Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutVolume 7 of 7 - Draft Environmental Impact Report - EIR - Bo City of Huntington Beach CITY CLERK'S CQpY Comment Regarding: DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT prepared by the Orange County Environmental Management Agency with respect to The Bolsa Chica Project Local Coastal Program (County Project No. 551; State Clearinghouse No. 93-071064) Submitted by: ERVIN, COHEN & JESSUP, as special counsel to the City of Huntington Beach On Behalf of: THE CITY OF HUN nNGTON BEACH i I Volume VIE[ February 17, 1"4 EU Ervin, Cohen &Jessup, 9401 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 900, Beverly Hills, California 90212 52 F r � TRANSPORTATION � ELEMENT OEM � ADVANCE PLANNING z � PROGRAM � z f o ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT r AGENCY O f10 A ' o Q 9<IrOP�1 f COUNTY OF ORANGE -� BOARD OF SUPERVISORS.- ; Roger R. Stanton Chairman - - , First District Harriett M. Wieder 1 (�((�� Gaddi H. Vasquez ' Second District 1 9✓2 Third District WE b . �k. .' Don R. Roth Thomas F. Riley Fourth District Fifth District a COMPONENT II ADVANCE PLANNING PROGRAM TRANSPORTATION RUMBNT County of Orange Environmental Management Agency Transportation Planning Division September 21, 1982 (GENERAL PLAN MODERNIZATION) Board of Supervisors Resolution No. 82-1398 Revised April 25, 1990 Board of Supervisors Resolution No. 90-571/ T90-2 Reprinted September, 1992 ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION First District Michael Potts Second District Roger Slates, Chairman Third District Clarice Blamer Fourth District Chuck McBurney 1 Fifth District Thomas Moody ENY MONMENTAL MANAGEMENT AGENCY Michael M. Ruane, Director Transportation Function: Ken R. Smith, Director Steve Hogan, Manager, Transportation Programs Robert Peterson, Manager, Transportation Planning Harry Persaud, Chief, Transportation Element Studies Siri Payakapan, Project Manager Richard Sherry, Planning Staff Leo Schwab, Planning Support Thuy Tran Gutierrez, Graphics Planning Function: Thomas Mathews, Director I TABLE OF CONTENTS ' LIST OF ACRONYMS/ABBREVIATIONS i INTRODUCTION 1 1 COMPONENT ONE: MASTER PLAN OF ARTERIAL HIGHWAYS (MPAH) A. Overview TE-1-1 B. Classification TE-1-3 C. Goals, Objectives and Policies TE-1-8 D. Implementation Programs TE-1-14 COMPONENT TWO: MASTER PLAN OF COUNTYWIDE BIKEWAYS (MPCB) A. Overview TE-2-1 B. Classification TE-2-1 C. Goals, Objectives and Policies TE-2-3 D. Implementation Programs TE-2-5 COMPONENT THREE: MASTER PLAN OF SCENIC HIGHWAYS (MPSH) A. Overview TE-3-1 B. Classification TE-3-1 C. Goals, Objectives and Policies TE-3-2 D. Implementation Programs TE-3-3 COMPONENT FOUR: MASTER PLAN OF TRANSIT SYSTEMS (MPTS) A. Overview TE-4-1 ' B. Classification TE-4-1 C. Goals, Objectives and Policies TE-4-2 D. Implementation Programs TE-4-4 APPENDICES: 1. State Freeways and Highways A-1-1 2. Relationship of Transportation Element to Other General Plan Elements A-2-1 3. Growth Management Plan-Transportation Implementation Manual A-3-1 4. Planning Criteria Determining Arterial Highway Classifications A-4-1 5. Criteria for Adding Commuter Arterials to MPAH Map A-5-1 6. Arterial Highway Cross Classification A-6-1 7. Criteria for Modified Arterial Highway Facilities A-7-1 S. Criteria for Changing Congested Intersection List A-8-1 9. Bikeway Planning and Design (Exerpt: Chapter 1000, A-9-1 Orange County Highway Design Manual) 10. Bikeway Designation Planning Guidelines A-10-1 11. Bikeway Route Addition and Deletion Criteria A-11-1 12. County Designated Scenic Highways and Candidate Corridors A-12-1 13. Scenic Highway Corridor Implementation Planning Guidelines A-13-1 14. Case Study: Live Oak Canyon Road/Trabuco Canyon Road A-14-1 15. Board of Supervisors Resolution, September 22, 1981 A-15-1 16. List of Major Transportation Studies and Implementing Programs A-16••1 17. Current Conditions and Future Demand A-17.4 Bibliography B-1 , LIST OF TABLES, CHARTS AND MAPS Tables 1 Appendix 4: A-4-1: Freeway/Transportation Corridors A-4-2 A-4-2: Arterial Highways A-4-2 Charts Component One: 1-1: Typical Section: Major (6 Lanes, Divided) TE-1-18 1-2: Typical Section: Primary (4 Lanes, Divided) TE-1-18 1-3: Typical Section: Secondary (4 Lanes, Undivided) TE-1-19 1-4: Typical Section: Commuter (2 Lanes, Undivided) TE-1-19 Component Two: 2-1: Two-Way Bike Path on Separated Right-of Way TE-2-6 2-2: Bike Lane, Parking Prohibited TE-2-6 2-3: Bike Lane, Parking Permitted TE-2-6 Component Three: 3-1: Safety Roadside Rest TE-3-7 3-2: Vista Point TE-3-7 3-3: Viewscape Half-Section (Typical) TE-3-7 3-4: Landscape Half-Section (Typical) TE-3-7 Appendix 9: Fig. 1003.IA: Class I Bikeway on Separate Right- of-Way (Typical) A-9-2 Fig. 1003.1B: Class I Bikeway Along Highway (Typical) A-9-2 I 1 1 Fig. 1003.1C: Class II Bikeway on Highway (Typical) A-9-4 Appendix 17: A-17-1: Orange County Population Growth Patterns: ' Average Annual Growth Rate, 1940-1988 A-17-7 A-17-2: Orange County Population and Housing Growth , Patterns: Annual Growth Rate, 1981-1989 A-17-8 A-17-3: Distribution of Countywide Growth, 1985 A-17-9 A-17-4: Orange County Population Projections: Average Annual Growth Rate, 1990-2010 A-17-10 A-17-5: Orange County Population Projections, 1990-2010 A-17-11 A-17-6: Orange County Housing Projections, 1990-2010 A-17-1;! A-17-7: Orange County Employment Projections, 1990-2010 A-17-13 A-17-8: Orange County Job/Housing Ratio Projections, j 1990-2010 A-17-14 A-17-9: Distribution of Countywide Growth by RSA: Employment and Housing, 1990-2010 A-17-:.5 A-17-10: Distribution of Countywide Growth, 1990-2010 A-17-16 A-17-11: Orange County Projections: Employment at Major Employment Centers, 2010 A-17-17 A-17-12: Orange County Major Activity Centers A-17-•18 A-17-13: State Freeway and Expressway System A-17-19 A-17-14: Existing Traffic Flow (ADT) A-17-20 Maps Component One: 1-1: Master Plan of Arterial Highways TE-1-20 Component Two: 2-1: Master Plan of Countywide Bikeways TE-2-7 Component Three: 3-1: Master Plan of Scenic Highways TE-3-6 Component Four: 4-1: A Preliminary Concept of Multi-Modal Network TE-4-7 Appendix 17: ' A-17-12: Orange County Major Activity Centers A-17-18 A-17-13: State Freeway and Expressway System A-17-19 A-17-14: Existing Traffic Flow (ADT) A-17-20 r 1 LIST OF ACRONYMS/ABBREVIATIONS ADT Average Daily Traffic AFIS Areawide Fiscal Impact Statement AHFP Arterial Highway Financing Program AMR Annual Monitoring Report AQMD Air Quality Management District CAA Community Analysis Area CALTRANS State of California Department of Transportation CAO County Administrative Office CARITS Coastal Area Road Improvements and Traffic Signals CE Circulation Element CENTROCCS Central Orange County Circulation Study CTC California Transportation Commission CVCS Capistrano Valley Circulation Study DMP Development Monitoring Program DOT Department of Transportation ' EDD Employment Development Department EMA Environmental Management Agency ETLAS E1 Toro/Laguna Hills Traffic Study FAC Forecast and Analysis Center FCPP Foothill Circulation Phasing Plan FHWA Federal Highway Administration HOV High Occupancy Vehicle LOS Level of Service MFI Maximum Feasible Intersection MMTS Multi-Modal Transportation Study MOU Memorandum of Understanding MPAH Master Plan of Arterial Highways MPCB Master Plan of Countywide Bikeways -i- MPSH Master Plan of Scenic Highways , MPTS Master Plan of Transit Systems NEOCCS Northeast Orange County Circulation Study ' NETTS Northern E1 Toro Traffic Study NOCCS North Orange County Circulation Study NSCOCCS North/South Central Orange County Circulation Study , OCP Orange County Preferred OCTAM Orange County Transportation Analysis Model OCTC Orange County Transportation Commission OCTD Orange County Transit District , OCUTT Orange County Unified Transportation Trust ROW Right-of-Way RSA Regional Statistical Area ' RTP Regional Transportation Plan SATCAA Santa Ana Transportation Corridor Alternatives Analysis SB Senate Bill SCAG Southern California Association of Governments SCHCS San Clemente Hills Circulation Study SEOCCS Southeast Orange County Circulation Study SR State Route SRTP Short Range Transit Plan STIP State Transportation Improvement Plan ' TAZ Traffic Analysis Zone TCA Transportation Corridor Agencies TE Transportation Element TDA Transportation Development Act TSM Transportation Systems Management UMTA Urban Mass Transportation Administration -ii- H 0 �r� r �r � � �s �r r� r �r �w r i r r r � � .�. INTRODUCTION The Transportation Element p sets forth a comprehensive strategy for planning, developing, and maintaining a countywide, surface ' transportation system to serve existing and planned land uses in Orange County. The primary goal, consistent with the State mandate, was originally adopted by the Orange County Board of Supervisors on May 10, 1972. On June 9, 1982, this goal was reaffirmed as follows: To develop an integrated transportation system consisting of a blend of transportation modes capable of meeting the need to move people and goods by private and public means with maximum efficiency, convenience, economy, safety and comfort; and a system that is consistent with other goals and values of the County and the region. An important objective of the Transportation Element is to recognize 1 and promote transportation modes and facilities of regional as well as local significance. State freeways and highways (Appendix 1), and transit services are examples of regional systems which have been incorporated into this Transportation Element to aid in providing a framework for cooperative planning and implementation of transportation services and facilities. The Transportation Element, one of the nine elements of the Orange County General Plan (Appendix 2), contains County policies on the development of transportation facilities necessary to accommodate orderly growth of the County. The Transportation Element identifies goals, objectives, policies, and implementation programs which affect the transportation system and provide guidance for future transportation planning efforts. The Element contains four components: Master Plan of Arterial Highways (MPAH), Master Plan of Countywide Bikeways (MPCB), Master Plan of Scenic Highways (MPSH), and Master Plan of Transit Systems (MPTS). All four components are closely related and play a vital role in the County's attempt to achieve a balanced transportation system through an integration of multi-modal transportation facilities. Each component identifies and briefly describes transportation goals, objectives, policies and implementation programs which are intended to serve as countywide guidelines, and specifically to provide direction within the unincorporated territory of the County. This framework is designed to promote a centralized regional, cooperative transportation 1 planning effort, and to facilitate County administration of the unincorporated area. It should be noted that all the appendices of the Element, which