Fountain Valley City Council
May 21, 2024

AGENDA

CITY COUNCIL/ SUCCESSOR

AGENCY TO THE FOUNTAIN

VALLEY AGENCY

FOR COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT/

FOUNTAIN VALLEY HOUSING AUTHORITY

Closed Session 5:00 p.m.

Regular Meeting 6:00 p.m.

Tuesday, May 21, 2024
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 the City Council or other 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.

Topic: City Council Meeting
Time: May 21, 2024 06:00 PM Pacific Time (US and Canada) Join Zoom Meeting
https://us02web.zoom.us/j/89888475281?pwd=cFFFZjBDd2xsbkkvRFBsdVFNbktw Zz09
Meeting ID: 898 8847 5281
Passcode: 485063

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

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 LABOR NEGOTIATORS
Pursuant to Government Code §54957.6.

Agency Designated Representatives: City Manager, Maggie Le, Finance Director, Ryan Smith, Human Resources Director, Carrie Hanes, Community Development Director / Deputy City Manager, Omar Dadabhoy, Attorney for the City, Colin Burns Employee Organizations: Police Officers' Association (POA), Police Officers' Management Unit (POMU), Fountain Valley Municipal Employees Association (Field Services unit), Fountain Valley General Employees Association (FVGEA), Fountain Valley Professional and Technical Employees (P&T), Individually Represented Battalion Chiefs and Individually Represented P&T (IRP&T)

2. CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS
Pursuant to Government Code §54957.6.

Agency Designated Representatives: City Manager, Maggie Le, Attorney for the City, Colin Burns
Employee Organizations: Administrative Officers

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

INVOCATION Council Member Patrick Harper
SALUTE TO THE FLAG Council Member Kim Constantine

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

ANNOUNCEMENT OF SUPPLEMENTAL COMMUNICATIONS

CITY MANAGER / MAYOR UPDATE

PRESENTATIONS
 Presentation of a Check from the Fountain Valley Rotary Club as a Donation for the Universally Accessible Playground

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 card 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 – 6 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 May 7th Regular City Council Meeting Page 6

3. Approve the Register of Demands for the period of 4/27/2024 to 5/10/2024 Page 16 Recommended Action: Staff recommends Alternative No. 1 to approve the attached Register of Demands representing payments made by the City of Fountain Valley between 4/27/2024 and 5/10/2024 for a total of $1,878,561.28.

4. City of Fountain Valley Six Month Strategic Objectives Update for November 16, 2023 through May 23, 2024. Page 30

5. Resolution Overturning the Planning Commission’s Approval of Resolution No. 23-32, Denying Precise Plan 576 and Conditional Use Permit 1925 for a 3,850 Square Foot Restaurant With a Double Drive-Through Facility Located in the Village Center Page 37 Recommended Action: Staff recommends that the City Council select Alternative No. 1 and adopt a Resolution reversing the Planning Commission’s approval of Resolution No. 23-32, denying PP 576 and CUP 1925 and adopt a Resolution approving PP 576 and CUP 1925 for a 3,850 square foot restaurant with a double drive-through facility located in the Village Center shopping center at the northeast corner of Magnolia Street and Talbert Avenue.

6. Accept the Parcel Map No. 2021-137 for the Property Located at 9945 Warner Avenue

Recommended Action: Staff recommends the City Council approve the Alternative No. 1 to accept Parcel Map No. 2021-137 for the property located at 9945 Warner Avenue.

ADMINISTRATIVE ITEMS

7. City Public Notification Policy Update – Presentation by Omar Dadabhoy, Community Development Director Page 86
Recommended Action: Pleasure of the City Council

8. Adopt 7-Year Transportation Capital Improvement Program (CIP) for Annual Measure M Eligibility Program submittal for FY 2024-2025 to 2030-2031 & Amend FY 2023-2024 7-Year Transportation Capital Improvement Program (CIP) list to include one Project – Presentation by Temo Galvez, Deputy Public Works Director Page 102
Recommended Action: Staff recommends that the City Council adopt a Seven-Year Transportation Capital Improvement Program (CIP) for the Annual Measure M (M2) Eligibility Program submittal for Fiscal Years 2024-2025 through 2030-2031, and amend the FY 2023- 2024 Seven-Year Transportation Capital Improvement Program (CIP) list to include one project.

9. A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Fountain Valley approving the Fiscal Year 2024/2025 Project List for SB-1 Funds in the amount of $1,462,013 for the following street rehabilitation projects: Talbert & Euclid and City Quadrant C3 – Presentation by Temo Galvez, Deputy Public Works Director Page 112
Recommended Action: Staff recommends that the City Council approve Alternative No. 1, which is to adopt a resolution approving the Fiscal Year 2024/2025 Project List for SB1 funds in the amount of $1,462,013 toward the Rehabilitation and Resurfacing of Talbert Avenue (Brookhurst Street to Bushard Street) and Euclid Avenue (Slater Avenue to Talbert Avenue) and Residential Roadway Rehabilitation Project in City Quadrant C3.

10. City Hall Finance Department Office and Breakroom Patio Security Gate Improvement Projects – Presentation by Ryan Damon, Assistant Engineer Page 119 Recommended Action: Staff recommends that the City Council:

1. Accept a fee proposal from Interwest Consulting Group, Inc. for the City Hall Finance Department Office and Breakroom Patio Security Gate Improvement Projects for project and construction management and field observation services in the amount of $12,750, and authorize staff to issue a Purchase Order for the amount; and,

2. Approve Amendment No. 6 to the Interwest Consulting Group, Inc. As-Needed On-Call Inspection Services Contract in the amount not-to-exceed $12,750.

COUNCIL MEMBER ITEMS FOR FUTURE CONSIDERATION

SECOND 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
The next Regular Meeting of the Fountain Valley City Council is June 4, 2024 at 6:00 p.m., in the Fountain Valley Council Chambers, 10200 Slater Avenue, Fountain Valley.

MINUTES OF THE

CITY COUNCIL/ SUCCESSOR AGENCY TO THE FOUNTAIN

VALLEY AGENCY

FOR COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT/ FOUNTAIN VALLEY

HOUSING AUTHORITY
Closed Session 4:00 p.m.

Study Session 5:00 p.m.

Regular Meeting 6:00 p.m.

Tuesday, May 7, 2024
Council Chambers

CLOSED SESSION
CALL TO ORDER 4:00 p.m.

PUBLIC COMMENTS (Closed Session matters only)
There were no public comments

1. CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS
Pursuant to Government Code §54957.6.

Agency Designated Representatives: City Manager, Maggie Le, Finance Director, Ryan Smith, Human Resources Director, Carrie Hanes, Community Development Director / Deputy City Manager, Omar Dadabhoy, Attorney for the City, Colin Burns Employee Organizations: Police Officers' Association (POA), Police Officers' Management Unit (POMU), Fire Association (FVFA), Fountain Valley Municipal Employees Association (Field Services unit), Fountain Valley General Employees Association (FVGEA), Fountain Valley Professional and Technical Employees (P&T), Individually Represented Battalion Chiefs and Individually Represented P&T (IRP&T)
No Reportable Action

2. CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS
Pursuant to Government Code §54957.6.

Agency Designated Representatives: City Manager, Maggie Le, Attorney for the City, Colin Burns
Employee Organizations: Administrative Officers
No Reportable Action

3. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL--ANTICIPATED LITIGATION Significant exposure to litigation pursuant to paragraph (2) of subdivision (d) of Section 54956.9:
(1 Potential Case - Letter received from Attorney Sam Blackmar) By a 5-0 vote, the City Council voted to grant settlement authority to the Attorney for the City.

4. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL--EXISTING LITIGATION
Paragraph (1) of subdivision (d) of Section 54956.9
Name of case: American Guard Services, Inc. v. City of Fountain Valley - OCSC # 30-2023- 01370295
By a 4-0 vote, the City Council voted to grant settlement authority to the Attorney for the City.

Council member Patrick Harper recused himself from the discussion.

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

PUBLIC COMMENTS (Study Session matters only)

1. League of California Cities California Business Ballot Measure Information – Presentation by Connor Medina, League of California Cities
Conner Medina provided an update to the City Council in regards to upcoming measures and the League of California Cities position on those measures.

2. Presentation of the 2024-25 Draft Budget – Presentation by Ryan Smith, Finance Director Finance Director Ryan Smith and Finance Manager Robin Harnish presented the draft budget to the City Council.

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

INVOCATION Pastor Paul Park
SALUTE TO THE FLAG Mayor Glenn Grandis

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

ANNOUNCEMENT OF SUPPLEMENTAL COMMUNICATIONS
Item 8 – comment letter received from the public. Item 9 – comment letter received from the BIA.

CITY MANAGER / MAYOR UPDATE
City Manager Maggie Le provided her update.

Mayor Grandis provided his update.

PRESENTATIONS
 Presentation of a Proclamation Recognizing May 19th – 25th as Public Works Week – Presentation by Mayor Grandis
Mayor Grandis presented the Public Works Department with a proclamation recognizing “Public Works Week”.
 City of Kindness Recognition to Nora Little – Presentation by Mayor Grandis Mayor Grandis presented Nora Little with a City of Kindness Certificate.  Presentation from the Fountain Valley Community Foundation to the Fountain Valley Police Department for their Drone Program – Presentation by Matt Taylor, President of the Fountain Valley Community Foundation
Matt Taylor presented the Fountain valley Police Department with a check for $14,000 to be used for the Police Department’s drone program.
 Recognize National Small Business Week April 28-May 4 – Mike Hohertz, Fountain Valley Chamber of Commerce
Mike Hohertz recognized national Small Business week for Fountain Valley.  Certificates of Recognition to the Fountain Valley High School Dance Team – Presentation by Mayor Grandis
Mayor Grandis recognized the Fountain Valley High School Dance Team for their success and presented them with Certificates of Recognition.
 Certificates of Recognition to the Fountain Valley High School Band and Choir – Presentation by Mayor Grandis
Mayor Grandis recognized the Fountain Valley High School Band and Choir for their success and presented them with Certificates of Recognition.

FIRST CITY COUNCIL/ SUCCESSOR AGENCY/ HOUSING AUTHORITY/ PUBLIC COMMENTS (Unscheduled Matters Only)
Katy Wright, Leston Trueblood

CONSENT CALENDAR
Consent Calendar Items 1 – 6 were approved simultaneously. Item Number 7 was pulled for comment.

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

2. Receive and File the Draft Minutes of the April 16, 2024 Regular City Council Meeting Minutes ACTION: Move to Receive and File the Draft Minutes of the April 16, 2024 Regular City Council Meeting Minutes
MOTION: Constantine SECOND: Cunneen
AYES: Constantine, Cunneen, Harper, Bui, Grandis
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None

3. Approve the City of Fountain Valley Register of Demands for the period of 4/6/2024 to 4/26/2024
ACTION: Move to Approve the City of Fountain Valley Register of Demands for the period of 4/6/2024 to 4/26/2024
MOTION: Constantine SECOND: Cunneen
AYES: Constantine, Cunneen, Harper, Bui, Grandis
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None

4. Amendment No. 3 proposes a contract amount increase to $26,000 for the consultant services agreement with Charles Abbott Associates. This increase is necessary to conclude the contract for building department on-call staffing and as-needed plan review services ACTION: Move to Approve Amendment No. 3 proposes a contract amount increase to $26,000 for the consultant services agreement with Charles Abbott Associates.

This increase is necessary to conclude the contract for building department oncall staffing and as-needed plan review services MOTION: Constantine SECOND: Cunneen
AYES: Constantine, Cunneen, Harper, Bui, Grandis
NOES: None
ABSENT: None

ABSTAIN: None

5. Approve Exhibit A – CY 2024 of the Cost Sharing Agreement (CON-16-08/1190) with the Municipal Water District of Orange County for Water Loss Control Technical Assistance in the amount of $10,120
ACTION: Move to Approve Exhibit A – CY 2024 of the Cost Sharing Agreement (CON16-08/1190) with the Municipal Water District of Orange County for Water Loss Control Technical Assistance in the amount of $10,120
MOTION: Constantine SECOND: Cunneen
AYES: Constantine, Cunneen, Harper, Bui, Grandis
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None

6. Approve the Water Loss Control Shared Services Election Form for FY 24-25 with the Municipal Water District of Orange County in the amount of $17,114 ACTION: Move to Approve the Water Loss Control Shared Services Election Form for FY 24-25 with the Municipal Water District of Orange County in the amount of $17,114
MOTION: Constantine SECOND: Cunneen
AYES: Constantine, Cunneen, Harper, Bui, Grandis
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None

7. Pulled for Public Comment
Second Reading and Adoption of an Ordinance approving Code Amendment No. 23-03 – An Amendment to allow freeway oriented signs with a digital display on properties meeting certain criteria in the Fountain Valley Crossing Specific Plan.

Public Comment – Katy Wright
ACTION: Move to Approve the Second Reading and Adoption of an Ordinance approving Code Amendment No. 23-03 – An Amendment to allow freeway oriented signs with a digital display on properties meeting certain criteria in the Fountain Valley Crossing Specific Plan.

MOTION: Cunneen SECOND: Harper
AYES: Cunneen, Harper, Grandis

NOES: Constantine, Bui
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None

PUBLIC HEARINGS

8. Public Hearing: Appeal of The Planning Commission Decision to Approve Resolution No. 23- 32, Denying Precise Plan 576 And Conditional Use Permit 1925 For a 3,850 Square Foot Restaurant With a Double Drive-Through Facility Located in The Village Center Shop Public Hearing Opened 7:50 p.m.

Jon Jerge, Michele Rucker, Brian Genovese, Michael Hohertz, Sharon Clark, Lisa Smith, Jon Smith, Katy Wright, Sondra Yoshikane, Fusako Takeda, John Etheridge, Charlie Gibbons, Lillian Yao, Mary-Ellen Esquer, Valerie Navaro, Logan Boyd, Mia Moncado Public Hearing Closed at 8:36 p.m.

ACTION: Move to Approve the Appeal of the Planning Commission Decision to Approve Resolution No. 23-32, Denying Precise Plan 576 And Conditional Use Permit 1925 For a 3,850 Square Foot Restaurant With a Double Drive-Through Facility Located in The Village Center Shop
MOTION: Harper SECOND: Constantine
AYES: Constantine, Harper, Grandis
NOES: Cunneen, Bui
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None

9. Public Hearing to Consider the City of Fountain Valley’s Comprehensive User Fee Study and Establish the FY 2024-25 User Fee Schedule
Public Hearing Opened 9:21 p.m.

No Public Comments
Public Hearing Closed at 9:22 p.m.

ACTION: Move to Approve the City of Fountain Valley’s Comprehensive User Fee Study and Establish the FY 2024-25 User Fee Schedule
MOTION: Constantine SECOND: Cunneen
AYES: Constantine, Cunneen, Harper, Bui, Grandis
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None

ADMINISTRATIVE ITEMS

10. 1) Approve a Resolution to accept a donation from the Fountain Valley Community Foundation in the amount of $10,000 and a donation from Hyundai Motor America in the amount of $4,000 for the purchase of two Public Safety Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) from Advexure; 2) Amend the Capital Replacement Schedule to include the UAS Equipment ACTION: Move to Approve a Resolution to accept a donation from the Fountain Valley Community Foundation in the amount of $10,000 and a donation from Hyundai Motor America in the amount of $4,000 for the purchase of two Public Safety Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) from Advexure; 2) Amend the Capital Replacement Schedule to include the UAS Equipment
MOTION: Constantine SECOND: Bui
AYES: Constantine, Cunneen, Harper, Bui, Grandis
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None

COUNCIL MEMBER ITEMS FOR FUTURE CONSIDERATION
Council Member Constantine requested the city look into hiring parking control officers instead of using the Police Department. There was no second.

CITY COUNCIL/ SUCCESSOR AGENCY/ HOUSING AUTHORITY/ PUBLIC COMMENTS (Unscheduled Matters Only)
CITY COUNCIL/SUCCESSOR AGENCY/HOUSING AUTHORITY AB 1234/GENERAL COMMENTS Vice Mayor Bui
April 17 Attended the Orange County Realtors city update April 18 Attended the OC Vibe tour, The Sober Living Task Force via Zoom and the Fountain Valley Chamber mixer
April 19 Attended the Pete Haak Memorial Bench Dedication April 20 Attended the Community Service Day
April 21 Attended the Asian American Senior Citizens event April 23 Attended the Rotary Club Teachers of the Year recognition and the Chamber of Commerce meeting
April 24 Attended the PCTA meeting
April 25 Attended the Mayors breakfast
April 26 Attended the Goodwill Ribbon Cutting and the 2nd Annual Policy Symposium Council Member Cunneen
April 23 Attended the Rotary Club Teacher of the Year Awards then went to the Fire Station to be fitted with fire gear for the Fire Ops 101 event
April 24 Attended the tour of the almost complete Navigation Center

April 25 Attended the Mayors Breakfast
May 2 Attended the FVSD and Chamber Bowling event with city representatives Mayor Grandis
April 17-19 Attended the Cal Cities event in Sacramento April 18 Attended the Foundation Board meeting via Zoom April 19 Attended the Pete Haak Memorial Bench Dedication April 20 Attended the Community Service Day event
April 21 Attended the Professional Pickleball Association Awards April 24 Attended the OC Sanitation Board of Directors meeting April 25 Attended the Mayors Breakfast and the UCI Board Meeting April 26 Attended the Goodwill Ribbon cutting, Chamber Business Awards and the travel the world cultural night at the Senior Center
April 30 Attended a meeting with Fire Chief Bill McQuaid in Washington D.C.

May 2 Attended the Huntington Beach Inter Faith Prayer Breakfast May 3 Attended the Movies in the Park
May 6 Attended the Fountain valley Schools Board Meeting

Council Member Constantine
April 16 Participated in the Fountain Valley High School Football Fundraiser at Islands in doing a to go meal. Later, I stopped by the Fountain Valley School District Art Show outside in the School District parking lot before the event started, as I had a City Council Meeting to participate in.

April 17-19 Attended the California League of Cities “City Leaders Summit” Conference in Sacramento. At the Conference, I toured the Capitol, to include the Senate Floor and the Assembly Floor, and met with various Senators and Assembly Members:

Senator Janet Nguyen, Assembly Member Tri Ta, Senator Tom Umberg, and Senator Josh Newman. In the evening, I attended the Legislative Reception at Cafeteria 15L at the Conference.

April 18 Was in the networking breakfast session, then various sessions throughout the day:

The “General Session” with Vincent Phipps, CEO/Owner, Communication VIP Training and Coaching. “AB 764 Changed the Rules (Again): Prepare Now for Districting and Redistricting”, then Networking Lunch, “A Collaborative Framework to Addressing Homelessness: Solano County and its Seven Cities, United Through a Regional Homelessness Policy Board”, Speed Sessions of “Creating Social Connection”, “Small Town, Big Aspirations: Leveraging Interagency Collaborations to Address Complex Infrastructure Challenges”, and “Attaining Equity Through Inclusive Engagement”, “California - Leading the Way on Generative AI in Local Government”, and “The Vital Importance of Local Enforcement in the Cannabis Industry”. Later, I watched the Sober Living Task Force Meeting on Zoom. In the evening, I watched the Fountain Valley Community Foundation Meeting on Zoom.

April 19 Participated in the networking breakfast session, then was in a meeting with our contracted grant writing consultants, Townsend Public Affiairs, at Cora Coffee, San Diego. We discussed pending grant applications and upcoming opportunities.

Then, I attended the “Interim Housing Solutions” and “Closing General Session” at the Conference, checked out of the hotel, and headed to the airport. Later, I arrived back in Fountain Valley via John Wayne Airport, I stopped by the Pete Haak /

Roger Jensen Memorial Bench at the FV Sports Park. The bench dedication was earlier in the day.

April 20 Listened to the Livable California Workshop on Zoom. The topic was housing, gentrification and displacement. Later, I stopped in at the health fair at Park View Estates.

April 23 Attended the Rotary Club’s annual “Teacher of the Year” (TOTY) Breakfast at the Fountain Valley School District. The teacher honorees were: Jeffrey Doherty of Courreges Elementary School, Ari Klusmeyer of Cox Elementary School, Connie Yang of Fulton Middle School, Whitney Goltermann of Gisler Elementary School, Rob Covacevich of Masuda Middle School, Brandon Plummer of Newland Elementary School, Michelle Cruz of Oka Elementary School, Britt Hughes of Plavan Elementary School, Leilan Shelton of Talbert Middle School, and Allyson Van Voy of Tamura Elementary School. Later, I watched the Orange County Board of Supervisors Meeting on the County’s website. In the evening, I attended the Art on a Box Board Meeting at Founders Village Senior and Community Center, then the Green Valley Recreation Homeowners Association Board Meeting in the Green Valley Community Room.

April 24 Participated in the Central Cities Navigation Center Tour at this new facility located at 13871 West Street in Garden Grove, later I stopped in at the Easy Acrylic Painting Workshop at the Fountain Valley Library.

April 25 Attended the Fountain Valley Mayor’s Breakfast at UCI Health - Fountain Valley.

Later, stopped in at the movie at the library…. “Barbie” at the Fountain Valley Library.

April 26 Participated in the grand opening event for Fountain Valley’s brand new Goodwill Boutique on Magnolia that replaced Tuesday Morning, then attended the Fountain Valley Chamber of Commerce Business Awards at Mile Square Park, the “Film Friday” movie for senior citizens, “The Iron Claw” at Founders Village Senior and Community Center. In the evening, I attended the Fountain Valley School District’s “Children’s Cultural event” at Founders Village Senior and Community Center.

April 27 Attended the Friends of the Fountain Valley Library “Spring Garden Sale” featuring lots of plants, plant arrangements, garden accessories, gardening book, and gift items at the Fountain Valley Library, then stopped in at the Fountain Valley High School Royal Regiment Sale at Fountain Valley High School.

April 28 Stopped in at the Cox Elementary PTA Spring Fling at Cox Elementary School.

April 29 Attended the Friends of the Fountain Valley Library Appreciation Lunch at Stonefire Grill., then in the evening, attended the Fountain Valley Republican Assembly Elections meeting at IHOP, Huntington Beach.

April 30 Participated in the Orange County Mosquito and Vector Control District annual Budget Meeting at the Orange County Mosquito and Vector Control District in Garden Grove.

May 3 Distributed around to various locations, such as Dunkin’ Donuts, Palm Island, Richards’ Cookie Jar, Yong’s Donuts, Lamppost Pizza, and Qargo Coffee, the monthly Centerpiece Newsletter of Founders Village Senior and Community Center.

Later, I attended the Fountain Valley Movie in the Park event in which the movie was “Moana”.

May 4 Stopped in at the Friends of the Library Plant Sale — second round at the Fountain Valley Library, then toured a few Fountain Valley homes that participated in the annual Mary Lou Heard Garden Tour.

May 5 Attended the Orange County Community Market “Picnic in the Park” event at Heritage Park, then toured some Fountain Valley homes that participated in the annual Mary Lou Heard Garden Tour.

May 7 Watched the Orange County Board of Supervisors Meeting on the County’s website.

Council Member Harper
April 18 Attended the MSRC meeting
April 22 Attended the OCTA Board Meeting
April 24 Attended the OCTA Finance Committee meeting
April 25 Attended the Mayors Breakfast
April 30 Attended the baking competition at City Hall
May 2-3 Attended the SCAG Regional Conference and General Assembly May 6 Attended the OCTA regional Planning and Highways Committee meeting

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

AUTHORITY
Mayor Grandis adjourned the meeting at 9:35 pm to the next Meeting of the Fountain Valley City Council on May 21, 2024 at 6:00 p.m., in the Fountain Valley Council Chambers, 10200 Slater Avenue, Fountain Valley.
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Glenn Grandis, Mayor
Attest:
___________________________
Rick Miller, City Clerk

CITY OF FOUNTAIN VALLEY

CITY COUNCIL

COUNCIL ACTION REQUEST
To: Honorable Mayor and Agenda Date: May 21, 2024
Members of the City Council
SUBJECT: City of Fountain Valley Register of Demands for the period of 4/27/2024 to 5/10/2024
Three-Year Strategic Goals
☐ Enhance the culture and environment of “A Nice Place to Live” ☒ Achieve fiscal stability by evaluating processes, and attract and retain revenue producing businesses/opportunities
☐ Attract and retain quality staff through best practices and trends ☐ Maintain, build, and modernize infrastructure to support growth and future needs of the City ☐ Not applicable
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:

Attached is the Register of Demands for the City of Fountain Valley to be ratified by the City Council.

DISCUSSION:

Pursuant to the State of California’s Government Code 37201 through 37210, the Director of Finance or their designated representative hereby certify to the accuracy of the following demands and to the availability of funds for payment thereof. Demands paid by the city shall be inspected and ratified by the legislative body on the next available Council agenda. The Finance Department has prepared the attached Register of Demands summarizing the City's payments released since the previous City Council meeting.

FINANCIAL ANALYSIS:

The attached Register of Demands represents payments made by the City of Fountain Valley between 4/27/2024 and 5/10/2024 for a total of $1,878,561.28.

ATTORNEY REVIEW:

The Attorney for the City reviewed this staff report and concurs with the recommended action.

PUBLIC NOTIFICATION:

Not applicable.

Register of Demands
May 21, 2024

ALTERNATIVES:

Alternative No. 1: Approve the attached Register of Demands.

Alternative No. 2: Do not approve as presented and provide direction to staff.

RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommends Alternative No. 1 to approve the attached Register of Demands representing payments made by the City of Fountain Valley between 4/27/2024 and 5/10/2024 for a total of $1,878,561.28.

Prepared by: Ryan Smith, Finance Director
Reviewed by: Colin Burns, City Attorney
Approved by: Maggie Le, City Manager
Attachment 1: Register of Demands 4/27/2024 to 5/10/2024.

