Agenda packet — Orange City Council, June 10, 2025 (part 3 of 4)

Account Terms Rep

TO BE DETERMINED
Ship Via

MIKE VERBURG
Reference
Due Date
L Item Code Description Ordered Shipped Price UOM Amount HP Desktop and MSFT Laptop Surface 7/Surface Pro and
options for Windows 11 Compliance
1 OMNIA Contract R200803(HP and MicroSoft covered
under contract)
2 HP ELITE MINI 800 G9 35W TCTO BU DT PC9 (CTO AS
REQUESTED)i7-14700T/16GB DDR5/512GB
3 550B5AV 341 0 $1,179.00 EA $402,039.00
15IN MST SURFACE LAPTOP 7, CU7/16/512GB CM WIN
11 PLATINUM 1YR WARRANTY
4 EP2-33256 75 0 $1,737.00 EA $130,275.00
5 CED05 CA RECYCLING FEE >15 IN TO <35 IN 75 0 $5.00 EA $375.00 6 T8I-00001 MICROSOFT SURFACE DOCK THUNDERBOLT 4 -BLACK 78 0 $223.00 EA $17,394.00 13IN MICROSOFT SURFACE PRO 10 - 13" - 2880 X 1920 -
INTEL CORE ULTRA 7 PROCESSOR - 16GB RAM -
256GB
7 ZDV-00001 6 0 $1,519.00 EA $9,114.00
SSD - WINDOWS 11 PRO - WI-FI - FULL HD 1440P
FRONT CAMERA - 10.5 MEGAPIXEL REAR CAMERA -

PLATINUM
8 9 CED04 CA RECYCLING FEE >4 IN < 15 IN 6 0 $4.00 EA $24.00

MICROSOFT SURFACE PRO KEYBOARD WITH SLIM

PEN - BLACK
10 8X8-00141 6 0 $205.00 EA $1,230.00
11 NEW-FACTORY SEALED RETAIL PACKAGE
12 *** FREE GROUND FREIGHT ***
RETURN PRODUCTS: IN MOST CASES, ITEMS THAT

HAVE BEEN RECEIVED BY THE CUSTOMER AND

HAVE HAD THE FACTORY SEAL BROKEN ARE NOT
RETURNABLE TO CPAC. CUSTOMER IS ADVISED

THAT ANY RETURNS ACCEPTED BY CPAC ARE
SUBJECT TO A MINIMUM 20% RESTOCKING FEE
PLUS SHIPPING COST. IN SOME CASES ONCE A

CUSTOMER'S PO HAS BEEN RECEIVED BY CPAC IT

WILL BE NON-CANCELLABLE UNLESS THE

MANUFACTURER AGREES TO ACCEPT THE
CANCELLATION. FOR MORE DETAILS ON CPAC'S

RETURN POLICY, PLEASE CONSULT
WWW.CPACINC.COM, SUPPORT OPTION.
13 14
15 EMAIL: [email protected]
CHOOSE YOUR OWN PAYMENT OPTION WITH MONTHLY, QUARTERLY, OR YEARLY LEASE PAYMENTS (OAC). 703
Sales Quotation
SQ - 1176051 May-06-2025
1 1 7 6 0 5 1 Bill To

CITY OF ORANGE

STEVEN SCARDINA
300 E. CHAPMAN AVENUE
ORANGE CA 92866

UNITED STATES
Phone # (714)744-2283
Ship To

CITY OF ORANGE
WAREHOUSE CORP YARD MIS X2284 8AM-NOON
637 W STRUCK AVE
ORANGE CA 92867

UNITED STATES
Contact

CITY OF ORANGE

VALDEMAR CHAVEZ
300 E. CHAPMAN AVENUE
ORANGE CA 92866

UNITED STATES
Phone # (714)744-2280
SQ - 1176051 Page 2 of 2
L Item Code Description Ordered Shipped Price UOM Amount Tax Details
AVALARA $43404.060
EXEMPT $0.000
Payment Details
NOTE: In the event a manufacturer changes the item price prior to shipping, the customer will be notified and can cancel or amend the order. No returns on Special Orders, Altered Items, Software, Custom-Builds, or Refurbished items, or Items noted as Non-Returnable. In most cases, new items with broken factory seal are not returnable. Approved returns subject to a min 20% re-stock fee + freight cost. For return policy details, please contact CPAC. All payments are due as stated on invoice. A late fee of 1.5% per month will be assessed on all past due balances. All cost of collection, including reasonable attorney's fees, shall be paid by buyer.

Name:_________________________________
Title: __________________________________
Signature:_______________________________
Date: _____________________ $603,855.06
$0.00
$0.00
$603,855.06
$399.00
$43,404.06
$560,052.00
Balance
Pay Discount
Paid
Total
Non Taxable
Tax
Taxable
704
Agenda Item
City Council
Item #: 3.17. 6/10/2025 File #: 25-0291
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
THRU: Tom Kisela, City Manager
FROM: Christopher Cash, Public Works Director

1. SUBJECT
Authorize purchase of materials and supplies for water maintenance operations from various vendors.

2. SUMMARY
Request to authorize purchase orders in the amount of $700,000 with Fergusion, $150,000 with Hubbell Lenoir City Inc., $250,000 with Waterline Technologies, $150,000 with C Wells Supply, $175,000 with Yo Fire, $75,000 with Core & Main, $100,000 with S&J Supply, $40,000 with PTI Sand & Gravel, $30,000 with West Coast Sand & Gravel, and $50,000 with Main Street Materials.

3. RECOMMENDED ACTION
Approve the purchase orders of miscellaneous materials and supplies from multiple vendors for a total of $1,720,000.

4. FISCAL IMPACT
The expense for these purchases is $1,720,000 and will be included in the FY 2025-26 budget in the Water Fund (600):
600.8041.55451.00000 Transmission & Distribution Mains $575,000 600.8041.55460.00000 Services $100,000
600.8041.55480.00000 Fire Hydrants $125,000
600.8041.51540.00000 Maintenance of Water Meters $50,000 600.8011.55470.00000 Meters $100,000
600.8041.55470.00000 Meters $130,000
600.8011.56032.18102 Meter Replacement Program $350,000 600.8011.53530.00000 Chemicals $275,000
600.8041.51520.00000 Maintenance of Water Mains $15,000 Total $1,720,000
City of Orange Page 1 of 2 Printed on 6/4/2025
powered by Legistar™705
Item #: 3.17. 6/10/2025 File #: 25-0291

5. STRATEGIC PLAN GOALS
Goal 5: Improve Infrastructure, Mobility, and Technology

6. DISCUSSION AND BACKGROUND
The Public Works Department Water Division purchases many different types of materials and supplies such as C900 pipe, ductile iron pipe, fire hydrants, valves, meters, meter boxes, lids, copper tubing, brass fittings, couplings, saddles, sand, gravel, base paving materials, liquid sodium hypochlorite, etc. for its daily maintenance and operations. These items are needed for the successful repair, installation, and maintenance of the City’s water infrastructure.

The Public Works Water Division uses the informal bid process to purchase the required materials by requesting all participating vendors to provide pricing for each individual item needed. There is no specific vendor that continually provides the lowest price for all items; therefore, the Public Works Water Division purchases materials from the vendors that offer the lowest price for that item.

The Public Works Water Division continuously purchases materials and supplies from the vendors listed below. Since the purchases from each vendor is over the $30,000 per year, per vendor limit, staff is requesting the City Council authorize the purchase orders on an as-needed basis in the amounts shown in the table for Fiscal Year 2025-2026.

Vendor Amount
Hubbell Lenoir City Inc. $150,000
Waterline Technologies $250,000
C Wells Supply $150,000
Ferguson $700,000
Yo Fire $175,000
Core & Main $75,000
S&J Supply $100,000
PTI Sand & Gravel $40,000
West Coast Sand & Gravel $30,000
Main Street Materials $50,000
The Public Works Water Division continues to monitor and seek out vendors with the lowest prices to ensure the City is getting the best value available.

7. ATTACHMENTS
· None
City of Orange Page 2 of 2 Printed on 6/4/2025
powered by Legistar™706
Agenda Item
City Council
Item #: 3.17. 6/10/2025 File #: 25-0291
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
THRU: Tom Kisela, City Manager
FROM: Christopher Cash, Public Works Director

1. SUBJECT
Authorize purchase of materials and supplies for water maintenance operations from various vendors.

3. RECOMMENDED ACTION
Approve the purchase orders of miscellaneous materials and supplies from multiple vendors for a total of $1,720,000.

5. STRATEGIC PLAN GOALS
Goal 5: Improve Infrastructure, Mobility, and Technology

7. ATTACHMENTS
· None
City of Orange Page 2 of 2 Printed on 6/4/2025
powered by Legistar™708
Agenda Item
City Council
Item #: 3.18. 6/10/2025 File #: 25-0303
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
THRU: Tom Kisela, City Manager
FROM: Adam Jevec, Chief of Police

1. SUBJECT
Authorize purchase of opioid trauma kits for the Police Department from High Threat Innovations, LLC as a sole source vendor.

2. SUMMARY
Purchase of 230 opioid trauma kits from High Threat Innovations, LLC of Rancho Cucamonga, California as a sole source vendor. The total amount of $50,912 includes custom opioid trauma kits designed specifically for first responders to support remediation activities in the City of Orange.

3. RECOMMENDED ACTION

1. Approve the sole source purchase of opioid trauma kits from High Threat Innovations, LLC for $50,912.

2. Authorize the appropriation of $50,912 from the Opioid Settlement Fund (126) unreserved fund balance to: 126.4011.53940.00000 Safety Equipment

4. FISCAL IMPACT
Upon approval of this appropriation, the estimated Opioid Settlement Fund (126) fund balance at June 30, 2025, will be $1 million.

5. STRATEGIC PLAN GOALS
Goal 1: Maintain Strong Emergency and Safety Services

6. DISCUSSION AND BACKGROUND
In 2022, California Attorney General Rob Bonta announced settlement agreements with opioid manufacturer Janssen Pharmaceuticals and Johnson & Johnson, along with distributors McKesson, Cardinal Health, and AmerisourceBergen. In 2023, he proposed multistate settlements with manufacturers Teva and Allergan, and pharmacies Walgreens, Walmart, and CVS. These settlements resolve over 3,000 opioid-related lawsuits from state and local governments nationwide, providing substantial financial resources to combat the opioid crisis in California.

California cities and counties are expected to receive up to $1.8 billion for substance use prevention, harm reduction, treatment, and recovery from the settlements with Teva, Allergan, and the Pharmacies, in addition to $2.2 billion anticipated from the Janssen and Distributors settlements.

Payment timeframes may vary and can extend up to 18 years. Funds must be specifically allocated to opioid remediation activities focused on prevention, intervention, harm reduction, treatment, and City of Orange Page 1 of 3 Printed on 6/5/2025
powered by Legistar™709
Item #: 3.18. 6/10/2025 File #: 25-0303
to opioid remediation activities focused on prevention, intervention, harm reduction, treatment, and recovery services within California communities. To date, the City of Orange has received $1.2 million from these settlements.

To prevent overdose deaths and reduce harm, the Police Department will equip officers with specialized full-size and micro-opioid trauma kits designed to provide rapid response to opioid overdoses and trauma injuries. Opioid overdoses can lead to several types of injuries and medical complications, primarily due to respiratory issues. Common injuries include trauma from falls or accidents resulting in head injuries, fractures, and facial injuries. These kits include life-saving components such as naloxone (Narcan) for opioid overdose reversal, tourniquets tailored for highrisk operational environments, and other wound care supplies.

Currently, patrol fleet vehicles are equipped with two Narcan treatments per vehicle which are replenished upon use. Officers in non-patrol assignments such as detectives and special units do not maintain an inventory of Narcan. Full-size trauma kits will be distributed to all public safety officers while custom micro trauma kits will be distributed to the specialized response team. Remaining inventory will be maintained in the Training Bureau of the Police Department for new incoming officers. Training and first aid refreshers on the use of the items will be facilitated within the Police Department.

These kits include life-saving components including the following:
· Medical-grade naloxone for opioid overdose reversal
· Tourniquets
· Vented chest seals
· Gloves
· Hypothermia blanket
· Pressure dressing
· Tape
· Shears
· Quick clot gauze
· Custom packaging suited for tactical carry and deployment High Threat Innovations, LLC is the sole known source that provides opioid trauma kits specifically engineered to meet the operational needs of law enforcement, combining both overdose intervention and trauma management in a compact, ruggedized form. Other vendors do not offer the required integration of opioid and trauma response capabilities in both full-size and micro formats.

Additionally, this procurement is of critical urgency due to a recent increase in opioid-related field incidents and trauma threats. Delays in procurement could lead to preventable fatalities or serious injuries. High Threat Innovations, LLC has confirmed immediate fulfillment capability, including expedited shipping and readiness to provide field training support upon delivery. No alternative vendors can guarantee the same speed and level of readiness for both kit formats.

Staff has researched available competitive options and, with approval of the City Manager, certifies City of Orange Page 2 of 3 Printed on 6/5/2025
powered by Legistar™710
Item #: 3.18. 6/10/2025 File #: 25-0303
Staff has researched available competitive options and, with approval of the City Manager, certifies the customized first responder opioid trauma kits are offered by only one vendor. High Threat Innovations, LLC in Rancho Cucamonga, California, is the sole manufacturer of the TraumaPAK and is the sole service provider offering a limited lifetime guarantee on their products.

The Police Department recommends the purchase of opioid trauma kits by High Threat Innovations, LLC in the amount of $50,912. An appropriation of $50,912 from the Opioid Settlement unreserved fund balance is necessary to cover the cost of the trauma kits.

7. ATTACHMENTS
· High Threat Innovations, LLC Quote
City of Orange Page 3 of 3 Printed on 6/5/2025
powered by Legistar™711
Agenda Item
City Council
Item #: 3.18. 6/10/2025 File #: 25-0303
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
THRU: Tom Kisela, City Manager
FROM: Adam Jevec, Chief of Police

1. SUBJECT
Authorize purchase of opioid trauma kits for the Police Department from High Threat Innovations, LLC as a sole source vendor.

3. RECOMMENDED ACTION

1. Approve the sole source purchase of opioid trauma kits from High Threat Innovations, LLC for $50,912.

2. Authorize the appropriation of $50,912 from the Opioid Settlement Fund (126) unreserved fund balance to:
126.4011.53940.00000 Safety Equipment

4. FISCAL IMPACT
Upon approval of this appropriation, the estimated Opioid Settlement Fund (126) fund balance at June 30, 2025, will be $1 million.

5. STRATEGIC PLAN GOALS
Goal 1: Maintain Strong Emergency and Safety Services

Payment timeframes may vary and can extend up to 18 years. Funds must be specifically allocated City of Orange Page 1 of 3 Printed on 6/4/2025
powered by Legistar™712
Item #: 3.18. 6/10/2025 File #: 25-0303
Payment timeframes may vary and can extend up to 18 years. Funds must be specifically allocated to opioid remediation activities focused on prevention, intervention, harm reduction, treatment, and recovery services within California communities. To date, the City of Orange has received $1.2 million from these settlements.

Additionally, this procurement is of critical urgency due to a recent increase in opioid-related field incidents and trauma threats. Delays in procurement could lead to preventable fatalities or serious injuries. High Threat Innovations, LLC has confirmed immediate fulfillment capability, including expedited shipping and readiness to provide field training support upon delivery. No alternative City of Orange Page 2 of 3 Printed on 6/4/2025
powered by Legistar™713
Item #: 3.18. 6/10/2025 File #: 25-0303
vendors can guarantee the same speed and level of readiness for both kit formats.

Staff has researched available competitive options and, with approval of the City Manager, certifies the customized first responder opioid trauma kits are offered by only one vendor. High Threat Innovations, LLC in Rancho Cucamonga, California, is the sole manufacturer of the TraumaPAK and is the sole service provider offering a limited lifetime guarantee on their products.

7. ATTACHMENTS
· High Threat Innovations, LLC Quote
City of Orange Page 3 of 3 Printed on 6/4/2025
powered by Legistar™714
TraumaPAK / High Threat Innovations
Your account representative is Ofer Lichtman:

Thank you for considering us. If you choose to accept this quote we will update it to an invoice. We look forward to serving you.

May 20, 2025 - Estimate #000176
Our Duns #106226415, Unique Entity ID: VXKVW6JLN6F1, Our Cage #8QL97 Customer:

Sergeant Jude King
Orange Police Department
[email protected]
Custom Opioid Response Trauma Kits
Custom TraumaPAK Elite Advanced First Responder Opioid Trauma Kit for patrol $42,000.00 ($210.00 ea.) × 200
Black TraumaPAK Elite in the Advanced first responder spec.

Narcan response nasal spray
Quick connection ZAK Tool and key ring
Sam XT tourniquet
Any color patch
Custom Micro Opioid TraumaPAK 2.0 $5,250.00
($175.00 ea.) × 30 - Black kit.

Narcan Response nasal spray
Upgrade 4’ quikclot to 12’ combat gauze
With Sam XT in black
Shipping $525.00
Free shipping due to local pick up option
Free Shipping (100%) -$525.00
Subtotal $47,250.00
Rancho Sales Tax (7.75%) $3,661.88
Total $50,911.88
TraumaPAK / High Threat Innovations
5979 Little Oak Ct
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91739
[email protected]
+1 (909) 906-0741
© 2025 Block, Inc.

All rights reserved.
715
Agenda Item
City Council
Item #: 3.19. 6/10/2025 File #: 25-0297
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Tom Kisela, City Manager

1. SUBJECT
Adoption of Resolution No. 11612 approving the City’s application, projects, and all other documents related to the Environmental Protection Agency Brownfield Assessment Coalition Grant.

2. SUMMARY
In November 2023, the Orange County Council of Governments approached the City of Orange and requested the City participate in a coalition comprising of other municipalities and non-profit organizations so the Orange County Council of Governments may secure funding through an Environmental Protection Agency Brownfield Assessment Coalition Grant. Resolution No. 11612 memorializes the Orange City Council’s approval of the proposed projects, scopes of work, and all other documents necessary to facilitate funding through the Brownfield Assessment Coalition Grant.

3. RECOMMENDED ACTION
Adopt Resolution No. 11612. A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Orange, California, approving the City’s application, projects, and all other documents necessary to facilitate the United States Environmental Protection Agency Brownfield Assessment Coalition Grant secured through the Orange County Council of Governments.

4. FISCAL IMPACT
None.

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

6. DISCUSSION AND BACKGROUND
In November 2023, the Orange County Council of Governments (OCCOG) approached the City about an Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Brownfield Assessment Coalition Grant (Brownfield Grant) opportunity. With OCCOG serving as lead agency, the Brownfield Grant provides participating entities the opportunity to, among other items, conduct mitigation studies to improve sites where previous uses may have led to environmental contamination.

To participate in the Brownfield Grant, in November 2023, the City signed a letter of intent to participate as a coalition member. A year later, the City signed a Memorandum of Agreement so the City may engage with OCCOG, OCCOG’s contracted consultant, Neighborhood Works of Orange County, and the cities of Garden Grove and Santa Ana to identify possible sites and projects eligible for the Brownfield Grant.

Through this collaborative approach, the City identified two projects in Orange that may be eligible for City of Orange Page 1 of 2 Printed on 6/4/2025
powered by Legistar™716
Item #: 3.19. 6/10/2025 File #: 25-0297
Through this collaborative approach, the City identified two projects in Orange that may be eligible for the Brownfield Grant funding - the Grijalva Park Masterplan Update (Masterplan Update) and a Market Feasibility Report (Market Feasibility Report) for Yorba Park. Both projects are discussed in turn.

Masterplan Update
The Masterplan Update has been programmed in the City’s Capital Improvement Program for several years. The Brownfield Grant will give the City the opportunity to complete this project, and with a completed masterplan, avail itself of other grant opportunities to put the masterplan amenities into place.

Market Feasibility Report
In recognizing that Yorba Park was once used as a landfill, the Market Feasibility Report will look at Yorba Park’s soil stability, geotechnical reports, potential site contamination, and recommended remediation actions while analyzing all potential uses on the site.

The EPA approved Grijalva and Yorba Parks as eligible sites. Scopes of work have been created for the Masterplan Update and the Market Feasibility Report. However, prior to moving forward on both projects, staff recommends the City Council approve Resolution No. 11612.

Resolution No. 11612 authorizes the City Manager to sign all Brownfield Grant documents and memorializes the City’s approval of the Brownfield Grant application, potential projects, and all other documents necessary to facilitate the grant.

7. ATTACHMENTS
· Resolution No. 11612
· U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Brownfields Assessment Cooperative Agreement with Orange County Council of Governments
· Brownfield Letter of Committment
· Memorandum of Agreement
· Grijalva Park Masterplan Update Scope of Work
· Yorba Park Market Feasibility Report
City of Orange Page 2 of 2 Printed on 6/4/2025
powered by Legistar™717
Agenda Item
City Council
Item #: 3.19. 6/10/2025 File #: 25-0297
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Tom Kisela, City Manager

1. SUBJECT
Adoption of Resolution No. 11612 approving the City’s application, projects, and all other documents related to the Environmental Protection Agency Brownfield Assessment Coalition Grant.

4. FISCAL IMPACT
None.

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

Through this collaborative approach, the City identified two projects in Orange that may be eligible for City of Orange Page 1 of 2 Printed on 6/4/2025
powered by Legistar™718
Item #: 3.19. 6/10/2025 File #: 25-0297
Through this collaborative approach, the City identified two projects in Orange that may be eligible for the Brownfield Grant funding - the Grijalva Park Masterplan Update (Masterplan Update) and a Market Feasibility Report (Market Feasibility Report) for Yorba Park. Both projects are discussed in turn.

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE

CITY OF ORANGE, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING THE
CITY’S APPLICATION, PROJECTS, AND ALL OTHER

DOCUMENTS NECESSARY TO FACILITATE THE

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY BROWNFIELD ASSESSMENT COALITION

GRANT SECURED THROUGH THE ORANGE
COUNTY COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS.

WHEREAS, in November 2023, the City of Orange submitted a letter of commitment to participate as coalition member with the Orange County Council of Governments as a part of its effort to secure funding through the Environmental Protection Agency’s Brownfield Assessment Coalition Grant (Brownfield Grant); and
WHEREAS, the Orange County Council of Governments executed a Cooperative Agreement with the Environmental Protection Agency in June 2024; and WHEREAS, through the execution of a Memorandum of Agreement, the City of Orange in collaboration with the Orange County Council of Governments (OCCOG), OCCOG’s consultant, and the cities of Garden Grove and Santa Ana have identified eligible sites and projects that may be funded through the Brownfield Grant; and
WHEREAS, specific to the City of Orange, two projects have been identified; and WHEREAS, these two projects include funding for the Grijalva Park Masterplan Update and a market feasibility analysis for Yorba Park; and
WHEREAS, scopes of work for both projects have been developed; and WHEREAS, prior to proceeding any further, this resolution seeks to memorialize the Orange City Council’s approval of both projects, the respective scopes of work, and any other documents necessary to formerly accept Brownfield Grant funds to complete said projects.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Orange:

SECTION I:

Approves of the Brownfield Grant application, the proposed projects, scopes of work, and all other Brownfield Grant documents necessary to participate in the Brownfield Grant program and to secure funding to complete the Grijalva Park Masterplan Update and Market Feasibility Analysis for Yorba Park.

SECTION II:

Authorizes its City Manager to execute all documents associated with the Brownfield Grant.
720
2 SECTION III:

This resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption by the City Council, and the City Clerk shall certify the vote adopting the resolution.

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

STATE OF CALIFORNIA )

COUNTY OF ORANGE )

CITY OF ORANGE )
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 , 2025 by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS:

Pamela Coleman, City Clerk, City of Orange
721

Page 1 of 15 ends

U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY BROWNFIELDS

ASSESSMENT COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT

WORK PLAN
Cooperative Agreement #: [to be provided by EPA]
FOR
Orange County Council of Governments Brownfield Assessment Coalition Project June 14, 2024
Submitted by:

Orange County Council of Governments
3972 Barranca Parkway, Suite J127
Irvine, California 92606-1204
Lead Contacts:

Marnie O’Brien Primmer, Executive Director
949.698.2856 | [email protected]
Erin Gardner, Project Manager
714-501-9416 | [email protected]
722

Page 2 of 15 ends

FY2024 EPA Brownfields Assessment Coalition Grant
Cooperative Agreement Work Plan
A. Recipient Title
Orange County Council of Governments (OCCOG)
B. Project Background
OCCOG is a joint powers authority acting as the sub-regional planning organization covering 35 jurisdictions in Orange County, California. The role of OCCOG is to collectively convene jurisdictions throughout the County to address land use, housing, energy, mobility, air quality, and water issues and to effectively engage on these important matters with the county as a whole.

OCCOG has formed a Coalition with a community-based non-profit organization, NeighborWorks Orange County (NWOC), and the Cities of Garden Grove, Orange and Santa Ana. These coalition members were identified as key partners for this project because of their ongoing partnerships with OCCOG and collective goals of promoting infill development as a means to improving economic conditions, addressing housing shortages, improving transportation corridors and reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Additionally, these partners represent some of the most disadvantaged areas of Orange County and, due to budget cuts, have extremely limited staff resources to manage a brownfield grant program on their own. Partnering with OCCOG provides the Coalition members with the means to address their brownfields issues by drawing on OCCOG’s grant experience and staff resources.

With a population of 3,200,000, over the past 100 years Orange County, the geographic boundary for this project, has grown from a rural, agricultural community, to become the sixth most populous county in the United States. In the early 1900s, the area was occupied by vast farmlands, which were replaced with tract housing by the mid-1950s as the manufacturing, tourism and service industries began to dominate the local economy. The opening of Disneyland in 1955 made Orange County an international tourist destination and piqued the interest of other industries looking to establish operations in areas that would attract worker talent. In the late 1950s, aerospace firms and light industry began expanding and by 1963 the county population topped one million.

Exploding population growth brought an intense demand for new infrastructure that the County struggled to keep up with. While the southern areas of the county have developed as masterplanned communities, the denser, older areas of the county have not redeveloped outmoded areas in a cohesive fashion. Areas such as the coastal zone are known for their world-class amenities and access to jobs and housing, other areas of the county are suffering from poverty, lack of quality affordable housing and access to public transit, and some of the nation’s worst air quality, crime, and homelessness. To combat the extreme socioeconomic and Environmental Justice (EJ) issues impacting sensitive populations, each of the Coalition partners have selected their own disadvantaged Target Areas (TAs), including: OCCOG – East Anaheim TA; City of Orange – Marlboro Neighborhood TA; City of Garden Grove – International West TA; NeighborWorks OC – Harbor Boulevard TA (Garden Grove); and City of Santa Ana – Harbor Boulevard TA (Santa Ana). These TAs are home to the highest concentrations of brownfields and sensitive populations in Orange County. Brownfields outside of the TAs but within the boundary of Orange County may also be prioritized for grant funding to further the area’s regional goals. 723

Page 3 of 15 ends

C. Goals and Objectives
a. EPA Strategic Plan
This project supports EPA’s Strategic Plan and GPRA Goal 6, Objective 6.1: Safeguard and Revitalize Communities, Clean Up and Restore Land for Productive Uses and Healthy Communities.
b. Project Goals
Project Goals:

The goals of the project are to establish a sustainable Brownfield Reuse and Revitalization Program. The Assessment Grant will be used in part to complete brownfield inventories in the TAs – a first step in identifying sites that contribute to blight, crime, environmental justice and public health issues. The Assessment Grant will fund Phase I and II Environmental Site Assessments (ESAs) that will help to define exposure risks and contaminants at specific sites. The Assessment Grant will help further the cleanup of contaminated sites via cleanup planning activities, and the transformation of these sites into safe housing, job-providing businesses, and/or community assets that provide improved opportunities for recreation, health or educational services.

The Assessment Grant will also be used to identify legacy contamination associated with brownfields in the TAs and to identify remedial measures necessary to address those threats at select priority sites. The project will support redevelopment initiatives that are working to provide new and safe affordable housing and green spaces, and improved transit-oriented development that will help improve air quality. The Assessment Grant will support these and other types of development while also advancing projects that will eliminate blight and eliminate potential exposure of residents to contaminants associated with targeted brownfield sites.

Outputs:

The Coalition will inventory and assess brownfields within Orange County to catalyze cleanup and revitalization of priority sites. Specific project outputs are anticipated to include the following:

Task 1 – Project Management, Reporting & Other Eligible Activities • Conduct monthly meetings with the Coalition and consultant team. • Prepare Quarterly Progress Reports (QPRs).
• Prepare annual Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE) Reports. • Prepare annual Federal Financial Reports (FFRs).
• Create and maintain property profiles in Assessment, Cleanup and Redevelopment Exchange System (ACRES).
• Prepare final DBE Report, FFR, and Project Close-Out/Performance Report. • Attend brownfields-related conferences/trainings.