contain additional data in support of these components, are a part of the Element. ' 1 COMPONENT ONE MASTER PIAN OF ARTMM HIGHWAYS MASTER PLAN OF ARTERIAL HIGHWAYS COMPONENT A. OVERVIEW The Arterial Highways Component establishes a system of countywide surface roadways. This system is depicted on the Master Plan of Arte- rial Highways (MPH) map (Map 1-1) and is a key factor in the definition of Orange County's transportation policy. The County's role as the overseer of the plan is to coordinate with the cities to develop a con- sistent intra-community arterial highway system which will effectively serve existing and future land uses. 1. Background The MPAH was first adopted by the County in 1956. The MPAH became the cornerstone of the first County Circulation Element initially adopted on August 6, 1974, by the Board of Supervisors (Resolution No. 74-1151), and was subsequently amended in December, 1978 (Resolution No. 78-1824). This component is amended on a regular basis, generally in response to land use policy changes within both incorporated and unincorporated areas of the County. These policy changes are reviewed for impacts on the arterial highway system in order to maintain a balance between the land use and transportation plans. The MPAH depicts a network of major thoroughfares comprising freeways, transportation corridors and four main arterial highway classifications: Major, Primary, Secondary, and Commuter. Modifications to these basic categories are also included in this Element. For example, Major arterials consist of Eight-Lane as ' well as Six-Lane Major arterial highways. In addition, three other arterial highway sub-categories are identified in this Element, i.e. , Superstreets, Modified Major and Modified Primary arterial highways. This highway network plays a major role in regional travel by connecting to and complementing the State highway system and local street network. The major and primary arterial classi- fications and superstreets predominantly serve through travel. Secondary and commuter arterial highways function as collectors funneling traffic from local streets to primary and major arterials. The overall network of thoroughfares is designed to accommodate existing and projected traffic. The MPAH classifi- cations are a statement of policy intended to reserve adequate right-of-way for future highway improvements. Design guidelines and criteria are briefly described for each arterial classifi- cation. TE-1-1 2. Purpose The Arterial Highways Component establishes a countywide highway network intended to ensure! coordinated highway development among Orange County governmental jurisdictions. The MPAH also serves as the legally required Circulation Element for the unincorporated area under California Government Code Section 65302(b), and is one of the four components of the Transportation Element of Orange County's General Plan. The main purpose of the MPAH is to describe an arterial highwa;r ' system that effectively supports General Plan policies and serve:; existing and adopted future land uses in both incorporated and ' unincorporated areas of Orange County. Extensive coordination wilt the land use planning and implementation processes carried on by the cities of Orange County, the County of Orange, and adjacent jurisdictions is essential for the MPAH to provide its intended ' service to county motorists. 3. HPAH Consistency Concept Consistency with the MPAH is essential to the integrity of a functional regional highway network. It ensures that each city implements the same base transportation network using similar standards and assumptions. To aid in establishing consistency among plans, utilization of common land use assumptions and travel demand projections are encouraged by all jurisdictions. Streets which serve predominantly as local collectors are generally not shown on the County MPAH because they do not contribute materially to regional circulation. Such roads may, however, be , locally significant, and therefore may be reflected on a cit;r's Circulation Element. Commuter streets may be added to or deleted from the MPAH subject to the criteria contained in Appendix 5: ' Criteria for Adding Commuter Arterials to MPAH Map. City plans reflecting such additional arterials are not considered inconsistent with the County MPAH for purposes of AHFP eligibility because the Cities' General Plans are expected to be n.ore responsive to local needs. Commuters currently shown on the MPAH, however, represent vital components of the circulation system where additional capacity is needed to supplement the system in laical ' areas. City plans are expected to include these roadways. The County and Cities' Circulation plans are reviewed for consistency each year to ensure compatible networks and carrying capacity of the circulation system, and the early detection of possible inconsistencies resulting from General Plan amendments. For example, the designation of a facility on the MPAE. is considered consistent with a designation of a lower classifimtion by a city if such designation allows comparable carrying capacity (e.g. , a major should be considered comparable to a one-way pr%mary couplet). The consistency review is done in conjunction with the Arterial Highway Financing Program (AHFP). The process and requirements for annual consistency reviews are outlined is the TE-1-2 AHFP Manual. The review process also affords the County the opportunity to discuss with city representatives appropriate ' classification of specific arterials and the possible need for changes to the County and/or City plans. A matrix showing the County's nomenclature for arterial highways along with functionally equivalent facilities in cities is contained in Appendix 6. B. CLASSIFICATION Arterial highways are shown on the MPAH map in the following two forms: 1) established alignments depicted by solid lines on the map, including existing highways where the centerline is the precise centerline, and ' future highways where the Board of Supervisors, a City Council, or the subdivision process has established a precise alignment; and, 2) conceptually proposed alignments, defined by intermittent lines indicating future facilities whose precise alignment has not yet been determined. Arterial highways have been divided into classifications to address 1 travel demand needs in terms of capacity to aid in setting consistent design standards countywide for various highway types. Classification consistency is the key objective of the MPAH to ensure that the County as a whole participates in the full network development. In addition, special intersection approaches for major, primary, and secondary arterials have been identified to help address congestion problems. A concept of the "Maximum Feasible Intersection" (MPH) has been introduced to established a guideline for intersection enhancement that is compatible with travel demand requirements and operational capabilities of the highway system. Traffic studies, for example, can also be used as a mechanism to identify intersections that may require enhancement above the standard plan specified for that facility. Reservation of right-of-way will, therefore, be required to ensure ' future implementation of the MFI. Therefore, notwithstanding typical intersection geometrics as identified, additional right-of-way may be required to implement the MFI. The MFI for each classification is defined in the classification description. 1. Transportation Corridor A transportation corridor is a multi-modal facility of six to ten lanes, depending on projected traffic volumes, and a median of sufficient width to accommodate future options such as fixed rail or high occupancy vehicles. The corridors will provide for 1 efficient movement of vehicular traffic where projected volumes exceed major arterial highway capacities. These routes will be designed to Caltrans freeway and expressway standards and incorporated into that system. Three transportation corridors are planned in Orange County: the San Joaquin Hills Transportation Corridor (SR-73); the Eastern Transportation Corridor (SR-231); and the Foothill Transportation Corridor (SR-241). These corridors, I approved in the Surface Transportation and Uniform Relocation Assistance Act passed by Congress in 1987 as Federal toll road pilot projects, are eligible to combine tolls with receipt of ' TE-1-3 r Federal and other sources of revenues. These new corridors are also authorized by State legislation as the State's first toll roads and will remain as pilot "toll" facilities until the bonding , is paid. These corridors are to be operated by demand management to ensure a high level of operation, and tolls will be the implementation mechanism to maintain free flow. Final alignment and environmental studies will define the ultimate route of the proposed corridors. These studies will identify the necessary rights-of-way based on projected traffic volumes and the various transportation modes to be accommodated. 2. Major Arterial 2.1 Bight-Lane Major Arterial An eight-lane divided roadway, with a typical right-of-wa;r width of 142 feet and a roadway width of 114 feet, curb t) curb, including a 14 foot median. An eight-lane major is designed to accommodate between 45,000 to 60,000 vehicle trips , per day at Level of Service 'C' . Maximum Feasible Intersection (MFI) The standard MFI for an eight-lane major arterial sha:!1 consist of four through lanes, two left-turn lanes, a fr,:e right-turn lane, and one optional right-turn lane. ' Alternative geometries, such as a grade separation or other special treatment, may be considered if they are cost effective and operationally feasible. In review and approval of subdivisions, the objective shall be to reserve adeque.te right-of-way to permit future implementation of the MFI as warranted. 2.2 Six-Lane Major Arterial A six-lane major arterial highway is a six-lane divided roadway, with a typical right-of-way width of 120 feet, and a , roadway width from curb to curb, including a 14 feet median, of 102 feet (Chart 1-1). A six-lane major is designed to accommodate between 30,000 and 45,000 vehicle trips per day at Level of Service 'C' . Six-lane Major arterials carry a liLrge volume of regional through traffic not handled by the frenvay system. MFI , The standard MFI for a major arterial shall consist of three through lanes, two left turn lanes, and a free right turn lane. Alternative geometries such as a grade separation or other special treatment may be considered if they are cost effective and operationally feasible. In review and approval TE-1-4 ' � i of subdivisions, the objective shall be to reserve adequate ' right-of-way to permit future implementation of the MFI as warranted. 