Appendix D
CEQA Initial Checklist
205
c., d., e. While many of the proposed projects involve new paved surfaces (e.g., Bike Lanes, bike paths, sidewalks), these surfaces constitute a very small, additional impervious surface, and would not substantially alter absorption rates, runoff or drainage. Adoption of the Trails Update would not result in significant adverse impacts due to drainage and/or surface runoff from development consistent with the plan.
g., h., i. The relatively small amount of new impervious surface developed under the Trails Update would not substantially alter absorption rates, runoff or drainage, and would not contribute to increased flooding. No significant flooding impacts are expected from adoption of the Trails Update. The majority of projects proposed under the Update would be improvements to existing roadways in urbanized areas, and would not subject users to flooding hazards. The proposed Santa Ana River trail extension would result in the development of a multi-use trail along a waterway that could potentially be subject to flooding during large storm events, particularly in areas where the pathway crosses beneath existing roadways. The trail would generally be constructed outside of flood-prone areas, and final trail design would incorporate features to ensure user safety during flood events. Development of the proposed bikeway and pedestrian improvements would not be expected to alter flood flows.
j. None of the areas proposed for development under the Trails Update are subject to seiche, tsunami, or mudflow.
Mitigation Measures
HYD-1 Prior to completion of final improvement plans for off-street pathways, a registered Civil Engineer shall provide recommendations on appropriate surface run-off collection and discharge features. All subsequent construction plans shall incorporate the recommendations of the drainage study, as approved by the appropriate public works department HYD-2. The Santa Ana River trail extension shall be developed outside flood prone areas along the river, unless existing natural or man-made constraints necessitate extending the trail through flood-prone areas for short distances (such as beneath an existing roadway overcrossing). Where the trail extends through such areas, a safety study shall be conducted and the recommendations of the study incorporated into the final trail design, such as trail closure protocols, to ensure the safety of trail users during flooding events.
Appendix D
CEQA Initial Checklist
206
IX. LAND USE AND PLANNING
Would the project:
a) Physically divide an established community?
b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan,
policy, or regulation of an agency with
jurisdiction over the project (including, but not
limited to the general plan, specific plan, local
coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted
for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an
environmental effect?
c) Conflict with any applicable habitat
conservation plan or natural community
conservation plan?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Explanation
a. Adoption of the Trails Update would not be expected to disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an established community. Bicyclists and pedestrians have not historically been a disruptive force in new locations, according to studies conducted by the Rails-To-Trails Conservancy. The majority of all improvements would be located within existing transportation, utility, or open space corridors. Some of the proposed improvements will be located within privately owned property that will require the acquisition of easements. The final alignment of any project would be subject to input from potentially affected property owners. To the extent that a property owner would prefer to see projects aligned in different locations in order to accommodate future development proposals or to address privacy or other issues, the Plan is sufficiently flexible to allow for such an alignment. Consequently, the Plan would not create any divisions between physical development that would detrimentally isolate or impact an existing community or land use. b. The Update establishes the long-term vision for equestrian, bicycle and pedestrian activity in Yorba Linda. As a general policy document, the Plan is consistent with the environmental plans and policies that other agencies may apply to evaluate specific components of the Plan. In particular, the Plan encourages multi- modal use of public streets and would encourage and support increased bicycle commuter use in ways that are consistent with the goals and plans promulgated by Caltrans and the City. The specific projects and programs proposed by the Plan will be subject to subsequent review and analysis by a variety of public agencies that may have permit jurisdiction over components of the project. Through this permit process, any potential conflicts between the specific design of future improvements and the plans and policies of other agencies (e.g. Caltrans, etc.) will be resolved.
c. Implementation of the proposed Trails Update would not conflict with any habitat conservation plan or natural community plan in effect in San Benito County.
Appendix D
CEQA Initial Checklist
207
X. MINERAL RESOURCES
Would the project:
a) Result in the loss of availability of a known
mineral resource that would be of value to the
region and the residents of the state?
b) Result in the loss of availability of a locallyimportant mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan
or other land use plan?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Explanation
a., b. Yorba Linda contains a mineral resource zone for construction aggregate along the Santa Ana River. The City also contains several oil production zones, mostly in the northern part of the city on the Shell site. In general, the development of equestrian, bicycle and pedestrian facilities on or near any mineral or oil resources zones would not occur until the extraction activities on those sites had been abandoned.
Therefore, no impacts to mineral resources are expected from implementation of the Trails Update.
Appendix D
CEQA Initial Checklist
208
XI. NOISE
Would the project result in:
a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise
levels in excess of standards established in the
local general plan or noise ordinance, or
applicable standards of other agencies?
b) Exposure of persons to or generation of
excessive ground borne vibration or ground
borne noise levels?
c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient
noise levels in the project vicinity above levels
existing without the project?
d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase
in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity
above levels existing without the project?
e) For a project located within an airport land use
plan or, where such a plan has not been
adopted, within two miles of a public airport or
public use airport, would the project expose
people residing or working in the project area
to excessive noise levels?
f) For a project within the vicinity of a private
airstrip, would the project expose people
residing or working in the project area to
excessive noise levels?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Explanation
a., c., d. Construction of projects proposed under the Trails Update could result in short-term noise impacts from construction activity. Projects involving the use of earthmoving or other heavy machinery could result in the temporary exceedance of local noise standards at nearby noise-sensitive land uses, such as residences, schools, hospitals, and churches.
The implementation of standard noise control measures would ensure that construction noise impacts are reduced to a lessthan-significant level.
No substantial long-term increase in the existing ambient noise environment is expected to result from the Trails Update, because noise levels generated from horse, bicycle and pedestrian use would typically be lower than those generated by automobile use in the community. The noise from day-to-day activities for the proposed projects would typically be limited to people talking, and would not be expected to be noticeable to surrounding residents assuming that the facilities are adequately sited, designed, and buffered.
