Fountain Valley City Council
February 7, 2023

City Council Regular Meeting Agenda Page 1 February 7, 2023

AGENDA

CITY COUNCIL/ SUCCESSOR

AGENCY TO THE FOUNTAIN

VALLEY AGENCY

FOR COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT/

FOUNTAIN VALLEY HOUSING AUTHORITY
Study Session 4:30 p.m.

Closed Session Immediately Following Study Session
Regular Meeting 6:00 p.m.

Tuesday, February 7, 2023
Council Chambers
10200 Slater Avenue
Fountain Valley, CA 92708
http://www.fountainvalley.org

MEETING ASSISTANCE: In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, anyone needing special assistance to participate in a meeting of the government bodies listed herein should contact the City Clerk’s Office at (714) 593-4445. Notification 72 hours prior to the meeting allows the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to the meeting.

AGENDA COMMUNICATIONS: All revised or additional documents and writings related to an item on this agenda provided to all or a majority of the government body members after distribution of the agenda packet, are available for public inspection (1) in the City Clerk’s Office at 10200 Slater Avenue, Fountain Valley, CA 92708 during normal business hours; and (2) in the Council Chambers at the time of the meeting. Unless directed otherwise by a government body listed herein all actions shall be based on/memorialized by the latest document submitted as a late communication.

PUBLIC COMMENTS/PUBLIC HEARINGS: Persons wishing to address th e Cit y Counci l or othe r government body listed complete a speaker card and give it to the City Clerk prior to the public comment period. Requests to speak will not be accepted after the public comment session begins without permission of the Mayor/Chair. Speakers must limit remarks to a total of (3) three minutes and address the City Council through the Mayor.

Comments to individuals or staff are not permitted. Scheduled Matters, including Public Hearings: Indicate on the card what item you want to address. Unscheduled Matters: Indicate on the card what subject matter you
want to address. Comments must be related to issues that are within the jurisdiction of the governing body listed on the agenda. Pursuant to the Brown Act, the governing body may not enter into discussion regarding items not on the agenda.

CONSENT CALENDAR: All matters listed under the Consent Calendar are considered by the governing bodies listed herein to be routine and will be enacted on simultaneously with one motion without discussion unless separate action and/or discussion is requested by a governing body member, staff, or a member of the public.

PUBLIC HEARINGS: Persons wishing to speak in favor of or in opposition to a proposal are given an opportunity to do so during the public hearing. Those wishing to address a governing body during the hearing are requested to complete the speaker card and submit it to the City Clerk prior to the hearing. If a proposed action is challenged in court, there may be a limitation to
raising only those issues raised during the hearing or in written correspondence received by the governing body at or before the hearing.

Note: The Fountain Valley City Council serves as the Successor Agency to the Fountain Valley Agency for Community Development (Successor Agency), the Fountain Valley Housing Authority, and the Fountain Valley Finance Authority. The Actions of the Successor Agency are separate and apart from the actions of the City Council.

ZOOM LINK INFORMATION
• Participants that choose to watch the City Council meeting through zoom are automatically placed in the waiting room and will only be allowed into the Zoom meeting if they request to make a public comment. In order to make a public comment, you will indicate through the chat feature which item you would like to speak on, and click on the “raise hand” icon to let the administrator know you wish to speak. • All participants are muted unless you are requesting to speak, at which time you will be allowed to unmute and make you comment.
• All public comments are allowed up to 3 minutes to speak. •
Join Zoom Meeting
https://us02web.zoom.us/j/89076709692?pwd=aVBuVkZOTEZWaFprTjRkMVhTaUNLZz09 Meeting ID: 890 7670 9692
Passcode: 254227
One tap mobile
+16694449171,,89076709692#,,,,*254227# US
+16699006833,,89076709692#,,,,*254227# US (San Jose)

STUDY SESSION
CALL TO ORDER 4:30 p.m.

PUBLIC COMMENTS (Study Session matters only)
Persons wishing to speak on a Study Session matter are requested to identify themselves by completing a blue speaker card indicating the item they want to address and to give the card to the City Clerk prior to the public comment period. The City Clerk will call upon those that wish to speak.

1. Update on the City’s Insurance Renewals and Options for Other Carriers – Presentation by Rick Miller – City Clerk / Administrator

CLOSED SESSION
CALL TO ORDER Immediately Following Study Session
PUBLIC COMMENTS (Closed Session matters only)
Persons wishing to speak on a Closed Session matter are requested to identify themselves by completing a blue speaker card indicating the item they want to address and to give the card to the City Clerk prior to the public comment period.

1. Conference with Legal Counsel - Anticipated Litigation Initiation of litigation pursuant to paragraph (4) of subdivision (d) of Section 54956.9: (1 potential case)

2. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS
Property: 17101 Bushard Agency Negotiator (APN: 167-301-04): Maggie Le, City Manager; Omar Dadabhoy, Community Development Director/Deputy City Manager; Ryan Smith, Finance Director; Colin Burns, Attorney for the City. Negotiating Parties: Henry Kim Raeburn Trust The BSK Family Trust: Price and terms of payment

3. CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS
Agency designated representatives: Mayor
Unrepresented employee: City Manager

4. PUBLIC EMPLOYEE PERFORMANCE EVALUATION
Title: City Manager

OPEN SESSION
CALL TO ORDER 6:00 p.m.

INVOCATION
SALUTE TO THE FLAG Mayor Kim Constantine

CITY COUNCIL/SUCCESSOR AGENCY/HOUSING AUTHORITY/ ROLL CALL Council Members: Bui, Cunneen, Harper, Mayor Pro Tem/Vice Chair Grandis, Mayor/Chair Constantine

ANNOUNCEMENT OF SUPPLEMENTAL COMMUNICATIONS

CITY MANAGER / MAYOR UPDATE

PRESENTATIONS
• City of Kindness Recognition to Isabella Paramo
• Presentation recognizing An Nguyen for hosting the Lunar New Year Event for the City of Fountain Valley as her Girl Scout Gold Award Project – Presentation by Christie Araiza

FIRST CITY COUNCIL/ SUCCESSOR AGENCY/ HOUSING AUTHORITY/ PUBLIC COMMENTS (Unscheduled Matters Only)
The Unscheduled Matters Public Comments portion will last 15 Minutes at the beginning of the meeting. Any requests to speak on unscheduled matters after the initial 15 minutes, will be heard at the end of the meeting, unless the Mayor approves an extension of this time. If an individual speaks during the First unscheduled matters time period, they do not get to speak at the end of the meeting as well. Persons wishing to speak on an unscheduled matter are requested to identify themselves by completing a blue speaker and to give the card to the City Clerk. Each person will have up to 3 minutes to speak. The City Clerk will call upon those that wish to speak.

PUBLIC COMMENTS (Scheduled Matters Only)
Persons wishing to speak on Agenda item(s) are requested to identify themselves by completing a blue speaker card indicating the item they want to address and to give the card to the City Clerk prior to the public comment period. Each person will be given up to 3 minutes to speak on the entire Consent Calendar, 3 minutes to speak on each item pulled from the consent calendar, and 3 minutes to speak on any agendized item(s) not appearing on the Consent Calendar.

CONSENT CALENDAR
Consent Calendar Items 1 – 7 will be approved simultaneously with one motion, unless separate action/or discussion is requested.

1. Waive the reading in full of all ordinances under consideration and direct the Mayor to read by titles only.

2. Receive and File the Draft Minutes of the January 17, 2023 Regular City Council Meeting

3. Second Reading and Adoption of an Ordinance approving Code Amendment No. 22-06

Recommended Action: Staff is requesting City Council approval of Alternative No. 1 to adopt the attached Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Fountain Valley approving a Notice of Exemption in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and approve Code Amendment No. 22-06 for accessory dwelling units.

4. Accept AGA Engineers Inc. $3,055 fee proposal for Assessment of Fountain Valley School Signage, and authorize staff to issue Purchase Order to encumber on-call contract; and Amend Traffic Improvement (Measure M) Budget for FY 22-23 for $3,055. Page 43 Recommended Action: Staff recommends that the City Council accept a fee proposal from AGA Engineers Inc. for $3,055 for the assessment of Fountain Valley school signage, and authorize staff to issue a Purchase Order to encumber the on-call contract. Staff also recommends that the City Council amend the Traffic Improvement (Measure M) Budget for Fiscal Year 2022-2023 in the amount of $3,055.

5. Accept Onward $4,870 proposal for Design Plans, Specifications, & Estimate for Proj TI277 & authorize staff to issue PO to encumber on-call contract. Approve reduction of staff time $4,870 costs & reappropriate for design services of Heil bike lanes Page 103 Recommended Action: Staff recommends that the City Council:

1. Accept the Onward Engineering proposal in the amount of $4,870 for Design Plans, Specifications, & Estimate (PS&E) and authorize staff to issue a purchase order to encumber the on-call CON 21-56 (Munis CON 1024).

2. Approve the reduction of staff time project costs in the amount of $4,870 (Project No. 2422221006 (TI277)) and reappropriate funds toward design services for Onward Engineering to accommodate bike lanes on Heil Avenue.

6. Approve $120,000 budget transfer from FY22/23 Edinger (Newhope to Harbor) Proj Budget to Warner & Ellis both from Brookhurst to Bushard Projects. Amend FY22/23 Projects Budget of $7,015, accept DMS $67,235 & $59,780 proposals, & issue POs Page 151 Recommended Action: Staff recommends that the City Council:

1. Approve a budget transfer of $120,000 from the FY 22/23 Pavement Rehabilitation for Edinger Avenue from Newhope Street to Harbor Boulevard Project (Project No. 2422321007) Budget to the Warner Avenue and Ellis Avenue both from Brookhurst Street to Bushard Street Rehabilitation and Resurfacing Projects;

2. Amend the FY 22/23 Project Budget (Traffic Improvement (TI) Fund 242) of $7,015.00; and

3. Accept the DMS Consultants, Inc. proposals for $67,235 and $59,780 ($127,015 total) for design plans, specifications & estimate (PS&E) for the Warner Avenue and Ellis Avenue both from Brookhurst Street to Bushard Street Rehabilitation and Resurfacing Projects, respectively, and authorize staff to issue Purchase Orders to encumber the on-call contract.

7. Approve the Cooperative Agreement between the City of Fountain Valley and the City of Westminster for the Rehabilitation and Resurfacing of Magnolia Street from Edinger Avenue to Heil Avenue Page 240
Recommended Action: Staff recommends that the City Council: 1) Approve the Cooperative Agreement between the City of Fountain Valley and the City of Westminster for the Rehabilitation and Resurfacing of Magnolia Street from Edinger Avenue to Heil Avenue.

ADMINISTRATIVE ITEMS

8. Waive bidding requirements pursuant to FVMC 2.36.070 Par 4 & authorize staff to issue purchase order to National Auto Fleet Group for purchase of one 2023 Ford Super Duty F350 Reg Cab 2WD XL 84” CA, plus upfit, for $112,199.91 – Presentation by HyeJin Le, Public Works Director Page 250
Recommended Action: Staff is requesting City Council approval of Alternative No. 1 to 1) waive the bidding requirements pursuant to FVMC 2.36.070 Par 4 and authorize staff to issue a purchase order to National Auto Fleet Group for the purchase of one (1) new/unused 2023 Ford Super Duty F-350 Reg Cab 2WD XL 84” CA, plus upfit, for $112,199.91 through the existing cooperative contract with Sourcewell; and 2) authorize staff to dispose of the existing vehicle by means that best meet the City’s needs.

COUNCIL MEMBER ITEMS FOR FUTURE CONSIDERATION

CITY COUNCIL/ SUCCESSOR AGENCY/ HOUSING AUTHORITY/ PUBLIC COMMENTS (Unscheduled Matters Only)
Persons wishing to speak on an unscheduled matter are requested to identify themselves by completing a blue speaker and to give the card to the City Clerk. Each person will have up to 3 minutes to speak. The City Clerk will call upon those that wish to speak.

CITY COUNCIL/SUCCESSOR AGENCY/HOUSING AUTHORITY AB 1234/GENERAL

COMMENTS

ADJOURN THE MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL/SUCCESSOR

AGENCY/HOUSING AUTHORITY
Tonight’s City Council Meeting is being Adjourned in the Memory of Clemente Mendez and Jim Applegate
The next Regular Meeting of the Fountain Valley City Council is February 21, 2023 at 6:00 p.m., in the Fountain Valley Council Chambers, 10200 Slater Avenue, Fountain Valley.

CITY OF FOUNTAIN VALLEY

CITY COUNCIL

COUNCIL ACTION REQUEST
To: Honorable Mayor and Agenda Date: February 7, 2023
Members of the City Council
SUBJECT: Update on the City’s Insurance Renewals and Options for Other Carriers EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:

This report is a summary of the current Insurance coverages the city has through PRISM (Formerly CSAC), the state of the insurance market and the other insurance options available through another carrier.

DISCUSSION:

In 2018, in a cost saving maneuver, the city switched insurance carriers, moving from the long time insurance provider of CalJPIA to PRISM (Formerly CSAC). The purpose of the switch was a financial decision and was not based on performance related to CalJPIA.

One of the City’s Strategic Planning goals is to assess opportunities for cost savings. Given that insurance premiums through PRISM (Formerly CSAC) have increased by $329,729 over five years, the City has started to review the cost of coverage, as illustrated in the diagram below. The rise in insurance premiums is not solely due to the rise in Exposure (payroll). The city is one of many cities in the risk pool and therefore losses by any agency are spread out through the entire program.

City of Fountain Valley Coverage Limit
Exposure
(Payroll) Premium
7/1/2018 - 7/1/2019 GL1 $25,000,000 $26,000,000 $321,467 7/1/2019 - 7/1/2020 GL1 $25,000,000 $26,540,000 $392,201 7/1/2020 - 7/1/2021 GL1 $25,000,000 $26,000,000 $515,028 7/1/2021 - 7/1/2022 GL1 $25,000,000 $25,870,000 $515,774 7/1/2022 - 7/1/2023 GL1 $25,000,000 $28,366,800 $651,196

Liability Claims
The City on average has had positive claim experience over the past 10 years with the exception of two claims that occurred in January 2013. The 2013 claims resulted in losses that exceeded $1 million per incident. As expected, these losses have contributed, in part, to the increase in premiums. On average, the city has received 19 claims per year since fiscal year 2013/14.

California JPIA
The California JPIA provides liability coverage that offers members two program options: the primary liability program and the excess liability program. Coverage in both programs includes bodily injury, personal injury, or property damage to a third party resulting from a member activity, including automobile liability. Employment practices liability is also a covered exposure. Claims for these programs are managed through a collaborative process with member communication and consultation. The California JPIA uses a third-party administrator to investigate and respond to all claims.

PRISM
Public Risk Innovation, Solutions, and Management (PRISM) will continue to be internationally recognized as a leading risk sharing pool for its member-directed operating philosophy and commitment to member fiscal sustainability. PRISM will continue to influence and shape the future of the risk management profession.

PRISM was formed in 1979 by 29 California counties. Since then, PRISM’s membership has expanded to include 55 of 58 counties in California and approximately 60% of cities (for at least one line of coverage), as well as numerous school districts, special districts, housing authorities, fire districts, and other Joint Powers Authorities.

The EIA is a member-driven organization with 18 Committees for the development, governance, oversight and future direction of all programs and services. Governance meetings (board, committee, strategic planning and annual meetings) along with many other educational training events are held year-round throughout the State of California and are open to all members free of charge. Travel is reimbursed, typically for up to two individuals per entity.

FINANCIAL ANALYSIS:

We are currently in the process of receiving quotes on all lines of coverage from CalJPIA. We have received our initial estimates on all the city coverage programs with PRISM, however, we are still waiting on final numbers and will bring those back once they are finale, as well as the quotes received from CalJPIA.

Prepared by: Rick Miller, City Clerk / Administrator
Reviewed by: Maggie Le, City Manager

MINUTES OF THE

CITY COUNCIL/ SUCCESSOR AGENCY TO THE FOUNTAIN

VALLEY AGENCY

FOR COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT/ FOUNTAIN VALLEY

HOUSING AUTHORITY
Closed Session 5:00 p.m.

Study Session immediately Following Closed Session
Regular Meeting 6:00 p.m.

Tuesday, January 17, 2023
Council Chambers

CLOSED SESSION
CALL TO ORDER 5:00 p.m.

PUBLIC COMMENTS (Closed Session matters only)

1. CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS
Agency designated representatives: Maggie Le, City Manager, Carrie Hanes, Human Resources Director, Colin Burns, City Attorney, Rob Frizzelle, Community Services Director, Ryan Smith, Finance Director
Unrepresented part-time employees
No Reportable Action

2. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL—EXISTING LITIGATION
(Paragraph (1) of subdivision (d) of Section 54956.9)
Name of case: WISP v Fountain Valley (FCC Case)
No Reportable Action

3. CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS
Agency designated representatives: Mayor
Unrepresented employee: City Manager
City Manager Maggie Le was not part of the discussion and left the Closed Session room.

No Reportable Action

4. PUBLIC EMPLOYEE PERFORMANCE EVALUATION
Title: City Manager
City Manager Maggie Le was not part of the discussion and left the Closed Session room.

No Reportable Action

OPEN SESSION
CALL TO ORDER 6:02 p.m.

INVOCATION Pastor Kene Panas
SALUTE TO THE FLAG Mayor Pro Tem Glenn Grandis

CITY COUNCIL/SUCCESSOR AGENCY/HOUSING AUTHORITY/ ROLL CALL Council Members Present: Bui, Cunneen, Harper, Mayor Pro Tem/Vice Chair Grandis, Mayor/Chair Constantine
Council Members Absent: None

ANNOUNCEMENT OF SUPPLEMENTAL COMMUNICATIONS
There were no announcements

CITY MANAGER / MAYOR UPDATES
City Manager Maggie Le reminded everyone that the Commission and Committee Applications are still being accepted and that City Hall would be closed from December 26 through December 30th. Mayor Constantine provided an update on the construction process of the bridges in Fountain Valley, the winter dance would be January 4th and the Lunar New Year lunch will happen on January 24th.

PRESENTATIONS
 City of Kindness Recognition of Community Services Staff

FIRST CITY COUNCIL/ SUCCESSOR AGENCY/ HOUSING AUTHORITY/ PUBLIC COMMENTS (Unscheduled Matters Only)
Carol Cole, Paul Gray, Hugh McIntyre, Katy Wright

CONSENT CALENDAR
Consent Calendar Items 1 – 10 were approved simultaneously.

1. Waive the reading in full of all ordinances under consideration and direct the Mayor to read by titles only.

ACTION: Move to Waive the reading in full of all ordinances under consideration and direct the Mayor to read by titles only.

MOTION: Grandis SECOND: Bui
AYES: Bui, Harper, Cunneen, Grandis, Constantine
NOES: None

ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None

2. Receive and File the Draft Minutes of the December 20, 2022 Regular City Council Meeting ACTION: Move to Receive and File the Draft Minutes of the December 20, 2022 Regular City Council Meeting
MOTION: Grandis SECOND: Bui
AYES: Bui, Harper, Cunneen, Grandis, Constantine
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None

3. City of Fountain Valley Six Month Strategic Objectives Update For November 17, 2022 through May 11, 2023
ACTION: Move to Receive and File City of Fountain Valley Six Month Strategic Objectives Update For November 17, 2022 through May 11, 2023
MOTION: Grandis SECOND: Bui
AYES: Bui, Harper, Cunneen, Grandis, Constantine
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None

4. Highway Safety Improvement Program for Traffic Signal Modification Improvements for 8 Intersections Accept PSOMAS $47,000 Proposal and authorize Staff to issue Purchase Order to PSOMAS & Approve budget amendment of FY22/23 as stated in staff report ACTION: Move to Approve the Highway Safety Improvement Program for Traffic Signal Modification Improvements for 8 Intersections Accept PSOMAS $47,000 Proposal and authorize Staff to issue Purchase Order to PSOMAS & Approve budget amendment of FY22/23 as stated in staff report
MOTION: Grandis SECOND: Bui
AYES: Bui, Harper, Cunneen, Grandis, Constantine
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None

5. Award of contract to Phil Martin & Associates, Inc. to provide environmental services for a 15-

lot subdivision located at 8572 Talbert Avenue
ACTION: Move to Approve the Award of contract to Phil Martin & Associates, Inc. to provide environmental services for a 15-lot subdivision located at 8572 Talbert Avenue
MOTION: Grandis SECOND: Bui
AYES: Bui, Harper, Cunneen, Grandis, Constantine
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None

PUBLIC HEARING

6. Conduct a Public Protest Hearing Regarding 2023-2027 Consumer Price Index (CPI) Increases for Republic (dba Rainbow) Residential Trash Collection Rates per the requirement of the Proposition 218
Public Hearing Opened: 6:27 PM
Public Comment – None
Public Hearing Closed – 6:28 p.m.

ACTION: Move to Approve the 2023-2027 Consumer Price Index (CPI) Increases for Republic (dba Rainbow) Residential Trash Collection Rates per the requirement of the Proposition 218
MOTION: Grandis SECOND: Cunneen
AYES: Bui, Cunneen, Harper, Grandis, Constantine
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None

7. Public Hearing and Introduction: Code Amendment No. 22-06 – An Amendment To Fountain Valley Municipal Code 21.08.055 For The Adoption Of An Ordinance For Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) In Compliance With State Law
Public Hearing Opened: 6:50 PM
Public Comment – Katy Wright
Public Hearing Closed – 6:53 p.m.

ACTION: Move to Adopt Code Amendment No. 22-06 – An Amendment To Fountain

Valley Municipal Code 21.08.055 For The Adoption Of An Ordinance For Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) In Compliance With State Law MOTION: Harper SECOND: Grandis
AYES: Bui, Cunneen, Harper, Grandis, Constantine
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None

ADMINISTRATIVE ITEMS

8. Award of Contract to Allegra Consulting, Inc. for Professional Services ACTION: Move to Approve and Award of Contract to Allegra Consulting, Inc. for Professional Services
MOTION: Constantine SECOND: Grandis
AYES: Bui, Cunneen, Harper, Grandis, Constantine
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None

9. Adopt a Resolution to effect certain changes to the City’s Master Salary Schedule in conformance with Title 2 of the California Code of Regulations section 570.5 and the California Public Employees’ Retirement System
Item number 9 was pulled from consideration of the agenda at the request of staff, and was not heard by the City Council

10. Accept proposals & award $1,454,514.79 contract to PlayPower for Universally Accessible Playground for Recreation Ctr & Sports Park construction. Accept $116,290 Interwest proposal & issue PO. Approve Interwest Amendment 1 to CON 21-72 for $400,000 Public Comment: John Borack
ACTION: Move to Approve and award $1,454,514.79 contract to PlayPower for Universally Accessible Playground for Recreation Ctr & Sports Park construction. Accept $116,290 Interwest proposal & issue PO. Approve Interwest Amendment 1 to CON 21-72 for $400,000 with the conditions that the General Fund be reimbursed by the park fees collected and with a not to exceed budget of 1.7 million dollars.