3. Modified-Major Arterial A modified-major arterial highway may remain on the County MPAH or a city circulation plan in lieu of a major arterial in already ' developed areas. A narrower right-of-way for such facility than the 120 feet may be developed but not less than 100-foot, in such cases to accommodate a six-through travel lane divided facility with a capacity of 30,000 - 45,000 vehicles per day at Level of ' Service 'C' . This requires prohibition of on-street parking and striping for six lanes where practical, parking and bus turnouts shall be provided. MFI The standard MFI for a modified-major arterial shall consist of ' three through lanes, two left-turn lanes, and a free right-turn lane. Alternative geometrics such as a grade separation or other special treatment may be considered if they are cost effective and operationally feasible. In review and approval of subdivisions, the objective shall be to reserve adequate right-of-way to permit future implementation of the MFI as warranted. ' 4. Primary Arterial A primary arterial highway is a four-lane divided roadway, with a typical right-of-way width of 100 feet and a roadway width from curb to curb, including a 14 feet median, of 84 feet (Chart 1-2). A primary is designed to accommodate between 20,000 and 30,000 vehicle trips per day at Level of Service 'C' . A primary ' arterial's function is similar to that of a major arterial. The principal difference is capacity. MFI The standard MFI for a primary arterial shall consist of two through lanes, two left turn lanes, and a right turn lane. Alternative geometrics such as a grade separation or other special treatment may be considered if they are cost effective and operationally feasible. In review and approval of subdivisions, the objective shall be to reserve adequate right-of-way to permit future implementation of the MFI as warranted. 5. Modified-Primary Arterial A modified-primary arterial highway may remain on the County MPAH or a city circulation plan in lieu of a primary arterial in already developed areas. The modified primary arterial highway is a four lane divided roadway with a typical right-of-way of 80 feet. This will require prohibition of on-street parking and striping for four lanes. Where practical, additional right-of-way may be acquired to ' TE-1-5 provide parking, bus turnouts, or additional traffic channelization features (e.g. deceleration lanes). A modified primary is designed ' to accommodate 20,000-30,000 vehicles per day at Level of Service 'C' . MFI The standard MFI for a modified-primary arterial shall consist of two through lanes, two left-turn lanes, and a right-turn lane. , Alternative geometrics such as a grade separation or other special treatment may be considered if they are cost effective and operationally feasible. In review and approval of subdivisions, the objective shall be to reserve adequate right-of-way to permit future implementation of the MFI as warranted. 6. Superstreet (Augmented Arterial) In addition to the arterial classifications, the MPAH recognize:, superstreet "augmented capacity" arterials with an enhancel traffic-carrying capacity. The augmentation in capacity may be ' achieved by a variety of measures: ° Addition of through or turn lanes ° Preferential traffic signal timing and synchronization ° Loops for left turn ° Removal of on-street parking ° Intersection grade separations ' ° Grade separated turning movements ° Access limitation - right turns only, or no access (streets and/or driveways) ' • Access consolidation ° Frontage roads • Pedestrian grade separations ° Other elements which may be found useful ' The intent of these measures is to minimize conflicts with cress traffic. These measures improve traffic carrying capacity and ' facilitate improved traffic flow along an arterial. Hence, the terms "High Flow Arterial" or "Continuous Flow Boulevard" can also be used to describe a "superstreet." This designation is intended to represent a roadway of a primary or major arterial classification. 7. Secondary Arterial ' A secondary arterial highway is a four-lane undivided (no median) roadway, with a typical right-of-way width of 80 feet, and a roadway width from curb to curb of 64 feet (Chart 1-3). A secondary is designed to accommodate between 10,000 and 20,000 vehicle trips per day at level of service 'C' . A secordary arterial serves as a collector, distributing traffic between local streets and major and primary arterials. Although some secondary arterials serve as through routes, most provide more direct a(:cess to surrounding land uses than major or primary arterials. TE-1-6 , i 1 MFI The standard MFI for a secondary arterial shall consist of two through lanes, one left turn lane, and a right turn lane. Alternative geometrics such as a grade separation or other special treatment may be considered if they are cost effective and operationally feasible. In review and approval of subdivisions, the objective shall be to reserve adequate right-of-way to permit future implementation of the MFI as warranted. 8. Commuter Arterial A commuter arterial highway is a two-lane undivided, unrestricted access roadway, with a typical right-of-way width of 56 feet and a roadway width from curb to curb of 40 feet (Chart 1-4). A commuter ' is provided to accommodate up to 10,000 vehicle trips per day at level of service 'C' . By strict definition, a commuter facility is not an arterial highway. It functions primarily as a collector ' facility. It differs from a local collector street in its ability to handle through traffic movements between two arterials. It is shown on the MPAH because it provides network continuity, or may serve through traffic demand where projected volumes do not warrant a secondary. As such, it is shown on the MPAH only when it is of regional significance and meets certain threshold criteria defined in Appendix 5: Criteria for Adding Commuter Arterials to MPAH Map. 9. Intersection Condition Intersection performance is the most critical factor in determining traffic conditions on arterials. The following identifies two intersection conditions that should be considered in the planning ' process to improve traffic flow conditions in the arterial highway system. Deficient Intersection ' A deficient intersection is one that is currently operating at worse than LOS 'D' as a result of factors outside the control of ' the jurisdiction (e.g., ramp metering), and which cannot be improved to LOS 'D' solely by fees or improvements provided by new development. Typically these intersections are built to their MFI and include those arterials providing access to the freeway. Level 1 of Service is to be calculated using Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) methodology. ' Congested Intersection A congested intersection is one that does not currently meet acceptable Traffic Level of Service policies of the jurisdiction in which it is located and is not built to its MFI. The intersection ' TE-1-7 associated traffic should also be within and the sole control of that jurisdiction. Level of Service is to be calculated using ' Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) methodology. 10. Other Facilities and Considerations State freeways are shown on the MPAH map for reference only. , Although maintained and operated by Caltrans, these freeways are an integral part of the countywide transportation system. Coordination between the County, Caltrans, Orange County ' Transportation Commission, and local jurisdictions . concerning- planning and improvements to these facilities is essential to meeting regional traffic needs. ' The typical sections depicted on the MPAH legend, and on Charts I and 2 are simplified diagrams based upon adopted Orange County ' Standard Plans. Notwithstanding these arterial highway specifications, additional right-of-way may be required for any classification when an arterial highway coincides with an adopted route for an additional public facility (e.g. , transit facilities , bikeways, or riding and hiking trails), or a scenic highway. The "right-of-way reserve" designation on the MPAH indicates that origin-destination needs have been projected in the area, but ultimate carrying capacity requirements have not been determined. This status is applied to facilities where the classification is uncertain due to potentially significant land use changes or network continuity needs. A route designated "right-of-way reserve" requires design and right-of-way sufficient to construct a major arterial highway. Any refinements to the underlying classification would occur in conjunction with the land use planning process. The "right-of-way reserve" designation alloys right-of-way flexibility to meet potential changes in the Land Ilse Element. ' C. GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES Goals, objectives and policies are intended to serve as countywide , guidelines and provide direction to transportation implementation in the County's unincorporated areas. 1. GOAL: TO PROVIDE AN ARTERIAL HIGHWAY NETWORK WHICH SERVES AS THE COUNTYWIDE ROADWAY COMPONENT OF A BALANCED TRANSPORTNrION SYSTEM. Objectives: 1.1 To plan, develop and implement a circulation system that is ' consistent with the Master Plan of Arterial Highways. 1.2 To plan and develop a system which interfaces with, and is ' complementary to, the existing and planned state freeway, highway, and tollway system. TE-1-8 , • 1 i 1 1.3 To plan, develop and implement a circulation system that responds to approved land uses and satisfies the circulation ' system needs of all local jurisdictions in the County. 1.4 To develop an arterial highway network which facilitates and ' complements transportation system management programs and minimizes single occupant vehicles on the roadway system. 2. GOAL: TO PROVIDE AN ARTERIAL HIGHWAY SYSTEM WHICH SUPPORTS LAND USE POLICIES OF THE COUNTY AND CITIES. Objectives: ' 2.1 To establish a coordinated arterial highway system which accommodates city and county land uses. 2.2 To coordinate land use plans to ensure that circulation systems are not overloaded. ' 2.3 To establish an arterial highway system designed to serve as part of a balanced transportation system (auto, rail, transit, bus, truck, bicycle, pedestrian, etc.). 2.4 To develop a countywide program to annually monitor arterial highway conditions at intersections to ensure that an acceptable level of service (LOS) is maintained. 2.5 To develop a circulation phasing plan to ensure that adequate roadway capacity is available on the circulation network to accommodate increments of new development. 3. GOAL: TO PROVIDE FOR SAFE, CONVENIENT AND EFFICIENT MOVEMENT OF PEOPLE AND GOODS. ' Objectives: 3.1 To provide an arterial highway system capable of meeting the ' continuing need to move people and goods by private and public means, with maximum efficiency, convenience, economy, safety, and comfort. ' 3.2 To establish minimum roadway specifications necessary to ensure safe movement of vehicles and other modes of transportation. r4. GOAL: TO PROVIDE A CIRCULATION SYSTEM WHICH CONFORMS TO APPLICABLE ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY STANDARDS. Objectives: 4.1 To assure that development of new arterial highways is sensitive to the character of communities and neighborhoods throughout the County and is responsive to the needs of the environment. TE-1-9 4.2 To encourage local jurisdictions to require a regional transportation impact analysis for projects having measurable impacts on existing and future congested regional transportation facilities. 