City Of Fountain Valley
Register of Demands
4/27/2024 - 5/10/2024
Department
Check
Date Vendor Description Doc #
Check/ACH
# Amount
10000000 NON-DEPARTMENTAL
05/09/24 U.S. BANK CORPORATE CITY P-CARDS APRIL 2024 - 4246 0445 5574 25407 1901 52,026.23 TOTAL NON-DEPARTMENTAL 52,026.23
10010100 CITY COUNCIL
05/09/24 CONSTANTINE, KIM MEAL AND TRANSPORTATION 25300 2310642 50.77 TOTAL CITY COUNCIL 50.77
10010102 LEGAL SERVICES
05/01/24 HARPER AND BURNS, LL MAR '24 CITY LEGAL SERVICES 24388 1867 31,067.30 05/09/24 HARPER AND BURNS, LL CITY LEGAL SERVICES 25524 1895 31,797.05 TOTAL LEGAL SERVICES 62,864.35
10010103 OFFICE OF CITY MANAGER
05/09/24 LE-NGUYEN, MAGGIE SOUTHWEST FLIGHT REIMBURSEMENT 25349 1897 213.96 05/09/24 LE-NGUYEN, MAGGIE BREAKFAST WITH COUNCILMEMBER 25350 1897 65.92 TOTAL OFFICE OF CITY MANAGER 279.88
10010104 ADMIN SERVICES
05/01/24 AMAZON TELEPROMTER 24455 1858 86.99
TOTAL ADMIN SERVICES 86.99
10020200 HUMAN RESOURCES
05/01/24 LIEBERT, CASSIDY & W MARCH 2024 CLIENT MATTER FO030-00028 25237 2310587 13,035.00 05/09/24 CONCENTRA MEDICAL CE 4/10 - 4/17/24 OCCUPATIONAL MEDICAL SVCS & 25379 2310641 695.85 05/01/24 AMAZON OFFICE SUPPLIES - NOTEBOOKS 25251 1859 17.83 05/09/24 VERIZON WIRELESS 4/26-5/25 - HR CELL PHONES 25451 2310744 125.67 05/09/24 EXPERIAN PRE EMPLOYMENT CREDIT CHECKS 25310 2310652 27.72 05/09/24 AT&T MOBILITY 3/27/2024 - 4/26/2024 HR CELL PHONES 25450 2310633 90.06 05/09/24 AMAZON OFFICE SUPPLIES - PENS 25286 1884 7.24
05/09/24 AMAZON OFFICE SUPPLIES - YOUTH IN GOVERNMENT 25287 1885 77.16 05/09/24 PSYCHOLOGICAL CONSUL HR DEPT PSYCH EXAMS (PSYCH CONSULT 25319 2310684 1,892.00 05/09/24 STERLING HEALTH SERV 2023 ACA REPORTING FEES 25340 1899 993.75 05/09/24 RETURN TO WORK PARTN ACCOMODATIONS MEETING 25406 2310693 920.00 05/09/24 SHRED-IT USA LLC HR DEPT SHRED-IT STERICYCLE SERVICE 25529 2310704 121.26 05/09/24 AMAZON OFFICE SUPPLIES - WEBCAM 25377 1890 43.13 TOTAL HUMAN RESOURCES 18,046.67
10030300 PLANNING
05/01/24 KOSMONT REALTY PROVIDE PROFESSIONAL REAL ESTATE 25268 2310585 2,022.80 05/09/24 KLING CONSULTING GRO SOILS REVIEW CONSULTING SVCS FOR 2023-

24602 2310670 850.00
05/01/24 KOSMONT REALTY PROVIDE PROFESSIONAL REAL ESTATE 25269 2310585 728.00 05/01/24 AMAZON OFFICE SUPPLIES 1XDK-GH4N-7XG3 25199 1858 96.09 05/09/24 AMAZON OFFICE SUPPLIES - 1YJC-GKVG-1PCG 25314 1883 7.29

05/09/24 AMAZON OFFICE SUPPLIES - 1lrn-r6ck-mtlk 25317 1883 56.54 TOTAL PLANNING 3,760.72
10030301 BUILDING & SAFETY
05/09/24 CALIFORNIA BUILDING SB1473 GREEN BUILDING FEES 1ST QTR 2024 24600 2310638 (80.40) 05/09/24 VERIZON WIRELESS WIRELESS REC CTR PLNG MIFI 25366 2310742 30.66 05/01/24 AMAZON OFFICE SUPPLIES 1XDK-GH4N-7XG3 25199 1858 46.60 05/09/24 AMAZON OFFICE SUPPLIES-17VF-K7CF-VVPV 25315 1883 40.05 05/09/24 AMAZON OFFICE SUPPLIES - 1YJC-GKVG-1PCG 25314 1883 102.28 TOTAL BUILDING & SAFETY 139.19
10040400 FINANCE
05/09/24 HDL COREN & CONE CONTRACT SVCS PROPERTY TAX APR-JUN 25323 2310661 3,960.00 TOTAL FINANCE 3,960.00
10040401 PURCHASING
05/09/24 OFFICE DEPOT 2024 03 PAPER FOR CH/SC 25383 2310680 641.60 05/09/24 PROFORMA PRINTING SY CITY SEAL #10 ENVELOPES - 10,000 25280 2310683 792.34 05/09/24 SPARKLETTS 2024 CH WATER/COFFEE 3/28 - 4/24/24 25382 2310732 525.14 TOTAL PURCHASING 1,959.08
10050500 ENGINEERING
05/09/24 THE INTERSECT GROUP TEMP ENVIRONMENTAL ASSISTANCE 4/16/24- 25285 2310736 808.02 TOTAL ENGINEERING 808.02
10050503 STREET LIGHTING
05/09/24 SO CALIF EDISON CO STREET LIGHTS - NEW 3/1 - 3/31/24 25282 2310716 17,772.38 05/09/24 YUNEX, LLC TRAFFIC SIGNALS CALL OUTS - MARCH 2024 25164 2310748 5,090.00 05/09/24 YUNEX, LLC TALBERT/WARD - CABINET HIT 3/19/2024 25165 2310748 5,210.00 TOTAL STREET LIGHTING 28,072.38
10050550 RIGHTS-OF-WAY
05/09/24 SO CALIF EDISON CO ROW SCE-MARCH (3/5/24-4/3/24) 25259 2310712 85.94 05/09/24 SO CALIF EDISON CO MEDIANS SCE-MARCH (2023-2024) 25267 2310715 999.38 05/09/24 IMPERIAL SPRINKLER S IRRIGATION PARTS-STOCK FOR MEDIANS AND 25306 2310663 1,366.21 05/09/24 IMPERIAL SPRINKLER S IRRIGATION MATERIAL FOR CITY YARD 25482 2310665 550.73 05/09/24 SO CALIF EDISON CO ROW SCE APRIL (4/4/24-5/2/24) 25471 2310721 80.72 TOTAL RIGHTS-OF-WAY 3,082.98
10050551 TREE MAINTENANCE
05/09/24 GREAT SCOTT TREE SER PRIVATE TREE WIRE AND WALL CLEARANCE- 25308 2310658 427.48 05/09/24 GREAT SCOTT TREE SER REMOVAL OF UNWANTED TREE-FULTON PARK- 25309 2310658 331.88 05/09/24 CINTAS CORPORATION 6 UNIFORMS (4/11/24) 25362 2310640 4.36 05/09/24 KIRBY BUILT MEMORIAL BENCH 25441 2310668 1,268.38 05/09/24 A.Y. NURSERY PARKWAY TREE REPLACEMENTS -APRIL 2024 25364 2310621 761.25 05/09/24 KIRBY BUILT MEMORIAL PLAQUE FOR BENCH 25442 2310669 230.92 05/09/24 CINTAS CORPORATION 6 UNIFORMS (4/25/24) 25361 2310640 4.36 05/09/24 CINTAS CORPORATION 6 UNIFORMS (5/2/24) 25506 2310640 3.45 TOTAL TREE MAINTENANCE 3,032.08
10050552 PARK MAINTENANCE
05/09/24 SITEONE LANDSCAPE SU ANNUALS FOR SENIOR CENTER 25307 2310706 674.95 05/09/24 SO CALIF EDISON CO NEIBLAS PARK-MARCH (3/6/24-4/4/24) 25255 2310709 23.46

05/09/24 CINTAS CORPORATION 6 UNIFORMS (4/11/24) 25362 2310640 4.36 05/09/24 SITEONE LANDSCAPE SU ADDITIONAL ANNUALS FOR SENIOR CENTER 25472 2310707 134.47 05/09/24 CINTAS CORPORATION 6 UNIFORMS (4/25/24) 25361 2310640 4.36 05/09/24 IMPERIAL SPRINKLER S IRRIGATION PARTS FOR PARKS MAINTENANCE 25475 2310664 787.54 05/09/24 CINTAS CORPORATION 6 UNIFORMS (5/2/24) 25506 2310640 5.27 05/09/24 SO CALIF EDISON CO NIEBLAS SCE APRIL (4/5/24-5/5/24) 25469 2310719 23.18 TOTAL PARK MAINTENANCE 1,657.59
10050553 CONCRETE MAINTENANCE
05/09/24 CINTAS CORPORATION 6 UNIFORMS (4/11/24) 25362 2310640 5.23 05/09/24 UNITED RENTALS HYDRANT REPAIR-18323 SAN JOSE 25477 2310741 268.62 05/09/24 CINTAS CORPORATION 6 UNIFORMS (4/25/24) 25361 2310640 5.23 05/09/24 CINTAS CORPORATION 6 UNIFORMS (5/2/24) 25506 2310640 5.23 TOTAL CONCRETE MAINTENANCE 284.31
10050554 PAVEMENT MAINTENANCE
05/09/24 AT&T MOBILITY TABLETS, CELLS, IPADS 25369 2310632 220.72 05/09/24 CINTAS CORPORATION 6 UNIFORMS (4/11/24) 25362 2310640 21.95 05/09/24 CINTAS CORPORATION 6 UNIFORMS (4/25/24) 25361 2310640 21.95 05/09/24 VULCAN MATERIAL COMP UTILITY REPAIR 18323 SAN JOSE 25481 2310747 284.57 05/09/24 VULCAN MATERIAL COMP UTILITY REPAIR 16645 MT ACOMA 25479 2310746 284.57 05/09/24 CINTAS CORPORATION 6 UNIFORMS (5/2/24) 25506 2310640 21.95 TOTAL PAVEMENT MAINTENANCE 855.71
10050555 STORM DRAIN MAINT
05/09/24 AT&T MOBILITY TABLETS, CELLS, IPADS 25369 2310632 20.48 05/09/24 CINTAS CORPORATION 6 UNIFORMS (4/11/24) 25362 2310640 123.66 05/09/24 SO CALIF EDISON CO SANDALWOOD PUMP STATION SCE-APRIL 25261 2310713 975.25 05/09/24 CINTAS CORPORATION 6 UNIFORMS (4/25/24) 25361 2310640 8.72 05/09/24 CINTAS CORPORATION 6 UNIFORMS (5/2/24) 25506 2310640 8.72 05/09/24 SO CALIF GAS CO WALNUT PUMP STATION GAS-APRIL (4/2/24- 25431 2310726 15.84 05/09/24 SO CALIF GAS CO SANDALWOOD PUMP STATION-APRIL (4/3/24- 25427 2310722 14.30 TOTAL STORM DRAIN MAINT 1,166.97
10050556 TRAFFIC CONTROL
05/09/24 CINTAS CORPORATION 6 UNIFORMS (4/11/24) 25362 2310640 9.15 05/09/24 FULL TRAFFIC MAINTEN U BOLT ASSEMBLY BRACKETS 25363 2310655 437.13 05/09/24 CINTAS CORPORATION 6 UNIFORMS (4/25/24) 25361 2310640 9.15 05/09/24 CINTAS CORPORATION 6 UNIFORMS (5/2/24) 25506 2310640 9.15 TOTAL TRAFFIC CONTROL 464.58
10050558 RECREATION CENTER
05/09/24 SAKIOKA WHOLESALE NU PLANT MATERIAL FOR SP-VARIOUS LOCATIONS 25304 2310701 109.91 05/09/24 SAKIOKA WHOLESALE NU PLANT MATERIAL FOR SP-VARIOUS LOCATIONS 25303 2310700 577.54 05/09/24 CINTAS CORPORATION 6 UNIFORMS (4/11/24) 25362 2310640 9.31 05/09/24 ALAN'S LAWNMOWER & G TOOLS FOR DAY OF SERVICE GREAT LAWN-SP 25297 2310626 1,421.30 05/09/24 IMPERIAL SPRINKLER S TOOLS FOR DAY OF SERVICE GREAT LAWN SP 25298 2310662 510.55 05/09/24 CINTAS CORPORATION 6 UNIFORMS (4/25/24) 25361 2310640 9.31 05/09/24 CINTAS CORPORATION 6 UNIFORMS (5/2/24) 25506 2310640 9.31 TOTAL RECREATION CENTER 2,647.23

10050559 GRAFFITI CONTROL
05/09/24 OMEGA INDUSTRIAL SUP GRAFFITI REMOVER, SUNSCREEN, AND CHILL 25478 2310681 1,505.34 TOTAL GRAFFITI CONTROL 1,505.34
10060600 FIRE SUPPRESSION
05/01/24 SVT FLEET SOLUTIONS APPARATUS MAINTENANCE AND REPAIR FOR 25222 2310612 3,741.53 05/01/24 SVT FLEET SOLUTIONS APPARATUS MAINTENANCE AND REPAIR FOR 25221 2310612 6,082.54 05/01/24 SVT FLEET SOLUTIONS APPARATUS MAINTENANCE AND REPAIR FOR 25224 2310612 5,242.26 05/01/24 SVT FLEET SOLUTIONS APPARATUS MAINTENANCE AND REPAIR FOR 25226 2310612 1,732.79 05/01/24 ALLSTAR FIRE EQUIPME TOOLS/TOOL MOUNTS FOR NEW RESCUE 25143 2310554 1,112.57 05/01/24 ARAMARK REFRESHMENT COFFEE LEASE STATION 1 (3/1- 3/31/24) 25146 2310561 25.64 05/01/24 AMAZON 1N1Y-3K94-H3XM EMERGENCY ROAD FLARES 25142 1858 65.22 05/01/24 CITY OF HUNTINGTON B ANNUAL AGREEMENT FOR FIRE DEPT. 25136 2310568 12,586.00 05/01/24 AT&T MOBILITY FIRE BACK-UP CELLS 3/9/24 - 4/8/24 25170 2310563 120.72 05/01/24 AT&T MOBILITY FIRE CELL PHONES 3/9/24 - 4/8/24 25171 2310564 185.15 05/01/24 TURNOUT MAINTENANCE REPAIR/CLEAN TURNOUTS 25145 2310616 248.00 05/01/24 WESTERN EXTRICATION HOLMATRO TOOL MAINTENANCE 25144 2310620 2,058.31 05/01/24 RAPCO INDUSTRIES, IN SHARPENED/REPAIR OF CUTTERS 25182 2310595 154.57 TOTAL FIRE SUPPRESSION 33,355.30
10060602 AMBULANCE SERVICES
05/01/24 LIFE ASSIST MEDICAL SUPPLIES 25148 2310588 807.70 05/01/24 BOUND TREE MEDICAL MEDICAL SUPPLIES 25156 2310565 71.09 05/01/24 BOUND TREE MEDICAL MEDICAL SUPPLIES 25157 2310565 729.50 05/01/24 LIFE ASSIST MEDICAL SUPPLIES 25153 2310588 105.57 05/01/24 LIFE ASSIST MEDICAL SUPPLIES 25154 2310588 116.91 05/01/24 WITTMAN ENTERPRISES, AMBULANCE BILLING SERVICES - MARCH 2024 25139 1880 13,111.86 05/01/24 MCKESSON MEDICAL-SUR MEDICAL SUPPLIES 25167 1870 443.68 05/01/24 MCKESSON MEDICAL-SUR MEDICAL SUPPLIES 25169 1870 58.00 05/01/24 LIFE ASSIST MEDICAL SUPPLIES 25155 2310588 125.47 05/01/24 MCKESSON MEDICAL-SUR MEDICAL SUPPLIES 25168 1870 187.77 05/01/24 AMBULANCE REFUND WITTMAN REFUND APRIL 2024 25173 2310560 748.80 05/01/24 AMBULANCE REFUND WITTMAN REFUND APRIL 2024 25174 2310555 223.73 05/01/24 AMBULANCE REFUND WITTMAN REFUND APRIL 2024 25175 2310557 100.00 05/01/24 AMBULANCE REFUND WITTMAN REFUND APRIL 2024 25176 2310558 498.46 05/01/24 AMBULANCE REFUND WITTMAN REFUND APRIL 2024 25177 2310559 80.00 05/01/24 AMBULANCE REFUND WITTMAN REFUND APRIL 2024 25178 2310556 87.59 05/01/24 BOUND TREE MEDICAL MEDICAL SUPPLIES 25181 2310565 1,210.94 05/01/24 BOUND TREE MEDICAL MEDICAL SUPPLIES 25204 2310565 1,961.10 TOTAL AMBULANCE SERVICES 20,668.17
10060603 FIRE PREVENTION
05/01/24 TRUE NORTH COMPLIANC FIRE PLAN CHECKS FOR MARCH 2024 25140 1876 1,445.00 05/01/24 AT&T MOBILITY FIRE CELL PHONES 3/9/24 - 4/8/24 25171 2310564 90.07 05/01/24 ENTENMANN-ROVIN CO. FIRE PREVENTION BADGE - THANG NGUYEN 25147 2310573 154.05 05/01/24 VCA CODE FIRE PLAN CHECKS - MARCH 2024 25180 1878 275.00 TOTAL FIRE PREVENTION 1,964.12
10060604 FIRE RESERVES

05/01/24 WARING, CHRISTOPHER RESERVE STIPEND FOR MARCH SHIFT 2024 25141 1879 20.00 TOTAL FIRE RESERVES 20.00
10070700 PATROL
05/01/24 AMAZON SELF-INKING STAMPS - 17G3-4T7H-79F6 23767 1858 36.96 05/09/24 GALLS, LLC B. RICHARDS SUPPLIES 25353 2310656 136.85 05/01/24 CRIME SCENE STERI-CL UNIT 404 - DR 24-11438 25130 2310571 300.00 05/09/24 GALLS, LLC B. RICHARDS SUPPLIES 25354 2310656 364.08 05/09/24 CRIME SCENE STERI-CL HAZ MAT CLEANUP - DR 24-12825 25356 2310644 500.00 05/09/24 THAO, CHENGZONG MEALS/FLIGHT/HOTEL CAPE SEMINAR 25394 1900 1,757.91 05/09/24 ANAYA-MANCINAS, TANI MEALS/MILEAGE/AIRBNB SPILLMAN ADMIN 25395 1891 1,257.11 05/09/24 CAVENAUGH & ASSOCIAT TUITION - DUI SEMINAR J. LEE 25403 2310639 620.00 TOTAL PATROL 4,972.91
10070702 TRAFFIC
05/09/24 ALL CITY MANAGEMENT CROSSING GUARDS - 3/31-4/13/24 25351 1882 6,360.33 TOTAL TRAFFIC 6,360.33
10070707 CRIME PREVENTION
05/09/24 PREMIER UNIFORMS RSVP SNAPBACK HATS 25352 2310682 379.20 TOTAL CRIME PREVENTION 379.20
10070708 RANGE
05/09/24 DOOLEY ENTERPRISES, 9MM 147GR AMMO 25358 2310647 1,231.58 05/09/24 ADKINS, BERTRUM A. RANGEMASTER APRIL 2024 25355 1881 875.00 TOTAL RANGE 2,106.58
10070800 ANIMAL CARE SVCS
05/09/24 COUNTY OF ORANGE ANIMAL CARE SERVICES 1/1/24-3/31/24 25359 2310643 143,283.43 TOTAL ANIMAL CARE SVCS 143,283.43
10080801 ATHLETICS
05/09/24 SITEONE LANDSCAPE SU (176) Bags of Field Product for Ball Fields 25265 2310705 2,576.33 05/09/24 BEACH CITIES SOCCER Adult Soccer Officials Assignor Fee (20) Games 25408 2310634 160.00 TOTAL ATHLETICS 2,736.33
10080802 FIELD OPERATIONS
05/09/24 AMAZON 1CVJ-M7W9-J66X - FIELDS OFFICE SUPPLIES 25277 1883 29.19 05/09/24 AMAZON 1J4G-Y64H-7RDP - CARABINERS FOR FIELDS 25270 1883 12.50 05/09/24 REC SVCS REFUND REFUND FOR DEPOSIT ON PB TOURNAMENT 1- 25375 2310685 500.00 TOTAL FIELD OPERATIONS 541.69
10080810 SENIOR & COMM CENTER
05/09/24 BLDG REFUND REFUND FOR RENTAL ON MAY 19, 2024 25312 2310637 47.50 05/09/24 BILL'S SOUND SYSTEMS SC AV/SOUND SYSTEM - HDMI CABLE 25384 2310636 503.00 05/09/24 SPECTRUM GAS PRODUCT SC HELIUM TANK RENTAL - APRIL 25378 2310734 13.00 05/09/24 PROFORMA PRINTING SY SENIOR CENTER SUPPLIES - ENVELOPES 25380 2310683 286.17 TOTAL SENIOR & COMM CENTER 849.67
10080820 CONTRACT CLASSES
05/09/24 AMAZON 1WYY-RF3M-JFP3 - RC SUPPLIES - 25273 1883 325.08 05/01/24 REC SVCS REFUND REFUND 412043 25219 2310597 15.00 05/01/24 REC SVCS REFUND REFUND 412043 25223 2310600 15.00 05/01/24 REC SVCS REFUND REFUND 412043 25225 2310604 15.00

05/01/24 REC SVCS REFUND REFUND 412043 25227 2310598 15.00 05/01/24 REC SVCS REFUND REFUND 412043 25230 2310601 15.00 05/01/24 REC SVCS REFUND REFUND 412043 25232 2310603 15.00 05/01/24 REC SVCS REFUND REFUND 412043 25233 2310596 30.00 05/01/24 REC SVCS REFUND REFUND 412043 25234 2310599 15.00 05/01/24 REC SVCS REFUND REFUND 412043 25235 2310602 15.00 05/09/24 REC SVCS REFUND REFUND 127025 25279 2310686 181.00 05/09/24 CS DANCE FACTORY CLASS PAYMENT FOR MUSICAL CHAIR 25311 2310645 526.50 05/09/24 REC SVCS REFUND REUND 412043 25370 2310687 105.00 05/09/24 REC SVCS REFUND REFUND 433050 25372 2310688 115.00 TOTAL CONTRACT CLASSES 1,402.58
10080821 SPECIAL EVENTS
05/09/24 BEARCOM BEARCOM RADIOS CANCELLATION FEE 25278 2310635 89.18 05/09/24 AMAZON 19CT-LJGF-JFYN - MITP SNACKS 25276 1883 41.32 05/09/24 AMAZON 1C7F-L3F3-YHLQ - STRAWS FOR MITP CRAFT 25271 1883 10.86 TOTAL SPECIAL EVENTS 141.36
10080822 ANNUAL EVENTS
05/09/24 AMAZON 1WYY-RF3M-JFP3 - RC SUPPLIES - 25273 1883 135.48 TOTAL ANNUAL EVENTS 135.48
11010050 ISF IS ADMIN CAPITAL
05/01/24 THE INTERSECT GROUP INTERSECT TEMP SERVICE D.Z. 3/18-3/22 24311 2310614 3,200.00 05/01/24 THE INTERSECT GROUP INTERSECT TEMP SERVICE D.P. 3/18-3/22 24312 2310614 1,640.00 05/09/24 ADVANCED OFFICE / IN 2/26-3/25/24 - CONTRACT 41290-01 OVERAGE 24178 2310624 527.69 05/01/24 INSIGHT PUBLIC SECTO INSIGHT AUTODESK CIVIL 3D SUB. RENEWAL 24536 1868 6,299.42 05/01/24 ADVANCED OFFICE / IN RICOH OWNED 24 - ADVANCED OFFICE 24298 2310553 60.99 05/01/24 RON TURLEY ASSOCIATE FLEET MANAGEMENT SAAS QUATERLY 24329 2310608 1,980.00 05/01/24 ADVANCED OFFICE / IN CONTRACT 41585 OVERAGE 3/6 - 4/5/24 24494 2310553 40.02 05/01/24 AMAZON AMAZON IT-POLICE ANDROID STICK 24448 1858 86.99 05/01/24 AMAZON AMAZON INVOICE TONER POLICE DEPT 24521 1858 168.33 05/01/24 NMK CORPORATION NMK PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 24529 2310593 1,295.99 05/01/24 AMAZON SUPPLIES - CUPS,NAME PLATES,STAPLER 24590 1858 65.54 05/01/24 CHARTER COMMUNICATIO SPECTRUM INTERNET/CABLE 4/9 - 5/8/24 25038 2310566 202.02 05/01/24 TPX COMMUNICATIONS CITY & PD PHONE LINES 4/9 - 5/8/24 25054 2310615 4,684.31 05/01/24 CHARTER COMMUNICATIO SPECTRUM SENIOR CENTER 25166 2310567 229.98 05/01/24 CMS SOLUTIONS NEC SYSTEM, SOFTWARE ASSURANCE 24717 2310569 115.00 05/01/24 GOLDEN STAR TECHNOLO INTUNE AND M365 APPS PUSH 24734 1866 8,183.12 05/01/24 ADVANCED OFFICE / IN RICOH OWNED 24 - ADVANCED OFFICE 25094 2310553 3.88 05/01/24 GOLDEN STAR TECHNOLO LENOVO TAPE SOLUTION HARDWARE 25124 1866 7,789.58 05/09/24 AMAZON TONER - POLICE 25118 1883 45.66
05/09/24 THE INTERSECT GROUP INTERSECT TEMP SERVICE D.Z. 4/15-4/19 25272 2310736 3,200.00 05/09/24 THE INTERSECT GROUP INTERSECT TEMP SERVICE D.P. 4/15-4/17 25275 2310736 984.00 05/09/24 ADVANCED OFFICE / IN RICOH LEASED 24 - US BANK 25365 2310622 5,831.32 05/01/24 AMAZON IT MINI ADPATERS 25203 1858 52.20
05/01/24 AMAZON TONER - PD 25205 1858 33.70
05/09/24 ADVANCED OFFICE / IN CONTRACT M9482-01 OVERAGE 4/1-4/30/24 25320 2310623 180.70

