Agenda packet — Orange City Council, May 13, 2025 (part 2 of 3)

364
Engineer’s Report
City of Orange
Landscape Maintenance District No. 15-1
12 combined with the unique proximity and access enjoy ed by parcels in the District, they provide a direct advantage and special benefit to property in the District.

Access to Improved Landscaped Areas within the District Since the parcels in the District are nearly the on ly parcels that enjoy close access to the Improvements, they directly benefit from the unique close access to improved landscaping areas and other public improvements that are provided by the Assessments. This is a direct advantage and special benefit to property in the District.

Improved Views within the Assessment Districts
The City, by maintaining permanent public improveme nts funded by the Assessments in the District, provides improved views to properties in the District. The properties in the District enjoy close and unique proximity, access and views of the specific Improvements funded in the District; therefore, the improved and protected views provide d by the Assessments are another direct and tangible advantage that is uniquely conferred upon property in the District.

Extension of a Property’s Outdoor Areas and Green Space s for Properties within Close Proximity to the Improvements
In large part because it is cost prohibitive to pro vide large open land areas on property in the District, the residential, commercial and other ben efiting properties in the District do not have larg e outdoor areas and green spaces. The Improvements wi thin the District provide additional outdoor areas that serve as an effective extension of the l and area for proximate properties because the Improvements are uniquely proximate and accessible to property in close proximity to the Improvements. The Improvements, therefore, provide an important, valuable and desirable extension of usable land area for the direct advantage and special benefit of properties in the District because such properties have uniquely good and close proximity to the Improvements.

Creation of Individual Lots for Residential and Commerci al Use that, in Absence of the Assessments, Would Not Have Been Created
In most of the District, the original owner/develop er(s) of the property within the District agreed unanimously to the Assessments. The Assessments pro vide the necessary funding for public improvements that were approved as a condition of d evelopment and subdivision approval.

Therefore, such Assessments allowed the original pr operty to be subdivided and for development of the parcels to occur. As parcels were sold, new own ers were informed of the Assessments through the title reports, and in some cases, through Depar tment of Real Estate “White Paper” reports that the parcels were subject to assessment. Purchase of property was also an “agreement” to pay the Assessment. Therefore, in the absence of the Assess ments, the lots within most of the District would not have been created. These parcels, and the Improvements that were constructed on the parcels, receive direct advantage and special benefit from the Assessments. 365
Engineer’s Report
City of Orange
Landscape Maintenance District No. 15-1
13 Special
Benefit +
General
Benefit =
Total
Benefit

Summary of Relative Weight of Benefit Factors
A solid argument could be made that the Creation of Individual Lots benefit comprises 100% of the benefit because the Improvements were incorporated into the original planning and design of the subdivision, and thus were deemed to be necessary a nd required for the development of the lot.

Without those Improvements and associated benefit, the lots would not have been created in the first place. Nevertheless, four other definitive be nefits accruing to the parcels within the District are identified, and an allowance should be made within the overall relative importance of benefits. The table below illustrates the relative benefit level of the five identified benefits used in this Report.

Benefit Factor

Proximity

Relative Weight

10%
Access 10%
Views 10%
Outdoor Area or Green Space Extension 10%
Creation of Individual Lots for Development 60%
Total Benefit 100%

General Versus Special Benefit
Article XIIIC of the California Constitution requir es any local agency proposing to increase or impose a benefit assessment to “separate the genera l benefits from the special benefits conferred on a parcel.” The rationale for separating special and general benefits is to ensure that property owners subject to the benefit assessment are not paying fo r general benefits. An assessment can fund special benefits but cannot fund general benefits. Accordin gly, a separate estimate of the special and general benefit is given in this section.

In other words:

There is no widely-accepted or statutory formula fo r general benefit. General benefits are benefits from improvements or services that are not special in nature, are not “particular and distinct” and are not “over and above” benefits received by other properties. SVTA provides some clarification by indicating that general benefits provide “an ind irect, derivative advantage” and are not necessaril y proximate to the improvements.

In this Report, the general benefit is liberally estimated and described, and then budgeted so that it is funded by sources other than the Assessment.
366
Engineer’s Report
City of Orange
Landscape Maintenance District No. 15-1
14 Benefit
+ to the
Public
at Large
Benefit to Real
Property Inside
the Assessment
District that is
Indirect and
Derivative
+
Benefit to Real
Property
= Outside the
Assessment
District
General
Benefit

The starting point for evaluating general and speci al benefits is the current, baseline level of servi ce.

The Assessment will fund Improvements “over and abo ve” this general, baseline level and the general benefits estimated in this section are over and above the baseline.

A formula to estimate the general benefit is listed below:

Special benefit, on the other hand, is defined in t he state constitution as “a particular and distinct benefit over and above general benefits conferred o n real property located in the district or to the public at large.” The SVTA decision indicates that a special benefit is confer red to a property if it “receives a direct advantage from the improvement ( e.g., proximity to a park).” In these Assessments, as noted, properties in the District h ave close and unique proximity, views and access to the Improvements and uniquely improved desirabil ity from the Improvements and other properties and the public at large do not receive s ignificant benefits because they do not have proximity, access or views of the Improvements. The refore, the overwhelming proportion of the benefits conferred to property is special, and is o nly minimally received by property outside the Assessment Districts or the public at large.

Benefit Finding
Quantification of General Benefit
In this section, the general benefit from landscapi ng and other types of Improvements is liberally estimated and described, and then budgeted so that it is funded by sources other than the Assessment.

Benefit to Property Outside the Assessment Districts
Properties within the District receive almost all o f the special benefits from the Improvements because properties in the District enjoy unique clo se proximity and access to the Improvements that are not enjoyed by other properties or the public a t large. However, certain properties within the proximity/access radius of the Improvements, but ou tside of the boundaries of the District, may receive some benefit from the Improvements. Since t his benefit is conferred to properties outside the District boundaries, it contributes to the over all general benefit calculation and will not be funded by the Assessments. The general benefit to p roperty outside of the District is calculated with the parcel and data analysis performed by SCI Consulting Group.

Since the properties outside the District but with frontage abutting the Improvements receive benefit but cannot be assessed by the District, thi s is a form of general benefit to other property.

The primary ways that parcels outside the district benefit by the Improvements is from proximity, 367
Engineer’s Report
City of Orange
Landscape Maintenance District No. 15-1
15 Assumptions:
47 parcel outside the District
1517 parcels in the District
Calculation:

General Benefit to property outside the
District =
47/(47+1517) * 40% = 1.20%

access, views and extension of outdoor space, which account for 40% of the available benefit.

Therefore, parcels that abut the landscape areas an d are not separated from the Improvements by a privacy fence are counted for this general benefit. The general benefit to property outside of the District is calculated as follows.

Benefit to Property Inside the Assessment Districts that is Indirect and Derivative The “indirect and derivative” benefit to property w ithin the District is particularly difficult to calculate. A solid argument can be presented that all benefit within the District is special, because the Improvements are clearly “over and above” and “part icular and distinct” when compared with the baseline level of service and the unique proximity, access and views of the Improvements enjoyed by benefiting properties in the District.

Nevertheless, the SVTA decision indicates there may be general benefit “co nferred on real property located in the district.” A measure of the general benefits to property within the Assessment area is the percentage of land area within the District tha t is publicly owned and used for regional purposes such as major roads, rail lines and other regional facilities because such properties used for regiona l purposes could provide indirect benefits to the pub lic at large. Approximately 7.15% of the land area in the District is used for such regional purp oses, so this is a measure of the general benefits to property within the District.

Benefit To The Public At Large
The general benefit to the public at large can be e stimated by the proportionate amount of time that the District’s Improvements including landscaping a re used and enjoyed by individuals who are not residents, employees, customers or property owners in the District. It should be noted that these Improvements do not attract the public at large in the same way as park improvements – and they confer far less benefit to the public at large than do similar park improvements.

One way to measure the special benefit to the gener al public is by the car trips through an area with Improvements. Of the five ways benefits are conferr ed (proximity, access, views, extension of a property’s green space, and creation of lots), the only benefit that is conferred by way of pass-by ca r trips is views, which accounts for 10% of the total benefits. For pass-by car trips, the benefit of views is found to be approximately half that of res idents, employees, customers or property owners in the District due to the brevity of the views. Therefore the relative benefit factor is reduced to 5%. 368
Engineer’s Report
City of Orange
Landscape Maintenance District No. 15-1
16 1.16%

11.31% 11.3% = 10.0%
= 11.6%

21.6% TOTAL GENERAL BENEFIT
100.0% x 11.6% Out -of -District General Benefits
Property within the District 7.15%
Public at Large 3.00%
Total In -District 11.35% 11.4% x 88.4%

1.20%
In -District General Benefits
Outside the District
Relative Percent of
General Overall General
Benefit Benefit Benefit

Next, the views factors are weighted by the relevan t number of car trips. Using the lane miles as representative of pass-by traffic, an analysis show s that 60% of the lane miles are on arterial or collector streets where the general public has view s of the landscaping. Therefore (60% of 5% =)

3.0% of the benefits from the Improvements are general benefits to the public at large.

Special Considerations of Improvements Outside of District The benefits are categorized into to two geographic groupings of Improvements: In-District Improvements that include parkways, medians and pas eos that are either inside the district boundaries, or are traffic medians that directly ab ut or front the district; and Out-of-District Improvements that are parkways or medians that are both outside the District boundaries and are not abutting, fronting or lying adjacent to the Dis trict. Based on weighted square footage of the various types of Improvements, Out-of-District Impr ovements count for approximately 11.6% of the total benefits. These Out-of-District benefits are found to be entirely General Benefit. For example some Improvements at Santiago Canyon Colleg e are maintained, but the funding for this work comes entirely from the College as general benefit funds.

The In-District Improvements, conversely, provide a pproximately 88.4% of the total benefits. The general benefits provided by these Improvements are discussed above.

Total General Benefits
Using a sum of these three measures of general bene fit plus the special considerations of general benefit from Out-of-District benefits (both weighted accordingly), we find that approximately 21.6% of the benefits conferred by the Improvements may b e general in nature and should be funded by sources other than the Assessment. This calculation is shown below.

Although this analysis finds that 21.6% of the Asse ssment may provide general benefits from the Improvements, the Assessment Engineer establishes a requirement for a minimum contribution from sources other than the Assessments of 22%. Thi s minimum contribution above the measure of general benefits will serve to provide additional coverage for any other general benefits.

369
Engineer’s Report
City of Orange
Landscape Maintenance District No. 15-1
17 Final Step – Calculate the Current General Benefit Contribution from the City This general benefit cannot be funded from the Asse ssments; it must be funded from other sources such as the City’s General Fund or other non-Distri ct funds. These contributions can also be in the form of in-lieu contributions to the installation a nd maintenance of the Improvements such as other City assets that support and protect the Improvemen ts. The City of Orange will contribute both monetary and in-lieu resources to ensure that the g eneral benefits conferred by the proposed Improvements are not funded by the District’s property owners.