4.3 To plan and develop, through design and alignment studies, ' roads in a manner which minimizes impacts associated with crossing of flood plains or drainage courses; known ' earthquake fault zones; wildlife, unique geological, and resource conservation and open space areas; and currently designated agricultural areas. 4.4 To provide an arterial highway system which, to the extent: ' practical, is compatible with the physical environment , enhances the environmental quality, and preserves thi? natural resources of the County. 5. GOAL: TO REDUCE PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC CONGESTION AND ENSURE ACCEPTABLE LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) ON EXISTING AND FUTURE MASTER PLAN OF ARTERIAL HIGHWAY FACILITIES. Objectives: 5.1 To develop, with input and involvement from local , jurisdictions, a uniform standard for acceptable LOS on arterial highways (intersections) countywide and consens-is ' on methodology to determine the LOS. 5.2 To develop a uniform standard for traffic analysis countywide, but flexible enough to allow the unique needs of local communities to be taken into consideration. 5.3 To develop a countywide "Congested Intersection Lisl:." ' This will include intersections which do not meet -:he standards established in 5.1 above. This list shall be updated annually. 5.4 To develop a financial mechanism such as trust funds, in ' coordination with appropriate funding agencies such as OCTC, to implement necessary improvements to links and intersections identified in 5.1. 5.5 The circulation system shall be implemented in 'a mariner , which achieves the established Traffic Level of Ser,rice Policy pursuant to the applicable Growth Management :'lan (GMP) Element. Appendix 3: GMP Transportation Implementation Manual contains traffic LOS policies ' applicable to County unincorporated areas. TE-1-10 ' 6. GOAL: NOTWITHSTANDING THE "MODIFIED" FACILITIES DESIGNATION ON THE MPAH, THE GOAL IS TO DEVELOP HIGHWAYS TO THEIR FULL CROSS SECTION WHENEVER RIGHT-OF-WAY BECOMES AVAILABLE THROUGH MAJOR REDEVELOPMENT PROGRAMS AND TO DISCOURAGE PLACEMENT OF ' ADDITIONAL MODIFIED CLASSIFICATIONS ON THE MPAH. Objectives: ' 6.1 To evaluate currently designated "modified" facilities annually to ensure that they are consistent with established criteria. ' 6.2 To find "modified" highway designations consistent with the MPAH, for the purposes of AHFP review, providing they meet ' the established criteria. 6.3 To find "modified" highway designations consistent with the MPAH when the established criteria is unmet if the local ' jurisdiction has made every practical effort to comply with the criteria and the local jurisdiction demonstrates to County's satisfaction that compliance is unfeasible. ' 7. GOAL: TO REDUCE PEAK HOUR VEHICLE DEMAND THROUGH THE IMPLEMENTATION OF POLICIES AND PROGRAMS THAT MINIMIZE SINGLE-OCCUPANT VEHICLES AND TRIP LENGTH ON THE COUNTYVIDE ' ROADWAY SYSTEM. Objectives: 7.1 To develop and promote a transportation system and strategies that are consistent with Regulation XV of the South Coast Air Quality Management District. r7.2 To develop countywide Park-N-Ride facilities to integrate multi-modal transportation facilities. ' 7.3 To promote and facilitate ridesharing activities, preferential parking, park and ride lots, in-vehicle driver information, operational improvements, flexible working ' hours and other traffic reduction strategies. 7.4 To promote and facilitate, especially in- newly developed areas, an improved job/housing balance as a means to reduce trip length and total travel demand in the County. 7.5 To require developers of more than 100 dwelling units, or 25,000 square feet of non-residential uses to: a) demonstrate consistency between the local transportation 1 ' TE-1-11 facilities, services, and programs, and the regional 1 ' transportation plan„ and b) to submit, as part of their development proposal (non-residential), a Transportation System Management/Transportation Demand Management (TSM/TDM) plan which includes strategies, implementation programs and an annual monitoring mechanism to ensure a reduction of single occupant automobile travel associated with development. Policies: ' Traffic Impact Fees: To establish "traffic impact fees" for application to any development projects with measurable traffic , impacts. These may serve as local matching funds for state ak. federal highway funding programs. Traffic Improvement Plans: To encourage all local jurisdictions to adopt comprehensive traffic improvement, phasing and financing plans, consistent with an adopted Growth Management Plan, in order to assist in countywide implementation of the MPAH. Interagency Coordination: To coordinate with Caltrans, Orange County Transportation Commission, and the Transportation Corridor ' Agencies on various studies relating to freeway, tollway and transportation corridor planning, construction, and improvement. Cooperative Studies: To coordinate planning of the arterial ' highway system, through the cooperative studies process, with Orange County cities, Orange County Transportation Commission, Orange County Transit District and adjacent counties. ' Cooperative Implementation: Where appropriate, to coordinate w:.th cities through the cooperative study process, the implementation of needed measures to provide for necessary channelization, high ' occupancy vehicle lanes, emergency or additional travel lanes, or bicycle lanes, whenever warranted and feasible. MPAH: To work with cities through the Arterial Highway Financing ' Program and other funding programs to implement the MPAH and foster interagency cooperation towards anticipating and effectively meeting the regional transportation needs of the County and its ' cities. Transportation Demand Management: To coordinate with the Orange , County Transportation Commission, Orange County Transit District, local jurisdictions, the development industry, and the business community to plan and implement transportation demand manage.ment policies and programs. Multi-jurisdictional cooperation is needed , 1.Current regional transportation plan is that developed b SCAG. This may ' g P P P Y Y change in the future, if SCAG's role in the County changes. TE-1-12 to determine the degree to which the use of alternative modes and modified work schedules can reduce deficiencies along arterial highway corridors, and in designing policies and programs that can accomplish these reductions. Analytical Methods: To encourage use of uniform analytical methods to aid in transportation planning and impact evaluation and support the development and utilization of sub-area models to address ' detailed transportation issues. Projections: To use adopted Orange County Preferred (OCP) forecasts for all projections of future year population, housing, employment, and other socioeconomic data to assure consistency among other General Plan Elements. Regional Traffic Forecast: To use Orange County Transportation Analysis Modeling (OCTAM) forecasts as the regional traffic forecast for the County, and as a basis for data required in subarea studies conducted by others. High-Floe Arterial Corridors: To undertake appropriate studies to analyze a network of high flow arterial corridors designed to complement the existing and proposed system of freeways and transportation corridors. Land Use Compatibility: To evaluate proposed Land Use Element amendments and phasing plans for major development projects to ensure maintenance of acceptable Levels of Service on arterial highway links and intersections. ' Implementation: To implement the arterial highway system in a manner that supports the implementation of adopted, overall land use development policies and which is consistent with financing capabilities. Funding: To maximize use of existing, available funding sources (i.e. , federal, state and local), and to develop and support the formulation of new funding mechanisms to implement necessary transportation facilities. ' Traffic Level of Service Policy: To require, within three years of the issuance of the first use and occupancy permit for a development project, or within five years of the issuance of a finished grading permit or building permit for a development project, whichever occurs first, that the necessary improvements to arterial highway facilities, to which the project contributes measurable traffic, be constructed and completed to attain Level of Service (LOS) 'D' at the intersections under the sole control of the County. Los 'C' shall also be maintained on Santiago Canyon Road links until such time as uninterrupted segments of the roadway ' (i.e. , no major intersections) are reduced to less than three miles. For a detailed discussion of LOS policies, refer to Appendix 3: Growth Management Plan Transportation Implementation Manual. ' TE-1-13 1 Traffic Improvement/Phasing Programs: To ensure that all new , development provides necessary transportation facilities and intersection improvements as a condition of development approval, and that circulation improvements are built to accommodate each , phase of development. Couprehensive traffic improvement programs shall be established. Participation in such programs shall be on a pro-rata basis and be required of all development projects except where an increased level of participation, exceeding these requirements, is established through negotiated legal mechanisms. Reclassification: A reduction in classification of a roadway from one side of an intersection to the other is made by transitioning the higher classification to the lower classification over a 609 foot section beyond the intersection. D. IMPLEM MATION PROGRAMS 1. Subdivision Conditions of Approval ' 2. Assessment District 3. Major Thoroughfare and Bridge Fee Programs ' Five major thoroughfare and bridge fee programs have been established by the County to fund roadway improvements and to ' assist in implementing the MPAH. The fee programs include: a. Foothill Circulation Phasing Plan The Foothill Circulation Phasing Plan (FCPP) Program Financing ' Plan contemplates construction of, among other items: a $240 million system of arterial road improvements, a portion of the ' Foothill Corridor, and intersection improvements designed to alleviate existing traffic problems while providing for development in the Foothill Area of southeast Orange County; and a development phasing plan which ties building permit ' issuance to achievement of road construction milestones and which limits, in effect, new residential construction to seventy-seven percent of existing County General Plan ' approvals. The FCPP was adopted by the Board of Supervisors on