Task 2 – Community Engagement & Brownfield Site Inventory/Prioritization • Coordinate and conduct meetings with the Coalition, Brownfield Advisory Committee (BAC) and general public as well as individual meetings with developers, property owners, and other stakeholders, as needed.
• Solicit, discuss and implement meaningful public input into the grant processes. 724

Page 4 of 15 ends

• Prepare and publish public notices.
• Prepare meeting materials, presentations and meeting minutes. • Prepare and distribute Project fact sheets and other informational materials. • Develop and regularly update a Project-specific webpage. • Obtain community feedback pertaining to priority sites and reuse planning efforts. • Establish site prioritization criteria.
• Complete an inventory of potential brownfield sites in the target areas. • Incorporate portions of the inventory into existing GIS database(s). • Prioritize sites for assessment and/or cleanup/reuse planning activities.

Task 3 – Site-Specific Assessment & Cleanup Planning Activities • Prepare site-specific eligibility determination (ED) requests for priority sites. • Obtain Property Access Agreements for sites approved for assessment activities. • Prepare Health and Safety Plans (HASPs) for sites approved for assessment activities. • Develop a comprehensive programmatic Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP). • Complete Phase I ESAs in compliance with ASTM E1527-21 and the All Appropriate Inquiries (AAI) Rule at up to 18 sites.
• Prepare site-specific Sampling and Analysis Plans (SAPs) and gather information needed to determine effects under the Endangered Species Act (Section 7) and National Historic Preservation Acts (Section 106) for sites selected for Phase II ESAs (as required). • Complete Phase II ESA and/or supplemental assessment activities at up to 14 sites. • Complete Regulated Building Materials (RBM) Surveys at up to 8 sites. • Prepare site-specific Cleanup Plans (Analysis of Brownfield Cleanup Alternatives [ABCAs] and/or Cleanup Action Plans [CAPs]) for up to 8 sites.

Task 4 – Area-Wide Planning Activities
• Complete AWP study for two brownfield-impacted areas.

Outcomes:

Grant funding will allow OCCOG and its Coalition to establish a sustainable Brownfields Site Reuse and Revitalization Program with organizational infrastructure to enhance the processes for assessing, remediating, and catalyzing redevelopment of priority sites. OCCOG expects the project outcomes will enhance the assessment, cleanup, and successful redevelopment/reuse of brownfields within the TAs. Other key objectives include raising awareness of brownfields and brownfield redevelopment tools; spurring investment and creating jobs through development projects on brownfield sites; and reducing threats to human health and the environment.

The following types of potential outcomes will be tracked on a quarterly basis for sites where EPA grant funds are used:
• Incorporation of green and sustainable assessment and remediation (GSR) techniques that are applicable to Phase II ESA activities.
• Number of sites and acres of land for which cleanup and/or reuse planning is performed. • Number of sites for which property title transfers are facilitated. 725

Page 5 of 15 ends

• Acres of land redeveloped and square footage of buildings positioned for adaptive reuse. • Acres of parks or green space created.
• Amount of additional public and private investment leveraged. • Amount of other funding leveraged.
• Number of jobs created or retained.
• Number of meeting participants, inquiries about available grant funding/site nominations, feedback received from community stakeholders and the number of community meetings held.

D. Tasks
Below we describe the four tasks identified in the grant application.

Task 1 – Project Management, Reporting & Other Eligible Activities a. Task Description
Procurement Activities:

Objective: Procure a Qualified Environmental Professional (QEP or “consultant”) to provide technical and programmatic assistance.

Activities: To position this project for expedited kick-off upon notice of grant award, OCCOG completed a qualifications-based procurement and evaluation process, consistent with applicable federal procurement rules (2 CFR 200.317 - 200.326 and 2 CFR Part 1500). OCCOG published a Request for Qualifications (RFQ) for this project in October 2023 and selected a local consultant team led by Montrose Environmental Solutions, Inc. The team includes several DBE partners that will support assessment activities and Kimley-Horn for urban planning/design, real estate strategy and community engagement support.

Lead: OCCOG.

Project Management & Reporting Activities:

Objective: Manage the Project in accordance with EPA requirements and Cooperative Agreement (CA) terms and conditions.

Activities: EPA compliance reporting (quarterly, annual, close-out and ACRES reporting), ongoing meetings with EPA, the Coalition and the QEP, and overall project management (e.g. maintain budget, schedule, etc.).

Lead: OCCOG with support from the consultant.

Brownfield-Related Conferences:

Objective: Attend 2-3 brownfield-related conferences/trainings.

Activities: Two OCCOG personnel and up to four Coalition member personnel will attend 2-3 brownfield conferences/trainings. Conferences are anticipated to include the California Land Recycling Conference in September 2024 and the National Brownfield Conference in 2025. 726

Page 6 of 15 ends

Lead: OCCOG and the Coalition.
b. Deliverables
Deliverables are anticipated include:
• RFP/RFQ for QEP services
• Contract with selected QEP
• Quarterly Progress Reports
• Quarterly ACRES updates
• Annual & Final FFR and DBE Reports
• Final Performance Report
Task 2 – Community Engagement & Brownfield Site Inventory/Prioritization a. Task Description
Public Outreach & Involvement Activities:

Objective: Ensure community concerns are considered and inform assessment planning and execution through preparing and implementing an initial Community Involvement Plan (CIP).

Activities: A robust engagement process will be initiated upfront via an initial CIP to engage the community and gather input to guide short- and long-term program goals and objectives. A Brownfield Advisory Committee (BAC) that consists of Coalition members, community-based organizations, local government partners and other stakeholders will be established at the beginning of the project. Ongoing BAC meetings (3-4 per year) and public meetings (minimum of 2 per year) will be hosted. Targeted outreach and individual meetings with stakeholders and property owners will also be conducted on an ongoing basis. Meetings may be broadcast via Zoom or similar platform so that stakeholders can participate online if unable to attend in person.

Lead: OCCOG with support from the Coalition, BAC and consultant team.

Public Updates & Other Public Information Activities:

Objective: Ensure the community is kept informed of Project goals, methods, and progress and ensure the public is provided opportunity for meaningful participation.

Activities: Develop and maintain project webpage. Develop project fact sheets and informational materials specific to community members and property owners. Prepare press releases and articles announcing project activities and upcoming meetings. Prepare and publish public notices to solicit public comments on cleanup plans prepared using grant funding (including documentation of significant comments received and how they were/are being responded to).

Lead: OCCOG with support from the Coalition, BAC and Contractor Brownfield Site Inventory & Prioritization Activities:

Objective: Build a GIS-based comprehensive inventory of potential brownfield sites in the select TAs as a foundation for identifying priority cleanup and redevelopment opportunity sites, reaching out to property owners, and selecting sites for assessment and/or cleanup planning activities. The data will be integrated with the OCCOG and/or local municipal databases to better relate the 727

Page 7 of 15 ends

presence of brownfields to various economic impacts and/or health data and to serve as a longterm planning tool.

Activities: The following activities may be completed as part of the inventory:
• Identify environmental records for all sites in the target area listed in EPA, California Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC), California Water Resources Control Board, and/or local environmental databases;
• Review select County, City, and State records that are potentially relevant to identifying brownfields (including occupancy and other permits, tax delinquency status, building code violations, LoopNet, assessors data, and sites identified in recent plans and studies); • Review available historical Sanborn Fire Insurance Maps, aerial photographs, topographic maps, local directories and/or other sources of information to identify historic sites which have a significant potential for impacts;
• Survey local real estate industry representatives for information on sites in the target areas; • Conduct tours/inspections throughout the target areas to identify blighted or vacant potential brownfield sites that are not recorded in existing databases or identified by recent plans/studies and collect photographs and/or video via a cellphone or tablet to share with project stakeholders; and
• Incorporate previous redevelopment or brownfields site databases. • Review other State and County records to verify that all sites with known or suspected impacts or threats to public health are included in the evaluation/prioritization process.

Following inventory activities, sites will be prioritized for assessment and/or cleanup planning.

The following criteria may be analyzed when prioritizing sites (the BAC will provide input on the final criteria):
• property owner willingness/ability to obtain site access (pass/fail criteria); • economic development potential/opportunities;
• known or suspected threats to public health;
• sites identified in existing community planning documents; • degree of known or suspected environmental impacts;
• degree of blight or underutilization;
• tax delinquency status;
• community concerns; and
• social, demographic and health data (as available) within the immediate site vicinity.

Lead: The consultant team will lead the inventory process with support from OCCOG, the Coalition and the BAC. The Coalition and BAC will lead the site prioritization process. b. Deliverables
Deliverables are anticipated include:
• Community Involvement Plan
• Project webpage (hosted on OCCOG’s website), fact sheets and other outreach materials. 728

Page 8 of 15 ends

• Community meetings with presentations, meeting materials and notes. • Press releases
• Brownfield Site Inventory/Prioritization List
• Prioritization Criteria
Task 3 – Site-Specific Assessment & Cleanup Planning Activities a. Task Description
Site Eligibility Request Activities:

Objective: The consultant will prepare eligibility requests for sites prioritized by the Coalition and BAC for assessment and/or cleanup planning activities.

Activities: Prior to initiating any site-specific work, eligibility requests will be submitted to the EPA Project Officer using the appropriate eligibility worksheet. Site eligibility will be reviewed and concurred on by the EPA Project Officer prior to initiating assessment or cleanup planning activities.

Lead: The consultant will prepare the eligibility requests with assistance from OCCOG and the Coalition.

Master Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP):

Objective: Establish quality assurance/quality control (QA/QC) procedures applicable throughout the life of the Project.

Activities: Before beginning Phase II ESA work, OCCOG and the QEP will participate in a preQAPP conference call with EPA, if required. A Master QAPP (i.e. not site-specific) that addresses both hazardous substances and petroleum sites will be developed and submitted to EPA for review and approval. The Contractor will finalize the Master QAPP once EPA has reviewed and provided comments on the draft.

For cost savings and efficiency purposes, the comprehensive Master QAPP will be developed at the beginning of the project. This approach will provide for ample EPA review and approval of the document well in advance of Phase II ESA activities and will significantly reduce costs associated with preparing multiple site-specific QAPPs throughout the life of the project. The Master QAPP will cover the full spectrum of field, sampling and analytical laboratory procedures for both hazardous substances and petroleum sites. Additionally, the QEP will refresh EPA’s 6 Good Faith Efforts and look for opportunities to add new Disadvantaged Business Enterprises (DBE) labs and drillers to the QAPP.

The Master QAPP will be supplemented by a Site-Specific Sampling and Analysis Plan (SAP) prepared for each site selected for a Phase II ESA and/or RBM Survey. As described in the following section, the SAP will define site conditions and applicable cleanup standards for constituents of concern and defer to the field, sampling, and analytical laboratory procedures defined in the EPA-approved Master QAPP.

Lead: The QEP will prepare the QAPP and OCCOG will review the draft prior to submittal to EPA.
729

Page 9 of 15 ends

Phase I ESA Activities:

Objective: Evaluate past and current site uses to assess potential for environmental contamination.

Activities: The following activities may be completed as part of the Phase I ESA task:
• Phase I ESAs will support property transfers and eventual redevelopment and provide information for evaluating the need for Phase II ESAs and cleanup. OCCOG anticipates conducting Phase I ESAs for up to 18 sites.
• The QEP will complete Phase I ESAs in accordance with ASTM Practice E1527-21 and the All Appropriate Inquiry (AAI) Rule. Property Access Agreements will be executed between OCCOG and the property owner.
• The ACRES database will be updated following completion of each Phase I ESA. An AAI Phase I ESA checklist will also be completed for submittal to EPA.

Lead: The QEP will lead the Phase I ESA task with assistance from the Coalition for data acquisition and report review and distribution. OCCOG will execute Property Access Agreements (as necessary) with property owners with support from the QEP.

Phase II ESA & RBM Survey Activities:

Objective: Collect environmental sampling data to assess conditions, evaluate risks to human health and the environment, prepare for cleanup planning, and facilitate property transfers and redevelopment.

Activities: OCCOG anticipates conducting Phase II ESAs for up to 14 sites and RBM Surveys for up to 8 sites, where the Phase I ESAs or other available information suggests that additional investigation is warranted. Phase II ESA activities will include sampling and analysis of soil, groundwater, and/or soil vapor, and report preparation. RBM Survey activities will include sampling and analysis of hazardous building materials (such as asbestos, lead-based paint, PCBs, etc.) and report preparation.

SAPs addressing each property where Phase II ESA and/or RBM Survey work is anticipated will be submitted to EPA for review and approval prior to conducting field activities. The SAP will define site conditions and applicable cleanup standards for constituents of concern and defer to the field, sampling, and analytical laboratory procedures defined in the EPA-approved Master QAPP.

As necessary, for each Phase II ESA, the QEP will provide information to OCCOG to help fulfill EPA’s requirements under the Endangered Species Act Section 7 and the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) Section 106. The information will include the Project location, any threatened or endangered species or habitat that may be affected by the Project, whether a site is of concern to the State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO), and an evaluation as to whether cleanup/redevelopment plans could have adverse effects on endangered or cultural resources.

The ACRES database will be updated following completion of each Phase II ESA. 730

Page 10 of 15 ends

Lead: The QEP will lead the Phase II ESA task with assistance from OCCOG and the Coalition for data acquisition and report review and distribution. OCCOG will execute Property Access Agreements with property owners (as needed) with support from the QEP.

Cleanup Planning Activities:

Objective: Prepare site-specific ABCAs and/or CAPs for up to 8 sites to address contamination, risks to human health and the environment, and support brownfield redevelopment.

Activities: OCCOG will conduct cleanup planning as required for brownfields where redevelopment is imminent and such activities will move redevelopment forward. Planning may include preparation of ABCAs and/or CAPs. Cleanup plans will describe detected contamination; conceptual site models; site-specific remedial action objectives; state and federal cleanup regulatory requirements; and evaluation of institutional and engineering controls.

Stakeholder meetings will be held, as needed, to develop and review the most appropriate and effective remedial/reuse options for each selected brownfield site. OCCOG and the QEP will work closely with EPA and DTSC when considering options for cleanup planning. The public notice and comment period for any ABCAs prepared using grant funding (including documentation of significant comments received and how they were/are being responded to) will be conducted under Task 2.

Lead: The QEP will lead with assistance from OCCOG and the Coalition on data acquisition, planning, and deliverable review and distribution.
b. Deliverables:

Deliverables are anticipated to include:
• Completed/approved Site Eligibility Worksheets
• Draft & Final Master QAPP
• Site-specific HASPs
• Phase I ESA Reports & AAI Checklists for up to 18 sites • Endangered Species Act Section 7 and NHPA Section 106 consultations (as necessary) • Draft & Final Site-specific SAPs
• Phase II ESA Reports for up to 14 sites
• RBM Survey Reports for up to 8 sites
• ABCAs and/or RAPs for up to 8 sites
• Documentation of Addressing Climate Change in the ABCAs • Updated Property Profiles in ACRES database
Task 4 – Area-Wide Planning
a. Task Description
Objective: Identify potential reuse options uses for two brownfield-impacted areas and develop strategies to facilitate the reuse of existing infrastructure, as well as identifying potential infrastructure investments needed to accommodate alternative future uses.

Activities: With support from OCCOG, the Coalition and BAC, the consultant team will develop the AWP Studies.
731

Page 11 of 15 ends

Lead: The consultant team will lead with assistance from OCCOG, the Coalition and BAC on planning, public outreach, and deliverable review and distribution. b. Deliverables
Deliverables are anticipated to include:
• AWP Study Work Plan for EPA review/approval.
• AWP Study for two areas (the elements of the study will be determined through a scope of work and may include site-specific reuse concepts, market studies, infrastructure studies and/or other planning activities deemed eligible by EPA).

E. Schedule of Milestones & Deliverables
The table below summarizes the anticipated deliverable schedule (assuming a project start date of July 1, 2024) and the agency/office each will be submitted to.

DUE DATE ITEM
Send to:

EPA PM STATE
EPA
GRAN
TS
EPA

FINANCE
Pre-award
(July-Sept. 2024)
▪ Two OCCOG staff (Marnie
Primmer & Erin Gardner) will
attend the California Brownfields
Conference in Carson, CA in
September 2024. Representatives
from the Coalition members will
also be invited to attend.
▪ Kick-off meeting with QEP and
EPA Project Manager (PM).
▪ Develop Site Nomination Form
and Access Agreement Template.
▪ Begin preparing Master QAPP.
▪ Begin preparing content for
project webpage and fact sheets
X
Month 1
(Oct. 2024)
▪ Submit draft QAPP for approval.
▪ Begin inventory activities.
▪ Establish BAC.
▪ Prepare eligibility requests for
priority sites.

X
X
(QAPP)
732

Page 12 of 15 ends

DUE DATE ITEM
Send to:

EPA PM STATE
EPA
GRAN
TS
EPA

FINANCE
Month 2-3
(Nov.-Dec. 2024)
▪ Establish access into ACRES.
(Property Profile Forms will be
entered into ACRES as property
specific projects are completed.)
▪ Finalize Master QAPP.
▪ Initiate Phase I ESA activities for
approved sites.
▪ Prepare HASPs and SAPs for
approved sites.
▪ Publish project webpage.

X
X
(QAPP &
SAPs)
Month 4
(Jan. 2025)
▪ Submit first Quarterly Progress
Report (QPR) in ACRES and
update property profiles -
continue preparing quarterly for
duration project.
▪ Complete first Phase I ESA.
▪ BAC Meeting #1.

X
Month 5-7
(Feb.-Apr. 2025)
▪ Initiate first Phase II ESA.
▪ Submit QPR #2 in ACRES and
update property profiles.
▪ Begin scoping for AWP Studies.

X
Month 8
(May 2025)
▪ BAC Meeting #2.
▪ Continue Phase I/II ESA Work. X X
Month 9
(June 2025)
▪ Initiate site-specific planning
activities.
▪ BAC Meeting #2.
▪ Initiate AWP in one TA.

X
Month 10
(July 2025)
▪ Submit QPR #3 in ACRES &
update property profiles. X
Month 13
(October 2025)
▪ Initiate AWP activities.
▪ Complete first Cleanup and/or
Reuse Plan.
▪ Submit QPR #4 in ACRES and
update property profiles.
▪ Submit annual DBE Report.

X X
Month 15
(December 2026) ▪ Submit annual FFR. X X
Month 17
(February 2026)
▪ Complete AWP Study for one
TA. X
733

Page 13 of 15 ends

DUE DATE ITEM
Send to:

EPA PM STATE
EPA
GRAN
TS
EPA

FINANCE
Ongoing
Eligibility approval requested &
confirmed (~21 days before Phase I
ESAs are scheduled and 24 - 42
days before Phase II ESAs are
scheduled).

X
Before fieldwork
begins
▪ Execute Property Access
Agreements.
▪ Prepare HASP.
▪ Prepare SAP (for Phase II ESAs).
▪ Prepare Section 7 and 106
consultations if required (for
Phase II ESAs).

X
X
(SAPs)
Ongoing
▪ Prepare Phase I & II ESA
Reports.
▪ Prepare All Appropriate Inquiries
Rule Checklist (Form EPA 560-
R-11-030)
▪ Prepare ABCA/cleanup plan/reuse
plan deliverables.

X
X
(cleanup
plans)
Annually
Prepare annual DBE (MBE/WBE)
Report for submittal by October
30th of each year.

X X
Annually Prepare annual FFR for submittal
by December 31st of each year. X X
Bi-monthly Prepare requests for reimbursement
(approximately every 1-2 months). X
September 2029
Prepare Final DBE Report & FFR &
Final Drawdown. X X X
September 2029 Prepare Final Performance Report X
734

Page 14 of 15 ends

F. Budget Summary
The table below provides an overview of the proposed budget by category and task.

Budget Category
Task 1
Project
Management,
Reporting &
Other Eligible
Activities
Task 2
Community
Engagement &
Brownfields Site
Inventory/
Prioritization
Task 3
Site-Specific
Assessment &
Cleanup
Planning
Activities
Task 4
Area-Wide
Planning
Activities
Budget
Category
Total
Personnel $32,000.00 $32,000.00 $24,000.00 $32,000.00 $120,000.00 Fringe Benefits $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
Travel $22,500.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $22,500.00
Equipment $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
Supplies $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
Contractual $36,400.00 $57,200.00 $1,024,000.00 $200,000.00 $1,317,600.00 Other $2,400.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $2,400.00
Total Direct Costs $93,300.00 $89,200.00 $1,048,000.00 $232,000.00 $1,462,500.00 Total Indirect Costs* $9,375.00 $9,375.00 $9,375.00 $9,375.00 $37,500.00 Total Budget $102,675.00 $98,575.00 $1,057,375.00 $241,375.00 $1,500,000.00 *A 2.5% indirect cost rate will be applied equally across the four project tasks for administrative/overhead costs. It is understood indirect costs cannot exceed 5% for this grant. The 2.5% indirect rate proposed by OCCOG falls within the 10% de minimus threshold for assistance agreements under $35M.

G. Greening Grants
OCCOG will strive to incorporated green practices into this grant and will request the same of its consultant team. Existing practices and new practices for this grant may include:

1. Implement a climate action plan

2. Implement sustainable water infrastructure practices

3. Utilize clean energy or implement other energy efficiency practices

4. Implement sustainable construction practices (green building)

5. Remediate contaminated sites with a reduced environmental footprint

6. Utilize fuel efficient vehicles

7. Purchase or lease more sustainable equipment, supplies and services

8. Implement sustainable materials management practices (reduce, reuse, recycle)

9. Consider other practices that directly reduce water, materials, climate, energy or air impacts
735

Page 15 of 15 ends

H. Pre-award Costs
OCCOG would like to request approval for pre-award costs for staff to attend the California Brownfields Conference in Carson, CA in September 2024. Additional pre-award activities we anticipate are described in the schedule table provided in Section E. Pre-award costs are anticipated to be up to $40,000.
736
737

Page 1 of 3 ends

BROWNFIELDS ASSESSMENT COALITION MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE FOLLOWING PARTIES:

ORANGE COUNTY COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS,

NEIGHBORWORKS ORANGE COUNTY, CITY OF GARDEN GROVE,

CITY OF ORANGE, AND CITY OF SANTA ANA
This Memorandum of Agreement documents the roles and responsibilities of the parties involved in the Fiscal Year 2024 Brownfield Assessment Coalition Grant awarded by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to the Coalition led by the Orange County Council of Governments (OCCOG) and supported by NeighborWorks Orange County, City of Garden Grove, City of Orange, and City of Santa Ana.

1. As the Lead Coalition Member, the OCCOG is accountable to EPA for management of the Cooperative Agreement (established between EPA and OCCOG) and compliance with the statutes, regulations, and terms and conditions of the award, and ensuring all Coalition Members comply with the terms and conditions.

2. It is the responsibility of the OCCOG to provide timely information to the Coalition Members regarding the management of the Cooperative Agreement and any changes that may be made to the Cooperative Agreement over the period of performance.

3. In addition to the OCCOG the Coalition Members include NeighborWorks Orange County, City of Garden Grove, City of Orange, and City of Santa Ana. Contact information for the lead project representative on behalf of each Coalition Member is as follows:

ORANGE COUNTY COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS
Name & Title: Marnie O’Brien Primmer, Executive Director Phone: 949-698-2856 | Email: [email protected]

NEIGHBORWORKS ORANGE COUNTY
Name & Title: Helen O’Sullivan, President & CEO
Phone: 714-490-1250 | Email: [email protected]

CITY OF GARDEN GROVE
Name & Title: Niki Wetzel, Community Development Director Phone: 714-741-5314 | Email: [email protected]

CITY OF ORANGE
Name & Title: Thomas Kisela, City Manager
Phone: 714-744-2222 | Email: [email protected]

CITY OF SANTA ANA
Name & Title: Alvaro Nuñez, City Manager
Phone: 714-647-5200 | Email: [email protected]

Docusign Envelope ID: 2FF2056E-53B7-411C-A038-62A2203037BA Docusign Envelope ID: 155075BC-741C-42C3-AA54-E310CF80F43A Docusign Envelope ID: 98291ADA-157D-4E05-9EF1-7E4E924FF7D6 738 962

Page 2 of 3 ends

4. Activities funded by the EPA Brownfields Assessment Coalition Grant is described in the Cooperative Agreement Work Plan (referred to as the “Work Plan”) established between EPA and OCCOG in July 2024. Project tasks outlined in the Work Plan include: 1) Project Management, Reporting and Other Eligible Activities; 2) Community Engagement and Site Inventory/Prioritization; 3) SiteSpecific Assessment and Cleanup Planning Activities; and 4) Area-Wide Planning (AWP) Activities.

5. The OCCOG was responsible for advancing a qualifications-based procurement process completed in fall 2023 to obtain the services of a consultant to assist with implementation of the EPA Brownfield Assessment Coalition Grant. Procurement was completed in accordance with 2 CFR 200.317–200.326 and the Best Practice Guide for Procuring Services Under EPA Assistance Agreements. One proposal was received from a consultant team led by Montrose Environmental Solutions, Inc. (Montrose). OCCOG staff reviewed and scored the proposal and completed a Fair and Reasonable Profit Analysis in accordance with EPA recommendations prior to entering a contract.

6. The OCCOG and its Coalition Members will work to develop a site selection process based on agreed upon factors and will ensure that a minimum of eight sites are assessed over the life of the Cooperative Agreement, including at least two sites within the jurisdiction of each Coalition Member. Selected sites will be submitted to EPA for approval to ensure eligibility prior to initiating assessment and/or cleanup/reuse planning activities. The Work Plan (established between EPA and OCCOG in July 2024) identifies the number of Phase I and II Environmental Site Assessments (ESAs), Regulated Building Materials (RBM) Surveys, Cleanup/Reuse Plans, and AWPs anticipated for the project.

7. Upon designation of the specific sites, it will be the responsibility of the OCCOG to work with the Coalition Member in whose geographic area the site is located to finalize the scope of work for the Consultant or other contractor(s). It will be the responsibility of this Coalition Member to obtain all required permits, easements, and/or access agreements as may be necessary to undertake assessments at the selected site.

8. The OCCOG is responsible for ensuring that other activities as negotiated with EPA in the Work Plan are implemented in accordance with a schedule agreed upon by the OCCOG and the Coalition Member in whose geographic area the site to be assessed is located.

9. The OCCOG is responsible for completing the project within the four-year period of performance (ending September 30, 2028) established by EPA in the Cooperative Agreement.

10.It will be the responsibility of each Coalition Member to comply with the terms of the Cooperative Agreement with EPA and respond to requests for work items and information in a timely manner to allow the OCCOG to meet EPA compliance reporting deadlines and other project deadlines.

Docusign Envelope ID: 2FF2056E-53B7-411C-A038-62A2203037BA Docusign Envelope ID: 155075BC-741C-42C3-AA54-E310CF80F43A Docusign Envelope ID: 98291ADA-157D-4E05-9EF1-7E4E924FF7D6 739 963

Page 3 of 3 ends

EFFECTIVE: OCTOBER 1, 2024
This MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT for the Brownfields Assessment Coalition led by the Orange County Council of Governments is agreed upon by the parties below.

ORANGE COUNTY COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS:

Signed by: Marnie O’Brien Primmer, Executive Director Date NEIGHBORWORKS OF ORANGE COUNTY:

Signed by: Helen O’Sullivan, President & CEO Date
CITY OF GARDEN GROVE:

Signed by: Niki Wetzel, Community Development Director Date CITY OF ORANGE:

Signed by: Thomas Kisela, City Manager Date
CITY OF SANTA ANA:

Signed by: Alvaro Nuñez, City Manager Date
10/28/2024

Lisa L. Kim, City Manager
Docusign Envelope ID: 2FF2056E-53B7-411C-A038-62A2203037BA 11/12/2024
Docusign Envelope ID: 155075BC-741C-42C3-AA54-E310CF80F43A 11/14/2024
Docusign Envelope ID: 98291ADA-157D-4E05-9EF1-7E4E924FF7D6 11/27/2024
740 964

MEMORANDUM
To: Erin Gardner – Orange County
Council of Governments
(OCCOG)
From: Ryan Givens, Planner |
[email protected]
CC: Marnie Primmer – OCCOG &
Leslie Hardy – City of Orange
Chris Gdak, Principal |
[email protected]
Project: OCCOG Brownfield
Assessment Grant
Date: May 13, 2025
RE: Work Plan for Grijalva Park Master Plan (Site-Specific Reuse Plan)

1.0 – INTRODUCTION
The purpose of this memorandum is to provide the work plan (and consultant fee) to develop a site-specific reuse plan (i.e., Master Plan) for Grijalva Park in the City of Orange. This planning work would be conducted under the Orange County Council of Governments (OCCOG) U.S. EPA Brownfield Grant where the City of Orange is a coalition partner and eligible for grant funding. For this project, Montrose Environmental Group and its subconsultant partner, Kimley-Horn and Associates (KHA), constitute the Consultant Team.

Subject Property Overview - Grijalva Park is a ~42-acre municipal park located at the northwest intersection of Prospect Street and Spring Street (also referred to as the “Property” herein). A drainage canal runs along the northwest boundaries (in an angled alignment) and several residential neighborhoods surround the Property. E. Spring Street extends into the park as a drive aisle and connects into McPherson Road (to the west) and E. Walnut Street (to the north). The Property once supported a landfill, but those operations have ceased; a pipeline extends across the property (pursuant to past planning/study documents). Grijalva Park includes a broad array of recreational amenities including sports fields, recreational buildings, multiple surface parking lots, and the Sports Center. Several areas of the Property remain undeveloped and underimproved (from a recreational perspective).