A summary and quantification of these other contributions from the City is discussed below:

The City of Orange owns, maintains, rehabilitates a nd replaces curb and gutter along the border of the District Improvements. This curb and gutter ser ves to support, contain, retain, manage irrigation flow and growth, and provide a boundary for the Improvements. The contribution from the City towards general benefit from the maintenan ce, rehabilitation, and replacement of the curb and gutter is conservatively estimated to be 5%.

The City owns and maintains a storm drainage system along the border of the District Improvements. This system serves to prevent floodin g and associated damage to the Improvements, and manage urban runoff including local pollutants loading from the Improvements.

The contribution from the City towards general bene fit from the maintenance, and operation of the local storm drainage system is conservatively estimated to be 5%.

The City owns and maintains local public streets al ong the border of the District Improvements.

These public streets provide access to the Improvements for residents’ enjoyment as well as efficient maintenance. The contribution from the City towards general benefit from the maintenance of local public streets is conservatively estimated to be 5%.

The value of the construction of the Improvements c an be quantified and monetized as an annuity.

Since this construction was performed and paid for by non-assessment funds, this “annuity” can be used to offset general benefit costs, and is conservatively estimated to contribute 10%.

The total General Benefit is liberally quantified a t 22% which is entirely offset by the conservativel y quantified total non-Assessment contribution toward s general benefit described above of 25%.

Therefore, no additional General Benefit must be funded by the City.

Zones of Benefit
The boundaries of the District were developed in co njunction and concurrent with the planning and design of the subdivisions and Improvements, and th us include only the properties in the City of Orange that are proximate to the Improvements and t hat would materially benefit from the Improvements. Certain other properties surrounding the District were not part of the designed association between the Improvements and the assess ed areas, and are generally less proximate to the Improvements. In other words, the boundaries of the District have been narrowly drawn to include only properties that will specially benefit from the Improvements, and would receive a declining level of service if the Assessments were not approved.

The SVTA decision indicates:

In a well-drawn district — limited to only parcels r eceiving special benefits from the improvement — ev ery parcel within that district receives a shared special benef it. Under section 2, subdivision (i), these benefit s can be construed as being general benefits since they are not “particular and distinct” and are not “over and above” the benefits received by other properties “located in the district.” 370
Engineer’s Report
City of Orange
Landscape Maintenance District No. 15-1
18 We do not believe that the voters intended to inval idate an assessment district that is narrowly drawn t o include only properties directly benefiting from an improve ment. Indeed, the ballot materials reflect otherwise . Thus, if an assessment district is narrowly drawn, the fact that a benefit is conferred throughout the district does not make it general rather than special. In that circumstance, the characterization of a benefit may depend on whet her the parcel receives a direct advantage from the improve ment (e.g., proximity to park) or receives an indire ct, derivative advantage resulting from the overall public benefit s of the improvement (e.g., general enhancement of the district’s property values).

In the District, the advantage that each parcel rec eives from the Improvements is direct, and the boundaries are narrowly drawn to include only parce ls that benefit from the Assessment. Therefore, the even spread of Assessment throughout the narrow ly drawn district is indeed consistent with the SVTA decision. For the most part, the benefits from the Improvements within the District do not vary further based on proximity of the parcels to t he Improvements because the increased benefits of greater proximity to the Improvements are genera lly offset by a parallel increase in negative factors such as higher levels of traffic, noise, etc. that comes with increased proximity.

There are two distinct neighborhoods within the Dis trict: Santiago Hills and Hillsdale. Santiago Hills is a complex neighborhood with arterial and c ollector streets traversing the residential areas and a commercial area on the northeast portion. In addition, Santiago Hills has a system of walking paths, or paseos, that provide additional benefits not found in the Hillsdale neighborhood. Hillsdale is a relatively small neighborhood, linear in shape centered on one residential street (Hillsdale Driv e) with Improvements along only one exterior frontage (Santiago Canyon Road).

In order to most conservatively assure that Assessm ents are proportional to the relative level of special benefits in the District, two zones have be en created. Zone of Benefit A (or “Zone A”) consists of all of the parcels that lie within the Santiago Hills neighborhood bounded generally by Chapman Avenue, Jamboree Road, Canyon View Avenue, Skylark Lane and Newport Boulevard.

Zone A receives the full complement of special benefits.

Zone of Benefit B (“Zone B”) consists of all the pa rcels that lie within the Hillsdale neighborhood lying generally north of Santiago Canyon Road. A de tailed analysis of the proportionate benefits received by the Hillsdale neighborhood as compared to the Santiago Hills neighborhood based on the weighted areas of parkways, paseos, and traffic medians within or proximate to the two zones shows that the Hillsdale neighborhood (Zone B) rece ives approximately 75% as much special benefit as the Santiago neighborhood (Zone A). Ther efore Assessments for parcels in Zone B are reduced approximately 20% from the rates for Zone A (see Assessment Diagram).

Method of Assessment
As previously discussed, the proposed Assessments w ill provide comprehensive Improvements that will clearly confer special benefits to properties in the District. The allocation of special benefits to property is partially based on the type of property and the size of property. These benefits can also partially be measured by the occupants on property in the District because such parcel population density is a measure of the relative benefit a parc el receives from the Improvements. It should be noted that many other types of “traditional” assess ments also use parcel population densities to apportion the Assessments. For example, the assessm ents for sewer systems, roads and water systems are typically allocated based on the popula tion density of the parcels assessed. Therefore, the apportionment of benefit is reasonably based on the type of parcel, the size of parcels and the population density of parcels.
371
Engineer’s Report
City of Orange
Landscape Maintenance District No. 15-1
19 The next step in apportioning Assessments is to det ermine the relative special benefit for each property. This process involves determining the rel ative benefit received by each property in relation to a single family home, or, in other words, on the basis of Single Family Equivalents (SFE). This SFE methodology is commonly used to distribute Asse ssments in proportion to estimated special benefit and is generally recognized as providing th e basis for a fair and appropriate distribution of Assessments. For the purposes of this Engineer’s Re port, all properties are designated a SFE value, which is each property’s relative benefit in relati on to a single family home on one parcel. In this case, the "benchmark" property is the single family detached dwelling which is one Single Family Equivalent or one SFE.

Not only residential improved property will be asse ssed, because commercial and other properties may also receive direct benefits from the Improvements, and will be assessed.

A fixed or flat Assessment is proposed for all sing le family residential properties regardless of occupancy or parcel size. Assessments on multi-fami ly residential parcels vary based on the number of dwelling units. Assessments on commercial proper ty are levied on an acreage basis because larger properties generally support larger buildings and h ave higher numbers of employees, customers and guests who would benefit from proximity and improve d access to well-maintained and improved landscaping.

Finally, the special benefits to be derived from th e proposed Assessments will be conferred on property and are not based on a specific property o wner’s use of the improvements, a specific property owner’s occupancy of property, or the prop erty owner’s demographic status such as age or number of dependents. The benefits conferred to pro perty are related to the average number of people who could potentially live on, work at, or o therwise could occupy a property, not how the property is currently used by the present owner. Th erefore, the number of people who could or potentially live on, work at or otherwise occupy a property is one indicator of the relative level of benefit received by a property.

In conclusion, the Assessment Engineer determined t hat the appropriate method of assessment apportionment should be based on the type of proper ty, the relative size of the property, property location, its relative population and its proximity to Improvements. This method is further described below.

Residential Properties
Certain residential properties in the District that contain a single residential dwelling unit are assigned one Single Family Equivalent or 1.0 SFE. D etached or attached houses and zero-lot line houses are included in this category of single fami ly residential property. If there is more than one single family detached dwelling on a parcel, it wil l be charged one SFE per single family detached dwelling.

Properties with more than one residential unit (oth er than parcels with more than one detached single family dwelling as described above) are designated as multi-family residential properties. These properties benefit from the Improvements in proport ion to the number of dwelling units that occupy each property, the average number of people who reside in multi-family residential units versus the average number of people who reside in a single family home (Population Density Factor) and the relative size of each type of residential d welling unit (Square Foot Factor). The population density factors for the area in Orange County encom passing the District, as depicted in the following table, provide the basis for determining the SFE factors for residential properties. Using the total population in a certain property type in the area of the District from the 2010 Census and 372
Engineer’s Report
City of Orange
Landscape Maintenance District No. 15-1
20 dividing it by the total number of such households, finds that approximately 3.21 persons occupy each single family residence, whereas an average of 2.93 persons occupy each condominium. The ratio of 3.21 people on average for a single family residence and 2.93 people per dwelling unit in a condominium unit results in a population density eq uivalent of 0.91 for condominiums. Next, the relative building areas are factored into the analysis because special benefits are related to the average size of a property, in addition to average populati on densities. For a condominium, this calculation results in an SFE factor of 0.71 per dwelling unit.

Table 1 – Residential Density and Assessment Factors

Type of Residential Property
Pop. Density
Equivalent
SqFt
Factor
SFE
Factor

Single Family Residential

1.00 1.00

1.00 Condominium 0.91 0.78 0.71

There are no other multi-family property types (e.g ., duplex, triplex, fourplex, apartments) in the District, and none are foreseen in the future. Therefore no SFE-based assessment rate is calculated.

Commercial Properties
SFE values for commercial land uses are based on th e equivalence of special benefit on a land area basis between single family residential property an d the average commercial property. The SFE values for various commercial land uses are further defined by using average employee densities because the special benefit factors described previ ously can be measured by the average number of people who work at commercial properties.

In order to determine employee density factors, the findings from the San Diego Association of Governments Traffic Generators Study (the “SANDAG S tudy”) are used because these findings were approved by the State Legislature as being a g ood representation of the average number of employees per acre of land area for commercial prop erties. As determined by the SANDAG Study, the average number of employees per acre for general commercial property is 24.

In comparison, the average number of people residin g in a single family home in the area is 3.21.

Since the average lot size for a single family home in the District is approximately 0.12 acres, the average number of residents per acre of residential property is 26.8.

The employee density per acre is roughly equal to ( or 0.9 times) the population density of single family residential property per acre (24 employees per acre / 26.8 residents per acre). However, the benefit derived by employees on commercial properti es is less than that derived by a resident on residential property, generally due to less time of use of services and Improvements. The Assessment Engineer determines that this factor is 0.5 for commercial to 1 for residential. Table 2 below shows the average employees per acre of land area or portion thereof for various types of commercial properties and lists the relative SFE fa ctors per 0.12 acre for properties in each land use category.
373
Engineer’s Report
City of Orange
Landscape Maintenance District No. 15-1
21 Commercial properties in excess of 5 acres generall y involve uses that are more land intensive relative to building areas and number of employees (lower coverage ratios). As a result, the benefit factors for commercial property land area in excess of 5 acres is determined to be the SFE rate per

0.12 acre for the first 5 acres and the relevant SFE rate per each additional acre over 5 acres.