October 14, 1987. b. Coastal Area Road Improvements and Traffic Signals ' The Coastal Area Road Improvements and Traffic Signals (CARITS) Fee Program is a financing plan for the construction ' and improvement of roadways and intersections in the South county coastal area. This program will raise $56.4 million to fund the construction of 13 roadway sections (31 lane-miles), improvements to 6 intersections, and installation of traffic ' signals at 29 locations. CARITS was adopted by the Board of Supervisors on December 14, 1988. TE-1-14 ' c. E1 Toro Road Fee Program The E1 Toro Road Fee Program was adopted in May of 1982. This financing program is intended to raise $2.9 million for upgrading E1 Toro Road between Trabuco Road and Live Oak ' Canyon Road to its 1982 Master Plan of Arterial Highways designation as a primary arterial. It should be noted that the classification has since been increased to a major arterial, but the additional lanes will be the responsibility of new development and the County. d. Moulton Parkway/Laguna Niguel Fee Program ' The Moulton Parkway/Laguna Niguel Fee Program, adopted January 7, 1987, will generate a total of $15.9 million in revenues to ' construct arterial highway improvements in the Laguna Hills and Laguna Niguel areas. Two studies define the improvements and costs to be funded through this fee program. The Moulton Parkway Feasibility Study defines $13.5 million in ' improvements to Moulton Parkway, from Lake Forest Drive to Crown Valley Parkway, to be funded by this program. The Laguna Niguel Comprehensive Traffic Study identifies $2.4 million in improvements to intersections along Crown Valley Parkway and Street of the Golden Lantern, among others, to be funded by this fee program. ' e. Plano Trabuco Area Road Fee Program The Plano Trabuco Area Road Fee Program was adopted in ' October, 1983 by the Board of Supervisors. The fee program was established to provide funding for the extension of Alicia Parkway and Santa Margarita Parkway across Trabuco Creek to Plano Trabuco Road, and an expansion of the Santa Margarita Parkway bridge over Trabuco Creek. The cost of these improvements is estimated at $13.4 million. ' f. Santiago Canyon Road Financing and Implementation Plan Formulation of a financing plan to fund improvements to Santiago Canyon Road between Chapman Avenue and Live Oak Canyon Road is ,being developed. This project is intended to meet the demands of increasing commuter traffic from the rapidly developing foothill communities. 4. Arterial Highvays Financing Program The Arterial Highway Financing Program (AHFP) is a County administered program established in 1958 as a cooperative program between the County and Orange County cities. Under this program, the County makes available approximately $4.0 million in State gas tax funds on a matching basis to cities which meet certain AHFP ' TE-1-15 eligibility criteria for circulation improvements. The process ' requires cooperative studies to resolve inconsistencies between city arterial highway plans and the MPAH as contained in the Arterial Highway Financing Program Manual. 5. Orange County Unified Transportation Trust ' The Orange County Unified Transportation Trust (OCUTT) Streets and Roads Programs is a temporary program built upon funds generated by ' the interest on the rapid transit savings account. These funds are allocated to cities, the County, and Caltrans for local streets ani; roads, arterials, freeways, and highway improvement projects. This: program is currently administered by the Orange Count;► ' Transportation Commission. Once the expenditures of the transit fund begin, this funding program may terminate. 6. Combined Road Program ' Combined Road Program (CRP) policy has been established since Jur.e 1, 1989, according to Section 137 of the Federal Surface ' Transportation and Uniform Relocation Assistance Act of 1987. ( Public Law 100-17). CRP funds combine resources that were for the Federal Aid Urban (FAU), Federal Aid Secondary (FAS) and Highway ' Bridge Replacement and Rehabilitation Program (HBRR) categories aid are available for roadway construction, safety projects, capacity projects, bikeways, pedestrian walkways, transit projects, and activities to promote carpool, vanpool, and other para-transit ' activities. This program is administered for the State by the statewide CRP committee and locally by the Orange County Transportation Commission. 7. County Gas Tax ' 8. Road Improvement Monitoring a. Development Monitoring Program (DMP) The County Administrative Office (CAO), in cooperation with the ' Environmental Management Agency (EMA), prepares the Coun+:y's Annual Development Monitoring Program which contains an analysis of existing and future system-wide circulation conditions. Also included are recommendations on improving Levels of Service. b. Annual Monitoring Reports (AMR) ' This is a detailed annual analysis of traffic conditions at intersections impacted by development in unincorporated ;south ' County. The analysis is included in the Development Monitoring Program and is done for horizons of three and five years. The report also contains specific mitigations that are necessary to ' ensure LOS consistent with standards specified in the Growth Management Plan Element. TE-1-16 ' c. Development Agreement Implementation Program To date, the County has entered into 20 Development Agreements with major South County developers. Each contains specific infrastructure improvements, including roadways, to be ' completed by the developer by certain development milestones. A Development Agreement Implementation Program has been established to define and clarify the benefits obtained through ' these agreements. This program is administered by the Planning Function of EMA. d. Facility Implementation Program ' This is a compendium of the five Growth Management areas of the County (unincorporated area) which shows all infrastructure improvements planned in each area for the next several years. 9. Transportation Demand Management Programs ' a. AQMD Regulation %V The South Coast Air Quality Management District adopted ' Regulation XV in December, 1987. Regulation XV requires every employer of 100 or more employees at any work site to prepare and implement annual trip reduction plans. The purpose of the plan is to reduce the number of vehicle trips used for work commuting during peak hours. The target for employers in Orange County is to achieve an average vehicle ridership (AVR) of 1.5 employees per vehicle. ' b. Transportation Management Associations/organizations Several transportation management associations/organizations, ' such as Irvine Spectrum Transportation Management Association (Spectrumotion), Newport Center Transportation Management Association (Centeride), South Coast Metro Transportation ' Management Association, Irvine Transportation Authority, Cypress Transportation Management Association, North Orange County Transportation Management Association and Newport Beach Transportation Resource Center, have been formed in major activity centers to enhance the effectiveness of transportation demand management strategies. 1 ' TE-1-17 1 TYPICAL SECTION 1 J 1 1 MAJOR - 120 ' 1 (6 LANES, DIVIDED) oc�o e a Chart 1-1 PRIMARY - 100 4 LANES ' C , DIVIDED) .J OD � . 1 Chart 1-2 TE-1-18 1 � TYPICAL SECTION i ' SECONDARY - 80' (4 LANES, UNDIVIDED) I Chart 1-3 COMMUTER - 56' (2 LANES, UNDIVIDED) r Chart 1-4 TE-1-19 1 1' OF O 9 b munry p sw MRruD.a 'll I (� U S' �P `,1 I ARTERIAL HIGHWAYS ISTABLISNED AUGRME.1 PRDIMD MAJOR y / MODIFIED MAJOR PRIMARY ........... MODIFIED PRIMARY SECONDARY •1 r I COMMUTER \\ •'\ // '`; TYPICAL SECTION ae--�uOlr—aa—Igi •\ •- MAIOR O (!p MobMO E4 Pun CpRaRr E 1 Sd IrwppLtcn um4R.M1u491 100 fir-- 118r 75i-75�Ri ham_^.. :• �, PRIMARY (fp YeRReO Ptn•ry M Cp- 9) - - � -`, Sr�Tn-m-oo-rtNm[IatrK MP44 SECONDARY '0 BII- t Q. 1 it li'� •'. _ — _ ' � I _^ter / .l, \', i (�J{ 'O!•'�..; COMMUTER \ ;//\�• 9 Intl Uro.taa R—" /' II\ aR4 RIUrr-0r.w1r u.v u KOIAKD wtt[N M MI[RVu `. • '. './ '.�• _ rRG.m.r mwf W.+rh M MMrtD tl0ur[rM M�Wrtnut ,' / ` , lil . ♦.r nre,x l.pUry la rtD[Sr•wt.aKRL DR EDOTFIpM I U. ' �/ ii� .. _ .. � ♦ '.'\,� a ra,scE„K mcMvr. oowrR;R.DIw:IR wsvrrwrgw . ----I- _ _�_�� I �\ :' i ♦••♦ I n unDE n rRMsmpm.c raR.rP+oowrtar sao rm.wrt. III ICI -( - �� ��_ :♦ ,• �a I.E.rnu awsururoR wR�m rnRar M prtu[na ,. '�•� 4`6\o\ I / ♦ �s a-r�E[ WNE�EIErTRANSPORTATION w t P D CORRIDOR ---- .: - n WAV GHT F- -,R -0 ooc_ - I �F \ -�� •_ RESERVE / DI /``�•� 11 \ .•I, �. ;� SUPERSTREETS �•� STATE ADDPTtD — -- _ FREEWAYS InTOrcwrwG[ � �/ /• \ [:.rr FAFM-,ur J—rw WfEft K ruaosrs cwar •� \ I`d i �\ �� ,\ `� -� PRIVATE STATUS "� I t II \� - �•r ��\ •••••ARTERIALS t0 I �', I T , \` fpt N•MER RaDItW IRY.KRR rD TM IRIRErOR4tq p M.DVMU:v ,K PRODPir MD K oRNYi I ' it oa..ry slMow runs GEKR/u twE ILw' v -(a D r" -13 KR.Uul. UHA u[WJIpMEO ro PKa rDll w6[auUll uIEMM[MS. CERTIFICATION 1. �.Al.G1F T•t M WM rW p YrPMI bw..1 mr.04wr `T'Ir-...\ � .'.�" � �` ` �tK p M wnW 104tP M QR•t p pM1rwR w9 IrslrmrD I �` I \ \�� nQRO.IJ'ruO.Mtl wIWRD IF[P� n LwNOY.ui •� \ RE6YRWD rP MDrtIDR. •�` I Mr[•r mnn Mi M R[N•N`!fD warp AM P YtptY•i.+..1 wtl M�O✓tD ^prp4 W p M IwlrOnurpt W WYt4M� MASTER PLAN OF ARTERIAL HIGHWAYS � -17_ - p M otw.0 mwrr,aRD p IV,•vape ' County of Crange, California E ; Transportation Planning, Environmental Management Agency Transportation Element Amendment 93-1 1 1 i ' COMPONENT TWO MASTER PLAN OF COUNT MDE BIKEBAYS 1 MASTER PLAN OF COUNTYWIDE BIKKWAYS COMPONENT 1 A. OVERVIEW Since the adoption of the initial Countywide Bikeways Element in 1971, traffic congestion, air pollution and energy costs have become more serious problems, and the bicycle has become a practical alternative mode of transportation. The Orange County Board of Supervisors established a similar policy emphasis on September 23, 1980 when the Master Plan of Countywide Bikeways (MPCB) was transferred from the Recreation Element to the Transportation Element of the General Plan. Comprehensive planning efforts will help the bicycle reach its full potential as an alternative transportation mode for commuting, shopping as well as for recreation. The Master Plan of Countywide Bikeways defines goals, policies and objectives as well as implementation programs involved in the planning, design and construction of an integrated system of regional bicycle facilities. The emphasis is ' placed on bicycle routes which complement other transportation modes (e.g. , transit, carpool, etc.) to serve places of employment and commercial districts. Another purpose of the MPCB is to serve the recreational objectives of bicycling. This is done in concert with other Countywide recreational programs such as regional parks and riding and hiking trails. rThe Master Plan of Countywide Bikeways Component provides the policies and practices which help to define the role of bicycle travel within Orange County. The MPCB defines a network of regional bikeways which interfaces with and complements adjacent Countys' and local (city) bike routes. The Master Plan of Countywide Bikeways supports General Plan policies and covers both the incorporated and unincorporated areas of Orange County. Coordination of the plan's development and implementation with the various cities of Orange County is an important part of the process. ' B. CLASSIFICATION The Master Plan of Countywide Bikeways (Map 2-1) indicates the general location and classification of all existing and proposed, officially adopted regional bikeways in Orange County. The CalTrans Highway Design Manual can be referenced for clarification and specific detail on design speeds, signing, striping and other related design issues. This document has been modified for adoption by EMA in the Orange County Highway Design Manual (Appendix 9). The basis for the design of bikeways in Orange County shall be, in order of precedence, Chapter 1000 of the Orange County Highway Design Manual, followed by Chapter 1000 of the CalTrans Highway Design Manual. Additional information can be found in the County's adopted Standard Plans. Laws pertaining to TE-2-1 the use of bicycles and trail facilities can be found in the Vehicle Code of the State of California. Following is a description of the , characteristics of Class I, II and III bikeways. 