05/09/24 ADVANCED OFFICE / IN CONTRACT 41290-01 OVERAGE 3/26-4/25/24 25321 2310623 717.76 TOTAL ISF IS ADMIN CAPITAL 47,618.20
11094001 ISF IS FINANCE PRJ NON-REC
05/09/24 TYLER TECHNOLOGIES IMP PAYROLL 1/3, 1/4, & 1/5 - ABRAHAM 25283 2310740 4,800.00 TOTAL ISF IS FINANCE PRJ NON-REC 4,800.00
11110000 ISF GB CITY HALL
05/09/24 AT&T MOBILITY TABLETS, CELLS, IPADS 25369 2310632 255.93 05/01/24 VERIZON SELECT SERVI LD SELECT 2/28 - 3/30/24 24679 2310619 20.26 05/01/24 FRONTIER COMMUNICATI METRONET 4/1 - 4/30/24 24582 2310577 519.16 05/09/24 SO CALIF EDISON CO CITY HALL SCE-MARCH (3/7/24-4/7/24) 25256 2310710 6,452.74 05/09/24 RED WING BUSINESS AD SAFETY BOOTS-H.A. 25301 2310690 215.00 05/09/24 CINTAS CORPORATION 6 UNIFORMS (4/11/24) 25362 2310640 18.14 05/09/24 ROAD RUNNER EXTERMIN MONTHLY PEST CONTROL 25399 2310699 76.00 05/09/24 CINTAS CORPORATION 6 UNIFORMS (4/25/24) 25361 2310640 18.14 05/09/24 CLIMATEC, LLC TECH SERVICE AGREEMENT (5/1/24-7/31/24) 25490 1893 717.75 05/09/24 CINTAS CORPORATION 6 UNIFORMS (5/2/24) 25506 2310640 18.14 05/09/24 SO CALIF GAS CO CITY HALL GAS APRIL (4/2/24-5/1/24) 25434 2310729 733.67 TOTAL ISF GB CITY HALL 9,044.93
11150000 ISF GB CITY YARD
05/01/24 GRAINGER, INC. POWER STRIP OUTLET 25209 2310582 41.93 05/01/24 REGENCY ENTERPRISES, LAMPS 25214 1875 195.75
05/01/24 SO CALIF EDISON CO CITY YARD SCE-MARCH (3/5/24-4/3/24) 25258 2310609 1,818.35 05/01/24 ROAD RUNNER EXTERMIN PEST CONTROL 25212 2310607 149.00 05/09/24 AMTECH ELEVATOR SERV ELEVATOR MAINTENANCE 25401 2310627 221.67 05/09/24 KEN'S LOCKSMITHERY COPIES OF KEYS 25337 2310666 141.37 05/09/24 CLIMATEC, LLC TECH SERVICE AGREEMENT (5/1/24-7/31/24) 25490 1893 62.91 05/09/24 SO CALIF EDISON CO YARD SCE APRIL (4/4/24-5/2/24) 25470 2310720 1,660.32 05/09/24 SO CALIF GAS CO YARD GAS-APRIL (4/3/24-5/2/24) 25428 2310723 53.74 TOTAL ISF GB CITY YARD 4,345.04
11160001 ISF GB FS1
05/01/24 FRONTIER COMMUNICATI CKT FS#1 METRO NET 4/1 - 4/30/24 24577 2310576 57.40 05/01/24 FRONTIER COMMUNICATI FS#1 PHONE 25201 2310580 188.63 05/01/24 ROAD RUNNER EXTERMIN PEST CONTROL 25211 2310606 85.00 05/09/24 FRONTIER COMMUNICATI FS#1 CKT 25367 2310654 41.55 05/09/24 SO CALIF EDISON CO FS #1 SCE APRIL (3/28/24-4/28/24) 25447 2310718 1,495.62 05/09/24 CLIMATEC, LLC TECH SERVICE AGREEMENT (5/1/24-7/31/24) 25490 1893 27.59 05/09/24 SO CALIF GAS CO FS #1 GAS-APRIL (4/2/24-5/1/24) 25432 2310727 252.45 TOTAL ISF GB FS1 2,148.24
11160002 ISF GB FS2
05/09/24 AIR EXCHANGE, INC VEHICLE EXHAUST VENT SYSTEM 25343 2310625 742.62 05/01/24 AT&T FS#2 CKT METRO 03/20 - 04/19 25253 2310562 58.36 05/01/24 SO CALIF EDISON CO FIRE STATION #2 SCE-APRIL (3/21/24-4/21/24) 25264 2310611 715.11 05/09/24 AT&T AT&T FS#2 & CY PH LINES 3/22-4/21 25284 2310631 654.51 05/09/24 CLIMATEC, LLC TECH SERVICE AGREEMENT (5/1/24-7/31/24) 25490 1893 27.61 05/09/24 SO CALIF GAS CO FS #2 GAS-APRIL-(4/3/24-5/2/24) 25429 2310724 84.92

TOTAL ISF GB FS2 2,283.13
11170000 ISF GB POLICE DEPARTMENT
05/01/24 FRONTIER COMMUNICATI JAIL PHONE 4/7 - 5/6/24 25037 2310578 114.01 05/09/24 SO CALIF EDISON CO PD SCE- MARCH (3/7/24-4/7/24) 25257 2310711 7,016.33 05/01/24 FRONTIER COMMUNICATI PD DISPATCH FAX 25202 2310581 98.84 05/09/24 AMTECH ELEVATOR SERV ELEVATOR MAINTENANCE 25404 2310629 200.41 05/09/24 VERIZON WIRELESS PD MDC 25368 2310743 1,186.83 05/09/24 ROAD RUNNER EXTERMIN MONTHLY PEST CONTROL 25398 2310698 112.00 05/09/24 CLIMATEC, LLC TECH SERVICE AGREEMENT (5/1/24-7/31/24) 25490 1893 717.78 05/09/24 SO CALIF GAS CO PD GAS APRIL (4/2/24-5/1/24) 25435 2310730 898.63 TOTAL ISF GB POLICE DEPARTMENT 10,344.83
11180000 ISF GB REC CENTER
05/01/24 UNITED RENTALS NORTH SPORTS PARK PORTABLE RESTROOMS 25059 2310617 3,430.01 05/01/24 GRAINGER, INC. SAFETY EQUIPMENT 25210 2310583 204.77 05/01/24 SO CALIF EDISON CO PARK & RIDE SCE-MARCH (3/7/24-4/7/24) 25260 2310610 1,874.40 05/01/24 REGENCY ENTERPRISES, LAMPS 25208 1874 621.74
05/09/24 KEN'S LOCKSMITHERY 3420 PAD LOCKS 25338 2310667 297.39 05/09/24 ROAD RUNNER EXTERMIN MONTHLY PEST CONTROL 25396 2310696 86.00 05/09/24 ROAD RUNNER EXTERMIN MONTHLY PEST CONTROL 25397 2310697 184.00 05/09/24 CLIMATEC, LLC TECH SERVICE AGREEMENT (5/1/24-7/31/24) 25490 1893 25.68 05/09/24 SO CALIF GAS CO REC CENTER GAS-APRIL (4/3/24-5/2/24) 25430 2310725 135.59 TOTAL ISF GB REC CENTER 6,859.58
11180001 ISF GB SR CENTER
05/01/24 FRONTIER COMMUNICATI SC ELEV FIRE LN 25095 2310579 313.49 05/09/24 DUNN-EDWARDS CORPORA PAINT FOR POOL ROOM 25341 2310649 42.63 05/09/24 DUNN-EDWARDS CORPORA PAINT SUPPLIES 25339 2310648 43.97 05/09/24 DUNN-EDWARDS CORPORA PAINT FOR POOL ROOM 25342 2310650 54.02 05/09/24 AMTECH ELEVATOR SERV ELEVATOR MAINTENANCE 25402 2310628 188.31 05/01/24 UNIVERSAL FLOORING S FLOOR REPAIR 25213 2310618 365.85 05/09/24 SO CALIF EDISON CO SENIOR CENTER SCE APRIL-(3/28/24-4/28/24) 25445 2310717 1,553.05 05/09/24 CLIMATEC, LLC TECH SERVICE AGREEMENT (5/1/24-7/31/24) 25490 1893 25.68 05/09/24 SO CALIF GAS CO SENIOR CENTER GAS APRIL (4/2/24-5/1/24) 25433 2310728 403.78 TOTAL ISF GB SR CENTER 2,990.78
11250001 PW - FLEET MGMT
05/09/24 LONG BEACH BMW PARTS FOR UNIT 425 PD M/C 20716 2310675 956.42 05/09/24 LONG BEACH BMW PARTS FOR UNIT 425 PD M/C 20718 2310675 2,684.94 05/01/24 FACTORY MOTOR PARTS PART CREDITS 24479 2310575 (63.38) 05/01/24 FACTORY MOTOR PARTS BATTERY CREDITS 24475 2310575 (39.15) 05/01/24 FACTORY MOTOR PARTS BATTERY CREDITS 24472 2310575 (126.62) 05/01/24 RINCON TRUCK CENTER, STOCK PARTS 25206 2310605 91.15 05/01/24 RINCON TRUCK CENTER, PART RETURN CREDIT 24751 2310605 (11.77) 05/09/24 CINTAS CORPORATION 6 UNIFORMS (4/11/24) 25362 2310640 65.52 05/01/24 RINCON TRUCK CENTER, STOCK PARTS 25207 2310605 33.93 05/01/24 FACTORY MOTOR PARTS STOCK BATTERIES 25231 2310575 275.29 05/01/24 BUMPER BUDDIES INC. UNIT 405 BUMPER BODY REPAIRS 25228 1861 900.00

05/01/24 CONNELL CHEVROLET PARTS FOR UNIT 405 25215 2310570 135.93 05/01/24 DEPT 143 TRAILER TIRES FOR UNIT 236 25229 2310572 261.66 05/01/24 NAPA AUTO PARTS STOCK BATTERIES 25216 2310592 451.54 05/01/24 DEPT 143 ALIGMENT FOR UNIT 405 25217 2310572 119.00 05/09/24 LAKIN TIRE WEST, INC USED TIRE PICK UP 25385 2310671 609.49 05/09/24 FACTORY MOTOR PARTS PARTS FOR UNIT 307 25386 2310653 65.24 05/09/24 THEODORE ROBINS FORD PARTS FOR UNIT 307 25390 2310739 97.30 05/09/24 RINCON TRUCK CENTER, STOCK PARTS 25392 2310695 22.55 05/01/24 MONSTER IMAGE, INC PD SEALS 25218 2310590 137.78 05/09/24 FACTORY MOTOR PARTS BATTERY FOR UNIT 409 25387 2310653 158.30 05/09/24 FACTORY MOTOR PARTS PART FOR UNIT 401 25388 2310653 33.01 05/09/24 CINTAS CORPORATION 6 UNIFORMS (4/25/24) 25361 2310640 65.52 05/09/24 RED WING BUSINESS AD SAFETY BOOTS-D.L. 25462 2310691 215.00 05/09/24 RED WING BUSINESS AD SAFETY BOOTS-A.L. 25476 2310692 213.66 05/09/24 FACTORY MOTOR PARTS PARTS FOR UNIT 269 25389 2310653 34.60 05/09/24 MCPEEK DODGE OF ANAH STOCK PARTS 25391 2310676 213.86 05/09/24 NAPA AUTO PARTS STOCK BATTERIES 25393 2310678 677.28 05/09/24 SC FUELS BULK DIESEL FOR STATION 2 25501 2310702 1,808.33 05/09/24 SC FUELS BULK DIESEL FOR STATION 1 25502 2310702 3,157.73 05/09/24 CINTAS CORPORATION 6 UNIFORMS (5/2/24) 25506 2310640 65.52 05/09/24 SOUTH COAST BOBCAT, PART FOR UNIT 241 25511 2310731 16.98 05/09/24 SOUTH COAST BOBCAT, PART FOR UNIT 241 25512 2310731 196.85 TOTAL PW - FLEET MGMT 13,523.46
11250052 ISF FL PW CAPITAL
05/09/24 NATIONAL AUTO FLEET VEHICLE REPLACEMENT PW UNIT 8530-FORD 25299 2310679 117,998.24 TOTAL ISF FL PW CAPITAL 117,998.24
11270052 ISF FL PD CAPITAL
05/09/24 NATIONAL AUTO FLEET 2024 POLICE DODGE DURANGO UNIT 434 25464 2310679 50,471.94 05/09/24 NATIONAL AUTO FLEET 2024 POLICE DODGE DURANGO UNIT 435 25459 2310679 50,471.94 TOTAL ISF FL PD CAPITAL 100,943.88
11380053 ISF EQ R&C CAPITAL
05/09/24 D HAUPTMAN CO//FOLD- SOCCER GOALS AND NETS FOR FV SPORTS 25409 2310646 4,107.34 TOTAL ISF EQ R&C CAPITAL 4,107.34
11400400 SELF INSURANCE
05/01/24 ATHENS ADMINISTRATOR PREFUNDING CLAIM:PAYMENT FOR HOSPITAL 25316 1860 28,090.08 05/09/24 ATHENS ADMINISTRATOR REPLENISHMENT OF CHECKS WRITTEN 04/1/24 25371 1892 137,205.61 TOTAL SELF INSURANCE 165,295.69
11400411 SELF INSURANCE
05/01/24 LIEBERT, CASSIDY & W LCW LEGAL FEES 25188 2310586 14,125.50 05/09/24 EMPLOYMENT DEVELOPME ACCT #932-0092-1 UNEMP BENEFITS(1/1/24 - 25485 2310651 4,293.76 05/01/24 HARPER AND BURNS, LL MAR'24 CLAIMS LITIGATION 24389 1867 20,886.17 05/09/24 THE COUNSELING TEAM MAY '24 EAP SERVICES FOR FVFD & FVPD 25531 2310735 1,100.00 TOTAL SELF INSURANCE 40,405.43
11400430 SELF INSURANCE
05/09/24 THE LINCOLN NATIONAL LIFE INSURANCE/LTD/ADD/EAP (05/01/24- 25318 2310737 3,264.32

05/09/24 MYERS-STEVENS & TOOH JUNE'24 - PORAC LTD (ACCT 54541) 25436 2310677 1,425.60 05/09/24 FOUNTAIN VALLEY FIRE JUNE'24 - FVFA LTD 25468 1894 702.00 TOTAL SELF INSURANCE 5,391.92
11500000 ISF EMPLOYEE BENEFITS
05/10/24 CALPERS CALPERS MEDICAL - MAY 2024 25097 1841 303,757.41 05/09/24 THE LINCOLN NATIONAL LIFE INSURANCE/LTD/ADD/EAP (05/01/24- 25318 2310737 1,424.70 05/01/24 FOUNTAIN VALLEY POLI PR PPE 042624 DPD DEDUCTIONS 25324 1864 2,500.00 05/01/24 FOUNTAIN VALLEY CRED PR PPE 042624 CU DEDUCTIONS 25325 1862 43,122.10 05/01/24 FOUNTAIN VALLEY FIRE PR PPE 042624 DFR DEDUCTIONS 25326 1863 2,647.64 05/02/24 EMPOWER/BENEFITS COR PR PPE 042624 EMPOWER DEDUCTIONS 25327 1855 72,848.40 05/02/24 CALIFORNIA STATE DIS PR PPE 042624 G31-G95-G96 DEDUCTIONS 25328 1856 743.99 05/01/24 MISSION SQUARE RET P PLAN #803216 - PPE 042624 RHF & RHS 25329 1871 2,555.60 05/01/24 MISSION SQUARE RET P PLAN #800389 - PR PPE 042624 RHA & RHC 25330 1872 1,161.33 05/01/24 MISSION SQUARE RET P PLAN #800414 - PR PPE 042624 RHM 25331 1873 203.54 05/01/24 U.S. BANK N.A. PR PPE 042624 PAR & PRE DEDUCTIONS 25332 1877 3,240.14 05/01/24 FVPOA PAC PR PPE 042624 POL DEDUCTIONS 25333 1865 525.00 05/02/24 INTERNAL REVENUE SER PR PPE 042624 TAXES - FED & MEDI 25334 1857 162,882.00 05/02/24 EMPLOYMENT DEVELOPME PR PPE 042624 TAXES - STATE 25335 2310552 54,494.26 TOTAL ISF EMPLOYEE BENEFITS 652,106.11
11500450 EMPLOYEE BENEFITS
05/10/24 CALPERS CALPERS MEDICAL - MAY 2024 25097 1841 29,861.00 05/09/24 MISSION SQUARE RET P MS PLAN #803210-RETIREE REIMBURSEMENT 25374 1898 130,596.16 TOTAL EMPLOYEE BENEFITS 160,457.16
23030313 CDBG NEIGHBOORHOOD REVITA
05/01/24 LEIFKES CONSULTING, CDBG HOME IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM 25240 1869 2,720.00 TOTAL CDBG NEIGHBOORHOOD REVITA 2,720.00
30095302 CAPITAL IMP - PAVEMENT REHAB
05/01/24 ONWARD ENGINEERING DESIGN FOR REHAB OF EUCLID SLATER TO 25161 2310594 14,169.40 05/01/24 ONWARD ENGINEERING DESIGN FOR REHAB TALBERT BUSHARD 25162 2310594 7,309.40 TOTAL CAPITAL IMP - PAVEMENT REHAB 21,478.80
50040403 WF UTILITY BILLING
05/01/24 INFOSEND, INC UTILITY BILL PRINTING - MARCH 2024 24330 2310584 6,733.32 TOTAL WF UTILITY BILLING 6,733.32
50050570 WF WTR PROD. OPNS
05/09/24 SPECIAL T WATER SYST SOFT WATER SERVICE WELL 10 25266 2310733 225.00 05/09/24 AT&T MOBILITY TABLETS, CELLS, IPADS 25369 2310632 288.30 05/01/24 LIFECOM OXYGEN TANK REFILL 25244 2310589 67.50 05/01/24 EXELE INFORMATION SY TOP VIEW SOFTWARE LICENSE RENEWAL 24495 2310574 547.50 05/01/24 LIFECOM OXYGEN TANK REFILL 25248 2310589 67.50 05/09/24 CINTAS CORPORATION 6 UNIFORMS (4/11/24) 25362 2310640 18.11 05/01/24 TESCO CONTROLS INC WELL 6 PLC REPAIRS 25250 2310613 1,482.50 05/09/24 KELLY, DAVID WATER CERTIFICATIONS-DISTRIBUTION AND 25302 1896 165.00 05/09/24 AMAZON TAPE AND CLIPBOARD FOLDER 1Y4N-XPL6- 25346 1888 70.28 05/01/24 LIFECOM GAS MONITOR CALIBRATION 25249 2310589 230.04 05/09/24 AMAZON ROLLERBALL PENS 149L-K9P4-HCXD 25344 1886 21.61

05/09/24 AMAZON BLUETOOTH COMPUTER SPEAKER FOR M.S. 25347 1889 20.65 05/09/24 SO CALIF EDISON CO RES 2 & WELLS -APRIL (3/5/24-4/3/24) 25262 2310714 62,681.19 05/09/24 LIFECOM GAS MONITOR CALIBRATION 25322 2310672 65.00 05/09/24 CINTAS CORPORATION 6 UNIFORMS (4/25/24) 25361 2310640 18.11 05/09/24 VERIZON WIRELESS WATER CELLS, USB MDM (MAR 26-APR 25) 25519 2310745 928.21 05/09/24 CINTAS CORPORATION 6 UNIFORMS (5/2/24) 25506 2310640 18.11 05/09/24 AMAZON ELECTRIC STAPLE CARTRIDGE 147T-QDCQ- 25513 1883 11.02 TOTAL WF WTR PROD. OPNS 66,925.63
50050571 WF DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM
05/01/24 INFOSEND, INC UTILITY BILL PRINTING - MARCH 2024 24330 2310584 72.80 05/09/24 HANSON AGGREGATES, L 25 TONS BASE 25292 2310660 457.17 05/09/24 SHAPEDPENS.COM WATER DROP PENS-WATER CONSERVATION 25305 2310703 3,137.15 05/09/24 CINTAS CORPORATION 6 UNIFORMS (4/11/24) 25362 2310640 39.34 05/09/24 AMAZON CHEMICALS FOR TRUCK CLEANING 1Y4N-XPL6- 25345 1887 84.93 05/01/24 MUNICIPAL WATER DIST MARCH 2024 TURF REMOVAL & S2D 25252 2310591 444.00 05/09/24 CINTAS CORPORATION 6 UNIFORMS (4/25/24) 25361 2310640 39.34 05/09/24 CINTAS CORPORATION 6 UNIFORMS (5/2/24) 25506 2310640 39.34 TOTAL WF DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM 4,314.07
50050573 WF CUSTOMER SERVICE
05/09/24 RED WING BUSINESS AD REDWING BOOTS 25288 2310689 215.00 05/09/24 CINTAS CORPORATION 6 UNIFORMS (4/25/24) 25361 2310640 75.04 TOTAL WF CUSTOMER SERVICE 290.04
50050574 WF METER M & R
05/09/24 AQUA-METRIC SALES 25 TONS SAND 25293 2310630 1,122.34 05/09/24 AQUA-METRIC SALES 1" IPEARL METERS 25289 2310630 1,050.27 05/09/24 AQUA-METRIC SALES 1" IPEARL METERS 25290 2310630 3,359.24 05/09/24 AQUA-METRIC SALES 1" IPEARL METERS 25291 2310630 3,369.57 TOTAL WF METER M & R 8,901.42
50095001 WATER FUND
05/09/24 RICHARD C. SLADE & A WELL NO. 11 CONST INSP AND REPORTS AUG 25243 2310694 1,412.17 05/09/24 RICHARD C. SLADE & A WELL NO. 11 CONST INSP AND REPORTS OCT 25245 2310694 398.73 05/09/24 RICHARD C. SLADE & A WELL NO. 11 CONST INSP AND REPORTS JAN 25247 2310694 4,293.73 TOTAL WATER FUND 6,104.63
50150580 SF SEWER MAINTENANCE
05/09/24 AT&T MOBILITY TABLETS, CELLS, IPADS 25369 2310632 60.00 05/09/24 THE MULTIPLE OF THE SAFETY BOOTS- PEDRO VASQUEZ 25425 2310738 215.00 05/09/24 CINTAS CORPORATION 6 UNIFORMS (4/11/24) 25362 2310640 8.72 05/09/24 SO CALIF EDISON CO SEWER LIFT STATION SCE-APRIL (3/14/24- 25254 2310708 474.13 05/09/24 HAAKER EQUIPMENT COM WEAR AND TEAR -ITEM REPLACED ON VACTOR 25294 2310659 1,574.50 05/09/24 LIFECOM REPAIR AND CALIBRATION FOR GAS MONITOR 25438 2310672 348.57 05/09/24 LIFECOM REPAIR AND CALIBRATION FOR GAS MONITOR 25439 2310673 510.19 05/09/24 LIFECOM REPAIR AND CALIBRATION FOR GAS MONITOR 25440 2310674 698.75 05/09/24 CINTAS CORPORATION 6 UNIFORMS (4/25/24) 25361 2310640 8.72 05/09/24 CINTAS CORPORATION 6 UNIFORMS (5/2/24) 25506 2310640 8.72 05/09/24 GRAINGER, INC. PERSONAL PROTECTIVE EQUIPMENT 25495 2310657 49.89

TOTAL SF SEWER MAINTENANCE 3,957.19
60030301 CUSTODIAL - BLDG SAFETY
05/09/24 CALIFORNIA BUILDING SB1473 GREEN BUILDING FEES 1ST QTR 2024 24600 2310638 804.00 TOTAL CUSTODIAL - BLDG SAFETY 804.00
TOTAL $1,878,561.28

CITY OF FOUNTAIN VALLEY

CITY COUNCIL

COUNCIL ACTION REQUEST
To: Honorable Mayor and Agenda Date: May 21, 2024
Members of the City Council
SUBJECT: City of Fountain Valley Six Month Strategic Objectives Update for November 16, 2023 through May 23, 2024.

Three-Year Strategic Goals
☒ Enhance the culture and environment of “A Nice Place to Live” ☒ Achieve fiscal stability by evaluating processes, and attract and retain revenue producing businesses/opportunities
☒ Attract and retain quality staff through best practices and trends ☒ Maintain, build, and modernize infrastructure to support growth and future needs of the City
☐ Not applicable
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:

On November 16, 2023 the City Council held a strategic planning session with executive management team and department managers. The Strategic Plan was then presented to City Council at the December 19, 2023 City Council Meeting for adoption. Those that were in attendance collaborated to establish the City’s six-month strategic planning objectives for November 16, 2023 through May 23, 2024. The strategic plan has and will continue to serve as a guideline for both the Council and City staff as we work to achieve our goals over the next few years. The Strategic Plan goals on the attached spreadsheet have been updated so that the City Council can see the progress that has been made on the action items.

DISCUSSION:

During the City’s Strategic Planning session on November 16, 2023, City Council, executive management team including department managers discussed achievements and missed opportunities.

There were group discussions that led to the creation of the City’s six-month strategic planning objectives. As adopted the vision and mission statements are:

The City of Fountain Valley vision statement is:

Fountain Valley is a safe, inclusive, and desirable community where you can live your best life! The City of Fountain Valley mission statement is:

The City of Fountain Valley is a team driven organization committed to providing excellent service to our community through our Core Values: Fiscal Stability, Honesty, Integrity and Ethical Behavior, Teamwork, Innovation, Quality of Life, and Excellent Customer Service.

City of Fountain Valley Strategic Plan
May 21, 2024

Through the collaborative efforts, City Council and City staff finalized the six-month strategic objectives matrix for November 16, 2023 through May 23, 2024 (Attachment No. 1) in support of the new goals for 2023-2026.

FISCAL REVIEW:

The fiscal impact has been budgeted in Fiscal Year 2023-24.

PUBLIC NOTIFICATION:

Not applicable.

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REVIEW:

Not applicable.

ATTORNEY REVIEW:

Attorney for the City has reviewed this item.

ALTERNATIVES:

Alternative No. 1: Receive and File the updated strategic objectives matrix for November 16, 2023 through May 23, 2024.

Alternative No. 2: Direct staff to take an alternate action.

RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommends that the City Council approve Alternative No. 1.

Prepared by: Maggie Le, City Manager
Reviewed by: Ryan Smith, Finance Director
Approved by: Colin Burns, Attorney for the City
Attachment:

1. Six Month Strategic Objectives Matrix for November 16, 2023 – May 23, 2024

A

C I T Y O F F O U N T A I N V A L L E Y

SIX-MONTH STRATEGIC OBJECTIVES
N o v e m b e r 1 6 , 2 0 2 3 – M a y 2 3 , 2 0 2 4
City of Fountain Valley Vision Statement
Fountain Valley is a safe, inclusive, and desirable community where you can live your best life! City of Fountain Valley Mission Statement
The City of Fountain Valley is a team driven organization committed to providing excellent service to our community through our core values.

Core Values
Fiscal Stability, Honesty, Integrity and Ethical Behavior, Teamwork, Innovation, Quality of Life, and Excellent Customer Service THREE-YEAR GOAL: ENHANCE THE CULTURE AND ENVIRONMENT OF “A NICE PLACE TO LIVE”

WHEN WHO WHAT STATUS COMMENTS

DONE ON
TARGET
REVISE
D
BUDGET

1. By April 15, 2024,
to City Manager
Request to
extend or
incorporate the
goal into the
following sixmonth plan.

Police Chief-lead with Deputy
City Manager/Community
Development Director
Present City’s action plan for the Central Cities
Navigation Center to City Manager. X
N/A CCNC operational
guidelines have been
approved by County.

Collaboration continues
between city partners for
the development of
action plans for
officer/outreach team
access. Preliminary
plans for access to
location have been
established as we standby for the CCNC
onboarding of staff to
finalize protocols.

2. By March 19,
2024, City
Council meeting
Community Services Directorlead with Finance Director
and Public Works Director
Create an RFP for Parks Master Plan.