The majority of proposed projects are exposed to normally acceptable noise levels for outdoor recreation. Therefore, the Trails Update would not result in the exposure of people to unacceptable noise levels. b. The proposed equestrian, bicycle and pedestrian projects would not result in substantial increases in ground borne noise or vibration.
e., f. The proposed Trails Update would not result in the exposure of persons to excessive noise levels in the vicinity of a public or private airstrip.
Appendix D
CEQA Initial Checklist
209
Mitigation Measures
NOI-1. Construction activities associated with the Trails Update would be subject to local noise control ordinances. In general, construction activities would be limited to normal working hours in areas adjacent to noise-sensitive uses such as residences, schools, and churches.
Appendix D
CEQA Initial Checklist
210
XII. POPULATION AND HOUSING
Would the project:
a) Induce substantial population growth in an
area, either directly (for example, by proposing
new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for
example, through extension of roads or other
infrastructure)?
b) Displace substantial numbers of existing
housing, necessitating the construction of
replacement housing elsewhere?
c) Displace substantial numbers of people,
necessitating the construction of
replacement housing elsewhere?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Explanation
a. The introduction of additional equestrian, bicycle or pedestrian facilities would not be expected to substantially alter projected populations. The introduction of additional bicycle and pedestrian facilities would provide transportation alternatives to residents and employees living and working in the City, but would not directly or indirectly induce population growth.
b., c. No existing housing would be displaced by implementation of the proposed Trails Update.
Appendix D
CEQA Initial Checklist
211
XIII. PUBLIC SERVICES
a) Would the project result in substantial
adverse
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
physical impacts associated with the provision of
new or physically altered governmental facilities,
need for new or physically altered governmental
facilities, the construction of which could cause
significant environmental impacts, in order to
maintain acceptable service ratios, response times
or other performance objectives for any of the
public services:
Fire protection?
Police protection?
Schools?
Parks?
Other public facilities?
Explanation
a. Properly designed bicycle and pedestrian improvements typically do not pose substantial public safety concerns in terms of fire or police protection. The appropriate local fire protection agency and law enforcement agency would review individual projects under the Trails Update in the preliminary design/feasibility phase in order to ensure that all necessary safety recommendations have been included in the plans (e.g., emergency access, sight lines, lighting). The proposed facilities are not expected to necessitate a substantial increase in fire or police services over their long-term operation.
The Master Plan would not increase demand for school facilities or park facilities, and is intended to improve access to such facilities by providing viable bicycle and pedestrian connections.
Though the proposed Trails Update contemplates installing additional facilities (e.g. signs, bike paths, Bike Lanes, etc.), these improvements represent an incrementally small addition to the existing transportation systems in Yorba Linda. Due to the low intensity, impact, and cost nature of the projects, it would not result in a significant effect on the maintenance costs of the appropriate jurisdictions.
Appendix D
CEQA Initial Checklist
212
XIV. RECREATION
a) Would the project increase the use of
existing
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
neighborhood and regional parks or other
recreational facilities such that substantial
physical
deterioration of the facility would occur or be
accelerated?
b) Does the project include recreational facilities or
require the construction or expansion of
recreational facilities which might have an
adverse physical effect on the environment?
Explanation
The projects proposed in the Trails Update will not substantially increase the demand for neighborhood or regional parks or other recreational facilities, or affect existing recreational opportunities. Many of the proposed equestrian, bicycle and pedestrian projects are intended for recreational use, and have the potential to improve access to recreational facilities, thereby enhancing the experience for users of these facilities.
Appendix D
CEQA Initial Checklist
213
XV. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC
Would the project:
a) Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial
in relation to the existing traffic load and
capacity of the street system (i.e., result in a
substantial increase in either the number of
vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on
roads, or congestion at intersections)?
b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a
level of service standard established by the
county congestion management agency for
designated roads or highways?
c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns,
including either an increase in traffic levels or
a change in location that results in substantial
safety risks?
d) Substantially increase hazards due to a
design feature (e.g., sharp curves or
dangerous intersections) or incompatible
uses (e.g., farm equipment)?
e) Result in inadequate emergency access?
f) Result in inadequate parking capacity?
g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or
programs supporting alternative
transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle
racks)?
Explanation
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a., b. The Trails Update would improve bicycle and pedestrian connections throughout Yorba Linda so that bicycle and pedestrian use for commuting, running errands and recreating is a viable alternative to automobile use. Consequently, the Trails Update has the potential to reduce vehicle trips.
The Trails Update provides for facilities for bicyclists and pedestrians, thereby reducing the potential conflicts between nonmotorized movement and motorized vehicles. All facilities will be designed to maximize safety by adhering to established design and engineering standards. It is not anticipated that the Trails Update would create any potentially significant safety hazards, provided the final designs of projects proposed in the plan account for location specific physical and traffic conditions. The specific layout and design of improvements would account for the potential hazards that can result from improper construction of bicycle improvements and facilities.
Installation of Bike Lanes and other facilities would not be expected to reduce the Level of Service on any existing roadway. e. The proposed Trails Update may result in new trail corridors that are not fully accessible by emergency vehicles. The local law enforcement agency and fire services agency shall be included in the final design process for each individual project to ensure that there are provisions for emergency access. f. The proposed bikeway and pedestrian projects would not be anticipated to generate a substantial amount of new traffic, and no parking impacts would occur.
Appendix D
CEQA Initial Checklist
214
g. Implementation of the proposed Trails Update would provide for a number of bicycle and pedestrian facilities and programs intended to promote alternative transportation for commuting, recreation, and utilitarian trips.
Mitigation Measures
TRA-1. All designated Class I, Class II, and Class III bikeways shall conform to the design standards identified in Chapter 1000 of the Caltrans Highway Design Manual.