In the recent past, the City of Orange recently explored options to enhance the Property for more recreational amenities; these may include a second community center, a new skatepark, and a community arts theater (among other improvements) – there is also potential for exploring options for adding a dog park.

See the following weblink for project background: https://www.cityoforange.org/ourcity/departments/community-services/parks-and-facilities/park-planning-and-development ) Grijalva Park occupies three separate tax lots/parcels, and this memorandum describes the Property as three specific sites. The following table summarizes each site therein in terms of size and existing improvements (See Figure 1 on the subsequent page for a graphic depiction).

Grijalva Park Sites Estimates Site Area Existing Improvements Site 1 10 acres Vacant Land / Lawn Areas
Site 2 17.58 acres Grijalva Sports Center
Parking Lots
**Planned Skate Park
Site 3 14.08 acres Sports Fields
2 Basket Basketball Courts
Volleyball Court
Playground
Recreational Building
Parking Lot
Walking Paths
Shelter Features
741
OCCOG | City of Orange | Grijalva Park - Work Plan / Scope of Work May 13, 2025 - UPDATED

Page 2 of 8 ends

Project Objectives - The City of Orange (“the City” herein) and OCCOG would like the Consultant Team to develop a Master Plan for Grijalva Park which responds to the existing site conditions, addresses known environmental conditions/limitations, builds upon recent planning ideas, and employs a community engagement plan (aimed to obtain stakeholder feedback and desires for the Park). The Master Plan will focus the reuse activities on Sites 1 and 2 but will incorporate the existing improvements on Site 3 to result in a holistic planning strategy for the entire Park. The resulting Grijalva Park Master Plan will represent a “Site-Specific Reuse Plan” as allowed under U.S.

EPA Brownfield Grants.

Figure 1 – Subject Properties (outlined in red)
(Source: City of Orange Geographic Information Systems Website) Site 1
Site 2
Site 3
742
OCCOG | City of Orange | Grijalva Park - Work Plan / Scope of Work May 13, 2025 - UPDATED

Page 3 of 8 ends

2.0 – SCOPE OF WORK
The following table list the tasks/subtasks that are included in the scope of work for the Consultant Team to produce the Grijalva Park Master Plan (i.e., a Site-Specific Reuse Plan pursuant to U.S. EPA Brownfields Grant eligible planning activities). For this endeavor, Montrose Environmental Solutions, Inc. and Kimley-Horn and Associates (KHA) constitute the “Consultant Team” Table 2.1 – City of Orange – Grijalva Park Master Plan Scope of Work Task Subtasks / Work Descriptions
Consultant Team
Task/Subtask
Participation
Montrose KHA
Task 1:

Project
Management
and
Coordination
Fee Estimate:
$18,460.00
Task Overview – The Consultant Team will manage the project components, prepare monthly invoices, schedule/attend project coordination meetings, and respond to the City/OCCOC’s periodic requests for project information. This task will include the following subtasks/components.
 

1.1: Monthly Coordination Meetings – The Consultant Team will facilitate monthly coordination meetings with City/OCCOG staff (as applicable) through the project duration to discuss upcoming tasks, review/discuss project materials, define task logistics, and discuss potential planning ideas benefiting the Property. This subtask would include up to ten (10) virtual meetings.
 

1.2: Consultant Team Coordination – The Consultant Team will conduct coordination meetings amongst each firm, as necessary, to address project tasks, review design concepts, and other applicable project-related materials. The Consultant Team will also coordinate with various City departments, as applicable, to obtain technical data.

This subtask would include up to eight (8) virtual meetings.  

1.3: Grant Management – The Conceptual Team (led by Montrose) will assist the OCCOG with the applicable grant management tasks; this would include monthly reporting, invoicing, and similar tasks which are required as part of the associated U.S. EPA Brownfield Grant. 
Task 2:

Existing
Conditions
Analysis / Plan
Review
Fee Estimate:
$9,195.00
Task Overview – The Consultant Team (led by KHA) will gather, review, and summarize the applicable existing conditions in and around the subject Property. This information will serve as baseline data for planning decisions and applicable findings will be added to the final Master Plan document (See Task 7 herein). This task will include the following subtasks/components.
 

2.1: Park Plan Review – The Consultant Team will review previous planning concepts (including components of the 2019 and 2022 draft conceptual renderings of the park) and analytical data associated with the subject Property in terms of planned enhancements, and technical findings.


2.2: Policy Review – The Consultant Team will review the City’s General Plan and Parks Master Plan to identify relevant policies and long-range planning ideas related to the Property (and immediately surrounding vicinity).


2.3: Zoning Review – The Consultant Team will review the City’s zoning code (i.e., Title 17 of the Orange Municipal Code) and document 
743
OCCOG | City of Orange | Grijalva Park - Work Plan / Scope of Work May 13, 2025 - UPDATED

Page 4 of 8 ends

Table 2.1 – City of Orange – Grijalva Park Master Plan Scope of Work Task Subtasks / Work Descriptions
Consultant Team
Task/Subtask
Participation
Montrose KHA
the allowable land uses, dimensional standards, and parking requirements as they relate to site improvements within Grijalva Park.

2.5: Easement Review – The Consultant Team will review readily available surveys, title reports, and/or geographic information systems (GIS) datasets to identify known easements that may be present on the subject Property. This would include an information request to the City of Orange; this task is heavily dependent on the information the City provides. This subtask does not include land survey services or extensive title research.


2.6: Site Visit – The Consultant Team will conduct one site visit to the subject Property with the objectives confirm design opportunities, and to learn about the site improvements, the surrounding land uses, and the current access/circulation routes. The Consultant Team will take site and area photographs.
 

2.7: Existing Conditions Memorandum – The Consultant Team will summarize the existing conditions findings in a memorandum. 
Task 3:

Environmental
Review
Fee Estimate:
$13,640.00
Task Overview – The Consultant Team (led by Montrose) will gather, review, and summarize the applicable environmental reports associated with the subject Property. This research is intended to summarize the known environmental conditions on the Property with emphasis on past land fill-related conditions, potential contamination/pollutants, soil stability, and potential land use restrictions (as applicable).


3.1: Plan/Study Review – The Consultant Team will review readilyavailable environmental investigations that may have been conducted for the subject Property (e.g., Phase I/II Environmental Site Assessments and/or geotechnical reports). Shortly after Project commencement, the Consultant Team will issue an information request to the City of Orange for any past plans/reports; this analysis will be based on the information the City provides to the Consultant Team.


3.2: Findings / Areas of Concern – Based on the review described in subtask 3.1, the Consultant Team will create exhibits and compose a memorandum that identifies any areas of concern as it relates to soil stability, potential site contamination, and/or potential land use restrictions.

Task 4:

Community
Engagement
Plan
Fee Estimate:
$16,630.00
Task Overview – The Consultant Team (led by KHA) will create and implement a Community Engagement Plan aimed to gather
stakeholder feedback related to potential enhancements on the Property; that feedback will guide the conceptual reuse plans (as defined in Task 6). This task will include the following subtasks/components.
 

4.1: Community Engagement Plan & Summarizes – The Consultant Team will prepare and implement a Community Engagement Plan  
744
OCCOG | City of Orange | Grijalva Park - Work Plan / Scope of Work May 13, 2025 - UPDATED

Page 5 of 8 ends

Table 2.1 – City of Orange – Grijalva Park Master Plan Scope of Work Task Subtasks / Work Descriptions
Consultant Team
Task/Subtask
Participation
Montrose KHA
(CEP) that outlines the targeted audiences, engagement methods, and timeline associated with the subject Property (Grijalva Park). The Consultant Team will review previously completed engagement feedback that may have occurred within the last five years. After each engagement event, the Consultant Team will summarize participant feedback in a memorandum.

4.2: City Staff Listening Session – Shortly after project commencement, the Consultant Team will facilitate one (up to 3 hour) “Listening Session” (or interview) with City-staff representatives to learn about their initial goals for Grijalva Park, understand challenges/opportunities facing the area, and to obtain preliminary reuse ideas the Property. The Consultant Team will develop interview questions and generate maps/exhibits to guide the discussion (as appropriate). Interview participants should include individuals representing building/planning, public works, parks & recreation, economic development, and administration; other agency partners are also appropriate participants. The City shall be responsible for scheduling the interview and distributing the invitations. 

4.3: Working Group – The Consultant Team will assist the City/OCCOG in convening a Project Working Group comprising individuals representing the City of Orange, residents, and community organizations (including the Greater Orange Community Arts Theatre, Orange Elderly Services, and Library groups). The Working Group would serve as the core project recommendation body. The Consultant Team will facilitate up to three (3) in-person Working Group Meetings, prepare agendas, and exhibits (as applicable). The City shall be responsible for distributing invitations, securing the meeting venue, and assigning staff resources.


4.4: Community Questionnaire – The Consultant Team will prepare and host one (1) on-line community questionnaire aimed to obtain community sentiments related to local needs, desired land uses, and preferences relating to potential recreational enhancements. The Consultant Team will provide a weblink to the City and summarize participant responses. The City shall be responsible for distributing/promoting the questionnaire (e.g., outreach activities, social media announcements, etc.).


4.5: Community Workshop – The Consultant Team and City of Orange staff will co-facilitate one (1) community workshop for the public to learn about the project and provide feedback on potential Property enhancements. The Workshop is intended to share project information and obtain stakeholder feedback/planning ideas for park enhancements. The Consultant Team will prepare engagement materials/exhibits, create a presentation, and provide staffing for the event. The City shall be responsible for advertising the event, securing the meeting venue, and assigning staff resources.

745
OCCOG | City of Orange | Grijalva Park - Work Plan / Scope of Work May 13, 2025 - UPDATED

Page 6 of 8 ends

Table 2.1 – City of Orange – Grijalva Park Master Plan Scope of Work Task Subtasks / Work Descriptions
Consultant Team
Task/Subtask
Participation
Montrose KHA

4.6 Work Session – The Consultant Team and City staff will cofacilitate one work session with the City of Orange Park Planning and Community Events Commission (also referred to as the “Parks Commission”). The objective would be to present preliminary planning ideas for the Park at an appropriate project milestone, and to gather Commissioner sentiments and suggestions. The City shall be responsible for scheduling the work session.

Task 5:

Reuse Plans
(Conceptual
Site Plan)
Fee Estimate:
$21,000.00
Task Overview – Based on the existing conditions, environmental review, and community engagement findings, the Consultant Team (led by KHA) will create one (1) overall conceptual site plan for Grijalva Park (while focusing on Sites 1 and 2). This will be a plan-view, color rendered 2-D site plan depiction of the preferred redevelopment scenario showing planned buildings, pedestrian access, open space areas, recreational enhancements, and adjacent streetscape enhancements (as applicable). The conceptual site plan will establish a curated plant palette suitable for the park’s design character, maintenance capacity, and environmental conditions. Additionally, directional wayfinding strategy will be created, which enhances user experience, accessibility, and park identity.

The Consultant Team will use readily available GIS datasets and aerial photography as base information to create the conceptual plans; land survey services are not included in this task. Additionally, the conceptual planning task does not include stormwater management design or evaluation. The conceptual site plan will include a graphic depiction of potential site improvements and a site statistics table listing the intensity assumptions, as appropriate (e.g., site area, parking calculations, building sizes, unit count, and/or floor area ratio).

The City shall be responsible for providing any conceptual plans to the Consultant Team that reflect past planning decisions for the property (e.g., plans for a new skatepark, Community Arts Theater, Second Community Center, etc.).
**Note: The plans will be created in AutoCAD and color rendered using industry-standard graphics software.

Task 6:

Implementatio
n Strategies /
CEQA Analysis
Fee Estimate:
$31,555.00
Task Overview – Based on the locally-preferred conceptual site plan for the Property, the Consultant Team will recommend a series of planning level implementation strategies to improve Grijalva Park. The Consultant Team will document its recommendations in a
memorandum. This task will include the following subtasks/ components.
 

6.1: Planning Strategies / CEQA Addendum – The Consultant team (led by KHA) will identify potential land use refinements that would support site enhancements (as applicable). In support of the discretionary actions for approval of the Grijalva Park Master Plan (Task 7), CEQA certification for the project will be required. Relying on the approved Initial Study Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) from 
746
OCCOG | City of Orange | Grijalva Park - Work Plan / Scope of Work May 13, 2025 - UPDATED

Page 7 of 8 ends

Table 2.1 – City of Orange – Grijalva Park Master Plan Scope of Work Task Subtasks / Work Descriptions
Consultant Team
Task/Subtask
Participation
Montrose KHA
2005, Kimley-Horn proposes to complete an addendum for
consistency of certification.

An agency may use an addendum to make changes or additions to the underlying CEQA. The Addendum test will be completed to provide substantial evidence showing that a proposed project would not create new significant adverse impacts or increase the severity of a significant adverse impact identified in the previous CEQA document.

KHA will prepare an Addendum to the 2005 IS/MND that will include the minor additions/changes necessary to make the previous MND adequately apply to the proposed Project in the changed situation (i.e., the revised Park Master Plan). Additionally, the Addendum will evaluate the environmental effects of the planned park programming. The Addendum will include a brief explanation of the decision not to prepare a subsequent IS/MND (State CEQA Guidelines § 15164(e).).

Pursuant to AB 819, which took effect January 1, 2022, public agencies must submit all CEQA environmental documents to the State Clearinghouse (SCH) for publication to CEQAnet. KHA will work with the City to obtain Submitter access to the CEQA Submit online platform. KHA will prepare the Notice of Determination (“NOD”) and SCH Forms (Notice of Completion (NOC), Environmental Document Transmittal, and OPR Summary Form) for the Project and file these along with the Project’s Addendum to CEQAnet and the County Clerk on behalf of the City.

Deliverables for this subtask are limited to: CEQA Addendum, NOD and State Clearing House Forms

6.2: Funding Strategies/Sources – The Consultant Team (led by Montrose) will research and summarize a series of grant funding sources/opportunities that could be sought to support site reuse/redevelopment. This would entail a desktop review of state and federal grant fundings sources; Montrose will summarize its findings in a spreadsheet listing the grants, associated agencies, fundings limits, eligibility requirements, and weblinks (to those programs). 
Task 7:

Master Plan
Document
Fee Estimate:
$27,460.00
Task Overview – The Consultant Team (led by KHA) will create/author a Grijalva Park Master Plan document/report that packages together all the deliverables into a user-friendly narrative that explains the process, findings, reuse planning ideas, and conceptual site plan components. The document will include narratives, representative imagery of key site plan components, and associated maps/plans (as applicable).

The Consultant Team and City/OCCOG staff will collaborate to define the document format in terms of content outline, fonts/colors, and layout. The Consultant Team will conduct up to two (2) rounds of revisions based on City/OCCOG staff comments. The Master Plan document will include the following components/chapters: (i) Project overview and introduction, (ii) Existing conditions analysis, (iii) Reuse  
747
OCCOG | City of Orange | Grijalva Park - Work Plan / Scope of Work May 13, 2025 - UPDATED

Page 8 of 8 ends

Table 2.1 – City of Orange – Grijalva Park Master Plan Scope of Work Task Subtasks / Work Descriptions
Consultant Team
Task/Subtask
Participation
Montrose KHA
ideas summary, (iv) Conceptual reuse plan alternatives, (v) Locally preferred conceptual plan (i.e., Master Plan site plan), (vi) Planninglevel implementation recommendations, and (vii) Appendices with relevant technical data (as applicable).
**Note: The Master Plan document will be created using Adobe InDesign software.

Task 8:

Adoption
Hearings and
Support
Fee Estimate:
$4,200
Task Overview – The Consultant Team (led by KHA) will assist City of Orange staff in the adoption hearings for the Grijalva Master Plan.

KHA shall have one (1) staff representative attend and provide support at up to two (2) public hearings related to the project. These may include, but are not limited to, meetings of an initial City Council hearing, and a potential second City Council hearing. The Consultant shall be prepared to present project materials, respond to public and agency comments, and coordinate with City staff as needed prior to and during the hearings. The City shall be responsible for scheduling the hearings and providing the Consultant Team with the meeting dates/times in advance.

Total Fee $142,140.00
including all the tasks herein, a 5% subconsultant markup (pursuant to the OCCOG contract) PLUS $896 for expenses.

Billed to OCCOG on a Time and Material Basis.

Consultant Team Fee
Distribution
$43,340.00
- Montrose
$98,800.00
- KHA
748

MEMORANDUM
To: Erin Gardner – Orange County
Council of Governments
(OCCOG)
From: Ryan Givens, Planner |
[email protected]
Cc: Marnie Primmer - OCCOG
Project: OCCOG Brownfield
Assessment Grant
Date: April 28, 2025
RE: Work Plan / Scope of Work for Yorba Park Market Feasibility Analysis

1.0 – INTRODUCTION
The purpose of this memorandum is to provide the scope of services (work plan) to conduct a Market Feasibility Analysis for the city-owned Yorba Park Property in Orange, California. The property once supported a landfill and has been modified into a public open space amenity; there may be opportunities to introduce new or additional land uses on the Property given its size and unique location within the City. The project objectives would be to explore market conditions, review/summarize past environmental/geotechnical reports, and identify potential new uses that may be conducive for the Property. The findings from the Market Feasibility Analysis will help the City make informed decisions on future use of the Property.

Project Funding – This Market Feasibility Analysis will be funded through the Orange County Council of Governments’ (OCCOG) U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Brownfield Assessment Grant. The Grant provides funding for environmental site assessments, technical studies, and reuse planning activities for brownfields across Orange County, California.

Property / Area Description – Yorba Park rests at the southwest corner of Chapman Avenue and Yorba Street, serving as a gateway Property leading into the City from Highway 55. The Property was a former landfill, but those operations ceased, and the land was repurposed into a public park. Today, Yorba Park is a large public green space, with expansive lawns along the street frontages and the City’s only dog park (situated in the central and southern portions of the Property). The dog park amenities include multiple fenced play areas. A surface parking lot is accessible from Yorba Street. Santiago Creek runs along the Property’s western boundaries and includes a multi-use pathway/ bicycle trail with a bridge near Chapman Avenue. The Property is believed to possess soil stability concerns related to the former landfill operations.

The Property is nestled in an established, urbanized environment; Chapman Avenue is a commercial corridor with a collection of shopping centers, standalone businesses, and medical services. Several single-family neighborhoods comprise the areas to the north and south of the Corridor. The St. Joseph Heritage Medical Group Urgent Care facility, and the Chapman Global Medical Center occupy the land direct north of Yorba Park. The Rusty Leaf Plaza (with Target store anchor) is located immediately to the east (across Yorba Street). The Orange Unified School District – Child Development Center, the Community Day School and Parkside Education Center occupy the buildings/land directly south of Yorba Park. 749
OCCOG | City of Orange – Yorba Park Market Feasibility - Work Plan / Scope of Work April 28, 2028

Page 2 of 5 ends

The following table summarizes the subject Property; Figure 1 depicts its location:

Table 1.0.a – Yorba Park Property Summary
Subject Data
General Location Southwest corner of Chapman Avenue and Yorba Street (no address available) Parcel Number 392-061-02
Size 7.76-acres / 338,300.04-sf
Zoning Recreation Open Space (R-O)
Work Plan Overview - The City of Orange (“the City” herein) and the Orange County Council of Governments (OCCOG) would like their consultants (Montrose Environmental Group and Keyser Marston Associates) to conduct a market feasibility analysis to identify potential land uses that would be conducive for the Yorba Park Property while considering the site conditions and market opportunities/challenges.

The Project will result in a Market Feasibility report that outlines the existing site conditions, summarizes the past environmental site assessments/geological studies, lists the applicable zoning/land use requirements, defines market conditions, and recommends potential land uses that could be introduced to the Property. The analysis will include conceptual site plans that show how the land could be redeveloped with future uses.

Figure 1 – Subject Property (outlined in yellow dashed line) (Source: Orange County Geographic Information Systems – GIS- Website) Yorba Park |
Subject Property
750
OCCOG | City of Orange – Yorba Park Market Feasibility - Work Plan / Scope of Work April 28, 2028

Page 3 of 5 ends

2.0 – SCOPE OF WORK
The following table lists the tasks included in the scope of work for the Market Feasibility Analysis related to the Yorba Park Property in the City of Orange. Within this document, Montrose Environmental Group and Keyser Marston Associates constitute the Consultant Team.

Table 2.1 – Yorba Park Market Feasibility Analysis Scope of Work Task Options Subtasks / Work Descriptions
TASK 1: PROJECT

MANAGEMENT &

COORDINATION
Fee Estimate:
$5,460.00
Task Overview – The Consultant Team (led by Montrose) will manage the project components, prepare monthly invoices, schedule/attend project coordination meetings, and respond to the City/OCCOG’s periodic requests for project information. This task will include the following subtasks/components.

1.1: Monthly Coordination Meetings – The Consultant Team will attend monthly coordination meetings with City/OCCOG staff (as applicable) through the project duration to discuss upcoming tasks, review/discuss project materials, define task logistics, and discuss potential planning ideas benefiting the Property.

1.2: Subconsultant Coordination and Document Review – Montrose, serving as the Prime Consultant, will manage invoices, review draft deliverables, and coordinate with subconsultant firms related to the project.

TASK 2: EXISTING

CONDITIONS

ANALYSIS
Fee Estimate:
$12,760.00
Task Overview – The Consultant Team (led by Montrose) will review and summarize the existing area conditions in terms of land use policy, zoning/development standards, local context, access/mobility, wet utilities, and property conditions; this information will serve as baseline data to guide potential reuse options for the Property. Montrose will also gather, review, and summarize past environmental and geotechnical reports/studies conducted for the Property. Montrose will document the findings in a memorandum so the content can be integrated into the larger Market Feasibility Assessment report (defined under Task 3). This task will include the following subtasks/components.

2.1: Land Use, Zoning, and Policy Document Review – Montrose will review and summarize the applicable City policy and development standards relating to the Property. This would include zoning/regulatory components such as allowable land uses, dimensional standards, parking/access requirements, and intensity limitations (as applicable).

2.2: Utilities Analysis – Montrose will conduct a planning-level review of the existing potable water and sanitary sewer service in and around the Property to determine line locations/sizes and the City’s ability to serve future projects in the vicinity. To conduct this research, Montrose will interview City staff to define utility conditions and require associated utility maps – this subtask does not include an in-depth system analysis or field inspection.

2.3 – Environmental Assessment Review – Montrose will review previously completed environmental site assessments, geotechnical reports, and/or similar studies to understand the location/extent of known contamination on the Property, and areas of soil stability concerns, recommended additional study, and identified remediation actions. This subtask will include the following components:
• Plan/Study Review – Montrose will review readily-available environmental investigations that may have been conducted for the subject Property (e.g., Phase I/II Environmental Site Assessments 751
OCCOG | City of Orange – Yorba Park Market Feasibility - Work Plan / Scope of Work April 28, 2028

Page 4 of 5 ends

Table 2.1 – Yorba Park Market Feasibility Analysis Scope of Work and/or geotechnical reports). The Consultant Team will issue an information request to the City of Orange for any past plans/reports; this analysis will be based on the information the City provides to the Consultant Team.
• Findings / Areas of Concern – Based on the review described in Plan/Study Review, Montrose will create exhibits and compose a memorandum that identifies any areas of concern as it relates to soil stability and potential site contamination, along with possible land use restrictions/controls.

TASK 3: MARKET

ASSESSMENT
Fee Estimate:
$51,975.00
Task Overview – The Consultant Team (led by Keyser Marston Associates - KMA) will write a Market Feasibility Study report for the Property to define the market conditions and financial feasibility of alternative development programs (land uses). KMA will integrate the data/findings from the other tasks contained in this Work Plan into the final report. This task will include the following subtasks/components (also see the attached KMA Proposal dated April 11, 2025).

3.1: Market Opportunities Analysis – KMA will collect and summarize the general market opportunities for the vicinity; that information will help define potential land uses/development programs that may be conducive for the Property. This subtask will include the following components. • Market Area Overview - KMA will summarize the demographic makeup of the residents, employment and businesses for the City and Orange County.
• Market Conditions Analysis – KMA will explore the market conditions for the vicinity. This would include real estate market conditions related to local rental rates (retail, office, hotel, and residential), residential sales prices, vacancy rates, hotel performance, and land/building values. This will also include market area performance relating to productivity levels for retail, retail surplus/leakage (in Orange), office market projections, and hotel performance. • Site Opportunities – KMA will identify potential land uses that may be most conducive for the Property based on the Market Conditions Analysis. KMA will identify potential rental and sales price rates for retail, office, hotel, and residential.

3.2: Financial Analysis – Based on the findings collected from subtask 3.1, KMA will conduct the following analysis:
• Entitlement and Physical Constraints – KMA will review the physical conditions on the Property and identify appropriate entitlement opportunities to best promote development.
• Land Use Alternatives – KMA will evaluate the financial feasibility for up to three (3) alternative development programs for the Property.

KMA will work with the City/Montrose to identify the three market supported development programs (for the Property). KMA will also conduct planning-level pro-forma estimates for each of the recommended development programs (aimed to assess the financial feasibility for potential projects). KMA will incorporate the conceptual plans (from Task 4) into this section of the report.
752
OCCOG | City of Orange – Yorba Park Market Feasibility - Work Plan / Scope of Work April 28, 2028

Page 5 of 5 ends

Table 2.1 – Yorba Park Market Feasibility Analysis Scope of Work TASK 4: CONCEPTUAL

REUSE PLANS
Fee Estimate:
$5,980.00
Task Overview – To support the Market Assessment activities under Task 3, Montrose will create conceptual site plans for each of the three identified development programs for the Property. The intent would be to show the scale and spatial arrangement for each program so the City can assess future land use options for the Property.

These will be plan-view, color rendered depictions of potential redevelopment options showing future buildings, pedestrian access, parking areas, and open space areas (as applicable). Montrose will use readily available GIS datasets and aerial photography as base information to create the conceptual plans; land survey services are not included in this task. Additionally, the conceptual planning task does not include stormwater management design or evaluation.

Each plan will include a graphic depiction of potential site improvements and a site statistics table listing the intensity assumptions, as appropriate (e.g., site area, parking calculations, building sizes, unit count, and/or floor area ratio).

TASK 5: REUSE

STRATEGIES
Fee Estimate:
$9,300.00
Task Overview – The Consultant Team (led by Montrose) will recommend a series of planning level strategies that the City may choose to employ to position the Property for reuse/enhancement and to align with the market findings (defined under Task 3). Montrose will document its recommendations in a memorandum; that information will be integrated into the Market Assessment report (defined under Task 3). This task will include the following subtasks/components.

5.1: Planning Strategies – Montrose will identity potential land use/zoning refinements, and capital projects that would support site reuse.

5.2: Land-based Strategies – Montrose (Geologist) will identity planning-level options to support future improvement projects as depicted on the conceptual reuse plan (as defined in Task 4). This may include, but not limited to, options for soil stability, advanced construction methods, and/or areas of the Property deemed unsuitable for development (as applicable).

TOTAL FEE ESTIMATE $85,599.00 (including the tasks described herein plus $124.00 for mileage)

ATTACHMENT
• Keyser Marston Associates (KMA) Proposal – April 11, 2025 753
777 SOUTH FIGUEROA STREET, SUITE 2555  LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 90017  PHONE 213.622.8095 2501009:KMA:kee
WWW.KEYSERMARSTON.COM 99900.000.002
ADVISORS IN:

Real Estate
Affordable Housing
Economic Development

BERKELEY
A. Jerry Keyser
Timothy C. Kelly
Debbie M. Kern
David Doezema

LOS ANGELES
Kathleen H. Head
James A. Rabe
Gregory D. Soo-Hoo
Kevin E. Engstrom
Julie L. Romey
Tim R. Bretz

SAN DIEGO
Paul C. Marra
Linnie A. Gavino
April 11, 2025
Ryan Givens
Principal, Brownfields & Community Revitalization Practice Montrose Environmental Solutions, Inc.

Dear Mr. Givens:

Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. (KMA) is pleased to submit the following proposal to provide economic consulting services to Montrose Environmental Solutions, Inc. (Montrose). As KMA understands the situation, Montrose is managing an EPA Brownfield Assessment Grant on behalf of the Orange County Council of Government (OCCOG). As such, on behalf of the City of Orange (City), Montrose would like to engage KMA, as a subconsultant, to evaluate the market and financial feasibility of alternative development scenarios for a site in the City of Orange (Site). In addition, Montrose will provide technical support for land-, entitlement-, and brownfield-related background and analysis. With this understanding, KMA is pleased to submit the following letter proposal to Montrose, which is organized as follows:
 KMA’s relevant qualifications are summarized;
 The proposed scope of services is described; and
 The proposed budget for the engagement is provided.