Table 2 – Commercial Density and Assessment Factors

Type of Commercial Land Use
Average
Employees
per Acre 1
SFE Unit
per

0.12 Acre
s

2 General Commercial

24 0.500
Office 3 68 1.420
Shopping Center 24 0.500

1. Source: San Diego Association of Governments Traffic Generators Study.

2. The SFE factors for commercial and industrial parce ls are applied by the 0.12 acre of land area or portion thereof. (Therefore, the minimum assessment for any assessable parcel in these categories is the SFE Units listed herein.) The rates apply up to first 5 acres of parcel size. Additional acreage i s benefited at the rate shown above per acre or portion thereof.

3. Currently there are no parcels in the District in t he Office category. This rate is included in the event General Commercial space is converted to Office space.

Vacant/Undeveloped Properties
The benefit to undeveloped properties is determined to be proportional to the corresponding benefits for similar type developed properties, but at a lower rate due to the lack of improvements on the property. A measure of the benefits accruing to the underlying land is the average value of land in relation to Improvements for developed prop erty. An analysis of the assessed valuation data from the County of Orange found that approximately 55% of the assessed value of improved properties is classified as the land value. It is r easonable to assume, therefore, that approximately 55% of the benefits are related to the underlying l and and 45% are related to the improvements and the day-to-day use of the property. Using this rati o, the SFE factor for vacant/undeveloped parcels is 0.55 per parcel.

Other Properties
Article XIIID stipulates that publicly owned proper ties must be assessed unless there is clear and convincing evidence that those properties receive no special benefit from the Assessment.

All properties that are specially benefited are ass essed. Certain other publicly owned property that lie within the District boundaries, including Santiago Canyon College, Chapman Hills Elementary School, Santiago Hills Park, and City of Orange pub lic safety facility on East Fort Road, are not assessed. These are discussed below.

Santiago Canyon College: The College lies within th e District and certain Improvements lie on their property. Although the College is not assessed in this District, the College pays for any special 374
Engineer’s Report
City of Orange
Landscape Maintenance District No. 15-1
22 benefit through a separate agreement with the City, and that monetary contribution is shown in Table 1. In addition, all benefit attributable for the College property is included in the General Benefit calculation shown above.

Chapman Hills Elementary School: Any special benefi t attributable to the School buildings and parking lots are entirely offset by the benefit pro vided to the neighborhood by the outdoor fields.

This facility was also included in the list of regi onal facilities in the calculation of general benef it to properties inside the district that is indirect and derivative above.

Santiago Hills Park: Any special benefit attributab le to the Park is entirely offset by the benefit provided to the neighborhoods by park facilities. T his facility was also included in the list of regional facilities in the calculation of general b enefit to properties inside the district that is in direct and derivative above.

City of Orange Public Safety Facility on East Fort Road: Any special benefit received by this facility is entirely offset by the benefit provided back to the neighborhood similar to other in-lieu contributions to the General Benefit contributions that are funded by the City’s General Fund or other non-District funds.

Miscellaneous, small and other parcels such as road s, right-of-way parcels, and common areas typically do not generate significant numbers of em ployees, residents, customers or guests, and have limited economic value. These miscellaneous parcels receive minimal, if any, benefit from the Improvements and are assessed an SFE benefit factor of zero SFEs.

Annual Cost Indexing
The Assessment is subject to an annual adjustment t ied to the Consumer Price Index-U for the Los Angeles-Long Beach-Anaheim area as of December of e ach succeeding year (the “CPI”), with a maximum annual adjustment not to exceed 3%. Any cha nge in the CPI in excess of 3% shall be cumulatively reserved as the “Unused CPI” and shall be used to increase the maximum authorized assessment rate in years in which the CPI is less t han 3%. The maximum authorized assessment rate is equal to the maximum assessment rate in the firs t fiscal year the Assessment was levied adjusted annually by the minimum of either 3% or the change in the CPI plus any Unused CPI as described above.

Appeals of Assessments Levied to Property
Any property owner who feels that the Assessment le vied on the subject property is in error as a result of incorrect information being used to apply the foregoing method of assessment may file a written appeal with the City of Orange City Manager or his or her designee. Any such appeal is limited to correction of an Assessment during the t hen-current Fiscal Year and applicable law. Upon the filing of any such appeal, the City Manager or his or her designee will promptly review the appeal and any information provided by the property owner. If the City Manager or his or her designee finds that the Assessment should be modified, the a ppropriate changes shall be made to the Assessment Roll. If any such changes are approved after the Assessment Roll has been filed with the County for collection, the City Manager or his or h er designee is authorized to refund to the property owner the amount of any approved reduction . Any dispute over the decision of the City Manager or his or her designee shall be referred to the Orange City Council, and the decision of the City Council shall be final.
375
Engineer’s Report
City of Orange
Landscape Maintenance District No. 15-1
23 Assessment Funds Must Be Expended Within the District Area The net available Assessment funds, after incidenta l, administrative, financing and other costs shall be expended exclusively for Improvements within the boundaries of the District or as described herein, and appropriate incidental and administrati ve costs as defined in the Plans and Specifications section.
376
Engineer’s Report
City of Orange
Landscape Maintenance District No. 15-1
24 ASSESSMENT
The amount to be paid for said Improvements and the expense incidental thereto, to be paid by the District for the Fiscal Year 2025-26 is generally as follows:

Table 3 – Summary Cost Estimate
For Landscape Maintenance District No. 15 -1
For Fiscal Year 2025-26

BUDGET ITEM COST

ANNUAL MAINTENANCE
Operating Expenses

$967,491
Salaries & Benefits $56,522
Administration and Project Management $76,695
Capital Expenses/ Revenues $0
Total for Services $1,100,708
Less Other Revenue ($567,879)
Taken from Reserve Funds $142,865

Net Amount of Assessment $389,964
As required by the Act, an Assessment Diagram showi ng the exterior boundaries of the Improvement District is hereto attached and incorpo rated herein by reference. The distinctive number of each parcel or lot of land in the Distric t is its Assessor Parcel Number appearing on the Assessment Roll.
377
Engineer’s Report
City of Orange
Landscape Maintenance District No. 15-1
25 ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM
The parcels proposed to be assessed in Landscape Ma intenance District No. 15-1 are shown on the Assessment Diagram, which is on file with the City Clerk of the City of Orange, and includes all those properties included in the original formation of LMD No. 86-2. The following Assessment Diagram is for general location only and is not to be considered the official boundary map. The lines and dimensions of each lot or parcel within t he District are those lines and dimensions as shown on the maps of the Assessor of the County of Orange, for Fiscal Year 2025-2, and are incorporated herein by reference, and made a part of this Diagram and this Report. 378
Engineer’s Report
City of Orange
Landscape Maintenance District No. 15-1
26 379
Engineer’s Report
City of Orange
Landscape Maintenance District No. 15-1
27 ASSESSMENT ROLL
An Assessment Roll (a listing of all parcels assess ed within the Assessment District and the amount of the Assessment) will be filed with the City Cler k and is, by reference, made part of this Report and is available for public inspection during norma l office hours at the City Hall at 300 East Chapman Avenue, Orange, California 92866.

Each lot or parcel listed on the Assessment Roll is shown and illustrated on the latest County Assessor records and these records are, by referenc e made part of this Report. These records shall govern for all details concerning the description of the lots or parcels. 380
Agenda Item
City Council
Item #: 7.1. 5/13/2025 File #: 25-0252

1. SUBJECT
Appointment(s) to the Orange Public Library Board of Trustees.

2. SUMMARY
Due to the resignation of Peggy Calvert, an unscheduled vacancy exists on the Orange Public Library Board of Trustees (“Board”).A Notice of Vacancy was posted on February 4, 2025, in accordance with Government Code Section 54974.

In addition, Mayor Slater recommends reappointing Rebecca Martinez to the Board for a three-year term expiring June 30, 2028. Ms. Martinez’sterm is due to expire on June 30, 2025. She was not reappointed at the April 8, 2025, Council meeting. A Notice of Scheduled Vacancy was posted on April 9, 2025.

3. RECOMMENDED ACTION
Confirm Mayor Slater’s recommendation to appoint Ariana Cazares to the Orange Public Library Board of Trustees to fill an unexpired term ending June 30, 2027; and reappoint Orange Public Library Board Trustee Rebecca Martinez for a three-year term expiring June 30, 2028.

City of Orange Printed on 5/7/2025Page 1 of 1
powered by Legistar™
381
Agenda Item
City Council
Item #: 7.1. 5/13/2025 File #: 25-0252

1. SUBJECT
Appointment(s) to the Orange Public Library Board of Trustees.

City of Orange Printed on 5/7/2025Page 1 of 1
powered by Legistar™
382
Agenda Item
City Council
Item #: 9.1. 5/13/2025 File #: 25-0189
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
THRU: Tom Kisela, City Manager
FROM: Leslie Hardy, Community and Library Services Director

1. SUBJECT
Lottery selection for permits to sell Safe and Sane Fireworks.

2. SUMMARY
On February 11, 2025, the Orange City Council adopted Resolution No. 11597 regarding rules and regulations for the number of permits, application process, and lottery process to sell Safe and Sane fireworks pursuant to Orange Municipal Code Chapter 8.13. An eligibility pool has been created from a compiled list of qualified applicant organizations and a lottery drawing can now be conducted wherein permittees are chosen via random selection for continuance in the permit process.

3. RECOMMENDED ACTION
Conduct a lottery via random selection process and provide notification to permittees regarding next steps in the Safe and Sane Fireworks sale permit process.

4. FISCAL IMPACT
None.

5. STRATEGIC PLAN GOALS
Goal 3: Enhance Public Communication Strategy and Quality of Life.

6. DISCUSSION AND BACKGROUND
On May 14, 2024, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 11545, submitting to the voters a question on whether to permit the sale, possession, and use of Safe and Sane Fireworks. Assigned the letter designation “AA”by the Orange County Registrar of Voters, Measure AA was approved in November 2024 with 61.18% of the vote. The Council adopted Resolution No. 11597, finalizing the lottery and permit process pertinent to the sale of Safe and Sane fireworks within the City (Attachment 1).

Staff finalized necessary application forms, created a webpage, and conducted outreach to allow interested groups to participate in the lottery process. The lottery process will determine which organizations will advance to the permit process.

The application process allowed for “Qualified Organizations” as defined in Orange Municipal Code Chapter 8.13 and Resolution No. 11597 to submit an application, which was made available electronically on the City’swebsite between March 3, 2025, and March 31, 2025 (application period).

At the conclusion of the application period, a total of 32 applications were received and reviewed to City of Orange Printed on 5/7/2025Page 1 of 2
powered by Legistar™
383
Item #: 9.1. 5/13/2025 File #: 25-0189
At the conclusion of the application period, a total of 32 applications were received and reviewed to determine eligibility for the lottery. Based on the requirements outlined in Section 3, Subsection D of Resolution No. 11597 it was determined that a total of 26 qualified organizations should be included in the lottery process (Attachment 2).

Several applications were received but determined not to be included in the lottery process. The El Modena Girls Basketball Booster Club submitted an application but is not included because the organization is affiliated with El Modena High School which is automatically receiving a permit covering all of their school organizations. An application was received from the Kiwanis Club of Greater Westminster, which did not meet several requirements of a Qualified Organization. Calvary Chapel Old Towne and Orange AYSO Region 1335 had submitted applications but withdrew from consideration during the review period.