TRA-2. A detailed safety engineering study shall be conducted before completion of the final trail improvement plans. The safety study should examine physical and roadway conditions in the vicinity of proposed improvements and provide recommendations that would minimize safety hazards. All subsequent construction plans shall incorporate the recommendations of the feasibility study.
TRA-3. Prior to issuance of construction permits, appropriate public works department engineering staff, and local law enforcement and fire protection agencies shall review the design plans to ensure that adequate provisions for safety and emergency access have been provided.
Appendix D
CEQA Initial Checklist
215
XVI. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
Would the project:
a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of
the applicable Regional Water Quality Control
Board?
b) Require or result in the construction of new
water or wastewater treatment facilities or
expansion of existing facilities, the
construction of which could cause significant
environmental effects?
c) Require or result in the construction of new
storm water drainage facilities or expansion of
existing facilities, the construction of which
could cause significant environmental effects?
d) Have sufficient water supplies available to
serve the project from existing entitlements
and resources, or are new or expanded
entitlements needed?
e) Result in a determination by the wastewater
treatment provider which serves or may serve
the project that it has adequate capacity to
serve the project’ projected demand in
addition to the provider’ existing
commitments?
f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient
permitted capacity to accommodate the
project’ solid waste disposal needs?
g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes
and regulations related to solid waste?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Explanation
a., b., e. The proposed Trails Update would not result in any substantial increase in sewage generation, and no additional sewage connections would be necessary.
c. The proposed projects would be designed to be integrated into the existing stormwater system, although the expected runoff is expected to be minimal given the small surface area of new paved trails and bikeways. d. The Trails Update would result in minimal additional water demand, and no additional water treatment or distribution facilities would be required. Proposed projects would utilize contemporary water-conservation technology in all landscaping improvements associated with the Trails Update.
f., g. The Trails Update will not result in the generation of solid waste that would overburden the capacity of the existing or planned solid waste disposal service for the project area.
Appendix D
CEQA Initial Checklist
216
XVII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
Less Than
Significant
with
a) Does the project have the potential to degrade
the quality of the environment, substantially
reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species,
cause a fish or wildlife population to drop
below self-sustaining levels, threaten to
eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce
the number or restrict the range of a rare or
endangered plant or animal or eliminate
important examples of the major periods of
California history or prehistory?
b) Does the project have impacts that are
individually limited, but cumulatively
considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable"
means that the incremental effects of a project
are considerable when viewed in connection
with the effects of past projects, the effects of
other current projects, and the effects of
probable future projects)?
c) Does the project have environmental effects
which will cause substantial adverse effects on
human beings, either directly or indirectly?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a., b., c. See specific impacts discussions above.
Appendix E
California Recreational Trail Use Statues
217
APPENDIX E. California Recreational
Trail Use Statutes
California Statutes Related to Trail Liability
GOVERNMENT CODES
831.2. Neither a public entity nor a public employee is liable for an injury caused by a natural condition of any unimproved public property, including but not limited to any natural condition of any lake, stream, bay, river or beach.
831.4. A public entity, public employee, or a grantor of a public easement to a public entity for any of the following purposes, is not liable for an injury caused by a condition of:
(a) Any unpaved road which provides access to fishing, hunting, camping, hiking, riding, including animal and all types of vehicular riding, water sports, recreational or scenic areas and which is not a (1) city street or highway or (2) county, state or federal highway or (3) public street or highway of a joint highway district, boulevard district, bridge and highway district or similar district formed for the improvement or building of public streets or highways. (b) Any trail used for the above purposes.
(c) Any paved trail, walkway, path, or sidewalk on an easement of way which has been granted to a public entity, which easement provides access to any unimproved property, so long as such public entity shall reasonably attempt to provide adequate warnings of the existence of any condition of the paved trail, walkway, path, or sidewalk which constitutes a hazard to health or safety. Warnings required by this subdivision shall only be required where pathways are paved, and such requirement shall not be construed to be a standard of care for any unpaved pathways or roads.
PUBLIC RESOURCE CODE
5075.4. No adjoining property owner is liable for any actions of any type resulting from, or caused by, trail users trespassing on
adjoining property, and no adjoining property owner is liable for any actions of any type started on, or taking place within, the boundaries of the trail arising out of the activities of other parties.
Appendix F
Workshop Notes and Responses
218
APPENDIX F. Workshop Notes and
Responses
August 31, 2004 City Council Workshop Notes with Responses Responses to comments in italics following each comment.
The Mayor requested that at the final review that the City Council receive a larger map so they could read the streets.
The City Council will receive a larger map with the final document. • The Mayor asked staff to look into recommending a trail connection as part of the bridge construction at Imperial Highway and Orangethorpe.
The Public Works Department will negotiate on behalf of the City with Caltrans and the City of Anaheim when the planning begins for this bridge over the railroad tracks.
The following were suggested as additional research to verify the following:
• Since the nursery property at Tract #9916 (A2, south of Bastanchury and east Prospect) was sold, could the city condition the new owner to put in a trail on the south side of 9916 in order to connect to the trail on Osmund?
The Planning Department and the Public Works Departments have been informed that the Study is requesting that an earthen trail be added as a condition for developing this lot.
• The Mayor would like to show how the trails in Vista del Verde connect to the Orange County park system at Canyon Regional Park.
This was added as Segment 50. Staff spoke with Orange County Harbors, Beaches and Parks, and Mr. Jeff Dickman was very encouraged of the City’s desire to collaborate on such a project. Field inspections by the Consultant revealed that there is an earthen trail in the Redwood area and leads to Carbon Canyon Regional Park; however, the County of Orange and City would have to negotiate the city trail connection with the County trail connection. • Someone indicated that the crossing at Valley View Circle and Valley View Avenue does not have a good crossing and improvement is needed. (B2)
This plan describes the various ways that the City can improve crossings, and plans for the City to make these improvements, but does not address each one individually.