STATEMENT OF QUALIFICATIONS
Description of the Firm
KMA is a full-service real estate, financial, and economic consulting firm specializing in real estate advisory and evaluation services. KMA is a privately held corporation that was founded in 1973. We have one of the largest real estate advisory practices on the West Coast, and the majority of KMA assignments involve long-standing client relationships.
754
Ryan Givens April 11, 2025
Montrose Environmental Solutions, Inc. Page 2
2501009:KMA:kee
99900.000.002
KMA’s services fall within the following general areas:
 Real Estate Evaluation and Transaction Services
 Strategic Planning and Economic Development Services
 Affordable Housing
 Valuation and Litigation Support
 Fiscal Impact Analyses
 Infrastructure and Public Finance Structuring
The increased complexities of real estate transactions demand a strong technical understanding of market opportunities and constraints. KMA can provide services that are grounded in a fundamental understanding of the Southern California real estate market, valuations and investment financing. Unique characteristics possessed by KMA include:

Experience
KMA has over 40 years of experience assisting clients throughout the West in real estate market and evaluation services; negotiation services; structuring public/private transactions; and project implementation services.

Cost Effectiveness
KMA can be cost effective for our clients given our ability to provide comprehensive services relating to market and financial feasibility, economic analysis, direct implementation experience and public finance without the need for multiple consultants.

Commitment
KMA offers the commitment of principals who are recognized leaders in real estate advisory services throughout California. This philosophy and structure provides clients with maximum direct contact with the firm’s principals.

SCOPE OF WORK
The KMA analysis will summarize the market conditions and financial feasibility of alternative development programs on the Site based on the following scope of services. 755
Ryan Givens April 11, 2025
Montrose Environmental Solutions, Inc. Page 3
2501009:KMA:kee
99900.000.002
Task 1 – Market Opportunities Analysis
Task 1 will evaluate the market opportunities for the Site based on the following scope of services.

MARKET AREA OVERVIEW
KMA will update the makeup of the residents, employment and businesses within the following areas:

1. The pertinent market area;

2. The City of Orange; and

3. Orange County.

There are numerous important demographic and economic characteristics that will profoundly impact the market support for residential and commercial development.

Included among these are the number of households, household formation, population and income levels. In addition, KMA will summarize business patterns in the market area.

MARKET CONDITIONS ANALYSIS
KMA will provide an assessment of market conditions to identify near- to mid-term development opportunities. The assessment of market conditions will consider the strengths, weaknesses and opportunities for uses of the Site. The analysis will evaluate the following:

Real Estate Conditions

1. Local and regional rent levels for retail, office, hotel and residential

2. Residential sales prices

3. Vacancy rates for retail, office and residential

4. Hotel performance factors including average daily rate, occupancy levels and revenue per available room (RevPAR).

5. Land and building values
756
Ryan Givens April 11, 2025
Montrose Environmental Solutions, Inc. Page 4
2501009:KMA:kee
99900.000.002

6. Recent transactions

7. Proposed developments
Market Area Performance

1. Productivity levels for retail

2. Retail surplus/leakage analysis by retail type

3. Residential growth projections

4. Office market projections

5. Hotel performance
Based on the information compiled, KMA will evaluate the strengths and weaknesses embodied by the existing uses in the market area. Information sources will include:
 Interviews with brokers active in the area;
 Real estate market reports prepared by real estate service corporations;  Sales tax information provided by the State Board of Equalization;  Publications prepared by local governmental agencies;  Information obtained from private firms; and
 Market research conducted by KMA.

SITE OPPORTUNITIES
The information compiled above will be utilized to evaluate the market opportunities for the Site. This evaluation will consider the depth of demand for various development types throughout the larger market area, and the appropriateness of these uses for the Site. Specifically, KMA will identify the following:
 Range of retail rents, occupancy rates and general demand for retail space.  Range of office rents, occupancy rates and general demand for office space.  Hotel room rates, occupancy levels and market area demand. 757
Ryan Givens April 11, 2025
Montrose Environmental Solutions, Inc. Page 5
2501009:KMA:kee
99900.000.002
 Range of rental rates for apartment units by bedroom count and per square foot, general occupancy rates and general demand for units.
 Price range (total and per square foot) for townhome or condominium units and general demand for each type of unit.

Upon completing Task 1, KMA will prepare a memorandum summarizing the key findings including:
 A summary of socioeconomic and demographic conditions;  Projected market demand for the various uses.

Task 2 - Financial Analysis
The information compiled in Task 1 will be utilized to evaluate development feasibility for the Site. Specifically, KMA will conduct the following analyses:

1. Entitlements & Physical Constraints - KMA will review the physical properties of the Site and identify appropriate entitlement opportunities to best promote development. The evaluation will consider and summarize State of California SLA requirements.

2. KMA will evaluate the financial feasibility for three alternative development programs for the Site. To conduct this analysis, will undertake the following activities:
a. Work with the Project Team to identify three market supported development programs.
b. Consider Project quality and target market, including affordability mix. c. Identify project land uses, including residential unit mix by bedroom count, residential unit sizes and scope of commercial and/or hotel development.
d. Prepare a pro forma analysis of the programs, evaluating the following:
i. Estimated construction costs
758
Ryan Givens April 11, 2025
Montrose Environmental Solutions, Inc. Page 6
2501009:KMA:kee
99900.000.002
ii. Appropriate operating parameters, including residential rents/sales prices (market and affordable), commercial rents hotel performance factors and relevant operating expenses
iii. Market rate return requirements
iv. Estimated residual land value
e. The land residual value supported by each development program will be compared to comparable land sales in the market area to confirm reasonableness and feasibility.

Upon completing Task 2, KMA will prepare a comprehensive memorandum summarizing the key findings of the Task 1 and Task 2 analyses including:
 A summary of socioeconomic and demographic conditions;  Projected market demand for the various uses and;
 Development feasibility of prototypical projects, including supported land residual values.

BUDGET & SCHEDULE
Given the nature of the assignment, the study would be prepared for a budget of $49,500.

Project Budget
Task 1 $30,000
Task 2 $19,500
Project Total $49,500
For the purposes of this analysis, KMA anticipates participating in two in person meetings and three virtual meetings. Any additional meetings will be billed on a timeand-expense basis in accordance with the rate schedule shown below. KMA believes Task 1 can be completed within six weeks of receiving authorization to proceed and any data/information requested from the Project Team. Task 2 can be completed within six weeks after the delivery of the final Task 1 report. Reimbursable expenses are in addition to the above amounts.
759
Ryan Givens April 11, 2025
Montrose Environmental Solutions, Inc. Page 7
2501009:KMA:kee
99900.000.002
Billing Rate Schedule
Chairman, President, Managing Principals $305.00
Senior Principals $295.00
Principals $275.00
Managers $245.00
Senior Associates $205.00
Associates $185.00
Senior Analysts $170.00
Analysts $145.00
Technical Staff $105.00
Administrative Staff $90.00
KMA appreciates the opportunity to submit this proposal. Please do not hesitate to contact us if this proposal can be modified to better meet your needs.

Sincerely,
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.

Kevin Engstrom Julie Romey
Senior Principal Senior Principal
760
Agenda Item
City Council
Item #: 7.1. 6/10/2025 File #: 25-0296

1. SUBJECT
Appointment to the Park Planning and Community Events Commission and Investment Advisory Committee.

2. SUMMARY
Due to the expired term of Erika de Vries, a scheduled vacancy exists on the Park Planning and Community Events Commission. A Notice of Vacancy was posted in accordance with Government Code Section 54974.

The Investment Advisory Committee was reinstated in April 2024. Pursuant to Resolution No. 11536, the reinstated Committee shall consist of seven voting members with a term of two years. Four members were appointed in March 2025 leaving three remaining vacancies.

3. RECOMMENDED ACTION
Confirm Mayor Slater’s recommendation to appoint Brandy Romero to the Park Planning and Community Events Commission for a four-year term ending on June 30, 2029; and Adam Carr to the Investment Advisory Committee for a two-year term ending on June 30, 2027.

City of Orange Page 1 of 1 Printed on 6/4/2025
powered by Legistar™761
Agenda Item
City Council
Item #: 7.1. 6/10/2025 File #: 25-0296

1. SUBJECT
Appointment to the Park Planning and Community Events Commission and Investment Advisory Committee.

City of Orange Page 1 of 1 Printed on 6/4/2025
powered by Legistar™762
Agenda Item
City Council
Item #: 7.2. 6/10/2025 File #: 25-0309
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
THRU: Tom Kisela, City Manager
FROM: Carolyn Cavecche, Audit Advisory Committee Chair

1. SUBJECT
Audit Advisory Committee Financial Analysis Report

2. SUMMARY
Receive a presentation from the Audit Advisory Committee for the Fiscal Years 2007-08 through Fiscal Year 2023-24 as directed by City Council at the February 25, 2025 meeting.

3. RECOMMENDED ACTION
Receive and file.

4. ATTACHMENTS
· Audit Advisory Committee Financial Review
City of Orange Page 1 of 1 Printed on 6/4/2025
powered by Legistar™763
Agenda Item
City Council
Item #: 7.2. 6/10/2025 File #: 25-0309
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
THRU: Tom Kisela, City Manager
FROM: Carolyn Cavecche, Audit Advisory Committee Chair

1. SUBJECT
Audit Advisory Committee Financial Analysis Report

2. SUMMARY
Receive a presentation from the Audit Advisory Committee for the Fiscal Years 2007-08 through Fiscal Year 2023-24 as directed by City Council at the February 25, 2025 meeting.

3. RECOMMENDED ACTION
Receive and file.

4. ATTACHMENTS
· Audit Advisory Committee Financial Review
City of Orange Page 1 of 1 Printed on 6/4/2025
powered by Legistar™764

AUDIT COMMITTEE FINANCIAL REVIEW
City Council
June 10, 2025
1 765
2 INTRODUCTION
2008-2013
Recession
• Brian Wilterink
• Caleb Brown
• Jeff Grampp
2014-2019
Post Recession
• Andrew Li
• Chris Horton
• Jack Schroeder
• Jeff Grampp
2020-2023
COVID
• Carolyn Cavecche
• Chris Horton
• Garrett Smith
2024
Present
• Carolyn Cavecche
• Chris Horton
• Garrett Smith
766
3 Recession Years (2008-2013)
700
710
720
730
740
750
760
$70
$75
$80
$85
$90
$95
$100
2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
Revenues, Expenditures, FTE
FTE Revenues Expenditures
In Millions
767
4 Recession Years (2008-2013)
Fund Balance
Balance as of June 30, 2008 June 30, 2013
General Fund $38,285,796 $29,255,854
Capital Projects 12,859,238 10,561,355
Equipment Maintenance 389,097 2,277,784
Equipment Replacement 19,439,157 17,154,447
Major Building Improvement 2,387,255 225,351
Workers’ Compensation 6,636,941 (1,231,493)
Self Insurance Liability 1,927,685 2,109,698
Self Insurance Liability – Dental 224,671 85,219
Employee Accrued Liability 2,416,795 3,998,388
Information System 323,293 779,159
Computer Replacement 5,161,121 2,029,983
Total Fund Balance $90,051,049 $67,245,745
768
5 Recession Years (2008-2013)
Long Term Liabilities
Total
Claims
Payable
Compensated
Absences
Cert of
Participation
OPEB
Liability
Pension
Liability
Balance
as of
$64,587,794 $11,231,057 $6,120,000 $6,520,368 $4,882,178 $93,341,397 June 30, 2008
$123,462,370 $16,163,851 $0 $7,981,486 $8,688,468 $156,296,175 June 30, 2013
769
6 Recession Years (2008-2013)
Expenditures, Payroll, Pension Contribution, FTE
2008 2013
% of Total
Expenses Amount % Increase % of TotalExpenses Amount
Expenses $89,171,284 $89,018,039 -0.2%
Covered Payroll $55,686,962 62.4% $55,939,736 0.5% 62.8% Pension Contributions $9,555,230 10.7% $13,331,741 39.5% 15.0% 753 722 -4.1% Full Time Employee
Equivalents
770
7 Recession Years (2008-2013)
Key Takeaways
• The City suffered significant financial setbacks due to the Great Recession and the dissolution of the Redevelopment Agency (RDA)
• A total of $19 million in General Fund fund balance was reduced as a result of the Recession and RDA dissolution.
771
8 Post Recession Years (2014-2019)
620
640
660
680
700
720
740
$80
$85
$90
$95
$100
$105
$110
$115
$120
$125
$130
2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019
Revenues, Expenditures, FTE
FTE Revenues Expenditures
In Millions
772
9 Post Recession Years (2014-2019)
Fund Balance
Balance as of June 30, 2013 June 30, 2019
General Fund $29,255,854 $38,771,518
Capital Projects 10,561,355 29,603,940
Equipment Maintenance 2,277,784 (4,183,758)
Equipment Replacement 17,154,447 17,400,891
Major Building Improvement 225,351 288,880
Workers’ Compensation (1,231,493) (9,378,545)
Self Insurance Liability 2,109,698 (1,222,261)
Self Insurance Liability – Dental 85,219 341,991
Employee Accrued Liability 3,998,388 6,935,245
Information System 779,159 60,425
Computer Replacement 2,029,983 2,538,427
Total Fund Balance $67,245,745 $81,156,753
773
10 Post Recession Years (2014-2019)
Long Term Liabilities
Total
Claims
Payable
Compensated
OPEB Liability Absences
Pension
Liability
Balance
as of
$123,462,370 $16,163,851 $7,981,486 $8,688,468 $156,296,175 June 30, 2013
$208,370,338 $24,891,855 $7,910,834 $17,928,670 $259,101,797 June 30, 2019
774
11 Post Recession Years (2014-2019)
Expenditures, Payroll, Pension Contribution, FTE
2013 2019
% of Total
Expenses Amount % Increase % of TotalExpenses Amount
Expenses $89,018,039 $115,378,298 29.6%
Covered Payroll $55,939,736 62.8% $62,167,047 11.1% 54.0% Pension Contributions $13,331,741 15.0% $23,520,033 76.4% 20.0% 722 654 -6.7% Full Time Employee
Equivalents
775
12 Post Recession Years (2014-2019)
Key Takeaways
• The City was treading water.
• Revenues did not rebound enough to offset the financial impact of the Recession. • There were deficits in three funds.
• FTE decreased during this period.
• Long term debt increased by $102.8 million, or 67%, during this period. 776
13 COVID Years (2020-2023)
630
640
650
660
670
680
690
700
$100
$105
$110
$115
$120
$125
$130
$135
$140
$145
$150
2020 2021 2022 2023
Revenues, Expenditures, FTE
FTE Revenues Revenues w/o One-time Expenditures
In Millions
777
14 COVID Years (2020-2023)
Fund Balance
Balance as of June 30, 2019 June 30, 2023
General Fund $38,771,518 $25,728,204
Capital Projects 29,603,940 38,359,032
Equipment Maintenance (4,183,758) (4,449,029)
Equipment Replacement 17,400,891 25,004,239
Major Building Improvement 288,880 202,129
Workers’ Compensation (9,378,545) (9,624,987)
Self Insurance Liability (1,222,261) (832,553)
Self Insurance Liability – Dental 341,991 536,653
Employee Accrued Liability 6,935,245 6,761,574
Information System 60,425 1,047,901
Computer Replacement 2,538,427 10,457,915
Total Fund Balance $81,156,753 $93,141,078
778
15 COVID Years (2020-2023)
Long Term Liabilities
Total
Lease
Revenue
Bond
Pension
Obligation
Bond
Claims
Payable
Compensated
Absences
OPEB
Liability
Pension
Liability
Balance
as of
$208,370,338 $24,891,855 $7,910,834 $17,928,670 $0 $0 $259,101,797 June 30, 2019
($29,695,653) $31,950,811 $9,595,557 $15,780,002 $248,970,043 $32,797,907 $309,398,667 June 30, 2023
779
16 COVID Years (2020-2023)
Expenditures, Payroll, Pension Contribution, FTE
2019 2023
% of Total
Expenses Amount % Increase % of TotalExpenses Amount
Expenses $115,378,298 $138,337,618 19.9%
Covered Payroll $62,167,047 54.0% $65,479,775 5.3% 47.3% Pension Contributions $23,520,033 20.0% $27,389,222 16.5% 19.8% 654 695 6.3% Full Time Employee
Equivalents
780
17 COVID Years (2020-2023)
Key Takeaways
• One-time federal dollars, American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA), kept the City afloat. • General Fund reserves fall to below immediate post recession level. • Long term debt increased by $50.3 million, or 19%, during this period. 781
18 Present (2024)
600
620
640
660
680
700
720
740
760
$130
$135
$140
$145
$150
2023 2024
Revenues, Expenditures, FTE
FTE Revenues Expenditures
In Millions
782
19 Present (2024)
Fund Balance
Balance as of June 30, 2023 June 30, 2024
General Fund $25,728,204 $28,457,558
Capital Projects 38,359,032 34,802,557
Equipment Maintenance (4,449,029) (4,618,612)
Equipment Replacement 25,004,239 23,678,522
Major Building Improvement 202,129 176,328
Workers’ Compensation (9,624,987) (7,903,557)
Self Insurance Liability (832,553) (691,138)
Self Insurance Liability – Dental 536,653 576,014
Employee Accrued Liability 6,761,574 7,383,486
Information System 1,047,901 1,320,963
Computer Replacement 10,457,915 8,364,107
Total Fund Balance $93,141,078 $91,546,228
783
20 Present (2024)
Long Term Liabilities
Total
Lease
Revenue
Bond
Pension
Obligation
Bond
Claims
Payable
Compensated
Absences
OPEB
Liability
Pension
Liability
Balance
as of
($29,695,653) $31,950,811 $9,595,557 $15,780,002 $248,970,043 $32,797,907 $309,398,667 June 30, 2023
($2,698,431) $32,444,297 $11,389,987 $14,394,262 $238,632,971 $32,082,059 $326,245,145 June 30, 2024
784
21 Present (2024)
Expenditures, Payroll, Pension Contribution, FTE
2023 2024
% of Total
Expenses Amount % Increase % of TotalExpenses Amount
Expenses $138,337,618 $144,257,908 4.3%
Covered Payroll $65,479,775 47.3% $69,624,157 6.3% 48.3% Pension Contributions & POB $27,389,222 19.8% $29,611,523 8.1% 20.5% 695 738 6.2% Full Time Employee
Equivalents
785
22 Present (2024)
Key Takeaways
• Three funds continued to run at a deficit.
• Total 2024 fund balance is slightly above June 2008 fund balance, yet the annual budget increased by $50 million over that time.
o 2008 General Fund Budget - $94 million
o 2024 General Fund Budget - $144 million
• FY 2023-24 long term debt increased by $16.8 million, or 5%, over FY 2022-23. 786
23 Present (2008-2024)
2008 2024
% of Total
Amount % Increase Expenses
% of Total
Amount Expenses
Revenue $94,872,591 $144,358,213 52.2%
Expenses 89,171,284 144,257,908 61.8%
Operating Surplus $5,701,307 $100,305
Covered Payroll $55,939,736 62.7% $69,624,157 24.5% 48.3% Pension Contribution & POB $9,555,230 10.7% $29,611,523 209.9% 20.5% Total Long-term Liabilities $93,341,397 $326,245,145 249.5% • Pension Cost if Increased at Same Rate of Covered Payroll: $9,555,230 x 24.5% = $11,896,261 • Increase in Pension Cost from Changes in Assumptions: $29,611,523 - $11,896,261 = $17,715,262 o Assumptions such as life expectancy and projected investment earnings. 787
24 Key Takeaways and Recommendations
• The City never fully recovered from the Great Recession, and dissolution of the Redevelopment Agency (RDA).
• In subsequent years, revenues did not keep up with city needs. • Debt Service is becoming an ever increasingly larger percentage of yearly budget; this is not unique to Orange.
• Specific goals and target levels for internal service funds need to be clarified and set by City Council.
• Balancing service levels with available revenue for a city the size of Orange will become increasingly challenging.
788
Agenda Item
City Council
Item #: 9.1. 6/10/2025 File #: 25-0231
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
THRU: Tom Kisela, City Manager
FROM: Monica Espinoza, Human Resources Director

1. SUBJECT
Public hearing and reporting on City of Orange vacancies pursuant to Government Code 3502.3.

2. SUMMARY
This report summarizes vacant City positions and discusses the current City vacancies, recruitment and retention efforts.

3. RECOMMENDED ACTION

1. Conduct and close Public Hearing.

2. Receive and file report of City vacancies, recruitment and retention efforts.

4. FISCAL IMPACT
There is no direct financial impact associated with conducting a public hearing pursuant to Government Code 3502.3. However, addressing recruitment and retention issues could involve future budgeting and bargaining considerations.

5. STRATEGIC PLAN GOALS
Goal 4: Improve Employee Retention and Recruitment

6. DISCUSSION AND BACKGROUND
Governor Newson signed Assembly Bill 2561 (AB 2561) into law on September 22, 2024 to amend the Meyers-Milias-Brown Act (MMBA). AB 2561 went into effect January 1, 2025 and codified California Government Code Section 3502.3 which mandates public agencies hold a public hearing at least once per fiscal year to report on vacancy status and recruitment and retention efforts.

Job Vacancies
As of May 16, 2025, the City has 63 vacancies among its eight formal bargaining groups who represent 603 full-time budgeted positions, for a 10.45% vacancy rate as summarized in the chart below.

Bargaining Group Number of
Vacancies
Number of
Positions
Percentage
of Bargaining
Group
City of Orange Police Association (COPA) 24 212 11.32%
City of Orange Police Management Association (PMA) 0 35 0% International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers (IBEW)7 51 13.73% City of Orange Page 1 of 3 Printed on 6/4/2025
powered by Legistar™789
Item #: 9.1. 6/10/2025 File #: 25-0231
Bargaining Group Number of
Vacancies
Number of
Positions
Percentage
of Bargaining
Group
City of Orange Police Association (COPA) 24 212 11.32%
City of Orange Police Management Association (PMA) 0 35 0% International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers (IBEW)
Local 47 Maintenance and Crafts
7 51 13.73%
International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers (IBEW)
Local 47 Water
6 25 24%
Orange City Firefighters, Inc. Local 2384 of the
International Association of Fire Fighters, AFL-CIO
3 116 2.58%
Orange City Fire Management Association (FMA) 0 6 0%
Orange Management Association (OMA) 4 50 8.0%
Orange Municipal Employees Association (OMEA) 19 108 17.59% Total 63 603 10.45%
Vacancies are created for a number of reasons, including internal movement such as a promotion or transfer, or when an employee leaves the organization due to retirement, voluntary resignation, or involuntary termination. When vacancies occur, the department initiates a requisition for recruitment to Human Resources. That requisition ultimately is reviewed by the City Manager to either approve, deny, or delay hiring based on the City’s ongoing fiscal challenges.

One of the eight bargaining groups exceeds the 20% vacancy threshold. The International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers (IBEW) Local 47 representing Water Division employees has the highest vacancy rate on a percentage basis at approximately 24%, or six vacancies. Within these identified vacancies are two Water Skilled Maintenance Workers and four Water Plant Operator II positions.

Recruitment Outreach and Process
The Human Resources Department collaborates with departments to implement recruitment strategies to attract and retain qualified candidates. The City posts job announcements on the City’s website as well as GovernmentJobs.com. Human Resources also submits advertisements to industry -specific websites/professional associations, participates in regional/college job fairs, and accepts interest cards that notify candidates when the City initiates recruitment of interest to a candidate.

Recruiters also target candidates within LinkedIn.

Once approval is received to fill a vacancy, the recruitment type is determined and a job announcement is initiated. Applications are screened and candidates meeting qualifications proceed through the process which may include testing and/or interview panels. Candidates scoring 70% or higher are placed on an eligibility list for consideration that expires after one year.

Retention Efforts
The City provides job-related trainings, post graduate educational degree incentives, professional development opportunities, employee engagement initiatives, wellness /education reimbursement programs, and alternative work schedules (9/80, 4/10, 3/12.5, or 48/96) depending on departments.

Despite these retention efforts, the City has fallen behind market median in compensation when compared to neighboring cities as a result of the City’s fiscal challenges, thereby losing institutional knowledge and talent to other agencies. Turnover is costly and results in reduced efficiency and City of Orange Page 2 of 3 Printed on 6/4/2025
powered by Legistar™790
Item #: 9.1. 6/10/2025 File #: 25-0231
knowledge and talent to other agencies. Turnover is costly and results in reduced efficiency and service to the public.

Pursuant to this new legislation, the appropriate posting and notifications of this hearing were made to all labor association/union representatives, noting the opportunity to address the City Council on the matter.

7. ATTACHMENTS
· Vacancy Report by Bargaining Group with Classifications City of Orange Page 3 of 3 Printed on 6/4/2025
powered by Legistar™791
Agenda Item
City Council
Item #: 9.1. 6/10/2025 File #: 25-0231
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
THRU: Tom Kisela, City Manager
FROM: Monica Espinoza, Human Resources Director

1. SUBJECT
Public hearing and reporting on City of Orange vacancies pursuant to Government Code 3502.3.

2. SUMMARY
This report summarizes vacant City positions and discusses the current City vacancies, recruitment and retention efforts.

3. RECOMMENDED ACTION

1. Conduct and close Public Hearing.

2. Receive and file report of City vacancies, recruitment and retention efforts.

5. STRATEGIC PLAN GOALS
Goal 4: Improve Employee Retention and Recruitment

Bargaining Group Number of
Vacancies
Number of
Positions
Percentage
of Bargaining
Group
City of Orange Police Association (COPA) 24 212 11.32%
City of Orange Police Management Association (PMA) 0 35 0% International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers (IBEW)7 51 13.73% City of Orange Page 1 of 3 Printed on 6/4/2025
powered by Legistar™792
Item #: 9.1. 6/10/2025 File #: 25-0231
Bargaining Group Number of
Vacancies
Number of
Positions
Percentage
of Bargaining
Group
City of Orange Police Association (COPA) 24 212 11.32%
City of Orange Police Management Association (PMA) 0 35 0% International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers (IBEW)
Local 47 Maintenance and Crafts
7 51 13.73%
International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers (IBEW)
Local 47 Water
6 25 24%
Orange City Firefighters, Inc. Local 2384 of the
International Association of Fire Fighters, AFL-CIO
3 116 2.58%
Orange City Fire Management Association (FMA) 0 6 0%
Orange Management Association (OMA) 4 50 8.0%
Orange Municipal Employees Association (OMEA) 19 108 17.59% Total 63 603 10.45%
Vacancies are created for a number of reasons, including internal movement such as a promotion or transfer, or when an employee leaves the organization due to retirement, voluntary resignation, or involuntary termination. When vacancies occur, the department initiates a requisition for recruitment to Human Resources. That requisition ultimately is reviewed by the City Manager to either approve, deny, or delay hiring based on the City’s ongoing fiscal challenges.

Recruiters also target candidates within LinkedIn.

Despite these retention efforts, the City has fallen behind market median in compensation when compared to neighboring cities as a result of the City’s fiscal challenges, thereby losing institutional knowledge and talent to other agencies. Turnover is costly and results in reduced efficiency and City of Orange Page 2 of 3 Printed on 6/4/2025
powered by Legistar™793
Item #: 9.1. 6/10/2025 File #: 25-0231
knowledge and talent to other agencies. Turnover is costly and results in reduced efficiency and service to the public.

7. ATTACHMENTS
· Vacancy Report by Bargaining Group with Classifications City of Orange Page 3 of 3 Printed on 6/4/2025
powered by Legistar™794
City of Orange Police Association (COPA) Number
of
Vacancies
Civilian Investigative Officer 1
Homeless Outreach Specialist 1
Police Dispatcher 1
Police Jailer 1
Police Officer 14
Police Records Clerk 3
Police Records Shift Supervisor 1
Police Services Officer 1
Senior Police Clerk 1
Total 24
International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers
Local 47 Maintenance and Crafts
Number
of
Vacancies
Chemical Sprayer 1
Parks Maintenance Leadworker 1
Public Works Maintenance Leadworker 2
Skilled Maintenance Worker - Facilities 1
Skilled Maintenance Worker – Public Works 2
Total 7
International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers
Local 47 Water
Number
of
Vacancies
Water Plant Operator II 4
Water Skilled Maintenance Worker 2
Total 6
Orange City Firefighters Local 2384 Number
of
Vacancies
Firefighter 3
Total 3
Orange Management Association Number
of
Vacancies
Library Manager II 1
Recreation Services Supervisor 1
Traffic Operations Superintendent 1
Tree Services Coordinator 1
Total 4
795
Orange Municipal Employees’ Association Number
of
Vacancies
Administrative Assistant 3
Administrative Specialist 1
Assistant Planner 1
Associate Civil Engineer 2
Associate Planner 1
Combination Building Inspector 1
Finance Clerk 2
Human Resources Technician 1
Librarian I 1
Library Assistant 1
Plan Check Engineer 1
Planning Aide 1
Recreation Services Coordinator 1
Senior Combination Building Inspector 1
Traffic Signal Technician II 1
Total 19
796
Agenda Item
City Council
Item #: 9.2. 6/10/2025 File #: 25-0265
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
THRU: Tom Kisela, City Manager
FROM: Christopher Cash, Public Works Director

1. SUBJECT
Public Hearing to consider approval of the Landscape Maintenance Assessment District 94-1 (Sycamore Crossing) Final Engineer’s Report for Fiscal Year 2025-2026. Resolution No. 11615.

2. SUMMARY
Resolution 11615 is the second step and will complete the process of the annual assessment for Landscape Maintenance Assessment District 94-1 (Sycamore Crossing). Staff recommends no increase in the assessments for Fiscal Year 2025-2026 and that they remain $293.08 per unit. The total assessment to be levied in Landscape Maintenance Assessment District 94-1 (Sycamore Crossing) will be $47,877.