MOTION: Grandis SECOND: Harper
AYES: Cunneen, Harper, Grandis, Constantine
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: Bui

COUNCIL MEMBER ITEMS FOR FUTURE CONSIDERATION
There were none

CITY COUNCIL/ SUCCESSOR AGENCY/ HOUSING AUTHORITY/ PUBLIC COMMENTS (Unscheduled Matters Only)
None
CITY COUNCIL/SUCCESSOR AGENCY/HOUSING AUTHORITY AB 1234/GENERAL COMMENTS Council Member Bui
December 21 Attended the swearing in for State Senator Janet Nguyen January 13 Attended the funeral for former Orange County Supervisor Bill Steiner and the 120th Anniversary of American-Korean Celebration Day
January 17 Attended the Rotary Most Improved Student Awards Council Member Cunneen
December 21 Attended the swearing in for State Senator Janet Nguyen January 12 Attended new City Council Member training hosted by the ACCOC January 14 Attended the swearing in of Congresswoman Michelle Steel January 17 Attended the Rotary Club Most Improved Student Awards and the OCTA Citizens Advisory Commission meeting
Mayor Pro Tem Grandis
December 21 Attended the swearing in for State Senator Janet Nguyen December 28 Attended the Police Dept. retirement ceremony for Corporal Estes January 3 Attended the New Employee Welcome at City Hall January 7 Attended the Rotary Holiday Party
January 9 Attended the Fountain Valley Schools Foundation Board Meeting January 10 Attended the new year Greetings at Vietnamese TV Stations January 11 Attended the Coastline College Board of Directors meeting and the OC San District Special Board Meeting
January 12 Attended the Kiwanis Board Meeting
Mayor Constantine
December 21 Toured again Republic Services in Huntington Beach.

January 5 Volunteered at the Friends of the Library Bookstore, at the Fountain Valley Library, packing and storing books, etc. for the upcoming book sale, then attended the Advisory Committee for Persons with Disabilities Meeting at the Senior Center.

January 6 Attended the Winter Dance for senior citizens at the Senior Center.

January 7 Assisted with setting up the Friends of the Library Book Sale at the Fountain Valley Library.

January 11 Watched the Planning Commission Meeting on the City’s website.

January 12 Attended the ACCOC Newly Elected Officials Luncheon at the Costa Mesa Hilton. The speaker was Gaddi Vasquez, US Ambassador, retired, then participated in the OC Mosquito and Vector Control Special Meeting online.

January 17 Attended the “Most Improved Student” Rotary Meeting at the Senior Center.

Council Member Harper
January 9 Attended the OCTA Board Meeting
January 10 Attended the Board of Supervisors Swearing in Ceremony January 11 Attended the ACCOC Meeting
January 12 Attended the OCTA Transit Committee meeting
January 14 Attended the swearing in of Congresswoman Michelle Steel

ADJOURN THE MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL/SUCCESSOR AGENCY/HOUSING

AUTHORITY

Mayor Constantine adjourned the meeting at 7:55 pm to the next Meeting of the Fountain Valley City Council on February 7, 2023 at 6:00 p.m., in the Fountain Valley Council Chambers, 10200 Slater Avenue, Fountain Valley.
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Kim Constantine, Mayor
Attest:
___________________________
Rick Miller, City Clerk

CITY OF FOUNTAIN VALLEY

CITY COUNCIL

COUNCIL ACTION REQUEST
To: Honorable Mayor and Agenda Date: February 7, 2023
Members of the City Council
SUBJECT: Second Reading and Adoption of an Ordinance approving Code Amendment No. 22-06 – An Amendment To The Fountain Valley Municipal Code (FVMC) Section 21.08.055 For the Adoption Of An Ordinance For Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) In Compliance With State Law Three-Year Strategic Goals
☒ Enhance the culture and environment of “A Nice Place to Live” ☐ Attract and retain revenue producing businesses
☐ Achieve fiscal stability in accordance with the 20-Year Financial Plan ☐ Attract and retain quality staff
☐ Not applicable

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
At its meeting of January 17, 2023, the City Council introduced for a first reading an Ordinance approving Code Amendment (CA) No. 22-06 to amend Section 21.08.055 of the FVMC for ADUs in compliance with state law (Attachment 1). The Ordinance was introduced by a vote of 5-0 during the first reading without amendment.

As detailed in the attached report (Attachment 2), the ordinance both make the City’s ADU Ordinance compliant with state law and will preserve what limited authority the City has remaining to regulate ADUs as a result of these new state laws. Some of the local control development standards that are in the existing ADU ordinance, and some new standards, include provisions for building separation, passageway and entrances, development standards such as floor area ratio, landscaping, ratio of 2nd story to 1st story, balconies and decks, open space, parking, and architectural compatibility.

The Ordinance is now presented to the City Council for a second reading and adoption.

FINANCIAL REVIEW
There is no financial impact associated with approving the proposed code amendment.

PUBLIC NOTIFICATION
The item was published in the Fountain Valley View and public notices were posted at City Hall, Recreation Center, and Fountain Valley Library for the public hearing on January 17, 2023.

Council Action Request
Second Reading – Adoption of an Ordinance approving Code Amendment 22-06 City Council Meeting February 7, 2023

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REVIEW
Adoption of this Ordinance is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) under Public Resources Code section 21080.17 [statutory exemption for second unit ordinances]; CEQA Guidelines sections 15282(h) [statutory exemption for second unit ordinances]; 15303 [new construction or small structures] and 15305 [minor alterations to land]. This ordinance is also exempt per CEQA Guidelines section 15061, because this ordinance will not have a significant effect on the environment, because ADU’s will largely constitute infill housing which is exempt from CEQA (Attachment 3).

ATTORNEY REVIEW
The Attorney for the City has reviewed the attached Ordinance.

ALTERNATIVES
Alternative No. 1: Adopt the attached Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Fountain Valley approving a Notice of Exemption in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and approving Code Amendment No. 22-06 to amend the Fountain Valley Municipal Code (FVMC) Section 21.08.055 for accessory dwelling units.

Alternative No. 2: Do not adopt the attached Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Fountain Valley approving a Notice of Exemption in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and do not approve Code Amendment No. 22-06 to amend the Fountain Valley Municipal Code (FVMC) Section 21.08.055 for accessory dwelling units.

Alternative No. 3: Continue the request for additional information.

RECOMMENDATION
Staff is requesting City Council approval of Alternative No. 1 to adopt the attached Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Fountain Valley approving a Notice of Exemption in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and approve Code Amendment No. 22-06 for accessory dwelling units.

Prepared By: Steven Ayers, Principal Planner
Approved By: Omar Dadabhoy, Community Development Director Approved By: Maggie Le, City Manager
Attachments:

1. Ordinance for Code Amendment No. 22-06

2. January 17, 2023 Staff Report

3. Notice of Exemption

ORDINANCE NO._____

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FOUNTAIN

VALLEY APPROVING A CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION PER THE

CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) AND APPROVING CODE AMENDMENT (CA) NO. 22-06 TO AMEND THE FOUNTAIN VALLEY MUNICIPAL CODE (FVMC) SECTION 21.08.055 FOR ACCESSORY
DWELLING UNITS (ADU’S)
WHEREAS, the Fountain Valley City Council adopted the Development Code Update on December 7, 2000; and
WHEREAS, on December 5, 2017, the Fountain Valley City Council adopted Ordinance No. 1527 approving an ADU ordinance compliant with Assembly Bill (AB) 2299 and Senate Bill (SB) 1069 that amended California Government Code 65852.2 and 65852.22; and
WHEREAS, on March 17, 2020, the Fountain Valley City Council adopted Ordinance No. 1558 approving an ADU ordinance compliant with AB 68, AB 881, SB 13, AB 587, and AB 670 that amended California Government Code 65852.2 and 65852.22; and WHEREAS, in 2022, the California Legislature approved, and Governor Newsom signed into law on September 28, 2022 two new bills (“New ADU Laws”) that, that among other things, amend Government Code Section 65852.2 and 65852.22. These two bill are AB 2221 and SB 897; and
WHEREAS, the new ADU laws take effect on January 1, 2023, and at that time, if the City’s ADU Ordinance does not comply with the New ADU Laws, the City’s ordinance shall become null and void on that date as a matter of law; and WHEREAS, portions of Fountain Valley’s existing ADU Ordinance (Ordinance No. 1558) conflicted with provisions of the New ADU Laws and will become null and void on January 1, 2023; and
WHEREAS, the City of Fountain Valley desires to amend FVMC Section 21.08.055 for the construction of ADU’s and Junior ADU’s (JADU’s) to comply with the amended provisions of Government Code sections 65852.2 and 65852.22; and WHEREAS, the Fountain Valley Planning Commission considered the proposed Code Amendment No. 22-06 at a duly noticed public hearing on December 14, 2022, and by a vote of 4-1 recommended the City Council approve a Categorical exemption per CEQA and approve Code Amendment No. 22-06 to amend FVMC Section 21.08.055 for ADU’s; and WHEREAS, the proposed Code Amendment No. 22-06 has been publicly noticed in accordance with State Law and the Fountain Valley Municipal Code.

SECTION 1
The City Council hereby determines that Code Amendment No. 22-06 is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) under Public Resources Code section 21080.17 [statutory exemption for second unit ordinances]; CEQA Guidelines sections 15282(h) [statutory exemption for second unit ordinances]; 15303 [new construction or small structures] and 15305 [minor alterations to land]. This ordinance is also exempt under CEQA Guidelines section 15061, because this ordinance will not have a significant effect on the environment, because ADUs will largely constitute infill housing which is exempt from CEQA.

SECTION 2
The City Council finds that due notice of the public hearing on January 17, 2023, conducted in the City Council Chambers, 10200 Slater Avenue, Fountain Valley, was given as required by the Fountain Valley Municipal Code, Title 21, and the State of California. Public notice of this hearing and a copy of the Planning Commission agenda were posted at City Hall, Recreation Center and the Fountain Valley Library.

SECTION 3
Pursuant to Fountain Valley Municipal Code section 21.34.050 the City Council does hereby find as follows:

1. The proposed amendment ensures and maintains internal consistency with the actions, goals, objectives and policies of the General Plan, and would not create any inconsistencies with Title 21, in the case of a title amendment. The proposed amendment would promote and encourage the development of a variety of housing opportunities to accommodate current and projected households by promoting the construction of additional dwelling units to accommodate Fountain Valley’s share of regional housing needs in accordance with adopted land use policies (General Plan Housing Element Goal #1/Policy 1.1). Code Amendment No. 22-06 would be consistent with California Government Code 65852.2, 65852.22, and Title 21 and would not create any inconsistencies with Title 21, in the case of a title amendment.

2. The proposed amendment would not be detrimental to the public convenience, health, interest, safety or welfare of the city. The proposed amendment would clearly identify standards that must be met per California Government Code 65852.2 and 65852.22 along with development standards to ensure consistency with the Fountain Valley Municipal Code to ensure public convenience, health, interest, safety, and welfare will be met.

3. The proposed amendment has been reviewed in compliance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the city’s environmental review procedures as addressed in Section 1 above.

4. The proposed amendment is internally consistent with other applicable provisions of Title 21. As noted in finding 1 above, Code Amendment No. 22-06 would update FVMC 21.08.055 to provide internal consistency with other applicable provisions

of Title 21. There are no other known inconsistencies with the proposed amendment and other applicable provisions of Title 21.

SECTION 4
Section 21.08.055 is hereby amended to read as follows:
“…
The following objective standards shall apply to accessory dwelling units. (a) Accessory Dwelling Units Constructed Within Existing Structures. An accessory dwelling unit: (1) attached to, or located within, a proposed or existing single-family dwelling, including attached garages, storage areas or similar uses, or an accessory structure; or (2) constructed in the same location and to the same dimensions as an existing structure that is converted to an accessory dwelling unit or to a portion of an accessory dwelling unit; or (3) attached to, or located within an existing multi-family structure projects shall conform to the following:
(1) Building Permit. Prior to constructing an accessory dwelling unit per this subsection, the applicant must apply for and receive approval of a building permit. The application shall be ministerially considered and approved, without discretionary review or a hearing, notwithstanding Government Code section 65901 or 65906 or regulation of variances or special use permits, and be in compliance with all requirements imposed by subsection (a).
(2) Plan Review. The city shall act on an application to create an accessory dwelling unit under subsection (a) within sixty days from the date the city receives a completed building permit application if there is an existing single-family or multifamily dwelling on the lot. If the application to create an accessory dwelling unit is submitted in conjunction with an application to create a new residential structure on the lot, the city may delay acting on the application for the accessory dwelling unit until the city acts on the application for the new residential structure, but the application to create the accessory dwelling unit shall be considered without discretionary review or hearing. If the applicant requests a delay, the sixty-day time period shall be tolled for the period of the agreed-upon delay. (A) Plan Review. The city shall approve or deny an application to create or serve an accessory dwelling unit under subsection (a) within sixty days from the date the city receives a completed building permit application if there is an existing single-family or multi-family dwelling on the lot. If the application to create or serve an accessory dwelling unit is submitted in conjunction with an application to create a new single-family or multifamily dwelling unit on the lot, the City may delay approving or denying the application for the accessory dwelling unit until the City approves or denies the application to create or serve the new single-family or multifamily dwelling, but the application to create or serve the accessory dwelling unit shall be considered without discretionary review or hearing. If the applicant requests a delay, the sixty-day time period shall be tolled for the period of the agreed-upon delay. If the City has not

approved or denied the completed application within 60 days, the application shall be deemed approved.
(B) Denial. If the permitting agency denies an application for an accessory dwelling submitted pursuant to subdivision (A), the permitting agency shall, within the time period of subparagraph (A), return in writing a full set of comments to the applicant with a list of items that are defective or deficient and a description of how the application can be remedied by the applicant. The permitting agency shall not deny an application for a permit to create an accessory dwelling unit due to the correction of nonconforming zoning conditions, building code violations, or unpermitted structures that do not present a threat to public health and safety and are not affected by the construction of the accessory dwelling unit.
(2) Demolition Permit. A demolition permit for a detached garage that is to be replaced with an accessory dwelling unit shall be reviewed with the application for the accessory dwelling unit and issued at the same time. The permit applicant shall not be required to provide a written notice or posted placard for the demolition of a detached garage that is to be replaced with an accessory dwelling unit, unless the property is located within an architecturally and historically significant historic district. (3) Building Code Requirements. Accessory dwelling units shall be constructed on a permanent foundation and shall be built in compliance with the California Building Code. Accessory dwelling units shall comply with local building code requirements that apply to detached dwellings, except that the construction of an accessory dwelling unit shall not constitute a Group R occupancy change under the local building code, as described in Section 310 of the California Building Code (Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations), unless the building official makes a written finding based on substantial evidence in the record that the construction of the accessory dwelling unit could have a specific, adverse impact on public health and safety. Nothing in this clause shall be interpreted to prevent the City from changing the occupancy code of a space that was unhabitable space or was only permitted for nonresidential use and was subsequently converted for residential use pursuant to this section. (4) Areas Allowed. Accessory dwelling unit(s) shall be permitted on a residentially zoned parcel with one existing or proposed single-family dwelling and in multi-family projects as noted in subsection (e).
(5) Number of Accessory Dwelling Units Allowed.
(A) A parcel with one existing or proposed single-family dwelling shall contain no more than a total of three dwelling units comprised of one single-family dwelling, one attached or detached accessory dwelling unit, and one junior accessory dwelling unit; and or
(B) A parcel with one existing or proposed single-family dwelling shall contain no more than a total of four dwelling units if they are comprised of one single-family dwelling, one internal accessory dwelling unit, one junior accessory dwelling unit, and one detached new construction accessory

dwelling unit that does not exceed four-foot side and rear yard setbacks with a maximum unit size of 800 square feet and height limitation of 16 feet; and (BC) In multi-family projects as noted in subsection (e). (6) Access. The accessory dwelling unit shall provide independent exterior access from the existing dwelling.
(7) Cannot be Sold Separately. The accessory dwelling unit may be rented separate from the primary residence but may not be sold or otherwise conveyed separate from the primary residence.
(8) Passageway. No passageway shall be required in conjunction with the construction of an accessory dwelling unit.
(9) Fire Sprinklers. The installation of fire sprinklers shall not be required in an accessory dwelling unit if sprinklers are not required for the primary residence. (10) Utility Connection. Accessory dwelling units shall not be considered by the city to be a new residential use for the purposes of calculating connection fees or capacity charges for utilities, including water and sewer service. The city shall not require the applicant to install a new or separate utility connection directly between the accessory dwelling unit and the utility or impose a related connection fee or capacity charge for an accessory dwelling unit under subsection (a).
(11) Parking. No additional parking spaces shall be required. (12) Minor Expansion. A minor expansion of not more than one hundred fifty square feet beyond the same physical dimensions as the existing accessory structure may be allowed if it is limited to accommodating ingress and egress, there is exterior access from the proposed or existing dwelling, and the side and rear setbacks are sufficient for fire safety.
(13) Rental. If the accessory dwelling unit is available for rent, the rental of the accessory dwelling unit shall be for a term longer than thirty days. (14) Covenant. A covenant containing restrictions that the accessory dwelling unit shall not be sold separately from the main dwelling unit and the rental term of the accessory dwelling unit shall not be less than thirty days shall be recorded with the county recorder’s office. Copies of the recorded covenant shall be filed with the building department and the covenant shall run with the land and shall be binding upon any future owner, heirs, or assigns. Accessory dwelling units created after January 1, 2025, shall be owner occupied and a covenant containing this restriction shall also be recorded for accessory dwelling unit’s created after January 1, 2025. (15) Nonconforming Zoning Conditions. An existing structure converted to an accessory dwelling unit under this section shall not require the correction of any legal nonconformity that may exist on the property as a requirement of approval. Illegal nonconformities shall be subject to Section 21.56.050 “Unlawful uses and structures.”

(16) Impact Fee. An impact fee for the development of an accessory dwelling unit may only be imposed for an accessory dwelling unit of seven hundred fifty square feet or larger and shall be charged proportionately in relation to the square footage of the primary dwelling unit. For purposes of this section, “impact fee” has the same meaning as the term “fee” is defined in subdivision (b) of Section 66000 of the state of California Government Code, except that it also includes fees specified in Section 66477 of the state of California Government Code. “Impact fee” does not include any connection fee or capacity charge charged by a local agency, special district, or water corporation.
(17) Certificate of Occupancy. The city shall not issue a certificate of occupancy for an accessory dwelling unit before a certificate of occupancy has been issued for the primary dwelling.
(18) Entrances. Entrances serving accessory dwelling units shall not be constructed facing directly onto, or parallel to, a front or side yard public street on any building elevation and shall be screened as to not be visible from the public right-of-way.

Staircases for two-story attached accessory dwelling units shall be internal to the building and shall count toward the total square footage of the accessory dwelling unit.

A maximum of two entrances may be provided to an accessory dwelling unit in the form of a front entry door and a door, or sliding glass door, located off the main living room area. No separate entry shall be allowed to an individual bedroom. (b) New Construction Accessory Dwelling Unit Structures. New accessory dwelling unit structures constructed: (1) attached to a proposed or existing single-family dwelling or multifamily dwelling including attached garages, storage areas or similar uses, or an accessory structure; or (2) detached from a proposed or existing single-family dwelling or multi-family dwelling and located on the same lot as the proposed single-family dwelling or multi-family dwelling, including detached garages, main dwelling shall conform to the following:
(1) Building Permit. Prior to constructing a new accessory dwelling unit per this subsection, the applicant must apply for and receive approval of a building permit. The application shall be ministerially considered and approved, without discretionary review or a hearing, notwithstanding Government Code section 65901 or 65906 or regulation of variances or special use permits, and be in compliance with all requirements imposed by subsection (b).
(2) Plan Review. The city shall act on an application to create an accessory dwelling unit under subsection (b) within sixty days from the date the city receives a completed building permit application if there is an existing single-family or multi-family dwelling on the lot. If the application to create an accessory dwelling unit is submitted in conjunction with an application to create a new residential structure on the lot, the city may delay acting on the application for the accessory dwelling unit until the city acts on the application for the new residential structure, but the application to create the accessory dwelling unit shall be considered without discretionary review or hearing. If the applicant requests a delay, the sixty-day time period shall be tolled for the period of the agreed-upon delay.

(A) Plan Review. The city shall approve or deny an application to create or serve an accessory dwelling unit under subsection (b) within sixty days from the date the city receives a completed building permit application if there is an existing single-family or multi-family dwelling on the lot. If the application to create or serve an accessory dwelling unit is submitted in conjunction with an application to create a new single-family or multifamily dwelling unit on the lot, the City may delay approving or denying the application for the accessory dwelling unit until the City approves or denies the application to create or serve the new single-family or multifamily dwelling, but the application to create or serve the accessory dwelling unit shall be considered without discretionary review or hearing. If the applicant requests a delay, the sixty-day time period shall be tolled for the period of the agreed-upon delay. If the City has not approved or denied the completed application within 60 days, the application shall be deemed approved.
(B) Denial. If the permitting agency denies an application for an accessory dwelling submitted pursuant to subdivision (A), the permitting agency shall, within the time period of subparagraph (A), return in writing a full set of comments to the applicant with a list of items that are defective or deficient and a description of how the application can be remedied by the applicant. The permitting agency shall not deny an application for a permit to create an accessory dwelling unit due to the correction of nonconforming zoning conditions, building code violations, or unpermitted structures that do not present a threat to public health and safety and are not affected by the construction of the accessory dwelling unit.
(2) Demolition Permit. A demolition permit for a detached garage that is to be replaced with an accessory dwelling unit shall be reviewed with the application for the accessory dwelling unit and issued at the same time. The permit applicant shall not be required to provide a written notice or posted placard for the demolition of a detached garage that is to be replaced with an accessory dwelling unit, unless the property is located within an architecturally and historically significant historic district. (3) Building Code Requirements. Accessory dwelling units shall be constructed on a permanent foundation and shall be built in compliance with the California Building Code. Accessory dwelling units shall comply with local building code requirements that apply to detached dwellings, except that the construction of an accessory dwelling unit shall not constitute a Group R occupancy change under the local building code, as described in Section 310 of the California Building Code (Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations), unless the building official makes a written finding based on substantial evidence in the record that the construction of the accessory dwelling unit could have a specific, adverse impact on public health and safety. Nothing in this clause shall be interpreted to prevent the City from changing the occupancy code of a space that was unhabitable space or was only permitted for nonresidential use and was subsequently converted for residential use pursuant to this section.

(4) Areas Allowed. New accessory dwelling unit(s) shall be permitted on a residentially zoned parcel with one existing or proposed single-family dwelling and in multi-family projects as noted in subsection (e).
(5) Number of Accessory Dwelling Units Allowed.
(A) A parcel with one existing or proposed single-family dwelling shall contain no more than a total of three dwelling units comprised of one single-family dwelling, one attached or detached accessory dwelling unit, and one junior accessory dwelling unit; and or
(B) A parcel with one existing or proposed single-family dwelling shall contain no more than a total of four dwelling units if they are comprised of one single-family dwelling, one internal accessory dwelling unit, one junior accessory dwelling unit, and one detached new construction accessory dwelling unit that does not exceed four-foot side and rear yard setbacks with a maximum unit size of 800 square feet and height limitation of 16 feet; and (BC) In multi-family projects as noted in subsection (e). (6) Kitchen, Bathroom, and Entrance. The accessory unit shall contain separate kitchen and bathroom facilities and may have a separate entrance from the main dwelling. The unit shall have a minimum gross floor area to accommodate the development of an efficiency unit as defined in Section 17958.1 of the Health and Safety Code.
(7) Cannot be Sold Separately. The accessory dwelling unit may be rented separate from the primary residence but may not be sold or otherwise conveyed separate from the primary residence.
(8) Attached and Detached Accessory Dwelling Units Maximum and Minimum Unit Size. The minimum size of a new accessory dwelling unit shall be two hundred twenty square feet. The maximum size for a new: (A) detached accessory unit shall be one thousand two hundred square feet, and (B) attached accessory dwelling unit shall be fifty percent of the primary residence.
(8) Attached and Detached Accessory Dwelling Units Maximum and Minimum Unit Size.
(A) The minimum size of a new accessory dwelling unit shall be two hundred twenty square feet.
(B) The maximum size for a new detached accessory unit shall be:
(i) 850 square feet; or
(ii) 1,000 square feet for an accessory dwelling unit that provides more than one bedroom.
(C) The maximum size for a new attached accessory dwelling unit shall be fifty percent of the primary residence.