A maximum number of twelve permits can be issued to Qualified Organizations, eight being issued to Qualified Organizations selected randomly from an eligible pool of lottery entrants and the remaining four permits being designated for El Modena High School, Orange High School, Orange Lutheran High School, and Richland Continuation High School. Staff coordinated with the administrations of each High School to determine interest in pursuing a permit for the sale of Safe and Sane fireworks.

All of the High Schools except for Richland Continuation School indicated they would pursue a permit as allotted. Richland’s election to withdraw results in an additional selection being added to the lottery, raising the total number allotted lottery permittees to nine.

Per Resolution No. 11597, it is recommended that an additional number of applicants be selected randomly to serve as “alternates”in the event that one or more of the initial nine selected applicants fails to obtain a permit. As such, it is recommended that six alternates be selected. These additional applicants shall be considered for a permit in the order they were drawn.

Applicants selected in the lottery will be contacted by the Orange Fire Department to begin the process to secure all necessary approvals to receive their permit for 2025 (Phase II).

7. ATTACHMENTS
· Attachment 1 - Resolution No. 11597
· Attachment 2 - List of Qualified Organizations
City of Orange Printed on 5/7/2025Page 2 of 2
powered by Legistar™
384
Agenda Item
City Council
Item #: 9.1. 5/13/2025 File #: 25-0189
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
THRU: Tom Kisela, City Manager
FROM: Leslie Hardy, Community and Library Services Director

1. SUBJECT
Lottery selection for permits to sell Safe and Sane Fireworks.

3. RECOMMENDED ACTION
Conduct a lottery via random selection process and provide notification to permittees regarding next steps in the Safe and Sane Fireworks sale permit process.

4. FISCAL IMPACT
None.

5. STRATEGIC PLAN GOALS
Goal 3: Enhance Public Communication Strategy and Quality of Life.

At the conclusion of the application period, a total of 32 applications were received and reviewed to City of Orange Printed on 5/7/2025Page 1 of 2
powered by Legistar™
385
Item #: 9.1. 5/13/2025 File #: 25-0189
At the conclusion of the application period, a total of 32 applications were received and reviewed to determine eligibility for the lottery. Based on the requirements outlined in Section 3, Subsection D of Resolution No. 11597 it was determined that a total of 26 qualified organizations should be included in the lottery process (Attachment 2).

Applicants selected in the lottery will be contacted by the Orange Fire Department to begin the process to secure all necessary approvals to receive their permit for 2025 (Phase II).

7. ATTACHMENTS
· Attachment 1 - Resolution No. 11597
· Attachment 2 - List of Qualified Organizations
City of Orange Printed on 5/7/2025Page 2 of 2
powered by Legistar™
386
RESOLUTION NO. 11597

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE

CITY OF ORANGE, CALIFORNIA, RESCINDING AND
REPLACING RESOLUTION NO. 11593 TO

REESTABLISH A FEE AND ADOPT RULES AND

REGULATIONS REGARDING THE NUMBER OF

PERMITS AS WELL AS THE APPLICATION AND
LOTTERY PROCESS TO SELL " SAFE AND SANE"

FIREWORKS PURSUANT TO ORANGE MUNICIPAL
CODE CHAPTER 8. 13.

WHEREAS, City of Orange voters approved Ordinance No. 10-24 allowing for the use, possessionand dischargeof" safe and sane" fireworks; and WHEREAS, Ordinance No. 10-24 repealed and replaced the then- existing Orange Municipal Code Chapter 8. 13; and
WHEREAS, Orange Municipal Code Chapter 8.13, as established by Ordinance No. 10- 24, provides that the City shall permit the sale, possession and discharge of " safe and sane" fireworks for private display within the City, in accordancewith rules and regulations adoptedby ordinance or resolution of the City Council, relating to the following: who may sell fireworks, the timeperiodsin whichtheymaybesoldanddischarged,thelocationwheretheymaybedischarged and the manner in which they may be discharged, stored, disposedof etc., Permits which may be required relating to fireworks, and similar provisions to protect the public health, safety, and welfare; and
WHEREAS, the City Council desires to adopt this Resolution to rescind and replace Resolution No. 11593 and reestablish rules and regulations regarding the number of Permits allowed eachyear aswell as the application and lottery processto receive a Permit as defined in Orange Municipal Code Chapter 8. 13.

NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ORANGE,

CALIFORNIA, DOES RESOLVE, DECLARE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION 1:

Resolution No. 11593 is hereby rescinded and replaced upon the effective date of this resolution.

SECTION 2:

The City Manager is hereby authorized to implement this resolution pursuant to Orange Municipal Code Chapter 8. 13.
387
SECTION 3:

The maximum number of Permits issued to Qualified Organizations, shall be 12 Permits per year.

A. Four of the maximum number of Permits shall be for Orange High School, El Modena High School, Richland Continuation High School, and Orange Lutheran High School.

The Permit for each high school shall incorporate all of the high school sports teams, affiliated civic groups, student groups, booster clubs, other school organizations, etc.

Each high school shall be responsible for how the Permit is administered and utilized.

None of the aforementioned high schools are required to complete an application for the lottery since eachhigh school will automatically receive a Permit to sell Safe and SaneFireworks. In the event that any of the four high schools electsto not participate in the sale of Safe and Sane Fireworks, then the Permit will be included as an additional lottery Permit available to qualified organizations.

B. All other Qualified Organizations interestedin receiving aPermit must file applications with the City Manager's Office or its designeebeginningthe first businessday of March, continuing up to 5:30 p.m. on the last businessday in March of the sameyear, at which time the filing period for that year will be closed.

C. In drawing from the pool of Qualified Organizations that submitted completed applications, the City Manager's Office or its designeeshall conduct a lottery during a City Council meeting using somemeansof random selection. The first 8 applicants to be randomly selected shall be granted a Permit upon completion of all Permit application requirements. An additional number of applicants shall be randomly selected in the event that one or more of the initial 8 applicants fails to obtain a Permit.

Additional applicants shall be consideredfor a Permit in the order they were drawn.

D. In additionto the requirementsof OrangeMunicipal CodeChapter8.13, Qualified Organizations must be organized primarily for veterans, patriotic, welfare, civic betterment, religious, athletic, educational, youth development or charitable purposes; must have their principal and permanentmeeting place within the City; provide direct and regular community servicesandbenefits to theresidentsof the City; andhavebona fide memberswho either residein the City, areemployed in the City, or are owners or operatorsof a businessor other establishmentlocated in the City.

E. Qualified Organizations may only submit one application to be included in the lottery for a Safe and Sane Fireworks Permit. If more than one application is submitted on behalf of any nonprofit organization or educational institution, including from their respectiveaffiliated organizations,the City shall disregardoneor all of the applications at its sole discretion. Any attempt to transfer an application shall void that application and may preclude an applicant from participating in the lottery in future years.

F. On forms and applications provided by the City, Qualified Organizations shall provide:
2 388
a. The proposedlocation of the fireworks stand.
b. The name, address and 24- hour telephone number of one or more responsible adults who will be in chargeof and responsible for the fireworks stand during the period fireworks are sold, displayed, or storedat such location. c. Written permission from the owner of record and/or lessor and/or management company of the property upon which said fireworks stand is proposed to be located.
d. Proof of the applicant' s statusasa Qualified Organization. e. Date when the applicant was organized and established. f. The names and addresses of the officers, if any, of the applicant. g. The name, address, and California StateFire Marshal's license number of any wholesaler or distributor from whom the Qualified Organization proposes to purchasefor resale.
h. The manner, method, and times regarding how the applicant proposes to sell Safe and Sane Fireworks.
i. A copy of the requisite retail salesPermit issuedby the Office of the California State Fire Marshal.
j. Copy of a City of Orangebusinesslicense.
k. Evidence of a temporary salestax Permit from the California State Board of Equalization.

This shall be not be construed asto limit the City from requesting additional information to effectuatethe intent andpurposesof this Resolution and OrangeMunicipal Code Chapter 8.13.

SECTION 4:

Permitteesshall provide certificates of insuranceevidencing the following minimum limits with a California admitted carrier with a current A. M. Best's rating of no lessthan anA.

A. General Liability: $ 1,000,000 per occurrence for bodily injury, personal injury, and property damage. If Commercial General Liability Insurance or other form with a generalaggregatelimit is used, either the general aggregatelimit shall apply separately to this project/location or the general aggregate limit shall be twice the required occurrence limit. The City of Orange its officers, elected or appointed officials, 3 389
employees, agents and volunteers must be named as certificate holder and as additional insured by separateattachedendorsement.

B. Any deductibles, self-insured retentions, or similar forms of coverage limitations or modifications must be declaredto and approvedby the City.

C. Permittee shall include all sub-Permitteesor subcontractors, if any, asinsured under its policiesor shallfurnishseparatecertificatesandendorsementsfor eachsub-Permittees or subcontractors. All coverage for sub- Permittees shall be subject to all of the requirements stated herein.

SECTION 5:

Permitteesagree, asa conditionof receivinga Permit, to protect, defend, indemnify, and hold harmless, the City, the City Council, the City' s officers, elected or appointed officials, employees, agents, andvolunteers from and againstany andall claims, damages,losses,expenses, judgments, demands, anddefensecosts, howevercaused, resultingfrom deathor injury and/or damageto property, arising directly or indirectly out of the obligations or operations undertaken by Permitteeby virtue of thePermitissuance, causedin wholeor in partby anyactor omissionof the Permittee, any subcontractors, anyone directly or indirectly employed, volunteers, or anyone for whose acts any of them may be liable, including but not limited to, concurrent active negligence, exceptwhere causedby the sole active negligence orrwillful misconduct of the City.

In the event of aninjury, claim, lawsuit, or any other dispute,the Permitteewill conduct all legal defensesto those injuries, claims, lawsuits, or any other disputes, including the defenseof the City if applicable, at its sole cost and expense, and at no cost or expenseto the City.

The City shall approve selection of Permittee's counsel. This defense and indemnity obligation shall apply to all claims and liability regardlessof whether any defensesand insurance policies are applicable. The policy limits do not act as a limitation upon the indemnification to be provided by Permittee.

SECTION 6:

Pursuant to Section 12635. 5 of the Health and Safety Code, the City will require each applicant receiving a Permit to pay a feeto the City apro rata portion of the actual and reasonable coststhe City incurred that is related to any of the following:
1) Processingand issuing Permits.
2) Inspection of fireworks stands.
3) Public education and awarenesscampaignsregarding the safe and responsibleuse of safe and sanefireworks, and the dangers and risks posedby the use of illegal fireworks.
4 390
4) Enforcing the provisions of the code of the City with respectto the sale and use of safe and sane fireworks, including extra personnel time and cleanup of the fireworks trash and debris. " Extra personnel time" means employee or contracted employee time that the City would not otherwise incur but for the sale and use of safe and sane fireworks.
5) Fire operation and suppression efforts that are directly related to safe and sane fireworks.