• The color of the tract map boundary lines needs to be another color other than what is selected as part of the types of trails. Even though it was a thinner red line than the Planned Class I Bike, some readers may get confused.
The map was changed to address this.
Appendix F
Workshop Notes and Responses
221
• The Mayor would like staff to continue negotiating with the County regarding opening the culvert at YL Blvd. And San Antonio. The reason is this intersection may not be the conducive for a crossing even with a traffic light.
The Parks and Recreation Director, the Parks and Facilities Superintendent, and the Recreation Superintendent met with the Orange County Flood Control District on November 22, 2004, to address this request. A field investigation indicates that a traffic light could make this crossing viable.
However, discussion included safety concerns with using the underground culvert such as the cement culvert would also attract skate board users; OC Flood Control would require some type of curbing to channel any water downstream and this narrows the width of the trail; adding a curb to channel water could create a safety hazard as some may use it as a climbing device, or skate board ramp; a new trap or gate would need to be designed so that users don’t try to trespass into the culvert to transport water downstream. The slope of the channel would not meet ADA standards. Curbing the channel would allow for only a very narrow trail that would present problems with users passing one another. Moreover, trail users avoid deep narrow places that could make them vulnerable to crime. This treatment would raise a number of liability issues for the City, with several safety concerns.
Last, this would require frequent sweeping to keep debris off the trail by a very small sweeper that the City does not have. • The Consultant needs to recommend a connection off Via Del Agua and Yorba Linda Boulevard (F3), as well as a connection to trail on the city/orange county limits. There were also comments that an earthen trail exists on the north side of Tract 10518. At the meeting, someone indicated this earthen trail is really a Gas line/water line easement.
The first request was added as Segment 35b along the Metropolitan Water District water line easement. Since this is a raw water line, MWD is willing to work with the City in allowing use of an earthen trail on their easement.
A field investigation determined that a trail along this stretch of Yorba Linda Blvd. is not feasible because it is narrow and has trees in the landscape easement that are recommended not to be removed. • City Council would like staff to prepare an implementation plan of which projects in priority, need to be addressed. This prioritization is found on page 155-156 of the study.
An implementation plan has been prepared and inserted.
• A resident indicated that there are tract maps that are not correct. The Council indicated they approved a trail near the horse stables (C2) and that trail is not indicated on this map.
Staff decided to add the tentative maps depicting the trails. The Map errors have been corrected. The areas in question are Villages 3 and 4 (B2 & C2), D2 particularly near Segment 29, and F2 near Segment 36. Also, the trails map shows Tract #13230 and this needs to be removed and listed as a 1200-acre open space site. No approved Tract map exists at the time of the writing of the report for 13230. All the above maps are needed electronically so that RRM can insert the changes. • At the public high school site, a community member wanted that tract map also included as well as a bike path.
Tract Map 16209 is still a tentative map and being reviewed as of the printing of this study. The tract does show both a concrete (paved) 8’ trail, and a 10’ equestrian trail.
Appendix F
Workshop Notes and Responses
222
• A resident want trails connections to the Santa Ana River Bike Trail and Chino Hills State Park should be shown on the map.
The map designer used AutoCAD to download the Chino Hills State Park map onto the map. The County of Orange was unable to provide an AutoCAD file to include the Orange County Trails system. RRM, the map designer indicated it would be very costly to have this work recreated for the City’s tails map. • A resident indicated that there is a lack of a connection from Fairmont Avenue to the Santa Ana Riverbed Trail.
A site inspection indicated that Fairmont Blvd. intersects La Palma Avenue. There is a signal to allow for crossing into the open lot or staging area adjacent to the west of the Yorba Regional Park. • The Mayor wants research to be done as to when the Anaheim Union Canal was abandoned and if it was done before the 1972 Master Plan of Trails. Two community members would like a more direct route from the El Cajon trail (C4) south of Mountain View.
On December 20, Parks and Recreation staff, and the Consultant conducted a field inspection and met with the neighbors.
Staff found documentation that in September of 1969, this property was deeded to the City of Yorba Linda. However, during the site inspection, staff received copies of documentation provided by a local resident, and additional references to contact. The study contains a recommendation for connectivity to this part of the El Cajon Trail.
The City acquired from the Orange County Water District on September 15, 1969, via Resolution 153, what is known as the El Cajon Trail. In this particular trail location, there are permanent encroachments. To date, documentation reveals that in 1996, the residents requested that the City abandon this easement. The City offered and required the residents to pay costs such as fees for preparation of legal description, the increased costs of rerouting the existing multi-use trail, and the City’s actual processing costs for securing all property owner agreements. In order for the City to take on this responsibility, it would require 100% participation. To date, no documentation supports that the residents came to a 100% agreement, and that no documentation exists that the City quitclaimed this to the residents. If the City receives full agreement, this may be a way to fund alternative improvements in Trail Segment 14.
There are a number of encroachments in the right-of-way, including a swimming pool, a fence, landscaping and more that would be physically difficult to move. Moreover, the right-of-way is not ideal for users. There are steep grades. If this right-ofway were used, it would be difficult for users to cross. Similar issues exist on the east side of Kellogg Dr. The recommended approach at this time is to seek full agreement from the residents and implement the alternative plan suggested in 1996. • The Mayor would like a second Exhibit or included in the overall map the trails in Chino Hills State Park so that readers can see what State Park trails they can access.
This has been added.
• A resident asked for a trail on Kellogg south of Yorba Linda Blvd. As a connection to the Gun Club Road (D3). Even though this is county property, the Mayor would like to research the possibility.
