.WPORT REACH of which copy attached hereto is a true and complete copy, was printed and published in the Costa Mesa, Newport Beach, Huntington Beach, Fountain Valley, Irvine, the South Coast communities and Laguna Beach issues of said newspaper for one ftfAsl4R9$l4RAvRRhR76"rlCilfiH issue(yp of August 10 198 —_ 3 198____- 198— 198_ 198_ I declare, under penalty of perjury, that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on August 10 198— 3 at Costa Mesa, California. Signature ' PROOF OF PUBLICATION I + • gust 8, 1983 C —jki BY THE Cm COUNCIL CITY Of NEWpofa SE11CH ITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM NO. TO: CITY COUNCIL AUG 081983 FROM: Public Works Department SUBJECT: OASIS PARK G. GAND 5TH AVENUE STREET IMPROVEMENT BETWEEN JASMINE AND IRIS AVENU RECOMMENDATIONS: 1. Approve the plans and specifications. 2. Authorize the City Clerk to advertise for bids to be opened on August 31, 1983 at 11:00 A.M. DISCUSSION: On May 23, 1983, the Council certified the environmental document and re- affirmed its April 25, 1983 approval of Alternative 3B for the OASIS Park grading project. The final grading plans and specifications for Alternative 3B provide for (1) extending the 48 -inch diameter Jasmine Creek storm drain to the Newport -Mesa Unified School District property line, where a new inlet structure will be built; (2) constructing a 24 -inch diameter storm drain from the Jasmine Creek storm drain easterly along 5th Avenue; (3) grading stockpiled earth from City property north of 5th Avenue at Larkspur Avenue across Jasmine Creek to a maximum fill height of ap- proximately 12 feet; (4) grading along 5th Avenue between Jasmine and Larkspur Avenues to provide for a 32 -foot road width improvement; and (5) constructing a 12- foot -wide bike trail atop the Jasmine Creek fill to a maximum grade of 62 per- cent between Iris and Larkspur Avenues; all as shown on the attached sketch "Proposed Project Grading." Funds for OASIS Park Grading were appropriated in the FY 1982 -83 budget and carried over into the current budget. The grading has been combined with 5th Avenue street improvement between Jasmine and Iris Avenues into one construction contract. Funds for the street im- provement were appropriated in the FY 1983 -84 budget, providing for (1) extension of the 5th Avenue storm drain to The Irvine Company property line easterly of OASIS Senior Citizens Center, and (2) construction of 5th Avenue street improvements, all as shown on the attached sketch "Proposed 5th Avenue Street and Storm Drain Improve- ments." Plans and specifications for the work outlined above have been completed by consultant Jack P. Norris, R.C.E. The Engineer's estimate of construction cost is $330,000. Funds were also appropriated in the FY 1983 -84 budget to provide for de- sign and construction of landscaping upon the OASIS Park parcel. Such design is underway and will soon be completed so that landscaping may immediately follow com- pletion of the grading work. The grading should be completed by December 1, 1983. X Benjamin B. Nolan Public Works Director LRD:jd Att. i v��UJ �rvn�ea e CD co CL I � v n. O 1 r III r ill "' � �1 1 � •4 ' ) �A /]' Y" I � O O � ` vim• �''�' ... � * ✓� � �� � ♦ \ + - - Lo 3A15nv ^ slil JASMUIE AVE. 1 LARKSPUR AVE! II II C A _y y NAR6UER17E I $ �I y I 9.6 2 m m O mo y I y D Gy 41 � � O _z n L NARIGDLD AVE. m O $m 3� vOi I Z D rn v my C CA I Aom= I -4 3 < Iw II -+ 1 $ m Z D C Z m NARCISSUS AYE. F STO RM DRAW Pift l • \ 1 \ y 1 O n U m N IIx O T O X ----------- i I N j m r y I I rn °9 I I x f I I � AVEUUE 1 J I J M, 1 I rn I i o I I z L, c n, I i May 23, 1983 1 ; CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM NO. J —L • TO: CITY COUNCIL BY THE CITY COUNCIL CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH FROM: Public Works Department SUBJECT: RECONSIDERATION OF OASIS PARK GRADING (C -2316) MAY 23 1983 RECOMMENDATIONS: Q f?fytsuQ�l 1. Accept, approve and certify the Final EIR as indicated in Attachment A; 2. Make the findings contained in the Statement of Facts (Attachment A, Exhibit 1) with respect to significant impacts identified in the Final EIR; 3. Find that the facts set forth in the Statement of Overriding Considerations (Attachment A, Exhibit 2) are true and are supported by substantial evidence in the record, including • the Final EIR; 4. With respect to the project, find that although the Final EIR identifies certain unavoidable significant environmental + effects that will result if the project is approved, those mitigation measures identified in the Certified Final EIR shall be incorporated into the proposed project, and all sig- nificant environmental effects that can feasibly be mitigated or avoided have been eliminated or reduced to an acceptable level, and that the remaining unavoidable significant effects, when balanced against the facts set forth in said Statement of Overriding Considerations (Attachment A, Exhibit 2), giving greater weight to the unavoidable environmental effects, are acceptable; and 5. Approve grading concept Alternative 3B for final design of the project. DISCUSSION: This matter was previously before the City Council on April 25, 1983; • with the action taken as recommended on the attached copy of a memo to the Council bearing the same date. On May 9, 1983, the Council voted to reconsider the matter on the basis that Mr. Richard A. Nichols, and possibly others, had not been adequately notified. Attached for Council Members for reference and background information are the following documents: 1. Letter to City Council dated April 15, 1983 from Mr. Richard A. Nichols containing comments on the Oasis Park grading project. (This letter previously appeared on the April 25 Council agenda.) � A 11 • is • i May 23, 1983 Subject: Reconsideration of Oasis Park Grading (C -2316) Page 2 2. Memo from Parks, Beaches, and Recreation Director dated May 10, 1983 regarding the Oasis Park project. Memo to City Council (with attachments) dated April 25, 1983 regarding the Oasis Park project. Mr. Nichols has met with the staff and with other parties interested in the project on a number of occasions over the past several months. It ap- pears from those meetings, and from the comments in his letter, that Mr. Nichols objects to the basic concepts involved; and desires a project significantly larger in scope than the current project. In order to implement the desires which Mr. Nichols has expressed, it would be necessary to revise the basic planning for the project as presently conceived by the City, to acquire land from the Newport Mesa School District and The Irvine Company, and to budget significantly more money. The recommended project is consistent with all prior planning done by the City for the facility; is consistent with the Council - approved budget for the project; is consistent with concept Alternative No. 3 approved by the Council on September 27, 1982; is consistent with concept approved by the Parks, Beaches, and Recreation Commission on September 7, 1982; and is con- sistent with the concept approved by the Bicycle Trails Citizens Advisory Committee. For the above reasons the staff feels was recommended on April 25. If it is desired the staff should be directed to halt all work o and a new planning process should be started. 4�;) ': - 4; 1, )ZV-4 Benjamin B. Nolan Public Works Director Att. for Council Members the project should proceed as instead to alter the concept, n implementation of the project .. 0 519 Iris (venue 1e Coruna is cD' ^2 >2 April i , City of Newport Beach ich, City Council /Planning Department £ APR 3300 W. Newport Boulevard 38 1983 ,1 Newport Beach, CA 92663 �Ry��F� Dear Mayor Hart and Council Members: Re: Comments on Oasis Park Grading EIS MEAN, We understand that an EIR is supposed to be a disinterested thin, party'zF evaluation of a� project according to given guidelines. This is prac- tically a staff written report extolling staff's point of view- and with only their input. Nowhere are we presented why the project is being undertaken except for the statement that funds are in the budget. We believe this project is being undertaken to install the storm drain along 5th Avenue so that develop- ment can proceed. As we recollect staff was to consider two alternatives Concept 3 and a second plan involving grading the surface to the level of Oasis parking lot. This has not been done. A picture of such a concept has been sketched in Figure 3A. The land being flat is useable for active park land in the future and play area im- mediately. It would allow moving the Youth Center down onto fill near the bicycle path on City property without loss of CYC parking (See attached - Figure 3). It would allow the sand playground to become part of the park rather than hidden from view. It would facilitate widening of 5th from Larkspur to Jasmine. It would discourage children from using the slopes toward the alley by returning them to 2 to 1 as originally planned. It is our belief that the project should not take place until the slope rights from the school board and the greenbelt dedication from Irvine is dedicated. With sufficient dedication and fill,a true recreation area with ball fields over the filled creek can be developed. The upper area can either be a green belt along the creek up to the dam or .a filled greenbelt area over the creek bed. . A 0 • u City Council/ Planning Dept. April 15, 1983 Page Two 0 We oppose the presently proposed plan. It is not a park. Secondly, the grades and compacted fill form a ready roadbed for a to be developed 5th Avenue from Sasmine to Iris. Thirdly, it leaves a large mound of dirt as exists presently which obstructs views along 5th Avenue. The flatter terrain blocks less views and provides a potentially useable park. We conclude with the statement that the staff proposal should not be built. It is 'bad for the community. The Irvine Co. proposed a creek de- velopment. We would prefer this to a greenbelt which is both unusable and unused. We believe the staff is being two -faced to say that. Harbor .View School although gated is available for recreation and then refuse to repair the Youth Center since they cannot depend on land use of the school portion of Grant Howald Park in the future. It seems funny how plenty of money is available for making a useless greenbelt but nothing is available to de- velop a useful park or buy minimal growth acreage around Oasis. Wouldn't it be great if the School Board, Irvine and PB &R got together and developed something useful. If not,let's leave the area as it is. Very truly yours, Richard A. Nichols i \00 X. /- a ca UL ......... ........ Jr N a JAV 'r . y • � '��, '11Ur� y'•' -'''' � , il��'. 1' .f -'us umsn II CIS _ 1 .r =^.�.► . '� � '- � � �� iii , t � • i i ` • ,ti r, I E0 dQ.� ,1, ti . us sw C • • J-e i CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH Parks, Beaches & Recreation Department DATE: May 10, 1983 TO: Benjamin B. Nolan, Public Works Director FROM: Parks, Beaches & Recreation Director SUBJECT: OASIS PARK PROJECT In accordance with our recent discussion on the referenced subject, listed below are comments relative to this Department's position on the park concept. 1. The OASIS passive park area is intended to provide an access link between the OASIS Senior Center and the Community Youth Center, The improved access, both pedestrian and bicycle, will allow participants of both facilities a con- venient and safe way to reach their destination. 2. Because of the narrow configuration of the parcel, an active relatively flat athletic area was not considered on the City - owned property. 3. Our assessment of the need for additional soccer fields has not determined that playing fields should be considered for this area. The American Youth Soccer Association has used Irvine Terrace Park, Buffalo Hills Park and Lincoln School for their games and practices. In addition, the Community Youth Center is currently used as a practice site. With the addition of San Miguel Park, which will have a multi- purpose athletic field, in our opinion sufficient playing sites are available for Corona del Mar residents to accom- modate existing programs. If further comments or additional data is needed to assist in implementing this project, please feel free to give me a call. /rJR , �� i ., `i # 0 April 25, 1983 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM NO. I -1 . TO:. CITY COUNCIL FROM: Public Works Department and Parks, Beaches and Recreation Department SUBJECT: OASIS PARK GRADING (C -2316) RECOMMENDATIONS: 1. Accept, approve and certify the Final EIR as indicated in Attachment A; . 2. Make the findings contained in the Statement of Facts (Attach- ment A, Exhibit 1) with respect to significant impacts identi- fied in the Final EIR: 3. Find that the facts set forth in'the Statement of Overriding Considerations (Attachment A, Exhibit 2) are true and are supported by substantial evidence in the record, including • the Final EIR: 4. With respect to the project, find that although the Final EIR identifies certain unavoidable significant environmental effects that will result if the project is approved, those mitigation measures identified in the Certified Final EIR shall be incorporated into the proposed project, and all sig- nificant environmental effects that can feasibly be mitigated or avoided have been eliminated or reduced to an acceptable level, and that the remaining unavoidable significant effects, when balanced against the facts set forth in said Statement of Overriding Considerations (Attachment A, Exhibit 2), giving greater weight to the unavoidable environmental effects, are acceptable; 5. Approve grading concept Alternative 3B for final design of the project; and 6. Authorize the Mayor and the City Clerk to execute a professional services agreement with Jack P. Norris, RCE. • DISCUSSION: On September 27, 1982, the Council considered four grading concepts for this project. Following public comments, the Council then (1) approved grading concept Alternative No. 3, (2) directed staff to proceed with an • • • Page 2 Subj: OASIS PARK GRADING (C -2316) April 25, 1983 environmental assessment and to report back ment of engineering, and (3) directed staf f assessment an additional alternative which within the City's OASIS Park site. to Council prior to commence - to include in the environmental utilizes a maximum volume of fill Subsequent to the September 27 Council meeting, staff prepared data for the additional alternative (known as Alternative No. 3A) and retained Culbertson, Adams and Associates of Mission Viejo to prepare the environ- mental assessment. In January of 1983 staff developed another alternative (known as Alternative No. 3B) resulting from a petition, and from a recommendation of the Traffic Affairs Committee. The petition, referred by Council to the Traffic Affairs Committee on August 9, 1982, requested a change in traffic circulation along 5th Avenue between Jasmine and Larkspur Avenues to mitigate a potentially very dangerous (traffic circulation) situation." The Traffic Affairs Committee's recommendation was that (1) Fifth Avenue between Jasmine and Larkspur Avenues should be widened to 32 feet in conjunction with the OASIS Park site grading, and (2) Fifth Avenue between Jasmine and Larkspur Avenues should be made one -way until the roadway can be widened. The Council's January 24, 1983, unanimous motion directed that "one lane road" caution signs be posted along 5th Avenue. Alternative No. 3B provides for the same park site improvements as the Council- approved grading Alternative No. 3, except that 5th Avenue is also graded to allow for a future 32 -foot street improvement to provide for two - way traffic flow between Jasmine and Larkspur Avenues. See attached Exhibit "Proposed Fifth Avenue Street and Storm Drain Improvements." Funding for such street improvements, and for storm drain and street improvements on the north side of 5th Avenue between Jasmine and Narcissus Avenues, has been requested in the Fiscal Year 1983 -84 budget. (Note: The City owns all property along the north side of 5th