Costsshallbe allocatedamongPermitteesin proportionto grosssalesasshownon each Permittee's salesandusetax return for the applicable period.

The pro rata shareof costs shall not exceed 7 percent of the gross salesof the fireworks sold in the City during the applicable period. The fee will be calculated annually and due September 2nd
SECTION 7:

The City Council hereby determinesthat the adoptions of MeasureAA, Resolution 11593, this resolution, and Ordinance No. 01- 25 are exempt from review under the California Environmental Quality Act becauseallowing and regulating safe and sanefireworks salesin the City on the Fourth of July cannot be expectedto have a significant environmental effect because such sales already occur without compliance with law or regulation to ensurethe public health, safety and welfare, and therefore this project regulates existing activity for the protection of the environment and other public values rather than allowing wholly new activity. Therefore, these provisions of the State CEQA Guidelines apply: section 15061( b)( 3) — the " common sense" exception, section 15305— the categorical exemption for minor alterations to land use limitations, and section 15308 — the categorical exemption for actions by regulatory agenciesto protect the environment.

ADOPTED this 11thday of February, 2025
aniel R. Slater, Mayor, City of Orange
ATTEST:
a/A44126( 401—e.frne
PamelaColeman, City Clerk, City of Orange
5 391
APPROVED AS TO FORM:

AcV)(
16V\
Vigliotta, City Attorney, City of Orange
tJ hck tclOJ(1' an - f c hike VV:
5Iio1Fa

STATE OF CALIFORNIA )

COUNTY OF ORANGE )

CITY OF ORANGE
I, PAMELA COLEMAN, City Clerk of theCity of Orange, California, do herebycertify' that the foregoingResolutionwasduly andregularlyadoptedby the City Councilof the City of Orangeat a regular meeting thereof held on the 11th.day of February 2025 by the following vote:.

AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Bilodeau, Dumitru, Tavoularis, Gyllenhammer, Slater
NOES:. COUNCILMEMBER • ' os
ABSENT: ' COUNCILMEMB S: Gutierr z
PamelaColeman, City Clerk, City of Orange
6 392
Attachment 2
List of Qualified Organizations

List Number

Name of Organization(s)
1* Orange Elks Lodge #1475 / Building Association (Historical) Benevolent and Protective Order, Elks Building
2 North Sunrise Little League
3 St. Paul's Lutheran Church and School
4 American Legion Post 132 (Orange Post 132)
5 The Supreme Emblem Club of The United States of America 6* McPherson Magnet School PTSA / McPherson Education Foundation 7 Carter-Drenner-Kalms Foundation, Inc.
8 Salem Lutheran Church & School
9 Hub for Integration, Reentry & Employment
10 Spirit and Truth Worship Center
11 Orange International Street Fair, Inc.
12 House of Mercy
13 Journey to Hope Ministries
14 A Quarter Blue
15 Orange Chiefs Football & Cheer
16 Orange Unified Public Schools Foundation
17 The Hub OC
18 Love Orange
19 Rest EZZZ Foundation
20 Orange Plaza Rotary Club
21 Olive Pony Baseball
22 Father JJ Juba Council 4922 Knights of Columbus
23 Bethel 337 Orange Job's Daughters International
24 Scepter Chapter #163 Order of the Easter Star
25 Orange County Friends of Music
26 Fletcher Elementary PTSA

*Entrants numbers 1 and 6 above represent combined applications for organizations that were deemed to be affiliated with the same nonprofit and/or educational institutions.

These applicants would have been independently considered Qualified Organizations if not for multiple affiliate status and we re therefore given the opportunity to combine their applications in lieu of having their applications disregarded. Each of these applying organizations accepted the offer to have their applications combined. 393
Agenda Item
City Council
Item #: 9.2. 5/13/2025 File #: 25-0244
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
THRU: Tom Kisela, City Manager
FROM: Christopher Cash, Public Works Director

1. SUBJECT
Expansion of Permit Parking Area “AA”to include both sides of E. Avenida Palmar from west City limits to N. Thora Street and both sides of N. Sandpiper Circle, and establishment of Permit Parking Area “AB,”to be comprised of both sides of N. Mallard Street from E. Locust Avenue to E. Jackson Avenue. Resolution Nos. 11606, 11607, or 11608.

2. SUMMARY
Staff received three requests for permit parking. All three requests were processed in accordance with the City’sNeighborhood Permit Parking Program, adequately supported by the affected property owners, and approved by the City Traffic Commission. If approved, E. Avenida Palmar and N.

Sandpiper Circle will be added the existing Permit Parking Area “AA”and N. Mallard Street, from E.

Locust Avenue to E. Jackson Avenue, will establish Permit Parking Area “AB.”

3. RECOMMENDED ACTION
Approve one of the following options: Option 1, 2 OR 3.

1. Option 1. Approve permit parking on E. Avenida Palmar, N. Sandpiper Circle and N. Mallard Street and adopt Resolution No. 11606. A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Orange adopting a revised master resolution of designated permit parking areas and established permit parking opportunity areas within the City of Orange.

2. Option 2. Approve permit parking on E. Avenida Palmar and N. Sandpiper Circle only and adopt Resolution No. 11607. A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Orange adopting a revised master resolution of designated permit parking areas and established permit parking opportunity areas within the City of Orange.

3. Option 3. Approve permit parking on N. Mallard Street only and adopt Resolution No. 11608. A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Orange adopting a revised master resolution of designated permit parking areas and established permit parking opportunity areas within the City of Orange.

4. FISCAL IMPACT
None.

5. STRATEGIC PLAN GOALS
Goal 5: Improve Infrastructure, Mobility, and Technology City of Orange Printed on 5/7/2025Page 1 of 4
powered by Legistar™
394
Item #: 9.2. 5/13/2025 File #: 25-0244

6. DISCUSSION AND BACKGROUND
The City’s Neighborhood Permit Parking Program (NPPP) provides a mechanism for protecting residential streets from external parking overflow when certain criteria are satisfied. To initiate the NPPP process, a property owner on an affected and eligible street must submit a written request identifying the streets and boundaries for permit parking as well as days and times where demand for on-street parking is the highest. City staff will review the proposed streets for eligibility for incorporation into the permit parking program. Once reviewed, staff will conduct a parking occupancy study on eligible streets. A street must have a minimum 75% parking occupancy and 75% property owner support via a petition process. If these criteria are met, staff will present the proposed permit parking boundaries to City Traffic Commission (CTC) for initial review and City Council for final approval.

This report presents requests for permit parking in two separate sets of streets (areas), which must be adopted by resolution. Because only one permit parking resolution may be adopted at any given City Council meeting, the two areas are combined into a single agenda item, with the recommended action formatted in such a way to give the City Council the option to approve permit parking in any one or both areas.

Permit Parking on E. Avenida Palmar and N. Sandpiper Circle Staff received written requests for permit parking to be implemented on several streets in the neighborhood of E. Avenida Palmar and N. Sandpiper Circle. Of those streets, only E. Avenida Palmar, from west City limits to N. Thora Street, and Sandpiper Circle met the objectives and criteria of the City’sNPPP for permit parking consideration. Staff mapped the number of legal parking spaces for each of the streets and conducted parking occupancy studies during hours of highest demand identified by the proponents. Both E. Avenida Palmar and N. Sandpiper Circle exceeded the 75% minimum level of parking occupancy, with an average parking occupancy of 76% and 75%, respectively. Subsequently, staff mailed petitions to affect property owners. The results of petition process for E. Avenida Palmar indicate that 88% of property owners are in favor of permit parking, 0% were opposed, and 12% did not respond. On N. Sandpiper Circle, 75% of property owners were in favor of permit parking, 0% were opposed, and 25% did not respond. Because the support on each street exceeded the 75% stipulated in the NPPP, staff supports, and the CTC recommends implementation of permit parking on the aforementioned streets. If approved, E. Avenida Palmar, from west City limits to N. Thora Street, and both sides of N. Sandpiper Circle would be added to existing Permit Parking Area “AA”,as shown in Attachment 4. Permit Parking Area “AA”was established in December 2023. The requests for permit parking on Avenida Palmar and Sandpiper Circle were made less than one year from implementation of permit parking in Area “AA.” One of the requests for permit parking was made by a resident of Thora Street, and also included Renee Street. While Renee Street satisfied the parking occupancy requirement (average occupancy of 97%,) it was not included in the petition process or recommended to CTC for the following reasons:
· Permitting Renee Street would not meet a key NPPP objective of providing reasonably convenient parking opportunities for residents that otherwise would not have access to such.

Both properties in Orange that front the street would have adequate parking without designating it parking-by-permit only.
· Many of the concerns being expressed are over red curb violations and public nuisance activities, both of which are enforcement matters that permit parking is not the appropriate City of Orange Printed on 5/7/2025Page 2 of 4
powered by Legistar™
395
Item #: 9.2. 5/13/2025 File #: 25-0244
mechanism for resolving.
· The street is already heavily parked to the extent that permitting nearby streets would not be expected to displace any additional vehicles onto Renee.

Notwithstanding the above, a resident/business owner on a property taking access onto Renee street spoke under public comments at the CTC meeting, requesting that Renee Street be considered as part of the permit parking approval. The resident has also subsequently submitted a letter to the CTC requesting same, a copy of which is provided as Attachment 11 for the City Council’s reference.

Permit Parking on N. Mallard Street
Staff received a written request for permit parking to be implemented on several streets in the area of N. Mallard Street. Of those streets, only N. Mallard Street, from E. Locust Avenue to E. Jackson Avenue, met the objectives and criteria of the City’sNPPP for permit parking consideration. Staff mapped the number of legal parking spaces for the street and conducted parking occupancy studies during hours of highest demand identified by the proponent. N. Mallard Street exceeded the 75% minimum level of parking occupancy, with an average parking occupancy of 79%. Subsequently, staff mailed petitions to affected property owners. The results of the petition process for N. Mallard Street indicate that 85% of property owners are in favor of permit parking, 7% are opposed, and 7% did not respond. Because the support on each street exceeded the 75% stipulated in the NPPP, staff supports, and the CTC recommends implementation of permit parking. If approved, N. Mallard Street, from E. Locust Avenue to E. Jackson Avenue, would establish Permit Parking Area “AB”.

Based on the above, three options are presented for City Council’s consideration:
· Option 1 approves permit parking on E. Avenida Palmar, N. Sandpiper Circle and N. Mallard Street; and
· Option 2 approves permit parking only on E. Avenida Palmar and N. Sandpiper Circle; and · Option 3 approves permit parking only on N. Mallard Street.

It should be noted that property owners of any street adjacent experiencing spillover may request to initiate permit parking within a year without having to pay the application fee. Parking occupancy, petition thresholds, and other requirements in effect at the time would still apply. Furthermore, permit parking does not supersede other parking restrictions such as street sweeping. Participation in the permit program is voluntary. However, any vehicle parking on the street without a permit after implementation is subject to citation.