X
$175,00
0 to
$250,00
0 (Park
Funds)
RFP has been released

B

3. By February
20, 2024, City
Council meeting
Public Works Director Present more information on Orange County Power Authority and its program for City Council
consideration.

X N/A Presented to City Council
at the January 30, 2024
Study Session. Staff is
working with OCPA
regarding next steps.

THREE-YEAR GOAL: ACHIEVE FISCAL STABILITY BY EVALUATING PROCESSES, AND ATTRACT

AND RETAIN REVENUE PRODUCING BUSINESSES/OPPORTUNITIES

WHEN WHO WHAT STATUS COMMENTS

DONE ON
TARGET
REVISE
D
BUDGET

1. By April 2, 2024, City
Council meeting
Finance Director-lead
and Executive
Management Team
Prepare and present the fee study results to City Council for adoption.

X In budget Presented at Study
Session on 4/16 and
Public Hearing on 5/7.

2. By May 7, 2024, City
Council Meeting
Finance Director Present potential amendments languages of the Responsible Spending Pledge with feedback from the
Measure HH Advisory Committee for City Council
consideration.

X N/A Meeting with HH
Committee on March
16 for further direction
on proposed
languages or keep the
current language.

3. By February 20,
2024, City Council
Meeting
Deputy City
Manager/Community
Development Director
Present and prioritize the Economic Development Plan’s
goals and objectives with implementation schedule for
City Council consideration.

X N/A Presented item to City
Council on February

20. 4. By March 19, 2024,
City Council Meeting
City Attorney-lead
with Finance Director
and City Clerk
Present a potential Transit Occupancy Tax increase
assessment option.

X N/A Presented item to City
Council on March 5
and direction to
reconsider in 2026.

C
THREE-YEAR GOAL: ATTRACT AND RETAIN QUALITY STAFF THROUGH

BEST PRACTICES AND TRENDS

WHEN WHO WHAT STATUS COMMENTS

DONE ON
TARGE
T
REVIS
ED
BUDGET

1. By December
19, 2023, city
Council
Meeting
HR Director,
Community Services
Director and
Engagement Team
Present and bring forward top trends in workforce and labor market for approval and adoption.

X N/A Staff received direction
from City Council on a
possible 4/10 pilot
program and profession
development programs
including scholarship
from employees’ family
members.

2. By April 16,
2024, City
Council
meeting
HR Director and
Engagement Team
Based on the December 19, 2023 recommendation on
priorities on workforce top trends, implement City Council direction on professional development, team building
experience and/or work schedule options.

X Engagement Team is
presenting a 4/10 pilot
program to City Council
on March 19 for further
direction.

D
THREE-YEAR GOAL: MAINTAIN, BUILD, AND MODERNIZE INFRASTRUCTURE TO SUPPORT

GROWTH AND FUTURE NEEDS OF THE CITY

WHEN WHO WHAT STATUS COMMENTS

DONE ON
TARGET
REVISE
D
BUDGET

1. By April 16, 2024, City
Council meeting
Public Works Director
and IT Director
Present current and future plans for citywide high speed internet access.

X In
budget
SiFi presented an
update to the City
Council on
January 30, 2024.

A website link to
FV Internet
Providers has
been added to the
City’s website.

Bi-monthly status
updates will be
sent to City
Council.

2. By May 21, 2024, City
Council Meeting
Public Works Director
and Fire Chief
 Finalize the bid process for the demolition and
design phases for the 17101 Bushard property.
 Initiate demolition and start work towards 30% of
design.
 Research Fire Station 1 potential project funding
and ongoing revenue opportunities.

X In
budget
Presented to City
Council on
January 30, 2024.

Demolition and
design scheduled
to commence
March 2024.

Funding and
revenue
opportunities are
actively being
explored.

E

3. By May 7, 2024, City
Council meeting
IT Director Build, upgrade, and modernize a secure network infrastructure. Starting phase 1.

X In
budget
IT has been
releasing
information as
upgrades have
been completed
through Council
Communicator.

We will continue
to release
information as
new builds and
upgrades as they
are in progress
and completed.

Phase 1
completed.

4. By February 20,
2024, City Council
meeting
Public Works
Director-lead and
Finance Director
Present to City Council a best practice for a multi-year systematic approach to program and fund building
maintenance needs for City facilities.

X N/A Presented to City
Council on
February 20,
2024. Direction
given by City
Council to add
funding to FY
2024-25 budget to
proceed with
project.

CITY OF FOUNTAIN VALLEY

CITY COUNCIL

COUNCIL ACTION REQUEST
TO: Honorable Mayor and Agenda Date: May 21, 2024
Members of the City Council
SUBJECT: Resolution Overturning the Planning Commission’s Approval of Resolution No. 23-32, Denying Precise Plan 576 and Conditional Use Permit 1925 for a 3,850 Square Foot Restaurant With a Double Drive-Through Facility Located in the Village Center Shopping Center at the Northeast Corner of Magnolia Street and Talbert 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:

On May 7, 2024, The Fountain Valley City Council voted 3 to 2 and overturned the Planning Commission’s denial of Precise Plan (PP) 576 and Conditional Use Permit (CUP) 1925 for a proposed McDonald’s restaurant with a double drive-through in the Village Center shopping center at the northeast corner of Magnolia Street and Talbert Avenue (Attachment #1). The Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on February 14, 2024 to review PP 576 and CUP 1925. Subsequent to conducting the public hearing, the Planning Commission voted 4 to 1 to deny PP 576 and CUP 1925. Resolution No. 23-32 was brought before the Planning Commission on March 13, 2024 memorializing the Planning Commission’s actions. An appeal of the Planning Commission’s decision to deny the project was filed by Design UA on March 20, 2024 (Attachment #2).

The appeal hearing was conducted at the regularly scheduled meeting of the City Council on May 7, 2024. At the conclusion of the public hearing, the City Council voted 3-2 to reverse the Planning Commission’s decision to deny the project, and directing staff to prepare a resolution to approve the proposed project. The resolution is presented to the City Council as Attachment 1 and formally approves Precise Plan 576 and Conditional Use Permit 1925 to allow for a 3,850 square foot restaurant with a double drive-through facility located in the Village Shopping Center.

Council Action Request
McDonald’s Appeal
May 21, 2024
2 of 3
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:

The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires analysis of agency approvals of discretionary “projects”. A “project,” under CEQA, is defined as “the whole of an action, which has a potential for resulting in either a direct physical change in the environment, or a reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment.” The proposed project is considered a project under CEQA.

The proposed project has been reviewed in compliance with the provisions of the CEQA and the city’s environmental review procedures and can be determined categorically exempt pursuant to Class 3 (Section 15303 – New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures) of the CEQA Guidelines.

Class 3 consist of construction of new structures including not exceeding 10,000 square feet in floor area on sites zoned for such use if not involving the use of significant amounts of hazardous substances, where all necessary public services and facilities are available, and the surrounding area is not environmentally sensitive. The proposed building and use does not include a significant amount of hazardous substances, all public services and facilities are available to the site, and the surrounding area is not environmentally sensitive.

FINANCIAL ANALYSIS:

The applicant has paid the appeal fee of $2,655.00 as required by the City’s 2023-2024 Fee Schedule.

ATTORNEY REVIEW:

The Attorney for the City has reviewed the attached Resolution.

PUBLIC NOTICE:

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

ALTERNATIVES:

Alternative No. 1: Adopt a Resolution reversing the Planning Commission’s approval of Resolution No. 23-32, denying PP 576 and CUP 1925 and adopt a Resolution approving PP 576 and CUP 1925 for a 3,850 square foot restaurant with a double drive-through facility located in the Village Center shopping center at the northeast corner of Magnolia Street and Talbert Avenue.

Alternative No. 2: Do not select Alternative No. 1 and direct staff to prepare an alternate resolution.

Alternative No. 3: Continue the item for more information.

Council Action Request
McDonald’s Appeal
May 21, 2024
3 of 3
RECOMMENDED ACTION:

Staff recommends that the City Council select Alternative No. 1 and adopt a Resolution reversing the Planning Commission’s approval of Resolution No. 23-32, denying PP 576 and CUP 1925 and adopt a Resolution approving PP 576 and CUP 1925 for a 3,850 square foot restaurant with a double drive-through facility located in the Village Center shopping center at the northeast corner of Magnolia Street and Talbert Avenue.

Prepared by: Matt Jenkins, Senior Planner
Reviewed by: Omar Dadabhoy, Community Development Director Approved by: Maggie Le, City Manager
Attachments: 1. City Council Resolution with Exhibit 1

2. City Council Staff Report May 7, 2024

3. Letter of Appeal

RESOLUTION NO. ______

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OVERTURNING THE
PLANNING COMMISSION’S APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION NO. 23-
32, DENYING PRECISE PLAN 576 AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 1925 FOR A 3,850 SQUARE FOOT RESTAURANT WITH A DOUBLE

DRIVE-THROUGH FACILITY LOCATED IN THE VILLAGE CENTER

SHOPPING CENTER AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF MAGNOLIA

STREET AND TALBERT AVENUE
WHEREAS, on June 13, 2023, an application was submitted by Design UA (“Applicant”) to construct a new 3,850 square foot double drive-through restaurant (“Site”) for McDonald’s located in the Village Plaza shopping center (“Project”); and WHEREAS, Fountain Valley Municipal Code (FVMC) Section 21.10.030 Table 2-6, states that drive-through are allowed in the C1-Local Business zone with a Conditional Use Permit (“CUP”) and per FVMC 21.40.030, a Precise Plan (“PP”) application is required for all new commercial development; and
WHEREAS, the Fountain Valley Planning Commission considered the proposed Project at its noticed public hearing on December 13, 2023; and WHEREAS, testimony was received from the applicant and public regarding the proposed Project; and
WHEREAS, on February 14, 2024, the Planning Commission considered the Project and after much testimony, the Planning Commission voted 4 to 1 to deny PP 576 and CUP 1925; and
WHEREAS, on March 13, 2024, Resolution No. 23-32 was approved by the Planning Commission to memorialize their decision from the February 14th meeting; and WHEREAS, on March 20, 2024, the Applicant, Design UA (“Appellant”), filed an appeal in accordance with FVMC 21.60 on the Planning Commission’s decision to deny PP 576 and CUP 1925; and
WHEREAS, per FVMC Section 21.60.050(f), an appeal hearing shall be considered a hearing de novo and the review authority may consider any issue(s) associated with the appeal, in addition to the specific grounds for the appeal. When reviewing an appeal, the review authority may:
(A) By resolution, affirm, affirm in part or reverse the action, the determination, or decision that is the subject of the appeal;
(B) Adopt additional conditions of approval deemed reasonable and necessary, and may even address issues or concerns that go beyond the subject of the appeal; or Attachment #1

Resolution No. ______

(C) Disapprove the land use entitlement approved by the previous review authority, even though the appellant only requested a modification or elimination of one or more conditions of approval.
(2) If new or different evidence is presented on appeal, the commission or council, may, but shall not be required to, refer the matter to the director or commission, as applicable, for further consideration.

WHEREAS, per FVMC Section 21.60.050(g), when reviewing an appeal the review authority shall adopt findings in support of the intended action on the appeal. The nature of the findings shall be in compliance with the findings adopted by the original review authority (e.g., Conditional Use Permit—Chapter 21.36, Precise Plan of Design—Chapter 21.44, Variance—Chapter 21.50, etc.); and
WHEREAS, the City Council reviewed the appeal at a public hearing, noticed in accordance with FVMC Section 21.60.050(a)(3), on May 7, 2024.

WHEREAS, on May 7, 2024, the City Council took testimony from the Appellant and their representatives and the public; and
WHEREAS, by a vote of 3-2, the City Council overturned the Planning Commission’s denial of both PP 576 and CUP 1925 and directed staff to return with a resolution reflecting the City Council’s actions; and
WHEREAS, attached hereto is Exhibit 1 containing conditions of approval from the Resolution No. 23-32 supporting the project that was presented to the Planning Commission on December 13, 2023.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION 1
The City Council finds that due notice of the public hearings in the Council Chambers, City Hall, 10200 Slater Avenue, was given as required by the FVMC, Title 21, and the Statutes of the State of California.

SECTION 2
Findings and Supporting Facts: The City Council finds that the shade canopies meet the criteria for a Development Review found in Chapter 21.40 of the Fountain Valley Municipal Code as follows:

1. The design and layout of the proposed development would:

A. Be consistent with the actions, goals, objectives and policies of the general plan and the development and design standards/guidelines of the applicable zoning district.

Attachment #1

Resolution No. ______

The proposed drive-through facility meets General Plan Goal 2.8, which is to provide for well-designed commercial and industrial development. Staff has worked with the applicant to provide a project design that is compatible with the existing shopping center in terms of architectural design of the building and the layout of the drive-through.

Chapter 21.30.030 – Drive-through facilities requires drive-through que lanes to be a minimum of 150 feet in length and designed to provide space before the menu board to accommodate at least four (4) waiting vehicles. The proposed design meets the minimum depth requirement for the queue lane and can accommodate six (6) vehicles at two (2) menu boards, where one (1) car is at the ordering speaker and two (2) vehicles are waiting. The design of drive-through que will accommodate a total of ten (10) vehicles.

B. Not interfere with the use and enjoyment of neighboring existing or future developments, and would not create traffic or pedestrian hazards; and The proposed project will not interfere with the use and enjoyment of the neighboring developments and would not create traffic or pedestrian hazards. The project proposes to construct a 3,850 square foot building with a double drivethrough. The proposed drive-through design will provide a queuing capacity of ten (10) vehicles in the drive-aisle. Should the que exceed ten (10) vehicles, vehicles can back-up in the parking lot on the south side of the building. A “pork chop” has been designed at the easterly side of the parking lot restricting vehicle circulation to prevent vehicles from entering the drive-through aisle from the easterly driveway off Talbert Avenue, which is closest to the drive-through entrance, and where a stacking issue could occur. This design will force vehicles to use the driveway farther west down Talbert Avenue., and will enter the drive-through by passing through the parking lot in front of the McDonald’s building. This will allow vehicle stacking to back up in the parking lot in front of McDonald’s, and not on to Talbert Avenue.

C. Provide a desirable environment for its occupants and visiting public as well as its neighbors through good/proper aesthetic use of materials, texture and color, and would remain aesthetically appealing and retain an appropriate level of maintenance.

The proposed project will maintain and enhance high quality development throughout the city by encouraging variety, quality, consistency, and innovation in land use practice and promoting quality commercial development. The proposed project will also improve architectural quality of development within Fountain Valley by promoting commercial development, which achieves harmony without monotony in the built environment and, by encouraging planning and design, which is people oriented, sensitive to the needs of visitors and residents and functionally efficient for its purpose. Lastly, the proposed architecture of the project will be fully finished on all elevations of the project and will be consistent with the approved upgrades to the rest of the shopping center and the recently approved Dutch Bros Coffee establishment.

Attachment #1

Resolution No. ______

2. The architectural design of the proposed structure(s) would be compatible with the character of the surrounding neighborhood and would maintain and enhance the attractive, harmonious and orderly development contemplated by the actions, goals, objectives and policies of the general plan and the Development Code.

The architectural design of the proposed project, including all colors, materials, and design elements, will complement the recently remodeled shopping center. The building’s primary exterior walls will be stucco with attractive vertical aluminum elements, and a stone veneer at the base that will match Sprouts, Dutch Bros, and the entire shopping center. This will provide for an attractive, harmonious, and orderly development contemplated by the actions, goals, objectives, and policies of the general plan and the zoning code.

3. The proposed development would not:

A. Be detrimental to the public convenience, health, interest, safety or welfare, or materially injurious to the properties or improvements in the immediate vicinity.

The proposed project will not be detrimental to the public convenience, health, interest, safety, or welfare or materially injurious to the properties or improvements in the immediate vicinity. Conditions of approval have been included in Exhibit A of this resolution to improve the overall appearance of the shopping center and prevent negative impacts from the drive-through, and therefore improve the health, interest, safety, and welfare of the center and properties in the immediate vicinity. Noise impacts from the drive-through should be significantly decreased with the construction of a wall along the drive-through entrance where the ordering speaker is located. This screen wall will range in height with 6-foot and 8-foot tall sections along the service alley for a total of 74 feet – parallel to the 6-foot tall block wall at the property line shared with the single-family homes to the east.

B. Substantially depreciate property values in the immediate vicinity or interfere with the use or enjoyment of property in the surrounding neighborhood, because of excessive dissimilarity or inappropriateness of design in relation to the surrounding neighborhood.

The project includes the construction of a restaurant with a drive-through for a nationally recognized fast-food chain restaurant. The project should not reduce property values in the immediate vicinity should not restrict or interfere with the use or enjoyment of property in the surrounding neighborhood, because of excessive dissimilarity or inappropriateness of design in relation to the surrounding neighborhood.

4. The proposed project has been reviewed in compliance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the city’s environmental review procedures as shown in Section 4 below.

The proposed Project has been reviewed in compliance with the provision of CEQA and the City’s Environmental Review Procedures as noted in Section 4 below.

Attachment #1

Resolution No. ______

SECTION 3
Findings and Supporting Facts: - The City Council finds that the subject application, as approved by the Planning Commission on February 12, 2020 in Resolution No. 19-38, meets the criteria for a CUP found in Chapter 21.36 of the FVMC as follows:

1. The proposed use is allowed within the C1, Local Business zoning district with the approval of a CUP and complies with all other applicable provisions of the Development Code and the Municipal Code.

The proposed restaurant with a double drive-through is an allowed use in the C1 zoning district subject to the Planning Commission’s approval of a Conditional Use Permit. Drive-through facilities are subject to their own codified requirements in FVMC

21.30.030 – Drive-Through Facilities.

2. The proposed use is consistent with the actions, goals, objectives, and policies of the General Plan and any applicable specific plan.

The proposed drive-through facility meets General Plan Goal 2.8, which is to provide for well-designed commercial and industrial development. Staff has worked with the applicant to provide a project design that is compatible with the existing shopping center in terms of architectural design of the building and the drive-through and site layout.

The project also meets General Plan Goal 2.12, which is to enhance the city’s economic base and business environment by assisting in the improvement and intensification of existing commercial development. The proposed facility will help intensify the Village Center shopping center and bring in more customers thus improving the city’s economic base. This use does not fall within any Specific Plans in the City of Fountain Valley.

3. The design, location, shape, size, and operating characteristics of the proposed use are compatible with the existing and future land uses in the vicinity.

The design, location, shape, size, and operating characteristics of the proposed drivethrough facility are compatible with the existing and future land uses in the within the Village Center shopping center. The proposed facility has been adequately designed to be incorporated within the boundaries of the property and utilizes the existing driveways along Talbert Avenue. The proposed “pork chop” at the easterly drive aisle will prevent any excess vehicle stacking with vehicles entering the drive-through off Talbert through the easterly driveway. Any vehicle backup in the drive-through will be maintained on the shopping center property and not affect the public right-of-way.

4. The subject site is physically suitable for the type and density/intensity of use being proposed including the provision of public access (e.g., width and pavement type), facilities, and utilities (e.g., drainage, fire protection, sewers, water), shape, size, the absence of physical constraints, and compatibility with adjoining land uses.

Attachment #1

Resolution No. ______

The subject site is physically suitable for the type and intensity of drive-through facility. The existing 6,279 sq. ft. building will be demolished and a new 3,850 sq. ft. building is proposed in its place. The project has been designed to comply with public access, facilities, and utility requirements and is compatible with adjoining land uses.

Sufficient vehicular and pedestrian access is provided from Talbert Avenue and from the shopping center.

5. Granting the CUP would not be detrimental to the public convenience, health, interest, safety, or welfare, or injurious to persons, property, or improvements in the vicinity and zoning district in which the property is located.

The proposed drive-through facility will be located in the recently remodeled shopping center to accommodate a Sprouts Farmers Market. The Planning Commission recently approved a Dutch Bros Coffee establishment with a double drive-through in March of 2023. Staff has included conditions of approval in Exhibit A to prevent the operations from negatively affecting persons, property, or improvements in the shopping center and the vicinity. Noise impacts from the drive-through should be significantly decreased with the construction of a wall along the drive-through entrance where the ordering speaker is located. This screen wall will range in height with 6-foot and 8-foot tall sections along the service alley for a total of 74 feet – parallel to the 6-foot tall block wall at the property line shared with the single-family homes to the east.

6. The proposed project has been reviewed in compliance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the city’s environmental review procedures.

The proposed Project has been reviewed in compliance with CEQA and is categorically exempt per Section 4 below.

7. By signing this Resolution, the business owner/operator has demonstrated his/her understanding of the conditions imposed in the PP and CUP, and attached as Exhibit 1 herein, granted to him/her and has agreed on the record to abide by those conditions.

SECTION 4
The City Council finds that proper noticing and disclosure has been provided per CEQA and that the Project can be determined categorically exempt pursuant to Class 1 (Section 15301 – Existing Facilities) and Class 3 (Section 15303 – New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures) of the CEQA Guidelines.

Class 3 consist of construction of new structures including not exceeding 10,000 square feet in floor area on sites zoned for such use if not involving the use of significant amounts of hazardous substances, where all necessary public services and facilities are available, and the surrounding area is not environmentally sensitive. The proposed building and use does not include a significant amount of hazardous substances, all public services and facilities are available to the site, and the surrounding area is not environmentally sensitive.

Attachment #1

Resolution No. ______

SECTION 5
The City Council hereby overturns the Planning Commission’s denial of PP 576 and CUP 1925 for a proposed McDonald’s restaurant with a double drive-through located in the Village Center shopping center at the northeast corner of Magnolia Street and Talbert Avenue. ____________________________
Glenn Grandis, Mayor
ATTEST:
_______________________
Rick Miller, City Clerk

APPROVED AS TO FORM

HARPER & BURNS LLP
__________________________
Colin Burns, Attorney for the City
Attachment #1

EXHIBIT 1

CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Precise Plan 576
Conditional Use Permit 1925
McDonald’s
Village Center Shopping Center
NE Corner Magnolia Street & Talbert Avenue
Fountain Valley, CA
The following Conditions of Approval [COA] apply to this project. The COA’s are specific conditions applicable to the proposed project. The property owner is responsible for the fulfillment of all conditions and standard development requirements, unless specifically stated otherwise.

In addition to complying with all applicable City, County, State and Federal Statutes, Codes, Ordinances, Resolutions and Regulations, permittee expressly accepts and agrees to comply with the following Conditions of Approval of this Permit:

Planning Department Conditions:

1. The site plan, floor plan, and elevation plans dated May 7, 2024 have been reviewed and approved by the City Council on May 7, 2024/

2. The number of persons shall not exceed the maximum occupancy load as determined by the Fire Department. If required by the Fire Department, signs indicating the occupant load shall be posted in a conspicuous place near the main entrance and must be posted prior to final inspection and prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy for the business.

3. Signs for this facility shall comply with the Sign Program for the Village Center Shopping Center.

4. Any wall signage facing residential to the east shall not be illuminated after dusk.

A timer shall be installed and utilized to regulate the sign lighting similar to parking lot lighting.

5. The windows of the business shall be free of any obstruction, tinting, or painting, except for window signage as permitted by the Fountain Valley Sign Code.

6. The approved hours of operation shall be 24 hours per day, seven (7) days per week for the restaurant and drive-through. Hours of delivery shall be restricted to the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. Monday through Friday, 9:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. on Saturday, and no time on Sunday or legal holiday. Based on substantiated noise complaints, the Community Development Director may further limit hours of operation.

PP 576 & CUP 1925

7. There shall be no trash dumping from the facility between the hours of 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m., seven (7) days a week.

8. Truck delivery material and goods shall not be stored outside of the building and shall be moved to the inside of the building expeditiously upon delivery.

9. Operation of the drive-through shall not result in stacking of vehicles in such a manner that would result in obstruction to any access aisle or parking spaces for other tenants in the shopping center, the main drive aisles for the shopping center, or public streets. If the drive-through operation affects traffic for other tenants, the service alley on the east side, or the public street along Talbert Avenue, design alternatives to remedy the issue, such as modifying the parking lot, mobile order takers, or other alternatives, shall be presented to the City for review and approval by the Community Development Director.

10. A “pork chop” or raised 6” curb shall be installed at the easterly drive aisle adjacent to the service alley.. This design shall be so vehicle circulation will be limited to a right-turn in and right-turn-out scenario from the parking area in front of the building, preventing vehicle access and stacking from the drive-through onto Talbert Avenue.

11. A decorative block wall shall be constructed along the easterly side of the project site drive through, parallel and adjacent to the service alley, adjacent to the residential properties to the east. The wall, as depicted on the plans in attachment #3 to the Staff Report, ranges from a height of 4 ft., 6 ft., and 8 ft. in sections to prevent excessive sound from traveling to the east. The wall shall be painted to match the adjacent building.

12. The drive-through speaker volume shall comply with the City’s noise ordinance, Ch. 6.28. Noise measured at the property line adjacent to residential shall not exceed the noise standards in Section 6.28.050. The speaker shall be equipped with the capability of adjusting the volume to maintain compliance with lower operating sound levels allowed by the noise ordinance during the evening hours.

The speakers capability to adjust the volume shall be verified during the plan check review process and once installed shall be verified prior to certificate of occupancy.

Based on substantiated complaints regarding the sound levels emanating from the drive-through speakers, the Community Development Director may require a noise study to be paid for by the business or property owner.

13. The operator is responsible for ensuring that their customers, while in the drive through lanes, do not create excessive or undue noise that would be inconsistent with the City’s noise standards. Signage shall be installed along the drive-through aisle indicating that no outdoor amplified music shall be permitted from customer radios. Signage shall be subject to the review and approval of the Community Development Director and shall be installed prior to any permit finals.

PP 576 & CUP 1925

14. To prevent scavenging, illegal dumping, and to contribute to the general cleanliness of the shopping center, the Project shall install a new trash enclosure containment area with a screened and securable gate compliant with FVMC

21.18.100 and Rainbow Environmental/Republic Services specifications. In addition, exterior signage shall be provided outside of the trash enclosure prohibiting the scavenging of any material from the trash dumpster. Any refuse containment area and signage shall be included in the applicant’s plan check submittal to the Building Department and shall be installed prior to issuance of certificate of occupancy of the Project.

15. The applicant shall install signage near the trash dumpster prohibiting trash dumping during the hours of 10:00 p.m. – 7:00 a.m. compliant with FVMC

6.28.050. Said signage shall be installed prior to certificate of occupancy of the building.

16. The colors, materials and facades of the building, trash enclosure, and screen wall shall be as approved by the Planning Commission. No changes to the colors or materials shall occur without approval by the Community Development Director.

Changes that the Community Development Director deems to vary significantly from the originally approved design shall be forwarded to the Planning Commission for its review and determination.