3. RECOMMENDED ACTION

1. Conduct and close Public Hearing.

2. Adopt Resolution No. 11615. A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Orange approving the Engineer’s Report and providing for the annual assessment for Landscape Maintenance Assessment District 94-1 (Sycamore Crossing).

3. Establish the assessment for Fiscal Year 2025-2026 for Landscape Maintenance Assessment District 94-1 (Sycamore Crossing) at $293.08 per single family unit per year.

4. FISCAL IMPACT
There is no direct fiscal impact to the City. The approval of the annual assessment will generate $47,877 in revenue with a proposed expenditure of $55,852 in the Sycamore Crossing Landscape Maintenance Assessment District Fund (293):
293.0000.40330.00000 Assessments-Landscape $47, 877

5. STRATEGIC PLAN GOALS
Goal 3: Enhance and promote quality of life in the community. a: Renovate, maintain, develop and/or expand public use places and spaces.

6. DISCUSSION AND BACKGROUND
In 1995, Landscape Maintenance District No. 94-1 (LMD 94-1) was established to maintain the landscape and flood control improvements along Santiago Creek that were constructed by Tract No. 14752 (Sycamore Crossing). Resolution No. 8462 approved Conditional Use Permit 2088-94 for Tentative Tract 15053 (Sycamore Crossing) and Resolution No. 8463 approved Tentative Tract Map City of Orange Page 1 of 2 Printed on 6/4/2025
powered by Legistar™797
Item #: 9.2. 6/10/2025 File #: 25-0265
Tentative Tract 15053 (Sycamore Crossing) and Resolution No. 8463 approved Tentative Tract Map 15053, which is part of Tract 14751.

Annually, staff performs a detailed accounting of expenses and calculates a new assessment for the benefiting property owners. All assessments are recommended to remain the same for Fiscal Year 2025-2026 (FY26) as they are for the current fiscal year. The 124 units in the interior of the Tract are currently assessed annually at $293.08. The 36 units adjacent to the landscape improvement have a 2% premium and are currently assessed at $298.94 per unit, per year. The senior housing site (Harmony Creek) is currently assessed at $597.88 per year. In addition, the City owns two lots within the district that pay into the District. The larger lot which remains as open space is assessed at $117.23 per year and the smaller lot for a future water well is $58.62 per year.

The total expenditure for FY26 is estimated to be $55,852, which is 13% higher than the current FY

25. This is due to the current landscape contract expiring in June 2025 with the projected cost increase for landscape maintenance. The proposed assessment will generate $47,877 in revenue.

The projected year-end Reserve fund balance is $132,905 and the District is funded entirely by annual assessment revenue. The deficit revenue between the annual assessment and the expenditure is $7,975. Reserve funds will be used to supplement any potential deficit in FY26 expenditures.

The attached Final Engineer’s Report contains detailed information about the assessment.

Each year, the process for setting the assessment of the Landscape Maintenance Districts is initiated. The process began on May 13, 2025 with the City Council’s Approval of Resolution No. 11610 which approved the Preliminary Engineer’s Report for LMD 94-1 and set June 10, 2025 as the date for the public hearing. This public hearing is the second step in the process and is held in accordance with the Lighting and Landscape Maintenance Act of 1972 as outlined in the “Order of Procedure”. At this time, property owners will have an opportunity to be heard on this issue.

7. ATTACHMENTS
· Resolution No. 11615
· Final Engineer’s Report - Landscape Maintenance District 94-1 City of Orange Page 2 of 2 Printed on 6/4/2025
powered by Legistar™798
Agenda Item
City Council
Item #: 9.2. 6/10/2025 File #: 25-0265
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
THRU: Tom Kisela, City Manager
FROM: Christopher Cash, Public Works Director

1. SUBJECT
Public Hearing to consider approval of the Landscape Maintenance Assessment District 94-1 (Sycamore Crossing) Final Engineer’s Report for Fiscal Year 2025-2026. Resolution No. 11615.

3. RECOMMENDED ACTION

1. Conduct and close Public Hearing.

3. Establish the assessment for Fiscal Year 2025-2026 for Landscape Maintenance Assessment District 94-1 (Sycamore Crossing) at $293.08 per single family unit per year.

5. STRATEGIC PLAN GOALS
Goal 3: Enhance and promote quality of life in the community. a: Renovate, maintain, develop and/or expand public use places and spaces.

6. DISCUSSION AND BACKGROUND
In 1995, Landscape Maintenance District No. 94-1 (LMD 94-1) was established to maintain the landscape and flood control improvements along Santiago Creek that were constructed by Tract No. 14752 (Sycamore Crossing). Resolution No. 8462 approved Conditional Use Permit 2088-94 for Tentative Tract 15053 (Sycamore Crossing) and Resolution No. 8463 approved Tentative Tract Map City of Orange Page 1 of 2 Printed on 6/4/2025
powered by Legistar™799
Item #: 9.2. 6/10/2025 File #: 25-0265
Tentative Tract 15053 (Sycamore Crossing) and Resolution No. 8463 approved Tentative Tract Map 15053, which is part of Tract 14751.

The total expenditure for FY26 is estimated to be $55,852, which is 13% higher than the current FY

25. This is due to the current landscape contract expiring in June 2025 with the projected cost increase for landscape maintenance. The proposed assessment will generate $47,877 in revenue.

The attached Final Engineer’s Report contains detailed information about the assessment.

7. ATTACHMENTS
· Resolution No. 11615
· Final Engineer’s Report - Landscape Maintenance District 94-1 City of Orange Page 2 of 2 Printed on 6/4/2025
powered by Legistar™800
RESOLUTION NO. 11615

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF

THE CITY OF ORANGE APPROVING THE
ENGINEER’S REPORT AND PROVIDING FOR

THE ANNUAL ASSESSMENT FOR LANDSCAPE
MAINTENANCE DISTRICT 94-1 (SYCAMORE

CROSSING)
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Orange has previously formed a special maintenance district pursuant to the terms of the “Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972” being part 2 of Division 15 of the California Streets and Highways Code, in what is known and designated as Landscape Maintenance District No. 94-1 (“Assessment District”); and WHEREAS, the City Council has initiated proceedings for the levy of the annual assessment for the Assessment District; and
WHEREAS, at this time a public hearing has been held in the manner and form as required by law, and the City Council has considered all oral statements and written protests made or filed by all interested persons; and
WHEREAS, this City Council is now satisfied with the assessment and diagram and all other matters as contained in the Engineer’s Report as now submitted for final consideration and approval, and is now desirous of proceeding with the levy of the annual assessment.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Orange as follows:

SECTION I:

That the above recitals are all true and correct.

SECTION II:

That all protests and objections of every kind and nature by, and the same hereby are, overruled and denied.

SECTION III:

That the Final Engineer’s Report consisting of the final submitted assessment and diagram for the proceedings, is hereby approved and confirmed and a copy of said Report is hereby filed with the City Clerk.
801
2 SECTION IV:

That the assessments for fiscal year 2025-2026 be established as approved by the City Council, and are hereby confirmed and levied upon the respective subdivisions of land in the Assessment District in the amounts as set forth in said final approved Engineer’s Report.

SECTION V:

The City Clerk shall immediately accomplish the following:

A. Deliver to the City Engineer the assessment, together with the diagram attached thereto and made a part thereof, as confirmed, with a Certificate of Confirmation attached and the date thereof. Said City Engineer shall then immediately place for a record said diagram and assessment in his office in a suitable book as a permanent record and attach a Certificate of Recordation.

B. Cause to be filed a certified copy of a diagram and assessment with the County Auditor, said filing to be completed no later than the 3rd Monday in August.

SECTION VI:

That the above confirmed assessment shall be collected at the same time and in the same manner as County property taxes are collected, and all laws providing for the collection and enforcement of these assessments.

ADOPTED this 10th day of June 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
802
3 STATE OF CALIFORNIA )

COUNTY OF ORANGE )

AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS:

Pamela Coleman, City Clerk, City of Orange
803
Engineer’s Report
City of Orange
Landscape Maintenance District No. 94-1
1 CITY OF ORANGE
FINAL ENGINEER’S REPORT

FOR THE ANNUAL LEVY ASSESSMENT

LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE
DISTRICT NO. 94-1
FISCAL YEAR 2025-2026
LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 94-1

SYCAMORE CROSSING
Intent Meeting: May 13, 2025
Public Hearing: June 10, 2025
LMD 94-1 Final ER FY 2025-26
804
805
3 Engineer’s Report
City of Orange
Landscape Maintenance District No. 94-1

TABLE OF CONTENTS
AFFIDAVIT FOR THE ENGINEER’S REPORT .......................................................... 2 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................. 4 PART I — PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS ................................................................... 6 A. Description of the District ...................................................................................................... 6 B. Improvements and Services .................................................................................................... 6 PART II — METHOD OF APPORTIONMENT ............................................................ 7 A. Background ............................................................................................................................... 7 B. Method of Assessment ............................................................................................................ 7 C. Financial Analysis ..................................................................................................................... 9 PART III — DISTRICT BUDGET ................................................................................. 10 PART IV — DISTRICT DIAGRAMS .............................................................................. 12 PART V — ASSESSMENT ROLL ................................................................................... 14 806
4 Engineer’s Report
City of Orange
Landscape Maintenance District No. 94-1

INTRODUCTION
Pursuant to the provisions of the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972, being Part 2 of Division 15 of the California Streets and Highways Code, commencing with Section 22500 (hereafter referred to as the “1972 Act”), and in compliance with the substantive and procedural requirements of the California State Constitution Articles XIIIC and XIIID (hereafter referred to as the “California Constitution”), the City Council of the City of Orange, County of Orange, State of California (hereafter referred to as “City”), in connection with the annual levy and collection of assessments of the special benefit assessment district designated as:

Landscape Maintenance District No. 94-1
(hereafter referred to as the “District”), which includes all lots and parcels of land that specially benefit from the improvements within the District. This Engineer’s Report (hereafter referred to as “Report”) has been prepared in connection with the annual levy and collections of assessments for said District pursuant to Chapter 1, Article 4 of the 1972 Act.

The City Council proposes to levy and collect annual assessments on the County tax rolls to provide ongoing funding for the costs and expenses required to service and maintain the landscaping improvements originally installed in connection with the development of properties within the District. The improvements to be provided by the District and the assessments described herein are made pursuant to the 1972 Act.

This Report describes the District, the improvements, and the proposed assessments to be levied in Fiscal Year 2025-2026 against properties in connection with the special benefits the properties will receive from the maintenance and servicing of the District improvements. The annual assessments to be levied on properties within the District will provide a funding source for the continued operation and maintenance of local landscaping improvements installed in connection with the development of properties within the District. The assessments described in this Report are based on an estimate of the direct expenditures, incidental expenses, and fund balances that will be necessary to maintain and service the improvements.

The word “parcel,” for the purposes of this Report, refers to an individual property assigned its own Assessor’s Parcel Number (APN) by the Orange County Assessor’s Office. The Orange County Auditor/Controller uses Assessor’s Parcel Numbers and specific Fund Numbers to identify properties to be assessed on the tax roll for the special benefit assessments.

This Report has been prepared and presented to the City Council to address any proposed changes to the District or improvements, if any, and the proposed budget and assessments for Fiscal Year 2025- 2026. The City Council will conduct a noticed public hearing to consider public testimonies, comments and written protests regarding the levy and collection of assessments for Fiscal Year 2025-2026. Upon conclusion of the public hearing, if majority protest does not exist the City Council may approve this Report (as submitted or amended) and levy the assessments for Fiscal Year 2025-2026. In such case, the assessments for fiscal year 2025-2026 shall be submitted to the Orange County Auditor/Controller for inclusion on the property tax roll for each parcel. If the proposed annual assessments for this District exceed the maximum assessment described herein (as approved by the property owners), the new or increased assessment must be confirmed through another property owner protest ballot proceeding before such an assessment may be imposed.
807
5 Engineer’s Report
City of Orange
Landscape Maintenance District No. 94-1
This Report consists of five (5) parts:

Part I
Plans and Specifications: A description of the District boundaries and the improvements associated with the District. The District has been formed as a single benefit zone encompassing all properties within the territory identified as Landscape and Maintenance District No 94-1.

Part II
The Method of Apportionment: A discussion of benefits the improvements and services provide to properties within the District and the method of calculating each property’s proportional special benefit and annual assessment.

Part III
The District Budget: An estimate of the annual costs to operate, maintain and service the landscaping and appurtenant facilities installed and constructed as part of the development of properties within the District. This budget includes an estimate of anticipated direct maintenance costs and incidental expenses. The special benefit assessments are based on the overall operation costs minus any costs that are considered general benefit. The proposed assessments for Fiscal Year 2025- 2026, and each subsequent year shall be based on the estimated net annual cost of operating, maintaining and servicing the improvements for that fiscal year as well as funds to be collected in installments to perform maintenance activities that cannot be reasonably collected in a single fiscal year’s assessments.

Part IV
District Diagram: A Diagram showing the exterior boundaries of the District is provided in this Report and includes all parcels that will receive special benefits from the improvements. Reference is hereby made to the Orange County Assessor’s Parcel Maps for a detailed description of the lines and dimensions of each lot and parcel of land within the District.

Part V
Assessment Roll: A listing of the proposed assessment amounts to be levied on Assessor’s Parcel within the District for Fiscal Year 2025-2026. The proposed assessment amount for each parcel is based on the parcel’s proportional special benefit as outlined in the method of apportionment. 808
6 Engineer’s Report
City of Orange
Landscape Maintenance District No. 94-1
PART I — PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS
A. Description of the District
The assessment district boundary is shown on a map entitled Assessment Diagram, Landscape Maintenance District No. 94-1, City of Orange, which is on file with the City Clerk of the City of Orange.

A reduced scale copy of the Diagram can be found in Part IV of this document.

All parcels of real property affected are more particularly described in maps prepared in accordance with Section 327 of the Revenue and Taxation Code, which are on file in the Office of the Orange County Assessor, and which are made a part of this report by reference.

B. Improvements and Services
Improvements and Services Permitted Pursuant to the 1972 Act The location of the works of improvement to be maintained under these proceedings is described as follows:

A. Lot E Tract 14752 - Generally a 23-foot wide strip of land along the northerly upper banks of Santiago Creek within Tract 14752;
B. Lot F Tract 14752 - Generally a 55-foot wide strip of land along the southerly upper banks of Santiago Creek with Tract 14752;
C. Lot C Tract 14752 - Generally an irregular shaped parcel adjacent to Lot F Tract 14752.

A general description of the works of improvement to be maintained under these proceedings are those generally described as follows:

A. Ornamental shrubs, trees, and ground cover
B. Habitat area including natural shrubs, trees, and ground cover C. Complete irrigation system including pipes, valves, sprinkler heads, and controller D. Soil cement erosion protection
The following items are excluded from the Maintenance District:

A. The center low flow channel of Santiago Creek.

B. Complete recreation trail/maintenance road including asphalt, signing, striping, and lighting.

Maintenance shall include, but not be limited to:

A. Repair, removal, or replacement of all or any part of any included improvement; B. Providing for the life, growth, health, and beauty of landscaping, including cultivation, irrigation, trimming, spraying, fertilizing, and treating for disease or injury; and C. The removal of trimmings, rubbish, debris, and other solid waste. 809
7 Engineer’s Report
City of Orange
Landscape Maintenance District No. 94-1
PART II — METHOD OF APPORTIONMENT
A. Background
The Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972 provides that assessments may be apportioned by any formula or method, which fairly distributes costs among all lots or parcels within the district in proportion to the estimated benefits received. It is necessary to identify the special benefit that the Works of Improvement will render to the properties within the Assessment District. It is also necessary that the properties receive a special and direct benefit as distinguished from benefit to the general public.

B. Method of Assessment
Identify the Special Benefit
First of all, it is necessary to identify the special benefit that the public improvement will render to the properties within the boundaries of Landscape Maintenance District No. 94-1. The improvements consist of landscaping and a recreation trail/maintenance road along the upper banks of Santiago Creek. The creek was a natural flood control channel running through Tentative Tract 14752. As a condition for developing the tract, it was necessary to improve the creek to provide 100-year flood protection consistent with the National Flood Insurance Program. Alternative designs were looked at ranging from a concrete lined channel to a multi-use natural looking channel. The later was chosen to provide a visually pleasing channel with landscaping along both banks, erosion control bank protection, a useful recreation trail and a maintenance road. An interesting biotic habitat was added to fulfill 404 & 401 permit requirements.

The Orange County Flood Control District owns and maintains the center 96-foot wide low flow channel. The City of Orange owns and LMD 94-1 maintains 23 feet on the north side and 55 feet on the south side of the channel.

The special and direct benefits that each property owner will receive are:
• The Landscape Maintenance District fulfills the financial obligation of the property owners to maintain the improvements in Santiago Creek installed by the Tract development and as required by Conditional Use Permit 2088-94, condition of approval of Tract 15053 and the Development Agreement for Sycamore Crossing.
• A pleasing landscape visible at the entrance to the tract. • Enhanced desirability of district properties through association with the improvements. • Enhancement of the urban environment by providing open space and landscaping. • Necessary flood protection provided by the improvements. • Improved erosion resistance, dust control and fire prevention. • There are many homes in the District that back up to Santiago Creek and the landscape improvement. Their back fences are made of wrought iron so they can enjoy the beauty and spaciousness of the landscape improvement.
810
8 Engineer’s Report
City of Orange
Landscape Maintenance District No. 94-1
Prior to 2011, the recreation trail, which begins within the Tract boundary and provides direct access to Hart Park, a City park with numerous recreation facilities, was considered as a special benefit. The recreation trail has been extended through the District and is now incorporated into the City regional trail system. This altered the special benefit of the recreation trail within the District. District funds are no longer used for the maintenance of the trail pavement, stripping and rail safety fence.

Apportionment of Cost
In further making the analysis, it is necessary that the property owners receive a special and direct benefit distinguished from that of the general public. In this case, an in-depth analysis was made, and several factors are being used in the final method and spread of assessments. In analyzing the overall district, it is noted that there are two types of development. There are 160 single family detached residential units on the north side of Santiago Creek and a 1.385 acre commercial site on the south side recently developed with senior housing.

All 160 residential units are relatively the same except for the fact that 36 units back up to the landscape improvement. The developer has placed an approximate 2% lot premium on these lots. This same differential was used in determining the assessment. A unit cost factor of 1.02 is assigned to these 36 units and the remaining 124 units have a cost factor of 1.0. The commercial site has been developed as low income housing for senior citizens.

The unit cost for the current FY 2024-2025 is $293.08 per unit for a total levy of $47,877.49. No increase is recommended for fiscal year 2025-2026. The levy will remain at $293.08. Therefore, the assessment levied on the 124 interior residential units will be $293.08, and for the 36 residential units along the channel it will be $298.94. In analyzing the special benefit to the senior citizen housing site we recognize the fact that seniors are generally not mobile enough to use the bike and pedestrian trail and therefore have limited access to the landscape improvement. The special benefit is limited to the visibility of the landscaping from the north facing units. With this in mind, a unit cost factor of 2.04 was assigned to the seniors housing site and the assessment levied will be $597.88. Since the enactment of Prop 218, publicly owned property within the District is no longer exempt from assessment. There are two lots within the boundaries of the District that are owned by the City of Orange. One is a small lot to be used in the future for a domestic water well. The other is a larger lot that will someday be used for recreation purposes. The special benefit to these lots is minimal at this time. A unit cost factor of 0.20 is assigned to the well site and a unit cost factor of 0.40 to the recreation site. The City will be levied $58.62 and $117.23 respectively. The total of the assessments levied on all the parcels will be $47,877.49.
811
9 Engineer’s Report
City of Orange
Landscape Maintenance District No. 94-1
C. Financial Analysis
The facilities, which are to be maintained by this landscape maintenance district, were installed by the developer of Tract No. 14752. The estimated costs of maintenance, operation, and administration of the facilities are shown in Part III.

Resolution 8462 approved Condition Use permit 2088-94 for Tentative Tract 15053 and Resolution 8463 approved Tentative Tract Map 15053, which is a part of Tract 14751. Both resolutions contain the following condition:
“To the satisfaction of the City of Orange’s Public Works Department and City Engineer, prior to the recordation of Final Tract Map 15053, the City shall form a landscape maintenance district which shall include the project for the purpose of levying and collecting an assessment to maintain the open space dedicated to the City by Tentative Tract 14752 and defining in Exhibit E-1 of the development agreement for this project. Said assessment shall not exceed the sum of $28.00 per month per residential unit in the project but may increase annually in accordance with the applicable increase maintenance cost index as provided in the Engineering News Record or such other comparable index as the parties shall agree. The future homeowner’s contributions (financial payments) towards the maintenance of Santiago Creek open space shall be included in the disclosure requirement to future buyers.” The individual 2025-2026 assessments, tabulated by Assessor's Parcel Number, are on file with the City Clerk of the City of Orange, and can be found in Part V, Assessment Roll.

The 1972 Act permits carrying forward surpluses or recovering deficits in subsequent fiscal years.

Costs for the District are reviewed annually and subsequent year's assessments will be credited or debited, as necessary.

The total assessment to be levied for fiscal year 2025-2026 by the district is recommended to be $47,877.49. This assessment is the same as fiscal year 2024-2025.

The assessments for Landscape Maintenance District No. 94-1, City of Orange, have been apportioned in direct accordance with the special and direct benefits that each parcel receives from the maintenance, operation, and administration of the Works of Improvement. 812
Engineer’s Report
City of Orange
Landscape Maintenance District No. 94-1
10 PART III — DISTRICT BUDGET
The following budget outlines the estimated costs to maintain the improvements for 2025-2026.

ANNUAL LEVY OF ASSESSMENT
LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 94-1
City of Orange

ESTIMATED COSTS

OPERATION & MAINTENANCE FUND BALANCE FROM PRIOR YEARS
Estimated Fund Balance as of March 2025 $132,905
The estimated budget necessary for the 2025-2026 Fiscal Year for the District is as follows:

BUDGET ITEM COST

ANNUAL MAINTENANCE
Salaries & Benefits $8,075
Telephone $125
Water $7,000
Electricity $400
Landscape Maintenance $22,430
Landscape Maintenance, Irrigation Repairs $6,997
Landscape Maintenance, Landscape Repairs $0
Other Professional & Consulting $800
Contractual Services, Tree Trimming Contract $6,516
Contractual Services, Electrical Maintenance $0
Contractual Services, Misc. Contract Services $0
Office Supplies & Operating Expenses $150
City Administrative Services $3,359
TOTAL LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE EXPENSES $55,852
813
Engineer’s Report
City of Orange
Landscape Maintenance District No. 94-1
11 FUNDS TO BE TAKEN FROM RESERVE $(7,975)
●This Budget Estimate is for the purpose of establishing an Annual Assessment. It may vary from the adopted City Budget. All assessments collected by the District may only be used for District expenditures regardless of the Budget Estimate.

BALANCE TO LEVY (maximum assessment) $47,877
814
Engineer’s Report
City of Orange
Landscape Maintenance District No. 94-1
12 PART IV — DISTRICT DIAGRAMS
The following diagram incorporates all parcels within the District, as the same existed at the time this Report was prepared. The combination of this map and the Assessment Roll contained in this Report constitute the Assessment Diagram for the Landscape and Maintenance District No. 94-1, also known as Sycamore Crossing.
815
Engineer’s Report
City of Orange
Landscape Maintenance District No. 94-1
13 816
Engineer’s Report
City of Orange
Landscape Maintenance District No. 94-1
14 PART V — ASSESSMENT ROLL
Parcel identification for each lot or parcel within the District is based on available parcel maps and property data from the Orange County Assessor’s Office, as they existed at the time this Engineer’s Report was prepared and the City Council adopted the Resolution of Intention. A listing of the lots and parcels to be assessed within this District along with the assessment amounts is provided herein.

If any parcel submitted for collection is identified by the County Auditor/Controller to be an invalid parcel number for the fiscal year, a corrected parcel number and/or new parcel numbers will be identified and resubmitted to the County Auditor/Controller. The assessment amount to be levied and collected for the resubmitted parcel or parcels shall be based on the method of apportionment and assessment rate described in this Report as approved by the City Council. Therefore, if a single parcel is subdivided to multiple parcels, the assessment amount applied to each of the new parcels shall be recalculated and applied according to the approved method of apportionment and assessment rate rather than a proportionate share of the original assessment for the parcel.

The following is a list of the parcels and proposed assessment amounts for Fiscal Year 2025-2026 for each of the parcels within the District as determined by the assessment rates and method of apportionment described herein:
817
Agenda Item
City Council
Item #: 9.3. 6/10/2025 File #: 25-0266
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
THRU: Tom Kisela, City Manager
FROM: Christopher Cash, Public Works Director

1. SUBJECT
Public Hearing to consider approval of the Landscape Maintenance Assessment Districts 86-2 (Santiago Hills), and 15-1 (Santiago Hills Overlay) Final Engineer’s Reports for Fiscal Year 2025- 2026. Resolution No. 11614.

2. SUMMARY
Resolution 11614 is the second step and will complete the process of the annual assessment for Landscape Maintenance Assessment Districts 86-2 (Santiago Hills) and 15-1 (Santiago Hills Overlay). The total assessments to be levied from 86-2 and 15-1 for Fiscal Year 2025-2026 are $533,651 and $389,964, respectively. The annual assessment per unit for 86-2 will remain at $369.44 for a single family detached unit and $221.66 for a condominium. For 15-1, staff recommend a 3.0% Consumer Price Index adjustment, the maximum allowed, which increases per unit assessment from $271.17 to $279.30 for a single family detached unit and from $192.53 to $198.31 for condominiums.

3. RECOMMENDED ACTION

1. Conduct and close Public Hearing.

2. Adopt Resolution No. 11614. A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Orange approving the Engineer’s Reports and providing for the annual assessment for Landscape Maintenance Assessment Districts 86-2 (Santiago Hills) and 15-1 (Santiago Hills Overlay).

3. Establish the assessment per single family detached unit per year for Fiscal Year 2025-2026 for Landscape Maintenance Assessment Districts 86-2 (Santiago Hills) and 15-1 (Santiago Hills Overlay) at $369.44 and $279.30 respectively for single family detached, and $221.66 and $198.31 respectively for condominiums.

4. FISCAL IMPACT
There is no direct fiscal impact to the City. The approval of the annual assessment for Fiscal Year 2025-2026 will generate $957,843 with a proposed expenditure of $1,100,708 in the Santiago Hills Landscape Maintenance Assessment District (291) Fund.
291.0000.40350.00000 Assessment 86-2 $533,651
291.0000.40360.00000 Assessment 15-1 $389,964
291.7026.48230.00000 Reimbursement $ 34,228
City of Orange Page 1 of 3 Printed on 6/4/2025
powered by Legistar™818
Item #: 9.3. 6/10/2025 File #: 25-0266
Total $957,843

5. STRATEGIC PLAN GOALS
Goal 3: Enhance and promote quality of life in the community a: Renovate, maintain, develop and/or expand public use places and spaces.

6. DISCUSSION AND BACKGROUND
In 1987, Landscape Maintenance Assessment District 86-2 (LMD 86-2) was established to maintain the landscape improvements constructed by Assessment District 86-1 in Santiago Hills. Annually, a detailed accounting of expenses is compiled, and a new assessment is calculated for the benefiting property owners.

This year’s assessment for a single family detached unit is $369.44. The assessment for a condominium is $221.66. This is the same as last year and the largest assessment currently allowed.

Revenue in the District is derived from assessments paid by property owners, both residential and commercial, as well as the Rancho Santiago Community College District who reimburses the District for the cost to maintain the parkways adjacent to the school.

On April 14, 2015, the City Council approved the formation of a new district (LMD 15-1) to overlay the existing LMD 86-2 and to provide additional funding necessary to serve the District. The annual assessment for LMD 15-1 was approved by the property owners on June 9, 2015.

The proposed Fiscal Year 2025-2026 (FY26) budget for the combined LMD 86-2 and LMD 15-1 indicates the amount of funding required to maintain the Districts’ landscape and provides a capital budget to replace aging landscaping and infrastructure over time. Additional revenues to fully fund the Districts would be obtained through the overlay district, LMD 15-1, and a separate agreement with the Rancho Santiago Community College District. The existing LMD 86-2 will stay at the maximum assessment; however, the assessment for LMD 15-1 will include a 3.0% Consumer Price Index (CPI) increase. The Assessment for LMD 15-1 is permitted to increase annually consistent with CPI increases for the Los Angeles-Long Beach- Anaheim area that is 3.4% as of December 2024.

The Public Works Department recommends assessing the CPI adjustment for FY26 the maximum

3.0% allowed to continue capital renovations of the aging landscape. The annual assessment for 15- 1 for a single family detached unit will increase by $8.13 from $271.17 to $279.30. The assessment for 15-1 condominiums will increase by $5.78 from $192.53 to $198.31.

The maximum assessment total for LMD 86-2 for FY26 is $533,651. The assessment total for LMD 15-1 for FY26 is $389,964 including the 3.0% CPI adjustment. Revenues of $34,228 from Rancho Santiago Community College District are included as a reimbursement for landscape maintenance costs paid by LMD 86-2 and LMD 15-1. This totals $957,843 in revenue. Expenditures in FY26 are anticipated to be approximately $1,100,708, which is 17% higher than the FY 25 budgeted amount.