Avenue between Goldenrod and Narcissus Avenues.) An environmental assessment titled "OASIS Park Grading Environmental Impact Report," has been completed and is included in Council packets. "Notices of Completion" have been forwarded from the Planning Department to interested parties, including all residents and property owners within 300 feet of the park site. A 30 -day public review period ended on April 14. Copies of re- sponses to the review are attached hereto. If park site grading is to be performed this year, engineering must proceed at once so that storm drain construction may be completed prior to next winter's storm season. Accordingly, staff has obtained a proposal from Jack P. Norris, RCE, to provide the following professional services for Page 3 Subj: OASIS PARK &DING (C -2316) • April 25, 1983 the project for compensation shown in parentheses: 1. Soils investigation under the supervision of a geotechnical • engineer working for Moore & Taber, Inc., including at least two test borings, testing, analysis and a written report ($3,080); 2. Detailed construction plans, specifications and Engineer's Esti- mate (PS & E) for the Jasmine Creek storm drain extension and inlet; the 5th Avenue storm drain lateral; the park parcel grading and contouring; and the bike trail construction ($9,500); 3. Topographical survey to augment previous survey as needed for the completion of item 2 above ($900); 4. Detailed construction PS & E for the 5th Avenue grading ($3,000); 5. Topographical survey to augment previous survey as needed for the completion of item 4 above ($500); 6. Coordinate items 1 and 2 with the Building Department to assure conformance with the City's grading ordinance (NC); 7. Detailed construction PS & E for extending the 5th Avenue storm drain later and the 5th Avenue street improvements (north side) to Narcissus Avenue ($6,000); and B. Topographical survey to augment previous survey as needed for the • completion of item 7 above ($1,1'00). Compensation would be in accordance with Norris' hourly fee sched- ule (attached) with a total fee for services specified above not to exceed $24,080. In addition, a $2,500 allowance for additional professional services, such as those staff deems necessary due to conditions discovered during con- tract preparation or construction, will be provided for in the contract. Ade- quate funds are budgeted in Account No. 02- 3497 -252 to compensate the consultant. The contract documents are to be completed on or before July 8, 1983. Barring unforeseen delay, work could commence on or about August 15, 1983, and be completed circa November 15, 1983. Ben,7amin B. Nolan Ronald A. Whitley Public Works Director Parks, Beaches & Recreation Director LRD: jd Att.: 1. Sketch: "Proposed Fifth Avenue Street and Storm Drain Improvements" 2. Attachment "A" - Actions & Findings • Exhibit 1 - Statement of Facts Exhibit 2 - Statement of Overriding Considerations 3. Attachment No. 1 to the Draft EIR 4, Draft EIR (in pocket) 5. Fee Schedule F• C 0 Ll I� N ,V-' I I I o i � :3 LI 1 — ----� I i W— Z Y I O z ---1 •im 010%wu r iL 1- �1 I S= I I W s` IlL IF!nnlAV i11y:M1nX ` " r----------- i 'o-000OO/ I o t+Sa Mina tpi fMMt 'il'11 \ ATTACHMENT "A" ACTIONS & FINDINGS A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT 1. Accepting and approving the Environmental Document with the following findings: a. The City of Newport Beach has prepared a Final Environmental Impact Report consisting of those items indicated below: 1. Draft EIR 2. Attachment No. 1 to the Draft FIR 3. Minutes of the City Council meetings of April 25, 1983 4. All correspondence and information received prior to the certification of this EIR and not included in 1 through 3 above. b. The City Council of Newport Beach accepts and approves the Final EIR and certifies that the Final FIR has been California Environmental Quality Act (hereinafter referred to as "CEQA ") and the State EIR Guidelines (hereinafter referred • to as "Guidelines ") and fully complies with, and satisfies, all of the requirements of CEQA and the Guidelines. c. The City Council of Newport Beach certifies that it has reviewed and considered the information contained in the Final EIR in conjunction with the decision and approval associated with this project. d. That in order to reduce adverse impacts of the proposed project, all feasible mitigation measures discussed in the environmental document have been incorporated into the proposed project. Specific economic, social or other consideration make infeasible any other potential mitigation measures or alternative to the proposed project. e. The the mitigation measures to be incorporated into the proposed project are contained in the Draft F.IR. B. STATEMENT OF FACTS i 1. Make the Findings, contained in the Statement of Facts (Exhibit 11, with respect to significant impacts identified in the Final EIR. C. STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS 1. Find that the facts set forth in the Statement of Overriding 1 Consideration (Exhibit 2) are true and are supported by substantial evidence in the record, including the Final EIR. i D. PROJECT FINDING 1. With respect to the project, find that although the Final EIR • identifies certain unavoidable significant environmental effects that will result if the project is approved, those mitigation measures identified in the Draft EIR shall be incorporated into the proposed project, and all significant environmental effects that can feasibly be mitigated or avoided have been eliminated or reduced to an acceptable level, and that the remaining unavoidable significant effects, when balanced against the facts set forth in said Statement of Overriding Considerations (Attachment 2), giving greater weight to the unavoidable environmental effects, are acceptable. E. PROJECT ACTION 1. Authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute a professional services agreement with Jack P. Norris, RCE. • 7 • EXHIBIT 1 • r� u u STATEMENT OF FACTS April 25, 1983 SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS WHICH CANNOT BE AVOIDED IF THE PROPOSAL, IS IMPLEMENTED, FINDINGS WITH RESPECT TO IMPACTS, AND STATEMENT OF FACTS IN SUPPORT THEREOF, ALL WITH RESPECT TO THE PROPOSED IMPLEMENTATION OF THE OASIS PARK GRADING PROJECT IN NEWPORT BEACH. BACKGROUND The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the State CEQA Guidelines (Guidelines) promulgated pursuant thereto provide: "No public agency shall approve or carry out a project for which an environmental impact report has been completed and which identifies one or more significant effects of the project unless the public agency makes one or more of the following written findings for each of the significant effects, accompanied by a statement of the facts supporting each finding ". (Section 15088 of the Guidelines) The City of Newport Beach has proposed the implementation of a grading project for the Oasis Park. ;Because this constitutes a project under CFQA and the Guidelines, the City of Newport Beach has prepared an Environmental Impact Report (EIR). This EIR has identified certain significant effects that will flow from this project and should the City Council desire to approve this project, after determining that the EIR is complete and has been prepared in accordance with CEQA and the Guidelines, the findings set forth herein should be made. BIOLOGY • • IMPACTS 1. Significant riparian vegetation will be removed from the site. a) Specific economic, social and other considerations make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the final EIR. b) The significant effect which remains will be substantially lessened through the incorporation of mitigation measures into the construction phase of the project, and the remaining effect is, when balanced against the facts set forth in the Statement of Overriding Considerations, and giving greater weight to the significant effects, acceptable. FACTS IN SUPPORT OF FINDINGS a) The project will provide increased habitat a different nature. • b) The project is consistent with the General Plan and policies of the City of Newport Beach. c) The project will comply with all conditions of approval required under project permits. d) The project will link two areas of the community with appropriate pedestrian and bicycle paths. e) The project may decrease crime related problems in the area by making the area more visible. f) The project will provide increased recreational opportunities to the community. g) The project will provide reasonable grades for utilization of the area and pedestrian circulation by members of Oasis. h) The project will provide appropriate measures to revegetate the area. .7 AESTHETICS • IMPACT 1. Views from adjacent residences will be altered. • a) Specific economic, social and other considerations make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the final EIR. b) The significant effect which remains will be substantially lessened through the incorporation of mitigation measures into the construction phase of the project, and the remaining effect is, when balanced against the facts set forth in the Statement of Overriding Considerations, and giving greater weight to the significant effects, acceptable. FACTS IN SUPPORT OF FINDINGS - a) The existing area has a man -made structure and the view presented is not icurrently that of a pristine natural environment. • b) The project is consistent with the General Plan and policies of the City of Newport Beach. c) The project will comply with all conditions of approval required under project permits. d) The project will link two areas of the community with appropriate pedestrian and bicycle paths. e) The project may decrease crime related problems in the area by making the area more visible. f) The project will provide increased recreational opportunities to the community. q) The project will provide reasonable grades for utilization of the area and pedestrian circulation by members of Oasis. h) The project will provide appropriate measures to revegetate the area. • (O • EXHIBIT 2 STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS • 1. The alternatives to the proposed project described in the Final EIR, with • the exception of the "No Project" alternative, would not avoid the unavoidable environmental effects of the proposed project. 2. The project will tie the community through enhanced pedestrian and bicycle circulation. 3. The proposed project does not preclude the retention of remainder of the drainage area in its existing state. 4. The proposed project will increase passive recreational opportunities within the area. 5. The proposed project will create an attractive addition to the existing park facility. 6. The proposed project will eliminate a potentially dangerous area due to lack of adequate present ability to observe the area. 7. The proposed project will not preclude the expansion of the area into an active recreation area if this is deem appropriate at a latter date. • • • • 0 Attachment. No. 1 to the DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT prepared by CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING DEPARTMENT PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT 3300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, CA 92663 (714) 640 -2197 and Culbertson, Adams and Associates, Inc. 27072 E1 Retiro Mission Viejo, CA 92692 (714) 643 -1622 April 15, 1983 12. • • TABLE OF CONTENTS I • PUBLIC PARTICIPATION 1 - 3 i COMMENTS ON THE DRAFT EIR. 1 - 21 ISSUES, QUESTIONS, COMMENTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 - 53 • • ►3 • • C7 PUBLIC PARTICIPATION C I{{ d DATE March 8, 1983 • NOTICE OF COMPLETION i TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN FROM: CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING DEPARTMENT P.O. BOX 1768 3300 W. Newport Blvd. Newport Beach, CA 92663 -3884 DATE: March 7, 1983 PROJECT OASIS PARK GRADING TITLE: PROJECT LOCATION - SPECIFIC: North of 5th Avenue, Iris Avenue to Larkspur Avenue, Corona del Mar PROJECT LOCATION.- PROJECT LOCATION - CITY: Newport Beach COUNTY: Orange DESCRIPTION OF NATURE, PURPOSE AND BENEFICIARIES OF PROJECT: Extend Jasmine Creek Storm Drain 125 feet and construct new headworks; construct 375 lin. ft. of storm drain along 5th Avenue between Jasmine Creek and Larkspur Avenue; grade across Jasmine Gully with onsite stockpiled earth; construct sidewalk bike trail between Iris and Larkspur Avenues; remove excess stockpiled earth from site; and droseed. Disruption of riparian habitat; and earthwork. The City of Newport Beach is the Lead Agency for this project. A copy of the Draft Environmental Impact Report: Qis attached for your review ❑ is available for review at the Planning Department 3300 I-lest Newport Blvd. Newport Beach, CA 92663 -3884 REVIEW PERIOD: 30 DAYS ENDING ON: April 14, 1983 Fhaft EIR Environmental. ZONTACT PERSON: Fred Talarico TITLE: Coordination PROJECT CONTACT: Lloyd Dalton, Design Engineer (714) 640 -2281 PHONE: (714)640 -2197 fit' DATE March 8, 1983 NOTICE OF COMPLETION • 4 TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: FROM: CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING DEPARTMENT P.O. BOX 1768 3300 W. Newport Blvd. Newport Beach, CA 92663 -3884 DATE: March 8, 1983 PROJECT TITLE: OASIS PARK GRADING PROJECT LOCATION - SPECIFIC: North of 5th Ave., Iris Ave. to Larkspur Ave., Corona del Mar PROJECT LOCATION.- PROJECT LOCATION - CITY: Newport Beach COUNTY: Orange DESCRIPTION OF NATURE, PURPOSE AND BENEFICIARIES OF PROJECT: w. Extend Jasmine Creek Storm Drain 125 feet & construct new headworks; construct 375 lin. ft. of storm drain along 5th Avenue between Jasmine Creek & Larkspur Avenue; grade across Jasmine Gully with onsite stockpiled earth; construct sidewalk bike trail between Iris and Larkspur Avenues; remove excess stockpiled earth from site; nd hydroseed. Disruption of riparian habitat; and earthwork. The City of Newport Beach is the Lead Agency for this project. A copy of the Draft Environmental Impact Report: ❑ is attached for your review ® is available for review at the Planning Department 3300 West Newport Blvd. Newport Beach, CA 92663 -3884 REVIEW PERIOD: 30 DAYS ENDING ON: April 14, 1983 FT EIR CONTACT PERSON: Fred Talarico TITLE: Environmental CoordinatorPHONE: (715) 640 -2197 PROJECT CONTACT: Lloyd Dalton, Design Engineer (714) 640 -2281 SPON - c/o Jean Watt 4 Harbor Island Drive Newport Beach, CA 92660 ' fb Resident 700 Heliotrope Ave. Corona del Mar, CA 92625 League of Women Voters, O.C. Resident tcIitf-flF"L' One /J4 ,,{, , 704 Heliotrope Ave. ! ort Beach, CA 92660 sh,r- i Corona del Mar, CA 92625 C� KY Audubon Society -Sea & Sage Cp; CA Resident P. 0. Box 1 706 Heliotrope Ave. Santa Ana, CA 92702 Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Sierra CyNb - Orange Cty.Grp. P. 0. Be,11033 Garderp ve, CA 92642 Friends of Irvine Coast P. 0. Box 714 Corona del Mar, CA 92625 on News Group ZT11 East Coast Hwy. Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Steve Marvel - Daily Pilot P. 0. Box 1560 Costa Mesa, CA 92626 Newport -Mesa Unfd Sch. Dist. 1857 Placentia Avenue Costa Mesa, CA 92627 So. Calif. Gas Co. Attn: W. R. Perkins P. 0. Box 3334 �eim, CA 92803 So. Calif. Edison Co. Attn: W. E. Guffey 7333 Bolsa Ave. Westminster, CA 92683 aEgn a ho. hood Control 4 n9 r, runner Sao Civic Cntr. Dr. Ana, CA 92702 Resident 707 Iris Ave. Corona del Mar, CA 92626 Resident 702 Heliotrope Ave. Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Resident 711 Iris Ave. Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Frank Simon 701 Iris Ave. Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Fred Sotomayer 700; Heliotrope Ave. Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Harvey R. Paeden 703 Iris Ave. Corona del Mar, CA 92625 0 Ross E. Mol'4i 3411 E bast Hwy Corgp el Mar, CA 92625 Thomas J. Viola 980 Hampton Rd. Arcadia, CA 91006 Georgia H. Hovis 709 Iris Ave. Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Harlan W. Hoyt 708 Heliotrope Ave. Corona del Mar, CA 92625 �w Michae [liigillo 1811 �1�y Ave. NewpVq each, CA 92663 Robert G. Monger 710 Heliotrope Ave. Corona del Mar, CA 92625 James M. Melbon 1807 Port Abbey P1. Newport Beach, CA 92660 Resident 715 Iris Ave. Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Resident 717 Iris Ave. Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Resident Gi- l 716 Heliotrope Ave. 1617 -E - $a}bea &}vd. '��'y Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Baiboa;- �fF--- g2yfsl , "` 'Mister Resident venue Mar, CA 92625 718 Heliotro a Av . Corona del Mar, CX 92625 Resident 701 Jasmine Ave. 17 Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Resident 00 Iris Ave. rona del Mar, CA 92625 Resident 703 Jasmine Ave. Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Resident 702 Jasmine Ave. Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Resident 705 Jasmine Ave. Corona del Mar, CA 92625 �nis Stieber 2 Heliotrope Ave. Corona del Mar, CA 92625 i Ronald 141 . 1 rl ;r •`' 13134 Wwood Housta, Tex. 77079 Donald LeFever 715 Heliotrope Ave. Corona del Mar, CA 92625 James Allen 522 E1 Modena Ave. Newport Beach, CA 92663 • Weir G. Smith P. 0. Box 67 Stratford, CA 93266 lIri� a Svh orona ar, CA 92625 Carlton J. Smith 23811 Via Fabricante Mission Viejo, CA 92691 John A. Allard P. 0. Box 134 Corona del Mar, CA 92625 E. W. Robinson' 30631 Marilyn Dr. South Laguna, CA 92677 John Bellamy 144 Jasmine Creek Dr. Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Douglas B. Bynon 12 Hidalgo Irvine, CA 92625 Resident 708 Jasmine Ave. Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Resident 715 Jasmine Ave. Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Resident 714 Iris Ave. Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Resident 717 Jasmine Ave. Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Resident 719 Jasmine Ave. Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Ramona R. Host 704 -A Iris Ave. Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Mabel McKay 707 Jasmine Ave. Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Jeffrey Cunningham 706 -A Iris Ave. Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Wayne J. Laurent P. 0. Box 67836 Los Angeles, CA 90067 Lawrence A. Jordan 711 JasmineAve. Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Ann Lessig Corzine 710 Iris Ave. Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Dennis E. Casino 713 Jasmine Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Wallace W.lerhead 712 Iris' CoronrYel Mar, CA 92625 Ione Wade 484 Del Rosa Dr. Pasadena, CA 92625 Robert J. Sunderland 3601 Seabreeze Lane Corona Del Mar, CA 92625 Jerome P. Tripoli P. 0. Box 192 Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Patricia Z. Hicks A r. Corona� �e %r, CA 92625 Roger G. Byron 13422-Newport Ave. Tustin, CA 92680 18 Resident 718 Iris Ave. bona del Mar, CA 92625 Resident 720 Iris Ave. Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Resident 701 Larkspur Ave. Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Resident 700 Jasmine Avenue Corona del Mar, CA 92625 ident Larkspur Ave. rona del Mar, CA 92625 Resident 705 Larkspur Avenue Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Resident 704 Jasmine Ave. Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Resident 709 Larkspur Ave. Corona del Mar, CA 92625 4 ' M. Jarvis v%�: L q7 St. Tropez .91 Newport Beach, C 92660 , Elizabeth A. Trotter 721 Jasmine Ave. Corona del Mar, CA 92625 David Lenton 23 Encore Crt. Newport Beach, CA Martin A. Melanson 224 Iris Ave. Corona del Mar, CA Helen E. Weiss. 700 Jasmine Ave. Corona del Mar, CA 92663 92625 92625 1 Stanley Winter 1 ' 18172 Mayapple y Irvine, CA 9% Margaret R. Armstrong 702 Jasmine Ave. Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Doris M. Sullivan 8409 Citadel Way Sacramento, CA 95825 Gerard P. Tardie 26 Lakeside Irvine, CA 92714 Olga B. Jeffrey 707 Larkspur Corona del Mar, CA Richard Huffman 708 Jasmine Ave. Corona del Mar, CA Triona B. Campagna 514 Fernleaf Ave. Corona del Mar, CA Resident 712 Jasmine Ave. Corona del Mar, CA 92,625 92625 92625 92626 i I i Resident 717 Larkspur Ave. Corona del Mar, CA Resident 716 Jasmine Ave. Corona del Mar, CA Resident 720 Jasmine Ave. Corona del Mar, CA Jerry Taylor 711 Larkspur Ave. Corona del Mar, CA 92625 92625 92625 92625 Arvo E. Haapa 710 Jasmine Ave. Corona del Mar, CA 92625 qeeL Larkspur gqqq��}}b`1ssociates 713 Larks'p Ave. Corona, el` Mar, CA 92625 George B. Farrell P. 0. Box 282 Corona del Mar, CA William F. Agee 715 Larkspur Ave. Corona del Mar, CA Marguerite Dalziel 714 Jasmine Ave. Corona del Mar, CA Hugo Di Lonardo 9532 via Salerno Burbank, CA 92625 92625 92625 92625 Richard C. Hunsaker 3512 Ocean Blvd. Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Charles Newton Robert Searles 719 Larkspur Avenue Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Chase 0. Sanderson 718 Jasmine Ave. Dona del Mar, CA 92625 John D. Allen 721 Larkspur Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Kr4 rh Lee C PGA 2cL Johanna - Ventre 7.20; Jasmine— Avenue n10 ^As Corona del Mar, CA. 92625 Resident 705 Marerite Avenue Corona, Mar, CA ident Larkspur Avenue orona del Mar, CA 92625 Resident 709 Marguerite Ave. Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Resident 708 Larkspur Avenue Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Resident 711 Marguerite Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Oident 710 Larkspur Ave. Corona del Mar, CA 92625 • ; Carl Ziegler 701 Marguerite Ave. Corona del Mar, CA 92625 700 Larkspur Ave, Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Willis E. Nielsen 707 Marguerite Ave. Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Alice J. Chambers P. 0. Box 306 Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Peter G. Leider 704 Larkspur Ave. Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Calvin P. Pierce 706 Larkspur Ave. Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Lawrence V. Harison 2515 E. Coast Hwy Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Stephen F. Piper 2524 Ocean Blvd. Corona del Mar, CA 92625 I. Moreno 2613 Via Olivera Palos Verdes Estates, CA 90274 John A. Allard 2515 E. Coast Hwy Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Gerhard N. Rostvold P. 0. Box 188 Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Resident 715 Marguerite Ave. Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Resident 717 Marguerite Ave. Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Resident 716 Larkspur Ave. Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Richard P. Succa 715P2 Marguerite Ave. Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Charles Solari Maurine Wilson 714 Larkspur Ave. Corona del Mar, CA 92625 W. Moseley P. 0. Box 312 Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Helen C. Long 1561 Mesa Dr. # 32 Santa Ana, CA 92625 Frank A. Williams 719 Marguerite Ave. Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Joseph Gallo 718 Larkspur Ave. Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Resident Gerald Obert John H. Marshall Coronarde�u�larVeCA 92625 713 Marguerite Ave. 721 Marguerite Ave. Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Robert G. Wolff 720 Larkspur Ave. Corona del Mar, CA 92625 ao Corona del Mar. Com. Assoc Mr. Richard Nichols, Pres. Box 516 na del Mar, CA 92625 The Irvine Co. 550 Newport Center Dr. Newport Beach, CA 92660 Leslie B. Jones 2021 Business Center Dr., Ste 112 Irvine, CA 92715 THE FOLLOWING WERLANT DEIR: Dept. of Water Resources Attn: Ken Fellows 1416 Ninth Street Sacramento, CA 95814 U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Attn: Jack Fancher 24000 Avila Road Laguna Niguel, CA 92677 Dept of Conservation Attn: Rick Mevis, Env. Cons Program Coordinator 1416 Ninth Street, Room 1354 Sacramento, CA 95814 Dept. of Fish & Game Fred A. Worthley, Jr.,Reg.Mgr. 350 Golden Shore Long Beach, CA 90802 • U.S. Army Corps of Engrs Environmental Resources Attn: Sid Levenson P.O. Box 2711 Los Angeles, CA 90053 Cal. Regional Water Quality Control Board Attn: Gordon Anderson 6809 Indiana Avenue Riverside, CA 92506 Diane Dixon State Clearinghouse 2888 Bayshore Drive, Apt. C Office of Planning & Research Newport Beach, CA 92663 1400 Tenth St., Room 250 Sacramento, CA 95814 Ron Covington 707 Orchid Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Janice De Bay 5107 Seashore Drive Newport Beach, CA 92663 Mary Lou Zoglin 10 Surfside Court Newport Beach, CA 92663 Brion Jeannette 470 Old Newport Blvd. Newport Beach, CA 92663 Buzz Person 201 Shipyard Way Newport Beach, CA 92663 Bobby Lovell 1242 W. Ocean Front Newport Beach, CA 92661 Robert Moody 5507 Seashore Drive Newport Beach, CA 92663 Terry Smith State Water Resources Control Bd. Jim Turner 324 Alverado Place Attn: John Huddleson,Region lib 435 Irvine Ave. Balboa, CA 92661 1416 Ninth Street Newport Beach, CA 92663 Sacramento, CA 95814 Sard Pegg Corona del Mar Community Assoc. Chriss Street 2633 Bamboo Street Mr. Richard Nichols, President 619 Heliotrope Newport Beach, CA 92660 P.O. Box 516 Corona del Mar. Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Liaison: Tom Thomson Barbara Cope P.O. Box 5100 Council Members Jackie Heather Balboa Island, CA 92625 16 Kia Loa Court Newport Beach, CA 92663 & Donald Strauss 0 COMMENTS ON THE DRAFT EIR • • :9a • • • �i SEW PORT • • CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH V = P.O. BOX 1768, NEWPORT BEACH. CA 92663 -3884 CITIZENS ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ADVISORY COMMITTEE April 7, 1983 Newport Beach City Council 3300 West Newport Blvd. P.O. BOX 1768 Newport Beach, CA 92663 -3884 SUBJECT: Draft EIR 'basis Park Grading Project" Honorable Mayor and Council: The Citizens Environmental Quality Advisory Committee at its meeting of April 5, 1983 reviewed this letter on the above subject Draft EIR and the Oasis Park Grading Project. The Committee offers the following comments for the Councils consideration in its review of this project. A. Comments on the Project It appears that there is considerable local concern over this project and the use of this site. The project as presented appears appropriate. B. Comments on the Draft EIR It is the opinion of the Committee that the Draft EIR does not adequately address the following: 1. The alternatives need to be expanded in their depth of analysis. 2. The report should more closely explain the relationship of actions on this site, the School District Property and Irvine Company Properties. 3. The report is also not clear as to the extent or nature of any flood control problems in the project area. Respectfully submitted, CITIZENS ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ADVISORY COMMITTEE By ! Ll .l nice e De Bay , hairma X300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach JDB:FT:tn a 3 TO: FRID TALARICO SUBJECT: EVALUATION OF OASIS PARK GRADING EIR • DATE: K%RCH 28, 1983 The SubcamLiteee respectfully submits the following camments on the oasis Park Grading EIR. 1. Description of the proposed project under II.A., page 2 -1 describes the effort as a budgeted storm drain project. 2. If, as it appears, intent of the EIR is for a storm drain project, why is the work addressed as a park? Why not simply address it as a storm drain project? 3. Is proposed grading intended to be sufficient to provide for extension, as well as widening, of 5th Avenue? 4. Items V. Cumulative Impacts, page 5 -1 and VI. Growth Inducing Imoacts, gage 6 -1, indicate that if proposed project is adopted, it will likely be impossible to retain the remainder of Jasmine Creek. In that context we question whether the proposed park will create or provide more • S. recreation possibilities than the existing site in its natural state. Insufficiently presented was an alternative which could have explored a project between the Irvine Company, School District and the City, all landowners adjacent to oasis Park. Haw does this project tie in with development of adjacent properties? 6. The subcamittee raised questions with the entire EIR in this regard - whether enough information has been offered to provide a clear, compre- hensive view of subject site in relation to adjacent sites. • 7. EIR insufficiently explores alternatives. Additional alternatives such as 3A, which could have made a more complete and comprehensive recrea- tional facility, were not adequately addressed. 8. Referring to Environmental Checklist Form, Item 19, Recreation, this Subcmmittee suggests that existing recreation opportunities might be better than proposed project. 9. Is there a flood problem? Will future development above the site worsen the problem? Respectfully submitted, A c2 ` • • ISSUES /QUESTIONS /COMMENTS 1 • • CEQAC - Letter of April 7, 1983 0 Comment 2: The report should more closely explain the relationship of actions on this site, the School District Property and Irvine Company Properties. (CEQAC) Response 2: Relationships between this project and adjacent landholdings are discussed in the Draft EIR. The property immediately to the north has been the subject of a general plan amendment request for the past two years. Any actions taken on this project will • not preclude any action on that request. There are no known proposals for the adjacent NMUSO properties to the north and west. The remaining public projects are as outlined in the Draft EIR, staff reports to the City Council on this project and described in the preliminary budget. Comment 3: The report is also not clear as to the extent or nature of any flood control problems in the project area. Response 3: The proposed project will not create any flood control problems within the area. The addition of curb, gutter, sidewalk and other proposed public improvement to Fifth Avenue from the project site to Marguerite Avenue will lessen or eliminate flood control problems that currently exist within this area. - Memo of March 28, 1983 • Comment 1: Description of the proposed project under II.A., Page 2 -1 describes the effort as a budgeted storm drain project. Response 1: The proposed project is budgeted as a storm drain project. Additional funds have been requested in the preliminary fiscal year 83/84 budget for the PB &R Department to take the project from rough grade to finished product. Comment 1: The alternatives need to be expanded in their depth of analysis. (CEQAC) Response 1: The proposed project is discussed in the Draft EIR. The Draft EIR describes all reasonable alternatives to the project which could feasibly attain the basic objectives of the project and why they were rejected in favor of the project. The concern of the CEQAC with the level of discussion may not be warranted. The City of Newport Beach GPA 81 -2 request of the Irvine Co. related to parcels within the area has been /will be in the near future tabled (based on straw votes of April 11, 1983). The project does not preclude any options dealing with adjacent properties. Comment 2: The report should more closely explain the relationship of actions on this site, the School District Property and Irvine Company Properties. (CEQAC) Response 2: Relationships between this project and adjacent landholdings are discussed in the Draft EIR. The property immediately to the north has been the subject of a general plan amendment request for the past two years. Any actions taken on this project will • not preclude any action on that request. There are no known proposals for the adjacent NMUSO properties to the north and west. The remaining public projects are as outlined in the Draft EIR, staff reports to the City Council on this project and described in the preliminary budget. Comment 3: The report is also not clear as to the extent or nature of any flood control problems in the project area. Response 3: The proposed project will not create any flood control problems within the area. The addition of curb, gutter, sidewalk and other proposed public improvement to Fifth Avenue from the project site to Marguerite Avenue will lessen or eliminate flood control problems that currently exist within this area. - Memo of March 28, 1983 • Comment 1: Description of the proposed project under II.A., Page 2 -1 describes the effort as a budgeted storm drain project. Response 1: The proposed project