17. All vents, gutters, downspouts, electrical conduits, etc. shall be internal to the building and not visible from the exterior elevations. Flashings shall be painted to match the color of the adjacent surface.

18. Exterior lighting shall be scheduled to direct the light downward away from the residential properties. If needed, light shielding may be installed to prevent light spillage onto adjacent properties. No additional exterior lighting is to be added unless a photometric study concludes the added lighting will have zero lighting shed impact on adjacent properties.

19. The applicant shall provide signing on the trash enclosure prohibiting the salvage of any material from the trash dumpsters. Signage shall be subject to review and approval by the Community Development Director, shall be included in the applicant’s plan check submittal to the Building Department, and shall be installed prior to certificate of occupancy of the business.

20. Precise Plan No. 576 and Conditional Use Permit No. 1925, shall be approved and in effect for a period of 12 months from the original date of approval by the Planning Commission and/or City Council. If no development has commenced at the end of this 12-month time period, Project approval shall expire and be determined void.

A total of two (2) one-year extensions may be granted at the discretion of the Community Development Director. A request for an extension of time should be made in writing by the applicant thirty (30) days prior to the expiration date.

PP 576 & CUP 1925

Date of Project Approval: May 21, 2024
Date of Project Expiration: May 21, 2025

21. The resolution is not effective unless it is signed by the applicant indicating and acknowledging his/her understanding of the conditions imposed herein. The failure of the applicant to sign this permit in no way shall be deemed to confer any greater rights than are contained in this permit.

22. By signing and accepting the resolution, the operator accepts the benefits conferred by the permit subject to the conditions imposed therein. By accepting the right to operate pursuant to the permit, the applicant waives all rights to challenge any condition imposed as unfair or unreasonable.

23. The applicant agrees to indemnify, hold harmless, and defend the City, its officers, agents and employees, from any and all liability or claims that may be brought against the City arising out of its approval of this permit, save and except that caused by City's active negligence. The applicant shall provide a copy of conditions of approval to each manager and to all employees.

24. The applicant shall comply with all federal, state, and local laws. Violations of any of those laws in connection with the use will be cause for revocation of this permit.

25. Violation of any condition of approval shall be a misdemeanor.

26. Install, and maintain in proper working order, security cameras around the premises. These cameras should include, but are not limited to, visual coverage of the areas available to the public on the inside of the business as well as the parking area in front of the business and the drive-through area. These cameras shall have high resolution and low-light capability. Video from all cameras will be recorded and made available to the Police Department upon request. A video camera plan shall be included in the applicant’s plan check submittal to the Building Department and security cameras shall be installed prior to issuance of certificate of occupancy of the business.

27. The Community Development Director may interpret the implementation of each condition of approval and, with advanced notice, grant minor amendments to approved plans and/or conditions of approval based on changed circumstances, new information, and/or relevant factors as long as the spirit and intent of the approved condition of approval is satisfied. Permits shall not be issued until the proposed minor amendment has been reviewed and approved for conformance with the intent of the approved condition of approval. If, in the opinion of the Community Development Director, the proposed changes are substantial in nature, an amendment to the original entitlement may be required pursuant to the provisions of the Fountain Valley Municipal Code.

28. The business shall comply with FVMC 21.24.110(27) which prohibits vehicle signs for the principal purpose of advertising a business.

PP 576 & CUP 1925

29. No satellite dishes greater than 2.2 meters shall be installed on the subject property without approval of the Planning Commission.

30. The business shall install roof exhaust equipment to filter food-smelling particles from leaving the facility and to prevent food smells present on adjacent properties.

31. All roof-mounted mechanical equipment (air conditioning, heating, ventilation ducts, exhaust, etc.) shall be screened from the view of adjacent properties and rights-of-way as specifically approved by the Community Development Director.

Roof treatment shall be common to the building and extended to all four (4) building elevations.

32. Street and unit numbers are to be maintained in such a manner as to be plainly visible, shall not be hidden from view by trees, shrubs, bushes, etc., and other obstructions on the property. Street numbers shall be located and be a minimum size so that they are clearly visible from the street and be maintained on the front and rear doors. All numbers shall not be less than 6 in. in height and 2 in. in stroke and be of contrasting color from the background. Street and unit numbers must be installed prior to issuance of Certificate of Occupancy of the business.

33. To maintain the cleanliness of the property, the business owner shall be responsible for maintaining the area adjacent to their premises over which they have control free of litter.

34. An alarm system shall be installed and be of a type that sounds a signal when it is activated.

35. The operator shall not permit vending machines, water machines, games, rides, etc. on the exterior of the building.

36. There shall be no outdoor storage or display of any kind without the approval of a temporary use permit.

37. There shall be no outdoor seating or tables unless specifically allowed by the Community Development Director.

38. There shall be no live entertainment within the facility.

39. There shall be no exterior amplified music. Speakers mounted on or incorporated with the building design on the exterior of the building shall be prohibited.

40. The petitioner shall be responsible for maintaining the premises over which they have control, free of graffiti.

41. Permittee acknowledges that Education Code Section 48200 et. seq. provides that persons between the ages of 6 and 18 are subject to compulsory education and are required to be in school unless exempted. Permittee agrees not to allow the

PP 576 & CUP 1925

business to become a "hang out" for truants and agrees not to allow youths to congregate or otherwise loiter in or around the business. Permittee shall take reasonable steps to control the conduct of others on this property so that it does not become a nuisance or otherwise disturb the peace and quiet of the neighborhood or peace, health and safety of the community.

42. The sale and consumption of alcohol on the premises shall be prohibited.

43. The operator will ensure that there will be no drinking and/or loitering in the parking lot or within 100 feet of the establishment in areas where the operator has control.

44. No alcoholic beverages shall be consumed on any property adjacent to the licensed premises under the control of the licensee.

45. Heavy-duty delivery trucks that have a Gross Vehicle Weight Rating (GVWR) in excess of 10,000 Ibs. are prohibited from idling their engine for more than five (5) minutes at the rear and side of the business.

46. Subject to verified complaints and/or calls for service, the Community Development Director or Chief of Police may require additional security measures, including but not limited to the provision of security guards, additional cameras and further limitations on the hours of operation.

47. The Community Development Director shall have the authority to modify any condition of approval, specifically those related to the drive-through.

48. Three or more sustained complaints within any one-year period received by the Fountain Valley Police Department regarding disturbances which have been caused by the business at the above referenced location may be grounds for revocation proceedings.

49. Emoloyees of the business shall park at the north side of the property behind the commercial storefronts.

50. The conditions herein contained shall run with the property and shall be binding on the business, and all heirs, executors, administrators, and successors in interest to the real property that is the subject of this approval.

Building Department Conditions:

51. Install, maintain and provide for all California Disabled Access compliance per the California Building Code and the Division of State Architect. No encroachment into the disabled path of travel is allowed under any condition with the exception of emergency vehicles and personnel.

52. Projects must comply with the California Code of Regulations, Title 24; Fountain Valley Ordinances, and California law in effect at the time of plan submittal.

PP 576 & CUP 1925

53. As deemed necessary by the Building Official, a grease interceptor shall be installed and sized per Section 1014 of the California Plumbing Code as adopted by the City of Fountain Valley in conformance with Chapter 14.38 of the Fountain Valley Municipal Code.

54. Grease interceptors are to be maintained in proper working order. Interceptors are to be inspected and accumulated fats, oils, and grease removed every three months at minimum. High use and/or production of fats, oils or grease may mandate more frequent treatment. Records must be generated and remain onsite for all maintenance procedures for a minimum of three years. Records shall be made available upon request to Orange County Environmental Health Care Agency representatives and City Officials Operation and maintenance shall comply with Fountain Valley Municipal Code Chapters 14.36, Sewers; and Chapter

14.40, Stormwater Regulations.

Public Works Department Conditions:

55. Grant no easement over any portion of this improvement between the time of approval of the tentative improvement and the time of final approval of the improvement, except as required by the City Engineer.

56. All public improvements, including but not limited to, streets, sewer, water, storm drain, traffic systems, traffic control, and street repairs shall be constructed in accordance with the most recent edition of the City of Fountain Valley Public Works Standard plans.

57. Provide improvement plans as prepared by a Registered Civil Engineer for all improvements. The plans shall be 24 in. by 36 in. mylar with an appropriate engineering scale (1”=10’, 1”=20’, 1"=40'). The plans shall include, but not be limited to, paving, sidewalk, curb, gutter, street lighting and all underground utilities. Underground utilities shall include, but not be limited to: electrical, communications, street lighting, gas, sewer, water and appropriate storm drain facilities. The design, layout and location of the gas, electrical, communications and street lighting shall be in accordance with the requirements of the respective utility company.

58. The developer shall provide complete "as-built" plans on 24"x36" of the appropriate scale mylar and electronic format AutoCad, latest version, in accordance with City standards prior to Public Works approval to release utilities and certificate of occupancy.

59. Prior to securing permits, complete landscaping plans prepared and signed by a California licensed landscape architect shall be approved by the Public Works and Planning Directors. The plans shall be on 24”x36” mylar with a scale to be consistent with the site plans.

60. Without credit, provide for street improvements including, but not limited to, curbs, gutters, street paving, traffic control devices, ADA accessible driveway

PP 576 & CUP 1925

approaches, ADA curb ramps, and sidewalks within the public right-of-way.

61. Provide sanitary sewer facilities as required with the City's Sewer Master Plan and to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.

62. Install a reduced pressure principle device on the domestic water supply line to the buildings as required by the City Engineer.

63. Install approved backflow devices for irrigation systems as required by the City Engineer.

64. When building is required to be fire sprinklered, the developer shall install a double check detector check valve assembly as required by the Fire Marshal and City Engineer.

65. Provide a comprehensive traffic study, as prepared by a Registered Traffic Engineer, showing trip generation for the new development and the impact on the adjacent arterial highways created by this development in conjunction with the existing developments. This report shall include the recommended traffic mitigation measures.

66. All vehicular access shall conform to the City of Fountain Valley standard plans and specifications and shall be subject to final approval of the City Engineer.

67. Provide a drawing with a turning template overlay to verify that the intended truck path can be accommodated.

68. All vehicular access shall conform to the City of Fountain Valley standard plans and specifications and shall be subject to final approval of the City Engineer.

69. Comply with the applicable provision of City ordinances concerning payment of fees or assessments, zoning regulations and subdivision development. All fees and assessments must be paid prior to the approval of the improvement plans and issuance of any permits.

70. Pay a Traffic Impact Fee in the amount indicated on the development fee schedule.

71. Pay a Sewer Connection Fee in accordance with the City’s Sewer Master Plan and Title 14 the FVMC. In the event that this fee has not been paid with previous development activity, the developer shall be responsible for payment of the fee applied to the gross acreage of the entire property.

72. No sewer connection shall be made in Magnolia Street.

73. Pay $4.65 per front foot for the existing sewer line in Talbert Avenue in accordance with Title 14 of the Fountain Valley Municipal Code.

PP 576 & CUP 1925

74. Pay $4.65 per front foot for the existing waterline in Talbert Avenue in accordance with Title 14 of the FVMC.

75. Pay a Median Beautification Fee in the amount of $8.54 per front foot for medians on Talbert Avenue in accordance with Title 20 of the FVMC.

76. A backflow prevention assembly will need to be installed by the applicant’s contractor. Installation inspection will be completed by the Fountain Valley Water Department.

77. Applicant shall improve the broken driveway approach located on the west entrance to the parking lot.

78. Pay Development Fees prior to permit issuance.

79. Pork Chop shall be a standard, full-faced 6” curb and not the proposed rolled curb

80. Revise northern curb at east alley entrance to create a wedge:

PP 576 & CUP 1925

Fire Department Conditions:

81. Code. Group M occupancies shall comply with 2022 California Fire Code (CFC), 2022 California Building Code (CBC), and current Fountain Valley Municipal Code (FVMC).

82. Premise Identification. Approved numbers or addresses shall be provided for all new and existing buildings in such a position as to be plainly visible and legible from the street or road fronting the property. CFC 505.1. Verify address assignment with Fountain Valley Fire Department, Fountain Valley Building Department, and Planning Department.

83. Portable Fire Extinguishers. Provide one 2A10BC State Fire Marshal tagged fire extinguisher for every 3000 square feet of floor area. Travel distance not to exceed 75 feet. CFC 906.3

84. Knox Box. Where access to or within a structure or area is restricted because of secured openings or where immediate access is necessary for life-saving or firefighting purposes, the fire code official is authorized to require a key box to be installed in an approved location. The key box shall be of an approved type and shall contain keys to gain necessary access as required by the fire code official.

CFC 506.1

85. Commercial Cooking Systems. All existing dry chemical and wet chemical extinguishing systems shall comply with UL 300. Commercial cooking equipment that produces grease laden vapors shall be provided with a Type 1 Hood, in accordance with the California Mechanical Code, and an automatic fire extinguishing system that is listed and labeled for its intended use. CFC 904.11

86. Combustible Materials. All drapes, hangings, curtains, drops and all other decorative material, including Christmas trees that would tend to increase the fire and panic hazard. These materials may also include natural and artificial decorative vegetation. These materials shall be made from a nonflammable material, or shall be treated and maintained in a flame-retardant condition by means of a flame-retardant solution or process approved by the State Fire Marshal. The State Fire Marshal seal shall be attached to these items or a certificate of flame retardancy shall be provided to the Fire Department. CCR Title 19, Division 1, Section 3.08

87. CO2 storage. If more than 100 lbs. of CO2 storage is used, the following requirements apply.
a. Provide a monitoring system for CO2 storage.
b. See CFC Section 5307, California Health and Safety Code 6.95 and NFPA

55. c. Submit plans to FVFD and FVBD.
d. An annual fire permit will be required.
e. Electronic filing with the state website “CERS” is mandatory.

PP 576 & CUP 1925

f. An assembly permit will be issued after final inspection and every year thereafter.

88. General. Fire Safety during construction shall comply with Chapter 33 of the 2022 California Fire Code as well as the following:

89. Portable Fire Extinguishers. Structures under construction, alteration or demolition shall be provided with not less than one approved portable fire extinguisher in accordance with Section 906 and sized for not less than ordinary hazard as follows:
 At each stairway on all floor levels where combustible materials have accumulated.
 In every storage and construction shed.
 Additional portable fire extinguishers shall be provided where special hazards exist including, but not limited to, the storage and use of flammable and combustible liquids. CFC 3315.1

90. Hazardous Materials. There shall be no hazardous storage where the aggregate quantity exceeds the exempt amounts set forth in the California Fire Code. All storage, dispensing, use and handling of hazardous materials shall be in accordance with Chapter 50 of the 2022 California Fire Code.

Environmental Conditions:

91. All new development and significant redevelopment shall comply with the requirements of the Fountain Valley Municipal Code 21.18.120, the provisions of Chapters 14.40 and 18.06 of this code, the City’s Local Implementation Plan (LIP) and NPDES Order No. R8-2009-0030 (NPDES No.

CAS 618030) to reduce and or eliminate the discharge of pollutants in urban and storm water runoff.

92. The Developer shall integrate Best Management Practices to ensure compliance with NPDES guidelines and the City’s Stormwater Management Ordinance, FVMC

21.18.120, prior to the issuance of the grading permit. The design, implementation, construction activities and maintenance of the management devices shall mitigate and reduce pollutants in storm water discharges to the maximum extent practicable.

93. An approved WQMP is required prior to the City issuing a grading or building permit. Each successor of the business or property is responsible for compliance with the WQMP.

94. The project’s demolition activities shall comply with the City’s Construction and Demolition Recycling Program (C&D Recycling Program). Complete the following steps in order to create your Construction Waste Management Plan (CWMP).

95. Complete and submit the Construction Waste Management Plan (CWMP) before any Building permits have been issued.

PP 576 & CUP 1925

96. Identify which authorized recycling/transfer hauling facility you will by using.

97. Save and submit to the City the weight ticket(s) indicating Construction & Demolition (C&D) and or Construction Demolition Public (CDP) and/or Diversion Report for review.

98. All projects will be signed off when all weight tickets demonstrate compliance and include the following information per the FVMC 6.09.

CITY OF FOUNTAIN VALLEY

CITY COUNCIL

COUNCIL ACTION REQUEST
TO: Honorable Mayor and Agenda Date: May 7, 2024
Members of the City Council
SUBJECT: Public Hearing: Appeal of the Planning Commission Decision to Approve Resolution No. 23-32, Denying Precise Plan 576 And Conditional Use Permit 1925 for a 3,850 Square Foot Restaurant With a Double DriveThrough Facility Located in The Village Center Shopping Center at the Northeast Corner of Magnolia Street and Talbert Avenue.

Three-Year Strategic Goals
☐ Enhance the culture and environment of “A Nice Place to Live” ☐ Achieve fiscal stability by evaluating processes, and attract and retain revenue producing businesses/opportunities
☐ Attract and retain quality staff through best practices and trends ☐ Maintain, build, and modernize infrastructure to support growth and future needs of the City
☒ Not applicable
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:

The Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on February 14, 2024 to review Precise Plan (PP) 576 and Conditional Use Permit (CUP) 1925 for a proposed McDonald’s restaurant with a double drive-through in the Village Center shopping center at the northeast corner of Magnolia Street and Talbert Avenue. Subsequent to public testimony, the Planning Commission voted 4 to 1 to deny PP 576 and 1925. Resolution No. 23-32 was brought before the Planning Commission on March 13, 2024, memorializing the Planning Commission’s actions. Design UA filed an appeal of the Planning Commission’s decision on March 20, 2024 (Attachment #1).

Proposal:

Petition submitted by Design UA to construct a new 3,850 square foot building with a double drive-through for a new McDonald’s restaurant located at the northeast corner of Magnolia Street and Talbert Avenue in the Village Center shopping center.

Code Requirement:

Per Fountain Valley Municipal Code (FVMC) Section 21.10.030 Table 2-6, a CUP is required for drive-in and drive-through sales in the C1 – Local Business Zone. Additional Attachment #2

City Council Action - Precise Plan 576 & Conditional Use Permit 1925 May 7, 2024

development standards for drive-through facilities are located in FVMC Section

21.30.030.

Additionally, per FVMC 21.44 a PP is required for any proposed structure in the City, except for those in the R1 zoning district. As the proposed Project is located in the C1 – Local Business Zone, a Precise Plan application was filed by the applicant.

Lastly, per FVMC 21.60, a decision rendered by the Planning Commission may be appealed to the City Council within 10 calendar days following the date the decisions was rendered by the Commission.

Discussion:

UA Designs has proposed to demolish two (2) commercial tenant spaces (Beach Cities Dog Day Care and Hwangs Martial Arts) and construct a new 3,850 square foot building with a double drive-through for a new McDonald’s restaurant at the southeast portion of the Village Center shopping center.

The Village Center shopping center was originally approved through PP 35 in 1964. Then in 2021, the Planning Commission approved the Sprouts Farmers Market (PP 563, CUP 1890, Variance 336, Development Review 21-01) that included minor façade improvements to the shopping center. On March 8, 2023, the Planning Commission approved a new Dutch Bros Coffee establishment with a double drive-through (PP 569 & CUP 1910) located on the west end of the shopping center adjacent to Magnolia Street.

The Dutch Bros. initially experienced extensive queuing lanes for the drive-through portion of the business that extended to the subject site and onto Talbert Avenue. That issue has since ceased and while the business continues to experience high demand, the drive through queue is contained within much smaller area.

The project has met all development standards outlined in the Development Code including site area, setbacks, floor area ratio, parking, building height, and landscaping as depicted on the plans in with the Planning Commission staff report dated February 14, 2024 (Attachment #2).

The Planning Commission initially reviewed the project on December 13, 2023.

Testimony was received from the public, primarily in opposition to the proposed project.

Below is a list of concerns raised by residents and the Planning Commission at the public hearing:
 Traffic
 Exiting onto Talbert Ave with the ability to make a left-hand turn – eastbound at the southeastern most driveway.
 School age kids patronizing the business.
 Food odors from the exhaust system
 Vehicle and speaker noise from the drive-through
 Vehicle exhaust from the drive-through lanes
Attachment #2

City Council Action - Precise Plan 576 & Conditional Use Permit 1925 May 7, 2024

 Crime & homelessness
 Delivery truck traffic & idling
 Hours of operation
 Lighting
 Directional signage
 Landscaping at the service alley
At the December 2023 Planning Commission meeting, the applicant requested a continuance in lieu of a vote on the item. The item was continued to allow the applicant to submit additional documents with exhibits addressing issues they feel were of concern to the residents and the Planning Commission that are summarized in Attachment #3 to the February 14, 2024 Staff Report (Attachment #2) included with this report.

The project was brought back to the Planning Commission on February 14, 2024. The plans were revised to reconfigure the front drive-aisle for one-way traffic and to reduce the hours of operation from 24 hours/day to 5:30 a.m. to 11:00 p.m. After listening to public testimony, the Commission voted 4 to 1 to deny PP 576 and CUP 1925. On March 13, 2024, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 23-32 memorializing the Planning Commission’s decision to deny PP 576 and CUP 1925.

APPEAL:

Design UA (Appellant/applicant) has filed an appeal of the Planning Commission’s denial of the project and has listed several major reasons for appeal. A synopsis of the Appellant’s comments is below and the full letter of appeal can be found in Attachment #1:

1. The denial was based on speculation on traffic impacts from a different project.

2. Alternate Planning Commissioner participation at hearing resulted in a continuance to later public hearing date.

3. That the project is consistent with the City’s applicable goals, policies, and standards.

4. Staff recommended approval as detailed in the February 14, 2024 Planning Commission staff report and concluded that no adverse impacts would occur which is reflective in the design of the project and supported by overwhelming substantial evidence as indicated in the odor mitigation memo, an updated traffic/queuing analysis, a photometric study, and a noise study that were submitted to support that no adverse impacts would occur.

The following is Staff’s response regarding the McDonald’s Appeal:

Attachment #2

City Council Action - Precise Plan 576 & Conditional Use Permit 1925 May 7, 2024

Response to #1:

The Appellant states that the Planning Commission’s denial was largely premised on unsupported speculation that the increased traffic from the recently opened Dutch Bros drive-through business would last indefinitely and the addition of another drive-through business in the shopping center would significantly impact traffic.

The Planning Commission first reviewed the proposed McDonald’s in December of 2023.

This was months prior to the opening of the Dutch Bros. At the December 13, 2023 meeting, as stated above, several issues were raised by residents and Planning Commissioners regarding the proposed project. The continuance, which was agreed to by the applicant, was provided in order to address the issues raised at the December 13, 2023 meetings.

Response to #2:

The Appellant contends that the participation of the Planning Commission Alternate during the first public hearing held on December 13, 2023, was a violation of the FVMC and may have jeopardized the Appellant’s right to a fair hearing.

The Fountain Valley Planning Commission is made up of five (5) appointed members and one (1) alternate appointed by the City Council that is authorized to serve and vote in place of a regular member of the Commission that is absent. The alternate member, Herman Jack Ajamian, was present at the December 13, 2023 meeting, spoke several times on the item, and expressed several concerns regarding the project.

While the alternate Commissioner is not permitted to vote on any item should there be full attendance from the five (5) appointed members at a public hearing, there is nothing in the FVMC that prohibits the alternate from commenting or participating on an agenda item. While the Appellant states that the Alternate is only authorized to “serve” if any regular member of the Commission is absent (all regular Commissioners were present for the meeting) it has been a long standing policy that the Alternate attend all meetings if their schedule permits and to participate in the discussion of the item. The duties of the alternate are as defined in the FVMC below:

FVMC § 2.76.080 Planning Commission — Created.

There shall be a city planning commission that shall consist of five regular members appointed by the city council in accordance with the provisions of this chapter. The city council may appoint one alternate member who shall attend all meetings of the commission and who is authorized to serve and vote in place of any regular member of the commission who is absent or who disqualifies him or herself from participating on any matter before the commission. The secretary to the planning commission shall be the planning/building director. The planning/building director, the city engineer and the city attorney or their assistants, may meet with and participate in the discussions of the planning commission, but shall not have a vote.

Attachment #2

City Council Action - Precise Plan 576 & Conditional Use Permit 1925 May 7, 2024

Additionally, as stated previously, several concerns regarding the project were made by the public and Planning Commissioners. There is no evidence to support the claim that the comments made by then Alternate Commissioner Ajamian improperly prejudiced or swayed the feelings of the regular Commissioners or were a factor in the continuance requested at the December 13, 2023 hearing. The then Commission Chair raised the possibility of a continuance and the applicant agreed to it. There is also no evidence that his comments at the December 13, 2023 hearing were the motivating factor behind the Planning Commission’s ultimate denial of the project on February 14, 2024.

Response to #3:

The third point of appeal brought by the Appellant is that the project is in fact consistent with all applicable City goals, policies, and standards as explained in the February 14, 2024 Planning Commission staff report, where staff recommended approval of the project.

Staff agrees that the project meets all of the applicable development standards for a commercial drive-through establishment. However, the Planning Commission did not agree with Staff’s proposed findings that the project met all of the City’s goals and policies.

Specifically, the Planning Commission determined that the project is not consistent with the General Plan Land Use Policy LU-1.1, which is:

Require that new development is located, scaled, buffered, and designed to minimize negative impacts on existing conforming uses and adjacent neighborhoods. Require that new residential developments are located, scaled, buffered, and designed so as to not hinder the economic viability and continuity of areas planned for nonresidential uses.

While the applicant has shown good faith in their efforts to offset any potential negative impacts to the adjacent neighborhoods, the Planning Commission determined that the proposed project did not meet the threshold set in LU-1.1.

Response to #4:
 Traffic & Queuing:

The Appellant states that the “Planning Commission’s findings cite zero evidence to support the conclusion that the project would increase traffic” and that there is “adequate queuing capacity, and design features ensure no adverse traffic impacts to Talbert Avenue and surrounding streets.”
According to the Appellant, the proposed 3,850 square foot McDonald’s would result in eight (8) fewer trips per day than if the existing 9,279 square foot tenant spaces were re-tenanted with other land uses. The Appellant has indicated in Attachment #2 to the February 14, 2024 Planning Commission staff report (Attachment #2 to this report) that they analyzed the trip generation for a 2,000 square foot fast food with a 7,279 square foot general grocery store would be 816 Attachment #2

City Council Action - Precise Plan 576 & Conditional Use Permit 1925 May 7, 2024

trips per day. The proposed McDonald’s is estimated to result in 808 trips per day.

However, the existing business were identified as underperforming and most likely did not reach the number of trips identified in the generalized trip analysis provided by the applicant. In addition, the McDonald’s would be located closer to the Talbert Avenue and any traffic would be more concentrated in that area with more potential to impact the street.