(D) The maximum unit sizes outlined in this section for an attached or detached accessory dwelling unit shall include an existing or proposed garage space if designated for the accessory dwelling unit.
(9) Building Separation for Detached Accessory Dwelling Units. A detached accessory dwelling unit shall be separated from the main dwelling a minimum of ten feet, must be located in the rear yard of the primary dwelling, and must be clearly subordinate by location and size.
(10) Length of Shared Wall for Attached Accessory Dwelling Units. An attached accessory dwelling unit shall share at least one wall with the main dwelling. The shared wall shall be at least five feet in length, or half the width of the accessory dwelling unit, whichever is larger.
(11) Setbacks. A setback of no more than four feet from the side and rear lot lines shall be required for a new accessory dwelling unit.
(12) Passageway and Entrances. No passageway shall be required in conjunction with the construction of an accessory dwelling unit. Entrances and outside stairways serving second story accessory dwelling units shall not be constructed facing directly onto, or parallel to, a front or side yard public street on any building elevation facing a front or side yard public street and shall be screened as to not be visible from the public right-of-way. Staircases for two-story attached accessory dwelling units shall be internal to the building and shall count toward the total square footage of the accessory dwelling unit. Landing areas for outside stairways shall be screened from adjacent side and rear yard properties when adjacent to other single-family homes and cannot be visible from a front or side yard public street. Landing areas that are covered with a roof structure shall be counted toward the seventy percent ratio if attached to the main dwelling. Outside stairways shall adhere to setback requirements of this code.

Besides a door, or sliding glass door located off of the main living area of an accessory dwelling unit, only one main entrance shall be provided with a door to the accessory dwelling unit per each accessory dwelling unit. A maximum of two entrances may be provided to an accessory dwelling unit in the form of a front entry door and a door, or sliding glass door, located off the main living room area. No separate entry shall be allowed to an individual bedroom. No entry to a ground level accessory dwelling unit shall be visible from the public right-of-way. The method of screening of any landing or entry shall be architecturally compatible with other onsite development in terms of colors, materials, and architectural style.
(13) Development Standards. Both detached and attached accessory dwelling units shall comply with the residential district general development standards for the property found in Table 2-3 of Section 21.08.040 for each zoning district including floor area ratio, landscaping, ratio of second story to first story, balconies and decks, and open space requirements. No development standard regarding a zoning clearance or separate zoning review or any other minimum or maximum size for an accessory dwelling unit, size based upon a percentage of the proposed or existing primary dwelling, or limits on lot coverage, floor area ratio, open space, front setbacks, and minimum lot size, for either attached or detached dwellings,landscaping, or open

space shall apply that would not allow permit for at least an new eight hundred square foot, sixteen foot tall accessory dwelling unit with at least four-foot side and rear setbacks.
(14) Privacy. Windows of an accessory dwelling units located within 5 feet of property line shall be clerestory or frosted windows.
(15) Parking. Parking requirements for accessory dwelling units shall be one space per accessory dwelling unit or per bedroom, whichever is less. These spaces may be provided as tandem parking on a driveway. Off-street parking shall be permitted in setback areas on an existing or expanded driveway or through tandem parking on an existing or expanded driveway as allowed by this code, unless specific findings are made that parking in setback areas or tandem parking is not feasible based upon specific site or regional topographical or fire and life safety conditions. Front yard setback landscaping requirements of Chapter 21.20 shall apply. No additional driveway shall be provided on the property to provide parking for an accessory dwelling unit unless the driveway is located on a corner lot subject to review and approval by the public works department. When a garage, carport, or covered parking structure is demolished in conjunction with the construction of an accessory dwelling unit, or converted to an accessory dwelling unit, those off-street parking spaces shall not be required to be replaced.
(16) Architectural Compatibility. The accessory dwelling unit must be architecturally compatible with the existing single-family dwelling on the lot and match the existing single-family dwelling unit in terms of exterior color and material, roof material and color, and types of windows and doors. The garage doors of a garage that has been converted to an accessory dwelling unit shall be removed and replaced with a structural wall.
(15) Height. A detached, new construction, accessory dwelling unit shall be restricted to a single-story structure with a maximum height of sixteen feet. An attached new construction, accessory dwelling unit shall not exceed the height limit applied to the main dwelling unit in the underlying zoning district.
(17) Height. Attached and detached accessory dwelling units shall be subject to the following height restrictions:
(A) A detached accessory dwelling unit on a lot with an existing single family or multifamily dwelling unit shall be restricted to a single-story structure with a maximum height of sixteen feet.
(B) A detached accessory dwelling unit on a lot with an existing or proposed single family or multifamily dwelling unit that is within one-half of one mile walking distance of a major transit stop or a high-quality transit corridor, as defined in Section 21155 of the Public Resources Code, shall be restricted to a single-story structure with a maximum height of eighteen feet. An additional two feet in height (for a maximum of twenty feet) shall be allowed to accommodate a roof pitch on the accessory dwelling unit that is aligned with the roof pitch of the primary dwelling unit.

(C) A detached accessory dwelling unit on a lot with an existing or proposed multifamily, multistory dwelling shall be restricted to a single-story structure with a maximum height of eighteen feet.
(D) An attached accessory dwelling unit shall be restricted to a two-story structure with a maximum height of 25 feet.
(18) Attics and Basements. The following standards shall apply to attics and basements of attached and detached accessory dwelling units:
(A) An accessory dwelling unit habitable attic, compliant with the size and height limitations and definition set forth in the California Building Code, shall count as a story and shall count toward the total living area size of an accessory dwelling unit. Habitable attics, as defined in the California Building Code, shall only be allowed on one-story attached accessory dwelling units that are limited to two stories total. Non-habitable attics shall be allowed in an attached or detached accessory dwelling unit for storage purposes only with no exterior architectural features, windows, etc. from the attic area (B) An accessory dwelling unit habitable basement, compliant with the size and height limitations and definition set forth in the California Building Code, shall not count as a story and shall count toward the total living area size of an accessory dwelling unit.
(1619) Fire Sprinklers. The installation of fire sprinklers shall not be required in an accessory dwelling unit if sprinklers are not required for the primary residence unless otherwise required by the current California Fire Code or Fountain Valley Municipal Code.
(1720) Utility Connections. An accessory dwelling unit shall not be considered to be a new residential use for purposes of calculating connection fees or capacity charges for utilities, including water and sewer service, unless the accessory dwelling unit was constructed with a new single-family dwelling. The city may require the applicant to install a new or separate utility connection directly between the accessory dwelling unit and the utility. Consistent with California Government Code Section 66013, the connection may be subject to a connection fee or capacity charge that shall be proportionate to the burden of the proposed accessory dwelling unit, based upon either its square feet or the number of its drainage fixture unit (DFU) values, as defined in the Uniform Plumbing Code adopted and published by the International Association of Plumbing and Mechanical Officials, upon the water or sewer system. This fee or charge shall not exceed the reasonable cost of providing this service. (1821) Impact Fee. An impact fee for the development of an accessory dwelling unit may only be imposed for an accessory dwelling unit of seven hundred fifty square feet or larger and shall be charged proportionately in relation to the square footage of the primary dwelling unit. For purposes of this section, “impact fee” has the same meaning as the term “fee” is defined in subdivision (b) of Section 66000 of the state of California Government Code, except that it also includes fees specified in Section 66477 of the state of California Government Code. “Impact fee” does not include any

connection fee or capacity charge charged by a local agency, special district, or water corporation.
(1922) Rental. If the accessory dwelling unit is available for rent, the rental of the accessory dwelling unit shall be for a term longer than thirty days. (2023) Covenant. A covenant containing restrictions that the accessory dwelling unit shall not be sold separately from the main dwelling unit, and the rental term of the accessory dwelling unit shall not be less than thirty days shall be recorded with the county recorder’s office. Copies of the recorded covenant shall be filed with the building department and the covenant shall run with the land and shall be binding upon any future owner, heirs, or assigns. Accessory dwelling units created after January 1, 2025 shall be owner occupied and a covenant containing this restriction shall also be recorded for accessory dwelling unit’s created after January 1, 2025. (2124) Nonconforming Zoning Conditions. An existing structure converted to an accessory dwelling unit under this section shall not require the correction of any legal nonconformity that may exist on the property as a requirement of approval. Illegal nonconformities shall be subject to Section 21.56.050 “Unlawful uses and structures.” (2225) Certificate of Occupancy. The city shall not issue a certificate of occupancy for an accessory dwelling unit before a certificate of occupancy has been issued for the primary dwelling.
(c) Notwithstanding subsection (a) or (b), parking requirements for an accessory dwelling unit will not be imposed in any of the following instances and upon verifiable proof provided by the applicant:
(1) The accessory dwelling unit is located within one-half mile walking distance of public transit. For the purposes of this section “public transit” shall include any bus stop.
(2) The accessory dwelling unit is located within an architecturally and historically significant historic district.
(3) The accessory dwelling unit is part of the proposed or existing primary residence or an accessory structure.
(4) When on-street parking permits are required but not offered to the occupant of the accessory dwelling unit.
(5) When there is a designated, fixed pick-up or drop-off location for a car share vehicle located within one block of the accessory dwelling unit. (6) When a permit application for an accessory dwelling unit is submitted with a permit application to create a new single-family dwelling or a new multifamily dwelling on the same lot, provided that the accessory dwelling unit or the parcel satisfies any other criteria listed in Section (c).

(d) Junior Accessory Dwelling Units. Junior accessory dwelling units constructed within the existing or proposed space of a single-family dwelling shall conform to the following objective standards:
(1) Building Permit. Prior to constructing a junior accessory dwelling unit per this subsection, the applicant must apply for a building permit. The application shall be considered and approved, without discretionary review or a hearing, notwithstanding Government Code section 65901 or 65906 or regulation of variances or special use permits and be in compliance with all requirements imposed by subsection (d). (2) Plan Review. The city shall act on an application to create a junior accessory dwelling unit under subsection (d) within sixty days from the date the city receives a completed building permit application if there is an existing single-family dwelling on the lot. If the permit application to create a junior accessory dwelling unit is submitted in conjunction with a permit application to create a new single-family dwelling on the lot, the city may delay acting on the permit application for the junior accessory dwelling unit until the city acts on the permit application to create the new single-family dwelling, but the application to create the junior accessory dwelling unit shall be considered without discretionary review or hearing. If the applicant requests a delay, the sixty-day time period shall be tolled for the period of the agreed-upon delay. (A) Plan Review. The city shall approve or deny an application to create or serve a junior accessory dwelling unit under subsection (d) within sixty days from the date the city receives a completed building permit application if there is an existing single-family dwelling on the lot.. If the application to create or serve a junior accessory dwelling unit is submitted in conjunction with an application to create a new single-family or multifamily dwelling unit on the lot, the City may delay approving or denying the application for the junior accessory dwelling unit until the City approves or denies the application to create or serve the new single-family or multifamily dwelling, but the application to create or serve the junior accessory dwelling unit shall be considered without discretionary review or hearing. If the applicant requests a delay, the sixty-day time period shall be tolled for the period of the agreed-upon delay. If the City has not approved or denied the completed application within 60 days, the application shall be deemed approved.
(B) Denial. If the permitting agency denies an application for a junior accessory dwelling submitted pursuant to subdivision (A), the permitting agency shall, within the time period of subparagraph (A), return in writing a full set of comments to the applicant with a list of items that are defective or deficient and a description of how the application can be remedied by the applicant. The permitting agency shall not deny an application for a permit to create a junior accessory dwelling unit due to the correction of nonconforming zoning conditions, building code violations, or unpermitted structures that do not present a threat to public health and safety and are not affected by the construction of the accessory dwelling unit.

(32) Building Code Requirements. Junior accessory dwelling units shall be constructed on a permanent foundation and shall be built in compliance with the California Building Code. Junior accessory dwelling units shall comply with local building code requirements that apply to detached dwellings, except that the construction of an accessory dwelling unit shall not constitute a Group R occupancy change under the local building code, as described in Section 310 of the California Building Code (Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations), unless the building official makes a written finding based on substantial evidence in the record that the construction of the accessory dwelling unit could have a specific, adverse impact on public health and safety. Nothing in this clause shall be interpreted to prevent City from changing the occupancy code of a space that was unhabitable space or was only permitted for nonresidential use and was subsequently converted for residential use pursuant to this section.
(43) Areas Allowed. Junior accessory dwelling units shall be permitted in the R1 and GH residential zones subject to compliance with subsection (d). (54) Number of Junior Accessory Dwelling Units Allowed. Only one junior accessory dwelling unit shall be allowed in any residential zone in addition to a single-family dwelling. No junior accessory dwelling unit shall be permitted on any residential lot already containing three or more dwelling units.
(65) Owner-Occupied. The main dwelling or the junior accessory dwelling unit shall be owner-occupied. Notwithstanding the foregoing, owner-occupancy shall not be required if the owner is another governmental agency, land trust, or housing organization.
(76) Rental. If the junior accessory dwelling unit is available for rent, the rental of the accessory dwelling unit shall be for a term longer than thirty days. (87) Cannot be Sold Separately. The junior accessory dwelling unit may be rented separate from the primary residence, but may not be sold or otherwise conveyed separate from the primary residence.
(98) Maximum and Minimum Size. The junior accessory dwelling unit is restricted to a maximum of five hundred square feet and a minimum size of two hundred twenty square feet.
(109) Constructed within Existing Structures. Junior accessory dwelling units must be constructed within the walls of the proposed or existing single-family residence.

Enclosed uses within the residence, such as attached garages, are considered part of the proposed or existing single-family residence.
(1110) Entrance. A junior accessory dwelling unit must include a separate entrance from the main entrance to the proposed or existing single-family residence. If a junior accessory dwelling unit shares a bathroom with the primary dwelling, the junior accessory dwelling unit must provide an interior entry to the primary dwelling’s main living area independent of the exterior entrance to the junior accessory dwelling unit and primary dwelling.

(1211) Efficiency Kitchen. At a minimum, a junior accessory dwelling unit must include an efficiency kitchen, which shall include a cooking facility with appliances and a food preparation counter and storage cabinets that are of reasonable size in relation to the size of the junior accessory dwelling unit.
(1312) Parking. No additional parking shall be required as a condition to grant the building permit.
(1413) Fire or Life Protection. A junior accessory dwelling unit shall not be considered a separate or new dwelling unit for the purpose of any fire or life protection. (1514) Utility Connections. For the purposes of providing service for water, sewer, or power, including a connection fee, a junior accessory dwelling unit shall not be considered a separate or new dwelling unit.
(1615) Nonconforming Zoning Conditions. An existing structure converted to accommodate a junior accessory dwelling unit under this section shall not require the correction of any legal nonconformity that may exist on the property as a requirement of approval. Illegal nonconformities shall be subject to Section 21.56.050 “Unlawful uses and structures.”
(1716) Certificate of Occupancy. The city shall not issue a certificate of occupancy for an accessory dwelling unit before a certificate of occupancy has been issued for the primary dwelling.
(1817) Covenant. A covenant containing restrictions below shall be recorded with the county recorder’s office and copies of the recorded covenant shall be filed with the building department.
(A) Either the main dwelling or the junior accessory dwelling unit shall be owner-occupied except if the owner is a governmental agency, land trust, or housing organization.
(B) The junior accessory dwelling unit shall not be sold separately from the main dwelling unit.
(C) The junior accessory dwelling unit shall be as approved. No changes to the junior accessory dwelling unit shall occur without approval of a new building permit.
(D) The rental term of the accessory dwelling unit shall not be less than thirty days.
(E) This covenant shall run with the land and shall be binding upon any future owners, heirs, or assigns.
(F) The restrictions shall be binding upon any successor in ownership of the property and lack of compliance with this provision may result in legal action against the property owner including revocation of any right to maintain a junior accessory dwelling unit on the property.

(e) Special Regulations for Multi-Family and Mixed-Use Accessory Dwelling Units. In addition to the requirements under subsections (a) through (c), accessory dwelling units attached to, or located within existing multi-family dwelling structures, or new construction accessory dwelling units in a multi-family residential or mixed-use zones shall conform to the following:
(1) At least one accessory dwelling unit shall be allowed within an existing multi-family dwelling and up to twenty-five percent of the existing multi-family dwelling units.

Multiple accessory dwelling units shall be allowed within the portions of existing multifamily dwelling structures that are not used as livable space, including, but not limited to, storage rooms, boiler rooms, passageways, attics, basements, or garages, if each unit complies with state building standards for dwellings. (2) Not more than two accessory dwelling units that are located on a lot that has an existing multi-family dwelling, but are detached from that multi-family dwelling and are subject to a height limit of eighteen sixteen feet and four-foot rear yard and side setbacks shall be allowed. An additional two feet in height shall be allowed to accommodate a roof pitch on the accessory dwelling unit that is aligned with the roof pitch of the primary dwelling unit.
(f) Accessory Dwelling Units Constructed Before January 1, 2018. This section shall not apply to a building that is deemed substandard pursuant to Section 17920.3 of the Health and Safety Code.
(1) Except as provided in subdivision (f) (2), the permitting agency shall not deny a permit for an unpermitted accessory dwelling unit that was constructed before January 1, 2018, due to either of the following:
(A) The accessory dwelling unit is in violation of building standards pursuant to Article 1 (commencing with Section 17960) of Chapter 5 of Part 1.5 of Division 13 of the Health and Safety Code.
(B) The accessory dwelling unit does not comply with Section 65852.2 or any local ordinance regulating accessory dwelling units.
(2) Notwithstanding subdivision (f)(1), the permitting agency may deny a permit for an accessory dwelling unit subject to subdivision (f)(1) if the permitting agency makes a finding that correcting the violation is necessary to protect the health and safety of the public or occupants of the structure.
(fg) Definitions. As used in this section, the following terms mean:
(1) “Accessory dwelling unit” means an attached or a detached residential dwelling unit that provides complete independent living facilities for one or more persons and is located on a lot with a proposed or existing primary residence. It shall include permanent provisions for living, sleeping, eating, cooking, and sanitation on the same parcel as the single-family or multi-family dwelling is or will be situated. An accessory dwelling unit also includes the following:
(A) An efficiency unit.

(B) A manufactured home, as defined in Section 18007 of the Health and Safety Code.
(2) “Accessory structure” means a structure that is accessory and incidental to a dwelling located on the same lot.
(3) “Efficiency unit” has the same meaning as defined in Section 17958.1 of the Health and Safety Code.
(4) “Living area” means the interior habitable area of a dwelling unit, including basements and attics, but does not include a garage or any accessory structure. (5) “Local agency” means a city, county, or city and county, whether general law or chartered.
(6) “Neighborhood” has the same meaning as set forth in Section 65589.5. (7) “Nonconforming zoning condition” means a physical improvement on a property that does not conform with current zoning standards.
(8) “Objective standards” means standards that involve no personal or subjective judgment by a public official and are uniformly verifiable by reference to an external and uniform benchmark or criterion available and knowable by both the development applicant or proponent and the public official prior to submittal. (89) “Passageway” means a pathway that is unobstructed clear to the sky and extends from a street to one entrance of the accessory dwelling unit. (10) “Permitting agency” means any entity that is involved in the review of a permit for an accessory dwelling unit or junior accessory dwelling unit and for which there is no substitute, including, but not limited to, applicable planning departments, building departments, utilities, and special districts.
(911) “Proposed dwelling” means a dwelling that is the subject of a permit application and that meets the requirements for permitting.
(1012) “Public transit” means a location, including, but not limited to, a bus stop or train station, where the public may access buses, trains, subways, and other forms of transportation that charge set fares, run on fixed routes, and are available to the public. (1113) “Tandem parking” means that two or more automobiles are parked on a driveway or in any other location on a lot, lined up behind one another. …
SECTION 5
If any section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of the ordinance. The City Council declares that it would have passed this ordinance and each and every section,

subsection, sentence, clause or phrase not declared invalid or unconstitutional without regard to whether any portion of the ordinance would subsequently be declared invalid or unconstitutional.

SECTION 6
The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this ordinance and cause it to be published as required by law. This ordinance shall become effective thirty (30) days after the date of its adoption. When this ordinance becomes effective, Urgency Ordinance No. 1596 shall be null and void.

PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 7TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2023.

ATTEST:
________________________ ________________________
Rick Miller, City Clerk Kim Constantine, Mayor

APPROVED AS TO FORM

HARPER & BURNS LLP
___________________________
Attorneys for the City
City of Fountain Valley

CITY OF FOUNTAIN VALLEY

CITY COUNCIL

COUNCIL ACTION REQUEST
To: Honorable Mayor and Agenda Date: January 17, 2023
Members of the City Council
SUBJECT: Public Hearing and Introduction: Code Amendment No. 22-06 – An Amendment To Fountain Valley Municipal Code 21.08.055 For The Adoption Of An Ordinance For Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) In Compliance With State Law
Three-Year Strategic Goals
☒ Enhance the culture and environment of “A Nice Place to Live” ☐ Attract and retain revenue producing businesses
☐ Achieve fiscal stability in accordance with the 20-Year Financial Plan ☐ Attract and retain quality staff
☐ Not applicable

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
On September 28, 2022, Governor Newsom signed into law Assembly Bill (AB) 2221 and Senate Bill (SB) 897 (“New ADU Laws”) that will amend California Government Code 65852.2 and 65852.22 addressing ADU’s starting on January 1, 2023. The New ADU Laws strive to expand standards for ADU’s and provide clarification from the last revisions to the state code. The state ADU revisions include changes to building height, front setbacks, adjustments to application review procedures, additional restrictions on denials, expansion to where Junior Accessory Dwelling Units (JADUs) can be built, new configurations requirements for JADUs, and the allowance for up to four (4) units per lot.

The attached Ordinance has been created in order to preserve what limited authority the City has remaining to regulate ADUs as a result of these new state laws. Some of the local control development standards that are in the existing ADU ordinance, and some new standards, include provisions for building separation, passageway and entrances, development standards such as floor area ratio, landscaping, ratio of 2nd story to 1st story, balconies and decks, open space, parking, and architectural compatibility.

At the Planning Commission meeting of December 14, 2022, the Planning Commission voted 4-1 approving Resolution No. 22-34 recommending the City Council approve Code Amendment No. 22-06. Staff recommends the City Council conduct a public hearing and introduce the attached Ordinance approving Code Amendment No. 22-06 to amend Fountain Valley Municipal Code (FVMC) 21.08.055 for the adoption of an ordinance for Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) in compliance with state law. Additionally, if approved, this Ordinance will supersede the ADU Urgency Ordinance No. 1596 that the City Council adopted on December 20, 2022.

Council Action Request
Code Amendment No. 22-06 Accessory Dwelling Units Ordinance City Council Meeting January 17, 2023

DISCUSSION
On September 28, 2022, Governor Newsom signed into law Assembly Bill (AB) 2221 and Senate Bill (SB) 897 (“New ADU Laws”) that will amend California Government Code 65852.2 and 65852.22 addressing ADU’s starting on January 1, 2023. The New ADU Laws strive to expand standards for ADU’s and provide clarification from the last revisions to the state code. Outlined below under “Summary of ADU Revisions” are some of the revisions from AB 2221 and SB 897.

Summary of ADU Revisions
Height Limitations
Local agencies must allow ADUs taller than 16 feet in the following circumstances:
 If located within a half-mile of a major transit stop or high quality transit corridor, a detached ADU that is on a lot with a single-family or multifamily dwelling may be up to 18 feet in height by right, and the ADU can be up to two feet taller (for a maximum of 20 feet) if necessary to match the roof pitch of the ADU to that of the main house. There are no rail, rapid bus transit stations, or ferry terminals in Fountain Valley and no Orange County Transit Authority (OCTA) bus routes (Routes 33, 35, 37, 43, 70, 72, 76, and 543) meet the specific requirements.