is budgeted as a storm drain project. Additional funds have been requested in the preliminary fiscal year 83/84 budget for the PB &R Department to take the project from rough grade to finished product. • C Comment 2: If, as it appears, intent of the EIR is for a storm drain project, why is the work addressed as a park? Why not simply address it as a storm drain project? Response 2: The proposed project is budgeted as a storm drain project. Additional funds have been requested in the preli.minary fiscal year 83/84 budget for the PB &R Department to take the project from rough grade to finished product. Comment 3: Is proposed grading intended to be sufficient to provide for extension, as well as widening, of 5th Avenue? Response 3: The grading will provide for the extension of Fifth Avenue to Jasmine Avenue. The limit of this budgeted project will be the grading and retention necessary to provide for road extension. Comment 4: Items V. Cumulative Impacts, Page 5 -1 and VI. Growth Inducing Impacts, Page 6 -1, indicate that if proposed project is adopted, it will likely be impossible to retain the remainder of Jasmine Creek. In that context we question whether the proposed park will create or provide more recreation possibilities than the existing site in its natural state. Response 4: The Draft EIR notes that the retention of the remaining 1,1000 feet of Jasmine Creek in its existing state may prove infeasible. It should be noted that the proposed project does not preclude retention of the remaining area in its existing state. This could only be determined at such time as the adjoining property - owners (The Irvine Company and Newport /Mesa Unified School District) were to submit development plans for this area. The proposed project will create more recreational opportunities than exist on the site in its existing condition the opportunities will be passive in nature with the exception of the bicycle trail. The project does not preclude the transition of the area into a more active recreational area if that were to be determined feasible at a latter date. Comment 5: Insufficiently presented was an alternative which could have explored a project between the Irvine Company, School District and the city, all landowners adjacent to Oasis Park. How does this project tie in with development of adjacent properties? Response 5: The Draft EIR describes all alternatives to the project that could reasonably attain the basic objectives of the project. An alternative that include all property- owners with an ultimate design for their properties is not reasonable at present. Additionally the proposed project will not preclude any presently know alternative use or design for either adjacent property owner. Comment 6: The subcommittee raised questions with the entire EIR in this regard - whether enough information has been offered to provide a clear, comprehensive view of subject site in relation to adjacent sites. 7 • • Response 6: The Draft EIR discusses the site as to its location in the regional and local content. Adjacent properties are discussed in Draft EIR and in the preceding responses. The determination of • the sufficiency of information to make a judgement on this project is the responsibility of the ultimate decision- maker. Comment 7: EIR insufficiently explores alternatives. Additional alternatives such as 3A, which could have made a more complete and comprehensive recreational facility, were not adequately addressed. Response 7: The Draft EIR notes that the retention of the remaining 1,1000 feet of Jasmine Creek in its existing state may prove infeasible. It should be noted that the proposed project does not preclude retention of the remaining area in its existing state. This could only be determined at such time as the adjoining property- owners (The Irvine Company and Newport /Mesa Unified School District) were to submit development plans for this area. The proposed project will create more recreational opportunities than exist on the site in its existing condition the opportunities will be passive in nature with the exception of the bicycle trail. The project does not preclude the transition of the area into a more active recreational area if that were to be • determined feasible at a latter date. The Draft EIR describes all alternatives to the project that could reasonably attain the basic objectives of the project. An alternative that include all property- owners with an ultimate design for their properties is not reasonable at present. Additionally the proposed project will not preclude any presently know alternative use or design for either adjacent property owner. Comment 8: Referring to Environmental Checklist Form, Item 19, Recreation, this Subcommittee suggests that existing recreation opportunities might be better than proposed project.. Response 8: The opinion of the subcommittee is noted. Comment 9: Is there a flood problem? Will future development above the site worsen the problem? Response 9: The proposed project will not create any flood control problems within the area. The addition of curb, gutter, sidewalk and • other proposed public improvement to Fifth Avenue from the project site to Marguerite Avenue will lessen or eliminate flood control problems that currently exist within this area. FT :nma 4/15/83 0 JACK P. NORRIS, RCE Civil Engineering &Land Surveying 17662 IRVINE BLVD, SUITE 7, TUSTIN, CALIF. 92680 (71 4) 730 -6410 SCHEDULE OF STANDARD HOURLY RATES Periodic progress billings will be made for work completed, based upon percentage of completion. Registered Engineer $ 50.00 Licensed Land Surveyor 46.00 Designer and Supervisor 40.00 Draftsman and Technician 34.00 Clerical 20.00 Survey Crew (3 -man) 112.00 (2 -man) 90.00 (1 -man) 64.00 • The above fees will be escalated 6% on each August 1, beginning August 1, 1983, for any work uncompleted at that time through no fault of Engineer. Outside agency fees and reproductions are not included in above fees and will be billed at cost plus 10 %. Periodic progress billings will be made for work completed, based upon percentage of completion. 0 « -%% April 25, 1983 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM NO. I -1 TO:, CITY COUNCIL BY THE CITY COUNCIL FROM: public Works Department and Parks, Beaches and RecreaMrOF NEWPORT BEACH Department SUBJECT: OASTS PARK GRADING (C -2316) APR 2 51983 RECOMMENDATIONS: 1. Accept, approve and certify the Final EIR as indicated in Attachment A; 2. Make the findings contained in the Statement of Facts (Attach- ment A, Exhibit 1) with respect to significant impacts identi- fied in the Final EIR: 3. Find that the facts set forth in'the Statement of Overriding Considerations (Attachment A, Exhibit 2) are true and are supported, by substantial evidence in the record, including the Final EIR: 4. With respect to the project, find that although the Final EIR identifies certain unavoidable significant environmental effects that will result if the project is approved, those mitigation measures identified in the Certified Final EIR shall be incorporated into the proposed project, and all sig- nificant environmental effects that can feasibly be mitigated or avoided have been eliminated or reduced to an acceptable level, and that the remaining unavoidable significant effects, when balanced against the facts set forth in said Statement of Overriding Considerations (Attachment A, Exhibit 2), giving greater weight to the unavoidable environmental effects, are acceptable; 5. Approve grading concept Alternative 3B for final design of the project; and C _(;�3q Z 6. Authorize the Mayor and the City Clerk to execute a professional services agreement with Jack P. Norris, RCE. DISCUSSION: On September 27, 1982, the Council considered four grading concepts for this project. Following public comments, the Council then (1) approved grading concept Alternative No. 3, (2) directed staff to proceed with an r Page 2 Subj: OASIS PARK.GRADING (C -2316) April 25, 1983 environmental assessment and to report back ment of engineering, and (3) directed staf f assessment an additional alternative which within the City's OASIS Park site. E to Council prior to commence - to include in the environmental utilizes a maximum volume of fill Subsequent to the September 27 Council meeting, staff prepared data for the additional alternative (known as Alternative No. 3A) and retained Culbertson, Adams and Associates of Mission Viejo to prepare the environ- mental assessment. In January of 1983 staff developed another alternative (known as Alternative No. 3B) resulting from a petition, and from a recommendation of the Traffic Affairs Committee. The petition, referred by Council to the Traffic Affairs Committee on August 9, 1982, requested a change in traffic circulation along 5th Avenue between Jasmine and Larkspur Avenues to mitigate a potentially very dangerous (traffic circulation) situation." The Traffic Affairs Committee's recommendation was that (1) Fifth Avenue between Jasmine and Larkspur Avenues should be widened to 32 feet in conjunction with the OASIS Park site grading,,and (2) Fifth Avenue between Jasmine and Larkspur Avenues should be made one -way until the roadway can be widened. The Council's January 24, 1983, unanimous motion directed that "one lane road" caution signs be posted along 5th Avenue. Alternative No. 3B provides for the same park site improvements as the Council- approved grading Alternative No. 3, except that 5th Avenue is also graded to allow for a future 32 -foot street improvement to provide for two - way traffic flow between Jasmine and Larkspur Avenues. See attached Exhibit "Proposed Fifth Avenue Street and Storm Drain Improvements." Funding for such street improvements, and for storm drain and street improvements on the north side of 5th Avenue between Jasmine and Narcissus Avenues, has been requested in the Fiscal Year 1983 -84 budget. (Note: The City owns all property along the north side of 5th Avenue between Goldenrod and Narcissus Avenues.) An environmental assessment titled "OASIS Park Grading Environmental Impact Report," has been completed and is included in Council packets. "Notices of Completion" have been forwarded from the Planning Department to interested parties, including all residents and property owners within 300 feet of the park site. A 30 -day public review period ended on April 14. Copies of re- sponses to the review are attached hereto. If park site grading is to be performed this year, engineering must proceed at once so that storm drain construction may be completed prior to next winter's storm season. Accordingly, staff has obtained a proposal from Jack P. Norris, RCE, to provide the following professional services for Page 3 Subj: OASIS PARK DING (C -2316) April 25, 1983 the project for compensation shown in parentheses: 1. Soils investigation under the supervision of a geotechnical engineer working for Moore & Taber, Inc., including at least two test borings, testing, analysis and a written report ($3,080); 2. Detailed construction plans, specifications and Engineer's Esti- mate (PS & E) for the Jasmine Creek storm drain extension and inlet; the 5th Avenue storm drain lateral; the park parcel grading and contouring; and the bike trail construction ($9,500); 3. Topographical survey to augment previous survey as needed for the completion of item 2 above ($900); 4. Detailed construction PS & E for the 5th Avenue grading ($3,000); 5. Topographical survey to augment previous survey as needed for the completion of item 4 above ($500); 6. Coordinate items 1 and 2 with the Building Department to assure conformance with the City's grading ordinance (NC); 7. Detailed construction PS & E for extending the 5th Avenue storm drain later and the 5th Avenue street improvements (north side) to Narcissus Avenue ($6,000); and 8. Topographical survey.to augment previous survey as needed for the completion of item 7 above ($1,100). Compensation would be in accordance with Norris' hourly fee sched- ule (attached) with a total fee for services specified above not to exceed $24,080. In addition, a $2,500 allowance for additional professional services, such as those staff deems necessary due to conditions discovered during con- tract preparation or construction, will be provided for in the contract. Ade- quate funds are budgeted in Account No. 02- 3497 -252 to compensate the consultant. The contract documents are to be completed on or before July 8, 1983. Barring unforeseen delay, work could commence on or about August 15, 1983, and be completed circa November 15, 1983. a' r Benjamin B. Nolan Ronald A. Whitley Public Works Director Parks, Beaches & Recreation Director LRO:jd Att.: 1. Sketch: "Proposed Fifth Avenue Street and Storm Drain 2. Attachment "A" - Actions & Findings Exhibit 1 - Statement of Facts Exhibit 2 - Statement of Overriding Considerations 3. Attachment No. 1 to the Draft EIR 4. Draft EIR (in pocket) 5. Fee Schedule Improvements" I L� I I � I S F I OJ I I r it ' L N I II I yZF W I I i I I 11 11 f WV"SAr I W J 3 Y cc 44 IL + 0 + 1� Ii�ld MrW NYO1C 11iA� 7FMWt 'CI X3 .� cncsnarw W z � W y I = 1 H w I G I WW 0W- IL o� wig ILu) rp U ' '3M 01091will II ° N f I I x= all I 1 W u z L_= o uunn�tirll `> 'c > ZII I' I+ i I rl I' �w anmlari IN MNSVf s • • ATTACHMENT "A" ACTIONS & FINDINGS A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT 1. Accepting and approving the Environmental Document with the following findings: a. The City of Newport Beach has prepared a Final Environmental Impact Report consisting of those items indicated below: 1. Draft EIR 2. Attachment No. 1 to the Draft EIR 3. Minutes of the City Council meetings of April 25, 1983 4. All correspondence and information received prior to the certification of this EIR and not included in 1 through 3 above. b. The City Council of Newport Beach accepts and approves the Final EIR and certifies that the Final EIR has been California Environmental Quality Act (hereinafter referred to as "CEQA ") and the State EIR Guidelines (hereinafter referred to as "Guidelines ") and fully complies with, and satisfies, all of the requirements of CEQA and the Guidelines. c. The City Council of Newport Beach certifies that it has reviewed and considered the information contained in the Final EIR in conjunction with the decision and approval associated with this project. d. That in order to reduce adverse impacts of the proposed project, all feasible mitigation measures discussed in the environmental document have been incorporated into the proposed project. Specific economic, social or other consideration make infeasible any other potential mitigation measures or alternative to the proposed project. e. The the mitigation measures to be incorporated into the proposed project are contained in the Draft EIR. B. STATEMENT OF FACTS 1. Make the Findings, contained in the Statement of Facts (Exhibit 1) , with respect to significant impacts identified in the Final EIR. C. STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS 1. Find that the facts set forth in the Statement of Overriding Consideration (Exhibit 2) are true and are supported by substantial evidence in the record, including the Final EIR. 6 � � D. PROJECT FINDING 1. With respect to the project, find that although the Final EIR identifies certain unavoidable significant environmental effects that will result if the project is approved, those mitigation measures identified in the Draft EIR shall be incorporated into the proposed project, and all significant environmental effects that can feasibly be mitigated or avoided have been eliminated or reduced to an acceptable level, and that the remaining unavoidable significant effects, when balanced against the facts set forth in said Statement of Overriding Considerations (Attachment 2), giving greater weight to the unavoidable environmental effects, are acceptable. E. PROJECT ACTION 1. Authorize the mayor and City Clerk to execute a professional services agreement with Jack P. Norris, RCE. 7 • • EXHIBIT 1 STATEMENT OF FACTS April 25, 1983 SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS WHICH CANNOT BE