Regarding the queuing lane, the proposed McDonald’s provides room for ten vehicles to queue. However, the study dated September 15, 2023, provided by the applicant, determined an average queue length in the three comparison restaurants of eight vehicles (with the average range of 5 to 11 vehicles). Eight vehicles, as stated, is the average. The peak vehicles queues for the comparison restaurants were 11, 13 and 13 in the AM peak times and 12, 15, 10, respectively, in the PM peak. All except one of the peak comparison times would exceed the queue, encroach into the parking lot, and potentially impact access.  Noise:

According to the Appellant, “with the identified design modifications, the project simply will not generate noise that could impact nearby residents.” The project proposes a number of improvements to assist in reducing potential noise impacts including the ability to adjust the speakers to reduce the decibel levels generated and the inclusion of the six-foot block wall between the drive through lane and the residences. What was not included in the study, and is of concern to residents, is the noise generated by restaurant customers. This includes noise from customers talking in the parking lot, customers talking inside their cars while in the drive through and noise generated by customer radios while listening to music, etc. while in the drive through lane.
 Food Smells:

According to the Appellant, “the denial finding regarding ‘food smells; are completely unsupported. The restaurant would emit exhaust including from cooking; however, McDonald’s has proposed a state-of-the art filtering, venting and exhaust system to ensure odors are minimal. While the applicant has provided a number of measures to greatly reduce the risk of odors, the Planning Commission was concerned with the amount of odor that cannot be mitigated and that would negatively impact surrounding residents.

In their response, the Appellant refers to the memo provided regarding food smells as the “Odor Mitigation Memo” and also refers to existing restaurants in the shopping center. This may raise concerns regarding the proposed categorical exemption as part of the original resolution of approval for the project. (Section 15303 – New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures). If there are mitigation measures required for the proposed project and there are existing Attachment #2

City Council Action - Precise Plan 576 & Conditional Use Permit 1925 May 7, 2024

conditions, which may be exacerbated by the subject business, a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) may be required per CEQA.
 Lighting:

Additional site lighting was referenced as one of the potential items that could potentially cause adverse impacts to the adjacent properties. The applicant has provided a photometric plan showing zero light impact to the adjacent residential properties to the east. Additionally, staff originally provided a standard condition of approval that any additional lighting would require a new photometric study performed.
 Delivery Trucks:

The findings in the denial resolution indicated that there would be a potential for an increase in the number of delivery trucks associated with the business. The Appellant is refuting this finding and estimates McDonald’s to receive deliveries 2-3 times per week from 30-45 minutes. They claim this is less than the adjacent Sprouts grocery store and would not be impactful. While McDonald’s might not have a high frequency in terms of deliveries, they most likely will receive more deliveries than the previous uses (Beach Cities Dog Day Care and Hwangs Martial Arts) on a weekly basis. Deliveries and idling trucks have historically been an issue with this shopping center and specifically in this location with previous tenants at the Beach Cities Dog Day Care location.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:

The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires analysis of agency approvals of discretionary “projects”. A “project,” under CEQA, is defined as “the whole of an action, which has a potential for resulting in either a direct physical change in the environment, or a reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment.” The proposed project is considered a project under CEQA.

The proposed project has been reviewed in compliance with the provisions of the CEQA and the city’s environmental review procedures and can be determined categorically exempt pursuant to Class 3 (Section 15303 – New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures) of the CEQA Guidelines.

Class 3 consist of construction of new structures including not exceeding 10,000 square feet in floor area on sites zoned for such use if not involving the use of significant amounts of hazardous substances, where all necessary public services and facilities are available, and the surrounding area is not environmentally sensitive. The proposed building and use do not include a significant amount of hazardous substances, all public services and facilities are available to the site, and the surrounding area is not environmentally sensitive.

Attachment #2

City Council Action - Precise Plan 576 & Conditional Use Permit 1925 May 7, 2024

FINANCIAL ANALYSIS:

The applicant has paid the appeal fee of $2,655.00 as required by the City’s 2023-24 Fee Schedule.

ATTORNEY REVIEW:

The Attorney for the City has reviewed the attached Resolution.

PUBLIC NOTICE:

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

APPEAL OPTIONS:

The appeal hearing shall be considered a hearing de novo and the review authority may consider any issue(s) associated with the appeal, in addition to the specific grounds for the appeal.

The City Council should conduct a public hearing, consider all oral and written testimony received during the hearing and, following closure of the hearing and deliberations, take one of the following actions pursuant to FVMC Section 21.60.050(f):
(A) By resolution, affirm, affirm in part or reverse the action, the determination, or decision that is the subject of the appeal;
(B) Adopt additional conditions of approval deemed reasonable and necessary, and may even address issues or concerns that go beyond the subject of the appeal; or (C) Disapprove the land use entitlement approved by the previous review authority, even though the appellant only requested a modification or elimination of one or more conditions of approval.
(2) If new or different evidence is presented on appeal, the commission or council, may, but shall not be required to, refer the matter to the director or commission, as applicable, for further consideration.

Per FVMC Section 21.60.050(g), when reviewing an appeal, the review authority shall adopt findings in support of the intended action on the appeal. The nature of the findings shall be in compliance with the findings adopted by the original review authority (e.g., Conditional Use Permit—Chapter 21.36, Precise Plan of Design—Chapter 21.44, Variance—Chapter 21.50, etc.).

ALTERNATIVES:

Alternative No. 1: Conduct a public hearing; affirm the Planning Commission’s denial of Precise Plan 576 and Conditional Use Permit 1925, and direct staff to prepare a confirming resolution.

Attachment #2

City Council Action - Precise Plan 576 & Conditional Use Permit 1925 May 7, 2024

Alternative No. 2: Conduct a public hearing, overturn the Planning Commission’s denial of Precise Plan 576 and Conditional Use Permit 1924, and approve Precise Plan 576 and Conditional Use Permit 1925, and direct staff to prepare subject a confirming resolution.

Alternative No. 3: If new or different evidence is presented on appeal, the City Council may refer the matter back to the Planning Commission for further consideration.

Alternative No. 4: Continue the item for additional information.

RECOMMENDED ACTION:

Pleasure of the City Council.

Prepared by: Matt Jenkins, Senior Planner
Reviewed by: Omar Dadabhoy, Community Development Director Fiscal Review by: Ryan Smith, Finance Director
Approved by: Maggie Le, City Manager
Attachments: 1. Letter of Appeal dated March 20, 2024

2. February 14, 2024 Planning Commission Staff Report with Attachments
Attachment #2

www.coxcastle.com Los Angeles | Orange County | San Francisco Cox, Castle & Nicholson LLP
3121 Michelson Drive, Suite 200
Irvine, California 92612-5678
P: 949.260.4600 F: 949.260.4699
Sean Matsler
949.260.4652
[email protected]
March 20, 2024
VIA EMAIL [[email protected]]
Mayor Grandis and Members of the City Council
City of Fountain Valley
Fountain Valley City Hall
10200 Slater Avenue
Fountain Valley, CA 92708
Re: Appeal of Planning Commission’s Denial of McDonald’s (Precise Plan No. 576 & Conditional Use Permit No. 1925) Honorable Mayor Grandis Members of the City Council:

This Firm represents the McDonald’s Corporation (McDonald’s) in connection with its proposed 3,850 square foot drive-through restaurant in the Village Shopping Center (Precise Plan No. 576 & Conditional Use Permit No. 1925). The City’s Planning Commission denied the project on March 13, 2024, reversing Community Development staff’s thorough and wellsupported recommendation for approval. For the reasons outlined below, McDonald’s formally appeals the Planning Commission’s denial, which denial (1) ignored overwhelming evidence that the project is consistent with the City’s applicable goals, policies, and standards; (2) was overwhelmingly based on speculation about traffic impacts from a different project; and (3) lacked substantial evidence to support the findings for denial. The Planning Commission’s consideration of the project was also procedurally irregular, as the City Council’s designated alternate member actively participated in questioning and deliberations, a violation of the Fountain Valley Municipal Code ("FVMC”). (FVMC § 2.76.080.) McDonald’s respectfully requests that the City Council provide a fair, thoughtful review that considers the merits of the project and acknowledges the thorough staff work that went into its approval recommendation. (FVMC § 21.60.050.) Specifically, McDonald’s respectfully requests that the City Council accept the appeal and approve the project consistent with the staff’s February 14, 2024 approval recommendation, including the draft approval findings.

I. Summary of Appeal
McDonald’s request for project approval is based on the following:
a. First, the Planning Commission’s denial was largely premised on unsupported speculation that increased traffic associated with the recently-opened Dutch Bros coffee shop will continue in perpetuity. That finding is inconsistent with the Attachment #3

City Council
March 20, 2024

Planning Commission’s own previous finding regarding Dutch Bros operation. (Planning Commission March 8, 2023 Staff Report re Dutch Bros Coffee (Exhibit A) [concluding that the maximum queue length at Southern California Dutch Bros was twenty-two (22) vehicles and that the Fountain Valley location had more than adequate capacity to accommodate expected demand].)
That Dutch Bros is experiencing significant, short-term demand is reflective of the fact that it is the first location in Orange County and opened just five (5) days before the Planning Commission’s February 14, 2024 hearing on McDonald’s. It is hardly surprising that demand was initially high. However, that demand will dissipate, consistent with the previous findings of the Planning Commission regarding queuing and traffic at other Dutch Bros locations.

Moreover, because the findings for denial (Resolution No. 23-32) are based primarily on speculation about future traffic, the findings are themselves not supported by substantial evidence. (Topanga Ass’n for a Scenic Community v.

County of Los Angeles (1974) 11 Cal.3d 506, 515 [the record must contain substantial evidence to support findings and the findings must, in turn, support the decision and be sufficiently detailed to “bridge the analytical gap” between raw evidence and the final decision].) The fact that staff’s initial recommendation for approval was itself supported by overwhelming substantial evidence (as discussed below) makes the lack of substantial evidence supporting the Planning Commission’s denial even more striking. The applicant presented substantial evidence supporting approval, while the denial is based on speculation fundamentally inconsistent with prior Planning Commission action. b. Second, the active participation of then-Planning Commission alternate member Herman Jack Ajamian was a violation of the FVMC and improperly prejudiced our client. His participation was particularly concerning not just because it was prohibited by FVMC Section 2.76.080, but because his obvious hostility to the project contributed to it getting continued to February 14, 2023. If Mr. Ajamian had not actively, verbally lobbied against the project, the matter may have been decided in December 2023, months before Dutch Bros opened. A hearing in December 2023 before Dutch Bros opened could have conceivably been decided in line with staff’s recommendation, as is the Planning Commission’s typical practice. Thus, his improper participation was a factor in the delayed consideration of the project until after Dutch Bros opened, the exact condition cited by the Planning Commission as the overwhelming reason for its denial of McDonald’s.

A project proponent is entitled to a procedurally fair review in a quasi-judicial administrative action. (Petrovich Development Company, LLC v. City of Sacramento (2020) 48 Cal.App.5th 963, 972 [court review of a quasi-judicial administrative action extends to questions whether the agency proceeded without, or in excess of Attachment #3

City Council
March 20, 2024

jurisdiction, or whether there was a fair hearing/trial].) Here, Mr. Ajamain’s participation ensured that McDonald’s was not given a procedurally fair hearing. In fact, his active participation and the result – delaying consideration of the project until after Dutch Bros opened – is directly linked to the project’s denial. McDonald’s project was proposed for consideration by the City’s Planning Commission, a five (5) member body. However, because of Mr. Ajamain’s participation, the project was, in reality, considered by a body of six (6) members. This significant procedural impropriety raises a substantive question of bias. (Clark v. City of Hermosa Beach (1996) 48 Cal.App.4th 1152, 1172-1173.)
c. Third, the project is consistent with all applicable City goals, policies, and standards, as explained in the February 14, 2024 Planning Commission staff report, which recommended approval of the project. (February 14, 2024 Planning Commission Staff Report re McDonald’s at p. 4 [“The project will meet all development standards outlined in the Development Code including site area, setbacks, floor area ratio, parking, building height, and landscape…”].) The project’s drive-through is designed consistent with the FVMC and the supporting analysis found appropriate queuing capacity to ensure vehicles do not obstruct right-of-way traffic. With respect to expected traffic, the project is actually anticipated to generate eight (8) fewer two-way trips than commercial/retail tenants occupying the existing to-be-demolished/replaced units.
d. Fourth, the findings of the February 14, 2024 staff report recommending approval of the project are supported by overwhelming substantial evidence, including an odor mitigation memo, an updated traffic/queuing analysis, a photometric study, and a noise study. Moreover, the staff report’s conclusions that no adverse impacts would occur are reflective of the thoughtful design of the project, which was specifically revised to respond to resident concerns about queuing and hours of operation.

McDonald’s proactively revised the project to (1) reorient the drive-aisle to a oneway approach from the west side of the shopping center and (2) modify requested hours down from 24 hours/day to 5:30 AM to 11:00 PM.

II. McDonald’s Appeal
As summarized above, McDonald’s appeals the Planning Commission’s March 13, 2024 denial of the project on multiple bases, each of which is discussed in greater detail below. a. The Planning Commission’s Findings and Justification for Denial Are Not Supported by Substantial Evidence and Are Based on Speculation
The Planning Commission’s findings for denial of the project lack any supporting substantial evidence and are instead based on vague unsubstantiated conclusory statements and speculation. (Topanga Ass’n for a Scenic Community v. County of Los Angeles (1974) 11 Cal.3d 506, 515 [the record must contain substantial evidence to support findings]. Moreover, each of Attachment #3

City Council
March 20, 2024

the conclusory denial findings are directly contradicted by substantial evidence already in the record, as presented to the Planning Commission as part of staff’s initial recommendation for approval.

Rejecting staff’s recommendation and ignoring evidence supporting approval, the Planning Commission found that the project could not be approved because it would increase traffic, noise, food smells, lighting, and idling of delivery trucks. (Resolution No. 23-32 Section 3, Finding 3 [“increase in traffic, noise, food smells, building and site lighting and idling of delivery trucks not currently present with the martial arts school and dog day care facility”], Section 3, Finding 1a [“include additional traffic exiting onto Talbert Avenue, additional food smells emanating from the restaurant, exterior building and site lighting, and an increased frequency of idling delivery vehicles”].) However, as discussed below, the substantial evidence in the record actually supports contrary findings: that the project is consistent with all applicable goals, policies, and standards and that the project would not result in adverse impacts from traffic, noise, food smells, lighting and/or idling of delivery trucks.

1. Traffic and Queuing
The Planning Commission’s findings conclude that that the project would increase traffic and, therefore, result in impacts to adjacent properties. Because of the project’s traffic, the requisite findings could not be made. (Resolution No. 23-32, Section 2, Finding 1.a [adding another drive-through use to the shopping center “will only further increase customer traffic…”], Finding 1.b [the project “would further create additional traffic and pedestrian hazards…”], Finding 3.a [project would cause “an increase in customer traffic throughout the day.”].) The Planning Commission’s findings cite zero evidence to support the conclusion that the project would increase traffic. That lack of evidence is alone a violation, as findings must be supported by substantial evidence. Here, however, the Planning Commission’s lack of evidence is even more egregious given there is clear, convincing, and substantial evidence that the project would actually result in eight (8) fewer trips than retail/commercial establishments in the existing 9,279 square foot building. (Urban Crossroads Queuing Analysis and Traffic Memo, Attachment 2 to February 14, 2024 Planning Commission Staff Report [the proposed 3,850 square foot restaurant would generate eight fewer two-way trips per day as compared to commercial/retail tenants].) Thus, the conclusion that the project would increase traffic is simply unfounded.

There is also adequate queuing capacity, and design features ensure no adverse traffic impacts to Talbert Avenue or surrounding streets. The project’s queuing analysis shows that the drive-through lanes measure 173 and 189 feet, respectively, which exceeds the 150-foot minimum required by the FVMC. (Urban Crossroads Queuing Analysis and Traffic Memo, Attachment 2 to February 14, 2024 Planning Commission Staff Report; FVMC § 21.30.030(d).) All other components of the drive-through design meet or exceed applicable FVMC standards.

Also, as demonstrated by the Queuing Analysis and Traffic Memo, the project was designed to ensure appropriate queuing capacity to support expected vehicles during peak condition.

Attachment #3

City Council
March 20, 2024

(Planning Commission March 8, 2023 Staff Report re Dutch Bros Coffee at p. 60 [concluding that the maximum queue length at Southern California Dutch Bros was twenty-two (22) vehicles and that the Fountain Valley location had more than adequate capacity to accommodate expected demand].)
Even though substantial evidence demonstrates that the project would not have traffic or queuing issues, the Planning Commission nevertheless denied it based on its purported traffic impacts. The conditions cited as traffic impacts, however, are (1) not associated with the project and (2) not reflective of expected long-term conditions. The Planning Commission found, for instance, that shopping center traffic increased significantly in February 2024 with the opening of the double drive-through Dutch Bros. (Resolution No. 23-32, Section 2, Finding 1.a [“a new double drive-through facility for Dutch Bros Coffee opened adding a significant increase to customer traffic in the shopping center…”].) There is limited truth to that statement: Dutch Bros opening did increase traffic to the shopping center, but such traffic increase is only expected to be short-term, as reflected in the Planning Commission’s own findings approving the Magnolia Street/Talbert Avenue Dutch Bros (and the substantial evidence supporting those findings). (Planning Commission March 8, 2023 Staff Report re Dutch Bros Coffee at p. 59 [Dutch Bros trip generation was anticipated to generate 14 new trips during the AM peak hour, 6 new trips during the PM peak hour, and 86 new trips daily].) The Dutch Bros findings likewise concluded that queuing capacity was appropriate and the expected maximum queuing would be twenty-two (22) vehicles. (Id.)
The “honeymoon” patronage of Dutch Bros and associated vehicular trips is not reflective of long-term conditions, as recognized by the Planning Commission’s prior findings not only for the shopping center location but also Dutch Bros 9065 Warner Avenue project. (April 12, 2023 Planning Commission Staff Report re Dutch Bros Coffee CA5503 (Exhibit B) at p. 6 [Warner Avenue project anticipated to generate 14 new trips during the morning peak, six new trips during the evening peak, and 86 total daily trips].) Like the City’s findings regarding the shopping center Dutch Bros, the Warner Avenue location’s assumed traffic was based on real-life, long-term trip observations to reflect a realistic condition. (Id.) Therefore, the City has a clear record regarding traffic expectations for Dutch Bros, which are based on substantial evidence. To conclude otherwise now, based on anomaly conditions, and penalize another proposed use would be fundamentally inconsistent and inappropriate.

The short-term increase in traffic associated with Dutch Bros is reflective of the fact that it is the first location in Orange County. However, Dutch Bros is planning on opening multiple Orange County locations, including an additional location in Fountain Valley located approximately one mile from the Magnolia Street location.1 With those additional locations and the inevitable end to the initial “honeymoon” rush, traffic and queuing will certainly disperse and revert to expected levels, like those documented at established locations in Apple Valley, La Quinta, and Indio, the three locations used in the Dutch Bros traffic analyses prepared for the 1 See https://www.ocregister.com/2024/02/23/dutch-bros-reveals-la-habra-location-details/ [Dutch Bros planning to expand to La Habra, La Mirada, and the additional location in Fountain Valley].) Attachment #3

City Council
March 20, 2024

Fountain Valley locations. (Planning Commission March 8, 2023 Staff Report re Dutch Bros Coffee at p. 59, April 12, 2023 Planning Commission Staff Report re Dutch Bros Coffee CA5503 at p. 22.)
As such, the Planning Commission’s speculation that such conditions would continue was unsupported and contradicts its own prior findings. That alone is an inappropriate basis for denial of the project. However, as discussed above, the Planning Commission made an additional substantive error in attributing traffic impacts to the project notwithstanding substantial evidence to the contrary (e.g., that the project would not increase vehicular trips).

2. Noise
The Planning Commission’s findings assert that the project would result in a significant increase in noise that “has the potential” to disrupt residents. The notion that the project will both definitively cause a “significant” increase in noise that “has” the potential to disrupt residents is itself inconsistent. The conclusion that a project would generate “significant” noise should be made through reference to a specific standard, such as a general plan or municipal code noise threshold, rather than a vague concept of “potential” to create an impact.

Even putting that inconsistency aside, the Planning Commission’s finding is directly contradicted by evidence in the record, which shows that noise from the project at the nearest residential receptor is expected to be approximately 11 dBA. For reference, normal breathing is approximately 10 dBA and the 11 dBA expected from the project at the nearest residential receptor is less than the sound in a library and is one-fifth that of a household refrigerator. The minor noise generated by the proposed project is insignificant compared to noise from existing sources, including Talbert Avenue, and would not cause a noticeable increase in noise at such receptors. The Fountain Valley General Plan (“General Plan”) Noise Element, for instance, notes that the 65 CNEL noise contour from “existing” (1995) traffic on the Talbert Avenue segment between Magnolia Street and Bushard Street extended approximately 114 feet from the right-ofway, which includes the residential receptors nearest to the project site. (General Plan Noise Element, Table 7-5.) The City’s General Plan Draft EIR confirms the noise contours from traffic on Talbert Avenue at the nearest receptors exceed 65 dBA. (General Plan Draft EIR, Figure 5.9-

2.) Thus, existing noise from Talbert Avenue at these residences far exceeds the project’s expected noise and an approximately 11 dBA increase in noise would be almost imperceptible.

The low level of noise emanating from the project is directly related to the significant project features incorporated by McDonald’s to ensure no adverse noise impacts would result, and is reflective of McDonald’s conscientious design. First, although an existing six-foot CMU wall separates the shopping center from adjacent residences, the project proposes to construct an additional wall along the drive-through as a noise barrier. The wall will total 74 feet long and will be constructed in staggered heights to maximize noise attenuation from project operations.2 2 Further showing the inappropriateness of the Planning Commission’s findings, the findings conclude that the proposed project would interfere with nearby residences because the “development is 45 feet from the rear property Attachment #3

City Council
March 20, 2024

Second, hearing concerns from area residents, McDonald’s agreed to modify the requested hours down from 24 hours/day to 5:30 AM to 11:00 PM.

With the identified design modifications, the project simply will not generate noise that could impact nearby residences. The Planning Commission’s denial findings reach the alternative conclusion, although not based on any evidence whatsoever.

3. Food Smells
The Planning Commission’s findings conclude that “food smells” – as a generic term – create potential inconsistencies with applicable goals, policies, and standards, and existing surrounding uses. (Resolution No. 23-32, Section 2, Finding 3.a [food smells emanating from the proposed restaurant use would be “detrimental” to the single-family homes to the east].) Again, the denial findings regarding “food smells” are completely unsupported. The restaurant would emit exhaust, including from cooking, however, McDonald’s proposed a stateof-the art filtering, venting, and exhaust system to ensure odors would be minimal. The Odor Mitigation Memo provided by the applicant explains the details of the system and supports its effectiveness:
i. Upblast Exhaust Fans: McDonald’s uses a custom exhaust fan which channels exhaust vertically to elevate exhaust particles high into the atmosphere. ii. Cascade High Efficiency Filters: These high-efficiency filters are tested to be approximately 270% more effective at extract particles from the exhaust than standard filters.
iii. UV-C System: The exhaust system uses a UV-C light to combine with ozone to react with grease/fats to produce carbon dioxide, water vapor, and polymerized grease (dust). The UV-C system is estimated to provide an approximately 90% odor reduction compared to a standard system without a UV-C light.

Condition No. 31, as proposed in the draft findings for approval, would ensure the odor elimination system is installed and functions to eliminate odors. It requires installation of the system and certification from an odor control mechanical engineer. To further ensure no external odor issues, the Community Development Director may require additional odor attenuation measures if there are substantiated odor complaints from residents or businesses. line and backyards of two (2) single-family homes and separated by a 6-foot wall.” (Resolution No. 23-32, Section 2, Finding 1.b [emphasis added].) That finding is not reflective of the proposed project, which includes the construction of a second CMU wall between the project and those residences. The Planning Commission simply ignored that project feature when denying the project, calling into question the “project” the Planning Commission was considering when making the denial findings.

Attachment #3

City Council
March 20, 2024

Also, it should be noted that the shopping center itself has multiple restaurants, including Subway, Bon Tofu & Grill, Ameci Pizza & Pasta, Union Jack Fish & Chips, and Mai Thai Restaurant. All of the restaurants are adjacent to residential uses and the latter restaurant, Mai Thai Restaurant, is located within 225 feet of the residents closest to the proposed McDonald’s.

Thus, the existing shopping center has multiple restaurants, each of which emit “food smells” common to restaurants (likely with a less sophisticated odor elimination system). The McDonald’s project would add a restaurant to the shopping center, but it would include installation of a state-of-the art filtration system that would ensure elimination of odors to the maximum extent possible.

City staff’s original recommendation to approve the project reflected all of the facts above, which constitute substantial evidence that no odor impact would occur. When denying the project, the Planning Commission ignored the substantial evidence present in the record and, instead, denied the project on vague, unfounded notions of odor impacts. For that reason, the denial findings are not supported by any substantial evidence and are not sufficiently detailed to “bridge the analytical gap” between raw evidence and the final decision. (Topanga Ass’n for a Scenic Community, supra, 11 Cal.3d at 515.)

4. Lighting
The Planning Commission’s findings conclude, without any evidence, that “site lighting” associated with the project would create inconsistencies with residential uses. It is true that the project would include outdoor lighting, but the notion that it would impact residents is completely incorrect.

First, there is existing site lighting at the project site, associated with the current commercial building and Resolution No. 23-32’s assertion to the contrary is incorrect. (Resolution No. 23-32, Section 3, Finding 2 [the project would “bring … building and site lighting … not currently present with the martial arts school and dog day care facility”] [emphasis added].) That lighting is oriented toward the alley between the existing building and adjacent residences. There is actually exterior lighting all along the eastern edge of the shopping center buildings, illuminating the back alley for deliveries and other access. The implication that the project would introduce otherwise non-existent lighting and would result in a land use conflict is, therefore, fundamentally wrong.

Second, as to McDonald’s, a photometric study demonstrates that light spill will not impact residences. The photometric study is included as Exhibit 4 to Attachment 2 to the February 14, 2024 staff report. In fact, with the proposed CMU wall, light levels at the edge of the development footprint (not extending into the existing alley) would be a maximum of 1.6 lumens. That light level drops to 0.0 lumens at the adjacent residences. Condition No. 19, as proposed by staff in its recommended approval resolution, requires a new photometric study prior to certificate of occupancy to verify consistency with approved plans. (February 14, 2024 Planning Commission Staff Report at p. 185.) It also provides that no additional external lighting Attachment #3

City Council
March 20, 2024

may be added unless a photometric study concludes the added lighting will have zero light spill impacts on adjacent properties.

Thus, the project, as designed, would ensure that no light spillage impacts would occur at residences. The Planning Commission’s vague, generalized conclusions otherwise are entirely unsupported.