1. Class I Bikeway (Bicycle Trail) A Class I bicycle trail is a facility which is physically separated from a roadway and designated primarily for the use of bicycles. Crossflows by pedestrians and motorists are to be minimized. However, where significant pedestrian traffic can be anticipated on a two-way Class I (off-road) bicycle trail, a design standard for combined pedestrian/bicycle traffic is provided in Section 1003.1 (1) of Appendix 9: Bikeway Planning and Design. Bicycle trails typically serve corridors not served by streets and highways, or where sufficient right-of-way exists to construct a separate facility parallel to the roadway. They can provide both recreational and commuter opportunities. These facilities can often serve to bridge gaps in the system caused by man-made or natural barriers. They often utilize abandoned railroad rights- of-way, utility easements, flood control channels, parks and similar linear open space corridors. 2. Class II Bikeway (Bicycle Lane) ' A Class II bicycle lane is a facility featuring a striped lane on the paved area of a road for preferential use by bicycles. It is located along the edge of the paved area outside the motor vehicle travel lanes and shall be restricted to parking. Where sufficient pavement width exists, it may be located between a parking lane and the outside motor vehicle travel lane. Section 1003.2 (1) of Appendix 9: Bikeway Planning and Design provides for a typical width of 8 feet for a Class II bikeway on a curbed street, and specifies that additional width be provided where parking is anticipated. On arterial highways in the County's unincorporated areas where a Class II trail is designated on the MPCB, parking shall be prohibited where insufficient width exists to accommodate both parking and bicycle lanes, in addition to the required number of vehicular travel lanes. A bike lane serves to differentiate the right-of-way assigned to bicyclists and motorists, and provides for more predictable movements by each. A bike lane is typically identified by black and white "Bike Lane" signs (Sign type "R81",State of California Uniform Sign Chart), special lane striping, and may have "Bike Lane" stencils on the pavement. Bike lanes are one-way facilities intended to be ridden in the same direction as adjacent motor vehicle flow. 3. Class III (Bicycle Route) A Class III bicycle route is a facility typically identified by green and white (Type "G93") "Bike Route" guide signing only. There usually are no special lane designations, and parking may be permitted. Bicycle traffic may share either the roadway with motor vehicles, or a sidewalk with pedestrians and, in either case, TE-2-2 bicycle usage is considered secondary. Bike routes are established as a means to connect otherwise discontinuous segments of Class I or Class II bikeways. 4. Undetermined A bikeway route designated on the MPCB map as "Undetermined" indicates that the ultimate trail category or classification, and/or its alignment has not yet been determined or officially adopted due to topographical or right of way constraints, or other considerations. C. GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES This section provides guidance regarding the Countywide Bikeways Component of the Transportation Element. 1. GOAL: TO DEVELOP AND IMPLEMENT A COMPREHENSIVE BIKEWAY PLAN THAT MA%IMIZES THE OPPORTUNITIES FOR NON-MOTORIZED VEHICLE TRANSPORTATION AND MEETS THE RECREATION AND LOCAL TRANSPORTATION NEEDS OF THE CITIZENS OF ORANGE COUNTY. Countywide Objectives: 1.1 To develop a bikeway network which provides non-motorized alternatives for commuter travel as well as recreational opportunities. 1.2 To develop a bikeway network which maximizes the safety and convenience of users of all levels of experience within that system. 1.3 To promote coordination among the County, its cities, and other agencies in providing an integrated bikeway system. 1.4. To review and update the MPCB as needed in order to assure compatibility with the other elements of the County General Plan, and with city plans, and to assure an integrated system of bikeways with adjacent counties. ' 1.5 To actively seek all available means of financing bikeways including State and Federal grants. Policies: Commuting: To design regional bicycle routes to connect residential areas with major activity centers (employment, educational, civic, etc.) by requiring, through the subdivision process, the dedication of right-of-way and construction of Master Plan designated bikeways as conditions of development. ' TE-2-3 Recreation: To plan bicycle routes to facilitate access to recreational areas such as regional parks, beach areas, and major tourist commercial/ recreational facilities (Disneyland, Knott's, etc.). System Connectivity: To plan a bikeway network to interface with ' other modes of transportation (train or transit stations and Park-N-Ride lots, etc.) in order to encourage and support the use of bicycling and reduce the use of motor vehicles. Modal Interaction: To encourage other modes of transportation (buses, trains, etc.) to plan for, and provide space for carrying recreational and commuting bicyclists on public transportation systems where feasible. Scenic Value: To locate regional bikeways along designated scenic highways wherever environmentally, physically, or economically feasible, and to encourage the development of scenic vista points and rest areas where feasible and appropriate. Right-of-Way: To utilize existing and abandoned public rights-of-way along flood control channels, parks, and roads, and utility and railroad rights-of-way wherever possible, and where a ' need can be demonstrated to construct bikeways. Public Information: To provide bicycle trail and safety information to the public by publishing bike trail maps and representing the County at trade shows, rideshare fairs, etc. Off Road Needs: To develop guidelines for the safe use of "mountain bikes", and to identify suitable areas for their use, including regional parks, in cooperation with EKA/Harbors, Beaches and Parks, in order to reduce the potential for conflicts with other trail users, and in recognition of the growing popularity of this mode of recreation. Design Standards: To design and construct regional bikeways in accordance with County and CalTrans standards in order to maximize safety and minimize potential conflicts with pedestrians and motor vehicles. Bicycle Safety: To separate bicycle and automobile traffic wherever possible, taking into consideration safety, users of the facility, economic factors, and physical feasibility; and to design only one-way bike lanes, thereby minimizing conflicts at intersections and reducing the hazards of bicyclists traveling against traffic. User Convenience: To encourage the provision of bicycle racks, showers, lockers and other storage facilities at destinations where practical and economically feasible when reviewing discretionary permits for major activity centers. TE-2-4 ' Trail Netvork: To plan, v p , develop, and maintain a network of countywide regional trails in both incorporated and unincorporated areas, through cooperative efforts with cities. Regional Continuity: To encourage other jurisdictions to adopt a system of bikeways that complements the County system. Regional Consistency: To periodically revise the Master Plan of Countywide Bikeways component of the Transportation Element, when warranted, to reflect changing conditions, and to evaluate proposed development projects for compatibility with the MPCB through the subdivision, and discretionary permit review process. Funding: To solicit and utilize all sources of local, regional, State and Federal funds to plan, acquire right-of-way, and construct bikeways, including such sources as SB 821, and SB 244 (CalTrans Bike Lane Account) funds; County Road, and Harbors, Beaches and Parks funds; and private grants. Development Commitsent: To encourage developers to provide local bicycle trails, as well as require construction of applicable MPCB bikeways within their projects as conditions of development approval. D. IMPLEMENTATION PROGRAMS 1. Subdivision Process Programs involve a review of subdivision maps for consistency with the MPCB, and a requirement that new developments dedicate necessary right-of-way, and develop bikeway facilities according to MPCB classification and design specifications. 2. Funding Regional bikeway funding programs (SB 821 and SB 244, etc.) accord priority to those projects which improve bicycle access to employment centers, educational facilities, and commercial developments, as well as to recreational areas. i 1 1 1 ' TE-2-5 r 2 O I O 2'-0' 2'-0' (MIN.) 10'-0' (MIN. WIDTH) PAVED (MIN.) GRADED GRADED TWO-WAY BIKE PATH Chart 2-1 ON SEPARATED RIGHT -OF-WAY 1 6' SOLID WHITE STRIPE 3'-0' 3'-0' (MIN.) (MIN.) MOTOR VEHICLE LANES 4' _0•' (MIN.) (MIN.) BIKE LANE BIKE LANE Chart 2-2 BIKE LANE PARKING PROHIBITED PARKING STALL OR OPTIONAL 4' SOLID STRIPE ' 6' SOLID WHITE STRIPE ........... :::=-, Ile - .. '-0 8'-0' 13 -0 MOTOR VEHICLE (MIN.) (MIN.) LANES BIKE PARKING ' LANE LANE Chart 2-3 BIKE LANE PARKING PERMITTED , TE-2-6 i i I i LEGEND � ORANGE couHrr 121tEw4rs s[ATNemLr I 000000• CLAAss I TRAILPpP�P 4 PARK•••�• y rrr••. A Y MIL /•� 0000000 g_Ass�III,SAL GY PO Y 1J D t>tt •s�OIIi U1DETERAIED Cc, MOM 2 �OPP rOR CAA `�• 0 D1 6.tEWAr Nlm,•EA 10 ON PGrJP ►A111t•�• OANYO`A, 40 •• p \ :4J T'P..• PARKS/PRESERVES 9 PARK ♦ �'94 • q0 • a•, I SHORELINE 0 �S 11 2 OVr: CLEVELAND •�iM • TYPICAL SECTION 2 < r N • I VIP 4 4P� •• ••• D•••• • • :• I �f- +—�'�,F 1 • 0 G`'' 7 t • 0 J O G 0p • y 6 J 1YS P. : IIA7YOM11L CLASS I 481008 t�Or•At anyow sY rATN e S • .PARK ] •• ' • Y Y.Y P N y •r • � 6 P..ep VrOI° �•T i e7 O O ` Ie•�a1• FOR[ST ,I 1 O O PO 3 r� J n W 6 P? ••••.