Therefore, ADU’s in Fountain Valley will be unaffected by this change and will continue to be limited to 16 feet.
 If a detached ADU is on a lot with an existing or proposed multistory multifamily dwelling, the ADU may be up to 18 feet in height by right, regardless of how close it is to transit.
 An attached ADU may now be up to 25 feet high or as high as a primary dwelling may be under the underlying zone, whichever is lower. A city may still limit the ADU to two stories.

Front Setbacks
 Cities have authority to impose front-yard setbacks on ADUs that are subject to an ADU permit, and that remains generally true, but now a front setback must yield to the extent necessary to enable the construction of an 800 square foot ADU with four-foot side- and rear-yard setbacks.

Adjustments to Application Review Procedures; Additional Restrictions on Denials  If a city denies an ADU application, it must now provide the applicant with a “full set of comments” listing the specific items that are “defective or deficient.” These comments must also describe “how the application can be remedied” by the applicant.
 A demolition permit for a detached garage that is to be replaced with an ADU must now be reviewed with the ADU application and issued at the same time.

Council Action Request
Code Amendment No. 22-06 Accessory Dwelling Units Ordinance City Council Meeting January 17, 2023

 Local agencies cannot deny an application to create an ADU solely because corrections are needed to address nonconforming zoning conditions, building code violations, or unpermitted structures elsewhere on the lot that do not present a threat to public health and safety and are not affected by the construction of the ADU. Note that this is only a limit on holding up an ADU to require compliance elsewhere on the property; it does not insulate the property owner from having to come into compliance separately from the ADU.

Expansion of Where JADUs Can be Built; New Configuration Requirements  Under existing state law, a junior accessory dwelling unit (JADU) must be “within the walls” of a proposed or existing single-family dwelling. This has traditionally been understood to include nonlivable space within the primary dwelling structure, such as attached garages. Now the State Legislature has made that expressly clear. The new amendments specify that “enclosed uses within the residence, such as attached garages, are considered part of the proposed or existing single-family residence.” This is more a change in the text of the law (that needs to be reflected in the local ordinance) than it is a substantive change in what the law requires.  In instances where the JADU shares a bathroom with the primary dwelling, local agencies must now require the JADU to have an interior entry to the primary dwelling’s “main living area,” independent of the exterior entrances of the JADU and primary dwelling.

Four Units per Lot
 Under existing state law, a parcel with one existing or proposed single-family dwelling shall contain no more than a total of three dwelling units comprised of:
o one single-family dwelling
o one accessory dwelling unit
o one junior accessory dwelling unit.
 Now the state law states that a parcel with one existing or proposed single-family dwelling shall contain no more than a total of four dwelling units if they are comprised of:
o one single-family dwelling
o one internal accessory dwelling unit
o one junior accessory dwelling unit
o one detached new construction accessory dwelling unit that does not exceed four-foot side and rear yard setbacks with a maximum unit size of 800 square feet and height limitation of 16 feet.

Proposed ADU Ordinance
The proposed Ordinance (Attachment #1) has been created to include the required changes noted above as well as preserve what limited authority the City has remaining to regulate ADU’s and Junior ADU’s as a result of these new state laws. Some of the local control development standards that are in the existing ADU ordinance, and some new standards, include provisions for building separation, passageway and entrances,

Council Action Request
Code Amendment No. 22-06 Accessory Dwelling Units Ordinance City Council Meeting January 17, 2023

development standards such as floor area ratio, landscaping, ratio of 2nd story to 1st story, balconies and decks, open space, parking, and architectural compatibility. A summary of these development standards can be found below.

Building Separation
 10-foot interior setback separation between the main residence and a detached ADU.
 The ADU must be clearly subordinate by location and size to the main dwelling.

Passageway and Entrances
 NEW - Entrances for ADU’s must be screened from the public right-of-way.

Stairways serving second story ADU’s must be within the interior of the building.
 A maximum of two entrances may be provided to an accessory dwelling unit in the form of a front entry door and a door, or sliding glass door, located off the main living room area. No separate entry shall be allowed to an individual bedroom.
 No entry to a ground level accessory dwelling unit shall be visible from the public right-of-way.
 The method of screening of any entry shall be architecturally compatible with other onsite development in terms of colors, materials, and architectural style.

Development Standards
 Both detached and attached accessory dwelling units, that are over 800 square feet, shall comply with the residential district general development standards for the property found in Table 2-3 of Section 21.08.040 for each zoning district including floor area ratio, landscaping, ratio of second story to first story, balconies and decks, and open space requirements.

Parking
 Parking requirements for ADU’s may be provided as tandem parking on a driveway.
 Off-street parking shall be permitted in setback areas on an existing or expanded driveway or through tandem parking on an existing or expanded driveway as allowed by this code, unless specific findings are made that parking in setback areas or tandem parking is not feasible based upon specific site or regional topographical or fire and life safety conditions. Front yard setback landscaping requirements of Chapter 21.20 shall apply.  No additional driveway shall be provided on the property to provide parking for an accessory dwelling unit unless the driveway is located on a corner lot subject to review and approval by the public works department.

Council Action Request
Code Amendment No. 22-06 Accessory Dwelling Units Ordinance City Council Meeting January 17, 2023

Architectural Compatibility
 The accessory dwelling unit must be architecturally compatible with the existing single-family dwelling on the lot and match the existing single-family dwelling unit in terms of exterior color and material, roof material and color, and types of windows and doors.
 The garage doors of a garage that has been converted to an accessory dwelling unit shall be removed and replaced with a structural wall.  NEW – An attached ADU shall share at least one wall with the main dwelling.

The shared wall shall be at least five feet in length, or half the width of the accessory dwelling unit, whichever is larger.

Maximum Size for ADU’s
 NEW – Maximum 850 square feet for a studio or 1-bedroom detached ADU.  NEW – Maximum 1,000 square feet for a detached ADU with more than 1 bedroom.
 NEW – Maximum unit sizes for attached or detached accessory dwelling unit shall include an existing or proposed garage space if designated for the accessory dwelling unit.

Privacy
 NEW – Windows of an accessory dwelling units located within 5 feet of property line shall be clerestory or frosted windows.

Attics and Basements
 NEW – Habitable attics shall count as a story and shall count toward the total living area size of an ADU.
 NEW – Habitable attics shall only be allowed on one-story attached accessory dwelling units that are limited to two stories total.
 NEW – Non-habitable attics shall be allowed in an attached or detached accessory dwelling unit for storage purposes only with no exterior architectural features, windows, etc. from the attic area.
 NEW – Habitable basements shall not count as a story but shall count toward the total living area size of an accessory dwelling unit.

One of the major changes staff is proposing in the Ordinance is to align the maximum size for detached ADU’s with state code requirements that have been in place for the last three years. State code has, and still does, set size limits for detached ADU’s based on bedroom count as well as establish a maximum size for detached ADU’s. While the wording in the state code for these provisions is confusing, since 2017 the city has set the maximum size of any detached ADU in Fountain Valley to meet the absolute maximum state code size of 1,200 square feet. With an average ADU unit size of 869 square feet, as outlined in Table H-23 of the 2021-2029 City of Fountain Valley Housing Element, staff is proposing to update the maximum size of detached ADU’s to meet the

Council Action Request
Code Amendment No. 22-06 Accessory Dwelling Units Ordinance City Council Meeting January 17, 2023

state code requirements of a maximum size of 850 square feet for a studio and 1-bedroom ADU and a maximum size of 1,000 square feet for a detached ADU with more than one bedroom. This update will make Fountain Valley’s ADU Ordinance consistent with state code as well as align with the trends in ADU size for the last five years.

Updating the maximum size for detached ADU’s will however create some legal nonconforming ADU’s in Fountain Valley. Since 2017, there have been 290 proposed and/or finaled ADU’s in the city and out of the 290, there have been only 23 that are larger than 1,000 square feet. If the ADU Ordinance is approved as presented, these units will become legal nonconforming. Legal nonconforming is defined as a use or structure that was created legally under the code at the time it was approved or constructed, but now that the code has changed the use or structure is no longer compliant with the code.

These ADU’s would only lose their legal nonconforming status if they were destroyed beyond 50%. FVMC 21.56.040(b) states the following:
“(b) Termination by Destruction.
(1) Involuntarily Damaged. If a nonconforming structure, or a conforming structure used for a nonconforming use, is involuntarily damaged, destroyed or demolished due to a catastrophic event (e.g., explosion, fire or other casualty, or by act of God, or by act of war), the right to continue occupancy of the nonconforming structure or to continue the nonconforming use, shall cease.
(2) Costs. The structure may be repaired or rebuilt and reoccupied only if the cost of repairing or replacing the damaged portion of the structure does not exceed fifty percent of the current value of the structure, immediately before the damage or destruction.” State law requires that all local ADU ordinances be sent to the Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) within 60 days after adoption. After adoption of an ordinance, HCD may submit written findings to the local agency as to whether the ordinance complies with state law. If HCD finds that the local agency’s ordinance does not comply with state law, HCD will notify the local agency and will provide the local agency with a reasonable time, no longer than 30 days, to respond to the findings before taking any other action authorized by state law.

If the local agency does not amend its ordinance in response to the HCD’s findings or does not adopt a resolution with findings explaining the reason the ordinance complies with state law and addressing HCD’s findings, HCD shall notify the local agency and may notify the Attorney General that the local agency is in violation of state law.

The attached ordinance has been created in order to preserve what limited authority the City has remaining to regulate ADUs as a result of these new state laws. If the City Council chooses to not adopt this proposed ordinance, it may lose its ability to enforce design or other standards, and the City could be required to approve ADUs that may be directly inconsistent with the City’s development standards, and the City could be subject to litigation.

Council Action Request
Code Amendment No. 22-06 Accessory Dwelling Units Ordinance City Council Meeting January 17, 2023

General Plan Consistency
The proposed ordinance will promote and encourage the development of a variety of housing opportunities to accommodate current and projected households by promoting the construction of additional dwelling units to accommodate Fountain Valley’s share of regional housing needs in accordance with adopted land use policies (General Plan Housing Element Goal #1/Policy 1.1). Also, the ordinance will be consistent with California Government Code 65852.2, 65852.22, and Title 21 and would not create any inconsistencies with Title 21, in the case of a title amendment.

FINANCIAL REVIEW
There is no financial impact associated with approving the proposed code amendment.

This Ordinance will preserve what limited authority the City has remaining to regulate ADUs as a result of new state law.

PUBLIC NOTIFICATION
The item was published in the Fountain Valley View and public notices were posted at City Hall, Recreation Center, and Fountain Valley Library.

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REVIEW
Adoption of this Ordinance is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) under Public Resources Code section 21080.17 [statutory exemption for second unit ordinances]; CEQA Guidelines sections 15282(h) [statutory exemption for second unit ordinances]; 15303 [new construction or small structures] and 15305 [minor alterations to land]. This ordinance is also exempt per CEQA Guidelines section 15061, because this ordinance will not have a significant effect on the environment, because ADU’s will largely constitute infill housing which is exempt from CEQA (Attachment #2).

ATTORNEY REVIEW
The Attorney for the City has reviewed the attached Ordinance.

ALTERNATIVES
Alternative No. 1: Introduce the attached Ordinance approving a categorical exemption per the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and approving Code Amendment No. 22-06 to amend the Fountain Valley Municipal Code (FVMC) Section 21.08.055 for accessory dwelling units.

Alternative No. 2: Do not introduce the attached Ordinance approving a categorical exemption per the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and approving Code Amendment No. 22-06 to amend the Fountain Valley Municipal Code (FVMC) Section 21.08.055 for accessory dwelling units.

Council Action Request
Code Amendment No. 22-06 Accessory Dwelling Units Ordinance City Council Meeting January 17, 2023

RECOMMENDATION
Staff is requesting City Council approval of Alternative No. 1 to introduce the attached Ordinance approving a categorical exemption per the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and approving Code Amendment No. 22-06 to amend the Fountain Valley Municipal Code (FVMC) Section 21.08.055 for accessory dwelling units.

Prepared by: Steven Ayers, Principal Planner
Reviewed by: Omar Dadabhoy, Community Development Director Approved by: Maggie Le, City Manager
Attachments:

1. Ordinance for Code Amendment No. 22-06

2. Notice of Exemption

CITY OF FOUNTAIN VALLEY
Planning Department
10200 Slater Avenue, Fountain Valley, CA 92708
714-593-4425 – fountainvalley.org
Notice of Exemption_________________________________________________ TO: Office of Planning and Research FROM: City of Fountain Valley P.O. Box 3044, Room 113 10200 Slater Avenue
Sacramento, CA 95812-3044 Fountain Valley, CA 92708
County Clerk
County of Orange
12 Civic Center Plaza
Santa Ana, CA 92701
Project Title: _________________________________________________________________________ Project Location/Address: ______________________________________________________________ Project Activity/Description: _____________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________ Public Agency Approving Project: City of Fountain Valley, Orange County, California Project Applicant: _____________________________________________________________________ Project Applicant’s Address: ___________________________________Phone Number: ____________ _____________________________________________________________________________ Exempt Status: (check one):

Ministerial (Sec. 21080 (b)(1); 15268);
Declared Emergency (Sec. 21080 (b((3); 15269 (a));
Emergency Project (Sec. 21080 (b)(4); 15269 (b) (c));
Categorical Exemption. State type and section number: _________________________________ Statutory Exemptions. State code number: ___________________________________________ Reasons why project is exempt: __________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ Lead Agency Contact Person: ___________________________ Contact Phone: _____________________________ If filed by applicant:

1. Attach certified document of exemption finding.

2. Has a Notice of Exemption been filed by the public agency approving the project?: Yes No Signature: ________________________________ Date: _____________ Title: ___________________ Signed by Lead Agency Signed by Applicant
Accessory Dwelling Units - Code Amendment No. 22-06
City of Fountain Valley - Citywide
An amendment to the Fountain Valley Municipal Code
(FVMC) Section 21.08.055 for the adoption of an ordinance for accessory dwelling units (ADUs) in compliance with state law.

City of Fountain Valley
10200 Slater Ave., Fountain Valley, CA 92708 (714)593-4425 15303, 15305, 15061
Public Resources Code 21080.17, CEQA 15282(h)
This request is exempt from CEQA under Public Resources Code section 21080.17 {statutory exemption for second unit ordinances]; CEQA Guidelines sections 15282(h) [statutory exemption for second unit ordinances]; 15303 [new construction or small structures] and 15305 [minor alterations to land]. This ordinance is also exempt under CEQA Guidelines section 15061, because this ordinance will not have a significant effect on the environment, because ADUs will largely constitute infill housing which is exempt from CEQA.

Steven Ayers, Principal Planner 714-593-4431

CITY OF FOUNTAIN VALLEY

CITY COUNCIL

COUNCIL ACTION REQUEST
To: Honorable Mayor and Agenda Date: February 7, 2023
Members of the City Council
SUBJECT: 1. Accept a fee proposal from AGA Engineers Inc. for $3,055 for the Assessment of Fountain Valley School Signage, and authorize staff to issue a Purchase Order to encumber the on-call contract; and,

2. Amend the Traffic Improvement (Measure M) Budget for Fiscal Year 2022- 2023 in the amount of $3,055.

Three-Year Strategic Goals
☒ Enhance the culture and environment of “A Nice Place to Live” ☐ Attract and retain revenue producing businesses
☐ Achieve fiscal stability in accordance with the 20-Year Financial Plan ☐ Attract and retain quality staff
☐ Not applicable
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:

On October 5, 2021, the City Council awarded 10 on-call consultant services contracts. AGA Engineers Inc. (AGA) was one of the highest ranked among the top ten qualified traffic engineering consultants through a competitive Request for Proposals (RFP) process per the City’s Administrative Purchasing Policy.

At the request of the City, AGA submitted a fee proposal for the assessment of current Federal and State compliance of School signage and pavement markings for every school in the City.

The scope of work includes assessing the existing school crossings at each of the 13 public schools. AGA will evaluate existing signs, pavement markings, school crossings, school area speed limit signs, and pedestrian crossing warning signs where AGA will provide City staff with a comprehensive list of recommendations for school area improvements to stay compliant with school area signage, pavement markings and crosswalk treatments. Upon completion of the assessment, the City will utilize the findings to develop design plans to implement school area improvements.

Staff recommends that the City Council 1. Accept a fee proposal from AGA Engineers Inc. for $3,055 for the Assessment of Fountain Valley School Signage, and authorize staff to issue a

AGA Fountain Valley School Signage
February 7, 2023

Purchase Order to encumber the on-call contract; and, 2. Amend the Traffic Improvement (Measure M) Budget for Fiscal Year 2022-2023 for $3,055.

DISCUSSION:

At the request of the City, AGA submitted a fee proposal for the assessment of current Federal and State compliance of school area signage and pavement markings for every school in the City. The scope of work includes assessing the existing school crossings at each of the 13 public schools. AGA will evaluate existing signs, pavement markings, school crossings, school area speed limit signs, pedestrian crossing warning signs where AGA will provide City staff with a comprehensive list of recommendations for school area improvements to improve with the school area signage, pavement markings and crosswalk treatments. Upon completion of the assessment, the City will utilize the findings to develop design plans to implement the recommended school area improvements.

On March 24, 2021, Staff solicited qualifications for As-Needed Engineering Services on the PlanetBids portal. On April 22, 2021, the City received proposals from 38 vendors for various services including traffic signal timing, maintenance, and repair. After careful consideration and evaluation of proposals, Staff selected 10 highest ranked consultants for the on-call list of qualified consultants for as-needed engineering services. This list also allows Staff to solicit competitive bids limited to those pre-qualified consultants.

AGA Engineers, Inc. is a highly qualified consulting firm and provides the City of Fountain Valley with excellent professional traffic signal and field assessment services. AGA has previously worked on various similar projects for the City of Fountain Valley including traffic signal modification design services and the Systemic Safety Analysis Report (SSARP). The SSARP was used to evaluate safety measures to address fatality and severe injury collisions Citywide.

Staff recommends that the City Council accept a fee proposal from AGA Engineers Inc. for $3,055 for the assessment of Fountain Valley school signage, and authorize staff to issue a Purchase Order to encumber the on-call contract; and, 2. Amend the Traffic Improvement (Measure M) Budget for Fiscal Year 2022-2023 for $3,055.

FISCAL REVIEW:

School Signage Assessment
Budget Amendment Amount (funded by Measure M) $3,055.00 Proposed Project Budget $3,055.00

AGA Fountain Valley School Signage
February 7, 2023

This amendment will be funded entirely by the Traffic Improvement Fund (Measure M) Special Revenue.

AGA Contact Amount (CON 21-57 | Munis CON 1006)
Total Contract for AGA Engineers* $400,000.00
Annual Traffic Signal Monitoring (1/1/22-6/30/22)
(PO 00220229)** $35,000.00
Annual Traffic Signal Monitoring (7/1/22-6/30/23)
(PO 00230146)*** $50,000.00
Preparation of Specifications for Traffic Signal Plans at Euclid/Condor and Talbert/Bushard**** $3,640.00
Fountain Valley School Signage Assessment $3,055.00
Total Contract Encumbrance $91,695.00
Remaining Contract Balance $308,305.00
*Approved by the City Council on October 5, 2021
**PO Approved by Finance on January 21, 2022
***PO Approved by Finance on November 28, 2022
**** Approved by the City Council on December 6, 2022
PUBLIC NOTIFICATION:

Not applicable.

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REVIEW:

Not applicable.

ATTORNEY REVIEW:

The Attorney for the City has reviewed and approved the attached contract CON 21-57 (Munis CON 1006).

ALTERNATIVES:

Alternative No. 1: 1. Accept a fee proposal from AGA Engineers Inc. for $3,055 for the assessment of Fountain Valley school signage, and authorize staff to issue a Purchase Order to encumber the on-call contract; and, 2. Amend the Traffic Improvement (Measure M) Budget for Fiscal Year 2022-2023 in the amount of $3,055. This is the recommended action.

Alternative No. 2: 1. Do not accept a fee proposal from AGA Engineers Inc. for $3,055 for the assessment of Fountain Valley school signage, and do not authorize staff to issue a Purchase Order to encumber the on-call contract; and, 2. Do not amend the Traffic Improvement (Measure M) Budget for Fiscal Year 2022- 2023 in the amount of $3,055. This is not recommended as AGA Engineers Inc. is highly qualified and has submitted a quality proposal at a fair and

AGA Fountain Valley School Signage
February 7, 2023

reasonable fee and this will not allow the City to achieve compliance with School area signage, pavement markings and crosswalks.

RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommends that the City Council accept a fee proposal from AGA Engineers Inc. for $3,055 for the assessment of Fountain Valley school signage, and authorize staff to issue a Purchase Order to encumber the on-call contract. Staff also recommends that the City Council amend the Traffic Improvement (Measure M) Budget for Fiscal Year 2022-2023 in the amount of $3,055.

Prepared by: Terri Phan, Management Aide
Co-Prepared by: Anthony Nuñez, Assistant Engineer
Recommended by: Kyle Hilton, Associate Engineer
Reviewed by: Temo Galvez, P.E., Deputy Public Works Director / City Engineer Approved by: Hye Jin Lee, P.E., Director of Public Works Fiscal Review by: Ryan Smith, Finance Director
Approved by: Maggie Le, City Manager
Attachment 1: AGA Engineers Inc. CON 21-57 (Munis CON 1006) Attachment 2: AGA Engineers Inc. Proposal for Fountain Valley School Signage Assessment

AGA Engineers, Inc.
211 E Imperial Hwy., Suite 208, Fullerton, CA 92835
(714) 992-4592 E-Mail: [email protected]
October 18, 2022
Temo Galvez
Deputy Public Works Director/City Engineer
City of Fountain Valley
10200 Slater Avenue
Fountain Valley, CA 92708
RE: Proposal – Fountain Valley School Signage Assessment Dear Mr. Galvez,
Per your request, AGA Engineers, Inc (AGA) is pleased to provide you with this letter proposal to provide where areas around each school in the City of Fountain Valley need to be assessed for additional signage and/or pavement markings. The assessment will reference the California Vehicle Code and California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CA MUTCD) for school signage and pavement markings. Per the City of Fountain Valley Safe Routes to School (SR2S) maps, there are 13 public schools in the City. AGA will note where the school crossings are located and the areas to be evaluated. It is understood that during the design phase, the existing school signage and pavement markings will be evaluated to determine if new signage and pavement markings are required. After the initial assessment has been conducted and approved by the City, signing and striping plans will be conducted based on the initial assessment. Phase I for this task is the initial assessment and Phase II involves the design of the signing and striping plans for each school area.

Phase I Scope of Work
- Utilizing Google Earth, assess the existing school crossings at each of the 13 public schools. - School Area Signage: AGA will coordinate with City staff if school signs are to be utilized to warn road users that they are approaching a school area even though there is no school crossing involved and no change in speed limit.
- Determine what area around each school is to be evaluated in the design phase. - Determine from Google Earth Street View if new signage and/or pavement markings are required or not. We will not show the details of what needs to be installed or removed. - Show a Google Earth image of the study areas for each school. Additional areas could be included in the design phase. For this assessment, AGA will note the areas with school crossings.

Mr. Temo Galvez
October 18, 2022

Attached are two sample assessments, one for Robert Gisler Elementary School and another for Cox Elementary School. Depending on the street layout and location of the school, the study area for a school can widely vary.

Phase I Fee Breakdown
- Develop School Area Map at $235/map 13 maps = $3,055
Phase II Scope of Work
Based on the initial assessment in Phase I, signing and striping plans will be developed. The signing and striping plans will be 1”=40’ scale and one school area may require more than one plan sheet to address multiple streets. Below is the scope of work for Phase II, signing and striping plans. - Conduct field review and measure all existing signs, potential conflicting striping/pavement legends and potential sign placement (existing posts, power poles and street lighting luminaire poles).
- Develop new signing and striping plans that show existing conditions (relevant signs and striping) and proposed signing and/or striping (pavement legends).