AVOIDED IF THE PROPOSAL IS IMPLEMENTED, FINDINGS WITH RESPECT TO IMPACTS, AND STATEMENT OF FACTS IN SUPPORT THEREOF, ALL WITH RESPECT TO THE PROPOSED IMPLEMENTATION OF THE OASIS PARK GRADING PROJECT IN NEWPORT BEACH. BACKGROUND The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the State CEQA Guidelines (Guidelines) promulgated pursuant thereto provide: "No public agency shall approve or carry out a project for which an environmental impact report has been completed and which identifies one or more significant effects of the project unless the public agency makes one or more of the following written findings for each of the significant effects, accompanied by a statement of the facts supporting each finding ". (Section 15088 of the Guidelines) The City of Newport Beach has proposed the implementation of a grading project for the Oasis Park. Because this constitutes a project under CEQA and the Guidelines, the City of Newport Beach has prepared an Environmental Impact Report (EIR). This FIR has identified certain significant effects that will flow from this project and should the City Council desire to approve this project, after determining that the EIR is complete and has been prepared in accordance with CEQA and the Guidelines, the findings set forth herein should be made. BIOLOGY IMPACTS Y 1. Significant riparian vegetation will be removed from the site. FINDINGS a) Specific economic, social and other considerations make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the final EIR. b) The significant effect which remains will be substantially lessened through the incorporation of mitigation measures into the construction phase of the project, and the remaining effect is, when balanced against the facts set forth in the Statement of Overriding Considerations, and giving greater weight to the significant effects, acceptable. FACTS IN SUPPORT OF FINDINGS a) The project will provide increased habitat a different nature. b) The project is consistent with the General Plan and policies of the City of Newport Beach. c) The project will comply with all conditions of approval required under project permits. d) The project will link two areas of the community with appropriate pedestrian and bicycle paths. e) The project may decrease crime related problems in the area by making the area more visible. f) The project will provide increased recreational opportunities to the community. g) The project will provide reasonable grades for utilization of the area and pedestrian circulation by members of Oasis. h) The project will provide appropriate measures to revegetate the area. AESTHETICS IMPACT 1. Views from adjacent residences will be altered. FINDINGS a) specific economic, social and other considerations make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the final EIR. b) The significant effect which remains will be substantially lessened through the incorporation of mitigation measures into the construction phase of the project, and the remaining effect is, when balanced against the facts set forth in the Statement of Overriding Considerations, and giving greater weight to the significant effects, acceptable. FACTS IN SUPPORT OF FINDINGS a) The existing area has a man -made structure and the view presented is not currently that of a pristine natural environment. b) The project is consistent with the General Plan and policies of the City of Newport Beach. c) The project will comply with all conditions of approval required under project permits. i d) The project will link two areas of the community with appropriate pedestrian and bicycle paths. e) The project may decrease crime related problems in the area by making the area more visible. f) The project will provide increased recreational opportunities to the community. g) The project will provide reasonable grades for utilization of the area and pedestrian circulation by members of Oasis. h) The project will provide appropriate measures to revegetate the area. to • EXHIBIT 2 STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS 1. The alternatives to the proposed project described in the Final EIR, with the exception of the "No Project" alternative, would not avoid the unavoidable environmental effects of the proposed project. 2. The project will tie the community through enhanced pedestrian and bicycle circulation. I 3. The proposed project does not preclude the retention of remainder of the drainage area in its existing state. 4. The proposed project will increase passive recreational opportunities within the area. 5. The proposed project will create an attractive addition to the existing park facility. 6. The proposed project will eliminate a potentially dangerous area due to lack of adequate present ability to observe the area. i 7. The proposed project will not preclude the expansion of the area into an active recreation area if this is deem appropriate at a latter date. Attachment No. 1 to the DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT prepared by CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING DEPARTMENT 6 PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT 3300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, CA 92663 (714) 640 -2197 and Culbertson, Adams and Associates, Inc. 27072 E1 Retiro Mission Viejo, CA 92692 (714) 643 -1622 April 15, 1983 12 0 TABLE OF CONTENTS i PUBLIC PARTICIPATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 - 3 COMMENTS ON THE DRAFT EIR . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 - 21 ISSUES, QUESTIONS, COMMENTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 - 53 13 Li PUBLIC PARTICIPATION DATE March 8, 1983 TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN • NOTICE OF COMPLETION • FROM: CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING DEPARTMENT P.O. BOX 1768 3300 W. Newport Blvd. Newport Beach, CA 92663 -3884 DATE: March 7, 1983 PROJECT OASIS PARK GRADING TITLE: PROJECT LOCATION - SPECIFIC: North of 5th Avenue, Iris Avenue to Larkspur Avenue, Corona del Mar PROJECT LOCATION-- PROJECT LOCATION - CITY: New rt Beach COUNTY: Orange DESCRIPTION OF NATURE, PURPOSE AND BENEFICIARIES OF PROJECT: Extend Jasmine Creek Storm Drain 125 feet and construct new headworks; construct 375 lin, ft. of storm drain along 5th Avenue between Jasmine Creek and Larkspur Avenue; grade across Jasmine Gully with onsite stockpiled earth; construct sidewalk bike trail between Iris and Larkspur Avenues.; remove excess stockpiled earth from site; and hydroseed. Disruption of riparian habitat; and earthwork. The City of Newport Beach is the Lead Agency for this project. A copy of the Draft Environmental Impact Report: Qis attached for your review ❑ is available for review at the Planning Department 3300 West Newport Blvd. Newport Beach, CA 92663 -3884 REVIEW PERIOD: 30 DAYS ENDING ON: April 14, 1983 Draft EIR Environmental CONTACT PERSON: Fred Talarico TITLE: Coordination PHONE: (714)640 -2197 PROJECT CONTACT: Lloyd Dalton, Design Engineer (714) 640 -2281 15 DATE March 8, 1983 • NOTICE OF COMPLETION • TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: FROM: CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING DEPARTMENT P.O. BOX 1768 3300 W. Newport Blvd. Newport Beach, CA 92663 -3884 DATE: March 8, 1983 PROJECT TITLE: OASIS PARK GRADING PROJECT LOCATION - SPECIFIC: North of 5th Ave., Iris Ave. to Larkspur Ave., Corona del Mar PROJECT LOCATION.- PROJECT LOCATION - CITY: Newport Beach COUNTY: Orange DESCRIPTION OF NATURE, PURPOSE AND BENEFICIARIES OF PROJECT: Extend Jasmine Creek Storm Drain 125 feet & construct new headworks; construct 375 lin. ft. of storm drain along 5th Avenue between Jasmine Creek & Larkspur Avenue; grade across Jasmine Gully with onsite stockpiled earth; construct sidewalk bike trail between Iris and Larkspur Avenues; remove excess stockpiled earth from site; and hydroseed. Disruption of riparian habitat; and earthwork. The City of Newport Beach is the Lead Agency for this project. A copy of the Draft Environmental Impact Report: ❑ is attached for your review ® "is available for review at the Planning Department 3300 West Newport Blvd. Newport Beach, CA 92663 -3884 REVIEW PERIOD: 30 DAYS ENDING ON: April 14, 1983 DRAFT EIR CONTACT PERSON: Fred Talarico TITLE: Environmental CoordinatorPHONE: (715) 640 -2197 PROJECT CONTACT: Lloyd Dalton, Design Engineer (714) 640 -2281 SPON - c/o Jean Watt Resident • Ross E. MoI'gdn 4 HarboP Island Drive I 700 Heliotrope Ave. 3411 E last Hwy Newport Beach, CA 92660 Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Cor9 e tb l Mar, CA 92625 ! League of Women Voters, O.C. Resident Thomas J. Viola - 1783 One At ��, 704 Heliotrope Ave. 980 Hampton Rd. Newport Beach, CA 92660 Sh vc Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Arcadia, CA 91006 C�4�t Audubon Society -Sea & Sage Cp. Resident I Georgia H. Hovis P. 0. Box 1779 CA 706 Heliotrope Ave. 709 Iris Ave. Santa Ana, CA 92702 Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Sierra C Orange Cty.Grp. P. 0. T033 Resident Harlan W. Hoyt Garde ve, CA 92642 707 Iris Ave. 708 Heliotrope Ave. Corona del Mar, CA 92626 Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Friends of Irvine Coast Resident Michae Q° i110 P. 0. Box 714 702 Heliotrope Ave. 1811 y Ave. Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Newoo' each, CA 92663 Sutton News Group Resident Robert G. Monger 2721 East Coast Hwy. 711 Iris Ave. 710 Heliotrope Ave. Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Corona del Mar, CA 92625 i Steve Marvel - Daily Pilot Frank Simon , James M. Melbon P. 0. Box 1560 701 Iris Ave. 1807 Port Abbey P1. Costa Mesa, CA 92626 Corona del Mar, CA 92625 { Newport Beach, CA 92660 Newport -Mesa Unfd Sch. Dist. Fred Sotomayer j Resident 1857 Placentia Avenue 70011 Heliotrope Ave. 715 Iris Ave. Costa Mesa, CA 92627 Corona del Mar, CA 92625 j Corona del Mar, CA 92625 I So. Calif. Gas Co. Harvey R. Paeden Resident Attn: W. R. Perkins 703 Iris Ave. 717 Iris Ave. P. 0. Box 3334 Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Anaheim, CA 92803 So. Calif. Edison Co. Julie IIr -aver `..% < <' "'`a) Resident Attn: W. E. Guffey Gilbert- A— Mitehell����.'=� "' "y 716 Heliotrope Ave. 7333 Bolsa Ave. 161-7--E:- -Be4boa -BlYd. u " " " "'Y P z Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Westminster, CA 92683 Balbaa;- e*- -926fr1 ll ,�hJL g ^7iS a nye �o. �lood Control Robes �f74ister Resident 44 n. r, runner 7705,,, Avenue 718 Helio rope 100 Cntr. Dr. Cori el Mar, CA 92625 pe Av Ana, CA 92702 Corona de Mar, C� 92625 Resident Carlton J. Smith Mabel McKay 701 Jasmine Ave. 23811 Via Fabricante 707 Jasmine Ave. 17 Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Mission Viejo, CA 92691 Corona del Mar, CA 92625 r 1 Resident John A. Allard , Jeffrey Cunningham 700 Iris Ave. P. 0. Box 134 706 -A Iris Ave. Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Resident + E. W. Robinson' • 1 Wayne J. Laurent 703 Jasmine Ave. 30631 Marilyn Dr. P. 0. Box 67836 Corona del Mar, CA 92625 South Laguna, CA 92677 Los Angeles, CA 90067 I I Resident John Bellamy Lawrence A. Jordan 702 Jasmine Ave. 144 Jasmine Creek Dr. 711 JasmineAve. Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Resident Douglas B. Bynon Ann Lessig Corzine 705 Jasmine Ave. 12 Hidalgo 710 Iris Ave. Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Irvine, CA 92625 Corona del Mar, CA 92625 .Janis Stieber Resident Dennis E. Casino 712 Heliotrope Ave. 708 Jasmine Ave. 713 Jasmine Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Corona del Mar, _CA 92625 Ronald L .l�rl vr^ 4,'` Resident � 13134 V*wood `. i 715 Jasmine Ave. Wallace 7ll$C08erhead Houst;`Tex. 77079 Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Coro r��; del Mar, CA 92625 Donald LeFever Resident 715 Heliotrope Ave. I 714 Iris Ave. lone Wade 484 Del Rosa Dr. Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Pasadena, CA 92625 1 James Allen Resident Robert J. Sunderland 522 El Modena Ave. 717 Jasmine Ave. 3601 Seabreeze Lane Newport Beach, CA 92663 Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Corona Del Mar, CA 92625 I Weir G. Smith Resident Jerome P. Tripoli P. 0. Box 67 719 Jasmine Ave. P. 0. Box 192 Stratford, CA 93266 Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Corona del Mar, CA 92625 1Irri 'th Ramona R. Host 704 -A Iris Ave. Patricia Z. Hicks Mona a ar, CA 92625 Corona del Mar, CA 92625 716 Iri Corona hl %r, CA 92625 Roger G. Byron David Lenton Resident 13422-Newport Ave. 23 Encore Crt. Tustin, CA 92680 717 Larkspur Ave. �a Newport Beach, CA 92663 1 i Corona del Mar, CA 92625 I Resident 718 Iris Ave. Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Resident 720 Iris Ave. Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Resident 701 Larkspur Ave. Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Resident 700 Jasmine Avenue Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Resident 703 Larkspur Ave. Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Resident 705 Larkspur Avenue Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Resident 704 Jasmine Ave. Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Resident 709 Larkspur Ave. Corona del Mar, CA 92625 L� Jon M. Jarvis ,s��' 37 St. Tropez Newport Beach, 92660 Martin A. Melanson 224 Iris Ave. Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Helen E. Weiss. 700 Jasmine Ave. Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Stanley Winter �y1' 18172 Mayapple Way Irvine, CA 7 Margaret R. Armstrong 702 Jasmine Ave. Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Doris M. Sullivan 8409 Citadel Way Sacramento, CA 95825 Gerard P. Tardie 26 Lakeside Irvine, CA 92714 Olga B. Jeffrey 707 Larkspur Corona del Mar, CA 92.625 Richard Huffman 708 Jasmine Ave. Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Triona B. Campagna 514 Fernleaf Ave. Corona dgl Mar, CA 92625 Resident 716 Jasmine Ave. Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Resident 720 Jasmine Ave. Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Jerry Taylor 711 Larkspur Ave. Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Arvo E. Haapa 710 Jasmine Ave. Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Larkspur ggqq tJvA�sociates 713 Larkspbphj Ave. Coronalp Mar, CA 92625 George B. Farrell P. 0. Box 282 Corona del Mar, CA 92625 William F. Agee 715 Larkspur Ave. Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Marguerite Dalziel 714 Jasmine Ave. Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Hugo Di Lonardo 9532 Via Salerno Burbank, CA 92625 Elizabeth A. Trotter Resident Richard C. Hunsaker 721 Jasmine Ave. 712 Jasmine Ave. 3512 Ocean Blvd. Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Corona del Mar, CA 92626 Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Charles Newton Robert Searles Iq 719 Larkspur Avenue Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Chase 0. Sanderson 718 Jasmine Ave. Corona del Mar, CA 92625 John D. Allen 721 Larkspur Corona del Mar, CA 92625 KA'rhL[E.+ V PCA2t6 _._ . �laAl{.r- TCrrtrc 728 ,lasmi rte Avenu e " Corona del Mar, CA. 92625 Resident 705 Mai erne Avenue Coro n Mar, CA Resident 702 Larkspur Avenue Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Resident 709 Marguerite Ave, Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Resident 708 Larkspur Avenue Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Resident 711 Marguerite Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Resident 710 Larkspur Ave. Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Resident Coronarlequ ar, A 92625 Carl Ziegler 701 Marguerite Ave. Corona del Mar, CA 92625 ,rte - 700 Larkspur Ave;/ Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Willis E. Nielsen 707 Marguerite Ave. Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Alice J. Chambers P. 0. Box 306 Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Peter G. Leider 704 Larkspur Ave. Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Calvin P. Pierce 706 Larkspur Ave. Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Lawrence V. Harison 2515 E. Coast Hwy Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Stephen F. Piper 2524 Ocean Blvd, Corona del Mar, CA 92625 0; j I. Moreno 2613 Via Olivera Palos Verdes Estates, CA 90274 i i Gerhard N. Rostvold P. 0. Box 188 Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Resident 715 Marguerite Ave. Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Resident 717 Marguerite Ave. Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Resident 716 Larkspur Ave. Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Richard P. Succa 715 Marguerite Ave. Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Charles Solari Maurine Wilson 714 Larkspur Ave. Corona del Mar, CA 92625 W. Moseley P. 0. Box 312 Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Helen C. Long 1561 Mesa Dr. # 32 Santa Ana, CA 92625 Frank A. Williams 719 Marguerite Ave. Corona del Mar, CA 92625 John A. Allard Joseph Gallo 2515 E. Coast Hwy 718 Larkspur Ave. Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Gerald Obert John H. Marshall 713 Marguerite Ave. 721 Marguerite Ave, Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Corona del Mar, CA 92625 i Robert G. Wolff 720 Larkspur Ave. Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Corona del Mar. Com. Assoc. Mr. Richard Nichols, Pres. P.O. Box 516 Corona del Mar, CA 92625 The Irvine Co. 550 Newport Center Dr. Newport Beach, CA 92660 Leslie B. Jones 2021 Business Center Dr., Ste 112 Irvine, CA 92715 • THE FOLLOWING WERE OT DEIR: Dept. of Water Resources Ron Covington Attn: Ken Fellows 707 Orchid 1416 Ninth Street Corona del. Mar, CA 92625 Sacramento, CA 95814 U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Janice De Bay Attn: Jack Fancher 5107 Seashore Drive 24000 Avila Road Newport Beach, CA 92663 Laguna Niguel, CA 92677 Dept of Conservation Mary Lou Zoglin ,Attn: Rick Mevis, Env. Cons. 10 Surfside Court Program Coordinator Newport Beach, CA 92663 1416 Ninth Street, Room 1354 Sacramento, CA 95814 Dept. of Fish & Game Brion Jeannette Fred A. Worthley, Jr.,Reg.Mgr. 470 Old Newport Blvd. 350 Golden Shore Newport Beach, CA 92663 Long Beach, CA 90802 Sacramento, CA 95814 Bernard U.S. Army Corps of Engrs. Buzz Person Chriss Street Environmental Resources 201 Shipyard Way 619 Heliotrope .Attn: Sid Levenson Newport Beach, CA 92663 P.O. Box 516 P.O. Box 2711 !Los Angeles, CA 90053 Liaison: Cal. Regional Water Quality Bobby Lovell Barbara Cope Control Board 1242 W. Ocean Front P.O. Box 5100 Attn: Gordon Anderson Newport Beach, CA 92661 Members Jackie Heather 6809 Indiana Avenue 16 Kia Loa Court Newport Beach, CA 92663 Riverside, CA 92506 Diane Dixon State Clearinghouse Robert Moody 2888 Bayshore Drive, Apt. C Office of Planning & Research 5507 Seashore Drive Newport Beach, CA 92663 1400 Tenth St., Room 250 Newport Beach, CA 92663 Sacramento, CA 95814 Terry Smith State Water Resources Control Bd. Jim Turner 324 Alverado Place Attn: John Huddleson,Region #8 435 Irvine Ave. Balboa, CA 92661 1416 Ninth Street Newport Beach, CA 92663 Sacramento, CA 95814 Bernard Pegg Corona del Mar Community Assoc. Chriss Street 2633 Bamboo Street Mr. Richard Nichols, President 619 Heliotrope Newport Beach, CA 92660 P.O. Box 516 Corona del Mar. Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Liaison: Tom Thomson Barbara Cope P.O. Box 5100 Council Members Jackie Heather Balboa Island, CA 92625 16 Kia Loa Court Newport Beach, CA 92663 & Donald Strauss ca • • COMMENTS ON THE DRAFT EIR M i CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH P.O. BOX 1768, NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92663 -3884 CITIZENS ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ADVISORY COMMITTEE April 7, 1983 Newport Beach City Council 3300 West Newport Blvd. P.O. BOX 1768 Newport Beach, CA 92663 -3884 SUBJECT: Draft EIR "Oasis Park Grading Project" Honorable Mayor and Council: The Citizens Environmental Quality Advisory Committee at its meeting of April 5, 1983 reviewed this letter on the above subject Draft EIR and the Oasis Park Grading Project. The Committee offers the following comments for the Councils consideration in its review of this project. A. Comments on the Project It appears that there is considerable local concern over this project and the use of this site. The project as presented appears appropriate. B. Comments on the Draft EIR It is the opinion of the Committee that the Draft EIR does not adequately address the following: 1. The alternatives need to be expanded in their depth of analysis. 2. The report should more closely explain the relationship of actions on this site, the School District Property and Irvine Company Properties. 3. The report is also not clear as to the extent or nature of any flood control problems in the project area. Respectfully submitted, CITIZENS ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ADVISORY COMMITTEE By J nice De Bay hairma X300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach JDB: FT. tn a 3 TO: FRED TALARICO SUBJECT: EVALi1MON OF OASIS PARK GRADING EIR DATE: MARCH 28, 1983 The Subco mLiteee respectfully submits the following comments on the oasis Park Grading EIR. 1. Description of the proposed project under II.A., page 2 -1 describes the effort as a budgeted storm drain project. 2. If, as it appears, intent of the EIR is for a storm drain project, why is the work addressed as a park? Why not simply address it as a storm drain project? 3. Is proposed grading intended to be sufficient to provide for extension, as well as widening, of 5th Avenue? 4. Items V. Qmulative Impacts, page 5 -1 and VI. Growth Inducing impacts, page 6 -1, indicate that if proposed project is adopted, it will likely be impossible to retain the remainder of . Jasmine Creek. In that context we question whether, the proposed park will create or provide more recreation possibilities than the existing site in its natural state. 5. Insufficiently presented was an alternative which could have explored a project between the Irvine Company, School District and the City, all landowners adjacent to Oasis Park. How does this project tie in with develognent of adjacent properties? 6. The subcommittee raised questions with the entire EIR in this regard - whether enough information has been offered to provide a clear, compre- hensive view of subject site in relation to adjacent sites. 7. EIR insufficiently explores alternatives. Additional alternatives such as 3A, which could have made a more complete and comprehensive- recrea- tional facility, were not adequately addressed. 8. Referring to Ermiroimiental Checklist Form, Item 19, Recreation, this Subcommittee suggests that existing recreation opportunities might be better than proposed project. 9. Is there a flood problem? Will future development above the site worsen the problem? Respectfully submitted, ( m/6 a11.7u. 3 � ay C :7 ISSUES /QUESTIONS /COMMENTS CEQAC - Letter of April 7, 1983 Comment 1: The alternatives need to be expanded in their depth of analysis. (CEQAC) Response 1: The proposed project is discussed in the Draft EIR. The Draft EIR describes all reasonable alternatives to the project which could feasibly attain the basic objectives of the project and why they were rejected in favor of the project. The concern of the CEQAC with the level of discussion may not be warranted. The City of Newport Beach GPA 81 -2 request of the Irvine Co. related to parcels within the area has been /will be in the near future tabled (based on straw votes of April 11, 1983). The project does not preclude any options dealing with adjacent properties. Comment 2: The report should more closely explain the relationship of actions on this site, the School District Property and Irvine Company Properties. (CEQAC) Response 2: Relationships between this project and adjacent landholdings are discussed in the Draft EIR. The property immediately to the north has been the subject of a general plan amendment request for the past two years. Any actions taken on this project will not preclude any action on that request. There are no known proposals for the adjacent NMUSO properties to the north and west. The remaining public projects are as outlined in the Draft EIR, staff reports to the City Council on this project and described in the preliminary budget. Comment 3: The report is also not clear as to the extent or nature of any flood control problems in the project area. Response 3: The proposed project will not create any flood control problems within the area. The addition of curb, gutter, sidewalk and other proposed public improvement to Fifth Avenue from the project site to Marguerite Avenue will lessen or eliminate flood control problems that currently exist within this area. CEQAC - Memo of March 28, 1983 Comment 1: Description of the proposed project under II.A., Page 2 -1 describes the effort as a budgeted storm drain project. Response l: The proposed project is budgeted as a storm drain project. Additional funds have been requested in the preliminary fiscal year 83/84 budget for the PB &R Department to take the project from rough grade to finished product. Comment 2: If, as it appears, intent of the EIR is for a storm drain project, why is the work addressed as a park? Why not simply address it as a storm drain project? Response 2: The proposed project is budgeted as a storm drain project. Additional funds have been requested in the preliminary fiscal year 83/84 budget for the PB &R Department to take the project from rough grade to finished product. Comment 3: Is proposed grading intended to be sufficient to provide for extension, as well as widening, of 5th Avenue? Response 3: The grading will provide for the extension of Fifth Avenue to Jasmine Avenue. The limit of this budgeted project will be the grading and retention necessary to provide for road extension. Comment 4: Items V. Cumulative Impacts, Page 5 -1 and VI. Growth Inducing Impacts, Page 6 -1, indicate that if proposed project is adopted, it will likely be impossible to retain the remainder of Jasmine Creek. In that context we question whether the proposed park will create or provide more recreation possibilities than the existing site in its natural state. Response 4: The Draft EIR notes that the retention of the remaining 1,1000 feet of Jasmine Creek in its existing state may prove infeasible. It should be noted that the proposed project does not preclude retention of the remaining area in its existing state. This could only be determined at such time as the adjoining property - owners (The Irvine Company and Newport /Mesa Unified School District) were to submit development plans for this area. The proposed project will create more recreational opportunities than exist on the site in its existing condition the opportunities will be passive in nature with the exception of the bicycle trail. The project does not preclude the transition of the area into a more active recreational area if that were to be determined feasible at a latter date. Comment 5: Insufficiently presented was an alternative which could have explored a project between the Irvine Company, School District and the city, all landowners adjacent to Oasis Park. How does this project tie in with development of adjacent properties? Response St The Draft EIR describes all alternatives to the project that could reasonably attain the basic objectives of the project. An alternative that include all property- owners with an ultimate design for their properties is not reasonable at present. Additionally the proposed project will not preclude any presently know alternative use or design for either adjacent property owner. Comment 6: The subcommittee raised questions with the entire EIR in this regard - whether enough information has been offered to provide a clear, comprehensive view of subject site in relation to adjacent sites. Response 6: The Draft EIR discusses the site as to its location in the regional and local content. Adjacent properties are discussed in Draft EIR and in the preceding responses. The determination of the sufficiency of information to make a judgement on this project is the responsibility of the ultimate decision - maker. Comment 7: EIR insufficiently explores alternatives. Additional alternatives such as 3A, which could have made a more complete and comprehensive recreational facility, were not adequately addressed. Response 7: The Draft EIR notes that the retention of the remaining 1,1000 feet of Jasmine Creek in its existing state may prove infeasible. It should be noted that the proposed project does not preclude retention of the remaining area in its existing state. This could only be determined at such time as the adjoining property - owners (The Irvine Company and Newport /Mesa unified School District) were to submit development plans for this area. The proposed project will create more recreational opportunities than exist on the site in its existing condition the opportunities will be passive in nature with the exception of the bicycle trail. The project does not preclude the transition of the area into a more active recreational area if that were to be determined feasible at a latter date. The Draft EIR describes all alternatives to the project that could reasonably attain the basic objectives of the project. An alternative that include all property- owners with an ultimate design for their properties is not reasonable at present. Additionally the proposed project will not preclude any presently know alternative use or design for either adjacent property owner. Comment 8: Referring to Environmental Checklist Form, Item 19, Recreation, this Subcommittee suggests that existing recreation opportunities might be better than proposed project. Response 8: The opinion of the subcommittee is noted. Comment 9: Is there a flood problem? Will future development above the site worsen the problem? Response 9: The proposed project will not create any flood control problems within the area. The addition of curb, gutter, sidewalk and other proposed public improvement to Fifth Avenue from the project site to Marguerite Avenue will lessen or eliminate flood control problems that currently exist within this area. FT:nma 4/15/83 EJACK P. NORRIS, RCE Civil Engineering & Land Surveying 17662 IRVINE BLVD, SUITE 7 STIN, CALIF. SCHEDULE OF STANDARD HOURLY RATES Registered Engineer $ 50.00 Licensed Land Surveyor 46.00 Designer and Supervisor 40.00 Draftsman and Technician 34.00 Clerical 20.00 Survey Crew (3 -man) 112.00 (2 -man) 90.00 (1 -man) 64.00 The above fees will be escalated 6% on each August 1, beginning August 1, 1983, for any work uncompleted at that time through no fault of Engineer. Outside agency fees and reproductions are not included in above fees and will be billed at cost plus 10 %. Periodic progress billings will be made for work completed, based upon percentage of completion. BY THE CITY COUNCIL • ` CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH APR 2 51983 City of Newport Beach City Council/ Planning Department 3300 W. Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, CA 92663 519 Iris .Avenue I�a�. 