This is due to the June 2025 expiration of the current landscape contract and a projected cost increase for landscape maintenance. The projected FY26 combined year-end reserve fund balance is $1,130,905. Reserve funds will be used to supplement any deficit in FY26 expenditures.

The attached Final Engineer’s Report contains detailed information about the assessment.

Each year, the process for setting the assessment of the Landscape Maintenance Districts is initiated. The process began on May 13, 2025 with the City Council’s Approval of Resolution No. 11611 which approved the Preliminary Engineer’s Reports for LMD 86-2 and 15-1, and set June 10, City of Orange Page 2 of 3 Printed on 6/4/2025
powered by Legistar™819
Item #: 9.3. 6/10/2025 File #: 25-0266
11611 which approved the Preliminary Engineer’s Reports for LMD 86-2 and 15-1, and set June 10, 2025 as the date for the public hearing. This public hearing is the second step in the process and is held in accordance with the Lighting and Landscape Maintenance Act of 1972 as outlined in the “Order of Procedure”. At this time, property owners will have an opportunity to be heard on this issue.

7. ATTACHMENTS
· Resolution No. 11614
· Final Engineer’s Report - Landscape Maintenance District No. 86-2 · Final Engineer’s Report - Landscape Maintenance District No. 15-1 City of Orange Page 3 of 3 Printed on 6/4/2025
powered by Legistar™820
Agenda Item
City Council
Item #: 9.3. 6/10/2025 File #: 25-0266
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
THRU: Tom Kisela, City Manager
FROM: Christopher Cash, Public Works Director

3. RECOMMENDED ACTION

1. Conduct and close Public Hearing.

4. FISCAL IMPACT
There is no direct fiscal impact to the City. The approval of the annual assessment for Fiscal Year 2025-2026 will generate $957,843 with a proposed expenditure of $1,100,708 in the Santiago Hills Landscape Maintenance Assessment District (291) Fund.
291.0000.40350.00000 Assessment 86-2 $533,651
291.0000.40360.00000 Assessment 15-1 $389,964
291.7026.48230.00000 Reimbursement $ 34,228
City of Orange Page 1 of 3 Printed on 6/4/2025
powered by Legistar™821
Item #: 9.3. 6/10/2025 File #: 25-0266
Total $957,843

5. STRATEGIC PLAN GOALS
Goal 3: Enhance and promote quality of life in the community a: Renovate, maintain, develop and/or expand public use places and spaces.

This year’s assessment for a single family detached unit is $369.44. The assessment for a condominium is $221.66. This is the same as last year and the largest assessment currently allowed.

The Public Works Department recommends assessing the CPI adjustment for FY26 the maximum

The attached Final Engineer’s Report contains detailed information about the assessment.

Each year, the process for setting the assessment of the Landscape Maintenance Districts is initiated. The process began on May 13, 2025 with the City Council’s Approval of Resolution No. 11611 which approved the Preliminary Engineer’s Reports for LMD 86-2 and 15-1, and set June 10, City of Orange Page 2 of 3 Printed on 6/4/2025
powered by Legistar™822
Item #: 9.3. 6/10/2025 File #: 25-0266
11611 which approved the Preliminary Engineer’s Reports for LMD 86-2 and 15-1, and set June 10, 2025 as the date for the public hearing. This public hearing is the second step in the process and is held in accordance with the Lighting and Landscape Maintenance Act of 1972 as outlined in the “Order of Procedure”. At this time, property owners will have an opportunity to be heard on this issue.

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF ORANGE APPROVING THE ENGINEER’S

REPORT AND PROVIDING FOR THE ANNUAL

ASSESSMENT FOR LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE
DISTRICTS 86-2 (SANTIAGO HILLS), AND 15-1
(SANTIAGO HILLS OVERLAY)
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Orange has previously formed a special maintenance district pursuant to the terms of the “Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972” being part 2 of Division 15 of the California Streets and Highways Code, in what is known and designated as Landscape Maintenance District Nos. 86-2 and 15-1 (“Assessment Districts”); and WHEREAS, the City Council has initiated proceedings for the levy of the annual assessment for the Assessment District; and
WHEREAS, at this time a public hearing has been held in the manner and form as required by law, and the City Council has considered all oral statements and written protests made or filed by all interested persons; and
WHEREAS, this City Council is now satisfied with the assessment and diagram and all other matters as contained in the Engineer’s Report as now submitted for final consideration and approval, and is now desirous of proceeding with the levy of the annual assessment.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Orange as follows:

SECTION I:

That the above recitals are all true and correct.

SECTION II:

That all protests and objections of every kind and nature by, and the same hereby are, overruled and denied.

SECTION III:

SECTION V:

The City Clerk shall immediately accomplish the following:

B. Cause to be filed a certified copy of a diagram and assessment with the County Auditor, said filing to be completed no later than the 3rd Monday in August.

SECTION VI:

ADOPTED this 10th day of June 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
825
3 STATE OF CALIFORNIA )

COUNTY OF ORANGE )

AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS:

Pamela Coleman, City Clerk, City of Orange
826
Engineer’s Report
City of Orange
Landscape Maintenance District No. 86-2
1 CITY OF ORANGE
FINAL ENGINEER’S REPORT

FOR THE ANNUAL LEVY ASSESSMENT LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE
DISTRICT NO. 86-2
FISCAL YEAR 2025-2026
LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 86-2

SANTIAGO HILLS
Intent Meeting: May 13, 2025
Public Hearing: June 10, 2025
LMD 86-2 Final ER FY 2025-26
827
828
3 Engineer’s Report
City of Orange
Landscape Maintenance District No. 86-2

TABLE OF CONTENTS
AFFIDAVIT FOR THE ENGINEER’S REPORT ........................................................ 2 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................... 4 PART I — PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS ................................................................. 6 A. Description of the District .................................................................................................... 6 B. Improvements and Services .................................................................................................. 6 PART II — METHOD OF APPORTIONMENT ......................................................... 10 A. General .................................................................................................................................. 10 B. Benefit Analysis .................................................................................................................... 10 C. Assessment Methodology ................................................................................................... 12 PART III — DISTRICT BUDGET ................................................................................ 14 PART IV — DISTRICT DIAGRAMS ............................................................................. 16 PART V — ASSESSMENT ROLL .................................................................................. 18 829
4 Engineer’s Report
City of Orange
Landscape Maintenance District No. 86-2

Landscape Maintenance District No. 86-2
(hereafter referred to as the “District”), which includes all lots and parcels of land that specially benefit from the improvements within the District. This Engineer’s Report (hereafter referred to as “Report”) has been prepared in connection with the annual levy and collections of assessments for said District pursuant to Chapter 1, Article 4 of the 1972 Act.

This Report has been prepared and presented to the City Council to address any proposed changes to the District or improvements, if any, and the proposed budget and assessments for Fiscal Year 2025-2026. The City Council will conduct a noticed public hearing to consider public testimonies, comments and written protests regarding the levy and collection of assessments for Fiscal Year 2025-2026. Upon conclusion of the public hearing, if majority protest does not exist the City Council may approve this Report (as submitted or amended) and levy the assessments for Fiscal Year 2025-2026. In such case, the assessments for fiscal year 2025-2026 shall be submitted to the Orange County Auditor/Controller for inclusion on the property tax roll for each parcel. If the proposed annual assessments for this District exceed the maximum assessment described herein (as approved by the property owners), the new or increased assessment must be confirmed through another property owner protest ballot proceeding before such an assessment may be imposed.

This Report consists of five (5) parts:
830
5 Engineer’s Report
City of Orange
Landscape Maintenance District No. 86-2
Part I
Plans and Specifications: A description of the District boundaries and the improvements associated with the District. The District is being formed as a single benefit zone encompassing all properties within the territory identified as Landscape and Maintenance District No 86-2.

Part III
The District Budget: An estimate of the annual costs to operate, maintain and service the landscaping and appurtenant facilities installed and constructed as part of the development of properties within the District. This budget includes an estimate of anticipated direct maintenance costs and incidental expenses. The special benefit assessments are based on the overall operation costs minus any costs that are considered general benefit. The proposed assessments for Fiscal Year 2025-2026, and each subsequent year shall be based on the estimated net annual cost of operating, maintaining and servicing the improvements for that fiscal year as well as funds to be collected in installments to perform maintenance activities that cannot be reasonably collected in a single fiscal year’s assessments.

Part V
Assessment Roll: A listing of the proposed assessment amounts to be levied on Assessor’s Parcel within the District for Fiscal Year 2025-2026. The proposed assessment amount for each parcel is based on the parcel’s proportional special benefit as outlined in the method of apportionment. 831
6 Engineer’s Report
City of Orange
Landscape Maintenance District No. 86-2
PART I — PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS
A. Description of the District
The assessment district boundary is shown on a map entitled Assessment Diagram, Landscape Maintenance District No. 86-2, City of Orange, which is on file with the City Clerk of the City of Orange. A reduced scale copy of the Diagram can be found in Part IV of this document.

B. Improvements and Services
Improvements and Services Permitted Pursuant to the 1972 Act As generally defined by the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972 and applicable to this District, the improvements and associated assessments may include one or more of the following:
1) The installation or planting of landscaping;
2) The installation or construction of statuary, fountains, and other ornamental structures and facilities;
3) The installation or construction of any facilities which are appurtenant to any of the foregoing or which are necessary or convenient for the maintenance or servicing thereof; 4) The installation of park or recreational improvements, including, but not limited to, all of the following:
a) Land preparation, such as grading, leveling, cutting and filling, sod, landscaping, irrigation systems, sidewalks, and drainage.
b) Lights, playground equipment, play courts, and public restrooms. 5) The maintenance or servicing, of any of the foregoing including the furnishing of services and materials for the ordinary and usual maintenance, operation, and servicing of any improvement including but not limited to:
a) Repair, removal, or replacement of all or any part of any improvements; b) Grading, clearing, removal of debris, the installation or construction of curbs, gutters, walls, sidewalks, or paving, or water, irrigation, drainage, or electrical facilities; c) Providing for the life, growth, health, and beauty of landscaping, including cultivation, irrigation, trimming, spraying, fertilizing, or treating for disease or injury; d) The removal of trimmings, rubbish, debris, and other solid waste; e) The cleaning, sandblasting, and painting of walls and other improvements to remove or cover graffiti;
f) Electric current or energy, gas, or other illuminating agent for any public lighting facilities or for the lighting or operation of any other improvements; g) Water for the irrigation of any landscaping, the operation of any fountains, or the maintenance of any other improvements.
6) Incidental expenses associated with the improvements including, but not limited to:
832
7 Engineer’s Report
City of Orange
Landscape Maintenance District No. 86-2
a) The cost of preparation of the report, including plans, specifications, estimates, diagram, and assessment;
b) Compensation payable to the County for collection of assessments; c) Compensation of any engineer or attorney employed to render services; d) Any other expenses incidental to the construction, installation, or maintenance and servicing of the improvements;
Description of Planned Improvements
The landscape improvements are generally described as follows:
a) Parkway and Recreation Areas:
• Newport Boulevard - approximately 18-foot wide zone (including the width of the sidewalk) from the back of the curb to the property line, and corner cutoffs at intersections, on the east side from Chapman Avenue to 312 feet south of the centerline of Skylark Place.
• Chapman Avenue - approximately 18-foot wide zone (including the width of the sidewalk) from the back of the curb to the property line, and corner cutoffs at intersections, on south side from Newport Boulevard to Jamboree Road. • Canyon View Avenue - approximately 30-foot wide zones (including the width of the sidewalk) from the back of the curb to the property line, and corner cutoffs at intersections, on both sides from Newport Boulevard to Jamboree Road. • White Oak Ridge – approximately 17-foot wide zones (including the width of the sidewalk) from the back of the curb to the property line, and corner cutoffs at intersections, on both sides from Newport Boulevard to Canyon View Avenue. • Trails End Lane - approximately 17-foot wide zone on the west side and approximately 28- to 32-foot wide zone on the east side (including the width of the sidewalks), both zones from the back of the curb to the property line, and corner cutoffs at intersections, from White Oak Ridge to Chapman Avenue.
• Handy Creek Corridor - from the intersection of Chapman Avenue and Newport Boulevard to White Oak Ridge and from White Oak Ridge to the intersection of Canyon View Avenue and Handy Creek Road (Lot 20, a portion of Lot 11, and Lot D of Tract No. 12417) including concrete walkways which also serve as emergency access ways. • Paseo - approximately 50-foot wide zone from the Park to White Oak Ridge and from White Oak Ridge to Old Camp Road (Lots A and B of Tract No. 12417) and approximately 35-foot wide zone from the Paseo to White Oak Ridge (Lot C of Tract No. 12417) including surface and subsurface drainage facilities and concrete walkways which also serve as emergency access ways.
• Handy Creek Road - approximately 10-foot wide zone (including the width of the sidewalks) on south side from the back of the curb to the property line form the end of Handy Creek Corridor (Lot D, Tract No. 12417) near Canyon View Avenue to the northerly terminus of the street.
833
8 Engineer’s Report
City of Orange
Landscape Maintenance District No. 86-2
• Fort Road - approximately 17-foot wide zones (including the width of the sidewalks) from the back of the curb to the property line on south side from White Oak Ridge to Jamboree Road.
• Santiago Canyon Road - approximately 18-foot wide zone (including the width of the sidewalk) from back of curb to back of sidewalk on north and south sides from Newport Boulevard to Jamboree Road.
• Old Camp Road - approximately 4-foot wide zones from back of curb to property line on both sides from Canyon View Avenue to the northerly terminus of the street. • Skylark Place - approximately 18-foot wide zones (including the width of the sidewalk) from back of the curb to the property line on both sides from White Oak Ridge to Newport Boulevard.
• Jamboree Road - variable width zone (including the width of the bike trail-sidewalk) from the back of the curb to the property line on the west side from Canyon View Avenue to Chapman Avenue.
• Additional Areas - areas adjacent to the 18-foot wide zones along Skylark Place, Chapman Avenue, and Jamboree Road have been dedicated to the City with tracts 12672,12741,12711,15398 and PM 92-195. Such areas have been landscaped by the developers and the sprinkler systems tied into the District's. b) Medians
• Chapman Avenue - 14-foot wide median from Newport Boulevard to Jamboree Road. • White Oak Ridge - 14-foot wide medians at Newport Boulevard and Canyon View Avenue.
• Trails End Lane - 14-foot wide median from White Oak Ridge to Chapman Avenue. • Jamboree Road - 24-foot wide median from southerly City limits to Santiago Canyon Road.
• Santiago Canyon Road - Variable width from Newport Boulevard to Jamboree Road. • Newport Boulevard - 22-foot wide median from Chapman Avenue to Santiago Canyon Road.
c) The following items are excluded from the Maintenance District:
• The 8 +/- acre Santiago Hills Park is excluded from this Landscape Maintenance District. • Sidewalks along all Maintenance District streets are excluded from this Landscape Maintenance District.
• The equestrian trail along Canyon View Avenue is excluded from this Landscape Maintenance District.
834
9 Engineer’s Report
City of Orange
Landscape Maintenance District No. 86-2
d) Maintenance shall include, but not be limited to:
• repair, removal, replacement or installation of all or any part of any included improvement such as storm drains and pedestrian walkways in the paseos; • providing for the life, growth, health, and beauty of landscaping, including cultivation, irrigation, trimming, spraying, fertilizing, and treating for disease or injury; and • the removal of trimmings, rubbish, debris, and other solid waste.

The maintenance of the District improvements generally include, but are not limited to all materials, equipment, utilities, labor and incidental expenses including administrative expenses for annual operation of the District as well as the performance of occasional repairs, replacement and expanded maintenance activities associated with those improvements. Detailed maps and descriptions of the location and extent of the improvements to be maintained by the District are on file at the City and by reference are made part of this Report.

The estimated annual cost to provide and maintain the improvements within the District shall be allocated to each property in proportion to the special benefits received. The Method of Apportionment described in this Report utilizes commonly accepted assessment engineering practices and has been established pursuant to the 1972 Act and the provisions of the California Constitution. 835
Engineer’s Report
City of Orange
Landscape Maintenance District No. 86-2
10 PART II — METHOD OF APPORTIONMENT
A. General
The 1972 Act permits the establishment of assessment districts by agencies for the purpose of providing certain public improvements, which include the construction, maintenance, and servicing of public landscaping and appurtenant facilities. The 1972 Act further requires that the cost of these improvements be levied according to benefit rather than assessed value:
“The net amount to be assessed upon lands within an assessment district may be apportioned by any formula or method which fairly distributes the net amount among all assessable lots or parcels in proportion to the estimated benefits to be received by each such lot or parcel from the improvements.” The method of apportionment described in this Report for allocation of special benefit assessments utilizes commonly accepted engineering practices and have been established pursuant to the 1972 Act and the provisions of the California Constitution. The formula used for calculating assessments in this District reflect the composition of the parcels, and the improvements and services provided, to fairly apportion the costs based on benefit to each parcel.

B. Benefit Analysis
Each of the proposed improvements, the associated costs and assessments have been carefully reviewed, identified and allocated based on special benefit pursuant to the provisions of the California Constitution and 1972 Act. The improvements provided by this District and for which properties will be assessed have been identified as necessary, required and/or desired for the orderly development of the residential properties within the District to their full potential. As such, the ongoing operation, servicing and maintenance of these improvements would be the financial obligation of those properties.

Therefore, the improvements and the annual costs of ensuring the maintenance and operation of the improvements are a distinct and special benefit to the residential properties within the District.

Special Benefit
The method of apportionment (method of assessment) established herein is based on the premise that each assessed parcel within the District receives special benefits from the improvements and the desirability and security of those properties is enhanced by the presence of well-maintained landscaping in close proximity to those properties.

The special benefits associated with the landscaping and open space improvements are specifically:
• Enhanced desirability of properties through association with the improvements. • Improved aesthetic appeal of properties providing a positive representation of the area and properties.
• Enhanced adaptation of the urban environment within the natural environment from adequate green space and landscaping.
• Environmental enhancement through improved erosion resistance, dust and debris control, and fire prevention.
• Increased sense of pride in ownership of property within the District resulting from wellmaintained improvements associated with the properties. 836
Engineer’s Report
City of Orange
Landscape Maintenance District No. 86-2
11 • Enhanced quality of life through well-maintained green space and landscaped areas. • Reduced criminal activity and property-related crimes (especially vandalism) against properties in the District through well-maintained surroundings and amenities including abatement of graffiti.
• Enhanced environmental quality of the parcels by moderating temperatures, providing oxygenation and attenuating noise.

The parkways and medians consist of landscaped areas along the edge of or within the middle of streets and highways in the District. The District also has landscaped corridors extending through the developed area, which provide access to Santiago Hills Park. The improvements in these areas consist of trees, shrubs, ornamental vegetation, and appurtenant improvements.

The improvements extend throughout the development area and serve several purposes. The landscaped parkways along the streets and highways enhance the public walkways throughout the District and allow pedestrian access to the residents in the area. These parkways also provide passive and active recreational uses as well as the aesthetic enhancement for the total development area.

Landscaped median islands also provide similar enhancements for the residents in the area.

The landscaped recreation/pedestrian corridors throughout the District provide for open space and recreational uses, which connect to the park site throughout the development area. Besides contributing to the active and passive recreation use in the area, the corridors aesthetically enhance the area within the District.

Maintenance of these public improvements primarily renders a people oriented benefit to the properties within the boundaries of the District and, as such, relates to the number of persons in each dwelling unit on each property. These benefits are direct and special to the properties within the District.

The preceding special benefits all contribute to the overall esthetic value and desirability of each of the assessed parcels within the District and thereby provide a special enhancement to these properties.

Furthermore, it has been determined that the lack of funding to properly service and maintain the improvements would likely have a direct negative impact on the properties within the District.

General Benefit
In reviewing the District improvements, the proximity of those improvements to both properties within the District and those outside the District as well as the reasons for installing and constructing such improvements, it is evident that the improvements are solely the result of developing properties within the District and the ongoing maintenance and operation of these improvements will directly affect the properties within the District. Although the improvements are visible to the public at large, the construction and installation of these improvements were necessary for the development of properties within the District and are not required nor necessarily desired by any properties or developments outside the District boundary and any public access or use of the improvements by others is incidental.

Therefore, it has been determined that the improvements and the ongoing maintenance, servicing and operation of those improvements provide no measurable general benefit to properties outside the District or to the public at large, but clearly provide distinct and special benefits to properties within the District.
837
Engineer’s Report
City of Orange
Landscape Maintenance District No. 86-2
12 C. Assessment Methodology
The benefit formula used to determine the assessment obligation for each parcel should be based upon both the improvements that benefit the parcels as well as the use of each property as compared to other parcels that benefit from those specific improvements. The method of apportionment established for most benefit assessment districts utilizes a weighted method of apportionment known as an Equivalent Benefit Unit (EBU) methodology The Equivalent Benefit Unit method of apportionment uses the single-family home site as the basic unit of assessment. A single-family residential property equals one Equivalent Benefit Unit (“EBU”). Every other land use is converted to EBUs based on an assessment formula that equates the property’s specific development status, type of development (land use), and size of the property, as compared to a single-family home site.

The EBU method of apportioning benefit is typically seen as the most appropriate and equitable assessment methodology for districts formed under the 1972 Act, as the benefit to each parcel from the improvements are apportioned as a function of land use type, size and development.

EBU Application by Land Use:

Single-Family Residential — This land use is defined as a fully subdivided residential home site with or without a structure. This land use is assessed 1.0 EBU per lot or parcel. This is the base value that the other land use types are compared and weighted against (i.e. Equivalent Benefit Unit or EBU).

Multi-Family Residential — This land use is defined as a fully subdivided residential parcel that has more than one residential unit developed on the property. This land use is assessed 0.6 EBU per dwelling unit.

Mixed Use Property — This land use is defined as property developed for either commercial or industrial use. This land use type is assessed at 11.0 EBUs per gross acre.

Exempt Parcels — This land use identifies properties that are not assessed and are assigned 0.0 EBU.

This land use classification may include, but is not limited, to lots or parcels identified as public streets and other roadways (typically not assigned an APN by the County); dedicated public easements, open space areas and right-of-ways including greenbelts and parkways; utility right-of-ways; common areas, sliver parcels and bifurcated lots or any other property that cannot be developed; park properties and other publicly owned properties that are part of the District improvements or that have little or no improvement value. These types of parcels are considered to receive little or no benefit from the improvements and are therefore exempted from assessment.

Lots 9, 10, 11, 15, and 19 of Tract No. 12417 have been assigned 0.0 EBU because they have been excluded from the District. The cost of maintaining the landscape improvements on these publicly owned parcels is not paid by the District but rather from the general fund of the public agency owning the parcel. Therefore, these publicly owned parcels do not receive any special benefit from the District.

The following table provides a listing of land use types, land use code designations, the Equivalent Benefit Unit factor applied to that land use type, and the multiplying factor used to calculate each parcel’s individual EBU.
838
Engineer’s Report
City of Orange
Landscape Maintenance District No. 86-2
13 Land Use Codes and Equivalent Benefit Units
Property Type Equivalent Benefit
Unit
Multiplier
Single-family Residential 1.000 Unit/Lot/Parcel
Multi-family Residential 0.600 Units/Dwelling Units
Mixed Use 11.000 Acreage
Exempt 0.000 Parcel
The benefit formula applied to parcels within the District is based on the preceding Equivalent Benefit Unit (EBU) table. Each parcel's EBU correlates the parcel’s special benefit received as compared to the other parcels benefiting from the improvements.

The following formula is used to calculate each parcel’s EBU (proportional benefit).

Parcel Type EBU x Multiplier (Acres or Unit) = Parcel’s EBU The total number of Equivalent Benefit Units (EBUs) is the sum of all individual EBUs applied to parcels that receive a special benefit from the improvement. An assessment amount per EBU (Rate) for each improvement is established by taking the total cost of the improvement and dividing that amount by the total number of EBUs of parcels benefiting from the improvement. This Rate is then applied back to each parcel’s individual EBU to determine the parcel’s proportionate benefit and assessment obligation for that improvement.

The Maximum allowable assessment rate of $369.44 EBU (single family) generates an assessment total of $533,650.77.

Total Balance to Levy / Total EBU = Assessment Rate per EBU Assessment Rate per EBU x Parcel’s EBU = Parcel’s Assessment 839
Engineer’s Report
City of Orange
Landscape Maintenance District No. 86-2
14 PART III — DISTRICT BUDGET
The following budget outlines the estimated costs to maintain the improvements for 2025-2026.

ANNUAL LEVY OF ASSESSMENT
LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 86-2
City of Orange

ESTIMATED COSTS

OPERATION & MAINTENANCE FUND BALANCE FROM PRIOR YEARS
Estimated Fund Balance (Includes 15-1 & 86-2) as of March 2025 $1,130,905 The estimated budget necessary for the 2025-2026 Fiscal Year for the District is as follows:

BUDGET ITEM COST

ANNUAL MAINTENANCE
Landscaping $436,953
Tree Trimming $121,064
Electrical Maintenance $9,500
Misc. Contract Services $0
Repair/ Maintenance Services $178,131
Supplies $6,743
Other Professional Services $1,100
Telephone $1,000
Electricity $20,000
Water $193,000
Salaries & Benefits $56,522
City Administrative Services $76,695
Capital Replacement/ Dedicated Reserves $0
TOTAL EST. LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE EXPENDITURES $1,100,708

ESTIMATED REVENUE
Landscape Maintenance District No. 86-2 $533,651
Rancho Santiago Community College District $34,228
Proposed Benefit Assessment FY 2025/26 (LMD 15-1)
(See LMD 15-1 Engineer’s Report for specifics)
• CPI Adjustment (Current Year 3.0%)
• Unused CPI Adjustment (Carry over from prior years)
$378,606
$11,358
$0
TOTAL ESTIMATED REVENUE $957,843
840
Engineer’s Report
City of Orange
Landscape Maintenance District No. 86-2
15 FUNDS TO BE TAKEN FROM RESERVES $(142,865)
●This Budget Estimate is for the purpose of establishing an Annual Assessment. It may vary from the adopted City Budget. All assessments collected by the District may only be used for District expenditures regardless of the Budget Estimate.

BALANCE TO LEVY FOR 86-2 $533,651
841
Engineer’s Report
City of Orange
Landscape Maintenance District No. 86-2
16 PART IV — DISTRICT DIAGRAMS
The parcels within the Landscape Maintenance District No 86-2 consist of all lots, parcels and subdivisions of land located in the planned residential development known as Santiago Hills.

The following diagram incorporates all parcels within the District, as the same existed at the time this Report was prepared. The combination of this map and the Assessment Roll contained in this Report constitute the Assessment Diagram for the Landscape and Maintenance District No. 86-2. 842
Engineer’s Report
City of Orange
Landscape Maintenance District No. 86-2
17 843
Engineer’s Report
City of Orange
Landscape Maintenance District No. 86-2
18 PART V — ASSESSMENT ROLL
Parcel identification for each lot or parcel within the District is based on available parcel maps and property data from the Orange County Assessor’s Office, as they existed at the time this Engineer’s Report was prepared and the City Council adopted the Resolution of Intention. A listing of the lots and parcels to be assessed within this District along with the assessment amounts is provided herein.

The following is a list of the parcels and proposed assessment amounts for Fiscal Year 2025-2026 for each of the parcels within the District as determined by the assessment rates and method of apportionment described herein:
844
Engineer’s Report
City of Orange
Landscape Maintenance District No. 15-1
1 CITY OF ORANGE
FINAL ENGINEER’S REPORT

FOR THE ANNUAL LEVY

ASSESSMENT LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE
DISTRICT NO. 15-1
FISCAL YEAR 2025-2026
LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 15-1

SANTIAGO HILLS
Intent Meeting: May 13, 2025
Public Hearing: June 10, 2025
LMD 15-1 Final ER FY 2025-26
845
846
3 Engineer’s Report
City of Orange
Landscape Maintenance District No. 15-1

TABLE OF CONTENTS
AFFIDAVIT FOR THE ENGINEER’S REPORT .................................................. 2 INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................... 4 Overview ..................................................................................................................................... 4 District’s Facilities ..................................................................................................................... 4 Assessment Background ........................................................................................................... 4 PLANS & SPECIFICATIONS ................................................................................... 5 FISCAL YEAR 2025-26 ESTIMATE OF COST AND BUDGET ............................. 8 Budget for Fiscal Year 2025-26 ............................................................................................... 8 METHOD OF APPORTIONMENT ...................................................................... 10 Method of Apportionment .................................................................................................... 10 Discussion of Benefit .............................................................................................................. 10 Benefit Factors ......................................................................................................................... 11 Benefit Finding ........................................................................................................................ 14 Zones of Benefit ...................................................................................................................... 17 Method of Assessment ........................................................................................................... 18 Residential Properties ............................................................................................................. 19 Commercial Properties ........................................................................................................... 20 Vacant/Undeveloped Properties........................................................................................... 21 Other Properties ...................................................................................................................... 21 Annual Cost Indexing ............................................................................................................. 22 Appeals of Assessments Levied to Property ....................................................................... 22 Assessment Funds Must Be Expended Within the District Area .................................... 23 ASSESSMENT .......................................................................................................... 24 ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM ...................................................................................... 25 ASSESSMENT ROLL .............................................................................................. 27 847
4 Engineer’s Report
City of Orange
Landscape Maintenance District No. 15-1

INTRODUCTION
Overview
The City of Orange (the “City”) services and maintains perimeter and median landscaping, interior walkways and paseos, and other improvements (“Improvements”) in the Santiago Hills neighborhoods in the eastern part of the City. This Engineer’s Report ("Report") was prepared to establish the budget for the Improvements (as described below) that will be funded by the new 2025-2026 assessments, if approved, and other revenue, to determine the general and special benefits received from the Improvements by property within the Improvement District (“District”), and to determine the method of assessment apportionment to lots and parcels. This Report and the assessments have been made pursuant to the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972, Part 2 of Division 15 of the California Streets and Highways Code (the "Act") and Article XIIID of the California Constitution (the “Article”).