Since the extent of the study areas are not known at this time, an average of three signing and striping plan sheets (worst case) will be estimated for each school area. The fee for one signing and striping plan sheet is $1,800. Therefore, for one school area with three plan sheets, the cost is $5,400. For the entire study area of 13 schools, 39 total plan sheets may be required. Therefore, the final estimated fee for Phase II is $70,200. The final total fee could be less if the final amount of signing and striping plan sheets is less than the estimated 39 plan sheets.

Phase II Fee Breakdown
- Signing and Striping Plan Sheets at $1,800/Plan Sheet 39 Plan Sheets = $70,200

Mr. Temo Galvez
October 18, 2022

We are prepared to begin work upon receipt of notice-to-proceed. It is anticipated that Phase I can be completed within two weeks. Phase II could be completed in eight weeks after Phase I has been completed and approved by City staff. The total cost for both phases is $73,255. Private schools adjacent to a public school are included in the fee. Any additional private schools outside of the public school areas will be charged an additional $235 per school area map and $5,400 for signing and striping plans.

If you have any questions or would like to discuss any aspect of our proposal, please contact me at [email protected] or (714) 992-4592.

Respectfully submitted,
Greg Wong, P.E.

Vice President
ATTACHMENT – Initial Assessment for Robert Gisler Elementary School and Cox Elementary School AGA Engineers, Inc. - Proposal for Fountain Valley School Signage Assessment (10-18-22).docx

Robert Gisler Elementary and Shoreline Christian Schools: Areas to be Evaluated for School Signage and Pavement Marking
Signage/Pavement Marking
Required
No Changes Required
(NONE)
111
11

Cox Elementary Schools: Areas to be Evaluated for School Signage and Pavement Marking Signage/Pavement Marking
Required
No Changes Required
111
Potential
Study Area

CITY OF FOUNTAIN VALLEY

CITY COUNCIL

COUNCIL ACTION REQUEST
To: Honorable Mayor and Agenda Date: February 7, 2023
Members of the City Council
SUBJECT: Arterial Streets Rehabilitation and Resurfacing – Project No. 2422221006 (TI277)
 Heil Avenue from Euclid Street to Harbor Boulevard and Ward Street from Edinger Avenue to North City Limit

1. Accept the Onward Engineering proposal for $4,870 for Design Plans, Specifications, & Estimate (PS&E) and authorize staff to issue a purchase order to encumber the on-call CON 21-56 (Munis CON 1024).

2. Approve a reduction of staff time project costs for $4,870 (Project No. 2422221006 (TI277)) and reappropriate funds toward design services for Onward Engineering to accommodate bike lanes on Heil Avenue.

Three-Year Strategic Goals
☒ Enhance the culture and environment of “A Nice Place to Live” ☒ Attract and retain revenue producing businesses
☐ Achieve fiscal stability in accordance with the 20-Year Financial Plan ☐ Attract and retain quality staff
☐ Not applicable
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:

The City of Fountain Valley prides itself in having one of the best road conditions in Orange County. The Engineering Division is preparing for a design modification to accommodate bike lanes on Heil Avenue from Euclid Street to Harbor Boulevard in its continuing effort to provide efficient traffic flow through its residential streets and arterial roadways and provide recreation center connectivity from the Santa Ana River bike trail to the Mile Square Park. The Rehabilitation and Resurfacing of Heil Avenue from Euclid Street to Harbor Boulevard and Ward Street from Edinger Avenue to the North City Limit (Project No. 2422221006) is scheduled for construction in winter 2023.

On October 5, 2021, the City Council approved an on-call list of qualified consultants for as-needed design services and awarded contracts to the list of qualified consultants for a not-to-exceed amount of $400,000 per contract for a three-year term. The purpose of

Heil Ave. Bike Lane Striping Plan
February 7, 2023

the on-call list is to establish a list of qualified consultants to support the various projects and staffing needs within Public Works Engineering for three (3) years. Maintaining an active and comprehensive on-call list will streamline the process of awarding projects to the most suitable firm for specific projects and reduce the time needed to solicit RFP for each project.

Staff selected Onward Engineering from the approved on-call list of qualified consultants for as-needed design services for the rehabilitation and resurfacing project. Onward Engineering has provided engineering services to various agencies in the Orange County area over the past several decades. Their staff resources include registered civil engineers, designers, contract administrators, surveyors, and computer-aided designers.

They offer innovative technology solutions to reduce design costs by deploying drone surveys with field verification.

On December 21, 2021, the City Council accepted a $75,134 fee proposal from Onward Engineering for Design Plans, Specifications, & Estimate (PS&E) for the Rehabilitation and Resurfacing of Heil Avenue from Euclid Street to Harbor Boulevard and Ward Street from Edinger Avenue to Northerly City Limit, Project No. 2422221006 (TI277) and authorized staff to encumber funds via a purchase order for Onward Engineering’s oncall contract.

Staff recommends that City Council:

1. Accept the Onward Engineering proposal in the amount of $4,870 for Design Plans, Specifications, & Estimate (PS&E) and authorize staff to issue a purchase order to encumber the on-call CON 21-56 (Munis CON 1024).

2. Approve the reduction of staff time project costs in the amount of $4,870 (Project No. 2422221006 (TI277)) and reappropriate funds toward design services for Onward Engineering to accommodate bike lanes on Heil Avenue.

DISCUSSION:

The City of Fountain Valley supports the traveling public with safe roads and efficient traffic flow. As part of the City’s continuing effort to maintain the longevity of its arterial roadways, the Engineering Division performs one arterial street project each year as part of the Capital Improvement Program (CIP). The City Council approved an appropriation for the FY 22/23 project budget for the Rehabilitation and Resurfacing of Heil Avenue from Euclid Street to Harbor Boulevard and Ward Street from Edinger Avenue to North City Limit, Project No. 2422221006 (TI277). Construction is anticipated to begin in FY 22/23.

Heil Ave. Bike Lane Striping Plan
February 7, 2023

Staff identified Heil Avenue from Euclid Street to Harbor Boulevard and Ward Street from Edinger Avenue to the N.C.L. as this year’s arterial street improvement project based on a comprehensive review of the City’s Pavement Management Plan (PMP), in conjunction with staff’s intimate knowledge of the City’s roadway conditions and engineering judgment. The PMP is updated every two (2) years as required as a condition for Measure M2 and Senate Bill 1 (SB 1) funding. The project scope of work includes the removal and reconstruction of deteriorated sections of the roadway and the placement of a rubberized asphalt concrete overlay. This project will also provide concrete improvements including American Disabilities Act (ADA) compliant sidewalk pathways. These improvements will provide better ride quality and extend the service life for Heil Avenue and Ward Street within the project limit.

Staff also identified the need for bike lanes on Heil Avenue to improve traffic flow, increase travelers’ safety, benefit the environment, and promote healthier transportation options.

Bike lanes will designate an exclusive space for bicyclists and enable them to travel at faster speeds while facilitating predictable maneuvers between bicyclists and motorists.

The path of travel for pedestrians and individuals with disabilities will be safer since bicyclists will not occupy sidewalks. Providing a safe and efficient biking option will allow

Heil Ave. Bike Lane Striping Plan
February 7, 2023

travelers to bike instead of drive, reducing the carbon footprint and encouraging exercise for bicyclists. Onward Engineering is familiar with the project and is equipped to modify designs to provide bike lanes, improving traffic flow and safety for commuters.

Onward Engineering has provided engineering services to various agencies in the Orange County area over the past several decades including the City of Fountain Valley.

Their staffing resources include registered civil engineers, designers, contract administrators, surveyors, and computer-aided designers. They provide qualityengineering services with good value.

FINANCIAL ANALYSIS:

PROJECT COSTS (Project No. 2422221006 (TI277))
Construction Contract (R.J. Noble Company)* $1,738,521.88 10% Contingency* $173,852.19
Material Testing Services (Ninyo & Moore Geotechnical
Consultants)* $15,857.00
Staff Time $21,768.93
Reduction of Staff Time to apply toward Design Services for Bike Lanes (Onward) ($4,870.00)
Design Services for Bike Lanes (Onward) $4,870.00
Total Project Cost $1,950,000
*Approved by City Council on September 20, 2022.

FUNDING SOURCE APPROVED

PROJECT BUDGET
RMRA (SB1) Funding $630,421
Measure M Funding $1,264,579
Water Fund (Water Utility Adjustments) $25,000
Sewer Fund (Sewer Utility Adjustments) $30,000
Current Project Budget $1,950,000
There are sufficient funds in the amended project budget to accommodate the design modifications for Onward Engineering. Measure M2 from Orange County Transportation Authority is the primary source of the Traffic Improvement Fund.

Heil Ave. Bike Lane Striping Plan
February 7, 2023

ATTORNEY REVIEW:

The Attorney for the City has reviewed and approved the As-Needed On-Call Design Services CON 21-56 (Munis CON 1024) for Onward Engineering on October 5, 2021.

ALTERNATIVES:

Alternative No. 1:

1. Accept the Onward Engineering proposal in the amount of $4,870 for Design Plans, Specifications, & Estimate (PS&E) and authorize staff to issue a purchase order to encumber the on-call CON 21-56 (Munis CON 1024).

2. Approve the reduction of staff time project costs in the amount of $4,870 (Project No. 2422221006 (TI277)) and reappropriate funds toward design services for Onward Engineering to accommodate bike lanes on Heil Avenue.

Alternative No. 2:

1. Do not accept the Onward Engineering proposal in the amount of $4,870 for Design Plans, Specifications, & Estimate (PS&E) and do not authorize staff to issue a purchase order to encumber the on-call CON 21-56 (Munis CON 1024).

2. Do not approve the reduction of staff time project costs in the amount of $4,870 (Project No. 2422221006 (TI277)) and do not reappropriate funds toward design services for Onward Engineering to accommodate bike lanes on Heil Avenue.

This is not recommended as providing bike lanes would increase the safety for bicyclists, motorists, and pedestrians, while improving traffic flow.

RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommends that the City Council:

1. Accept the Onward Engineering proposal in the amount of $4,870 for Design Plans, Specifications, & Estimate (PS&E) and authorize staff to issue a purchase order to encumber the on-call CON 21-56 (Munis CON 1024).

2. Approve the reduction of staff time project costs in the amount of $4,870 (Project No. 2422221006 (TI277)) and reappropriate funds toward design services for Onward Engineering to accommodate bike lanes on Heil Avenue.

Prepared by: Terri Phan, Management Aide
Co-prepared by: Tony Nuñez, Assistant Engineer
Recommended by: Kyle Hilton, Associate Engineer
Reviewed by: Temo Galvez, Deputy Public Works Director/City Engineer

Heil Ave. Bike Lane Striping Plan
February 7, 2023

Approved by: Hye Jin Lee, Director of Public Works
Fiscal Review by: Ryan Smith, Finance Director/City Treasurer Approved by: Maggie Le, City Manager
Attachment 1: Onward Engineering CON 21-56 (Munis CON 1024).

Attachment 2: Onward Proposal

QA/QC
Manager Project Manager Project Engineers Subconsultants $150 $140 $115
Hours Hours Hours
CCO1 - STRIPING CHANGES ON HEIL
1 Redesign Striping Plans for Added Bike Lanes 2 8 30 $0.00 $4,870.00 CCO1 - STRIPING CHANGES ON HEIL 2 8 30 $0.00 $4,870.00
The hourly rates above are our fee schedule. Any additional work will be negotiated utilizing those hourly rates.

Onward Engineering Fee Proposal to Provide Professional Engineering Services to the City of Fountain Valley for the Heil Ave from Euclid St to Harbor Blvd and Ward St from Edinger Ave to 150' north of Margarita Ave Rehabilitation Project CCO1 - Striping Changes on Heil
Task Project Tasks Total
Lump Sum

CITY OF FOUNTAIN VALLEY

CITY COUNCIL

COUNCIL ACTION REQUEST
To: Honorable Mayor and Agenda Date: February 7, 2023
Members of the City Council
SUBJECT: Rehabilitation and Resurfacing of Arterial Streets:
 Warner Avenue from Brookhurst Street to Bushard Street and  Ellis Avenue from Brookhurst Street to Bushard Street

1. Approve a budget transfer of $120,000 from the FY 22/23 Pavement Rehabilitation for Edinger Avenue (Newhope Street to Harbor Boulevard) Project (Project No. 2422321007) Budget to the Warner Avenue and Ellis Avenue both from Brookhurst Street to Bushard Street Rehabilitation and Resurfacing Projects;

2. Amend the FY 22/23 Project Budget (Traffic Improvement (TI) Fund 242) of $7,015.00; and

3. Accept the DMS Consultants, Inc. proposals for $67,235 and $59,780 ($127,015 total) for design plans, specifications & estimate (PS&E) for the Warner Avenue and Ellis Avenue both from Brookhurst Street to Bushard Street Rehabilitation and Resurfacing Projects, respectively, and authorize staff to issue Purchase Orders to encumber the on-call contract.

Three-Year Strategic Goals
☒ Enhance the culture and environment of “A Nice Place to Live” ☒ Attract and retain revenue producing businesses
☐ Achieve fiscal stability in accordance with the 20-Year Financial Plan ☐ Attract and retain quality staff
☐ Not applicable
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:

The City of Fountain Valley is proud to provide one of the best road conditions in Orange County. In a continuing effort to increase the longevity of its local streets and arterial roadways, the Engineering Division is preparing for the engineering design of the 2023 Arterial Streets Improvement Projects for Warner Avenue and Ellis Avenue both from Brookhurst Street to Bushard Street.

Rehabilitation and Resurfacing:

Warner from Brookhurst St. to Bushard St.

Ellis from Brookhurst St. to Bushard St.

February 7, 2023

On October 5, 2021, the City Council approved an on-call list of qualified consultants for as-needed design services and awarded contracts to the list of qualified consultants, for a not-to-exceed amount of $400,000 per contract, for a three-year term. Staff selected DMS Consultants, Inc. (DMS) from the approved on-call list of qualified consultants for as-needed design services for the rehabilitation and resurfacing project. DMS was established in 1994 and provides engineering and related services to municipalities, government entities, and private industries throughout Southern California. DMS presently provides on-call civil engineering services to various agencies in Orange County and Los Angeles County.

Previously, next year’s arterial street improvement project was budgeted for Edinger Avenue from Newhope Street to Harbor Blvd. Due to continuous traffic detour routes by OC405 construction activities, Staff has determined Warner Avenue and Ellis Avenue both from Brookhurst Street to Bushard Street as next year’s arterial streets improvement projects.

Staff recommends that the City Council:

1. Approve a budget transfer of $120,000 from the FY 22/23 Pavement Rehabilitation for Edinger Avenue from Newhope Street to Harbor Boulevard Project (Project No. 2422321007) Budget to the Warner Avenue and Ellis Avenue both from Brookhurst Street to Bushard Street Rehabilitation and Resurfacing Projects;

2. Amend the FY 22/23 Project Budget (Traffic Improvement (TI) Fund 242) of $7,015.00; and

3. Accept the DMS Consultants, Inc. proposals for $67,235 and $59,780 ($127,015 total) for design plans, specifications & estimates (PS&E) for the Warner Avenue and Ellis Avenue both from Brookhurst Street to Bushard Street Rehabilitation and Resurfacing Projects, respectively, and authorize staff to issue Purchase Orders to encumber the on-call contract.

DISCUSSION:

The City of Fountain Valley supports the traveling public with great roads and an excellent pavement maintenance and rehabilitation program. The Engineering Division performs one arterial street improvement project each year as part of the Capital Improvement Program (CIP) and the City’s continuing effort to increase the longevity of its arterial roadways. The City Council approved a budget appropriation for the Pavement Rehabilitation of Edinger Avenue from Newhope Street to Harbor Boulevard Project within the 2022-2023 CIP. Alternatively, Staff identified an increased priority to improve road conditions on Warner Avenue and Ellis Avenue both from Brookhurst Street to Bushard Street.

Rehabilitation and Resurfacing:

Warner from Brookhurst St. to Bushard St.

Ellis from Brookhurst St. to Bushard St.

February 7, 2023

Staff determined Warner Avenue and Ellis Avenue both from Brookhurst Street to Bushard Street as next year’s arterial streets improvement projects based on a comprehensive review of the City’s Pavement Management Plan (PMP), in conjunction with Staff’s intimate knowledge of the City’s roadway conditions, engineering judgment, and coordination with the I-405 widening project. It should be noted, that the PMP is updated every two (2) years as a condition of Measure M2 and Senate Bill 1 (SB 1) funding.

These segments of arterial streets had been heavily traveled due to continuous traffic detour routes by OC405 construction activities for the last 5 years. Due to the diligence and strategic planning between Fountain Valley and OCTA staff, the OC 405 construction schedule was expedited. OCTA has reaffirmed that the heavy construction within Fountain Valley will be complete by the Fall of 2023. Therefore, these segments of arterial streets can now be paved. It should be noted, that the City previously received funds

Rehabilitation and Resurfacing:

Warner from Brookhurst St. to Bushard St.

Ellis from Brookhurst St. to Bushard St.

February 7, 2023

($657,008) in 2019 through a Cooperative Agreement Amendment #1 with OCTA for local street pavement restoration due to the OC405 project.

The scope of work for the projects includes the removal and reconstruction of deteriorated sections of the roadways and the placement of a rubberized asphalt concrete overlay.

These projects will also provide concrete improvements including American Disabilities Act (ADA) compliant sidewalk pathways. These improvements will provide better ride quality and extend the service life for Warner Avenue and Ellis Avenue, within the project limits.

DMS has completed similar design projects for the City of Fountain Valley. They recently provided civil engineering services for The Rehabilitation and Resurfacing of Warner Avenue from Brookhurst Street to Euclid Street, completed in 2021, and the Rehabilitation and Resurfacing of Euclid Street from Slater Avenue to Warner Avenue, completed in 2018. DMS has also previously designed several residential paving projects in the City and has a very thorough understanding of the City’s soil and street conditions. DMS offers a diversity of services and comprehensive experience to provide practical and high-quality engineering.

FISCAL REVIEW:

On June 21, 2022, the City Council approved a Resolution adopting the FY22-23 Annual Operating Budget & Ten-Year Capital Improvement Program (Adoption of the Ten-Year Capital Improvement Plan consistent with Measure M2 Eligibility process), which includes the Project Budget for the Rehabilitation of Edinger Avenue from Newhope Street to Harbor Boulevard (Project No. 2422321007) in the amount of $120,000. Staff identified an increased need to improve road conditions on Warner Avenue and Ellis Avenue both from Brookhurst Street to Bushard Street. Staff requests the following City Council approval
 A budget transfer of $120,000 from Project No. 2422311007 to the Rehabilitation and Resurfacing of Warner and Ellis Projects both from Brookhurst Street to Bushard Street.
 FY22/23 project budget amendment of $7,015 of TI Fund 242 to increase the total project budget to $127,015 to ensure sufficient funds are available for the DMS Consultants, Inc. design services for the two projects.

FY22/23 Project Budget (TI277) (Fund 242)
FY22/23 Project Budget for Rehabilitation of Edinger from Newhope to Harbor (Project No. 2422321007) * $120,000
Budget Transfer from Project No. 2422321007 to Rehabilitation and Resurfacing of Warner and Ellis Projects $120,000
FY22/23 Project Budget Amendment $7,015

Rehabilitation and Resurfacing:

Warner from Brookhurst St. to Bushard St.

Ellis from Brookhurst St. to Bushard St.

February 7, 2023

Total Project Budget $127,015
ANTICIPATED PROJECT COSTS (TI277)
Design Services for Rehabilitation and Resurfacing of Warner Avenue from Brookhurst St to Bushard St (DMS Consultants, Inc.) $67,235
Design Services for Rehabilitation and Resurfacing of Ellis Avenue from Brookhurst St to Bushard St (DMS Consultants, Inc.) $59,780
Total Anticipated Design Services Project Costs $127,015 *Approved by City Council on June 21, 2022
DMS Consultants, Inc. As-Needed On-Call Design Services CON 21-62 (Munis CON 1039)
CON 21-62 (Munis CON 1039) * $400,000
Residential Roadway Rehabilitation (Quadrant D1)
(PO 00220227)**
$29,260
Rehabilitation and Resurfacing of Warner Avenue from
Brookhurst St to Bushard St
$67,235
Rehabilitation and Resurfacing of Ellis Avenue from
Brookhurst St to Bushard St
$59,780
Total Remaining Amount to CON 21-62 (Munis CON 1039) $243,725 *Approved by City Council on October 5, 2021
** PO Approved by Finance on June 22, 2022
There are sufficient funds in the FY 22/23 Traffic Improvement Fund (Fund 242) to accommodate the proposed design services projects. Measure M2 from Orange County Transportation Authority is the primary source of the Traffic Improvement Fund.

PUBLIC NOTIFICATION:

Not applicable.

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REVIEW:

Not applicable.

ATTORNEY REVIEW:

The Attorney for the City has reviewed and approved the As-Needed On-Call Design Services CON 21-62 (Munis CON 1039) for DMS Consultants, Inc. on October 5, 2021.

Rehabilitation and Resurfacing:

Warner from Brookhurst St. to Bushard St.

Ellis from Brookhurst St. to Bushard St.

February 7, 2023

ALTERNATIVES:

Alternative No. 1:

1. Approve a budget transfer of $120,000 from the FY 22/23 Pavement Rehabilitation for Edinger Avenue from Newhope Street to Harbor Boulevard Project (Project No. 2422321007) Budget to the Warner Avenue and Ellis Avenue both from Brookhurst Street to Bushard Street Rehabilitation and Resurfacing Projects;

2. Amend the FY 22/23 Project Budget (Traffic Improvement (TI) Fund 242) of $7,015.00; and

3. Accept the DMS Consultants, Inc. proposals for $67,235 and $59,780 ($127,015 total) for design plans, specifications & estimate (PS&E) for the Warner Avenue and Ellis Avenue both from Brookhurst Street to Bushard Street Rehabilitation and Resurfacing Projects, respectively, and authorize staff to issue Purchase Orders to encumber the on-call contract.

Alternative No. 2:

1. Do not approve a budget transfer of $120,000 from the FY 22/23 Pavement Rehabilitation for Edinger Avenue from Newhope Street to Harbor Boulevard Project (Project No. 2422321007) Budget to the Warner Avenue and Ellis Avenue both from Brookhurst Street to Bushard Street Rehabilitation and Resurfacing Projects;

2. Do not amend the FY 22/23 Project Budget (Traffic Improvement (TI) Fund 242) in the amount of $7,015.00; and

3. Do not accept the DMS Consultants, Inc. proposals in the amounts of $67,235 and $59,780 ($127,015 total) for design plans, specifications & estimate (PS&E) for the Warner Avenue and Ellis Avenue both from Brookhurst Street to Bushard Street Rehabilitation and Resurfacing Projects, respectively, and do not authorize staff to issue Purchase Orders to encumber the on-call contract.

This is not recommended as delaying these projects would not properly maintain the City’s long-term investment in its roadway network.

RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommends that the City Council:

1. Approve a budget transfer of $120,000 from the FY 22/23 Pavement Rehabilitation for Edinger Avenue from Newhope Street to Harbor Boulevard Project (Project No. 2422321007) Budget to the Warner Avenue and Ellis Avenue both from Brookhurst Street to Bushard Street Rehabilitation and Resurfacing Projects;

Rehabilitation and Resurfacing:

Warner from Brookhurst St. to Bushard St.

Ellis from Brookhurst St. to Bushard St.