7. ATTACHMENTS
· Attachment 1 Resolution No. 11606 (Option 1)
· Attachment 2 Resolution No. 11607 (Option 2)
· Attachment 3 Resolution No. 11608 (Option 3)
· Attachment 4 E. Avenida Palmar and N. Sandpiper Circle Activation Map · Attachment 5 N. Mallard Street Activation Map
· Attachment 6 City Traffic Commission Staff Report April 9, 2025 (Avenida Palmar and City of Orange Printed on 5/7/2025Page 3 of 4
powered by Legistar™
396
Item #: 9.2. 5/13/2025 File #: 25-0244
· Attachment 6 City Traffic Commission Staff Report April 9, 2025 (Avenida Palmar and Sandpiper Circle)
· Attachment 7 City Traffic Commission Staff Report April 9, 2025 (Mallard Street) · Attachment 8 Draft City Traffic Commission Minutes April 9, 2025 · Attachment 9 Notification Letter Avenida Palmar and Sandpiper Circle · Attachment 10 Notification Letter Mallard Street
· Attachment 11 Letter to CTC Requesting Permit Parking on Renee Street City of Orange Printed on 5/7/2025Page 4 of 4
powered by Legistar™
397
Agenda Item
City Council
Item #: 9.2. 5/13/2025 File #: 25-0244
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
THRU: Tom Kisela, City Manager
FROM: Christopher Cash, Public Works Director

Sandpiper Circle will be added the existing Permit Parking Area “AA”and N. Mallard Street, from E.

Locust Avenue to E. Jackson Avenue, will establish Permit Parking Area “AB.”

3. RECOMMENDED ACTION
Approve one of the following options: Option 1, 2 OR 3.

4. FISCAL IMPACT
None.

5. STRATEGIC PLAN GOALS
Goal 5: Improve Infrastructure, Mobility, and Technology City of Orange Printed on 5/7/2025Page 1 of 4
powered by Legistar™
398
Item #: 9.2. 5/13/2025 File #: 25-0244

Both properties in Orange that front the street would have adequate parking without designating it parking-by-permit only.
· Many of the concerns being expressed are over red curb violations and public nuisance activities, both of which are enforcement matters that permit parking is not the appropriate City of Orange Printed on 5/7/2025Page 2 of 4
powered by Legistar™
399
Item #: 9.2. 5/13/2025 File #: 25-0244
mechanism for resolving.
· The street is already heavily parked to the extent that permitting nearby streets would not be expected to displace any additional vehicles onto Renee.

7. ATTACHMENTS
· Attachment 1 Resolution No. 11606 (Option 1)
· Attachment 2 Resolution No. 11607 (Option 2)
· Attachment 3 Resolution No. 11608 (Option 3)
· Attachment 4 E. Avenida Palmar and N. Sandpiper Circle Activation Map · Attachment 5 N. Mallard Street Activation Map
· Attachment 6 City Traffic Commission Staff Report April 9, 2025 (Avenida Palmar and City of Orange Printed on 5/7/2025Page 3 of 4
powered by Legistar™
400
Item #: 9.2. 5/13/2025 File #: 25-0244
· Attachment 6 City Traffic Commission Staff Report April 9, 2025 (Avenida Palmar and Sandpiper Circle)
· Attachment 7 City Traffic Commission Staff Report April 9, 2025 (Mallard Street) · Attachment 8 Draft City Traffic Commission Minutes April 9, 2025 · Attachment 9 Notification Letter Avenida Palmar and Sandpiper Circle · Attachment 10 Notification Letter Mallard Street
· Attachment 11 Letter to CTC Requesting Permit Parking on Renee Street City of Orange Printed on 5/7/2025Page 4 of 4
powered by Legistar™
401
RESOLUTION NO. 11606

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE

CITY OF ORANGE ADOPTING A REVISED MASTER

RESOLUTION OF DESIGNATED PERMIT PARKING

AREAS AND ESTABLISHED PERMIT PARKING

OPPORTUNITY AREAS WITHIN THE CITY OF
ORANGE

WHEREAS, pursuant to California Vehicle Code Section 22507, local authorities may generally prohibit or restrict the stopping, parking, or standing of vehicles on certain streets or highways, or portions thereof, during all or certain hours of the day; and

WHEREAS, local authorities may also include a designation of certain streets upon which preferential parking privileges are established with a permit or permits that exempt them from the prohibition or restriction of the ordinance or resolution; and

WHEREAS, pursuant to the authority provided by the California Vehicle Code, the City Council of the City of Orange codified Chapter 10.30 of the Orange Municipal Code generally establishing parking requirements for the City of Orange; and

WHEREAS, Sections 10.30.010 and 10.30.020 specifically establishes the Neighborhood Parking Permit Program designating portions of certain public streets for permit-parking and explicitly authorizes the City Council of the City of Orange to add, remove or modify designated areas within the Neighborhood Parking Permit Program by resolution; and

WHEREAS, the creation of a “Master Resolution” containing all the permit parking areas in a single document eliminates the need to potentially revise multiple resolutions when an area is added, deleted, or modified within the Neighborhood Parking Permit Program; and

WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Orange most recently adopted said Master Resolution on January 28, 2025 (Resolution No. 11595), containing a list of all permit parking areas within the City; and

WHEREAS, staff now recommends adding additional streets in the Neighborhood Permit Parking Program; and

WHEREAS, staff recommends adjustments to descriptions of Neighborhood Permit Parking Program Area “S” and Area “T” to be consistent with signage installed in the field and available records; and

WHEREAS, accordingly, the City Council desires to rescind Resolution No. 11595 and replace it with a revised Resolution;

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED , by the City Council of the City of Orange does resolve as follows:
402
2 SECTION I:

That Resolution No. 11595, adopted January 28 , 202 5, is hereby rescinded, effective immediately upon the date of the adoption of Resolution No. 11606.

SECTION II:

The following streets be added to the Neighborhood Permit Parking Program Area “AA”:

Both sides of E. Avenida Palmar, from west City limits to N. Thora Street.

Both sides of N. Sandpiper Circle.

The following streets be added to the Neighborhood Permit Parking Program Area “AB”:

Both sides of N. Mallard Street, from 985 N. Mallard Street to E. Jackson Avenue.

SECTION III:

That the Master Resolution of Permit Parking Area for the Neighborhood Permit Parking Program attached hereto as Exhibit s “A”, Exhibit “B”, Exhibit “C”, Exhibit “D”, Exhibit “E”, Exhibit “F”, Exhibit “G”, Exhibit “H” and Exhibit “I” are hereby adopted.

ADOPTED this day of , 2025

Daniel R. Slater, Mayor, City of Orange

ATTEST:

Pamela Coleman, City Clerk, City of Orange

APPROVED AS TO FORM:

Wayne W. Winthers, Interim City Attorney, City of Orange

403
3 I, PAMELA COLEMAN, City Clerk of the City of Orange, California, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly adopted by the City Council of the City of Orange at a regular meeting thereof held on the day of , 202 5 by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS:

Pamela Coleman, City Clerk, City of Orange
404
Exhibit A

Page 1 of 7 ends

EXHIBIT A

The following areas are all areas that have been designated by the City Council for inclusion in the Neighborhood Permit Parking Program and are subject to Chapter 10.30 of the Orange Municipal Code. Any additions or deletions to the Neighborhood Permit Parking Program shall be made by amending this Master Resolution.

CHAPMAN UNIVERSITY NEIGHBORHOOD PERMIT PARKING AREA “A”

1. Both sides of Center St. from Walnut Ave. to the southern terminus of Center St. adjacent to residential land uses.

2. Both sides of Cleveland St. from Palm Ave. to Sycamore Ave.

3. East side of Cypress St. from Maple Ave. to the southern property line of 171 North Cypress St.

4. Both sides of Cypress St. from Walnut Ave. to Sycamore Ave.

5. Both sides of Everett Pl. from Shaffer St. to Glassell St.

6. Both sides of Glassell St. from Walnut Ave. to Rose Ave.

7. East side of Grand St. from the southern property line of 127 N Grand Street to the northern property line of 147 North Grand St.

8. Both sides of Grand St. from Palm Ave. to the southern property line of 183 N Grand St. adjacent to residential land uses.

9. Both sides of Grand St. from Mayfair Ave. to Walnut Ave. adjacent to residential land uses.

10. Both sides of Harwood St. from Palm Ave. to the northern terminus of Harwood St.

11. Both sides of Jefferson Ave. from Harwood St. to Shaffer St.

12. East side of Lemon St. from Maple Ave. to the southern property line of 149 North Lemon St.

13. Both sides of Lemon St. from Palm Ave. to Walnut Ave. adjacent to residential land uses.

14. Both sides of Maple Ave. from Cleveland St. to Orange St. adjacent to residential land uses.

15. North side of Maple Ave. from Olive St. to the eastern property line of 115 East Maple Ave.

16. Both sides of Mayfair Ave. from Shaffer St. to Glassell St.

17. Both sides of Olive St. from Maple Ave. to the northern terminus of Olive St. adjacent to residential land uses.

18. Both sides of Olive St. from Sycamore Ave. to Walnut Ave.

19. Both sides of Orange St. from Maple Ave. to Palm Ave. adjacent to residential land uses.

20. Both sides of Orange St. from Walnut Ave. to the northern terminus of Orange St.

21. Both sides of Palm Ave. from Harwood St. to Glassell St. adjacent to residential land uses.

22. North side of Palm Ave. from Pine St. to Harwood St.

23. Both sides of Rose Ave. from Glassell St. to Grand St.

24. Both sides of Shaffer St. from Chapman Ave. to Walnut Ave. adjacent to residential land uses.

25. West side of Shaffer St. from Walnut Ave. to the northern property line of 516 North Shaffer St.

26. Both sides of Sycamore Ave. from Cambridge St. to Center St.

27. North side of Sycamore Ave. from Glassell St. to the western property line of 317 West Sycamore Ave. adjacent to residential land uses.

28. South side of Sycamore Ave. from the western property line of 314 West Sycamore Ave. to Lemon St.

29. Both sides of Walnut Ave. from Cambridge St. to Center St. adjacent to residential land uses. 405
Exhibit A

Page 2 of 7 ends

AREA “B”

1. Both sides of Adams Ave. from Glassell St. to Grand St.

2. Both sides of Hoover Ave. from Glassell St. to Grand St.

3. Both sides of Quincy Ave. from Glassell St. to Grand St.

4. Both sides of Wilson Ave. from Glassell St. to Grand St.

AREA “C”

1. Both sides of Compton Ave. from Manchester Ave. to Lewis St.

2. East side of Lewis St. from the northerly property line at 4035 Compton Ave. to the southern property line of 119 N. Lewis St.