�• •``••M�•I ` ••• I F'V 1M aasogQ J p 10 • 1e • of ° • •`h••` m'•6 0 •` P� 6 eA1r OO' e/ •, V d2 •IRvm LAN[ ,I P • V•L O S,dO ° /' ew ` P AeT1AO0 PARR CrN S7� I r,� CIASI r� ' �0 t¢ op0 O Yd • 7 20 OAKS J°o <C^O42i '+ ow,wAo ttlsm ur•ruuro wloNmro ' 1 O° o O+y l� ., r� i a�r1� •. A 44 42 At j rrnr�rs.ar VS 0o JJ wL i• 'y C • PO •e C °� ` 4 oSELPYT�\la��/• •DLO 6 O 7. ni ply °s,; Oe wi •�� ' ON q i 0A NAL.N• S .�. :,ACC t7^ t (°37�• 26 44 T� Ao • 76 Croy •••• �— .�.r.er CUR 100 20 P • J a0 i °1' •••• i ,wa�e.,� � +, • t • sAme 0 00 �+E T 4 • orti • • Q• : i F °°�ao ••gory r� r ° •�YT J'S • ,'"t • • • cuss r ..� L O L • CIQLLL • OIY•110AD tHem LA.Ie rAel.O RIeR1tD 6 • C 6 16 'C : 4 � �s T Lt' �h` O •_ ►Awl 41 I L 0 e • VJ `• • �� s • • tY��r 0 37 PO to • }� 43 n • 41 :l J L. r,(th 41 • CAMKes 0 29 • • •i1?�• • • 76 � O • • � �� y42 � • pAmR I. • a� °o 0L r 22 � # •` t e ° •: < m 7s j• 67 •4 76 : ;a 0 .1 P • iW: SW • • Va 722 . wM[[L •• v`• t . t ,•' �� �� • ••JEROMWO 9S ` • OYIrOm I /� • 17 f4 27 P : C� TV1 Y OjOe• :HtOt• 2 ••• RO: PAM v f oP e•ee a~•f NCA� p a6 : A `• 'eYOSiY� • tt 23 j� • `i�M•• giy.D• •oe!56 • ` 72 ``• 7 20 �•` �. .°dr 0�1P 4 ie : $ [tTl '� ~ es` • • >+,0 :f 6 L �"QO ecr .+ • S7 fir. 37 • o• ('µ 72 •'����r ' ���",} / y4r /6 • • bI O 00 � p,Y [11TtmmtAl ' tFo 40 •w• ' _ AGty. 76 r 76 dd • Jy, I ! 10°p- 27 E•! :p�•N .46 '!'y�� �• ' : ►ARt : _ •••fin ` 61 4 :••••••• �I/IV7Ia lEb� 4�^•p ri :2 ••• •... 1�► V s y I k •6t•• `a`•'•• 7t T6 i42) •°c� 77 96 ••, 4 •. •a. �,_• V. • I / The 6w•t.r PIen of Cemt7vid.Dikanys J2 OYAM i lb ••�. c > �y; • Qi ¢p�% 04T y! .as or![leall7.dopt. by County d the Ora • T ` pAma • 37 •. s `4�N.' ` 66 •• a • i3"r • ` �t Coty Dowd of Sep m•tvlsors S. s pt •er / • er i `?; .I bEPt `✓. 66 •�DA` 70 O .�• z i r„e S '� I lOT C 29, 1973, b. 11-I0DD, as a te•poaot of 6¢ y. o ••• 44y.. •• 67 C •: `•� ••_•• • • '_ tho the Detrat3m Klement of otaegr Cemp's O S2 ALIrORM1A� �.' ••`• � • ••�•`• • "•• �• • W • v0'f O 4 ■maolutlOR MIUm•er WIS , ratifiedlaxa e C 21 O e • OE r • • • 72 •• a • , PG•4( a SC r , • • ••�O `Er, •` • • •'yF • O • AVE • component o! the Tr.aspo[tatlm Dlsaat t o t• :> :••90 Aw a• G Q� 66 'z ••• LAotnA .� •.� •• .: • of the General Clam. IRS • CRYSTAL • • y� ` •• r VEP iw i •m 8i~o �0 67 re0ud :� ••• ••• *A f00 I Mrey eortlly that tho Nmrer 71aa of J (G ♦e` 60 SOga•• ° P fJer td: • cove po D6 • I • •4y••• Counryvldo t!lava "O v ♦ pAt•MK• W • 6 •• .MS ass• a6 • ,. ys tempe0•at, ca•dsting ' Be 10 2J t• • oe • SSd ^5' 4• • ;.� of the[•nerd load r.ot vtemt of bq.� M 'sutmsg � om • A.o• V STATE 42 � ` • •o O .:latlq.0d pnposN coon f s, St �y�rrP •�. L vlt > 62o• • • 70 q m 'dl' • , • • • 71 •• �s `O is m prepared md.r y direct �.• t '• • <p$ 61 • # r---d•d for adop • °'•.ts TALK 62 i �.•••••• , �•• • MALT • .•W end of `w • A u ST.htl - asa Ot •� g •�t�"`'J•I• �tti•�w•••••w•••"° T tho 0 0p000 23 �• • 72 60 S e•.eo R. �• L ue.lDLD • CteCA r 2p m9 7 •r� ••J' o An MACH ALro r SP •�• twaA A �A' •• •• dl a K • �S • 61 26 hYietperrt•t!m ho[rr D1TSa pt tTATE •t••.••e•••em•eN•N•1••••N•e> -S 04 •6• . •�J�° •fACN ►ARR � MAl[tACN CALL WMTW0T00 0TATe MACH SEAS ¢'e O b�l ST 23 {µ CLp�E f+ rat b I KAT[•RACK I lN!reb!CeTtlf7 that the r•Coteend•d 6l K^C" I Mmt•r tl.o of Countywide 511tovgs w approved As the olflclal gap Of III. Trat•portatlm[!sent of the Coastal jciao y th.Oraa[e Coum0 71amlop MAP 2- 1 : MASTER PLAN OF COUNTYWIDE BIKEWAYS C.eois4 by m�3,. 19t0, and .dept.d y Sosolutlm aamh•r 90.373 0! to.Orange Carry Dead of Supervisors m Amm 25,1910. County of Orange, California R. ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT AGENCY. TRANSPORTATION PLANNING I Down.,DIr for tovlreaatental Reaysent ADse7 III TE-2-7 MPCB i f i COMPONENT THREE MASTER PLAN OF SCENIC HIGHWAYS i 1 1 i , 1 i MASTER PLAN OF SCENIC HIGHWAYS COMPONENT ' A. OVERVIEW The Scenic Highways Component of the Transportation Element fulfills the requirement of California Government Code Section 65302(h) which mandates a Scenic Highway Element of the General Plan. The Scenic Highway Element of the General Plan was first adopted by the Board of ' Supervisors on June 12, 1973 (Resolution No. 73-659). The Component identifies the countywide scenic highway routes. The primary purpose of the Scenic Highways Component is to define the policy guidelines pertaining to the implementation of the Master Plan of Scenic Highways. It attempts to incorporate safety, utility, economy, and aesthetics into the planning, design and construction of scenic highways B. CLASSIFICATION ' The designated scenic highways of Orange County have been divided into two categories: Viewscape Corridors and Landscape Corridors (Appendix 12). 1. Viewscape Corridor (Type 1) A viewscape corridor is a route which traverses a corridor within which unique or unusual scenic resources and aesthetic values are found. This designation is intended to minimize the impact of the highway's and land development upon the significant scenic ' resources along the route. Safety roadside rests and vista points should be developed, when feasible and where appropriate, to enhance any exceptional scenic values (Charts 3-1 and 3-2). Development of the right-of-way should, to the extent possible, follow the adopted Viewscape Typical Section (Chart 3-3). If utilization of the typical section would destroy the scenic amenities of the corridor, a modification of the standard can be considered. The appropriate width and development of the right-of-way must be discussed/considered in the scenic corridor implementation plans. 2. Landscape Corridor (Type 2) ' A landscape corridor traverses developed or developing areas and has been designated for special treatment to provide a pleasant driving environment as well as community enhancement. Development within the corridor should serve to complement the scenic highway. ' TE-3-1 Development of a landscape corridor should, to the extent possib:.e, follow the adopted Landscape Typical Section (Chart 3-4). any variation to the typical section should be addressed in the scenic corridor implementation plans. C. GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES , This section provides guidance for countywide and county unincorporated goals, objectives and policies regarding scenic highways. 1. GOAL: TO PRESERVE AND ENHANCE UNIQUE OR SPECIAL AESTHETIC AND ' VISUAL RESOURCES THROUGH SENSITIVE HIGHWAY DESIGN AND THE REGULATION OF DEVELOPMENT VITHIN THE SCENIC CORRIDOR. , Objectives: 1.1 To protect and enhance the County's beauty, amenities and quality of life. 1.2 To add to the pleasure of its residents and visitors, anc to play an important role in encouraging the growth of the recreation and tourist industries upon which the economy of many areas of the County depend. 1.3 To coordinate with CalTrans, the various cities of Or:Lnge , County, and the development community, in the development: of new scenic corridors in order to preserve the aesthi:tic qualities of the environment. 1.4 To coordinate with the cities of Orange County in the preservation of established scenic corridors so as to ' protect existing scenic qualities of the corridors. 1.5 To develop the roadway portion of the scenic corridors in a manner that recognizes the natural scenic resources of the , corridor and is sensitive to them to the maximum extent feasible. Policies: ' Project Consistency: To require preparation and approval of highway plans demonstrating project consistency with the intent of the Scenic Highway Component prior to tract map recordation. This can be accomplished through the subdivision, discretionary permit, Feature or Area Plan review process. , Offer of Dedication: Vhere necessary to preserve unique or special visual features, impose conditions on development within a scenic highway corridor to require dedication of scenic easeaents , consistent with the adopted corridor plan. To preserve scenic routes which have exceptional or unique visual , features, but are not necessarily designated as arterial highways on the MPAH, by placement on the Master Plan of Scenic Higt.ways TE-3-2 ' (MPSH). Development of the scenic highway shall be in conformance with a Specific Plan prepared in accordance with the Scenic Highway Implementation Planning Guidelines (Appendix 13). Cooperative Planning: To connect County-designated scenic highways 1 with city-designated scenic highways; adjacent-County-designated scenic highways, or those in the State Scenic Highway system so as to form a linked system. ' Where feasible, through the design process and alignment studies, develop the scenic highway in a manner which takes into account the cone of vision of the motorist. Consider both the short and ' long-range views available along the way while enhancing them with foreground framing. To design the roadway to have a visual quality and riding comfort resulting from its horizontal and vertical design. Introduce curves where feasible to take advantage of natural or man-made scenic features. ' To incorporate pedestrian, equestrian, and bicycle trails into the right-of-way of scenic highways as designated by the Master Plan of ' Countywide Bikeways and the Master Plan of Riding and Hiking Trails. Where feasible, utilize contour grading and slope rounding to ' gradually transition graded road slopes into the natural configuration consistent with the topography of the area. ' D. IMPLEMENTATION PROGRAMS 1. Subdivision Process During the review of subdivisions and discretionary permits, assure that the number of access points (e.g. driveways, local roads, etc.) on scenic highways are minimized. 1 1 i 1 ' TE-3-3 i SAFETY ROADSIDE REST Comfort Station Picnic Table Rl- Possible Bicycle Trail ko Historical Landmark P • C'•Is O ' Drinking Fountain Information Panel 00 Safety Roadside Rest: Facilities of limited size (usually I to 3 acres) located along highways for the rest, comfort and enjoyment of the scenic highway traveler, may include sanitary facilities, picnic tables and landscaping. Chart 3-1 VISTA POINT .......... Passible Hiking Trail cgl�p 0 C.) Cc) Log Bumpers 0 oo (D Vista Point: A designed turnout with a scenic view and with sufficient width to p-o- vide for a paved parking area and a separated access lane from the traveled portion of the highway. Chart 3-2 TE-3-4 J VIEWSCAPE HALF-SECTION (TYPICAL) 1 SYMMETRICAL ABOUT PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY (ROW) 10 (A) (E) ('C,D,E) MEDIAN SHOULDER I PARKWAY id (10') TRAVEL WAY I (8') STRIP(301 w 36' MAJOR HIGHWAY J 24' PRIMARY & , w } MINIMUM (T') 101 SECONDARY HIGHWAY {< z 3 m W LL NOON �iQ _ a ' MAJOR HIGHWAY 84' PRIMARY HIGHWAY 72' PLUS EQUESTRIAN TRAIL N.T.S. Chart 3-3 SECONDARY HIGHWAY 62' LANDSCAPE HALF-SECTION (TYPICAL) ' SYMMETRICAL ABOUT z z .J ' PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY (ROW) (C.0,E) 3 (A,B) PARKWAY LL MEDIAN STRIP , ' W MIN) TRAVEL WAY PARKING & RIGHT TURN LANE (251 cc 44' MAJOR HIGHWAY w wW 35' PRIMARY HIGHWAY ¢Iwo ' 32' SECONDARY HIGHWAY ¢law MAJOR HIGHWAY 76' ' PRIMARY HIGHWAY 67' PLUS EQUESTRIAN TRAIL N.T.S. SECONDARY HIGHWAY 57' LEGEND (A) NORMALLY NO MEDIAN FOR SECONDARY HIGHWAYS (B) 15' MINIMUM FOR EXISTING TREE ROW (E.G. EUCALYPTUS) (C) PARKWAY STRIP TO ACCOMOOATE HIGHWAY BEAUTIFICATION &PAVED FACILITIES FOR PEDESTRIANS& BICYCLES (D) ADD 10' ON ONE SIDE FOR MASTER PLAN EQUESTRIAN TRAIL (E) PRECISE WIDTH OF PARKWAY STRIP AND THE USE OF CURB AND GUTTER OR A.C. DIKE,TO BE DETERMINED BY SCENIC CORRIDOR IMPLEMENTATION PLANNING Chart 3-4 TE-3-5 MAR LA VA i !r I♦ ►♦ ♦�vv♦� �� Zvi.