5. Delivery Trucks
The findings for denial conclude that delivery trucks and delivery truck idling associated with the project are inconsistent with surrounding uses. That conclusion ignores the fact that the project is proposed at an existing shopping center that includes an existing grocery store.

McDonald’s is estimated to require deliveries 2-3 times per week, with truck onsite for only 30- 45 minutes. (February 14, 2024 Planning Commission Staff Report at p. 60.) The existing grocery store (Sprouts) generates a much greater volume of delivery trucks. McDonald’s has committed to coordinate delivery schedules with Sprouts to ensure alley traffic is effectively managed.

City staff’s recommended conditions of approval included Condition No. 46, which prohibited heavy-duty delivery trucks from idling their engine for more than five (5) minutes near the rear and side of the building. (February 14, 2024 Planning Commission Staff Report at p. 188.) To ensure that condition is implemented, Condition No. 47 works in tandem and permits the Community Development Director to prohibit deliveries until such time that measures can be implemented to ensure the five (5) minute maximum is achieved. (Id.) The denial finding’s premise that idling delivery trucks would impact adjacent residences is directly contradicted by the substantial evidence in the record (and identified above). Because of the expected frequency of delivery trucks (2-3 times a week) and the maximum idling time (five minutes), truck idling would occur for approximately 15 minutes each week. That is far less than delivery trucks associated with other existing uses and constitutes an immaterial increase in truck deliveries/idling from existing conditions. The Planning Commission’s findings for denial are simply unsupported and lack any basis in substantial evidence. b. Planning Commission Alternate Member Herman Jack Ajamian’s Participation Resulted in an Unfair Hearing
Pursuant to the FVMC, a project proponent is entitled to a fair hearing before a fivemember Planning Commission. (FVMC Section 2.76.080.) McDonald’s was not afforded that right. Instead, because of the active participation of then-Planning Commission alternate member Herman Jack Ajamian, McDonald’s Planning Commission panel was comprised of six (6) members. His participation was particularly concerning not just because it was expressly prohibited by FVMC Section 2.76.080, but because his obvious hostility to the project contributed to it getting continued to February 14, 2023.

Attachment #3

City Council
March 20, 2024

FVMC Section 2.76.080 states that the Planning Commission:
“…shall consist of five regular members appointed by the city council in accordance with the provisions of this chapter. The city council may appoint one alternate member who shall attend all meeting of the commission and who is authorized to serve and vote in place of any regular member of the commission who is absent or who disqualifies him or herself from participating on any matter before the commission.”
Section 2.76.080 is plain and unambiguous – an alternate member may only “serve” as a Planning Commissioner if one of the regular commissioners is absent or disqualified. The term “serve” clearly means not just voting, but actively participating in discussions as would a regular member of the Planning Commission. (FVMC § 2.76.080 [an alternate is authorized “to serve and vote in place of any regular member”] [emphasis added].) Therefore, Mr. Ajamian’s participation was a violation of the FVMC, made even more glaring given his vocal lobbying against the project. Without any direction to stop or cease his comments from the City Attorney, Mr. Ajamian offered the following questions and opinions regarding the project:
 “…how does this co-existing with the Dutch Bros, the Chevron, the ATM … the Bank of America ATM?”
 “…my biggest concern, as I stated earlier, is umm the coexistence of the Dutch Bros and McDonald’s.”
 He said without any evidence that “Dutch Bros is “geared somewhat towards kids, you know high-school students … McDonald’s is somewhat as well and I just think that the amount of vehicular traffic going in out of the center … I have a concern about what could potentially happen….”
His final comment summarized his opinion succinctly – “I am not 100% on-board with McDonald’s here….” However, though he is entitled to his opinion, he was not entitled to voice it on December 13, 2023, as he was not serving as a Planning Commissioner under the clear direction of FVMC Section 2.76.080. That alone calls into question the fairness of the hearing provided to McDonald’s.

The improper effect of his participation is even more evident considering that Mr.

Ajamian’s comments contributed to the continuance of the project until February 14, 2024. Thus, his improper participation was a factor in the delayed consideration of the project until after Dutch Bros opened, the exact condition cited by the Planning Commission as the overwhelming reason for its denial of McDonald’s. To that end, Mr. Ajamian’s inappropriate participation contributed directly to the project’s denial. (Petrovich Development Company, LLC, supra, 48 Attachment #3

City Council
March 20, 2024

Cal.App.5th at 972 [a project proponent is entitled to a procedurally fair review in a quasijudicial administrative action].) Mr. Ajamain’s participation ensured that McDonald’s was not given a procedurally fair hearing. This significant procedural impropriety raises a substantive question of bias against the project. (Clark, supra, 48 Cal.App.4th at 1172-1173.)
Like any applicant for a discretionary approval, McDonald’s requests a procedurally and substantively fair where all relevant evidence is considered. If provided that, McDonald’s is confident the City Council will find that overwhelming substantial, factual evidence supports the approval of the project, consistent with staff’s initial recommendation. McDonald’s prides itself on being a good neighborhood partner, and this location is no exception. It was selected not just because it is an excellent location to establish a fast-food restaurant, but because it accommodates a design that is sensitive to surrounding uses. The multiple technical studies provided by McDonald’s, as included in the February 14, 2024 staff report and referenced in staff’s recommendation and findings, demonstrate how substantial evidence shows that this project will (1) meet all applicable goals, policies, and standards, and (2) ensure no adverse impacts to adjacent uses.

I appreciate your time and attention to this matter. I respectfully request that you grant McDonald’s appeal and approve the project consistent with City staff’s February 14, 2024 recommendation.

Sincerely,
Sean Matsler
of COX, CASTLE & NICHOLSON LLP
Attachment #3

CITY OF FOUNTAIN VALLEY

CITY COUNCIL

COUNCIL ACTION REQUEST
To: Honorable Mayor and Agenda Date: May 21, 2024
Members of the City Council
SUBJECT: Accept the Parcel Map No. 2021-137 for the Property Located at 9945 Warner Avenue Three-Year Strategic Goals
☒ Enhance the culture and environment of “A Nice Place to Live” ☒ Achieve fiscal stability by evaluating processes, and attract and retain revenue producing businesses/opportunities
☐ Attract and retain quality staff through best practices and trends ☐ Maintain, build, and modernize infrastructure to support growth and future needs of the City
☐ Not applicable
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:

Staff recommends that the City Council accept Parcel Map. No. 2021-137 for the property located at 9945 Warner Avenue to allow the property owner to separate the Taco Bell and Hot Off the Grill to be on their own lot.

The City’s Planning and Public Works Departments and the County Surveyor’s office have reviewed and approved Tentative Parcel Map No. 2021-137 for technical accuracy and compliance with the Subdivision Map Act. Parcel Map No. 2021-137 splits one (1) parcel into two (2) parcels, and the property for this parcel is located at 9945 Warner Avenue. In July 2021, the Subdivision Review Committee approved the proposed tentative parcel map in being consistent with the City’s General Plan for developing commercial properties. After City Council acceptance of the parcel map, the map will be forwarded to the County for recordation.

DISCUSSION:

Patrick D. Earl of KDM Meridian submitted Parcel Map No. 2021-137 to split one (1) parcel into two (2) parcels on behalf of Bryan Mimaki, Manager of Mimaki Management, LLC, property owner/applicant of the property located at 9945 Warner Avenue. The parcel map being presented for City Council consideration of acceptance meets the requirements of the tentative parcel map and is in conformance with the Subdivision Map Act. The parcel map that is being submitted for City Council acceptance is a Subdivision of Parcel 2 of Parcel Map recorded in Book 87, Pages 1 and 2 of Parcel Maps, in the Office of the County Recorder of Orange County, California. The parcel map dedicates two (2) parcels for commercial purposes (i.e. Taco Bell and Hot Off the Grill), as follows: Parcel 1 (19,816 sq. ft.) and Parcel 2 (28,291 sq. ft.). This map is consistent with the City’s General Plan and development standards for commercial properties in this area.

Parcel Map No. 2021-137 for the Property Located at 9945 Warner Avenue May 21, 2024

All required City fees for the tentative parcel map were paid. After the City Council acceptance of the parcel map, staff will forward the map to the County Clerk-Recorder’s office for recordation.

FISCAL REVIEW:

Required in the conditions of approval and acceptance of Parcel Map No. 2021-137, the owners/applicants have paid the following fee:

Final Subdivision Map Checking: $1,540
PUBLIC NOTIFICATION:

Not applicable.

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REVIEW:

Parcel Map 2021-137 is categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act per Section 15315 Minor Land Division.

ATTORNEY REVIEW:

This does not require review by the Attorney for the City.

ALTERNATIVES:

Alternative No. 1: The City Council accept Parcel Map No. 2021-137 for the property located at 9945 Warner Avenue. This is the recommended alternative as this will allow for the parcel map to dedicate two (2) parcels for commercial purposes, as follows: Parcel 1 (19,816 sq. ft.) and Parcel 2 (28,291 sq. ft.).

Alternative No. 2: The City Council does not accept Parcel Map No. 2021-137 for the property located at 9945 Warner Avenue. This is not the recommended alternative as this will not allow for the parcel map to dedicate two (2) parcels for commercial purposes, as follows: Parcel 1 (19,816 sq. ft.) and Parcel 2 (28,291 sq. ft.).

RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommends the City Council approve the Alternative No. 1 to accept Parcel Map No. 2021-137 for the property located at 9945 Warner Avenue.

Prepared by: Jessenia Penaloza, Assistant Engineer
Recommended by: Kyle Knoke, Associate Engineer
Reviewed by: Temo Galvez, P.E., Deputy Public Works Director / City Engineer Approved by: Scott Smith, Director of Public Works
Fiscal review by: Ryan Smith, Finance Director
Approved by: Maggie Le, City Manager

Attachment 1: Parcel Map No. 2021-137

CITY OF FOUNTAIN VALLEY

CITY COUNCIL

COUNCIL ACTION REQUEST
To: Honorable Mayor and Agenda Date: May 21, 2024
Members of the City Council
SUBJECT: City Public Notification Policy Update
Three-Year Strategic Goals
☐ Enhance the culture and environment of “A Nice Place to Live” ☐ Achieve fiscal stability by evaluating processes, and attract and retain revenue producing businesses/opportunities
☐ Attract and retain quality staff through best practices and trends ☐ Maintain, build, and modernize infrastructure to support growth and future needs of the City
☒ Not applicable
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:

At their regularly scheduled meeting on November 21, 2023, the City Council directed Staff to review the City’s existing Enhanced Notification Policy and provide options for additional methods that could be used to reach a greater number of residents. In order to provide a comprehensive and outside perspective, the City hired Tripepi Smith, a consulting firm specializing in outreach and communications.

On February 20, 2024, Tripepi Smith presented the City Council with various options for enhanced notifications as part of a Study Session. At the conclusion of the item, the City Council directed Staff to prepare an amendment to the City’s Enhanced Notification Policy that would double the size of the noticing radius from 500 to 1,000 feet and incorporate all other items that would not result in the use of additional resources/funding.

Background:

The City of Fountain Valley has adopted a City Council Policy regarding Public Notification.

State law provides various minimum levels of notice that must be provided to the public prior to holding a hearing on a private development project or planning and zoning matter. The City of Fountain Valley has historically provided notice that exceeds the minimum amounts required by State law. This Policy details the City’s standards for providing enhanced notice of such projects and matters.

Council Action Request
Public Notification Policy
City Council Meeting May 22, 2024

At their regularly scheduled meeting on November 21, 2023, the City Council directed Staff to review the City’s existing Enhanced Notification Policy and provide options for additional methods that could be used to reach a greater number of residents. On February 20, 2024, Tripepi Smith presented the City Council with various options for enhanced notifications as part of a Study Session. The attached update to the Public Notification Policy would incorporate the changes directed by the City Council.

DISCUSSION:

The City Council instructed staff to revise the Public Notification Policy, introducing several adjustments outlined as follows:
 State law requires notices for public hearings to be mailed to property owners within 300 feet of the subject property. Currently, the City includes residents in addition to property owners and expands the 300 feet to 500 feet. The amendment would double the size of the current 500-foot radius to 1,000 feet. Expanding the radius to 1,000 feet effectively quadruples the area covered by the notification.  Several low/no cost items were also selected, including notifications to be placed in the following:
o On City social media sites, including Nextdoor, Twitter and Instagram. o In the City Manager’s and/or Mayor’s update messages, if applicable. o Summary of notices to be placed in City Council meeting agendas The updated Public Notification Policy has incorporated the changes above and is included as Attachment #1.

FINANCIAL REVIEW:

The increase in the radius map notifications will quadruple the cost of notifications. Currently, the City pays the cost of mailing out notifications; however, in the newly adopted fee study, the applicant will be responsible for paying postage.

PUBLIC NOTIFICATION:

The item was posted as part of the normal agenda posting process.

Council Action Request
Public Notification Policy
City Council Meeting May 22, 2024

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REVIEW:

No further environmental review is necessary for the proposed ordinance pursuant to Section 15061 (b) (3) (Common Sense Exemption) of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations (State CEQA Guidelines) and the adoption of the Resolution is not a “project” under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) because the adoption of Inclusionary Housing InLieu Fees consists of the creation of a governmental funding mechanism that does not involve any commitment to any specific project (CEQA Guidelines section 15378(b)(4)); and the Resolution commits no fees to any specific project.

ATTORNEY REVIEW:

The Attorneys for the City reviewed this staff report.

ALTERNATIVES:

Alternative No. 1: Adopt the attached updated Public Notification Policy.

Alternative No. 2: Do not adopt the attached updated Public Notification Policy and provide further direction to Staff.

RECOMMENDATION:

Per the pleasure of the City Council
Prepared by: Omar Dadabhoy, Deputy City Manager/Community Development Director
Approved by: Maggie Le, City Manager
Attachments:

1. Draft update to the Public Notification Policy with Strikeouts and Underlines

2. Community Development Notification Policy Report dated January 30, 2024

CITY OF FOUNTAIN VALLEY

CITY COUNCIL POLICY

PUBLIC NOTIFICATION

POLICY STATEMENT
State law provides various minimum levels of notice that must be provided to the public prior to holding a hearing on a private development project or planning and zoning matter.

The City of Fountain Valley has historically provided notice that exceeds the minimum amounts required by State law. This Policy details the City’s standards for providing enhanced notice of such projects and matters.

REQUIRED NOTICE
Notwithstanding anything in this Policy to the contrary, the minimum amount of notice shall be that which is required by State law. Anything above the minimum notice required by State law is referred to herein as “enhancing noticing.” The enhanced noticing provisions of this Policy are directive, not mandatory. The failure to provide the enhanced notice discussed in this Policy shall not void or invalidate any City action, discussion, or decision.

ENHANCEMENTS TO STATE LAW NOTICING REQUIREMENTS
Whenever a public hearing is required to be noticed in accordance with Government Code Section 65091, the following shall apply:

1. When notice is to be mailed or delivered pursuant to 65091(a)(3), the 300-foot noticing distance shall be increased to 500 1000 feet. The 500 1000-foot noticing distance provided for by this Policy shall be measured from the exterior property lines of the real property that is the subject of the hearing. a. Notification boundaries shall include lots on both sides of interior residential streets.
b. All developed property not identified on the latest equalized assessor’s tax role but for which Certificate of Occupancies have been issued by the City should be notified and addressed as “Occupant.”

2. For a project that is located on real property that fronts an arterial street, the 500 1000-foot radius shall not include the width of the arterial street and shall begin on the opposite side of the street.

3. For a project that is located adjacent to freeway right-of-way, the 5001000-foot radius shall not include the width of the freeway right-of-way and shall begin on the opposite side of the freeway right-of-way.

4. For a project that is located on property next to a mobile home park, notification via delivery or mail shall be provided to the occupants of each mobile home space that is located within the 5001000 ft. radius in addition to the owner of the mobile home park.

5. For a project that is adjacent to a homeowners’ association, for which the names and addresses of officers of the homeowners’ association are on file with the City, all officers of said homeowners’ association shall be notified.

6. For a project that has regional significance, the Community Development Director shall provide notice to a significantly larger area as determined in his or her discretion.

7. For a project that is located within or adjacent to commercial or industrial centers, notice shall be provided to the property owner of the commercial or industrial center as well as to all commercial/industrial tenants located within the 5001000- foot radius.

ENHANCED NOTICE OF ALL DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS
For any development project (public or private), notice of the project shall be provided, along with a brief description of the project shall be provided as below:
 , iIn the electronic Fountain Valley Newsletter, at least 10 calendar days prior to the City Council or Planning Commission meeting at which the project will be discussed or acted upon.
 On City social media sites, including Nextdoor, Twitter and Instagram.  In City Manager’s or Mayor’s update messages if applicable.  Summary of notices to be placed in City Council meeting agendas

ENHANCED NOTICE OF LARGER DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS
For any development project (public or private) that is proposed to be 5 stories or more, or 60 feet in height or above (as measured from the ground adjacent to the project) (see FVMC 21.18.050), notice of any discussion or action before the City Council or Planning Commission shall be provided (as used herein, notice is considered provided on the day it is placed for pickup in the US Mail) at least 10 calendar days prior to the public meeting at which the project will be discussed or acted upon, as follows:

1. By advertisement on the Public Cable Television Authority; and

2. By posting the item on the City’s website; and

3. By postcard to all residential properties in the City.

Adopted/Effective: This policy shall supersede the City Council’s Policy on Public Notification adopted on March 21, 1989, including any amendments thereto.

City of Fountain Valley
Community Development Notification
Policy Report
Submitted January 30, 2024, by:

Jon Barilone, Principal
Kylie Sun, Business Analyst
Meara Hain, Junior Business Analyst

Table of Contents
Executive Summary.......................................................................................................... 3 State of California Legal Requirements for Noticing ....................................................... 3 Existing City Notification Policy - June 2022 ................................................................... 4 Notification Policy Comparison Research........................................................................ 6 Additional Ideas to Consider........................................................................................... 9

Executive Summary
The City of Fountain Valley Community Development Department provides services designed to protect the public’s health, safety, and welfare. Comprised of current and advanced planning, building and safety services, code enforcement, and housing, the department focuses on the future as well as the present in its mission to ensure orderly development throughout the city.

The Community Development Department has partnered with Tripepi Smith to conduct research on the State’s legal requirements for public noticing, evaluate the City of Fountain Valley’s public notification policy, and compare it to surrounding comparable cities. This report outlines our findings and provides recommendations to enhance the City’s current notification process.

State of California Legal Requirements for Noticing
The State of California requires minimum levels of notice that must be provided to the public prior to holding a hearing on a private development project or planning and zoning matter.

This report highlights key requirements of the State law according to California Legislature (1984) CHAPTER 2.7. Public Hearings 65090 – 65096.

Color key:
• Red text outlines how notice shall be delivered.
• Orange text outlines when notice shall be delivered.
• Green text outlines to whom notice shall be delivered. 65090.
(a) When a provision of this title requires notice of a public hearing to be given pursuant to this section, notice shall be published pursuant to Section 6061 in at least one newspaper of general circulation within the jurisdiction of the local agency which is conducting the proceeding at least 10 days prior to the hearing, or if there is no such newspaper of general circulation, the notice shall be posted at least 10 days prior to the hearing in at least three public places within the jurisdiction of the local agency. 65091.
(a) When a provision of this title requires notice of a public hearing to be given pursuant to this section, notice shall be given in all of the following ways:
(1) Notice of the hearing shall be mailed or delivered at least 10 days prior to the hearing to the owner of the subject real property as shown on the latest equalized assessment roll.
(3) Notice of the hearing shall be mailed or delivered at least 10 days prior to the hearing to each local agency expected to provide water, sewage, streets, roads,

schools, or other essential facilities or services to the project, whose ability to provide those facilities and services may be significantly affected. (4) Notice of the hearing shall be mailed or delivered at least 10 days prior to the hearing to all owners of real property as shown on the latest equalized assessment roll within 300 feet of the real property that is the subject of the hearing. If the number of owners to whom notice would be mailed or delivered pursuant to this paragraph or paragraph (1) is greater than 1,000, a local agency, in lieu of mailed or delivered notice, may provide notice by placing a display advertisement of at least one-eighth page in at least one newspaper of general circulation within the local agency in which the proceeding is conducted at least 10 days prior to the hearing. (5) If the notice is mailed or delivered pursuant to paragraph (4), the notice shall also either be:
(A) Published pursuant to Section 6061 in at least one newspaper of general circulation within the local agency which is conducting the proceeding at least 10 days prior to the hearing.
(B) Posted at least 10 days prior to the hearing in at least three public places within the boundaries of the local agency, including one public place in the area directly affected by the proceeding.
65092.
(a) When a provision of this title requires notice of a public hearing to be given pursuant to Section 65090 or 65091, the notice shall also be mailed or delivered at least 10 days prior to the hearing to any person who has filed a written request for notice with either the clerk of the governing body or with any other person designated by the governing body to receive these requests.

Existing City Notification Policy - June 2022
The City of Fountain Valley has historically provided notice that exceeds the minimum amounts required by State law. The City’s policy (last updated June 2022) outlines the City’s standards for providing “enhanced” notice or notice that exceeds State requirements.

The City’s enhancements to State law noticing requirements are laid out as follows. Significant enhancements are bolded for emphasis.

Whenever a public hearing is required to be noticed in accordance with Government Code Section 65091, the following shall apply:

1. When notice is to be mailed or delivered pursuant to 65091 (a)(3), the 300-foot noticing distance shall be increased to 500 feet. The 500-foot noticing distance provided for by this Policy shall be measured from the exterior property lines of the real property that is the subject of the hearing.

a. Notification boundaries shall include lots on both sides of interior residential streets.
b. All developed property not identified on the latest equalized assessor’s tax role but for which Certificate of Occupancies have been issued by the City should be notified and addressed as “Occupant.”

2. For a project that is located on real property that fronts an arterial street, the 500-foot radius shall not include the width of the arterial street and shall begin on the opposite side of the street.

3. For a project that is located adjacent to freeway right-of-way, the 500-foot radius shall not include the width of the freeway right-of-way and shall begin on the opposite side of the freeway right-of-way.

4. For a project that is located on property next to a mobile home park, notification via delivery or mail shall be provided to the occupants of each mobile home space that is located within the 500 ft. radius in addition to the owner of the mobile home park.

5. For a project that is adjacent to a homeowners’ association, for which the names and addresses of the officers of the homeowners’ association are on file with the City, all officers of said homeowners’ association shall be notified.

6. For a project that has regional significance, the Community Development Director shall provide notice to a significantly larger area as determined in his or her discretion.

7. For a project that is located within or adjacent to commercial or industrial centers, notice shall be provided to the property owner of the commercial or industrial center as well as to the commercial industrial tenants located within the 500-foot radius.

For any development project (public or private), notice of the project shall be provided, along with a brief description of the project, in the electronic Fountain Valley Newsletter, at least 10 calendar days prior to the City Council of Planning Commission meeting at which the project will be discussed or acted upon.

For any development project (private or public) that is proposed to be 5 stories or above, or 60 feet in height or above (as measured from the ground adjacent to the project), notice of any discussion or action before the City Council or Planning Commission shall be provided at least 10 calendar days prior to the public meeting at which the project will be discussed or acted upon, as follows:

1. By advertisement on the Public Cable Television Authority; and

2. By email to all persons on the City’s list of recipients of the electronic Fountain Valley Newsletter.

Notification Policy Comparison Research
While the City of Fountain Valley exceeds the public noticing requirements as outlined by the State of California, the city can benefit from reviewing the notification practices of surrounding cities and cities of similar populations. This report outlines the notification policies of 10 comparable cities, organized by population size.

City & Key Information Radius Notification Enhancements

1. City of Seal Beach
Population: 25,046
Area: 11.29 sq mi
Reason for comparing: Similar in
land area.

Information source:

11.5.10.025 Public
Notification. Section A.
500 ft. One page in the newspaper is needed for
more significant developments in Seal
Beach.

2. City of Cypress
Population: 49,955
Area: 6.58 sq mi
Reason for comparing: Similar
population, similar in land area.

Information source:

Notice of Hearing
500 ft. The City of Cypress provides notifications
via its local newspaper.

3. City of Placentia
Population: 51,951
Area: 6.62 sq mi
Reason for comparing: Similar in
population,
Information Source:

Development Plan Review
300 ft. -
500 ft.

The City of Placentia does not provide
any notification enhancements.

4. City of Tustin 300 ft. -
500 ft.

The City of Tustin does not provide any
notification enhancements.

Population: 79,514
Area: 11.08 sq mi
Reason for comparing: Close in
proximity, similar in land area.

Information Source: Instructions for
Filling a Development Action Section
B. Submittal Requirement Checklist
and Description

5. City of Newport Beach
Population: 85,159
Area: 23.80 sq mi
Reason for comparing: Close in
proximity.

Information source:

Public Hearing Requirements
Attachment B
300 ft. The City of Newport Beach does not
provide any notification enhancements.

6. City of Westminster
Population: 90,638
Area: 10.05 sq mi
Reason for comparing: Close in
proximity, similar in land area.

Information source:

Land Use and Development
Application Packet, page 5 (section
17-21)
300 ft. -
500 ft.

The City of Westminster does not provide
any notification enhancements.

7. City of Costa Mesa
Population: 111,490
Area: 15.65 sq mi
Reason for comparing: Close in
proximity.
700 ft.,
900 ft. or
1,100 ft
The City of Costa Mesa provides an onsite posting in the form of a flyer.

Newspaper publication is also required
for more significant development
projects.

Developments 150-225 feet in height
require a 700-foot notification radius;

Information source:

Code of Ordinance: Chapter III
Planning Applications, Section 13-29
d.
developments 225-300 feet in height
require a 900-foot notification radius;
developments more than 300 feet in
height require a 1,100-foot notification
radius.

8. City of Garden Grove
Population: 171,637
Area: 17.94 sq mi
Reason for comparing: Close in
proximity.

Information source:

Land Permit Use General Information
Section IV. Application Process
500 ft. The City of Garden Grove does not
provide any notification enhancements.

9. City of Huntington Beach
Population: 197,481
Area: 26.75 sq mi
Reason for comparing: Close in
proximity.

Information source: Public
Notification Policy
500 ft. The City of Huntington Beach provides
(General Plan Amendments) and ZMA's
(Zoning Map Amendments) for public
school sites or for sites larger than 5
acres.

10. City of Santa Ana
Population: 311,379
Area: 27.27 sq mi
Reason for comparing: Close in
proximity.

Information source:

Sunshine Ordinance Example of Onsite Public Notice Page 2 300ft. or
2,000 ft.

In accordance with the Sunshine
Ordinance, the City of Santa Ana requires
notifications to be sent out via mail
notices, flyers, newspapers, and
newsletters.