3. West side of Manchester Ave. from Sheringham Ave. to Compton Ave.

4. North side of Sheringham Ave. from Manchester Ave. to Windgap Dr.

5. South sides of Sheringham Ave. from Woodridge Cr. to Windgap Dr.

6. Both sides of Sunningdale Cr. from Compton Ave. south to include the cul-de-sac.

7. Both sides of Windgap Dr. from Compton Ave. south to include the cul-de-sac.

8. West side of Woodridge Cr. from Sheringham Ave. south to include the cul-de-sac.

9. East side of Woodridge Cr. from the northerly property line of 119 N. Woodridge Cr. south to include the cul-de-sac.

AREA “D”

1. Both sides of Dunas St. from Maple Ave. north to include the cul-de-sac.

2. Both sides of Maple Ave. from Prospect St. to Olympia Way.

3. Both sides of Olympia Way from Maple Ave. to Spring St.

4. Both sides of Shasta St. from Maple Ave. north to include the cul-de-sac.

5. Both sides of Vine Ave. from Olympia Way to its western terminus.

6. Both sides of First St. from Chapman Ave. north to include the cul-de-sac.

7. Both sides of Pearl Ave. from First St. to McPherson Rd.

8. East side of McPherson Rd. from 131 to 133 N. McPherson Rd.

AREA “E”

1. West side of Elm St. south of Sycamore Ave. to include the cul-de-sac.

AREA “F”
Permit Parking between the hours of 10:00 p.m. and 6:00 a.m.

1. Both sides of Almond Ave. from Prospect St. to Violet Ln.

2. Both sides of Kathleen St. from Chapman Ave. to Palmyra Ave.

3. Both sides of Palmyra Ave. from Craig Dr. to Prospect St.

4. East side of Prospect St. from Almond Ave. to Palmyra Ave.

5. Both sides of Violet Ln. from Almond Ave. to Palmyra Ave. 406
Exhibit A

Page 3 of 7 ends

AREA “G”
Permit Parking between the hours of 10:00 p.m. and 6:00 a.m.

1. Both sides of Euclid Ave. from James St. to Seranado St.

2. Both sides of James St. from Sycamore Ave. to Euclid Ave.

3. Both sides of Palm Ave. from Swidler St. to Seranado St.

4. Both sides of Sycamore Ave. from Swidler St. to Seranado St.

5. Both sides of Seranado St. from Spring St. to Walnut Ave.

6. Both sides of Silverleaf Ave. from Thomas St. to Seranado St.

7. Both sides of Spring St. from Swidler St. to Seranado St.

8. Both sides of Swidler St. from Spring St. to Walnut Ave.

9. Both sides of Thomas St. from Sycamore Ave. to Silverleaf Ave.

10. Both sides of Walnut Ave. from Swidler St. to Seranado St.

AREA “H”

1. Both sides of Shaffer St. beginning 390 feet north of Katella Ave. and ending at Trenton Ave. (R-1 zoned single-family residences only.)

AREA “I”

1. Both sides of Almond Ave. from Prospect St. to Dunas St.

2. Both sides of Century Ave. from James St. to Thomas St.

3. Both sides of Craig Dr. 100 feet south of Roberta Dr. to Prospect St.

4. Both sides of Dunas St. from Palmyra Ave. to Almond Ave.

5. Both sides of James St. from Century Dr. to La Veta Ave.

6. North side of La Veta Ave. from Prospect St. to Dunas St.

7. Both sides of Merelet Ln. from Craig Dr. to include the cul-de-sac.

8. Both sides of Olympia Way from Palmyra Ave. to Almond Ave.

9. North side of Palmyra Ave. from Prospect St. to Thomas St.

10. Both sides of Ruth Pl. easterly of James St.

11. Both sides of Ruth Pl. from Prospect St. to Olympia Way.

12. Both sides of Shasta St. from Palmyra Ave. to Almond Ave.

13. Both sides of Thomas St. from Century Dr. to Palmyra Ave.

AREA “J”

1. Both sides of Binnacle Ave. from Jetty Dr. to its easterly terminus.

2. North side of Chapman Ave. from Jetty Dr. to 4537 W. Chapman Ave.

3. North side of Chapman Ave. frontage road from Jetty Dr. to cul-de-sac.

4. Both sides of Grant Pl. from Chapman Ave. northerly to include the cul-de-sac.

5. Both sides of Jetty Dr. from Chapman Ave. to Sirius Ave.

6. West side of Lewis St. from Sirius Ave. to Simmons Ave.

7. South side of Simmons Ave. from Lewis St. to Spinnaker St.

8. Both sides of Sirius Ave. from Lewis St. to Jetty Dr.

9. Both sides of Spinnaker St. from Binnacle Ave. to Simmons Ave. 407
Exhibit A

Page 4 of 7 ends

10. Both sides of Stay Court easterly of Jetty Dr.

11. Both sides of Tiller Ave. from Lewis St. to Spinnaker St.

AREA “K”

1. Both sides of the 2700 block of E. Bennett Ave.

2. Both sides of the 2700 block of E. Killingsworth Ave.

3. Both sides of the 100-200 blocks of N. Malena Dr.

4. Both sides of the 2700 block of E. Sherman Ave.

5. Both sides of the 100-200 blocks of N. Wheeler St.

AREA “L”

1. Both sides of Jacaranda Ave. from Morgan St. to Mallard St.

2. Both sides of Juniper Ave. from Morgan St. to Mallard St.

3. Both sides of Mallard St. from Collins Ave. northerly to 985 N. Mallard St.

4. Both sides of Morgan St. from Collins Ave. northerly to 986 N. Morgan St.

AREA “M”

1. Both sides of Citrus St. from Almond Ave. to the southerly commercial property lines south of Chapman Ave.

AREA “N”

1. West side of Bedford Rd. from La Veta Ave. to Bronson Ave.

AREA “O”

1. North side of Spring St. from Hewes St. to Earlham St.

AREA “P”

1. Both sides of the 1000 block of Gardner Dr.

2. Both sides of the 1000 block of Greengrove St.

3. Both sides of Monroe Ave. from California St. to Lincoln St.

4. Both sides of Quincy Ave. from California St. to Lincoln St.

5. Both sides of Lincoln St. between Adams Ave. and Wilson Ave. including the cul-de-sac.

6. West side of Lincoln St. from 990 N. Lincoln St. to Adams Ave.

7. East side of Lincoln St. from 1073 N. Lincoln St. to Adams Ave.

8. Both sides of Adams Ave. between Lincoln St. and California St.

AREA “Q”

1. Both sides of the 8500 block of Biscayne Way.

2. Both sides of the 8500 block of Deershire Ct.

3. Both sides of the 200 block of Fairfield Ln.

4. Both sides of the 200 block of Firenza Way.

5. Both sides of the 8500 block of Heatherview Ln.
408
Exhibit A

Page 5 of 7 ends

AREA “R”

1. Both sides of San Luis Dr. from 7821 (north side) to Santa Cruz Ave., and from 7816 (south side) to the beginning of 8132.

2. 8102 and 8110 Santa Cruz Ave. (south side).

3. Both sides of Santa Maria St. between San Luis Dr. and Santa Cruz Ave.

AREA “S”

1. Both sides of Poplar St. between Maple Ave. and the cul-de-sac.

2. North side of Maple Ave. between Stevens St. and 1949 W. Maple Ave.

3. South side of Maple Ave. from Stevens St. to 2010 W. Maple Ave.

4. Both sides of Eckhoff St. between 130-283 N. Eckhoff St. except the following spaces:
• Four spaces on the east side of Eckhoff St. from the southerly limit to W. Arbor Way (approximately 110 feet).
• Five spaces on the east side of Eckhoff St. from 45 feet north of W. Arbor Way end of curb return to Maple Ave. (approximately 140 feet. It allows one parking space to remain in the permit parking program just north of the driveway at 2037 W. Arbor Way for visibility).
• Three spaces on the east side of Eckhoff St. north of Willow Ave. to the northerly limit (approximately 70 feet).
• Two spaces on the east side of Eckhoff St. from the existing red curb north of Maple Ave. to the driveway south of 206 N. Eckhoff St.

AREA “T”

1. Both sides of Cully Dr. from the westerly property lines of 861 and 864 W. Cully Dr. to the cul-de-sac.

AREA “U”

1. Both sides of Waverly St. from the northerly property lines of 133 and 138 S. Waverly St. to Almond Ave.

AREA “V”

1. The south side of E. Rose Ave. from 1932/1934 to N. Highland St.

2. Both sides of N. Highland St. from E. Rose Ave. to E. Barkley Ave.

3. Both sides of E. Mayfair Ave. from 1740 E. Mayfair Ave. to N. Highland St.

4. The south side of E. Lomita Ave. from 1734/1736 to N. Highland St.

5. The north side of E. Lomita Ave. from 1901 to N. Highland St.

6. Both sides of E. Barkley Ave. from the cul-de-sac to N. Highland St.

7. Both sides of the cul-de-sacs of N. Victoria Dr., N. Russell Dr., and N. Shirley Dr., north of E.

Mayfair Ave.

409
Exhibit A

Page 6 of 7 ends

AREA “W”

1. Both sides of Madison Ave. from Wayfield St. to the cul-de-sac.

2. Both sides of Orange Grove Ave. from Wayfield St. to the westerly property lines of 1743/1744

3. E. Orange Grove Ave.

4. East side Wayfield St. between Orange Grove Ave. and the southerly property lines of 550/555 Wayfield St.

5. West side of Wayfield St. between Orange Grove Ave. and Madison Ave.

AREA “X”

1. South side of Collins Ave. from Hart St. to 2842 E. Collins Ave.

AREA “Y”

1. Both sides N. Citrus St. from Walnut Ave. to W. Sycamore Ave.

AREA “Z”

1. Both sides of Sycamore Ave. from Rancho Santiago Blvd. to Richard St.

2. Both sides Rancho Santiago Blvd. from the south city limits to Silverleaf Ave.

3. Both sides of Silverleaf Ave. from Rancho Santiago Blvd. to Richard St.

4. Both sides of Christine St. from Silverleaf Ave. to Sycamore Ave.

5. Both sides of Richard St. from Silverleaf Ave. to Sycamore Ave.

AREA “AA”

1. Both sides of Ryals Ln. from the West City limit to Bob White Way.

2. East side of Bob White Way between Ryals and Partridge Ln.

3. Both sides of the 200 Block of Renee St.

4. Both sides of Avenida Palmar, from west City limits to N. Thora St.

5. Both sides of Sandpiper Circle.

AREA “AB”

1. Both sides of Mallard Street, from 985 N. Mallard St. to Jackson Ave.

OPPORTUNITY AREA “1”

1. Both sides of Lilac Ln. from Culver Ave. to Orchard Ave.

2. Both sides of Plum Ln. from Culver Ave. to Orchard Ave.

3. Both sides of Orchard Ave. from Flower St. to the easterly terminus of the street.

4. Both sides of Bedford Rd. between Culver Ave. and La Veta Ave.

5. Both sides of Devon Rd. between Palmyra Ave. and Culver Ave. (permit parking between the hours 4:00p.m. and 9:00a.m.)

6. Both sides of Crest Rd. between Palmyra Ave. and Culver Ave.

410
Exhibit A

Page 7 of 7 ends

Opportunity Area “2”

1. Both sides of Fairway Dr. from Cambridge St. to Tustin St.

2. Both sides of Young Cir. south of Fairway Dr.

3. Both sides of Greenview Dr. south of Fairway Dr.

OPPORTUNITY AREA “3”

1. Wayfield St. between Palm Ave. and Walnut Ave.

2. Palm Ave. between Park Ln. and Wayfield St.

3. Park Ln. between Dana Pl. and Palm Ave.

4. Wayfield Cr. south of Palm Ave.

5. Both sides of Mount Vernon Ave. between Wayfield St. and Le May Ct.

6. Both sides of Park Ln. between Mount Vernon Ave. and Sycamore Ave.

7. Both sides of Martha Ave. east of Park Ln.

8. Both sides of Sycamore Ave. between Wayfield St. and Highland St.

9. Both sides of Highland St. between Sycamore Ave. and south terminus.

10. Both sides of Wayfield St. from Chapman Ave. north to include the cul-de-sac.

OPPORTUNITY AREA “4”

1. Both sides of Trenton Ave. from the westerly property lines of 331 E. Trenton Ave. and 1482 N.

Grant St. to Shaffer St.