1421 Cororde 2625 ,Apri N, If' �8 1983 P,D Dear Mayor Hart and Council Members: n � \/ Re: Comments on Oasis Park Grading EIS AGENU We understand that an EIR is supposed to be a disinterested third party's evaluation of a� project according to given guidelines. This is prac- tically a staff written report extolling staff's point of view and with only their input. Nowhere are we presented why the project is being undertaken except for the statement that funds are in the budget. We believe this project is being undertaken to install the storm drain along 5th Avenue so that develop- ment can proceed. As we recollect staff was to consider two alternatives Concept 3 and a second plan involving grading the surface to the level of Oasis parking lot. This has not been done. A picture of such a concept has been sketched in Figure 3A. The land being flat is useable for active park land in the future and play area im- mediately. It would allow moving the Youth Center down onto fill near the bicycle path on City property without loss of CYC parking (See attached - Figure 3). It would allow the sand playground to become part of the park rather than hidden from view. It would facilitate widening of 5th from Larkspur to Jasmine. It would discourage children from using the slopes toward the alley by returning them to 2 to 1 as originally planned. It is our belief that the project should not take place until the slope rights from the school board and the greenbelt dedication from Irvine is dedicated. With sufficient dedication and fill,a true recreation area with ball fields over the filled creek can be developed. The upper area can either be a green belt along the creek up to the dam or a filled greenbelt area over the creek bed. City Council/ Planning Dept. April 15, 1983 Page Two We oppose the presently proposed plan. It is not a park. Secondly, the grades and compacted fill form a ready roadbed for a to be developed 5th Avenue from Jasmine to Iris. Thirdly, it leaves a large mound of dirt as exists presently which obstructs views along 5th Avenue. The flatter terrain blocks less views and provides a potentially useable park. We conclude with the statement that the staff proposal should not be built. It is 'bad for the community. The Irvine Co. proposed a creek de- velopment. We would prefer this to a greenbelt which is both unusable and unused. We believe the staff is being two- faced to say that, Harbor. View School although gated is available for recreation and then refuse to repair the Youth Center since they cannot depend on land use of the school portion of Grant Howald Park in the future. It seems funny how plenty of money is available for making a useless greenbelt but nothing is available to de- velop a useful park or buy minimal growth acreage around Oasis. Wouldn't it be great if the School Board, Irvine and PB &R got together and developed something useful. If not,let's leave the area as it is. Very truly yours, Richard A. Nichols 0 N )A tic .......... 117, 111-YI IN 1.� .1i FCO cq c Q. 'ski %,It -,"d"MoNks", -Y ii 1'.r ), 1'> cc sill C TO: CITY CLERK FROM: Public Works Director SUBJECT: RESOLUTION NO. 83 -2 February 14, 1983 Please correct Section 4 of Resolution No. 83 -2 to order that assessments ". . may be paid in five equal annual installments. . ." in lieu of the order that assess- ments ". . . may be paid in three equal annual installments. ." This correction is needed to satisfy an August 28, 1971 City commitment to the 5 -year repayment period. Inasmuch as the sole commitment to term of repay- ment was stated to be 5 years, the City Attorney feels that the correction may be made without review or rehearing by City Council. aH'� Q 44 Benjamin B. Nolan Public Works Director LD:jd • TO: CITY COUNCIL JAN 10 By the Cif f COUNCIL CITY op t.,z PORT BFACH FROM: Public Works Department January 10, 1983 CITY COUNCIL PGENDA ITEM NO. SUBJECT: REPORT ON COST OF WORK ACCOMPLISHED UNDER CHAPTER 27 OF THE IMPROVE- MENT ACT OF 1911 (ALLEY IMPROVEMENTS IN BLOCK 3, TRACT 27, CONTRACT 2316) RECOMMENDATIONS: 1. Hold public hearing to hear protests. 2. Close public hearing. 3. Revise, correct of modify report, if desired. 4. Adopt a resolution confirming the assessments; overruling any protests not allowed; assessing the costs against the bene- fitted properties; and providing that the assessments may be paid in three annual installments bearing interest at the rate of 7% per annum. DISCUSSION: On December 31, 1981, the City Council received a petition from the owners of 10 of the 12 lots in the City block bounded by 15th Street, Bolsa Avenue, Clay Avenue, and Orange Avenue, requesting that the City improve their alley using the procedure set forth in Chapter 27 of the Improvement Act of 1911. A sketch showing the location of the project is attached. The public hearing recommended above is item 6 of the summary of the Chapter 27 procedure outlined below: 1. The owners of 60% of the front footage facing the alley file a petition with the City Clerk requesting the improvement. 2. Upon the filing of the petition and after a notice from the City, the owners have a duty to construct improvements. 3. A public hearing is held at which time the City Council may hear protests from anyone who does not desire the improvement. 4. If the construction is not commenced within 60 days by the property owners, the City shall do the work and make the cost a lien on the properties. The work is financed by an advance from the City. The funds are taken from the Annual Street and Alley Maintenance Appropriation (General Fund). 5. The City would combine the work with other similar projects and have the alleys paved at the earliest opportunity. f , • TO: CITY COUNCIL JAN 10 By the Cif f COUNCIL CITY op t.,z PORT BFACH FROM: Public Works Department January 10, 1983 CITY COUNCIL PGENDA ITEM NO. SUBJECT: REPORT ON COST OF WORK ACCOMPLISHED UNDER CHAPTER 27 OF THE IMPROVE- MENT ACT OF 1911 (ALLEY IMPROVEMENTS IN BLOCK 3, TRACT 27, CONTRACT 2316) RECOMMENDATIONS: 1. Hold public hearing to hear protests. 2. Close public hearing. 3. Revise, correct of modify report, if desired. 4. Adopt a resolution confirming the assessments; overruling any protests not allowed; assessing the costs against the bene- fitted properties; and providing that the assessments may be paid in three annual installments bearing interest at the rate of 7% per annum. DISCUSSION: On December 31, 1981, the City Council received a petition from the owners of 10 of the 12 lots in the City block bounded by 15th Street, Bolsa Avenue, Clay Avenue, and Orange Avenue, requesting that the City improve their alley using the procedure set forth in Chapter 27 of the Improvement Act of 1911. A sketch showing the location of the project is attached. The public hearing recommended above is item 6 of the summary of the Chapter 27 procedure outlined below: 1. The owners of 60% of the front footage facing the alley file a petition with the City Clerk requesting the improvement. 2. Upon the filing of the petition and after a notice from the City, the owners have a duty to construct improvements. 3. A public hearing is held at which time the City Council may hear protests from anyone who does not desire the improvement. 4. If the construction is not commenced within 60 days by the property owners, the City shall do the work and make the cost a lien on the properties. The work is financed by an advance from the City. The funds are taken from the Annual Street and Alley Maintenance Appropriation (General Fund). 5. The City would combine the work with other similar projects and have the alleys paved at the earliest opportunity. 0 January 10, 1983 Subject: Report on Cost of Work Accomplished Under Chapter 27 of the Improve- ment Ace of 1911 (Alley Improvements in Block 3, Tract 271 Contract 2316) Page 2 6. Upon completion of the work, another public hearing is held to hear any protests about the construction or the spreading of the assessments. 7. After the public hearing, the cost of construction is assessed. against each parcel. The assessments may be paid in cash, or the City will allow the assessment to be paid over a three - year period at an interest rate of 7% on the unpaid balance. The collections are credited to the unappropriated surplus of the General Fund. The improvements were constructed under City Contract No. 2316. The work was accepted by the City Council on December 13, 1982. Total Project Cost: Construct V -thick PCC alley 4,665 sq. ft. @ $3 per sq. ft. $13,995 Construct alley approaches, 2 @ $200 400 Adjust sewer manhole to grade, 2 @ $200 400 Construction Cost $14,795 Engineering and Inspection (20 %) 21959 Total to be divided equally among 12 lots $17,754 Typical final assessment per lot __ $17,754 = $1,479.50 (not including garage approaches) 12 Council Policy L -5 affirms that the property owners pay the cost of engineering and inspection in accordance with Chapter 27 provisions of the 1911 Act. Attached is a table indicating the individual assessment. The cost of improvements to the alley was divided equally among the 12 lots that abut the alley. A written notice (Exhibit "B ") with "NOTICE OF COST" (Exhibit "C ") was sent to each property owner. In addition, a "NOTICE OF COST" was posted at each assessed lot. On April 26, 1982, when the first public hearing was held, the e mated typical assessment for lots without driveway approaches was $1,855. Beni min B. Nolan Public Works Director GW:jd Att. I V Q 2 Q SC.9 L E: / /00 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT T.p�l C T 27 BLOC, 3 O / f7� t DRAWN ._� %!� DATE. APPROVED PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR RE. N0. DRAWING No.FY// /FJ/ T "GT �� /5 7'w ST. •33/!••33o5.33GV• •333/• V h iQ SC.9 L E: / /00 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT T.p�l C T 27 BLOC, 3 O / f7� t DRAWN ._� %!� DATE. APPROVED PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR RE. N0. DRAWING No.FY// /FJ/ T "GT �� i " CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT COST OF WORK ACCOMPLISHED UNDER CHAPTER 27 OF IMPROVEMENT ACT OF 1911 IN BLOCK 3, TRACT 27 CONTRACT 2316 LOT NO. ASSESSOR'S PROPERTY OWNER COST ASSESSED PARCEL & MAILING ADDRESS 1 425 - 292 -08 Diana D. Springer $ 1,479.50 3300 Clay St. Newport Beach, CA 92663 2 425 - 292 -07 William J. Winter $ 1,479.50 2312 Elden Ave. # B Costa Mesa, CA 92627 3 425 - 292 -06 Steve R. Burr $ 1,479.50 3308 Clay Street Newport Beach, CA 92663 Portion 425 - 292 -05 Edward H. Flach $ 1,479.50 of 829 Harbor Island Dr. 4 Newport Beach, CA 92663 Portion 425 - 292 -04 Yvonne des Voigne $ 1,479.50 of 504 Orange Ave. 4 & 5 Newport Beach, CA 92663 Portion 425 - 292 -03 John L. Hart $ 1,479.50 of 435 Redlands Ave. 5 Newport Beach, CA 92663 6 425 - 292 -02 Joseph V. Ferguson $ 1,479.50 4743 Barcelone Ct. Calabasas, CA 91302 7 425 - 292 -01 Carrol C. Cates $ 1,479.50 510 Riverside Ave. Newport Beach, CA 92663 8 425 - 292 -12 Richard A. Brewer $ 1,479.50 1982 Port Locksleigh • Newport Beach, CA 92660 9 & 425 - 292 -10 Neil J. Powers $ 2,959.00 10 425 - 292 -11 505 Santa Ana Ave. Newport Beach, CA 92663 11 425- 292 -09 H. Paul Norman $ 1,479.50 513 Bolsa Avenue Newport Beach, CA 92663 TOTAL $17,754.00 5 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH P.O. BOX 1768, NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92663.3884 PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT (714) 640 -2281 December 15, 1982 Dear Property Owner: Sent to: Carrol C. Cates Joseph V. Ferguson John L. Hart Yvonne Des Voigne Edward H. Flach Steve R. Burr William J. Winter Diana D. Springer H. Paul Norman Neil J. Powers Richard A. Brewer Attached is a "Notice of Cost" which sets a date for a public hearing by the City Council upon the report of the Public Works Director on the cost of construction of a Portland cement con- crete alley in'Block 3, Tract 27 (Newport Heights). The public hearing will be held at City Hall, Council Chamber, on January 10, 1983, at 7:30 P.M. Block 3, Tract 27, is the City block bounded by 15th Street, Bolsa Avenue, Clay Avenue, and Orange Avenue. If there are any questions that can be answered prior to the public hearing, please call me at (714) 640 -2281. Very truly yours, A,� Gilbert Wong Project Engineer GW:rb Att. PUBLIC NOTICE 1 NOTICE or PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City Council of the City of Newport Beach will-hold o pubic hearing regarding: Coat of work accompiiehed under Chapter 27 of j the linpmnment Act of 1911 (alley improvements in Block 3, Tract 27, Contract 2316). NOTICE IS KPEBY FURTHER GIVEN that the odd public hear. 1 ino will be held on the 10th day of lanuary, 1981, at the hour of 7:30 P.M. in the Council Chamber of the City Hall of the City of Newport . Beach, California, at which lime and place any and all penoas in- tereeted may appear and be heard thereon. Wanda E. Andereen, City Clark, City of Newport Beach. Publish Dec. 15, '92 in The New. part Ensign NE1250 Ex#18 r 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach i NOTICE- OF COST NOTICE ON THE REPORT OF THE PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR AND THE TIME OF HEARING OBJECTIONS THEREON YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED that the Public Works Director of the City of Newport Beach, California, has filed with the City Council of Newport Beach, California, his report on the cost of the con- struction of a Portland cement concrete alley (15 feet in width, in Block 3, Newport Heights in the City of Newport Beach, California) adjacent to the property located at The cost of said construction was The hour of 7:30 P.M. on the 10th day of January, 1983, in the City Council chambers is the hour, date, and place fixed by the City Council for a public hearing on the report of the Public Works Director on the cost of construction and for hearing any objections. or protests against the cost thereof or against the levying of an assessment against the following described property for the purpose of paying the cost of said construction. Proposed assessment against property: Legal description of property: Assessor's Parcel Number: Common street address: Name of owner of record: Mailing address of owner of record: Dated Decern5er 20, 1982 By en am n to an Public works Director ExH /B/ T �C .NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City Council of the City of Newport Beach will hold a public hearing regarding: Cost of work accomplished under Chapter 27 of the Improvement Act of 1911 (alley improvements in Block 3, Tract.27, Contract 2316). NOTICE IS HEREBY FURTHER GIVEN that the said public hear ng will be held on the. 10th day of January , 19 , at the hour of 7:30 P.M. in the Council Chambers of the City Hall of the City of Newport Beach, California, at which time and place any and all persons interested may appear and be heard thereon. `G anda E. Ande sen City Clerk City of Newport Beach City CLrx Pile Bulletin Board [a, PROOF OF PUBLICA" `IOW (2015.5 C.C.P.) STATE OF CALIFORNIA, « � ',ounty of Orange, I am a citizen of the United States and a resident of the County aforesaid; I am over the age of eighteen years, and not a party to or intc-:ested in the above - entitled matter. I am the principal clerk of the printer of the Nei +purt Harbor Ensign newspaper of general circula- tion, printed and published weekly in the city of Newport Beach, County of Orange, and which news- paper has been adjudged a newspaper of general circulation by the Superior Court of the County of Or- ange, State of California, under the date of May 14, 1951, CASE NUMBER A- 20178 that the notice, of which the annexed is a printed copy (set in type not sir r+. ".•: than nonpareil) has been published in oath mn+a ar and entire issue of said newspaper and r,ot in ..,;} - `:`plemeni theroof on the following dates to wit. 1 5 .................. I certify (or declare) under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Dated at Nowport Beach, California, this,'b day of Signature TI-17L N '1V 0RT FNSICN 2721 F. Ccast Hwy, Co, ;•.i del Mar, Cah.fc:n,i,; 62625. tr Lr Il r• C< .�.'e r,.. Filinc_. Stamp Proof of Publication of A Paste Clipping of Notice SECURELY In This Space PROOF OF PUBLICATION 7- 409SNG -0 • Y I Poi .'ez p, ralty of perjury that H-.e 1. true ceirrect. Dated at Newport day,)f 19 r3 Sigrlah.re i F YGN 2 F y., Con ::::<: d I :`afar, Ca 'I i h -nia 92625 JAIV !7 7983, - C/Ty refo Prot A P".; 1 ': ::J PROOF OF PUBLICATION Z -X, Pumm XMICE- NOT= or ' Pumm Hcmmo N=CE 3 HEWW (1p" flud the CRY counw of & aw a# ?Iewvmt B@=h WS hou a PAU, heart" regmchng- . , Coo of W k ma"Pa" ies don ChQ0ft 27 qj the. jft*oct went Act of 1911 (alt" Ime. krwmknh In am& 31 TROW17i ixg WW be hold on thm jummy, 1963, at the P.M. in the coundl C the CUT HaU of the City Be=h, California, at. -d &4* MY =d aH teroobd my appe, a therem. W=& L And= Inow" o' the U, '-t S' -desand 3,.,t ci :r:- -id; I ai;. ,.er the age, of igh4c01 11 - `- c71 �ct ;.rty to or ;:..,.rested in the --b-Ve ' r,:; Piit� ' T the pfinc'-,al clerk of the Printer of t'.e i. tv;i ,md pL,!-.':,hed weekly in the city of Ne,.. j t Count-.1 of Crange, and %,.-hi°F. nt"— ";,rn a newspaper of gane, it v the Sui.