Landscape Maintenance District (LMD) No. 15-1 was formed in 2015. This assessment district is identical to the existing Landscape Maintenance District No. 86-2 in its geographic boundaries, parcels to be assessed, Improvements to be serviced, maintained, or repaired and budgeted cost centers. The assessments collected, if approved, will be in addition to those collected for Landscape Maintenance District 86-2.

District’s Facilities
The City’s landscape facilities to be funded by assessments within this District are located in the Santiago Hills neighborhoods of the City. The Improvements generally include entrance signs, traffic islands and medians, parkways, recreation areas, paseos, lighting, and the infrastructure required to support these Improvements.

Assessment Background
The City formed Landscape Maintenance District No. 86-2 in 1987 to service and maintain the specific landscape facilities and improvements relevant to this report. Revenues from that district remain relatively flat, there is not an inflation adjustment provision, while the costs to maintain and service these facilities and improvements have risen steadily. In 2007 the City began to decrease service levels in an effort to contain costs within available revenues. The service levels continued to decrease to offset the effects of rising utilities, labor and materials costs until the creation of LMD No. 15-1.

In order to restore service levels and make needed repairs and improvements to the District’s facilities, the LMD No. 15-1 that exactly overlaid the existing assessment district, was formed. 848
5 Engineer’s Report
City of Orange
Landscape Maintenance District No. 15-1

PLANS & SPECIFICATIONS
The City maintains landscaping and other improvements in locations within the proposed Assessment District’s boundaries. The work and improvements proposed to be undertaken by the Landscape Maintenance District No. 15-1 and the cost thereof paid from the levy of the annual Assessment provide special benefit to Assessor Parcels within the District as defined in the Method of Assessment herein. In addition to the definitions provided by the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972, (the “Act”) the work and improvements are generally described as follows:

Entrance Sign
The entrance signs with landscape improvements to be maintained are to be located at the following locations within the District:
• Chapman Avenue at Newport Boulevard (southeast corner) • Newport Boulevard at Canyon View Avenue (northeast corner) Parkways and Recreation Areas
The landscaped parkways and recreation areas to be maintained by the District are located as follows:
• Newport Boulevard – approximately 18-foot wide zone (including the width of the sidewalk) from the back of the curb to the property line, and corner cutoffs at intersections, on the east side from Santiago Canyon Road to 312 feet south of the centerline of Skylark Place. • Chapman Avenue – approximately 18-foot wide zone (including the width of the sidewalk) from the back of the curb to the property line, and corner cutoffs at intersections, on both sides from Newport Boulevard to Jamboree Road.
• Canyon View Avenue – approximately 30-foot wide zone (including the width of the sidewalk) from the back of the curb to the property line, and corner cutoffs at intersections, on both sides from Newport Boulevard to Jamboree Road.
• White Oak Ridge – approximately 17-foot wide zone (including the width of the sidewalk) from the back of the curb to the property line, and corner cutoffs at intersections, on both sides from Newport Boulevard to Canyon View Avenue.
• Trails End Lane – approximately 17-foot wide zone on the west side and approximately 28- to 32-foot wide zone on the east side (including the width of the sidewalk), both zones from the back of the curb to the property line, and corner cutoffs at intersections, from White Oak Ridge to Chapman Avenue.
• Handy Creek Corridor – from the intersection of Chapman Avenue and Newport Boulevard to White Oak Ridge, and from White Oak Ridge to the intersection of Canyon View Avenue and Aspen Street (Lot 20, a portion of Lot 11, and Lot D of Tract 12417) including concrete walkways which also serve as emergency access ways.
• Paseo – approximately 50-foot wide zone from Santiago Hills Park to White Oak Ridge and from White Oak Ridge to Old Camp Road (Lots A and B of tract No. 12417) and approximately 35-foot wide zone from the Paseo to White Oak Ridge (Lot C of Tract No. 12417) including surface and subsurface drainage facilities and concrete walkways which also serve as emergency access ways.
• Aspen Street – approximately 10-foot wide zone (including the width of the sidewalk) on south side from the back of the curb to the property line from the end of Handy Creek 849
6 Engineer’s Report
City of Orange
Landscape Maintenance District No. 15-1
Corridor (Lot D, Tract No. 12417) near Canyon View Avenue to the northerly terminus of the street.
• Fort Road – approximately 17-foot wide zone (including the width of the sidewalk) from the back of the curb to the property line on south side from White Oak Ridge to Jamboree Road.
• Santiago Canyon Road – approximately 18-foot wide zone (including the width of the sidewalk) from the back of the curb to the property line on north and south sides from Newport Boulevard to Jamboree Road.
• Old Camp Road – approximately 4-foot wide zone from the back of the curb to the property line on both sides from Canyon View Avenue to northerly terminus of the street. • Skylark Place – approximately 18-foot wide zone (including the width of the sidewalk) from the back of the curb to the property line on both sides from White Oak Ridge to Newport Boulevard.
• Jamboree Road – variable width zone (including width of the bike trail-sidewalk) from back of the curb to the property line on the west side from Canyon View Avenue to Santiago Canyon Road.
• Additional Areas – areas adjacent to the 18-foot wide zones along Skylark Place, Chapman Avenue, and Jamboree Road have been dedicated to the City with tracts 12672, 12741, 12711, 15398 and PM 92-195. Such areas have been landscaped by the developers and the sprinkler systems tied to the District’s.

Traffic Islands and Medians
• The landscaped islands and medians to be maintained by the District are located as follows:
• Chapman Avenue – 14-foot wide median from Newport Boulevard to Jamboree Road. • White Oak Ridge – 14-foot wide medians at Newport Boulevard and Canyon View Avenue. • Trails End Lane – 14-foot wide median from White Oak Ridge to Chapman Avenue. • Jamboree Road – 24-foot wide median from southerly City limits to Santiago Canyon road. • Santiago Canyon Road – Variable width from Newport Boulevard to Jamboree Road. • Newport Boulevard – 22-foot wide median from Chapman Avenue to Santiago Canyon Road.

Excluded Improvements
The following items are excluded from the District:
• The 8+/- acre Santiago Hills Park is excluded from this District • The City’s public safety facility on East Fort Road is excluded from this District • Chapman Hills Elementary School is excluded from this District • Santiago Canyon College is excluded from this District (Note that while some public improvements along the College frontage are maintained along with District Improvements, the College pays directly into the District’s fund to compensate for that work) • Sidewalks along all streets within the District are excluded • The Equestrian trail along Canyon View Avenue is excluded from this District Definitions
Installation, maintenance and servicing of Improvements, may include, but are not limited to, turf and play areas, landscaping, ground cover, shrubs and trees, irrigation systems, sidewalks, parking 850
7 Engineer’s Report
City of Orange
Landscape Maintenance District No. 15-1
lots, drainage systems, lighting, fencing, entry monuments, recreational facilities, security patrols to protect the Improvements, graffiti removal and repainting, and labor, materials, supplies, utilities and equipment, as applicable, at each of the locations owned, operated or maintained by the District.

As applied herein, “Installation” means the construction of Improvements, including, but not limited to, land preparation (such as grading, leveling, cutting and filling), sod, landscaping, irrigation systems, walkways and drainage, lights, and recreational facilities. “Maintenance” means the furnishing of services and materials for the ordinary and usual maintenance, operation and servicing of any Improvement, including repair, removal or replacement of all or any part of any Improvement; providing for the life, growth, health, and beauty of landscaping, including cultivation, irrigation, trimming, spraying, fertilizing, or treating for disease or injury; the removal of trimmings, rubbish, debris, and other solid waste, and the cleaning, sandblasting, and painting of walls and other Improvements to remove or cover graffiti. “Servicing” means the furnishing of electric current, or energy, gas or other illuminating agent for any public lighting facilities or for the lighting or operation of any other Improvements; or water for the irrigation of any landscaping, the operation of any fountains, or the maintenance of any other Improvements.

Incidental expenses include all of the following: (a) The costs of preparation of the report, including plans, specifications, estimates, diagram, and Assessment; (b) the costs of printing, advertising, and the giving of published, posted, and mailed notices; (c) compensation payable to the County for collection of Assessments; (d) compensation of any engineer or attorney employed to render services in proceedings pursuant to this part; (e) any other expenses incidental to the construction, installation, or maintenance and servicing of the Improvements; (f) any expenses incidental to the issuance of bonds or notes pursuant to Streets & Highways Code Section 22662.5; and (g) costs associated with any elections held for the approval of a new or increased assessment (Streets & Highways Code §22526).

Modifications to the District structure could include, but are not limited to, substantial changes or expansion of the Improvements provided, substantial changes in the service provided, modifications or restructuring of the District including annexation or detachment of specific parcels, revisions in the method of apportionment, or proposed new or increased assessments.

The Assessment proceeds will be exclusively used for Improvements within the District plus incidental expenses.
851
8 Engineer’s Report
City of Orange
Landscape Maintenance District No. 15-1
FISCAL YEAR 2025-26 ESTIMATE OF COST AND BUDGET
Budget for Fiscal Year 2025-26
The following budget shows the cost of the Improvements that would be funded by the District in Fiscal Year 2025-26. This table shows the total combined expenditures associated with the Improvements for both Landscape Maintenance Districts (No. 15-1 and No. 86-2). Accordingly, revenues from both Districts are also shown.

BUDGET ITEM COST

ESTIMATED REVENUE
Landscape Maintenance District No. 86-2 $533,651
Rancho Santiago Community College District $34,228
Proposed Benefit Assessment FY 2025/26 (LMD 15-1)
(See LMD 15-1 Engineer’s Report for specifics)
• CPI Adjustment (Current Year 3.0%)
• Unused CPI Adjustment (Carry over from prior years)
$378,606
$11,358
$0
TOTAL ESTIMATED REVENUE $957,843
852
9 Engineer’s Report
City of Orange
Landscape Maintenance District No. 15-1
FUNDS TO BE TAKEN FROM RESERVES $(142,865)
District Expenditures will be adjusted to match the maximum allowable assessment.
●This Budget Estimate is for the purpose of establishing an Annual Assessment. It may vary from the adopted City Budget. All assessments collected by the District may only be used for District expenditures regardless of the Budget Estimate.

BALANCE TO LEVY FOR 15-1 $389,964
Notes to Estimate of Costs:

1. The Act requires that proceeds from the Assessments must be deposited into a special fund that has been set up for the revenues and expenditures of the District. Moreover, funds raised by the Assessment shall be used only for the purposes stated within this Report. Any balance remaining at the end of the Fiscal Year, June 30, must be carried over to the next Fiscal Year. The District may also establish a dedicated reserve fund for contingencies and special projects as well as a dedicated capital improvement fund for accumulating funds for larger capital improvement projects or capital renovation needs. Any remaining balance would either be placed in the dedicated reserve fund, the capital improvement fund, or would be used to reduce future years' Assessments.

2. The rate shown here is for a single-family home or its equivalent. For the definition of the term SFE and rates for other types of property, see the section titled, “Method of Assessment Apportionment” and the sections following it in this report.

3. The total cost of the services and Improvements is the total assessment amount of $356,873 plus the value of the general benefit contributions from the City described in the section titled, “Method of Assessment Apportionment.”

4. The Assessment allows for an annual adjustment tied to the Consumer Price Index (the “CPI”), as detailed in the section titled “Method of Apportionment – Annual Cost Indexing.” For Fiscal Year 2025-2026, the CPI is 3.4% for the Los Angeles-Long Beach-Anaheim area as of December 2024. Due to the remaining fund balance from Fiscal Year 2024-25, the Public Works staff recommends setting the CPI adjustment at 3.0% (maximum allowed) for Fiscal Year 2025-2026. 853
Engineer’s Report
City of Orange
Landscape Maintenance District No. 15-1
10 Enhanced Level
of Service +
Baseline Level
of Service =
Final Level
of Service

METHOD OF APPORTIONMENT
Method of Apportionment
This section of the Engineer's Report explains the benefits to be derived from the Improvements and the methodology used to apportion the total assessment to properties within the District.

The method used for apportioning the Assessment is based upon the relative special benefits to be derived by the properties in the District over and above general benefits conferred on real property or to the public at large. The Assessment is apportioned to lots and parcels in proportion to the relative special benefit from the Improvements. The apportionment of special benefit is a two-step process: the first step is to identify the types of special benefit arising from the Improvements and the second step is to allocate the Assessments to property based on the estimated relative special benefit for each type of property.

This section of the Engineer’s report includes a discussion of the benefits to be provided by the proposed Improvements and the method of apportionment of assessments within the District. The formula below identifies the final level of service as the sum of the baseline level of service (without this proposed Assessment) and the enhanced level of service to be funded by the proposed Assessment.

Discussion of Benefit
In summary, the Assessments can only be levied based on the special benefit to property. This benefit is received by property over and above any general benefits. With reference to the requirements for assessments, Section 22573 of the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972 states:
"The net amount to be assessed upon lands within an assessment district may be apportioned by any formula or method which fairly distributes the net amount among all assessable lots or parcels in proportion to the estimated benefits to be received by each such lot or parcel from the improvements." Proposition 218, as codified in Article XIIID of the California Constitution, has confirmed that assessments must be based on the special benefit to property and that the value of the special benefits must be equal to or exceed the cost of the assessment:
"No assessment shall be imposed on any parcel which exceeds the reasonable cost of the proportional special benefit conferred on that parcel."
The following benefit categories summarize the types of special benefit to residential, commercial, industrial and other lots and parcels resulting from the Improvements to be provided with the assessment proceeds. These types of special benefits are summarized as follows:

A. Proximity to Improved Landscaped Areas and Other Public Improvements within the District.

B. Access to Improved landscaped areas and Other Public Improvements within the District. 854
Engineer’s Report
City of Orange
Landscape Maintenance District No. 15-1
11 C. Improved Views within the District.

D. Extension of a property’s outdoor areas and green spaces for properties within close proximity to the Improvements.

E. Creation of individual lots for residential and commercial use that, in absence of the Assessments, would not have been created.

In this case, the recent Silicon Valley Taxpayers Association, Inc. v. Santa Clara County Open Space Authority (SVTA) decision in 2008 provides enhanced clarity to the definitions of special benefits to properties from similar improvements in three distinct areas:
• Proximity
• Expanded or improved access
• Views
The SVTA decision also clarifies that a special benefit is a service or improvement that provides a direct advantage to a parcel and that indirect or derivative advantages resulting from the overall public benefits from a service or improvement are general benefits. The SVTA decision also provides specific guidance that Improvements are a direct advantage and special benefit to property that is proximate to a facility that is improved by an assessment:

The characterization of a benefit may depend on whether the parcel receives a direct advantage from the improvement (e.g. proximity to a park) or receives an indirect, derivative advantage resulting from the overall public benefits of the improvement (e.g. general enhancement of the district’s property values).

Proximity, improved access and views, in addition to the other special benefits listed herein further strengthen the basis of these Assessments.

Moreover, the Dahms v. Downtown Pomona Prop. & Bus. Improvement Dist. (Dahms) decision in 2009 further clarified that certain services and Improvements funded by assessments, that are over and above what otherwise would be provided and that other property in general and the public do not share or receive are 100% special benefit. The assessment-funded services upheld by Dahms included streetscape maintenance and security services.

Benefit Factors
The special benefits from the Improvements are further detailed below:

Proximity to Improved Landscaped Areas within the District The boundaries of the District were developed in conjunction and concurrent with the planning and design of the subdivisions and Improvements, and thus have been carefully drawn to only include the properties in the City of Orange that are proximate to the Improvements and that would materially benefit from the Improvements. In other words, the District has been narrowly drawn to include the properties that receive special benefits from the Improvements. Therefore, property in the District enjoys unique and valuable proximity to the Improvements that the public at large and property outside the District do not share.

In the absence of the Assessments, the Improvements would not be provided and the public improvements funded in the District would be degraded due to insufficient funding for maintenance, upkeep and repair. Therefore, the Assessments provide Improvements that are over and above what otherwise would be provided. Improvements that are over and above what otherwise would be provided do not by themselves translate into special benefits but when 855
Engineer’s Report
City of Orange
Landscape Maintenance District No. 15-1
12 combined with the unique proximity and access enjoyed 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 only 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 improvements 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 provided 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 Spaces for Properties within Close Proximity to the Improvements
In large part because it is cost prohibitive to provide large open land areas on property in the District, the residential, commercial and other benefiting properties in the District do not have large outdoor areas and green spaces. The Improvements within the District provide additional outdoor areas that serve as an effective extension of the land 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 Commercial Use that, in Absence of the Assessments, Would Not Have Been Created
In most of the District, the original owner/developer(s) of the property within the District agreed unanimously to the Assessments. The Assessments provide the necessary funding for public improvements that were approved as a condition of development and subdivision approval.

Therefore, such Assessments allowed the original property to be subdivided and for development of the parcels to occur. As parcels were sold, new owners were informed of the Assessments through the title reports, and in some cases, through Department 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 Assessments, 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. 856
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 and 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 benefits 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 requires any local agency proposing to increase or impose a benefit assessment to “separate the general 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 for general benefits. An assessment can fund special benefits but cannot fund general benefits. Accordingly, 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 for 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 indirect, derivative advantage” and are not necessarily 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.
857
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 special benefits is the current, baseline level of service.

The Assessment will fund Improvements “over and above” 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 the state constitution as “a particular and distinct benefit over and above general benefits conferred on real property located in the district or to the public at large.” The SVTA decision indicates that a special benefit is conferred 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 have close and unique proximity, views and access to the Improvements and uniquely improved desirability from the Improvements and other properties and the public at large do not receive significant benefits because they do not have proximity, access or views of the Improvements. Therefore, the overwhelming proportion of the benefits conferred to property is special, and is only 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 landscaping 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 of the special benefits from the Improvements because properties in the District enjoy unique close proximity and access to the Improvements that are not enjoyed by other properties or the public at large. However, certain properties within the proximity/access radius of the Improvements, but outside of the boundaries of the District, may receive some benefit from the Improvements. Since this benefit is conferred to properties outside the District boundaries, it contributes to the overall general benefit calculation and will not be funded by the Assessments. The general benefit to property 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, this is a form of general benefit to other property.

The primary ways that parcels outside the district benefit by the Improvements is from proximity, 858
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 and 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 within 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 “particular 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 “conferred 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 that is publicly owned and used for regional purposes such as major roads, rail lines and other regional facilities because such properties used for regional purposes could provide indirect benefits to the public at large. Approximately 7.15% of the land area in the District is used for such regional purposes, 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 estimated by the proportionate amount of time that the District’s Improvements including landscaping are 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 general public is by the car trips through an area with Improvements. Of the five ways benefits are conferred (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 car 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 residents, employees, customers or property owners in the District due to the brevity of the views. Therefore the relative benefit factor is reduced to 5%. 859
Engineer’s Report
City of Orange
Landscape Maintenance District No. 15-1
16 1.16%

11.31% 11.3% = 10.0%
= 11.6%
TOTAL GENERALBENEFIT 21.6%
Out-of-District General Benefits 100.0% x 11.6%
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 relevant number of car trips. Using the lane miles as representative of pass-by traffic, an analysis shows that 60% of the lane miles are on arterial or collector streets where the general public has views 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 paseos that are either inside the district boundaries, or are traffic medians that directly abut 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 District. Based on weighted square footage of the various types of Improvements, Out-of-District Improvements 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 College are maintained, but the funding for this work comes entirely from the College as general benefit funds.

The In-District Improvements, conversely, provide approximately 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 benefit 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 be 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 Assessment 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%. This minimum contribution above the measure of general benefits will serve to provide additional coverage for any other general benefits. 860
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 Assessments; it must be funded from other sources such as the City’s General Fund or other non-District funds. These contributions can also be in the form of in-lieu contributions to the installation and maintenance of the Improvements such as other City assets that support and protect the Improvements. The City of Orange will contribute both monetary and in-lieu resources to ensure that the general 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 and replaces curb and gutter along the border of the District Improvements. This curb and gutter serves 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 maintenance, 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 flooding and associated damage to the Improvements, and manage urban runoff including local pollutants loading from the Improvements.

The contribution from the City towards general benefit 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 along 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 can 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 at 22% which is entirely offset by the conservatively quantified total non-Assessment contribution towards 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 conjunction and concurrent with the planning and design of the subdivisions and Improvements, and thus include only the properties in the City of Orange that are proximate to the Improvements and that would materially benefit from the Improvements. Certain other properties surrounding the District were not part of the designed association between the Improvements and the assessed 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 receiving special benefits from the improvement — every parcel within that district receives a shared special benefit. Under section 2, subdivision (i), these benefits 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.” 861
Engineer’s Report
City of Orange
Landscape Maintenance District No. 15-1
18 We do not believe that the voters intended to invalidate an assessment district that is narrowly drawn to include only properties directly benefiting from an improvement. 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 whether the parcel receives a direct advantage from the improvement (e.g., proximity to park) or receives an indirect, derivative advantage resulting from the overall public benefits of the improvement (e.g., general enhancement of the district’s property values).

In the District, the advantage that each parcel receives from the Improvements is direct, and the boundaries are narrowly drawn to include only parcels that benefit from the Assessment. Therefore, the even spread of Assessment throughout the narrowly 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 the Improvements because the increased benefits of greater proximity to the Improvements are generally 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 District: Santiago Hills and Hillsdale. Santiago Hills is a complex neighborhood with arterial and collector 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 Drive) with Improvements along only one exterior frontage (Santiago Canyon Road).

In order to most conservatively assure that Assessments are proportional to the relative level of special benefits in the District, two zones have been 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 parcels that lie within the Hillsdale neighborhood lying generally north of Santiago Canyon Road. A detailed 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) receives approximately 75% as much special benefit as the Santiago neighborhood (Zone A). Therefore 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 will 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 parcel receives from the Improvements. It should be noted that many other types of “traditional” assessments also use parcel population densities to apportion the Assessments. For example, the assessments for sewer systems, roads and water systems are typically allocated based on the population 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.
862
Engineer’s Report
City of Orange
Landscape Maintenance District No. 15-1
19 The next step in apportioning Assessments is to determine the relative special benefit for each property. This process involves determining the relative 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 Assessments in proportion to estimated special benefit and is generally recognized as providing the basis for a fair and appropriate distribution of Assessments. For the purposes of this Engineer’s Report, all properties are designated a SFE value, which is each property’s relative benefit in relation 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 assessed, 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 single family residential properties regardless of occupancy or parcel size. Assessments on multi-family residential parcels vary based on the number of dwelling units. Assessments on commercial property are levied on an acreage basis because larger properties generally support larger buildings and have higher numbers of employees, customers and guests who would benefit from proximity and improved access to well-maintained and improved landscaping.

Finally, the special benefits to be derived from the proposed Assessments will be conferred on property and are not based on a specific property owner’s use of the improvements, a specific property owner’s occupancy of property, or the property owner’s demographic status such as age or number of dependents. The benefits conferred to property are related to the average number of people who could potentially live on, work at, or otherwise could occupy a property, not how the property is currently used by the present owner. Therefore, 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 that the appropriate method of assessment apportionment should be based on the type of property, 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. Detached or attached houses and zero-lot line houses are included in this category of single family residential property. If there is more than one single family detached dwelling on a parcel, it will be charged one SFE per single family detached dwelling.

Properties with more than one residential unit (other 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 proportion 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 dwelling unit (Square Foot Factor). The population density factors for the area in Orange County encompassing 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 863
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 equivalent 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 population 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 the equivalence of special benefit on a land area basis between single family residential property and 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 previously 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 Study”) are used because these findings were approved by the State Legislature as being a good representation of the average number of employees per acre of land area for commercial properties. 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 residing 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 properties 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 factors per 0.12 acre for properties in each land use category.
864
Engineer’s Report
City of Orange
Landscape Maintenance District No. 15-1
21 Commercial properties in excess of 5 acres generally 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
Office3 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 parcels 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 is benefited at the rate shown above per acre or portion thereof.

3. Currently there are no parcels in the District in the 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 property. 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 reasonable to assume, therefore, that approximately 55% of the benefits are related to the underlying land and 45% are related to the improvements and the day-to-day use of the property. Using this ratio, the SFE factor for vacant/undeveloped parcels is 0.55 per parcel.

Other Properties
Article XIIID stipulates that publicly owned properties 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 assessed. 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 public safety facility on East Fort Road, are not assessed. These are discussed below.

Santiago Canyon College: The College lies within the District and certain Improvements lie on their property. Although the College is not assessed in this District, the College pays for any special 865
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 benefit attributable to the School buildings and parking lots are entirely offset by the benefit provided to the neighborhood by the outdoor fields.

This facility was also included in the list of regional facilities in the calculation of general benefit to properties inside the district that is indirect and derivative above.

Santiago Hills Park: Any special benefit attributable to the Park is entirely offset by the benefit provided to the neighborhoods by park facilities. This facility was also included in the list of regional facilities in the calculation of general benefit to properties inside the district that is indirect 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 roads, right-of-way parcels, and common areas typically do not generate significant numbers of employees, 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 tied to the Consumer Price Index-U for the Los Angeles-Long Beach-Anaheim area as of December of each succeeding year (the “CPI”), with a maximum annual adjustment not to exceed 3%. Any change 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 than 3%. The maximum authorized assessment rate is equal to the maximum assessment rate in the first 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 levied 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 then-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 appropriate 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 her 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.
866
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 incidental, 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 administrative costs as defined in the Plans and Specifications section.
867
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)
Reserve Funds $142,865
Net Amount of Assessment $389,964
As required by the Act, an Assessment Diagram showing the exterior boundaries of the Improvement District is hereto attached and incorporated herein by reference. The distinctive number of each parcel or lot of land in the District is its Assessor Parcel Number appearing on the Assessment Roll.
868
Engineer’s Report
City of Orange
Landscape Maintenance District No. 15-1
25 ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM
The parcels proposed to be assessed in Landscape Maintenance 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 the District are those lines and dimensions as shown on the maps of the Assessor of the County of Orange, for Fiscal Year 2025-26, and are incorporated herein by reference, and made a part of this Diagram and this Report. 869
Engineer’s Report
City of Orange
Landscape Maintenance District No. 15-1
26 870
Engineer’s Report
City of Orange
Landscape Maintenance District No. 15-1
27 ASSESSMENT ROLL
An Assessment Roll (a listing of all parcels assessed within the Assessment District and the amount of the Assessment) will be filed with the City Clerk and is, by reference, made part of this Report and is available for public inspection during normal 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 reference made part of this Report. These records shall govern for all details concerning the description of the lots or parcels. 871
Agenda Item
City Council
Item #: 9.4. 6/10/2025 File #: 25-0272
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
THRU: Tom Kisela, City Manager
FROM: Russell Bunim, Community Development Director

1. SUBJECT
Public Hearing to consider introduction and First Reading of Ordinance No. 11-25 establishing Single Room Occupancy housing as a permitted land use for certain qualifying properties and a finding of CEQA exemption.

2. SUMMARY
The proposed ordinance establishes standards, provisions, and limitations governing the permitting, development, siting, and management of Single Room Occupancy housing units.

3. RECOMMENDED ACTION

1. Conduct and close the Public Hearing.

2. Introduce and conduct First Reading of Ordinance No. 11-25. An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Orange amending Title 17 of the Orange Municipal Code to allow Single-Room Occupancy housing as a permitted use in certain zoning districts and related definitions and development standards.

3. Find the ordinance categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) per State CEQA Guidelines Sections 15061(b)(3) and 15378.

4. FISCAL IMPACT
None.

5. STRATEGIC PLAN GOALS
Goal 2: Enhance Economic Development and Achieve Fiscal Sustainability.

2.12: Update Zoning Ordinance for process clarity and improve efficiency for new businesses

6. DISCUSSION AND BACKGROUND
A Single Room Occupancy (SRO) housing unit is a single room, between 150 and 375 square feet that is limited to two occupants. Each SRO unit must have a kitchen and bathroom, which can be in the individual room or provided as a shared facility. The purpose of SRO units is to allow the development of reduced-size dwelling units, which provide additional options for affordable housing opportunities.