2. Both sides of Trenton Ave., from Shaffer St to Cleveland St.

3. Both sides of Grant St. from Trenton Ave. to the cul-de sac.

OPPORTUNITY AREA “5”

1. Both sides of Greengrove St. from Meats Ave. to the southern terminus.

2. Both sides of Del Mar Ave. from Cambridge St. to Greengrove St.

3. South side of Meats Ave., from Cambridge St. to Greengrove St. 411
Exhibit B

Page 1 of 2 ends

EXHIBIT B

The following are descriptions of preemptively established permit parking opportunity areas approved by the City Council and are subject to Chapter 10.30 of the Orange Municipal Code. Any additions or deletions to the Neighborhood Permit Parking Program shall be made by amending this Master Resolution.

CHAPMAN UNIVERSITY NEIGHBORHOOD PERMIT PARKING OPPORTUNITY AREA “A”
Generally bounded by Lomita Avenue to the north, Cypress Street to the west, Chapman Avenue to the south, and Cambridge Street to the east, as shown in Exhibit C.

OPPORTUNITY AREA “1”
To the north, Opportunity Area “1” is comprised of the area bounded by Sycamore Avenue. To the west, Opportunity Area “1” is comprised of the area bounded by, but does not include, the 57 Freeway.

To the south, Opportunity Area “1” is comprised of the area bounded by, but does not include, the 22 Freeway from the 57 Freeway to Bedford Road, and La Veta Avenue from Bedford Road to Main Street. To the east, Opportunity Area “1” is comprised of the area bounded by, and inclusive of, the east side of Bedford Ro ad from the 22 Freeway to La Veta Avenue; and bounded by, but does not include, Main Street from La Veta Avenue to Sycamore Avenue.

OPPORTUNITY AREA “2”
To the north, Opportunity Area “2” is comprised of the area bounded by, but does not include, the Santiago Creek Bike Trail. To the west, Opportunity Area “2” is comprised of the area bounded by, but does not include, Cambridge Street. To the south, Opport unity Area “2” is comprised of the area bounded by, but does not include, the 22 Freeway. To the east, Opportunity Area “2” is comprised of the area bounded by, but does not include, Tustin Street.

OPPORTUNITY AREA “3”
To the north, Opportunity Area “3” is comprised of the area bounded by, but does not include, the Walnut Avenue. To the west, Opportunity Area “3” is comprised of the area bounded by, and inclusive of, Wayfield Street from Walnut Avenue to Palm Avenue and Wayfield Street from Chapman Avenue to the northern terminus of Wayfield Street. To the south, Opportunity Area “2” is comprised of the area bounded by, but does not include, Chapman Avenue. To the east, Opportunity Area “2” is comprised of the area bounded by, but does not include, the 55 Freeway and Le May Court.

OPPORTUNITY AREA “4”
To the north, Opportunity Area “4” is comprised of the area bounded by, and inclusive of, Trenton Avenue. To the west, Opportunity Area “4” is comprised of the area bounded by the western property line of 331 East Trenton Avenue. To the south, Opportunity Area “4” is comprised of the area bounded by the prolongation of the southern property line of 1411 North Shaffer Street and 1412 North Shaffer Street. To the east, Opportunity Area “4” is comprised of the area bounded by, but does not include, Cambridge Street.

412
Exhibit B

Page 2 of 2 ends

OPPORTUNITY AREA “5”
To the north, Opportunity Area “5” is comprised of the area bounded by, and inclusive of, the south side of Meats Avenue. To the west, Opportunity Area “5” is comprised of the area bounded by, but does not include, Cambridge Street. To the south, Opportunity Area “5” is comprised of the area bounded by, and inclusive of, Del Mar Avenue and the southern terminus of Greengrove Street. To the east, Opportunity Area “5” is comprised of the area bounded by, and inclusive of, Greengrove Street.

OPPORTUNITY AREA “6”
Opportunity Area “6” is generally bounded by Almond Avenue to the north, Cypress Street to the west, Palmyra Avenue to the south, and Shaffer Street to the east, as shown in Exhibit I. 413
414
J:\Production_Environment\Projects\PermitParking\PermitParking.aprx\Parking Permit Areas 12/12/2024
Source: City of Orange (2024)
0 500250
Feet
.

Bitterbush Channel
SantaAnaRiver
W Maple Ave
N
Bitterbush
St
N
Flow
er
St
W Sycamore Ave
W SpruceAve
W Palm Ave
W Willow Ave
N
Ram
partSt
W Beverly Dr
W Cherry Dr
N
Donneybrooke
St
N
Holly
St
1D
1B
57 5 W Culver Ave
W Almond Ave
S
M
arks
W
ay
W Mills Dr
W Palmyra Ave
S Anita Dr
W La Veta Ave
W Chapman AveW Chapman Ave
1B
1A
1A
107A
105B
22 Fernw
ood
Dr Sherwood Ln
Col William
Eldridge Park
14D
W Palm Ave
W Maple Ave
N
CedarSt
N
Jew
ellPl
W Birch Ave
N
Ash
St
W Cherry Dr
El Camino Real
Park
Portola Middle
School
Far Horizons
Montessori
School
Sycamore
Elementary
School
W Culver Ave
W Almond Ave
S
Feldner
Rd
S
Alpine
Rd
S
Pepper
St
S
Devon
Rd
W Robin Rd
S
M
ain
St
W Chapman Ave
West Orange
Elementary
School
CHOC
Children's Main
Campus-Orange
St Joseph
Hospital
22 Main Place Dr
15 14B
OpArea1
S
E
N
Legend
NPPP Opportunity Area 1
Area E
Area N
Area S
Exhibit D

CITY OF ORANGE
Opportunity Area 1
415
416
J:\Production_Environment\Projects\PermitParking\PermitParking.aprx\Parking Permit Areas 12/12/2024
Source: City of Orange (2024)
0 500250
Feet
.

N
M
aplew
ood
St
N
California
St
E Everett Pl
E Rose Ave
N
Fern
St
E Mayfair AveN
Lincoln
St
N
HartStN
Highland
St N
Elm
w
ood
St
55 55
S
Loretta
Dr
N
Clinton
St
E Palm Ave
N
W
ayfield
St
E Rose Ave
N
Fern
St
E Walnut Ave
E Walnut Ave
E Palmyra Ave
N
Lincoln
St
S
TeriLn
N
M
ilford
St
N
Sacram
ento
St
S
W
heelerPl
S
Yorba
St
N
O
ak
St
S
Lincoln
St
Burly Ave
N
Handy
St
E Chapman Ave
S
Tustin
St
N
Tustin
St
Yorba Park
V
K
OpArea3
W
U
Legend
NPPP Opportunity Area 3
Area K
Area U
Area V
Area W
Exhibit F

CITY OF ORANGE
Opportunity Area 3
417
J:\Production_Environment\Projects\PermitParking\PermitParking.aprx\Parking Permit Areas 12/12/2024
Source: City of Orange (2024)
0 500250
Feet
.

SPRR
N
Cam
bridge
St
E Palmdale Ave
E Glendale Ave
N
Neville
St
E Taft AveW Taft Ave
Shaffer Park
Taft Elementary
School
SPRR
E Wilson Ave E Wilson Ave
N
Shaffer
St
Xtra
W
ay
N
Cam
bridge
St
N
G
rand
St
N
California
St
E Trenton Ave
E Barkley Ave
E Hoover Ave E Hoover Ave
E Adams Ave
E Adams Ave
N
Lem
on
St
E Chestnut Ave
E Vanowen Ave
E Collins Ave
N
G
lassellSt
E Katella Ave
W Collins Ave
W Katella Ave
Yorba Junior
High School
N
Lincoln
St
N
Lincoln
St
P
B
OpArea4
H
Legend
NPPP Opportunity Area 4
Area B
Area H
Area P
Exhibit G

CITY OF ORANGE
Opportunity Area 4
418
J:\Production_Environment\Projects\PermitParking\PermitParking.aprx\Parking Permit Areas 12/12/2024
Source: City of Orange (2024)
0 500250
Feet
.

E Heim Ave
N
CanalSt
E Meats Ave
N
Cam
bridge
St
E Gr ove Ave
E Palmdale Ave
N
Bourbon
St
E Glendale Ave
E Glendora Ave
E Cumberland Rd
N
O
range
O
live
Rd
E Taft Ave
Shaffer Park
Taft Elementary
School
E Chestnut Ave
55 E Orangeview Ln
N
Bourbon
St
E Heim Ave
N
Highland
St
N
Lincoln
St
N
Tustin
St
The Village At
Orange
OpArea5
Legend
NPPP Opportunity Area 5
Exhibit H

CITY OF ORANGE
Opportunity Area 5
419
420
RESOLUTION NO. 11607

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE

CITY OF ORANGE ADOPTING A REVISED MASTER

RESOLUTION OF DESIGNATED PERMIT PARKING

AREAS AND ESTABLISHED PERMIT PARKING

OPPORTUNITY AREAS WITHIN THE CITY OF
ORANGE

WHEREAS, staff now recommends adding additional streets in the Neighborhood Permit Parking Program; and

WHEREAS, accordingly, the City Council desires to rescind Resolution No. 11595 and replace it with a revised Resolution;

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED , by the City Council of the City of Orange does resolve as follows:
421
2 SECTION I:

That Resolution No. 11595, adopted January 28 , 202 5, is hereby rescinded, effective immediately upon the date of the adoption of Resolution No. 11607.

SECTION II:

The following streets be added to the Neighborhood Permit Parking Program Area “AA”:

Both sides of E. Avenida Palmar, from west City limits to N. Thora Street.

Both sides of N. Sandpiper Circle.

SECTION III:

ADOPTED this day of , 2025

Daniel R. Slater, Mayor, City of Orange

ATTEST:

Pamela Coleman, City Clerk, City of Orange

APPROVED AS TO FORM:

Wayne W. Winthers
Interim City Attorney, City of Orange

422
3 I, PAMELA COLEMAN, City Clerk of the City of Orange, California, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly adopted by the City Council of the City of Orange at a regular meeting thereof held on the day of , 202 5 by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS:

Pamela Coleman, City Clerk, City of Orange
423
Exhibit A