This was investigated and was determined not to be feasible at this time for several reasons. First, the part of Kellogg Drive in question is in the unincorporated lands under the jurisdiction of the County. Currently, Kellogg Drive is built as a commuter roadway. OCTA has indicated that Kellogg Drive is expected to be reclassified as a Secondary Arterial. In order to be classified as a Secondary Arterial, Kellogg Drive would have to been widened. The County does not believe there is enough County right-of-way to also include a trail with the widening. Second, in order to connect with the Gun Club Road, Kellogg would have to be linked along Yorba Linda Blvd. At this point, Yorba Linda Blvd. is three lanes in each direction and does not have room to accommodate a minimum of a six- foot trail as the sidewalk is too narrow on the north side. Another option would be to cross at f Yorba Linda and the Gun Club Rd., however, this would require a signal and excavating of the sidewalk on the Southside of Yorba Linda Boulevard.
Appendix F
Workshop Notes and Responses
223
• There needs to be a safe trail crossing on Lakeview Avenue near the current entrance to the Black Gold Golf Club (B2). It does not appear to be an acceptable access.
This plan describes the various ways that the City can improve crossings, and plans for the City to make these improvements, but the study is not designed to address each one individually. • A resident indicated that feeder trails are not included on the map. The Mayor would like the feeder trails included. Staff will do this if they are public trails and recorded on the tract maps.
Research revealed that some of these feeder trails that the public is referring to are private trails. Known private feeder trails have been added to the map in a different color to demonstrate the research conducted; however, private feeder trails or trails not for General Public Use will not appear on the General Plan Amendment. • Segment 29 crossing does not look safe and since a trail is going to be installed on the south side of Fairmont Boulevard. This tract map is also not updated.
This plan describes the various ways that the City can improve crossings, and plans for the City to make these improvements, but does not address each one individually.
Map errors have been corrected.
• A resident said he wanted a better connection to the Santa Ana Riverbed from Segment 40-41.
The City will negotiate with Caltrans and the City of Anaheim to plan this along with the bridge construction at Imperial Hwy. and Orangethorpe Ave.
• The City Council would also like staff to recommend how they will inform property owners of their encroachment issues. A suggestion was to give the written notice and explain what formal action will take place if it is not rectified.
Community Preservation handles encroachments in the recreational or equestrian trails the same way as an obstruction of public right-of-way. It’s a violation of Yorba Linda Municipal Code section
12.20.020. Any “violator” is given due process. An initial “Notice to Comply” is issued, followed by a “Final Notice to Comply”, if not corrected by the first notice. After that process the person responsible, (usually the property owner) is subject to administrative citations. That consists of
$100 first, $200 second and $500 final and subsequent failures to comply. The administrative fine process is outlined in chapter 1.13 of the Municipal Code. The file is forwarded to the City Attorney when a resident does not comply. Then, if no compliance, an arraignment date is set with North County Superior Court. There is also a City Council Policy E-5 regarding the Encroachment onto city-owned property or easements. • A Council Member asked Public Works to find out if the City is complying with the suggestions recommended in the trails study (pages 191-193).
The Public Works Department provided input and reviewed the trails maintenance and construction sections within the document. The trails study does include the City’s design standards for Asphalt Trail and for Earthen Trail. • The City Attorney suggested that information regarding security and public safety should be removed (pages 136-139) or rephrased so that the City is not placed in a liable position.
This language has been rephrased.
• The Mayor indicated that the El Cajon Trail near YL Blvd and Lakeview Avenue is not drawn in accurately. (C3)
Appendix F
Workshop Notes and Responses
224
Map errors have been corrected.
• A resident indicated that there is no connection from Fairmont Avenue to the Santa Ana Riverbed trail. This needs to be researched.
A field investigation determined that the existing trail along the Fairmont Ave. bridge connects directly to the trail along the Santa Ana River via crossing La Palma Avenue at the traffic signal and entering the earthen trail on the Southside of La Palma Avenue.
• On Segment 35 going south to Eastside Community Park, a community member indicated that a straight line does not indicate the canyons/ravines and the hilly topography.
The alignment of the trail will be determined in the design stage. This map line is intended to indicate a general location for the trail.
• The Mayor indicated that there is a trail near the fire station (I4).
These tract maps indicate that some of the lots are either open space or linear parks. The Map has not been adjusted. • Mayor Ken Ryan suggested that trails may be included on the tract maps near the Old Pomegranate Road.
In researching Tract Maps 15650, and Tentative Tract maps 15352 and 15199, the lots noted on these maps are either open space or landscape maintenance purposes. Open space or landscape maintenance areas are not included as part of recreational trails system. Recording these open space or landscape maintenance lots would mislead trail users as they do not connect to the City Trail system.
• The Council indicated they wanted to see more trails on the eastside near segment 48 to allow other property owners access.
When the eastside was developed the City did not require trail easements. Therefore, the land is generally private and there is not enough public right-of-way to add trails beyond what this plan calls for. • The Mayor would like to show the connection at Gypsum Canyon Road as it is not currently shown on the map.
Map changes have been made.
• A resident wants a bike path connection along Bastanchury from Rio del Oro to Village Center This has been added as part of Segment 32.
• The Mayor would like the trails near Segment 45 in the East Lake Village area placed on the map.
The Tract Map 9426 indicates that this is a private trail for the Eastlake Homeowners Association. Tract map 9718 indicates that Lot A is for walkway easements and Lot J is for walkway or bike trails. Assessor Parcel Number 349-791 indicates that Lot B is a private trail for the Eastlake Homeowners Association. • Tract Map 13230 needs to be updated.
Approximately 1200 acres located in tract 13230 is going to be dedicated as open space to the State of California Parks and Recreation Department.
225
Appendix G
Public Input 2024 Update
APPENDIX G: Public Input from 2024
Plan Update
The following bullets list comments and comment themes received from community members during the 2024 Plan Update process. • From the Online Feedback Map
o The El Cajon Trail abruptly ends/starts at Bastanchury Road - on the sidewalk with no easy way to get on the road/trail as there is no ramp. Adding a ramp would be nice. o It would be nice if a biking/walking trail connected with carbon canyon. o Ohio is major road without sidewalks or safe riding paths that is used to access multipurpose trails and the equestrian arena. Motorist have hit horses and riders and regularly come within inches when passing. It is a busy pedestrian road with dog walkers, strollers, wheelchairs, runners, and bikers. The speed limit is much too high (35) for the number of pedestrians having to share the road. The same as Lakeview which has sidewalks.