February 7, 2023

2. Amend the FY 22/23 Project Budget (Traffic Improvement (TI) Fund 242) of $7,015.00; and

3. Accept the DMS Consultants, Inc. proposals for $67,235 and $59,780 ($127,015 total) for design plans, specifications & estimate (PS&E) for the Warner Avenue and Ellis Avenue both from Brookhurst Street to Bushard Street Rehabilitation and Resurfacing Projects, respectively, and authorize staff to issue Purchase Orders to encumber the on-call contract.

Prepared by: Terri Phan, Management Aide
Co-prepared by: Tony Nuñez, Assistant Engineer
Recommended by: Kyle Hilton, Associate Engineer
Reviewed by: Temo Galvez, Deputy Public Works Director/City Engineer Approved by: Hye Jin Lee, Director of Public Works
Fiscal Review by: Ryan Smith, Finance Director/City Treasurer Approved by: Maggie Le, City Manager
Attachment 1: DMS Consultants, Inc. CON 21-62 (Munis CON 1039) Attachment 2: DMS Consultants, Inc. Warner from Brookhurst to Bushard Proposal Attachment 3: DMS Consultants, Inc. Ellis from Brookhurst to Bushard Proposal

PROFESSIONAL CIVIL ENGINEERING SERVICES
Proposal For
Warner Avenue
from Brookhurst Street to Bushard Street
Rehabilitation and Resurfacing Project
Presented To:

City of Fountain Valley
10200 Slater Avenue
Fountain Valley, California 92708
Attn: Anthony Nunez
Assistant Engineer
[email protected]
Presented By:

DMS Consultants, Inc.
12371 Lewis Street, Suite 203
Garden Grove, California 92840
714.740.8840
January 3, 2023

January 3, 2023
Mr. Tony Nunez
Assistant Engineer
City of Fountain Valley
Public Works/Engineering Department
10200 Slater Avenue
Fountain Valley, CA 92708
SUBJECT: Warner Avenue from Brookhurst Street to Bushard Street Rehabilitation and Resurfacing Project
Dear Tony:

DMS Consultants, Inc. is pleased to present this proposal to provide civil engineering design services for the subject project.

Mr. Surender Dewan, President of DMS Consultants, Inc., would be assigned as the Project Manager of this project. As such, Mr. Dewan would be responsible for the overall scheduling and budget control and would be available to meet with the City to discuss the project as required.

Our design team includes the following subconsultants:

Smith-Emery Laboratories Geotechnical Investigation Services Digital Mapping Inc. Photogrammetric Services
Upon receiving authorization, we will have the project completed by March 31, 2023.

I hope that our experience, record of performance and sincere interest in working with the City of Fountain Valley will result in a favorable consideration. We look forward to the opportunity of working with you and your staff.

Sincerely,
DMS Consultants, Inc.

Surender Dewan, P.E.

President
12371 Lewis Street, Suite 203, Garden Grove, CA 92840

Firm Profile .................................................................. 1 Project Team................................................................ 2 Firm Experience .....................................................3 - 5 Subconsultants Profile ............................................... 6 Scope of Work ............................................................. 7 Project Understanding.........................................8 - 10 Project Approach................................................ 11 - 13 References................................................................. 14 Fee Proposal.............................................................. 15 Warner Avenue - Brookhurst Street to Bushard Street Page 206 1 DMS Consultants, Inc.
12371 Lewis Street, Suite 203
Garden Grove, CA 92840
Tel: 714.740.8840
www.dmsconsultantsinc.com
DMS Consultants, Inc. is dedicated to technical excellence and high quality services. A team approach is taken to every project undertaken, with a project engineer directing, managing and acting as the central design figure in the work. Our firm strives to maintain a high level of communication with the client and jurisdictional agencies.

We are acutely aware of the value and importance of providing close individual attention to each project and to working within the constraints of time and budget. We also know that the success of our firm rests clearly on the management, competence, and expertise of our professional staff and team.

Established in 1994, our firm provides engineering and related services to municipalities, government entities, and private industries throughout Southern California. With a staff of registered civil engineers, designers, construction observers, contract administrators, surveyors, and specialists in transportation, building and safety, and computer-aided design, DMS Consultants, Inc. is uniquely qualified to respond to the diverse needs of our clientele.

DMS Consultants, Inc. presently provides on-call civil engineering services to the City of Brea, City of Fountain Valley, City of Fullerton, City of Gardena, City of La Mirada, City of Newport Beach, and City of San Dimas.

DMS Consultants, Inc. has the ability to provide in-house services in the following areas:
▪ Street rehabilitation
▪ ADA accessibility type improvements
▪ Storm drain improvements
▪ Sewer improvements
▪ SWPPP documents
▪ Plan check services
DMS Consultants, Inc. has the capacity to sub-consult for areas including but not necessarily limited to:
▪ Geotechnical services
▪ Traffic engineering services
Warner Avenue - Brookhurst Street to Bushard Street Page 207 City of Fountain Valley
Smith-Emery Laboratories
Geotechnical Investigations
Subconsultant
Bob Kelsoe, L.S.

Survey Party Chief
DMS Consultants, Inc.
2-Man Survey Crew
2 The most important element in the provision of professional services is the assignment of key personnel.

Quality personnel and an effective management system combine to produce quality services.

Accordingly, the following key personnel will be assigned to this project.

AVAILABILITY OF STAFF
DMS Consultants, Inc. prides itself in performing the work on a short notice and in a timely manner. We will assign significant staff to complete the work on schedule and to the City’s satisfaction.

Surender Dewan, PE, QSD/QSP
President / Project Manager
DMS Consultants, Inc.

Digital Mapping Inc.

Photogrammetric Services
Subconsultant
Nishant Chadha, MS, MBA
Project Engineer
DMS Consultants, Inc.

Hoang Nguyen, BS
Design Engineer
DMS Consultants, Inc.

Warner Avenue - Brookhurst Street to Bushard Street Page 208 Warner Avenue - Brookhurst Street to Bushard Street 3
Warner Avenue Rehabilitation and Resurfacing Project - Fountain Valley DMS was selected by the City of Fountain Valley to provide civil engineering services for Warner Avenue Rehabilitation and Resurfacing project. The project area was Warner Avenue from Brookhurst Street to Euclid Street. The project included reconstruction of roadway, reconstruction of median curb, ADA improvements, striping and signage plans, project specifications, and cost estimates.

Agency: City of Fountain Valley
Regino DeAvila, Associate Engineer
714.593.4515 [email protected]
Construction Cost: $1.6 million
Project Status: Design complete: 2020
Construction complete: 2021
Project Manager: Surender Dewan, PE
Alondra Boulevard and Imperial Highway Rehabilitation Project - La Mirada DMS was selected by the City of La Mirada to provide civil engineering services for Alondra Boulevard and Imperial Highway Rehabilitation project. The project area is Alondra Boulevard from Valley View to Mottley Drive and Imperial Highway from Marquardt Avenue to Wicker Avenue. The project includes reconstruction of roadway, reconstruction of median curb, ADA improvements, striping and signage plans, median landscape improvements, project specifications, and cost estimates.

Agency: City of La Mirada
Eric Villagracia, Project Manger
562.902.2373 [email protected]
Construction Cost: $2.1 million
Project Status: Design: 2021
Construction: Active
Project Manager: Surender Dewan, PE
Commonwealth Avenue and Raymond Avenue Reconstruction Project - Fullerton DMS was selected by the City of Fullerton to provide civil engineering services for Commonwealth Avnue and Raymond Avenue Reconstruction project. The project area is Commonwealth Avenue from Balcom Avenue to Acacia Avenue and Raymond Avenue from Commonwealth Avenue to Chapman Avenue. The project includes rehabilitation of existing roadway, removal and reconstruction of damaged curb and gutter and sidewalk, signage and striping plans, project specifications, and estimate of probable costs.

Agency: City of Fullerton
Jose Medina, Assistant Engineer
714.738.6863 [email protected]
Construction Cost: $3.5 million
Project Status: Design: 2022
Construction: Active
Project Manager: Surender Dewan, PE

Warner Avenue - Brookhurst Street to Bushard Street 4
MacArthur Boulevard Pavement Reconstruction Project - Newport Beach DMS was selected by the City of Newport Beach to provide civil engineering services for MacArthur Boulevard Pavement Reconstruction project. The project area was MacArthur Boulevard from Coast Highway east to Bonita Canyon Road. The project included rehabilitation of existing roadway, removal and reconstruction of damaged curb and gutter, sidewalk, median curb, preparation of signage and striping plans, project specifications, and estimate of probable cost.

Agency: City of Newport Beach
Frank Tran, Associate Civil Engineer
949.644.3321 [email protected]
Construction Cost: $2.2 Million
Project Status: Design complete: 2016
Construction complete: 2017
Project Manager: Surender Dewan, P.E.

Euclid Avenue Street Improvements - Fountain Valley
DMS was selected by the City of Fountain Valley to provide civil engineering services The project area was Euclid Street from Slater Avenue to Warner Avenue. The project included reconstruction of roadway, reconstruction of median curb, ADA improvements, landscape and irrigation plans, preparation of striping and signage plans, project specifications, and estimate of probable cost.

Agency: City of Fountain Valley
Regino DeAvila, Associate Engineer
714.593.4515 [email protected]
Construction Cost: $1.2 Million
Project Status: Design complete: 2018
Construction complete: 2018
Project Manager: Surender Dewan, P.E.

Van Ness Avenue Street Improvement Project - Gardena
DMS was selected by the City of Gardena to provide civil engineering services for Van Ness Avenue Street Improvement project. The project area is Van Ness Avenue from Redondo Beach Boulevard to Marine Avenue. The project includes rehabilitation of existing roadway, removal and reconstruction of damaged curb and gutter, sidewalk and ADA accessible ramps, preparation of striping and signage plans, project specifications, and cost estimate.

Agency: City of Gardena
Frank Sanchez, PE, Associate Engineer
310.217.9631 [email protected]
Construction Cost: $1.2 million
Project Status: Design: Active
Construction: Pending
Project Manager: Surender Dewan, PE

Warner Avenue - Brookhurst Street to Bushard Street 5
Via Verde Street Improvements - San Dimas
DMS was selected by the City of San Dimas to provide civil engineering services for Via Verde Street Improvements. The project limits are form 1400’ west of Covina Hills Road to Easterly City Limits. The project includes rehabilitation of existing roadway, removal and reconstruction of damaged curb and gutter, sidewalk and ADA accessible ramps, preparation of striping and signage plans, project specifications, and cost estimates.

Agency: City of San Dimas
Shari Garwick, PE, Director of Public Works
909.644.3344 [email protected]
Construction Cost: $3 million
Project Status: Design: 2022
Construction: Active
Project Manager: Surender Dewan, P.E.

Smith-Emery Laboratories
1197 N. Tustin Avenue
Anaheim, CA 93807
Tel: 714.238.6133
www.smithemery.com
Smith-Emery Laboratories was formed in 1904 and is located in Anaheim, California. Smith-Emery Laboratories is the oldest and largest independent testing agency in the Western Region of the United States. With over 100 registered licensed deputy inspectors, supported by an educated staff of civil, geotechnical, and chemical engineers and technicians, Smith-Emery has earned the reputation as the leading independent testing and inspection agency in California. ▪
▪
▪
▪ ▪
▪
▪
▪
▪
▪
▪
▪
▪
Warner Avenue - Brookhurst Street to Bushard Street 6

The City of Fountain Valley intends to retain the services of a consultant to provide civil engineering design services for the development of construction documents for roadway improvements for the Warner Avenue from Brookhurst Street to Bushard Street.

The proposed scope of work consists of the following:
■ Project kickoff meeting and design progress meeting as necessary and design coordination.
■ Accumulation and review of existing plans and other available data. As-built plans to be provided by the City.
■ Project survey. Survey sections not to exceed 50’ shall include right-of-way, centerline, lot lines, curb and gutter in areas where improvements are required, cross gutters, ADA ramps, surface features, appurtenances, and sewer/storm drain manhole locations. ■ Pavement analysis.
■ Utility coordination.
■ Removal and replacement of curb, gutter, sidewalk and ADA accessible ramps. ■ Removal of parkway trees causing damage and replacement with size and species specified by City.
■ Drive approach reconstruction to conform to ADA standards. ■ Construction support to include submittal review, RFI and RFC response and preparation of as-built plans after the completion of construction. ■ PS&E submittals at 60%, 90% and 100% completion.

Warner Avenue - Brookhurst Street to Bushard Street 7

Warner Avenue from Brookhurst Street to Bushard Street is an arterial serving the businesses and residents of Fountain Valley and neighboring cities. This section of the roadway is bounded by commercial developments on both north and south sides of the street.

Warner Avenue is 104 feet wide from curb to curb in a 120-foot right-of-way. The existing roadway is striped for three lanes in each direction with a median divider in the center which varies in width from 14 feet to 4 feet. No parking is permitted on the street.

The intersections of Warner Avenue with Brookhurst Street, Greenleaf Street and Bushard Street are signalized.

There is full width sidewalk on both sides of the street with the exception of a section along southerly curb between Buttonwood Street and Greenleaf Street which has a frontage road along residential streets. (Figure 1) The existing sidewalk along both sides of the street appear to be in good condition with the exception of a few isolated locations. (Figure 2)
The curb and gutter in the project area appears to be in relatively good condition except at a few locations where we observed damaged curb and gutter and ponding, particularly along the northerly curb west of Tahoma Street. (Figure 3)
Warner Avenue - Brookhurst Street to Bushard Street 8
Figure 1 Figure 2

Nearly all of the driveways in the project area do not
conform to ADA standards of accessibility and will
require reconstruction. (Figure 4) Reconstruction of
driveways will require improvements i.e., removal and
replacement of existing pavement on private properties
to approximately 10 feet within private property. Only
the driveways at the following locations conform to
ADA standards:
▪ Driveway to Hot & Grill restaurant
▪ Easterly driveway to Plavan School
▪ Driveway to autobody shop, northeast corner of
Warner Avenue and Bushard Street
▪ Driveways to Sam Club
Curb ramp at southeast corner of Warner Avenue and
Bushard Street has a traffic signal pull box at the
proposed location of truncated domes. (Figure 5) The
traffic signal pull box will need to be relocated.
9 Figure 3 Figure 4
Warner Avenue - Brookhurst Street to Bushard Street
Figure 5

Curb ramps at the following locations do not conform to ADA standards of accessibility and will require reconstruction.
▪ Northeast and southeast corner of Warner Avenue and Bushard Street. ▪ Southeast and southwest corner of Buttonwood Street and Warner Avenue. ▪ Southeast corner of Nectarine Street and Warner Avenue requires truncated dome only. (Figure 6) Pavement Condition
A cursory review of the existing conditions indicate the pavement to be in relatively good condition (Figure 7) except for a section adjacent to Bushard Street intersection. A major portion of the roadway can be rehabilitated by a combination of cold mill and overlay.

Actual treatment will be per a pavement analysis report to be prepared in conjunction with this project.

Warner Avenue in the project area is on OCTA bus route without any concrete bus pads. 10 Figure 6 Figure 7
Warner Avenue - Brookhurst Street to Bushard Street Page 216 Design Review Meeting
▪ In a consultation meeting with the City, the scope of work, procedure and precise limits of the project improvements will be reviewed. Obtain from the City existing improvement plans and record maps of the project area.
▪ Review with City staff to obtain specific input related to City goals and discuss preliminary issues. ▪ Meet with City staff on a continuous, as needed basis throughout the design and construction phases to ensure that work is expeditiously carried out in keeping with City requirements.

Utility Coordination
▪ Notify all utilities at the start and at 60% design of the location and extent of the work to ensure that all structures are properly located on the plans.
▪ A copy of all correspondence with utility companies will be provided to the City. ▪ Final plans will be sent to each affected utility company prior to bidding of the work along with notification of when work is anticipated to begin.
▪ Plot utility information from utility maps/atlas obtained by City from utility companies.

Pavement Analysis
▪ Conduct six (6) borings total. A core rig will be used to obtain asphalt core samples and underlain aggregate base and subgrade samples. Typical bulk and intact soil samples shall be recovered for subsequent laboratory testing. The borings will be backfilled with the same cuttings along with pea gravel and pavement replaced with high strength grout or asphaltic cold patch. ▪ Proposed study is to:
a) Explore the subsurface conditions by means of a core rig for access and auger to a maximum depth of 5-feet.
b) Identify existing pavement section and base section including the presence of Petro Mat or other engineering fabric.
c) Determine R-Value and Classification for subgrade material in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System.
d) Identify in-situ subgrade conditions including moisture content and density. e) Present professional opinions in a final report for the subject project which will include various recommendations that will be based on the findings.

Warner Avenue - Brookhurst Street to Bushard Street 11 Page 217 Design Survey
▪ Set aerial targets.
▪ Perform aerial survey.
▪ Locate beginning, intermediate, and final benchmarks. Locate and identify horizontal controls used. ▪ Mark limits of broken curb and gutter as well as defective sidewalk and curb ramps not conforming to ADA requirements.
▪ Conduct topographic survey and obtain street cross sections at 50’ intervals. Street cross sections to show elevations at top of curb, gutter flowline, lip of gutter, edge of pavement, lane line, centerline, top of median curb, finished surface at median curb and back of walk. ▪ Obtain street cross sections at BCRs and ECRs.
▪ A minimum of 2 benchmarks will be used. A bench circuit will be run and closure error established, if any. Each benchmark will be established on the plans and in the survey notes.

Design Phase - 60% Submittal
▪ Prepare base maps and plot existing utilities, existing right-of-way, etc. ▪ Plot proposed cross sections.
▪ Superimpose proposed improvements over existing cross sections. ▪ Check the proposed cross sections for accuracy of cross slope. If the proposed cross slope is less than the minimum required or more than the maximum permissible, revise the type of proposed treatment to the street surface.
▪ Develop alternate methods of achieving City’s goals, giving consideration to existing pavement condition as determined by the pavement evaluation report. Repair, rehabilitation, partial and full replacement of existing pavement will be considered.
▪ Prepare preliminary street improvement plans at 1”=40’ horizontal and 1”=4’ vertical scale. ▪ Prepare details for driveways, curb ramps and cross gutters. ▪ Prepare preliminary signage and striping plans in accordance with the State of California Department of Transportation Traffic Manual.
▪ Prepare preliminary estimate of probable cost.

Warner Avenue - Brookhurst Street to Bushard Street 12 Page 218 Design Phase - 90% Submittal
▪ Prepare final street improvement plans. Final plans to include:
▪ Title sheet will include:
▪ Project title, vicinity and location map, plan sheet index and scale. ▪ Utility and plan legends, utility notes, contact names and telephone numbers. ▪ Bench marks, basis of bearings, general and master construction notes. ▪ Standard signature and title blocks.
▪ Plan and profile sheets will include:
▪ Base maps with existing utilities, right-of-way, etc. ▪ Topography between right-of-way and beyond as necessary. ▪ Right-of-way limit lines.
▪ Utility location plot.
▪ Construction notes and quantity estimates.
▪ Typical sections and details
▪ Top of curb, and top of curb at median and finished surface. ▪ Plot proposed cross sections at 50-foot intervals.
▪ Prepare final signage and striping plans. Final plans to include:
▪ Removal and/or construction of existing and/or proposed traffic features where applicable. ▪ Traffic striping (traffic lanes, crosswalks, etc.).
▪ Traffic signing.
▪ Pavement markings and markers.
▪ Prepare project specifications.
▪ Prepare final estimate of probable cost.

Final Plan Submittal
▪ After approval of project design, the plans will be plotted on mylar and delivered to the City.

Construction Support Services
▪ Provide coordination during bidding process including answering bidders questions during the bidding phase.
▪ Provide assistance during construction consisting of plan interpretation and plan revisions resulting from changed conditions.
▪ Prepare “As-Built” plans based on information provided by the City.

Warner Avenue - Brookhurst Street to Bushard Street 13 Page 219 ■ Kevin Kwak, PE
Principal Civil Engineer
City of Gardena
1717 West 162nd Street
Gardena, California 90247
310.217.9643
[email protected]
■ David Grantham, PE
Engineering Manager
City of Fullerton
303 W. Commonwealth Avenue
Fullerton, California 92832
714.738.6853
[email protected]
■ Shari Garwick, PE
Director of Public Works
City of San Dimas
245 East Bonita Avenue
San Dimas, California 91773
909.394.6248
[email protected]
■ Patricia Carpenter, PE
Associate Civil Engineer
City of Newport Beach
100 Civic Center Drive
Newport Beach, California 92660
949.644.3344
[email protected]
Warner Avenue - Brookhurst Street to Bushard Street 14 Page 220 Warner Avenue Rehabilitation and Resurfacing Project
From Brookhurst Street to Bushard Street

1. Preliminary Design Development.................................................................................$640.00

2. Utility Coordination.......................................................................................................$840.00

3. Design Survey.........................................................................................................$12,800.00

4. Design Phase - 60% Submittal..............................................................................$22,800.00

5. Design Phase - 90% Submittal................................................................................$8,350.00

6. Final Design Phase...................................................................................................$1,640.00

7. Specifications and Bid Package................................................................................$4,520.00

8. Bidding and Construction Phase Assistance.............................................................$1,280.00

9. As-Built Plans...............................................................................................................$840.00

10. Reproductions...........................................................................................................$1,000.00

11. Meetings ...................................................................................................................$1,000.00 SUBTOTAL: $55,710.00
Subconsultant Services

12. Pavement Analysis - Smith-Emery Laboratories (10% mark-up) ..............................$5,200.00

13. Aerial Survey and Targets - Digital Mapping Inc. (10% mark-up)..............................$6,325.00 SUBTOTAL: $11,525.00
TOTAL DESIGN FEE: $67,235.00
Fee Schedule
Project Manager ............................................................................................. $160.00 Project Engineer ............................................................................................. $125.00 Design Engineer ............................................................................................. $105.00 Two-Man Field Party....................................................................................... $220.00 Three-Man Field Party .................................................................................... $310.00 Survey Manager ............................................................................................. $115.00 Clerical.............................................................................................................. $55.00 Warner Avenue - Brookhurst Street to Bushard Street 15 Page 221

PROFESSIONAL CIVIL ENGINEERING SERVICES
Proposal For
Ellis Avenue
from Brookhurst Street to Bushard Street
Rehabilitation and Resurfacing Project
Presented To:

City of Fountain Valley
10200 Slater Avenue
Fountain Valley, California 92708
Attn: Anthony Nunez
Assistant Engineer
[email protected]
Presented By:

DMS Consultants, Inc.
12371 Lewis Street, Suite 203
Garden Grove, California 92840
714.740.8840
January 3, 2023

January 3, 2023
Mr. Tony Nunez
Assistant Engineer
City of Fountain Valley
Public Works/Engineering Department
10200 Slater Avenue
Fountain Valley, CA 92708
SUBJECT: Ellis Avenue from Brookhurst Street to Bushard Street Rehabilitation and Resurfacing Project
Dear Tony:

DMS Consultants, Inc. is pleased to present this proposal to provide civil engineering design services for the subject project.

Mr. Surender Dewan, President of DMS Consultants, Inc., would be assigned as the Project Manager of this project. As such, Mr. Dewan would be responsible for the overall scheduling and budget control and would be available to meet with the City to discuss the project as required.

Our design team includes the following subconsultant:

Smith-Emery Laboratories Geotechnical Investigation Services Upon receiving authorization, we will have the project completed by March 31, 2023.

I hope that our experience, record of performance and sincere interest in working with the City of Fountain Valley will result in a favorable consideration. We look forward to the opportunity of working with you and your staff.

Sincerely,
DMS Consultants, Inc.

Surender Dewan, P.E.