-r oior Court of the County of0r rJ Califom:i, under the date of May 14, )9151. NUMBEP A-20178 that The notice, of "'I .irc.xed is .-, printed copy (set in type not i,opar0l' `as been published in each P i,;F i:, A said newspaper and not In :i, ;lie,": n the following i a t e s to -wit. I Poi .'ez p, ralty of perjury that H-.e 1. true ceirrect. Dated at Newport day,)f 19 r3 Sigrlah.re i F YGN 2 F y., Con ::::<: d I :`afar, Ca 'I i h -nia 92625 JAIV !7 7983, - C/Ty refo Prot A P".; 1 ': ::J PROOF OF PUBLICATION Z -X, Pumm XMICE- NOT= or ' Pumm Hcmmo N=CE 3 HEWW (1p" flud the CRY counw of & aw a# ?Iewvmt B@=h WS hou a PAU, heart" regmchng- . , Coo of W k ma"Pa" ies don ChQ0ft 27 qj the. jft*oct went Act of 1911 (alt" Ime. krwmknh In am& 31 TROW17i ixg WW be hold on thm jummy, 1963, at the P.M. in the coundl C the CUT HaU of the City Be=h, California, at. -d &4* MY =d aH teroobd my appe, a therem. W=& L And= Inow" i, RESOLUTION NO. 8 3 -2 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ASSESSING THE COST OF CONSTRUCTING ALLEY IMPROVEMENTS AGAINST CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF CHAPTER 27 OF THE IMPROVEMENT ACT OF 1911 (ALLEY IMPROVEMENTS IN BLOCK 3, TRACT 27, CONTRACT N0. 2316) WHEREAS, on December 31, 1981, the City Council directed the Public Works Director (acting as Superintendent of Streets) to notify the owners of the real property located in Block 3, Tract 27, to construct alley improvements in accordance with the procedure set forth in Chapter 27, Division 7 of the Streets and Highways Code; and WHEREAS, notice was given to each owner or person in possession pursuant to the requirements of Section 5877 of the Streets and Highways Code, and on the 26th day of January, 1982, a public hearing was held by the City Council to consider protests and objections to the proposed improvements; and WHEREAS, after the close of said hearing the City Council, after passing upon such objections or protests, ordered that the improvements be constructed; and WHEREAS, the Superintendent of Streets has completed the construction of said improvements and has given notice of the cost of the construction to the owners or persons in possession of the affected property and has filed a report with the City Council specifying the workmanship which has been done, the cost of construction and other information as required by Section 5882 of the Streets and Highways Code; and WHEREAS, on the 10th day of January, 1983, the City Council held a hearing for the purpose of passing upon the report of the Superintendent of Streets and to hear any objections or protests by property owners liable to be assessed for such construction, and any other interested persons; • 0 NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Newport Beach does hereby RESOLVE, DECLARE and ORDER, as follows: SECTION 1. The report filed by the Public Works Department dated January 10, 1983, concerning the work completed on the alley improvements in Block 9, Tract 27, is hereby confirmed, and all protests by persons owning property liable to be assessed for such work are overruled. SECTION 2. The cost of the construction is hereby assessed against the parcels of property fronting upon the improvements so constructed, which parcels are described by the County Assessor's parcel number, and the amounts of the assessment applicable to each parcel are hereinafter set forth: 425 - 292 -08 $1,479.50 425- 292 -07 $1,479.50 425- 292 -06 $1,479.50 425- 292 -05 $1,479.50 425 - 292 -04 $1,479.50 425 - 292 -03 $1,479.50 425 - 292 -02 $1,479.50 425- 292 -01 $1,479.50 425- 292 -12 $1,479.50 425- 292 -10 & 11 $2,959.00 425- 292 -09 $1,479.50 48- 024 -21 $1,013.73 48- 024 -04 $ 954.22 48- 024 -05 $ 590.21 48- 024 -06 $ 337.91 48- 024 -07 $ 369.23 48- 024 -08 $ 456.23 48- 024.23 $ 337.91 48- 024.22 $ 337.91 SECTION 3. The assessments set forth in Section 2 hereof shall be a lien upon the respective parcel from the time of recordation of a Notice of Lien, which lien shall continue until the assessment and all interest thereon is paid, or until it is discharged of record. SECTION 4. The City Council hereby determines that the payment of the assessments set forth in Section 2 hereof may be paid in three equal annual installments which shall bear interest on the unpaid balance at the rate of 78 per annum; said interest shall begin to run on the 31st day after the adoption of this resolution by the City Council. OA ADOPTED this day of JAN 10 , 1983. Evelyn R. Hart Mayor ATTEST: Wanda E. Andersen City Clerk RSP /Assess C l December 13, 1982 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DEU 13 1982 ITEM NO. By the CITY COUNCIL TO: CITY COUNCIL CITY OP NSVJPORT BEACH FROM: Public Works Department SUBJECT: REPORT ON COST OF WORK ACCOMPLISHED UNDER CHAPTER 27 OF THE IMPROVE- MENT ACT OF 1911 (ALLEY IMPROVEMENTS IN BLOCK 3, TRACT 27, CONTRACT NO. 2316) RECOMMENDATION: Set public hearing to be held on January 10, 1983. DISCUSSION: On December 31, 1981, the City Council received a petition from the owners of TO of the 12 lots in the City block bounded by 15th Street, Bolsa Avenue, Clay Avenue, and Orange Avenue, requesting that the City improve their alley using the procedure set forth in Chapter 27 of the Improvement Act of 1911. A sketch showing the location of the project is attached. The public hearing recommended above is item 6 of the summary of the Chapter 27 procedure outlined below: 1. The owners of 60% of the front footage facing the alley file a petition with the City Clerk requesting the improvement. 2. Upon the filing of the petition and after a notice from the City, the owners have a duty to construct improvements. 3. A public hearing is held at which time the City Council may hear protests from anyone who does not desire the improvement. 4. If the construction is not commenced within 60 days by the property owners, the City shall do the work and make the cost a lien on the proPerties. The work is financed by an advance from the City. The funds are taken from the Annual Street and Alley Maintenance Appropriation (General Fund). 5. The City would combine the work with other similar projects and have the alleys paved at the earliest opportunity. 6. Upon completion of the work, another public hearing is held to hear any protests about the construction or the spreading of the assessments. December 13, 1982 0 Subject: Report on Cost of Work Accomplished ment Act of 1911 (Alley Improvements No. 2316) Page 2 • under Chapter 27 of the Improve - in Block 3, Tract 27, Contract 7. After the public hearing, the cost of construction is assessed against each parcel. The assessments may be paid in cash, or the City will allow the assessment to be paid over a 3 -year period at an interest rate of 7% on the unpaid balance. The collections are credited to the unappropriated surplus of the General fund. The improvements were constructed under City Contract No. 2316. The work is to be accepted by the City Council on December 13, 1982. Total Project Cost: Construct V -thick PCC alley 4,665 sq. ft. @ $3 per sq. ft. $13,995 Construct alley approaches, 2 @ $200 400 Adjust sewer manhole to grade, 2 @ $200 400 Construction Cost $14,795 Engineering and Inspection (20 %) 2,959 Total to be divided equally among 12 lots $17,754 Typical final assessment per lot - $17,754 (not including garage approaches - 12 = $1,479.50 Council Policy L -5 affirms that the property owners pay the cost of engineering and inspection in accordance with Chapter 27 provisions of the 1911 Act. No protests are expected at the public hearing. On April 26, 1982, when the first public hearing was held, the estimated typical assessment for lots without driveway approaches was $1,855. The final figure of $1,479.50 is approximately 25% less than the previous estimate. c r � Benj min B. Nolan Public Works Director GW:jd Att. I u W D scdz i "= Boa' m u j5 TN Sr. CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT 7"Ip.e10 T 27 DRAWN _N - DATE APPROVED PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR R.E. N0. DRAWING ELI �� By Oho CITY COUNCIL CITY OF NOW WA1CH TO: CITY COUNCIL c' September 27, 1982 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM NO. C: , 1 �6 FROM: Public Works Department and Parks, Beaches & Recreation Department SUBJECT: OASIS PARK GRADING (C -2316) RECOMMENDATION: Approve grading concept Alternative No. 3, and direct staff to pro- ceed with environmental assessment and engineering. DISCUSSION: The FY 1982 -83 budget includes appropriations of $49,000 and $41,000 to grade a portion of the City -owned parcel north of Fifth Avenue and to ex- tend Jasmine Creek storm drain north of Fifth Avenue, respectively. The par- cel, designated as a passive park site, is located between Iris and Marguerite Avenues. (See attached site plan.) A 70 -stall parking lot was recently constructed at the easterly end of the parcel with funds provided in the FY 1981 -82 budget. The westerly end of the parcel joins the Community Youth Center. The northerly length of the parcel adjoins the Harbor View Elementary School site and an undeveloped parcel belonging to The Irvine Company. During the budget hearing, residents expressed concern about the project purpose and design concept. The staff was instructed to prepare alternative concepts for Council review prior to final design, and to keep the community informed regarding project planning. The major concern in the development of the parcel as a passive park site appears to be the configuration of the earth fill to be placed across Jasmine Gully to provide for a useable sidewalk -bike trail for senior citizens and elementary school children. A tributary concern of Corona del Mar resi- dents is that the Jasmine Creek earth fill might provide the initial step toward the completion of a Fifth Avenue bypass of commercial Corona del Mar. These concerns have been studied by staff, and a discussion of four alterna- tives, plus sketches, prepared for Council consideration. Two of the alternatives include a minimal amount of grading across Jasmine Gully, and should enable a comparatively moderate utilization of the park site. Another alternative includes no grading across Jasmine Gully, which should enable a comparatively minimal utilization of the park site. The most desirable alternative includes grading of the full width of the park site across Jasmine Gully, which should enable optimum utilization of the site as a passive park. A brief discussion of each of the alternatives follows. Il- lustrative drawings are attached for reference. 0 4 September 27, 1982 Subject: OASIS Park Grading (C -2316) Page 2 Alternative No. 1 Description This concept provides for no earth fill across Jasmine Gully; a substan- tial volume of earth export; sidewalk -bike trail reconstruction between Iris and Larkspur Avenue; signs and posts; and hydroseeding. (See sketch Considerations - -earth fill only in the drainage swale parallel to Fifth Avenue - -6,000 cubic yards of earth export - -no extension of Jasmine Creek storm drain -- 375 - linear -foot lateral for Fifth Avenue storm drain -- sidewalk -bike trail grades remain at 19% and 24% -- minimum access through or utilization of park site -- $58,500 total estimated cost Alternative No. 2 Description This concept provides for minimal earth fill across Jasmine Gully; a sub- stantial volume of earth export; a new sidewalk bike trail between Iris and Larkspur Avenues; a storm drain lateral along Fifth Avenue between Jasmine Creek and Larkspur Avenue; posts and signs; and hydroseeding. (See sketch.) Considerations - -4,500 cubic yards of earth fill - -6,000 cubic yards of earth export - -no extension of Jasmine Creek storm drain -- 375 - linear -foot lateral for Fifth Avenue storm drain --10% maximum sidewalk -bike trail grade -- moderate access through or utilization of park site -- $68,000 total estimated cost Alternative No. 3 Description This concept provides for an earth fill across Jasmine Gully; a moderate volume of earth export; a new sidewalk -bike trail between Iris and Larkspur Avenues; a storm drain extension and headworks reconstruction in Jasmine Creek; a storm drain lateral along Fifth Avenue between Jasmine Creek and Larkspur Avenues; posts and signs; and hydroseeding. (See sketch.) 0 6 September 27, 1982 Subject: OASIS Park Grading (C -2316) Page 3 Considerations -- 10,500 cubic yards of earth fill - -5,000 cubic yards of earth export -- 125 - linear -foot extension of Jasmine Creek storm drain -- headworks reconstruction -- 375 - linear -foot lateral for Fifth Avenue storm drain - -6%-A maximum sidewalk bike trail grade -- optimum access through and utilization of park site -- $99,000 total estimated cost Alternative No. 4 Description This concept provides for a minimal earth fill across Jasmine Gully; a substantial volume of earth export; a sidewalk -bike trail bridge struc- ture with abutments at Jasmine Gully; a new sidewalk -bike trail between Iris and Larkspur Avenues; a storm drain lateral along Fifth Avenue between Jasmine Creek and Larkspur Avenue; posts, signs, and lighting; and hydroseeding. (See sketch.) Considerations - -4,000 cubic yards of earth fill - -6,500 cubic yards of earth export - -no extension of Jasmine Creek storm drain -- 375 - linear -foot lateral for Fifth Avenue storm drain --10% maximum sidewalk bike trail grade -- 100 - foot -long by 12- foot -wide steel bridge with timber deck - -10- foot -high by 20- foot -long by 12- foot -wide reinforced concrete abutments -- bridge lighting a necessity -- possible liability risk in vicinity of bridge -- moderate access through or utilization of park site -- $127,000 total estimated cost Of the four preceding alternatives, only Alternative No. 3 will per- mit construction of a desirable sidewalk -bike trail grade (62% maximum grade over a length of 250 feet). A CalTrans reference, "Planning and Design Criteria for Bikeways in California," suggests a maximum bike path grade of 5 %; however, a flatter grade at this site may only be achieved by use of a higher earth fill across Jasmine Gully (impacting the privacy of nearby residents) or a swaled sidewalk -bike trail along Fifth Avenue (impacting the visibility of bikewalk users). A $14,000 SB 821 Bicycle Trails Program appropriation will be avail- able for this project if the bike trail design is in reasonable conformance with the aforementioned CalTrans reference. Assuming such appropriation, a total of $104,000 is available for this project. 0 6 September 27, 1982 Subject: OASIS Park Grading (C -2316) Page 4 At the September 7, 1982 meeting of the Bicycle Trails Citizens' Advisory Committee, the bike trail reconstruction through Jasmine Gully was discussed. The Committee voted to support the concept of bike trail recon- struction through the gully which provides for maximum access through the park site (i.e., minimum grades). The Committee also recommended a contribution of the FY 1982 -83 SB 821 Bicycle Trails Program appropriation to the project. Additionally, the Parks, Beaches & Recreation Commission, at their meeting of September 7, 1982, unanimously voted to recommend concept Alterna- tive No. 3, which will maximize the land use and provide improved access to the Community Youth Center and OASIS facilities. Staff met with representatives from the Corona del Mar Community Association, the Friends of OASIS, and other interested parties on the morning of September 17, 1982. The various grading concepts were discussed in detail, and the parties were informed of Council action to be taken on September 28. In general, the grading concept Alternative No. 3 was considered most desirable. It should also be noted that Council approval at this time of a pre- ferred grading alternative is considered tentative, since aPDropropriate environmental and engineering documentation is to be prepared and submitted for approval prior to advertisement for bids. Final plan, specifications and Engineer's estimate will be prepared by Jack P. Norris, Consulting Civil Engineer. 1,2V 7''Lfd v'Li J L' IL Benjamin B. Nolan Public Works Director LRD:jd Att. Ronald A. Whitley Parks, Beaches & Recre ion Director - fr iT 4 4 4