The city owns 8 ft (?) which can be converted to a path. o My family and other neighbors utilize this trail daily. Either to walk to the school or go to Travis Ranch Park.
The request is to add some safety features when crossing Dominguez Ranch Road. A few recommendations/options: cross walk, stop sign, safety lights, etc. o Ohio Street needs a bike lane and horse markings so you can access the trail and equestrian area South of YL Blvd
o No safe biking access to Santa Ana River Trail or to SAVI Ranch. Crossing La Palma, Esparanza, and Orangethorpe are unsafe. Separated paved walking/biking trails are needed. o Complete bicycle/walking trail to Santa Ana River along the Carbon Canyon Creek. Tustin Ave. and Kraemer Blvd. are hazardous to cyclists due to no bike lanes and 91 freeway on/off ramps. Need better bike access going south from Placentia.
o Please complete the connector between the Yorba Linda Trail at Bastanchury and the trails along at Imperial at La Floresta to provide pedestrian/bike access to the community and local businesses. o Complete this segment of the proposed OC Loop project which is planned between Imperial and Bastanchury. Also, complete north of Imperial to the Carbon Canyon Dam where existing trail connects to Carbon Canyon Park and Chino Hills State Park.
o Complete north-south trail along Carbon Canyon Creek to connect with El Cajon trail and OC Loop/Brea trails. Carbon Canyon Creek is at the Placentia/Yorba Linda border and would be a good joint effort for the two Cities to cooperate on. No other safe north-south bike/pedestrian trails exist in this area and this would improve connection between local residents and existing trails. Part of this route is used as a local trail. Need to formalize and extend this trail.
• From Local Community Events (October 14, 2023, and December 2, 2023) o Horse trails need to be maintained.
• From Virtual Community Meeting ( January 11, 2024)
o Request for connections to other cities' bike lanes and trails. • Trail Ride Site Visit (January 17, 2024)
o On January 17, 2024, Yorba Linda Country Riders President Dee Dee Friedrich and Board Member Mimi Mosman led consultants on a trail tour around Yorba Linda. The site visit included inspecting the crossing on
226
Appendix G
Public Input 2024 Update
Lakeview south of Yorba Linda Boulevard, where trail riders have to cross a high-volume road to connect to the El Cajon Trail. The tour included the trailhead at Yorba Linda Boulevard and Avocado Avenue and then looked at the terminus of trails at Buena Vista Avenue and Grandview Avenue. The tour also looked at gaps in the trail system on Ohio Street, which is a direct path to the Paxton Equestrian Center, the Lakebed, and other trails. The City used this information to inform the trail analysis for new opportunities and enhancements to existing trails.
o Takeaways from the site visit include
▪ Hutchings Drive prevents connection to Buena Vista
▪ Hidden Hills is very disconnected
▪ Gun Club Road stops and is dangerous to cross to existing trails ▪ Ohio Street is a highly traveled path that is dangerous for horses • In-person event, (January 18, 2024)
o Request for Active transportation trails in Placentia (near Bastanchury Rd.). o Request for Trail amenities
• From Local Community Event (May 4, 2024)
o Need to make is safer for horse riding
o Lakeview Street is unsafe for horses, develop a horse crossing bridge o Develop more bike paths away from cars
o Like the improvements done on the Santa Ana River Trail
City of Yorba Linda Trail Map, 2024 Exhibit OR - 2
Trails
ATTACHMENT 5
CITY CLERK'S OFFICE
DATE: JANUARY 21, 2025
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
FROM: MARCIA BROWN, CMC, CITY CLERK
SUBJECT: CITY COUNCIL APPOINTMENTS TO ORGANIZATIONS, AGENCIES AND
COMMITTEES
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that Council vote on the appointments to various organizations, agencies and committees as per the Mayor’s recommendations.
BACKGROUND
At the Council meeting of December 3, 2024, the Mayor inquired of Council Member’s interest in serving on regional organizations, agencies, and committees. Ordinance No. 2009-928, adopted on March 17, 2009, states in part that the first Tuesday of each December the Mayor shall ask Council Members to state whether they are available and desire to serve a particular entity on the list of regional organizations, agencies, or committees. The Ordinance further states that the Mayor shall then consider the experience, special skills and workload of each Council Member and prepare written recommendations for presentation as a staff report at the next regular City Council meeting.
The appointments shall be affirmed by a majority vote of the City Council.
The following agencies pay a stipend or otherwise provide a financial benefit to the appointee: Orange County Fire Authority, Orange County Mosquito and Vector Control District and Transportation Corridor Agency. After Council appointments are confirmed, staff will file Form 806 on the City’s website, reporting the compensation paid by these agencies.
DISCUSSION
The Orange County Fire Authority bylaws require that each member agency, by resolution of its governing body, designate and appoint one representative to act as its Director on the Authority Board of Directors. The resolution is included in this packet.