President
12371 Lewis Street, Suite 203, Garden Grove, CA 92840

Firm Profile .................................................................. 1 Project Team................................................................ 2 Firm Experience .....................................................3 - 5 Subconsultants Profile ............................................... 6 Scope of Work ............................................................. 7 Project Understanding.........................................8 - 10 Project Approach................................................ 11 - 13 References................................................................. 14 Fee Proposal.............................................................. 15 Ellis Avenue - Brookhurst Street to Bushard Street Page 224 1 DMS Consultants, Inc.
12371 Lewis Street, Suite 203
Garden Grove, CA 92840
Tel: 714.740.8840
www.dmsconsultantsinc.com
DMS Consultants, Inc. is dedicated to technical excellence and high quality services. A team approach is taken to every project undertaken, with a project engineer directing, managing and acting as the central design figure in the work. Our firm strives to maintain a high level of communication with the client and jurisdictional agencies.

We are acutely aware of the value and importance of providing close individual attention to each project and to working within the constraints of time and budget. We also know that the success of our firm rests clearly on the management, competence, and expertise of our professional staff and team.

Established in 1994, our firm provides engineering and related services to municipalities, government entities, and private industries throughout Southern California. With a staff of registered civil engineers, designers, construction observers, contract administrators, surveyors, and specialists in transportation, building and safety, and computer-aided design, DMS Consultants, Inc. is uniquely qualified to respond to the diverse needs of our clientele.

DMS Consultants, Inc. presently provides on-call civil engineering services to the City of Brea, City of Fountain Valley, City of Fullerton, City of Gardena, City of La Mirada, City of Newport Beach, and City of San Dimas.

DMS Consultants, Inc. has the ability to provide in-house services in the following areas:
▪ Street rehabilitation
▪ ADA accessibility type improvements
▪ Storm drain improvements
▪ Sewer improvements
▪ SWPPP documents
▪ Plan check services
DMS Consultants, Inc. has the capacity to sub-consult for areas including but not necessarily limited to:
▪ Geotechnical services
▪ Traffic engineering services
Ellis Avenue - Brookhurst Street to Bushard Street Page 225 City of Fountain Valley
Smith-Emery Laboratories
Geotechnical Investigations
Subconsultant
Bob Kelsoe, L.S.

Survey Party Chief
DMS Consultants, Inc.
2-Man Survey Crew
2 The most important element in the provision of professional services is the assignment of key personnel.

Quality personnel and an effective management system combine to produce quality services.

Accordingly, the following key personnel will be assigned to this project.

AVAILABILITY OF STAFF
DMS Consultants, Inc. prides itself in performing the work on a short notice and in a timely manner. We will assign significant staff to complete the work on schedule and to the City’s satisfaction.

Surender Dewan, PE, QSD/QSP
President / Project Manager
DMS Consultants, Inc.

Nishant Chadha, MS, MBA
Project Engineer
DMS Consultants, Inc.

Hoang Nguyen, BS
Design Engineer
DMS Consultants, Inc.

Ellis Avenue - Brookhurst Street to Bushard Street Page 226 Ellis Avenue - Brookhurst Street to Bushard Street 3
Warner Avenue Rehabilitation and Resurfacing Project - Fountain Valley DMS was selected by the City of Fountain Valley to provide civil engineering services for Warner Avenue Rehabilitation and Resurfacing project. The project area was Warner Avenue from Brookhurst Street to Euclid Street. The project included reconstruction of roadway, reconstruction of median curb, ADA improvements, striping and signage plans, project specifications, and cost estimates.

Agency: City of Fountain Valley
Regino DeAvila, Associate Engineer
714.593.4515 [email protected]
Construction Cost: $1.6 million
Project Status: Design complete: 2020
Construction complete: 2021
Project Manager: Surender Dewan, PE
Alondra Boulevard and Imperial Highway Rehabilitation Project - La Mirada DMS was selected by the City of La Mirada to provide civil engineering services for Alondra Boulevard and Imperial Highway Rehabilitation project. The project area is Alondra Boulevard from Valley View to Mottley Drive and Imperial Highway from Marquardt Avenue to Wicker Avenue. The project includes reconstruction of roadway, reconstruction of median curb, ADA improvements, striping and signage plans, median landscape improvements, project specifications, and cost estimates.

Agency: City of La Mirada
Eric Villagracia, Project Manger
562.902.2373 [email protected]
Construction Cost: $2.1 million
Project Status: Design: 2021
Construction: Active
Project Manager: Surender Dewan, PE
Commonwealth Avenue and Raymond Avenue Reconstruction Project - Fullerton DMS was selected by the City of Fullerton to provide civil engineering services for Commonwealth Avnue and Raymond Avenue Reconstruction project. The project area is Commonwealth Avenue from Balcom Avenue to Acacia Avenue and Raymond Avenue from Commonwealth Avenue to Chapman Avenue. The project includes rehabilitation of existing roadway, removal and reconstruction of damaged curb and gutter and sidewalk, signage and striping plans, project specifications, and estimate of probable costs.

Agency: City of Fullerton
Jose Medina, Assistant Engineer
714.738.6863 [email protected]
Construction Cost: $3.5 million
Project Status: Design: 2022
Construction: Active
Project Manager: Surender Dewan, PE

Ellis Avenue - Brookhurst Street to Bushard Street 4
MacArthur Boulevard Pavement Reconstruction Project - Newport Beach DMS was selected by the City of Newport Beach to provide civil engineering services for MacArthur Boulevard Pavement Reconstruction project. The project area was MacArthur Boulevard from Coast Highway east to Bonita Canyon Road. The project included rehabilitation of existing roadway, removal and reconstruction of damaged curb and gutter, sidewalk, median curb, preparation of signage and striping plans, project specifications, and estimate of probable cost.

Agency: City of Newport Beach
Frank Tran, Associate Civil Engineer
949.644.3321 [email protected]
Construction Cost: $2.2 Million
Project Status: Design complete: 2016
Construction complete: 2017
Project Manager: Surender Dewan, P.E.

Euclid Avenue Street Improvements - Fountain Valley
DMS was selected by the City of Fountain Valley to provide civil engineering services The project area was Euclid Street from Slater Avenue to Warner Avenue. The project included reconstruction of roadway, reconstruction of median curb, ADA improvements, landscape and irrigation plans, preparation of striping and signage plans, project specifications, and estimate of probable cost.

Agency: City of Fountain Valley
Regino DeAvila, Associate Engineer
714.593.4515 [email protected]
Construction Cost: $1.2 Million
Project Status: Design complete: 2018
Construction complete: 2018
Project Manager: Surender Dewan, P.E.

Van Ness Avenue Street Improvement Project - Gardena
DMS was selected by the City of Gardena to provide civil engineering services for Van Ness Avenue Street Improvement project. The project area is Van Ness Avenue from Redondo Beach Boulevard to Marine Avenue. The project includes rehabilitation of existing roadway, removal and reconstruction of damaged curb and gutter, sidewalk and ADA accessible ramps, preparation of striping and signage plans, project specifications, and cost estimate.

Agency: City of Gardena
Frank Sanchez, PE, Associate Engineer
310.217.9631 [email protected]
Construction Cost: $1.2 million
Project Status: Design: Active
Construction: Pending
Project Manager: Surender Dewan, PE

Ellis Avenue - Brookhurst Street to Bushard Street 5
Via Verde Street Improvements - San Dimas
DMS was selected by the City of San Dimas to provide civil engineering services for Via Verde Street Improvements. The project limits are form 1400’ west of Covina Hills Road to Easterly City Limits. The project includes rehabilitation of existing roadway, removal and reconstruction of damaged curb and gutter, sidewalk and ADA accessible ramps, preparation of striping and signage plans, project specifications, and cost estimates.

Agency: City of San Dimas
Shari Garwick, PE, Director of Public Works
909.644.3344 [email protected]
Construction Cost: $3 million
Project Status: Design: 2022
Construction: Active
Project Manager: Surender Dewan, P.E.

Smith-Emery Laboratories
1197 N. Tustin Avenue
Anaheim, CA 93807
Tel: 714.238.6133
www.smithemery.com
Smith-Emery Laboratories was formed in 1904 and is located in Anaheim, California. Smith-Emery Laboratories is the oldest and largest independent testing agency in the Western Region of the United States. With over 100 registered licensed deputy inspectors, supported by an educated staff of civil, geotechnical, and chemical engineers and technicians, Smith-Emery has earned the reputation as the leading independent testing and inspection agency in California. ▪
▪
▪
▪ ▪
▪
▪
▪
▪
▪
▪
▪
▪
Ellis Avenue - Brookhurst Street to Bushard Street 6

The City of Fountain Valley intends to retain the services of a consultant to provide civil engineering design services for the development of construction documents for roadway improvements for the Ellis Avenue from Brookhurst Street to Bushard Street.

The proposed scope of work consists of the following:
■ Project kickoff meeting and design progress meeting as necessary and design coordination.
■ Accumulation and review of existing plans and other available data. As-built plans to be provided by the City.
■ Project survey. Survey sections not to exceed 50’ shall include right-of-way, centerline, lot lines, curb and gutter in areas where improvements are required, cross gutters, ADA ramps, surface features, appurtenances, and sewer/storm drain manhole locations. ■ Pavement analysis.
■ Utility coordination.
■ Removal and replacement of curb, gutter, sidewalk and ADA accessible ramps. ■ Removal of parkway trees causing damage and replacement with size and species specified by City.
■ Drive approach reconstruction to conform to ADA standards. ■ Construction support to include submittal review, RFI and RFC response and preparation of as-built plans after the completion of construction. ■ PS&E submittals at 60%, 90% and 100% completion.

Ellis Avenue - Brookhurst Street to Bushard Street 7

Ellis Avenue from Brookhurst Street to Bushard Street is a minor arterial serving the City of Fountain Valley and neighboring cities. This section of the roadway is bounded by single family homes, however the frontage of these homes is from interior streets and not Ellis Avenue.

Ellis Avenue is 64 feet wide from curb to curb in a 80-foot right-of-way. The existing roadway is striped for two lanes in each direction with a 5-foot wide bike lane along both the northerly and southerly curb.

The intersections of Ellis Avenue with Brookhurst Street and Bushard Street are signalized.

There is a 5-foot wide sidewalk on both sides of the street with the exception of sections along the northerly curb from Jacaranda Street to approximately 600 feet east and from Birch Street to approximately 600 feet west. (Figure 1) These sections have frontage road along residential streets.

The existing sidewalk along both sides of the street appear to be in good condition with the exception of a few locations where it is cracked or uplifted by tree roots. (Figure 2) Ellis Avenue - Brookhurst Street to Bushard Street 8
Figure 1 Figure 2

The curb and gutter in the project area appears to be in relatively good condition except at a few isolated locations. (Figure 3)
There are no driveways along the northerly curb except
for the driveways to the shopping complex at the
northeast corner of Ellis Avenue and Brookhurst Street.

Along the southerly curb many of the driveways do not
conform to ADA standards of accessibility and will
need to be reconstructed. (Figure 4)
The following driveways will need to be reconstructed:
▪ Two (2) driveways along southerly curb east of
Hawthorn Street.
▪ Three (3) driveways along southerly curb to the
shopping center located at southwest corner of
Ellis Avenue and Brookhurst Street.

Removal and reconstruction of driveways for ADA
conformance will require improvements i.e., removal
and replacement of existing pavement on private
property to approximately 10 feet within private
property.

There are ADA conforming curb ramps at all intersecting streets except for the westerly entrance to the shopping center complex located along northerly curb west of Brookhurst Street intersection. (Figure 5) 9 Figure 4
Figure 3
Ellis Avenue - Brookhurst Street to Bushard Street
Figure 5

Most of the cross gutters along southerly curb with the exception of intersection with Callens Circle are cracked and will require reconstruction. (Figure 6)
The following are locations requiring cross gutter reconstruction:
▪ Ellis Avenue and Birch Street intersection.
▪ Ellis Avenue and Tamarind Street intersection.
▪ Ellis Avenue and Tahoe Street intersection.
▪ Ellis Avenue and Hawthorn Street intersection.

Pavement Condition
A cursory review of the existing conditions indicate the pavement to be in relatively good condition except for a section in the vicinity of Brookhurst Street intersection which is badly fatigued and will require reconstruction. (Figure 7)
It appears that most of the street can rehabilitated with a combination of cold mill and overlay.

Actual treatment will be per a pavement analysis report to be prepared in conjunction with this project. 10 Figure 6 Figure 7
Ellis Avenue - Brookhurst Street to Bushard Street Page 234 Design Review Meeting
▪ In a consultation meeting with the City, the scope of work, procedure and precise limits of the project improvements will be reviewed. Obtain from the City existing improvement plans and record maps of the project area.
▪ Review with City staff to obtain specific input related to City goals and discuss preliminary issues. ▪ Meet with City staff on a continuous, as needed basis throughout the design and construction phases to ensure that work is expeditiously carried out in keeping with City requirements.

Utility Coordination
▪ Notify all utilities at the start and at 60% design of the location and extent of the work to ensure that all structures are properly located on the plans.
▪ A copy of all correspondence with utility companies will be provided to the City. ▪ Final plans will be sent to each affected utility company prior to bidding of the work along with notification of when work is anticipated to begin.
▪ Plot utility information from utility maps/atlas obtained by City from utility companies.

Pavement Analysis
▪ Conduct six (6) borings total. A core rig will be used to obtain asphalt core samples and underlain aggregate base and subgrade samples. Typical bulk and intact soil samples shall be recovered for subsequent laboratory testing. The borings will be backfilled with the same cuttings along with pea gravel and pavement replaced with high strength grout or asphaltic cold patch. ▪ Proposed study is to:
a) Explore the subsurface conditions by means of a core rig for access and auger to a maximum depth of 5-feet.
b) Identify existing pavement section and base section including the presence of Petro Mat or other engineering fabric.
c) Determine R-Value and Classification for subgrade material in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System.
d) Identify in-situ subgrade conditions including moisture content and density. e) Present professional opinions in a final report for the subject project which will include various recommendations that will be based on the findings.

Ellis Avenue - Brookhurst Street to Bushard Street 11 Page 235 Design Survey
▪ Locate beginning, intermediate, and final benchmarks. Locate and identify horizontal controls used. ▪ Mark limits of broken curb and gutter as well as defective sidewalk and curb ramps not conforming to ADA requirements.
▪ Conduct topographic survey and obtain street cross sections at 50’ intervals. Street cross sections to show elevations at top of curb, gutter flowline, lip of gutter, edge of pavement, lane line, centerline, top of median curb, finished surface at median curb and back of walk. ▪ Obtain street cross sections at BCRs and ECRs.
▪ A minimum of 2 benchmarks will be used. A bench circuit will be run and closure error established, if any. Each benchmark will be established on the plans and in the survey notes.

Design Phase - 60% Submittal
▪ Prepare base maps and plot existing utilities, existing right-of-way, etc. ▪ Plot proposed cross sections.
▪ Superimpose proposed improvements over existing cross sections. ▪ Check the proposed cross sections for accuracy of cross slope. If the proposed cross slope is less than the minimum required or more than the maximum permissible, revise the type of proposed treatment to the street surface.
▪ Develop alternate methods of achieving City’s goals, giving consideration to existing pavement condition as determined by the pavement evaluation report. Repair, rehabilitation, partial and full replacement of existing pavement will be considered.
▪ Prepare preliminary street improvement plans at 1”=40’ horizontal and 1”=4’ vertical scale. ▪ Prepare details for driveways, curb ramps and cross gutters ▪ Prepare preliminary signage and striping plans in accordance with the State of California Department of Transportation Traffic Manual.
▪ Prepare preliminary estimate of probable cost.

Ellis Avenue - Brookhurst Street to Bushard Street 12 Page 236 Design Phase - 90% Submittal
▪ Prepare final street improvement plans. Final plans to include:
▪ Title sheet will include:
▪ Project title, vicinity and location map, plan sheet index and scale. ▪ Utility and plan legends, utility notes, contact names and telephone numbers. ▪ Bench marks, basis of bearings, general and master construction notes. ▪ Standard signature and title blocks.
▪ Plan and profile sheets will include:
▪ Base maps with existing utilities, right-of-way, etc. ▪ Topography between right-of-way and beyond as necessary. ▪ Right-of-way limit lines.
▪ Utility location plot.
▪ Construction notes and quantity estimates.
▪ Typical sections and details
▪ Top of curb, and top of curb at median and finished surface. ▪ Plot proposed cross sections at 50-foot intervals.
▪ Prepare final signage and striping plans. Final plans to include:
▪ Removal and/or construction of existing and/or proposed traffic features where applicable. ▪ Traffic striping (traffic lanes, crosswalks, etc.).
▪ Traffic signing.
▪ Pavement markings and markers.
▪ Prepare project specifications.
▪ Prepare final estimate of probable cost.

Final Plan Submittal
▪ After approval of project design, the plans will be plotted on mylar and delivered to the City.

Construction Support Services
▪ Provide coordination during bidding process including answering bidders questions during the bidding phase.
▪ Provide assistance during construction consisting of plan interpretation and plan revisions resulting from changed conditions.
▪ Prepare “As-Built” plans based on information provided by the City.

Ellis Avenue - Brookhurst Street to Bushard Street 13 Page 237 ■ Kevin Kwak, PE
Principal Civil Engineer
City of Gardena
1717 West 162nd Street
Gardena, California 90247
310.217.9643
[email protected]
■ David Grantham, PE
Engineering Manager
City of Fullerton
303 W. Commonwealth Avenue
Fullerton, California 92832
714.738.6853
[email protected]
■ Shari Garwick, PE
Director of Public Works
City of San Dimas
245 East Bonita Avenue
San Dimas, California 91773
909.394.6248
[email protected]
■ Patricia Carpenter, PE
Associate Civil Engineer
City of Newport Beach
100 Civic Center Drive
Newport Beach, California 92660
949.644.3344
[email protected]
Ellis Avenue - Brookhurst Street to Bushard Street 14 Page 238 Ellis Avenue Rehabilitation and Resurfacing Project
From Brookhurst Street to Bushard Street

1. Preliminary Design Development.................................................................................$640.00

2. Utility Coordination.......................................................................................................$840.00

3. Design Survey.........................................................................................................$11,670.00

4. Design Phase - 60% Submittal..............................................................................$22,800.00

5. Design Phase - 90% Submittal................................................................................$8,350.00

6. Final Design Phase...................................................................................................$1,640.00

7. Specifications and Bid Package................................................................................$4,520.00

8. Bidding and Construction Phase Assistance.............................................................$1,280.00

9. As-Built Plans...............................................................................................................$840.00

10. Reproductions...........................................................................................................$1,000.00

11. Meetings ...................................................................................................................$1,000.00 SUBTOTAL: $54,580.00
Subconsultant Services

12. Pavement Analysis - Smith-Emery Laboratories (10% mark-up) ..............................$5,200.00 SUBTOTAL: $5,200.00
TOTAL DESIGN FEE: $59,780.00
Fee Schedule
Project Manager ............................................................................................. $160.00 Project Engineer ............................................................................................. $125.00 Design Engineer ............................................................................................. $105.00 Two-Man Field Party....................................................................................... $220.00 Three-Man Field Party .................................................................................... $310.00 Survey Manager ............................................................................................. $115.00 Clerical.............................................................................................................. $55.00 Ellis Avenue - Brookhurst Street to Bushard Street 15 Page 239

CITY OF FOUNTAIN VALLEY

CITY COUNCIL

COUNCIL ACTION REQUEST
To: Honorable Mayor and Agenda Date: February 7, 2023
Members of the City Council
SUBJECT: 1) Approve the Cooperative Agreement between the City of Fountain Valley and the City of Westminster for the Rehabilitation and Resurfacing of Magnolia Street from Edinger Avenue to Heil Avenue
Three-Year Strategic Goals
☒ Enhance the culture and environment of “A Nice Place to Live” ☒ Attract and retain revenue producing businesses
☐ Achieve fiscal stability in accordance with the 20-Year Financial Plan ☐ Attract and retain quality staff
☐ Not applicable
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:

The City of Westminster and the City of Fountain Valley share city boundaries along Magnolia Street on the northerly part of town. The City of Westminster plans to rehabilitate portions of Magnolia Street from Edinger Avenue to Heil Avenue. This offers an excellent opportunity to collaborate on this road rehabilitation project where both cities share boundaries. For the City of Fountain Valley, City staff identified Magnolia Street from Edinger Avenue to Heil Avenue as a candidate for roadway improvements based on field observations and a pavement investigation report. The City of Westminster is taking the lead on this project, as the City of Westminster owns 88% of the right of way on Magnolia Street. The City of Fountain Valley Engineering staff is working closely with Westminster Engineering staff to properly develop the plans and construction of these improvements.

This project provides rehabilitation and resurfacing of Magnolia Street from Edinger Avenue to Heil Avenue. The project also includes the adjustment of water and fire hydrant valves to finish grade.

Staff recommends that the City Council approve the cooperative agreement between the City of Fountain Valley and the City of Westminster for the rehabilitation and resurfacing of Magnolia Street from Edinger Avenue to Heil Avenue.

DISCUSSION:

The City of Westminster and the City of Fountain Valley have collaborated on capital improvement projects for many years and this year, both agency staff have identified Magnolia Street from Edinger Avenue to Heil Avenue as a candidate for roadway improvements based on field observations and a pavement investigation report. The City of Westminster is taking the lead on this project, as the City of Westminster owns 88% of Magnolia Street right of way. The City of Fountain Valley Engineering staff

Magnolia Street from Edinger Avenue to Heil Avenue
February 7, 2023

will be working closely with Westminster Engineering staff to properly develop the plans and construction of these improvements.

The project consists of rehabilitation and resurfacing, utilizing asphalt concrete base course then placing asphalt rubber hot mix, on Magnolia Street from Edinger Avenue to Heil Avenue. The project also includes adjusting utility valves to finish grade. This project will provide excellent roadway pavement conditions consistent with those currently enjoyed by Fountain Valley residents and visitors citywide.

Consistent with the Public Contract Code, the City of Westminster is competitively bidding the Magnolia Street paving project. Based on the lowest responsible bid contract, the construction contract will be considered for award by the City of Westminster City Council at the City of Westminster City Council Meeting. The City of Westminster as a lead agency plans to apply for Federal funding for the project after the cooperative agreement is accepted and executed by the City of Fountain Valley City Council.

The Federal grant process will determine the project schedule.

The cooperative agreement outlines the project costs and the City’s fair share of construction costs.

The City of Westminster will be taking the lead on the construction management and inspection for the project, per the cooperative agreement, with assistance from City of Fountain Valley staff.

FISCAL REVIEW:

FY 2022-2023 PROJECT BUDGET
FY 2022-2023 Project Budget
Traffic Improvement Fund 242 (Measure M) $200,000.00

ANTICIPATED PROJECT COSTS
Engineers Estimate Construction Cost $158,933.25
Construction Contingency 10% * $15,893.33
Staff Time $10,000.00
Total Anticipated Project Costs $184,826.58
*Note that, as in all of the City's public works contracts, the contract itself provides the Director of Public Works authority to issue change orders of up to 10% of the original contract amount. When the Council approves the contract, it approves this authority. Ten percent is generally considered within the normal range of changed conditions on a public works construction project and, by providing change order authority upfront, Council helps to reduce the possibility of delay damages that could be incurred when a contractor must stop work and wait for authorization to proceed.

This project budget is part of the FY 2022-2023 City CIP Budget. The City’s fair share of estimated construction costs is $174,826.58 and will be funded by Measure M Funds. The construction cost is an estimate and is subject to change depending on cost of construction material commodities prices.

PUBLIC NOTIFICATION:

Not applicable.

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REVIEW:

Not applicable.

Magnolia Street from Edinger Avenue to Heil Avenue
February 7, 2023

ATTORNEY REVIEW:

The City Attorney has reviewed and approved the Cooperative Agreement between the City of Fountain Valley and the City of Westminster.

ALTERNATIVES:

Alternative No. 1: This is the recommended action.

Approve the cooperative agreement between the City of Fountain Valley and the City of Westminster.