The City of Santa Ana requires a 2,000-
foot radius within city boundaries and a
300-foot radius outside city boundaries.

All residents within those radii must be
alerted of the upcoming development.

Additional Ideas to Consider
As noted, the City of Fountain Valley already exceeds the public noticing requirements as outlined by the State of California. Tripepi Smith has outlined a few additional ideas to enhance the City’s existing practices, which range from policy modifications to leveraging the City's existing communication platforms. It will be up to City leadership to determine the viability of these ideas:

1. Double the City's current noticing radius from 500 feet to 1,000 feet.

2. Establish a 1:20 noticing requirement for building height. For every one foot of building height, the noticing would go out 20 additional feet.

3. Establish thresholds for when a project would trigger a Citywide notice, such as a certain height limit.

4. Double what is required by State law.
a. The State of California requires notification of projects for a 300 ft radius. In Fountain Valley, provide notification for all within a 600 ft radius. b. The State of California requires a 10-day notice. In Fountain Valley, provide a 20-day notice.

1. Note: A 20-day noticing period may delay projects or have an impact on economic development efforts. We’d recommend establishing thresholds for when a 20-day notice is required, and when a 10-day notice will suffice.

5. "Boost" posts about notices on Facebook and Instagram, targeting everyone who selfidentifies as living in Fountain Valley. a. This requires a dedicated budget for these digital placements, as the minimum suggested spend for each post is approximately $100-200. b. Your strategy may include lumping several notices together in a single post, or a single notice with a call to action to visit the Community Development webpage for more information.

6. Leverage the targeting features of Nextdoor to post every notice. a. The radius can be anywhere from 0.5 miles to 2 miles out from a specific address.

7. Develop a "self-serve" GIS map that is consistently updated with new developments throughout the city.
a. Host the GIS map on the City’s website, specifically on the City’s Community Development webpage.
b. Ensure residents are aware of the GIS map by pushing out information on where to find it and how to use it, via the City’s existing communication methods. c. Note: It is our understanding the City does not have the capability of executing a GIS map at this time. In the meantime, the City could consider creating an interactive Google Map, which allows a “Name” and “Description” for each pin.

8. Provide email/text notifications for members of the public who want to specifically be notified of all developments in the city, regardless of where they are happening. a. Individual notifications via the website's Notify Me function. b. AND/OR, provide a separate function dedicated to development notices only.

9. Dedicate a certain section/percentage of regular City communications to development updates.
a. A section within a larger, more regular communication, such as the monthly City Manager's Update or quarterly City Manager's Report.
b. Establish a baseline of how often the City will point social media followers/subscribers to the City's Community Development webpage, such as twice a month.

10. Include a compilation/summary of notices as part of every Council Meeting agenda.

11. Increase the threshold for when notices need to be posted on the local cable television network (PCTA).

CITY OF FOUNTAIN VALLEY

CITY COUNCIL

COUNCIL ACTION REQUEST
To: Honorable Mayor and Agenda Date: May 21, 2024
Members of the City Council
SUBJECT: Adopt a Seven-Year Transportation Capital Improvement Program (CIP) for the Annual Measure M (M2) Eligibility Program submittal for Fiscal Years 2024-2025 through 2030-2031 and Amend the FY 2023-2024 Seven-Year Transportation Capital Improvement Program (CIP) list to include one Project.

Three-Year Strategic Goals
☒ Enhance the culture and environment of “A Nice Place to Live” ☐ Achieve fiscal stability by evaluating processes, and attract and retain revenue producing businesses/opportunities
☐ Attract and retain quality staff through best practices and trends ☒ Maintain, build, and modernize infrastructure to support growth and future needs of the City
☐ Not applicable
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:

Staff recommends that the City Council adopt a Seven-Year Transportation Capital Improvement Program (CIP) for the Annual Measure M (M2) Eligibility Program submittal for Fiscal Years 2024-2025 through 2030-2031, and amend the FY 2023-2024 Seven-Year Capital Improvement Program (CIP) to include one Project.

Each year, Orange County cities are required to submit various items to the Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) to establish and maintain eligibility to receive Measure M (M2) funds. As part of OCTA’s renewed Measure M2 funding eligibility package for FY 2024-2025, it is a requirement that local agencies annually adopt a Seven-Year CIP and submit the adoption as part of the annual Measure M Eligibility package.

The attached Seven-Year CIP list includes all foreseeable transportation improvement projects, which will involve Measure M funding for Fiscal Years 2024-2025 through 2030-2031, and amend the FY 2023-2024 Seven-Year Capital Improvement Program (CIP) to include one Project.

Measure M FY24-25 CIP List Adoption & Amend FY23-24 List to Include Talbert & Euclid May 21, 2024

DISCUSSION:

Each year, Orange County cities are required to submit various items to the OCTA to establish and maintain eligibility to receive Measure M2 funds.

This year, as part of OCTA’s renewed Measure M2 funding eligibility package for FY 2024- 2025, the City of Fountain Valley is required to submit an Eligibility Checklist, as well as documentation related to the City’s Seven-Year CIP, Maintenance of Effort (MOE), Pavement Management Plan (PMP) and a PMP Resolution, and General Plan Policies that accommodate transit and active transportation. In addition to these requirements, and as part of OCTA’s renewed Measure M2 funding eligibility package for FY 2024-2025, it is also a requirement that local agencies annually adopt a Seven-Year CIP list and submit the adoption as part of the annual Measure M Eligibility package.

The attached Seven-Year CIP list includes all foreseeable transportation improvement projects, which will involve Measure M funding for Fiscal Years 2024-2025 through 2030-2031.

Projects included as part of the City’s FY2024-2025 submittal include the following:
 Citywide Signal Retiming
 Citywide Coordination Timing Maintenance
 Citywide Signal Communication Maintenance
 Traffic Signal System Equipment Improvements Citywide  Citywide Arterial Roadway Rehabilitation Projects
 Magnolia – Edinger to Heil (Westminster Lead)
 Ellis (Brookhurst to Bushard), Warner (Brookhurst to Bushard), and Improvements on Slater Arterial Roadway Rehabilitation Project
 Talbert (Brookhurst to Bushard) & Euclid (Slater to Talbert)  Newhope (Edinger to Heil), Ward (Apache River to Ellis), Ellis (Brookhurst to Ward), and Slater (Brookhurst to Ward)
 Euclid/Condor & Talbert/Bushard Signal Modifications
 Edinger Traffic Signal Synchronization Program (TSSP) Project  Warner Traffic Signal Synchronization Program (TSSP) Project  Talbert Traffic Signal Synchronization Program (TSSP) Project  Euclid Traffic Signal Synchronization (City of La Habra Lead) Project  Slater Traffic Signal Synchronization Program (TSSP) (City of Irvine Lead) Project The submittal of the Seven-Year CIP list does not commit the City to fund the listed projects.

However, for projects to be eligible to receive M2 funding, the City’s Seven-Year CIP needs to be identified on the adopted Seven-Year CIP list. Staff identified approximately $27 million in funded and unfunded projects on the Seven-Year CIP list over the next seven (7) years.

The FY 2023-2024 Seven-Year CIP list will be amended to include the following project, as part of the CIP list for Measure M Eligibility compliance:
 Talbert Avenue (Brookhurst Street to Bushard Street) & Euclid Street (Slater Avenue to Talbert Avenue)

Measure M FY24-25 CIP List Adoption & Amend FY23-24 List to Include Talbert & Euclid May 21, 2024

FISCAL REVIEW:

The adoption of the Seven-Year CIP list has no direct fiscal impact, but will help maintain the City’s eligibility for receipt of Measure M2 funds.

PUBLIC NOTIFICATION:

Not applicable.

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REVIEW:

Not applicable.

ATTORNEY REVIEW:

The Attorney for the City has reviewed and approved the attached Seven-Year CIP list.

ALTERNATIVES:

Alternative No. 1: Adopt a Seven-Year Transportation Capital Improvement Program (CIP) for the Annual Measure M (M2) Eligibility Program submittal for Fiscal Years 2024-2025 through 2030-2031, and Amend the FY 2023-2024 Seven-Year Transportation Capital Improvement Program (CIP) list to include one additional project listed above.

Alternative No. 2: Do not adopt a Seven-Year Transportation Capital Improvement Program (CIP) for the Annual Measure M (M2) Eligibility Program submittal for Fiscal Years 2024-2025 through 2030-2031 and do not amend the FY 2023-2024 Seven-Year Transportation Capital Improvement Program (CIP) list to include one project. This is not the recommended action, as it would make the City ineligible for Measure M2 funding.

RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommends that the City Council approve Alternative No. 1 to adopt a Seven-Year Transportation Capital Improvement Program (CIP) for the Annual Measure M (M2) Eligibility Program submittal for Fiscal Years 2024-2025 through 2030-2031, and amend the FY 2023- 2024 Seven-Year Transportation Capital Improvement Program (CIP) list to include one project.

Prepared by: Terri Phan, Management Aide
Recommended by: Kyle Knoke, Associate Engineer
Reviewed by: Temo Galvez, P.E., Deputy Public Works Director / City Engineer Approved by: Scott Smith, P.E., Director of Public Works Fiscal Review by: Ryan Smith, Finance Director / City Treasurer Approved by: Maggie Le, City Manager

Measure M FY24-25 CIP List Adoption & Amend FY23-24 List to Include Talbert & Euclid May 21, 2024

Attachment: Fountain Valley Seven-Year CIP Transportation Capital Improvement Program (CIP) list for FY 2024-2025 through 2030-2031

CITY OF FOUNTAIN VALLEY

CITY COUNCIL

COUNCIL ACTION REQUEST
To: Honorable Mayor and Agenda Date: May 21, 2024
Members of the City Council
SUBJECT: A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Fountain Valley approving the Fiscal Year 2024/2025 Project List for SB-1 Funds in the amount of $1,462,013 for the following street rehabilitation projects and funding appropriations:
 Talbert Avenue (Brookhurst Street to Bushard Street) & Euclid Avenue (Slater Avenue to Talbert Avenue) ($950,308); and,
 Residential Roadway Rehabilitation Project in City Quadrant C3 ($511,705) Three-Year Strategic Goals
☒ Enhance the culture and environment of “A Nice Place to Live” ☐ Achieve fiscal stability by evaluating processes, and attract and retain revenue producing businesses/opportunities
☐ Attract and retain quality staff through best practices and trends ☒ Maintain, build, and modernize infrastructure to support growth and future needs of the City
☐ Not applicable
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:

Staff recommends that the City Council adopt a Resolution of the City Council of the City of Fountain Valley approving the Fiscal Year 2024/2025 Project List for Senate Bill 1 (SB-1) Funds, in the amount of $1,462,013, for the following street rehabilitation projects and funding appropriations:
 Talbert Avenue (Brookhurst Street to Bushard Street) & Euclid Avenue (Slater Avenue to Talbert Avenue) ($950,308); and,
 Residential Roadway Rehabilitation Project in City Quadrant C3 ($511,705) To be eligible for receipt and use of the funds, agencies must adopt a resolution that identifies each year projects that will utilize SB-1 funding. In addition, there are specific and separate annual financial reporting requirements, as well as a continued Maintenance of Effort (MOE) General Fund spending to ensure that these new SB-1 revenues supplement and not supplant existing spending.

SB1 Resolution FY24-25_Local Streets and Roads Program
May 21, 2024

DISCUSSION:

On April 28, 2017, the Governor signed into law SB-1, the Road Repair and Accountability Act of 2017. Administered through the Roadway Maintenance and Rehabilitation Account (RMRA), SB-1 provides for an additional $1.5 billion statewide over the next decade to improve California’s pavement and transportation infrastructure. The major focus of the funding is for pavement rehabilitation to improve the condition of roadways throughout the State. The major revenue-generating sources for this new funding are increases in gasoline and diesel fuel taxes, varying increases in vehicle registration fees, and the initiation of a flat fee for electric vehicles.

The basic eligible projects include roadway rehabilitation, safety projects, complete street components (such as bike lanes and pedestrian facilities), and traffic control devices. For agencies whose pavement condition index (PCI) is less than 80 (on a scale of 0 to 100), the eligible projects are restricted to those listed above. For agencies whose PCI is greater than 80, the eligible list of projects includes not only those listed above but can also include additional project categories such as roadway capacity improvement projects. Based on the City’s current and approved 2022 Pavement Management Plan (PMP) Report, the overall PCI for Fountain Valley is 85.7. The overall PCI for residential pavement is 86.4 while the PCI for the arterial system is 84.5. While this strong PCI provides for additional transportation investment opportunities, Staff recommends that the funds generated by SB-1 continue to be focused on the City’s residential and arterial highway rehabilitation and resurfacing projects. The City has over a $24 million backlog on paving projects. The City of Fountain Valley will receive approximately $1 million per year over the life of SB-1.

Pavement Condition Index (PCI) is a metric that is common to all agencies throughout the State and is used to provide a measure of the condition of the pavement of each roadway and cumulatively for each agency. It is based upon a scale of 0-100 with 100 representing a brand new or recently rehabilitated street.

To receive funds, agencies must meet the eligible project expenditures commensurate with their PCI, as well as some additional financial commitment and reporting requirements, including:
 Transparency – The City will be required to submit a list of projects annually to the California Transportation commission (CTC) via the City’s Capital Improvement Program (CIP).
 Complete Streets – To the extent beneficial, cost-effective, practicable, and where feasible, projects should incorporate complete street elements that improve the quality of bicycle and pedestrian facilities and that improve safety for all users of transportation facilities.
 Maintenance of Effort (MOE) – The City cannot use this funding to supplant historical funding from its General Fund and must maintain the average General Fund expenditures for transportation-related projects.

SB1 Resolution FY24-25_Local Streets and Roads Program
May 21, 2024

Potential Uses
The City’s PMP identifies the investment necessary to maintain or improve the City’s PCI. As identified in the current and approved 2022 PMP Report, the current PCI is 85.7. While this is a relatively strong PCI, approximately 13% of the City’s pavement network is in a condition labeled as fair, poor, or very poor. These conditions will only deteriorate over time. There is currently a backlog of approximately over $24 million.

Residential Pavement Network - Due to the City’s investment in its residential pavement network over the last seventeen years, the PCI for the residential network is in the high 80s. As identified in the current and approved 2022 Pavement Management Plan Report, the current PCI of the residential network is 86.4. Only portions of a few quadrants have not received the additional new asphalt cap to restore the structural integrity of those streets. Due to the past economic challenges in the City from the 2007 recession, the residential program has fallen behind schedule. Because of that delay, continued deterioration of the remaining residential roadways has led to increased repair costs and, thus, higher overall costs to complete these efforts. A portion of the current SB-1 funds are programmed for the residential roadway program for the next fiscal year. After these quadrants are completed, this will likely lead to a slight increase in the overall PCI of the residential network; however, continued investment in those areas that were completed nearly a decade ago will be required to preserve the investment made.

Arterial Pavement Network – The City made a strong investment in its arterial highway pavement network. Because of this investment, the City of Fountain Valley has among the best pavement conditions in the County. From 2016 to 2022, the PCI of the arterial network increased from 81.8 to 84.5. Previously, the City was able to benefit from an influx of Federal funds about every six (6) to seven (7) years. This provided a boost to the arterial paving condition. In the past, the City was able to take advantage of a Federal grant opportunity that provided for the funding of Harbor Boulevard and Edinger Avenue, from Brookhurst to Euclid.

Without additional funding, the City’s Local Fair Share funds from Measure M are not adequate to keep pace with the arterial pavement network needs. Several arterial sections of pavement are showing advanced signs of distress as they have reached the end of the useful life of their previous pavement treatment; therefore, additional SB-1 funding is proposed to be dedicated to improving the City’s arterial pavement PCI.

FISCAL REVIEW:

Funding projections, which will vary due to changes in fuel consumption rates as well as the average cost of vehicles, are only available for three fiscal years.

Each year, city staff identifies and prioritizes the streets to maximize the PCI. Any unused funds are carried over for the following year’s project.

It should be noted that the City cannot use this funding to supplant historical funding from its “General Fund” and must maintain the average expenditures for transportation-related projects.

SB1 Resolution FY24-25_Local Streets and Roads Program
May 21, 2024

PUBLIC NOTIFICATION:

Not applicable.

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REVIEW:

Not applicable.

ATTORNEY REVIEW:

The Attorney for the City has reviewed and approved the resolution.

ALTERNATIVES:

Alternative No. 1: Adopt a resolution approving the Fiscal Year 2024/2025 Project List for SB1 funds in the amount of $1,462,013, where $950,308 will go toward the Rehabilitation and Resurfacing of Talbert Avenue (Brookhurst Street to Bushard Street) and Euclid Avenue (Slater Avenue to Talbert Avenue) and where $511,705 will go toward Residential Roadway Rehabilitation Project in City Quadrant C3. This is the recommended action.

Alternative No. 2: Adopt a resolution approving the Fiscal Year 2024/2025 Project List for SB1 funds in the estimated amount of $1.46 million toward a different project type. This is not recommended. Applying these funds to projects within the other eligible categories does not address the ongoing pavement rehabilitation needs going forward. It is important to continue the City’s long-term commitment to funding roadway maintenance to ensure that the City maintains is high-quality roadway infrastructure consistent with the City’s Pavement Management Plan.

RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommends that the City Council approve Alternative No. 1, which is to adopt a resolution approving the Fiscal Year 2024/2025 Project List for SB-1 funds in the amount of $1,462,013 toward the Rehabilitation and Resurfacing of Talbert Avenue (Brookhurst Street to Bushard Street) and Euclid Avenue (Slater Avenue to Talbert Avenue) and Residential Roadway Rehabilitation Project in City Quadrant C3.

Prepared by: Terri Phan, Management Aide
Recommended by: Kyle Knoke, Engineering Associate
Reviewed by: Temo Galvez, P.E., Deputy Public Works Director / City Engineer Approved by: Scott Smith, P.E., Director of Public Works Fiscal Review by: Ryan Smith, Finance Director / City Treasurer Approved by: Maggie Le, City Manager
Attachment 1: Resolution

CITY OF FOUNTAIN VALLEY

CITY COUNCIL

COUNCIL ACTION REQUEST
To: Honorable Mayor and Agenda Date: May 21, 2024
Members of the City Council
SUBJECT: City Hall Finance Department Office and Breakroom Patio Security Gate Improvement Projects

1. Accept a fee proposal from Interwest Consulting Group, Inc. for the City Hall Finance Department Office and Breakroom Patio Security Gate Improvement Projects for project and construction management and field observation services in the amount of $12,750, and authorize staff to issue a Purchase Order for the amount; and,

2. Approve Amendment No. 6 to Interwest Consulting Group, Inc.’s As-Needed On-Call Contract in the amount not-to-exceed $12,750.

Three-Year Strategic Goals
☒ Enhance the culture and environment of “A Nice Place to Live” ☐ Achieve fiscal stability by evaluating processes, and attract and retain revenue producing businesses/opportunities
☒ Attract and retain quality staff through best practices and trends ☒ Maintain, build, and modernize infrastructure to support growth and future needs of the City
☐ Not applicable
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:

Staff recommends that the City Council accept a fee proposal from Interwest Consulting Group, Inc. (Interwest) for the City Hall Finance Department Office and Breakroom Patio Security Gate Improvement Projects for project and construction management and field observation services in the amount of $12,750, authorize staff to issue a Purchase Order for the amount, and approve Amendment No. 6 to the Interwest Consulting Group, Inc. As-Needed On-Call Contract, in the amount not-to-exceed $12,750.

City staff is proposing to utilize Interwest’s consultant services for project and construction management and field observation services for both Projects. Subsequently, City staff will solicit construction quotes from reputable and reliable contractors and administratively award a construction contract for a not-to-exceed amount of $50,000 to construct one Finance Department office and a separate construction contract for a not-to-exceed amount of $15,000 to install the breakroom patio security gate, consistent with the City purchasing policy. The

City Hall Finance Department Office and Breakroom Patio Security Gate Improvement Projects
May 21, 2024

Project construction is anticipated to begin in early June 2024, and be completed by June 30, 2024.

DISCUSSION:

The Finance Department is currently filling vacancies that require an additional office space.

This office will be located adjacent to the office of the Finance Director. In addition, City staff determined that a breakroom patio gate is needed to address security concerns to the entry point on the exterior patio. This proposed gate would allow only authorized individuals access to enter and exit through the westerly patio entry point to City Hall.

On May 8, 2024, Interwest provided City staff a fee proposal in the amount of $12,750 that includes tasks for project and construction management and field observation services to complete the Projects. Staff also reached out to Onward Engineering, Inc. and Annealta Group, Inc., from the City approved as Needed On-Call Contracts, to solicit proposals; however, these firms indicated that they were not equipped, at this time, to provide the services requested for this project; therefore, Interwest is the most equipped, qualified, and available firm to provide the services needed for this project. Further, it should be noted that Interwest’s extensive municipal building and facility project experience makes them the most qualified to complete the Project within the City’s requirements and designated time frames. It should also be noted that they have provided construction management services to the City for projects with similar scope including the Finance Manager, Payroll Administrator and Zen/Lactation Room office Improvements as part of the City Hall Remodel, Improvements to the Fountain Valley Police Department, and the Universally Accessible Playground Project.

Interwest will prepare bid packages for the Projects and work with City staff to solicit construction quotes from qualified contractors. The estimated construction cost for the new Finance Department Office is anticipated to not exceed the amount of $50,000, and the breakroom patio security gate improvement project is anticipated to not exceed the amount of $15,000. This will allow City staff to execute both construction contracts administratively, consistent with the City purchasing policy.

The construction project scope includes relocating the Finance Director’s office door, as well as performing the following installations: one new wall that will connect with the existing vicinity walls to create the proposed office, new lighting fixtures, a door for the new office, and new windows for the existing Finance Director’s office and proposed Finance office. In addition, the construction scope for the security gate will provide secured access to the staff breakroom outside patio area at City Hall.

Interwest’s proposal for project and construction management and field observation services for the City Hall Finance Department Office and Breakroom Patio Security Gate Improvement Projects include the following activities:
 Analyze the existing City Hall layout and review record drawings to prepare bid packages for the proposed Finance Department Office and breakroom patio security gate.

City Hall Finance Department Office and Breakroom Patio Security Gate Improvement Projects
May 21, 2024

 Collaborate with the City’s Building Department to ensure the proposed projects meet California Codes and Regulations and City Standards.
 Assist City staff with the quote procurement process following bid package completion.  Provide construction management and field observation services.

City staff anticipates construction will begin in early June 2024, and be completed by June 30, 2024. The City will require the contractor to perform all work between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m., Monday through Friday. Construction hours may be modified to accommodate any City staff needs.

FISCAL REVIEW:

The FY 2023-24 Project No. 24004 budget includes sufficient funding for the City Hall Finance Office and Breakroom Patio Gate Improvement Projects.

FY 2023-2024 City Hall Finance Department Office and Breakroom Patio Security Gate Projects Costs
Interwest’s Consultant Services $12,750.00
Estimated Construction Cost – Finance Department Office Project
$50,000.00
Estimated Construction Cost – Breakroom Patio Security
Gate Project
$15,000.00
Total Project Costs $77,750.00
FY 2023-2024 Budget for City Hall Security and Accessibility Project No. 24004 FY 2023-2024 City Hall Security and Accessibility Project Budget
$1,000,000.00
Project Expenditure to Date $15,953.00
Project Budget Encumbrances $19,077.00
Budget Transfer to IT Office Upgrades Project (Project No. 24044) *
$167,000.00
Available Project Budget $797,970.00
Proposed Project Costs $77,750.00
Remaining Available Project Budget $720,220.00
*City Council approved Budget Transfer to IT Office Upgrades Project on March 19, 2024 Total Contract for Interwest Consulting Group, Inc.

Previously Approved Interwest Consulting Group, Inc. Services $839,775.00 City Hall Finance Department Office and Breakroom Patio Security Gate Improvement Projects for Project and Construction
Management and Field Observation Services
$12,750.00
Total Interwest Contract $852,525.00

City Hall Finance Department Office and Breakroom Patio Security Gate Improvement Projects
May 21, 2024

PUBLIC NOTIFICATION:

Not applicable.

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REVIEW:

Not applicable.

ATTORNEY REVIEW:

The Attorney for the City reviewed and approved the Interwest Consulting Group, Inc. AsNeeded On-Call Contract on November 16, 2021, and Amendment No. 6 to Interwest Consulting Group, Inc. As-Needed On-Call Contract, presented to City Council on May 21, 2024.

ALTERNATIVES:

Alternative No. 1:

1. Accept a fee proposal from Interwest Consulting Group, Inc. for the City Hall Finance Department Office and Breakroom Patio Security Gate Improvement Projects for project and construction management and field observation services in the amount of $12,750, and authorize staff to issue a Purchase Order for the amount; and

2. Approve Amendment No. 6 to the Interwest Consulting Group, Inc. As-Needed On-Call Contract in the amount not-to-exceed $12,750.

Alternative No. 2:

1. Do not accept a fee proposal from Interwest Consulting Group, Inc. in the amount of $12,750 for the City Hall Finance Department Office and Breakroom Patio Security Gate Improvement Projects for project and construction management and field observation services in the amount of $12,750, and do not authorize staff to issue a Purchase Order for the amount; and,

2. Do not approve Amendment No. 6 to the Interwest Consulting Group, Inc. As-Needed OnCall Contract in the amount not-to-exceed $12,750.

Alternative No. 2 is not the recommended action as the City will be unable to proceed with project and construction management and field observation services for the proposed Finance Department Office and Breakroom Patio Security Gate Improvement Projects.

RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommends that the City Council:

1. Accept a fee proposal from Interwest Consulting Group, Inc. for the City Hall Finance Department Office and Breakroom Patio Security Gate Improvement Projects for project and construction management and field observation services in the amount of $12,750, and authorize staff to issue a Purchase Order for the amount; and,

2. Approve Amendment No. 6 to the Interwest Consulting Group, Inc. As-Needed On-Call Inspection Services Contract in the amount not-to-exceed $12,750.

City Hall Finance Department Office and Breakroom Patio Security Gate Improvement Projects
May 21, 2024

Prepared by: Ryan Damon, Assistant Engineer
Co-Prepared by: Terri Phan, Management Aide
Recommended by: Kyle Hilton, Associate Engineer
Reviewed by: Temo Galvez, P.E., Deputy Public Works Director / City Engineer Approved by: Scott Smith, P.E., Director of Public Works Fiscal Review by: Ryan Smith, Finance Director / City Treasurer Approved by: Maggie Le, City Manager
Attachment 1: Amendment No. 6 to Interwest Consulting Group, Inc. CON 21-72 (Munis CON 1142)
Attachment 2: Interwest Consulting Group, Inc. CON 21-72 (Munis CON 1142)