ALTERNATIVES
Ask for additional information and provide staff with further direction.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Mayor’s Recommendations of City Council Appointments to Organizations, Agencies and Committees
2. Resolution Appointing a Representative to Orange County Fire Authority
CITY COUNCIL APPOINTMENTS TO
ORGANIZATIONS, AGENCIES AND COMMITTEES
2025
AGENCY/COMMITTEE DELEGATE ALTERNATE
ACC-OC Mayor Mayor Pro Tem
Bridges at Kraemer Place Community Advisory Board Campbell N/A Finance Committee
Rodriguez
Singh N/A
Foothill/Eastern Transportation Corridor Agency Lim Huang Orange County City Selection Committee Mayor N/A
Orange County Council of Governments (OCCOG) Lim N/A
Orange County Fire Authority Campbell N/A
Orange County Mosquito and Vector Control District
Huang
2-Year Term Exp 1/27 N/A
Placentia Navigation Center Lim N/A
Placentia Yorba Linda Unified School District Campbell Rodriguez Santa Ana River Flood Protection Agency Singh Campbell
Southern California Association of Governments Lim Rodriguez Trauma Intervention Program Singh Lim
Yorba Linda Chamber of Commerce Lim Rodriguez
Yorba Linda Water District Lim Rodriguez
YLWD/CC Joint Advisory Committee
Lim
Rodriguez N/A
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
YORBA LINDA CALIFORNIA, DESIGNATING AND
APPOINTING ITS REPRESENTATIVE TO THE ORANGE
COUNTY FIRE AUTHORITY’S BOARD OF DIRECTORS
WHEREAS, the City, as a “member” of the Orange County Fire Authority Joint Powers Authority (JPA) is entitled to appoint a representative director (“Director”) to the Orange County Fire Authority’s Board of Directors, and
WHEREAS, each member agency, by resolution of its governing body, shall designate and appoint one representative to act as its Director on the Authority Board of Directors, except the County whose Board of Supervisors shall appoint two representatives to act as its Directors, and
WHEREAS, each Director shall be a current elected member of the governing body, and
WHEREAS, each Director shall hold office until the selection of a successor by the appointing body, and
WHEREAS, each Director is to serve at the pleasure of his or her appointing body and may be removed at any time, with or without cause, at the sole discretion of that appointing body, and
WHEREAS, any vacancy shall be filled in the same manner as the original appointment of a Director.
NOW, THEREFORE the City Council of the City of Yorba Linda does hereby resolve as follows:
SECTION 1. The City Council hereby designate and appoint Council Member ___________ as a Director to the Orange County Fire Authority Board of Directors.
SECTION 2. The City Council hereby directs the City Clerk to transmit a copy of execute resolution to the Clerk of the Authority of the Orange County Fire Authority prior to their next regularly scheduled board meeting.
SECTION 3. This Resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption by the City Council and the City Clerk shall attest to and certify the vote adopting this Resolution.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Yorba Linda, California on the ___ day of _____, 2024.
_____________________________
MAYOR
CITY OF YORBA LINDA
ATTEST:
______________________________
MARCIA BROWN, CITY CLERK
CITY OF YORBA LINDA
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
RUTAN & TUCKER, LLP
_______________________________
CITY ATTORNEY
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
ss.
COUNTY OF ORANGE )
I, MARCIA BROWN, City Clerk of the City of Yorba Linda, California, DO HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was adopted at a regular meeting of the City of Yorba Linda held on the ___ day of _____, 2024 and was carried by the following roll call vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Campbell, Haney, Huang, Lim, Rodriguez NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
_______________________________
MARCIA BROWN, CITY CLERK
CITY OF YORBA LINDA
FINANCE DEPARTMENT
DATE: JANUARY 21, 2025
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
FROM: SUNNY HAN, FINANCE DIRECTOR / CITY TREASURER
SUBJECT: FISCAL YEAR 2024/25 FIRST QUARTER BUDGET UPDATE
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council receive and file the attached list of line-item budget transfers and supplemental budget appropriations for the first quarter of FY 2024/25 (Attachment 1), as required by City Council Policy F-4 – Supplemental Budget and Line Item Transfers.
BACKGROUND
On June 20, 2023, the City adopted the Two-Year Budget for fiscal years 2023/24 and 2024/25. On June 4, 2024, the City Council approved revisions to the FY 2024/25 budget through the Mid-Term Budget Update process. From time to time, the City’s operating and capital improvement budgets require modification. These modifications included refinement in estimated costs and events that were unanticipated when the budget was adopted.
Subsequent budget adjustments and transfers for the first quarter of FY 2024/25 have been identified and recorded. This update is to inform Council of these adjustments.
DISCUSSION
When the FY 2024/25 budget was adopted, a budget surplus of $532,562 was projected, which was subsequently adjusted to $620,761 during the Mid-Term Budget Review.
The following table includes the revenue and expenditure estimates included in the MidTerm Update and the latest projection of June 4, 2024. Because the first quarter only reflects three months of actual activity, the updates, as would be anticipated, are minimal. The budget adjustments column reflects budget adjustments already approved by the City Council or City Manager during the first three months of the fiscal year. A list of these adjustments is reflected in Attachment 1.
In comparison to the Mid-Term Budget Update, operating revenue is projected to be $314,302 or 0.6% above budget. This adjustment is due to increases in projected property tax revenue, primarily due to the annual Proposition 13 increase, and the impacts of home sales on assessed values.