This is the recommended action, as it will permit the City to implement the needed improvements.

Alternative No. 2: Reject the cooperative agreement with the City of Westminster.

Do not approve the cooperative agreement between the City of Fountain Valley and the City of Westminster. This is not a viable alternative, as the City of Fountain Valley would not be able to take advantage of the economy of scale in implementing the needed improvements in collaboration with the City of Westminster. This will also not allow the City to meet its commitment to meet OCTA Measure M timely use of funds requirements.

RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommends that the City Council: 1) Approve the Cooperative Agreement between the City of Fountain Valley and the City of Westminster for the Rehabilitation and Resurfacing of Magnolia Street from Edinger Avenue to Heil Avenue.

Prepared by: Terri Phan, Management Aide
Recommended by: Kyle Hilton, Associate Engineer
Reviewed by: Temo Galvez, Deputy Public Works Director / City Engineer Approved by: Hye Jin Lee, Director of Public Works
Fiscal review by: Ryan Smith, Finance Director/City Treasurer Approved by: Maggie Le, City Manager
Attachments: 1. Cooperative Agreement between the City of Fountain Valley and the City of Westminster.

AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT ("Agreement"), dated this _____ day of _________________, 2022, is made and entered into by and between the City of Westminster, a municipal corporation, hereinafter referred to as “WESTMINSTER” and the City of Fountain Valley, a municipal corporation, hereinafter referred to as “FOUNTAIN VALLEY”.

WITNESSETH:

WHEREAS, WESTMINSTER is contemplating the rehabilitation of the pavement surface of that portion of Magnolia Street from Edinger Avenue to Heil Avenue (South City Limit), located in the City of Westminster, (hereinafter the “WESTMINSTER PORTION”); and,
WHEREAS, there is a portion of Magnolia Street located within the boundaries of FOUNTAIN VALLEY (hereinafter “FV PORTION”); and,
WHEREAS, FOUNTAIN VALLEY desires to have WESTMINSTER rehabilitate the FV PORTION of Magnolia Street in conjunction with the WESTMINSTER PORTION, collectively the “PROJECT”, and WESTMINSTER is willing to do so. The exact location of the FV PORTION is described in detail in the document attached hereto as Exhibit A and Exhibit B, incorporated herein by this reference. The estimated cost of the FV PORTION, including a ten percent (10%) contingency, is One Hundred and Seventy-Four Thousand Eight Hundred and Twenty-Seven Dollars ($174,827) (the "Estimated Cost").

NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the following promises, covenants, and conditions, the parties hereto do agree as follows:

1. DUTIES OF WESTMINSTER
a. Upon commencement of the PROJECT, WESTMINSTER shall include the FV PORTION as a part of WESTMINSTER’s public works project, prepare the request for bids, hire the lowest responsible bidder (the “Successful Contractor”), and oversee and administer the PROJECT in the FV PORTION in the same manner and to the same extent as the WESTMINSTER PORTION, all in accordance with all applicable laws governing construction of public works by WESTMINSTER, including, but not limited to, the California Environmental Quality Act and laws governing public bidding and the payment of prevailing wages. If WESTMINSTER, in its sole discretion, determines not to proceed with the PROJECT at any time prior to commencement of actual work, this Agreement shall terminate with no further action required by either party. In the event the projected actual cost

of the FV PORTION, as reflected in the Successful Contractor's bid, exceeds the Estimated Cost by twenty percent (20%), WESTMINSTER shall not award a contract to the Successful Bidder for the FV PORTION without prior written approval of FOUNTAIN VALLEY.
b. At least thirty (30) calendar days prior to release of the Notice Inviting Bids for the PROJECT, WESTMINSTER’s City Engineer shall provide FOUNTAIN VALLEY’s City Engineer a copy of the PROJECT’s plans and specifications for his approval, which approval shall not be unreasonably withheld. If FOUNTAIN VALLEY’s City Engineer objects to the plans and specifications, and if his objections cannot be satisfied through discussions with WESTMINSTER’s City Engineer, the FV PORTION shall not be included in the PROJECT and WESTMINSTER shall proceed with the WESTMINSTER PORTION only.
c. WESTMINSTER agrees that it shall not permit nor cause any hazardous materials to be brought upon, kept, used, stored, generated or disposed of in, or, or about the FV PORTION. “Hazardous Materials” shall mean any material that, because of its quantity, concentration, or physical or chemical characteristics, or any combination thereof, is deemed by a federal, state, or local governmental authority to pose a present or potential hazard to human health or safety or to the environment.
d. WESTMINSTER shall ensure that its contract with the Successful Contractor requires the Successful Contractor provide insurance acceptable to FOUNTAIN VALLEY as shown in Exhibit “C,” to name FOUNTAIN VALLEY as an additional insured, and to indemnify, defend, and hold harmless FOUNTAIN VALLEY in the same manner and to the same extent as WESTMINSTER. WESTMINSTER shall not permit construction of any portion of the PROJECT to commence until evidence of the required insurance and additional insured endorsements have been provided to and approved by FOUNTAIN VALLEY.

2. FOUNTAIN VALLEY’S DUTIES
a. FOUNTAIN VALLEY shall pay WESTMINSTER for the actual cost of the work on the FV PORTION based upon unit prices bid of the Successful Contractor and quantities actually used on the FV PORTION. FOUNTAIN VALLEY shall pay WESTMINSTER the total amount due for the FV PORTION upon official final approval of the work by FOUNTAIN VALLEY provided that such final approval shall not be unreasonably withheld. b. FOUNTAIN VALLEY agrees that any permits required by the Successful Contractor for the work to be performed on the FV PORTION shall be issued

to the Successful Contractor at no cost to WESTMINSTER or the Successful Contractor.
c. FOUNTAIN VALLEY shall provide its own inspection services for the FV PORTION of the work.
d. FOUNTAIN VALLEY agrees to fully cooperate with WESTMINSTER and the Successful Contractor in the prosecution of the work, traffic control, and any other matters required for completion of the PROJECT in the FV PORTION. e. FOUNTAIN VALLEY acknowledges that WESTMINSTER is not the contractor for the PROJECT and that WESTMINSTER does not warrant any work performed by the Successful Contractor. Notwithstanding the above, WESTMINSTER shall require the Successful Contractor to provide FOUNTAIN VALLEY with any and all warranties, insurance coverage, and indemnities and any other rights the Successful Contractor agrees to provide to WESTMINSTER under the construction contract and as provided by law. f. In addition to the above, FOUNTAIN VALLEY also agrees to pay WESTMINSTER for all costs associated with any change orders pertaining to the FV PORTION, provided the change orders have been previously recommended by the City Engineer and approved in writing by FOUNTAIN VALLEY’s Public Works Director where the Public Works Director has a change order approval authority of 10% of the contract amount which for this project is $15,893 and whereas any change order above this amount will require City Council Approval.

3. ENTIRE AGREEMENT
This writing constitutes the entire agreement between the parties with respect to the subject matter hereof, and supersedes all oral or written representations or written agreements that may have been entered into between the parties. No modifications or revisions shall be of any force or effect, unless the same is in writing and executed by the parties hereto.

4. ORDER OF PRECEDENCE
In the event of an inconsistency in this Agreement and any of the attached Exhibit, the terms set forth in this Agreement shall prevail. If, and to the extent this Agreement incorporates by reference any provision of any document, such provision shall be deemed a part of this Agreement. Nevertheless, if there is any conflict among the terms and conditions of this Agreement and those of any such provision or provisions so incorporated by reference, this Agreement shall govern over the document referenced.

5. ASSIGNMENT
Neither FOUNTAIN VALLEY nor WESTMINSTER may assign or transfer its rights or obligations under this Agreement, or any part thereof, without the written consent of the other party.

6. ATTORNEYS’ FEES
In the event that litigation is brought by any party in connection with this Agreement, the parties shall bear their own attorneys’ fees.

7. GOVERNING LAW
This Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the State of California. If any portion of this Agreement is held invalid under any applicable statute or rule of law, then such portion only shall be deemed invalid. Venue shall exclusively be in a court of competent jurisdiction in the County of Orange, California.

8. NO WAIVER
No waiver or failure to exercise any right, option, or privilege under the terms of this Agreement on any occasion shall be construed to be a waiver of any other right, option, or privilege on any other occasion.

9. NO THIRD PARTY RIGHTS
The parties do not intend to create rights in, or to grant remedies to, any third party as a beneficiary of this Agreement or of any duty, covenant, obligation, or undertaking established herein.

10. NOTICES
Notices and communication concerning this Agreement shall be sent to the following addresses:

WESTMINSTER FOUNTAIN VALLEY
City of Westminster City of FOUNTAIN VALLEY
Attention: Jake Ngo, P.E. Attention: HyeJin Lee, MS, PE.

Public Works Director/City Engineer Director of Public Works 8200 Westminster Blvd. 10200 Slater Avenue
Westminster, CA 92683 Fountain Valley, CA 92708

Either party may, by notice to the other party, change the address specified above.

Any notices, documents, correspondence or other communications concerning this Agreement may be provided by personal delivery, facsimile or mail and shall be addressed as set forth above. Such communication shall be deemed served or delivered: a) at the time of delivery if such communication is sent by personal delivery; b) at the time of transmission if such communication is sent by facsimile; and c) five (5) calendar days after deposit in the U.S. Mail as reflected by the official U.S. postmark if such communication is sent through regular United States mail.

11. EFFECTIVE DATE
The effective date of this Agreement shall be the latest date of execution hereinafter set forth opposite the names of the signatures hereto.

12. INDEMNITY
WESTMINSTER and FOUNTAIN VALLEY each hereby agrees to indemnify, defend, protect and hold harmless the other party, and its elected and appointed officials, officers, employees, representatives, volunteers, and agents from and against any and all claims (including, without limitation, claims for bodily injury, death or damage to property), demands, workers’ compensation benefits, obligations, damages, actions, causes of action, suits, losses, judgments, fines, penalties, liabilities, costs and expenses of any kind or nature, arising from the activities of the indemnitor or its officers, agents, or employees on the PROJECT, or any breach of contract, negligent acts, omissions or breach of law, or willful misconduct of the indemnitor, or its officers, agents, or employees arising out of the performance of, or failure to perform, any provisions of this Agreement. Neither party assumes liability for the acts or omissions of persons other than each party’s respective officers, agents, or employees. In the event judgment is entered against both parties because of joint or concurrent negligence of both parties, or their officers, agents, or employees, an apportionment of liability to pay such judgment shall be made by a court of competent jurisdiction. The respective obligations of the parties pursuant to this Section shall survive expiration or earlier termination of this Agreement.

13. COOPERATION
In the event any claim or action is brought against WESTMINSTER relating to the performance rendered under this Agreement, FOUNTAIN VALLEY shall render any reasonable assistance and cooperation which WESTMINSTER might require.

14. COSTS
Each party shall bear its own costs and fees incurred in the preparation and negotiation of this Agreement and in the performance of its obligations hereunder except as expressly provided herein.

15. HEADINGS
Paragraphs and subparagraph headings contained in this Agreement are included solely for convenience and are not intended to modify, explain or to be a full or accurate description of the content thereof and shall not in any way affect the meaning or interpretation of this Agreement.

16. CONSTRUCTION.

The parties have participated jointly in the negotiation and drafting of this Agreement. In the event an ambiguity or question of intent or interpretation arises with respect to this Agreement, this Agreement shall be construed as if drafted jointly by the parties and in accordance with its fair meaning. There shall be no presumption or burden of proof favoring or disfavoring any party by virtue of the authorship of any of the provisions of this Agreement.

17. SEVERABILITY
If any provision of this Agreement is determined by a court of competent jurisdiction to be unenforceable in any circumstance, such determination shall not affect the validity or enforceability of the remaining terms and provisions hereof or of the offending provision in any other circumstance. Notwithstanding the foregoing, if the value of this Agreement, based upon the substantial benefit of the bargain for any party, is materially impaired, which determination made by the presiding court or arbitrator of competent jurisdiction shall be binding, then both parties agree to substitute such provision(s) through good faith negotiations.

18. COUNTERPARTS
This Agreement may be executed in one or more counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original and all of which shall constitute but one and the same instrument.

19. CORPORATE AUTHORITY
The persons executing this Agreement on behalf of the parties hereto warrant that they are duly authorized to execute this Agreement on behalf of said parties and that by doing so the parties hereto are formally bound to the provisions of this Agreement. [Signatures on the following page.]

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed on the dates hereinafter respectively set forth.

CITY OF WESTMINSTER, ATTEST:

A municipal corporation
By: ___________________________ _____________________________ Christine Cordon, City Manager LUCIE COLOMBO, Westminster Interim City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: DATE OF EXECUTION:
__________________________________ _____________________________ Christian Bettenhausen, Westminster City Attorney
CITY OF FOUNTAIN VALLEY, ATTEST:

A municipal corporation
By: ___________________________ _____________________________ Maggie Le, City Manager Rick Miller, FOUNTAIN VALLEY City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: DATE OF EXECUTION:
______________________________ _____________________________ Colin Burns, FOUNTAIN VALLEY City Attorney

CITY OF FOUNTAIN VALLEY

CITY COUNCIL

COUNCIL ACTION REQUEST
To: Honorable Mayor and Agenda Date: February 7, 2023
Members of the City Council
SUBJECT: 1) Waive the bidding requirements pursuant to FVMC 2.36.070 Par 4 and authorize staff to issue a purchase order to National Auto Fleet Group for the purchase of one (1) new/unused 2023 Ford Super Duty F-350 Reg Cab 2WD XL 84” CA, plus upfit, for $112,199.91 through the existing cooperative contract with Sourcewell; and
2) Authorize staff to dispose of the existing vehicle by means that best meet the City’s needs
Three-Year Strategic Goals
☒ Enhance the culture and environment of “A Nice Place to Live” ☐ Attract and retain revenue producing businesses
☐ Achieve fiscal stability in accordance with the 20-Year Financial Plan ☒ Attract and retain quality staff
☐ Not applicable
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:

Parts shortages and the computer chip supply challenge continue to limit U.S. vehicle production. As a result, Ford is allocating 2023 Super Duty trucks to existing fleet customers based on a percentage of their average Super Duty purchases for the last five (5) years.

Although the City of Fountain Valley currently has an available budget of $689,665.82 in the Fleet Management Fund for the purchase of eight (8) super duty trucks for the Public Works Department in FY 2022/23, the City has received an allocation from Ford of only one Super Duty truck.

Based on the condition of the Super Duty trucks scheduled for replacement in FY 2022/23 and the needs of the City, staff is recommending that the City use its allocation to replace Unit #8530, a 2005 Ford F-350 flatbed truck with lift gate, which is assigned to Concrete Maintenance. It is used to safely transport the heavy equipment necessary for the maintenance and replacement of the City’s sidewalks and other concrete structures. This vehicle was originally scheduled for replacement in FY 2017/18, and its condition has deteriorated to the point that it needs to be considered for immediate replacement. It currently has 95,120 miles and has exceeded its 12-year lifespan by five (5) years. In addition, it is no longer considered

Purchase of Ford F-350 Truck
February 7, 2023

a reliable vehicle due to increased downtime for repairs and difficulty getting the necessary parts.

Utilizing an existing cooperative contract through Sourcewell, the total cost to purchase a new 2023 Ford Super Duty F-350 Reg Cab 2WD XL 84” CA, plus upfit, to replace Unit #8530 is $112,199.91. Given the current market conditions, City staff does not anticipate being able to purchase the other seven trucks that are scheduled for replacement in FY 2022/23. Therefore, there is sufficient funding in the account for the purchase.

City staff is requesting that City Council 1) waive the bidding requirements pursuant to FVMC

2.36.070 Par 4 and authorize staff to issue a purchase order to National Auto Fleet Group for the purchase of one (1) new/unused 2023 Ford Super Duty F-350 Reg Cab 2WD XL 84” CA, plus upfit, for $112,199.91 through the existing cooperative contract with Sourcewell; and 2) authorize staff to dispose of the existing vehicle by means that best meet the City’s needs.

DISCUSSION:

As part of the FY 2022/23 Annual Operating Budget and Ten-Year Capital Improvement Program adopted by City Council on June 21, 2022, $1,274,000 was budgeted for the replacement of nine (9) trucks assigned to the Public Works Department. Many of these trucks were scheduled for replacement previously, but the City was unable to procure the vehicles due to production challenges affecting vehicle manufacturers.

This fiscal year the City has only been able to purchase one of the nine trucks scheduled for replacement, the sewer cleaner truck. Parts shortages and the computer chip supply challenge continue to limit U.S. vehicle production resulting in a backlog of approximately 5 million vehicles since 2020 according to Government Fleet (“Order and Allocation Updates for MY23 Super Duty”, November 23, 2022). As a result, Ford is allocating 2023 Super Duty trucks to existing fleet customers based on a percentage of their average Super Duty purchases for the last five years. The City of Fountain Valley has received an allocation of one Super Duty truck.

Therefore, the City can only purchase one (1) Super Duty truck this fiscal year.

Based on the condition of the Super Duty trucks scheduled for replacement in FY 2022/23 and the needs of the City, City staff is recommending that the City use its allocation to replace Unit #8530, a 2005 Ford F-350 flatbed truck with lift gate, which is assigned to Concrete Maintenance. It is used to safely transport the heavy equipment necessary for the maintenance and replacement of the City’s sidewalks and other concrete structures. This vehicle was originally scheduled for replacement in FY 2017/18, and its condition has now deteriorated to the point that it needs to be considered for immediate replacement. It has 95,120 miles on it, has far exceeded its expected lifespan of 12 years and is no longer considered a reliable vehicle.

City staff has identified an existing cooperative contract through Sourcewell, formerly the National Joint Powers Alliance (NJPA), that can be used for the purchase of this vehicle.

Sourcewell combines the buying power of 50,000 government, education, and nonprofit organizations through nationally, competitively solicited cooperative contracts. Cooperative purchasing is “Procurement conducted by, or on behalf of, one or more Public Procurement Units” as defined by the American Bar Association Model Procurement Code for State and

Purchase of Ford F-350 Truck
February 7, 2023

Local Governments. Sourcewell’s rigorous process streamlines the procurement process by developing Invitation for Bids and Request for Proposals for national, competitive solicitations that meet or exceed local requirements. Sourcewell issued a Request for Proposal (RFP) in July 2021 for the procurement of automobiles, SUVs, vans, and light trucks with related equipment and accessories. The RFP was publicly advertised. Thirteen proposals were received in September 2021 and were evaluated based on eight criteria with pricing being the most heavily weighted. Based on that process, National Auto Fleet Group was the highest ranked and awarded a cooperative contract (Contract #091521-NAF) by Sourcewell. The City can utilize the cooperative contract with National Auto Fleet Group through Sourcewell to purchase the vehicle at a competitive price in compliance with the City’s purchasing policy.

Section 2.36.070 Par 4 of the Fountain Valley Municipal Code authorizes the procurement of goods and services without formal bidding under the following circumstance: “When participating in cooperative contracts with another government agency.” Utilizing the existing cooperative contract through Sourcewell, the total cost to purchase a new/unused 2023 Ford Super Duty F-350 Reg Cab 2WD XL 84” CA, plus upfit, to replace Unit #8530 is $112,199.91.

Replacing the Ford F-350 flatbed truck with lift gate (Unit #8530) assigned to Concrete Maintenance as scheduled will support the City’s strategic goals of enhancing the culture and environment of “A Nice Place to Live” and attracting and retaining quality staff. Replacing this vehicle as scheduled decreases vehicle downtime, increases fleet reliability and provides staff with the tools they need to effectively maintain safe sidewalks and other concrete structures.

The remaining seven (7) trucks scheduled for replacement will be budgeted for in FY 2023/24.

FISCAL REVIEW:

There is currently an available budget of $689,665.82 in the Fleet Management Fund in the Public Works Department, ISF – Fleet Capital – PW Trucks/Vans account (112.50.50052.55545) for the purchase of eight trucks that are scheduled for replacement in FY 2022/23.

The total cost to purchase a new/unused 2023 Ford Super Duty F-350 Reg Cab 2WD XL 84” CA, plus upfit, is $112,199.91. A total of $65,000 was allocated for the purchase and upfitting of a Ford F-350 flatbed truck with lift gate to replace Unit #8530 assigned to Concrete Maintenance in the Streets/Traffic/Graffiti division of Public Works.

Given the current market conditions, City staff does not anticipate being able to purchase the other seven (7) trucks that are scheduled for replacement in FY 2022/23. Therefore, there is sufficient funding in the account for the purchase even though it exceeds the amount allocated for the vehicle.

Purchase of Ford F-350 Truck
February 7, 2023

Fleet Management Fund
Public Works Department
ISF – Fleet Capital – PW Trucks/Vans Account (112.50.50052.55545) FY 2022/23 Available Budget $ 689,665.82
2023 Ford Super Duty F-350 Reg Cab 2WD XL 84” CA, plus Upfit $ 112,199.91* *Includes sales tax and tire fees
The purchase will be expensed to the Fleet Management Fund in the Public Works Department, ISF – Fleet Capital – PW Trucks/Vans account (112.50.50052.55545).

The trucks that the City is unable to procure this fiscal year will be budgeted for replacement in FY 2023/24.

PUBLIC NOTIFICATION:

Not applicable.

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REVIEW:

Not applicable.

ATTORNEY REVIEW:

This does not require the Attorneys for the City review or approval. This action will be issued on a City approved purchase order form that provides standard terms and conditions which have been approved by the Attorneys for the City.

ALTERNATIVES:

Alternative No. 1: 1) Waive the bidding requirements pursuant to FVMC 2.36.070 Par 4 and authorize staff to issue a purchase order to National Auto Fleet Group for the purchase of one (1) new/unused 2023 Ford Super Duty F-350 Reg Cab 2WD XL 84” CA, plus upfit, for $112,199.91 through the existing cooperative contract with Sourcewell; and 2) authorize staff to dispose of the existing vehicle by means that best meet the City’s needs. This is the recommended action.

Alternative No. 2: Do not approve the proposal to purchase the F-350 truck through the cooperative contract and direct staff to obtain multiple quotes for the vehicle. This is not recommended as the cost under the cooperative contract is competitive and provides the best value to the City. All Sourcewell contracts have been competitively solicited nationally and also save considerable staff time and effort over individual requests and specifications with various vendors to meet our procurement needs. In addition, it is unlikely that the City will be able to procure the truck from another vendor due to the high demand for trucks and the scarcity of vehicles.

Purchase of Ford F-350 Truck
February 7, 2023

Alternative No. 3: Do not authorize the purchase of the Ford F-350 truck at this time, and defer and direct staff to return at a future date with an update on the condition of the existing vehicle. This is not recommended, as this unit should be replaced now due to its age and condition. If the City does not order the vehicle now, the City will miss its opportunity to procure the vehicle this fiscal year, and it is likely that availability and pricing will not improve next fiscal year. The current production challenges and inflationary conditions are expected to continue to calendar year 2024 resulting in increased pent-up demand, limited supply and even higher prices.

RECOMMENDATION:

Staff is requesting City Council approval of Alternative No. 1 to 1) waive the bidding requirements pursuant to FVMC 2.36.070 Par 4 and authorize staff to issue a purchase order to National Auto Fleet Group for the purchase of one (1) new/unused 2023 Ford Super Duty F-350 Reg Cab 2WD XL 84” CA, plus upfit, for $112,199.91 through the existing cooperative contract with Sourcewell; and 2) authorize staff to dispose of the existing vehicle by means that best meet the City’s needs.

Prepared by: Christine Smith, Senior Management Analyst Reviewed by: Mark Sprague, Field Services Manager
Approved by: Hye Jin Lee, Director of Public Works
Fiscal review by: Ryan Smith, Finance Director/City Treasurer Approved by: Maggie Le, City Manager
Attachment:

1. Quote