The proposed ordinance completes Housing Policy Action 4H in the City’s Housing Element of the City’s General Plan. These requirements include implementing standards, provisions and limitations City of Orange Page 1 of 3 Printed on 6/4/2025
powered by Legistar™872
Item #: 9.4. 6/10/2025 File #: 25-0272
City’s General Plan. These requirements include implementing standards, provisions and limitations governing the permitting, development, siting, and management of SRO units. A summary of development and operational standards for SRO units are contained in the Planning Commission staff report (Attachment 3).

The proposed ordinance would allow SRO housing units only as an adaptive reuse of existing hotels or motels with 30 guest rooms or less, and existing office buildings with a gross floor area of 5,000 square feet or less, which are located within the Limited Business (C-1), General Business (C-2), and Limited Business Tustin Redevelopment Project Area (C-TR) zoning districts.

Properties that are eligible for conversion to SRO are only those that qualify at the time of adoption of this ordinance. No buildings constructed after the adoption of this ordinance are eligible for SRO conversion. A map and list of properties eligible for conversion to SRO is in Attachment 5.

Income Restricted Units
All units within SRO projects shall be restricted to very-low and low-income individuals as defined by the City's Housing Element, with the exception of the 24-hour manager unit. Rental rates shall be calculated using a maximum of 30% of income toward housing expenses based on County of Orange income figures. The City will be able to count these units towards fulfilling its Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) allocation.

Adaptive Reuse of Existing Buildings
There are seven hotels or motels that are eligible for conversion. The total Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT) revenue collected from the eligible hotels/motels represents approximately 4.4% of the City’s total TOT revenue from all hotels/motels citywide.

Additionally, there are 28 existing office building properties identified as eligible for conversion. The conversion of underutilized office buildings to SRO units will provide opportunities for properties to be updated to current building codes and aesthetic enhancements to building exteriors. Furthermore, conversion to SRO will require an on-site manager to monitor and maintain the upkeep of the buildings.

7. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
Categorical Exemption: The proposed project is not subject to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to (1) Section 15061(b)(3) of the state CEQA Guidelines (Common Sense Exemption) because it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that it would have a significant effect on the environment; and (2) Section 15378 because it will not have a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change on the environment and is not a "project." For this reason, no further CEQA documentation is required.

8. ATTACHMENTS
· Attachment 1 - Ordinance No. 11-25
· Attachment 2 - Planning Commission Resolution No. PC 16-24 · Attachment 3 - Planning Commission Staff Report, April 21, 2025 · Attachment 4 - Planning Commission Minutes, April 21, 2025 City of Orange Page 2 of 3 Printed on 6/4/2025
powered by Legistar™873
Item #: 9.4. 6/10/2025 File #: 25-0272
· Attachment 5 - Map of Eligible Properties for SRO Conversion · Attachment 6 - Police Department Report of Hotel Calls for Service City of Orange Page 3 of 3 Printed on 6/4/2025
powered by Legistar™874
Agenda Item
City Council
Item #: 9.4. 6/10/2025 File #: 25-0272
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
THRU: Tom Kisela, City Manager
FROM: Russell Bunim, Community Development Director

2. SUMMARY
The proposed ordinance establishes standards, provisions, and limitations governing the permitting, development, siting, and management of Single Room Occupancy housing units.

3. RECOMMENDED ACTION

1. Conduct and close the Public Hearing.

3. Find the ordinance categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) per State CEQA Guidelines Sections 15061(b)(3) and 15378.

4. FISCAL IMPACT
None.

5. STRATEGIC PLAN GOALS
Goal 2: Enhance Economic Development and Achieve Fiscal Sustainability.

2.12: Update Zoning Ordinance for process clarity and improve efficiency for new businesses

The proposed ordinance completes Housing Policy Action 4H in the City’s Housing Element of the City’s General Plan. These requirements include implementing standards, provisions and limitations City of Orange Page 1 of 3 Printed on 6/4/2025
powered by Legistar™875
Item #: 9.4. 6/10/2025 File #: 25-0272
City’s General Plan. These requirements include implementing standards, provisions and limitations governing the permitting, development, siting, and management of SRO units. A summary of development and operational standards for SRO units are contained in the Planning Commission staff report (Attachment 3).

8. ATTACHMENTS
· Attachment 1 - Ordinance No. 11-25
· Attachment 2 - Planning Commission Resolution No. PC 16-24 · Attachment 3 - Planning Commission Staff Report, April 21, 2025 · Attachment 4 - Planning Commission Minutes, April 21, 2025 City of Orange Page 2 of 3 Printed on 6/4/2025
powered by Legistar™876
Item #: 9.4. 6/10/2025 File #: 25-0272
· Attachment 5 - Map of Eligible Properties for SRO Conversion · Attachment 6 - Police Department Report of Hotel Calls for Service City of Orange Page 3 of 3 Printed on 6/4/2025
powered by Legistar™877
ORDINANCE NO. 11-25

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF ORANGE AMENDING TITLE 17 (ZONING)

OF THE ORANGE MUNICIPAL CODE TO MAKE

SINGLE-ROOM OCCUPANCY (SRO) A PERMITTED

USE IN CERTAIN ZONING DISTRICTS AND BY

ADDING DEFINITIONS AND DEVELOPMENT
STANDARDS RELATED TO SRO DEVELOPMENT.

WHEREAS, the City of Orange (City) recognizes the opportunity for Single Room Occupancy (SRO) units to meet housing needs of the community, especially extremely-low, verylow and low-income households; and WHEREAS, The City seeks to fulfill our Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) allocation, which includes 1,067 units affordable to very-low-income households and, 604 units affordable to low-income households; and
WHEREAS, the City is updating the Orange Municipal Code to permit Single-Room Occupancy units in appropriate zoning districts, subject to requirements of State Law (Proposed Ordinance); and
WHEREAS, these requirements include implementing standards, provisions and limitations governing the permitting, development, siting, and management of Single-Room Occupancy units; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, having considered the proposed changes to the OMC at a public hearing held on April 21, 2025 and having received public testimony on the item, determined the Proposed Ordinance serves the City’s best interests and furthers the public health, safety and general welfare; and
WHEREAS, the City Council, having now considered the proposed changes to the OMC at a public hearing held on June 10, 2025, including review of the staff report, and having received public testimony on the item, desires to adopt the Proposed Ordinance.

NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ORANGE DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION I:

That the recitals and findings contained herein are true and correct, incorporated herein, and with the public record, form the basis for this Ordinance.

SECTION II:

Section 17.04.020 of the Orange Municipal Code, “Zoning – Definitions – “A” Definitions,” is hereby amended to include the following definition, in alphabetical order:
878
2 “Adaptive Reuse” means reusing an existing building for a purpose other than which it was originally built or designed for.

SECTION III:

Section 17.04.038 of the Orange Municipal Code, “Zoning – Definitions – “S” Definitions,” is hereby amended to read as follows:
“Single Room Occupancy” means a single room that is the primary residence of its occupant or occupants. The unit must contain either food preparation or sanitary facilities, and may contain both. If the units do not contain sanitary facilities or food preparation facilities, the building must contain food preparation and/or sanitary facilities that are shared by tenants. Single Room Occupancy is different from and, does not include, uses defined in Title 17 as "dormitory," or "dormitory-style housing," or "student housing."
SECTION IV:

Section 17.18.140 of the Orange Municipal Code, “Zoning – Commercial Districts Single Room Occupancy Housing is hereby added to read as follows:

17.18.140 Single Room Occupancy Housing Development Standards.

A. Purpose. The purpose of these provisions is to allow the development of reduced-size dwelling units, defined as single room occupancy (SRO) units, which provide additional options for affordable housing opportunities. These SRO regulations establish development and operational standards for single-room occupancy units and are considered to be in addition to the regulations of the underlying zoning districts where SRO development is permitted.

B. Affordability. All units within SRO projects shall be deed restricted, via an affordable housing agreement with the City, for occupancy by very-low and low-income individuals as defined by the City's housing element, with the exception of a 24-hour manager unit.

C. Applicability. The standards contained in this section shall apply to all SRO units.

D. Development and Operational Standards.

1. Occupancy. A SRO unit shall be occupied by not more than two persons. Occupancy of SRO units may be restricted to seniors.

2. Tenancy. Tenancy of SRO units shall be offered for a minimum of 30 days or longer.

3. Unit Size. The minimum size of a SRO unit shall be 150 square feet and the maximum size shall be 375 square feet.
879
3 4. Management. A SRO management plan shall be submitted to, reviewed, approved, and enforced by the Community Development Director or designee. The management plan shall be approved before issuance of a certificate of occupancy. The management plan shall contain management policies, operations, emergency procedures, overnight guest policy, security program including video cameras monitoring building access points at every floor, rental procedures and proposed rates, maintenance plans, staffing needs, and tenant mix, selection and regulations. An on-site 24-hour manager is required in every SRO project. A manager's unit shall be provided which shall be designed as a complete residential unit and be a minimum of 300 square feet in size, and a maximum of 1,000 square feet in size.

Each SRO project may be subject to review at any time by the City, which includes, but is not limited to, the review of management services, property maintenance, or property operations. Income levels shall be verified by a third party and submitted to the City annually on the anniversary date of the project’s certificate of occupancy or final inspection, whichever is last. The SRO management plan shall define third party verification criteria. The SRO project owner shall be responsible for filing an annual report with the Community Development Department, which includes the range of monthly rents, the monthly income of residents, occupancy rates, and the number of vehicles owned by residents.

5. Entrances. All SRO units shall be independently accessible from a single main entry, excluding emergency and other service support exits, which shall be situated adjacent to and in full view of the manager’s desk.

6. Cooking Facilities. Cooking facilities shall be provided either in individual units or in a community kitchen. Where cooking is in individual SRO units, each unit shall have a sink with hot and cold water, with a garbage disposal, a countertop measuring a minimum of 18 inches wide by 24 inches deep, with dedicated electrical outlets and a microwave oven or properly engineered cook top unit pursuant to Building Code requirements, and a refrigerator. A complete kitchen facility available for residents shall be provided on each floor of the structure, if each individual unit is not provided with a minimum of a refrigerator and a microwave oven.

7. Bathroom facilities. A SRO unit is not required to, but may contain, partial or full restroom facilities. A partial restroom facility shall have a toilet and sink in an enclosed compartment with a door. This compartment shall be a minimum of 15 square feet. A full restroom facility shall have a toilet, sink, and bathtub, shower, or bathtub/shower combination. If a full bathroom facility is not provided, common bathroom facilities shall be provided in accordance with the California Building Code for congregate residences with at least one full bathroom per floor on the same floor as the units it is intended to serve and shall be accessible from a common area or hallway and one full bathroom per four units. Each shared shower or bathtub facility shall be provided with an interior lockable door.

8. Closet. Each SRO unit shall have a separate enclosed closet. The closet shall be at least 120 cubic feet with a minimum four-foot horizontal dimension along one plane. 880
4 9. Common Area. A minimum of ten square feet for each unit or 250 square feet, whichever is greater, shall be provided for a common area within the building and shall be accessible to all residents at all times. All common areas shall be within the building occupied by SRO units. Dining rooms, meeting rooms, recreational rooms, or other similar areas approved by the city shall be considered common areas. Shared bathrooms, shared kitchens, janitorial storage, laundry facilities, utility rooms, secured office area, and common hallways shall not be considered as common areas. Common area shall be provided on the ground floor adjacent to the entry area, managers unit, and office. The common area shall provide a central focus for tenant social interaction and meetings.

10. Office. A secured office area shall be incorporated in the facility for the storage of confidential resident records and security office personnel.

11. Mailboxes. Mailboxes shall be provided for each unit, located near the lobby in plain view of the entry desk.

12. Laundry Facilities. Laundry facilities shall be provided in the building, in a separate room, at the ratio of one washer and dryer for every 10 units, with at least one washer and dryer per floor.

13. Janitorial Storage. A cleaning supply room or utility closet with a wash tub with hot and cold running water shall be provided on each floor of the SRO facility.

14. Parking. See Chapter 17.34.060 (Off-Street Parking and Loading - Required Number of Parking Spaces).

SECTION V:

The Single-family Dwelling Use provisions of Table 17.34.060.A of the Orange Municipal Code, “Zoning – Off-Street Parking and Loading – Required Number of Parking Spaces for Residential Uses,” is hereby amended to read as follows:

Table 17.34.060.A

REQUIRED NUMBER OF PARKING SPACES FOR RESIDENTIAL USES

USE REQUIRED NUMBER OF SPACES
Single Room
Occupancy
(SRO)
No additional off-street parking spaces are required than what was existing at the time of conversion to SRO.

SECTION VI:

Table 17.13.030 of the Orange Municipal Code, “Zoning – Master Land Use Table – Permitted Uses,” is hereby amended to add the following:
881
5 ZONIN
G

RESIDENTIAL COMMERCIAL MIXED USE INDUSTR
IAL

AGRICULTU
RAL

OPEN SPACE
P
I
OVERL
AY
SAND
&
GRAV
EL
LAN
D
USE
R1-5R1-6Rto
-15
R1-20 toR-140 &R1-RR2-6 toR2-8R-3R-4MHOPCP/C1CTRC2C3CROTMU-15SOTMU-15OTMU-24NMU-24UMUM1M2A1ROSHPIFP-1FP-2SG Housing—Includes all structures permitted as living quarters whether they be for short or long-term occupancy. Includes all uses identified in California Building Code definitions that are preceded with main entry words (key terms) that include one of the following: Dwelling, unit, house, housing, congregate, residence, multifamily, dormitory, home(s), hotel, motel, residential care facility, residential facility, or lodging.

Single
Room
Occup
ancy
- - - - - - - - P
*
P
*
P
*
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
882
6 SECTION VII:

Section 17.13.040 of the Orange Municipal Code, “Zoning – Master Land Use Table – Special Use Regulations,” is hereby amended to add the following:

HHH. Single Room Occupancy Housing (SRO).

1. Adaptive Reuse of the following existing structures that meet the following criteria only.
a. Motel/Hotel with 30 guest rooms or less.
b. Office Buildings with a total gross floor area of 5,000 square feet or less.

2. Only those buildings that meet the criteria of 17.13.040 (HHH)(1) that are existing at the time of adoption of this ordinance shall be eligible for conversion to SRO. No buildings constructed after the adoption of this ordinance are eligible for SRO conversion.

3. If any building that is eligible for conversion to SRO at the time of the adoption of this ordinance is demolished or partially destroyed by fire, explosion, act of God, act of a public enemy, collapse, or any other casualty or calamity, beyond 75% of the appraised value (as defined by this section) is no longer eligible for conversion to SRO.

In determining the appraised value of a structure eligible for SRO conversion, the cost of land or any factors other than those concerning the affected structure itself shall not be considered.

Appraised value, for the purpose of this section, shall mean the market value of the structure as reported by the owner, based upon the market value of comparable structures in the City. Where the City and owner do not agree upon the appraised value based on said comparable, appraised value shall mean the value reported by a qualified appraiser, approved by the City, hired by the owner to determine the value of the structure

4. Any conversion of existing buildings to SRO must be done for the entire site. No partial conversions to SRO are allowed.

SECTION VIII:

Section 17.10.060.D.1.l of the Orange Municipal Code, “Zoning – Specific Administrative Procedures – Site Plan Review – Minor Site Plan Review - Criteria,” is hereby amended to read as follows:
l. Adaptive reuse of an existing building, specified in OMC 17.13.040 HHH., to provide single room occupancy housing pursuant to OMC 17.18.140. 883
7 SECTION IX:

The proposed project is not subject to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) of the state CEQA Guidelines (Common Sense Exemption) because (1) it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that it would have a significant effect on the environment; and (2) Section 15378 because it will not have a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change on the environment and is not a "project." For this reason, no further CEQA documentation is required.

SECTION X:

If any section, subdivision, paragraph, sentence, clause or phrase of this Ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Ordinance. The City Council hereby declares that it would have passed this Ordinance, and each section, subdivision, paragraph, sentence, clause and phrase thereof, irrespective of the fact that any one (or more) section, subdivision, paragraph, sentence, clause or phrase had been declared invalid or unconstitutional.

SECTION XI:

The City Clerk is hereby directed to certify the adoption of this Ordinance and cause the same to be published as required by law. This Ordinance shall take effect thirty (30) days from and after the date of its final passage.

ADOPTED this 10th day of June 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
884
8 STATE OF CALIFORNIA )

COUNTY OF ORANGE )

CITY OF ORANGE )
I, PAMELA COLEMAN, City Clerk of the City of Orange, California, do hereby certify that the foregoing extension of an interim Ordinance was duly passed and adopted at the regular meeting of the City Council held on the 10th day of June, 2025 by the following vote, to wit:

AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS:
________________________________________
Pamela Coleman, City Clerk, City of Orange
885
RESOLUTION NO. PC 16-24

A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF

THE CITY OF ORANGE RECOMMENDING THAT THE

CITY COUNCIL ADOPT AN ORDINANCE AMENDING
TITLE 17 OF THE ORANGE MUNICIPAL CODE TO
ALLOW SINGLE.ROOM OCCUPANCY HOUSING AS A

PERMITTED USE IN CERTAIN ZONING DISTRICTS AND

RELATED DEFINITIONS AND DEVELOPMENT

STANDARDS
APPLICANT: CITY OF ORANGE
WHEREAS, the City recognizes the opportunity for Single Room Occupancy (SRO) units to meet housing needs of the community, especially Extremely-Low, Very-Low and LowIncome households; and WHEREAS, the subject Ordinance has been prepared to accommodate Single-Room Occupancy housing units in appropriate zoning districts, in accordance with California Government Code Section 65583(c)(1); and
WHEREAS, there are a number of under-utilized small scale office buildings and smallscale motels that lend themselves to adaptive re-use for affordable housing given their proximity to transit, goods, services, and employment; and
WHEREAS, single-room occupancy units can provide affordable housing options for single persons living alone, young professionals, persons looking to transition into permanent housing or seniors looking to age in place in the community; and WHEREAS, conversion of underutilized small scale office buildings and small-scale motels to single-room occupancy units provides an opportunity to implement standards, provisions, and limitations goveming the permitting, development, siting, and management of properties where no such standards exist; and
WHERAS, the City of Orange 2021-2029 Housing Element includes Housing Policy Action 4H that calls for the City to allow Single-Room Occupancy housing units.

WHEREAS, this proposed Ordinance has been crafted to include implementing standards, provisions and limitations goveming the permitting, development, siting, and management of Single-Room Occupancy units to ensure the orderly management and operation of such properties;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Commission recommends that the City Council approve the subject ordinance, attached hereto as Attachment A, based on the following:
886
SECTION 1- FINDINGS

1. The proposed Ordinance amends existing provisions of the OMC to achieve compliance with California Government Code Section 65583(cX1).

2. The proposed Ordinance implements the City's 2021-2029 General Plan Housing Element. Specifically, the Ordinance will assist in providing housing to meet the needs of low- and very-low-income households, remove govemmental constraints, promote housing opportunities for all persons, maximize future residential development potential, facilitate infill construction, and provide workforce housing. The ordinance also incorporates provisions intended to preserve and protect the quality of life in established neighborhoods.

SECTION 2.ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The proposed project is not subject to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15061(bX3) of the state CEQA Guidelines (Common Sense Exemption) because it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that it would have a significant effect on the environment. For this reason, no further CEQA documentation is required.

ADOPTED this 2l't day of April2025.

Alison Vejar
Planning Commission Chair
I hereby certit/ that the foregoing Resolution was adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Orange at a regular meeting thereof held on the 21't day of April 2025, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT
Vejar, Leslie, Martinez, Maldonado, McCormack
None
Yazquez and Tucker
Ortlieb, Principal Planner
887

EXHIBIT A
RESOLUTION NO. PC 16.24

SRO ORDINANCE
888
ORDINANCE NO. XX.25

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
oF ORANGE AMENDING TITLE 17 (ZONING) OF THE
ORANGE MUNICIPAL CODE TO MAKE SINGLE.ROOM

OCCUPANCY (SRO) A PERMITTED USE IN CERTAIN

ZONING DISTRICTS AND BY ADDING DEFINITIONS

AND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS RELATED TO SRO
DEVELOPMENT.

WHEREAS, the City of Orange (City) recognizes the opportunity for Single Room Occupancy (SRO) units to meet housing needs of the community, especially extremely-low, very-low and low-income households; and
WHEREAS, The City seeks to fulfill our Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) allocation, which includes 1,067 units affordable to very-low-income households and, 604 units affordable to low-income households; and
WHEREAS, the City is updating the Orange Municipal Code to permit Single-Room Occupancy units in appropriate zoning districts, subject to requirements of State Law (Proposed Ordinance); and
WHEREAS, these requirements include implementing standards, provisions and limitations governing the permitting, development, siting, and management of Single-Room Occupancy units; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, having considered the proposed changes to the OMC at a public hearing held on April 21, 2025 and having received public testimony on the item, determined the Proposed Ordinance serves the City's best interests and furthers the public health, safety and general welfare; and
WHEREAS, the City Council, having now considered the proposed changes to the OMC at a public hearing held on
_,
including review of the staff report, and having received public testimony on the item, desires to adopt the Proposed Ordinance.

NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ORANGE DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION I:

That the recitals and f,rndings contained herein are true and correct, incorporated herein, and with the public record, form the basis for this Ordinance.

SECTION II:
889
Section 17.04.038 of the Orange Municipal Code, "Zoning - Definitions - "S'-' Definitions," is hereby amended to read as follows:
"single Room Occupancy" means a single room that is the primary residence of its occupant or occupants. The unit must contain either food preparation or sanitary facilities, and may contain both. If the units do not contain sanitary facilities or food preparation facilities, the building must contain food preparation andlor sanitary facilities that are shared by tenants.

Single Room Occupancy is different from and, does not include, uses defined in Title 77 as "dormitory," or "dormitory-style housing," or "student housing." SECTION II:

Section 17.04.020 of the Orange Municipal Code, "Zoning - Definitions - "A" Definitions," is hereby amended to include the following definition, in alphabetical order:
"Adaptive Reuse" means reusing an existing building for a purpose other than which it was originally built or designed for.

SECTION III:

Section 17.18.140 of the Orange Municipal Code, "Zoning- Commercial Districts Single Room Occupancy Housing is hereby added to read as follows:

17.18.140 Single Room Occupancy Housing Development Standards.

D. Applicability. The standards contained in this section shall apply to all SRO units.

E. Development and Operational Standards.

1. Occupancy. A SRO unit shall be occupied by not more than two persons. Occupancy of SRO units may be restricted to seniors.

2. Tenancy. Tenancy of SRO units shall be offered for a minimum of 30 days or longer.

3. Unit Size. The minimum size of a SRO unit shall be 150 square feet and the maximum size shall be 375 square feet.
890

4. Management. A SRO management plan shall be submitted to, reviewed, approved, and enforced by the Community Development Director or designee. The management plan shall be approved before issuance of a certificate of occupancy. The management plan shall contain management policies, operations, emergency procedures, overnight guest policy, security program including video cameras monitoring building access points at every floor, rental procedures and proposed rates, maintenance plans, staffing needs, and tenant mix, selection and regulations. An on-site 24-hour manager is required in every SRO project. A manager's unit shall be provided which shall be designed as a complete residential unit and be a minimum of 300 square feet in size, and a maximum of 1,000 square feet in size.

Each SRO project may be subject to review at any time by the City, which includes, but is not limited to, ihe review of management services, property maintenance, or property operations' Income levels shall be verified by a third party and submitted to the City annually on the anniversary date of the project's certificate of occupancy or final inspection, whichever is last.

The SRO management plan shall define third party verification criteria. The SRO project owner shall be responsible for filing an annual report with the Community Development Department, which includes the range of monthly rents, the monthly income of residents, occupancy rates, and the number of vehicles owned by residents.

7. Bathroom facilities. A SRO unit is not required to, but may contain, partial or full restroom facilities. A partial restroom facility shall have a toilet and sink in an enclosed compartment with a door. This compartment shall be a minimum of 15 square feet. A full restroom facility shall have a toilet, sink, and bathtub, shower, or bathtub/shower combination. If a full bathroom facility is not provided, common bathroom facilities shall be provided in accordance with the Califomia Building Code for congregate residences with at least one full bathroom per floor on the same floor as the units it is intended to serve and shall be accessible from a cofitmon area or hallway and one full bathroom per four units. Each shared shower or bathtub facility shall be provided with an interior lockable door.

8. Closet. Each SRO unit shall have a separate enclosed closet. The closet shall be at least 120 cubic feet with a minimum four-foot horizontal dimension along one plane. 891

9. Common Area. A minimum of ten square feet for each unit or 250 square feet, whichever is greater, shall be provided for a common area within the building and shall be accessible to all residents at all times. All common areas shall be within the building occupied by SRO units. Dining rooms, meeting rooms, recreational rooms, or other similar areas approved by the city shall be considered common areas. Shared bathrooms, shared kitchens, janitorial storage, laundry facilities, utility rooms, secured office area, and common hallways shall not be considered as common areas. Common area shall be provided on the ground floor adjacent to the entry area, managers unit, and office. The common area shall provide a central focus for tenant social interaction and meetings.
1 1. Office. A secured office area shall be incorporated in the facility for the storage of confidential resident records and security office personnel.

12. Mailboxes. Mailboxes shall be provided for each unit, located near the lobby in plain view of the entry desk.

13. Laundry Facilities. Laundry facilities shall be provided in the building, in a separate room, at the ratio of one washer and dryer for every l0 units, with at least one washer and dryer per floor.

14. Janitorial Storage. A cleaning supply room or utility closet with a wash tub with hot and cold running water shall be provided on each floor of the SRO facility.

15. Parking. See Chapter 17.34.060 (Off-Street Parking and Loading - Required Number of Parking Spaces).

SECTION VI:

The Single-family Dwelling Use provisions of Table 17.34.060.A of the Orange Municipal Code, "Zoning - Off-Street Parking and Loading - Required Number of Parking Spaces for Residential Uses," is hereby amended to read as follows:

Table 17.34.060.A

UIRED NUMBER OF PARKING SPACES FOR RESIDENTIAL USES
SECTION VII:

Table 17.13.030 of the Orange Municipal Code, "Zoning - Master Land Use Table - Permitted [Jses," is hereby amended to add the following:

USE REQUIRED NUMBER OF SPACES
Single Room
Occupancy
(SRO)
No additional off-street parking spaces are required than what was conversion to SRO.
existing at the time of
892

RESIDENTIAL COMMERCIAL MIXED USE INDUSTR
IAL

AGRICULTU
RAL

OPEN SPACE
P
I
OVERL
AY
SAND
&
GRAV
EL
LAN
D
USE
I
(,|
P8 +t 7
(Jr O\
frFF
l+t E5ts
R"5
NJ N) tt
oo o\
FI
(/)
FI
5 7
F
o
o
o
-JF
o
NJ
o(]) o
i
z
I
qar
a
c
a
z
I
Lar
o.l7
eI
N) 5
z
I
N.) 5
C
7 ? ?
N)
a
+1
E
I
Frl
I
N)
U)
for short or long-term occupancy. Includes all uses identified in (key terms) that include one of the following: Dwelling' unit' motel, residential care facility, residential facility, or lodging.

Housing-Includes all structures permitted as living quarters whether they be California Building Code definitions that are preceded with main entry words house, housing, congregate, residence, multifamily, dormitory, home(s), hotel, Single
Room
Occup
ancy
P
d<
P
*
P
{<
ZONIN
G
893
Resolution No. PC 16-24
Page9ofl1
SECTION VIII:

Section 17.13.040 of the Orange Municipal Code, "Zoning - Master Land Use Table - Special Use Regulations," is hereby amended to add the following:

HHH. Single Room Occupancy Housing (SRO).

1. Adaptive Reuse of the following existing structures that meet the following criteria only.
a. Motel/Hotel with 30 guest rooms or less
b. Office Buildings with a total gross floor area of 5,000 square feet or less.

2. Only those buildings that meet the criteria of 17.13.040 (HHH)(l) that are existing at the time of adoption of this ordinance shall be eligible for conversion to SRO. No buildings constructed after the adoption of this ordinance are eligible for SRO conversion.

3. If any building that is eligible for conversion to SRO at the time of the adoption of this ordinance is demolished or partially destroyed by fire, explosion, act of God, act of a public enemy, collapse, or any other casualty or calamity, beyond 75o/o of the appraised value (as defined by this section) is no longer eligible for conversion to SRO.

In determining the appraised value of a structure eligible for SRO conversion, the cost of land or any factors other than those concerning the affected structure itself shall not be considered.

Appraised value, for the pu{pose of this section, shall mean the market value of the structure as riported by the owner, based upon the market value of comparable structures in the City. Where the City and owner do not agree upon the appraised value based on said comparable, appraised value shall mean the value reported by a qualified appraiser, approved by the City, hired by the owner to determine the value of the structure

4. Any conversion of existing buildings to SRO must be done for the entire site. No partial conversions to SRO are allowed.

SECTION IX:

Section 17.10.060.D.1.1 of the Orange Municipal Code, "Zoning Specific Administrative Procedures - Site Plan Review - Minor Site Plan Review - Criteria," is hereby amended to read as follows:
l. Adaptive reuse of an existing building, specified in OMC 17.13.040 HHH., to provide single room occupancy housing pursuant to OMC 17.18.140.

SECTION X:
894
Resolution No. PC 16-24

Page 10 of 1 ends

Orange City CouncilJune 10, 2025

Orange City Council
June 10, 2025