FISCAL YEAR 2023/24 FIRST QUARTER BUDGET UPDATE
P a g e | 2
MID-TERM
BUDGET
BUDGET
ADJUSTMENTS
ADJUSTED
BUDGET YTD ACTUALS
FY 2024/25 9/30/2024 9/30/2024 9/30/2024
RESOURCES
Property Taxes $ 25,923,250 $ 314,302 $ 26,237,552 $ 292,786 Sales & Use Tax 8,596,000 - 8,596,000 603,386
Franchise Tax 2,433,960 - 2,433,960 -
Other Taxes 1,600,150 - 1,600,150 230,383
Fees, Charges & Permits 2,792,815 - 2,792,815 595,115
Parks & Recreation Revenue 2,704,351 - 2,704,351 521,947 Administrative Charges 2,601,302 - 2,601,302 637,184
Other Revenue 1,741,685 - 1,741,685 1,692,522
Total Operating Revenue 48,393,513 314,302 48,707,815 4,573,323 Interfund transfers 539,000 75,000 614,000 9,785
Fd Balance Reserves 566,757 488,145 1,054,902 -
Total Resources 49,499,270 877,447 50,376,717 4,583,108
APPROPRIATIONS
Administration $ 9,896,580 $ 176,284 $ 10,072,864 $ 4,488,947 City Attorney 650,000 - 650,000 77,185
Community Development 3,720,119 162,010 3,882,129 726,783 Finance 1,364,983 37,519 1,402,502 227,742
Non-Departmental 31,000 - 31,000 3,271
Parks & Recreation 10,133,250 174,965 10,308,215 2,335,211 Police Services 15,316,754 812 15,317,566 3,774,973
Public Works 6,287,104 322,943 6,610,047 868,341
Vacancy Factor (363,165) - (363,165) -
Total Operating Expenditures 47,036,625 874,533 47,911,158 12,502,453 Transfer to Special Reserve Fund - - - -
Transfer to SB2 Fund 110,000 - 110,000 -
Transfer to LMAD 1,275,127 - 1,275,127 -
Transfer to Capital Projects Fund 456,757 - 456,757 -
Total Appropriations 48,878,509 874,533 49,753,042 12,502,453 Excess Resources over Appropriations $ 620,761 $ 2,914 $ 623,675 Fund Balance Reserves @ 7/1/2024 29,557,656 - 29,557,656 Less Uses of Fd Bal Reserves (566,757) (488,145) (1,054,902) Est. Fund Balance Reserves @ 6/30/2025 $ 29,611,660 $ (485,231) $ 29,126,429 Uses of Fund Balance Reserves:
Transfer out - CIP $ 456,757 $ - $ 456,757
Transfer to SB2 Fund 110,000 - 110,000
GF Carryovers from FY 2023/24 - 488,145 488,145
$ 566,757 $ 488,145 $ 1,054,902
CITY OF YORBA LINDA
GENERAL FUND BUDGET
FY 2024/25 - FIRST QUARTER BUDGET TOTALS
FISCAL YEAR 2023/24 FIRST QUARTER BUDGET UPDATE
P a g e | 3
FISCAL IMPACT
The Mid-Term Budget Review reflected an anticipated operating surplus of $620,761. Due to the adjustments to the revenue and expenditures budgets discussed in this report, the surplus is now anticipated to be $623,675.
ATTACHMENTS
1. List of Budget Adjustments for the First Quarter of Fiscal Year 2024/25
ATTACHMENT 1
Date Type Purpose Amount Authorization Fund Department Account No. Project string BUA #
GENERAL FUND ADJUSTMENTS
7/2/2024 Appropriation CIPA Premium Increase 23,451 $ City Manager General Administration 1010150-427450 BUA-19 7/2/2024 Appropriation FY 2023/24 Carryovers 488,145 $ City Council General (Reserves) Various Various BUA-322 7/22/2024 Appropriation Transfer funds from Park In-Lieu to General Fund for Park Improvements 75,000 $ City Council General Parks & Recreation 1010460-432650 BUA-165 7/31/2024 Appropriation Appropriate CalRecycle State Grant Funds received 17,112 $ City Manager General Parks & Recreation 1010460-461150 BUA-259 8/6/2024 Appropriation Appropriate budget for incremental costs associated with approval of MOUs 270,825 $ City Council General Various Various BUA-276 Total General Fund First Quarter Expenditure Adjustments - FY 2024/25 874,533 $
OTHER ADJUSTMENTS
7/2/2024 Appropriation FY 2023/24 Carryovers 4,865,265 $ City Council CIP PW/P&R Various Various BUA-322 7/2/2024 Appropriation FY 2023/24 Carryovers 5,000 $ City Council CDBG Community Dev Various BUA-322 7/2/2024 Appropriation FY 2023/24 Carryovers 535,701 $ City Council LMAD Public Works Various BUA-322 7/2/2024 Appropriation FY 2023/24 Carryovers 5,756 $ City Council Library Library Various BUA-322 7/2/2024 Appropriation FY 2023/24 Carryovers 33,713 $ City Council AQMD Public Works Various BUA-322 7/2/2024 Appropriation FY 2023/24 Carryovers 14,432 $ City Council PEG Administration Various BUA-322 7/2/2024 Appropriation FY 2023/24 Carryovers 121,042 $ City Council Black Gold Golf Club Parks & Recreation Various BUA-322 7/22/2024 Appropriation Transfer funds from Park In-Lieu to General Fund for Park Improvements 75,000 $ City Council Park-in-Lieu Parks & Recreation 4021999-491010 BUA-165 8/6/2024 Transfer Move budget for temporary staffing services 10,000 $ City Manager LMAD Public Works 2010350-433200 BUA-24 8/6/2024 Appropriation Appropriate budget for incremental costs associated with approval of MOUs 16,927 $ City Council LMAD Public Works Various BUA-276 8/6/2024 Appropriation Appropriate budget for incremental costs associated with approval of MOUs 50,780 $ City Council Library Library Various BUA-276 8/20/2024 Appropriation Appropriate Santiago Library System Grant 3,537 $ City Manager Library Library 2020700-427260 BUA-122 8/28/2024 Transfer Transfer budget for theatrical productions 39,200 $ City Manager General Parks & Recreation 1010475-433120 BUA-200 9/18/2024 Appropriation Supplemental budget adjustment for Pavement Management Program 99,050 $ City Council Gas Tax Public Works 2111999-494010 SI2510023 BUA-256 9/20/2024 Appropriation Supplemental budget adjustment for remote broadcast hardware 14,331 $ City Manager PEG Administration 2101000-461120 BUA-127 Total Other First Quarter Adjustments - FY 2024/25 5,889,735 $ City of Yorba Linda
Quarterly Listing of Year-To-Date Line-Item Budget Transfers and Supplemental Budget Appropriations Fiscal Year 2024/25 - First Quarter Adjustments