• LN ♦off r�+� . �♦��� �I, ♦ ..�� low . ♦`'�► ,► ♦♦v '+� .�.. �► �� t �I R IF 1 • I I, ' COMPONENT FOUR ' MASTER PLAN OF TRANSIT SYSTEMS II 1 t 1 MASTER PLAN OF TRANSIT SYSTEMS COMPONENT ' A. OVERVIEW By Board Resolution No. 81-1396, September 22, 1981, a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) was established between the Orange County Transit ' District (OCTD) and the County of Orange for the purpose of assuring cooperative, effective and coordinated land use and transit planning within the County. While the County and cities do not have juris- diction over the Transit District, County and city decisions relating to the planning and development of land uses and the arterial highway system significantly affect the effectiveness of the transit system. The primary purpose of the Master Plan of Transit Systems (MPTS) is to outline the policies and practices which will promote the incorporation of transit into the transportation network. The MPTS addresses the broad policies and actions that have long-term effects on transit services. The MPTS does not include the short-range bus route plans because these are operational decisions and are subject to frequent changes by OCTD. ' This document also identifies the areas where the County and cities can facilitate the deployment of service and complement the goals and ' objectives of OCTD. The Master Plan of Transit Systems ensures that the needs of OCTD are considered in the County planning process. By so doing, it accomplishes one of the key objectives of the Memorandum of Understanding between the County and OCTD (see Appendix 15). For ' detailed information regarding OCTD plans and programs, the Orange County Transit District should be contacted. ' B. CLASSIFICATION Transit services are generally distinguished by type or category as follows: 1. Grid Service ' A grid service is a service which has existed for two or more years, operates throughout the day on a year-round basis, and does not service downtown Santa Ana. These routes generally operate at high speeds and serve areas with lower employment densities and ' secondary OCTD transit terminals (terminals serving less than ten routes). ' 2. Radial Service A radial service is a service which has existed for two or more years, operates throughout the day on a year-round basis, and ' serves downtown Santa Ana. These routes generally serve areas with TE-4-1 high concentrations of the transit dependent and high employment densities, and serve the downtown Santa Ana Transit Terminal, the focal point of transfer activity in the OCTD fixed-route system. 3. Peak-Hour A peak-hour service is a transit service that has existed for two , or more years, operates year-round, and only during weekday peak hour time periods. 4. Express Service An express service is a transit operation which has existed for two or more years, operates year-round, and has freeway travel accounting for 50 percent or more of its daily service hours. 5. Development Service A development service is a service which is either new (in operation for less than two years), seasonal, or special (operated ' for special events). C. GOALS, OBJECTIVES, AND POLICIES Goals, objectives, and policies are intended to serve as countywide guidelines and provide direction to transportation implementation in the County's unincorporated areas. ' 1. GOAL: TO SERVE THE PEOPLE OF ORANGE COUNTY BY PROVIDING HIGH QUALITY PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION SERVICES THAT ARE CONVENIENT, EFFECTIVE, SAFE AND EFFICIENT , Objectives: 1.1 To make multi-modal transportation service and information , available to all residents of the County. 2. GOAL: TO PROVIDE FOR CONKUTER (PEAK HOUR) TRANSIT SERVICE ' Objectives: 2.1 To increase commuter usage and service. 2.2 To encourage rail use. 2.3 To plan and design high speed trains, monorails, etc. ' 2.4 To encourage private participation and incentives to ' develop rail transit. 3. GOAL: TO RESPOND TO THE TRANSPORTATION NEEDS OF THE TRANSIT DEPENDENT, SUCH AS SENIOR CITIZENS, YOUTHS, HANDICAPPED , PERSONS, AND THOSE 'WHO CANNOT AFFORD PRIVATE TRANSPORTATION TE-4-2 ' Objectives: ' 3.1 To provide convenient and comfortable service to facilitate the needs of the transit dependent. ' 3.2 To maximize mobility of the transit dependent. 3.3 To identify, implement and develop assistance to the ' transit dependent. 4. GOAL: TO ENCOURAGE THE DEVELOPMENT OF CONVENIENT AND EFFECTIVE TRANSIT ALTERNATIVES AND HIGH-OCCUPANCY VEHICLE SYSTEMS TO ' REDUCE TRAFFIC CONGESTION, CONSERVE EdBEW AND CONTRIBUTE TO CLEAN AIR Objectives: 4.1 To increase employer participation in Transportation Demand Management (TDM) programs and to maximize private sector participation. 4.2 To develop, in cooperation with appropriate agencies and ' jurisdictions, regional parking facilities in a manner that will facilitate transit ridership and alleviate highway congestion, energy consumption, and air quality problems. 4.3 To encourage integrated development of existing and future multi-modal facilities. ' 4.4 To develop a Master Plan of Countywide Multi-modal Facilities. (A preliminary concept of a multi-modal network is shown on Map 4 1.) 5. GOAL: TO PROVIDE TRANSPORTATION SERVICES THAT ARE COST EFFECTIVE, PRODUCTIVE AND RESPONSIVE TO DEMAND, AND TO OPERATE THOSE SERVICES VITHIN THE FINANCIAL RESOURCES AVAILABLE ' Objectives: 5.1 To provide a level of service such that all categories of ' service are productive. 5.2 To increase fare box recovery and cost effectiveness. ' Policies: Pedestrian Accessibility Policy: To ensure that transit services have maximum pedestrian accessibility. When reviewing subdivisions or site plans, coordinate with OCTD to ensure that warranted transit facilities and pedestrian linkages ' are integrated into the project design in a manner that will minimize walking distance. ' TE-4-3 Require sidewalks, handicap ramps, passenger amenities (shelters, benches, signs, etc.) and other transit facilities (bus pads, red curb zone or turnouts, etc. ) at transit stops. ' Building sites within a development should be laid out in a manner that will assure that the majority of the occupants will be within ' a quarter-mile walking distance of a bus stop. Building sites should ideally be located nearest to the street where transit service is, or will be provided. D. IMPLEMENTATION PROGRAMS 1. Transitvay Development ' To serve the County's major activity centers, a 19.4-mile system of transitways is proposed for the I-5, SR-55 and SR-57 freeway corridors. The 19.4 miles of transitway, along with approximately 90 miles of commuter (carpool) lanes, will create an overall countywide network of 110 miles of exclusive transit/High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) facilities. ' 2. Express Fixed Route A bus system which operates on the freeway and arterial highway ' system. This service is provided primarily for commuters from residential areas to major employment centers. 3. Commuter Network ' Commuter Network provides carpool and vanpool matching services, and TDM program development and assistance services to employers ' and activity centers. This program includes transportation services such as ridesharing, flex-time programs, parking management, rideshare promotional incentive programs, and helping ' people use OCTD buses. 4. Market Development This program utilizes private contractors, using OCTD-owned equipment, to provide experimental fixed route services in newly developing areas of the County. While largely targeted at ' commuters, these routes also provide mobility for transit-dependent persons in areas lacking the density required for regular fixed route service. 5. Local Fixed Route ' This service is provided by a system of 46 bus lines (1989) , operating over a one-mile grid network. The service operates on arterials, collectors, and local streets and carries approximately 85% of OCTD passengers. Service is available daily, with the highest levels of service occurring during peak periods. Some of , the local routes provide lift-service for the physically handicapped. TE-4-4 ' ' 6. Neighborhood Dial-A-Ride This is a demand responsive (on-call) service for those unable to get to a fixed route, or who are located in areas not served by the ' fixed route system. This service thus operates primarily on local and collector streets. ' 7. Accessible Service for the Disabled The District has a policy of ensuring mobility for the transportation disabled, and of equipping all new revenue vehicles ' with wheelchair lifts. It is currently planned that all such vehicles operated by OCTD will be lift-equipped by 1991. ' 8. Coordination between Development and Transit When considering General Plan amendments, Zone changes, and Use Permit applications, to coordinate the location of high-density ' residential (especially affordable housing), and non-residential development near existing and proposed trunk-line transit routes, Park-N-Ride lots, major transfer stations, and proposed fixed guideway routes. 9. In-Fill Development for Transit Encourage in-fill development consistent with that needed to make the use of public transit more cost effective. 10. Park-N-Ride Lots and Transit Identify and designate Park-N-Ride lots and major transfer stations planned by OCTD on General Plan land use and Community Profile ' maps. 11. Regional Parking Facilities ' When reviewing site plans and environmental impact reports for major activity centers, or Planned Communities where a high level of transit service is expected, ensure that sufficient land and ' facilities are provided for transit terminals and Park-N-Ride/car pool purposes. 12. Transportation System Nanagement/Transportation Demand Management ' (TSM/TDM) When reviewing site plans and environmental impact reports for ' high- density residential, industrial, and commercial development, encourage positive incentives (e.g. bus passes, ride sharing rewards/incentives, and preferential parking for car/van pools, etc.) for transit solutions as mitigation measures for traffic ' impacts. ' TE-4-5 13. Development Incentives Consider development incentives such as density bonuses, parking ' reductions, etc. for developers who make significant contributions toward promoting public transit and providing transit stations. 14. Right-of-Vay Provide, or reserve right-of-way on planned freeways and ' transportation corridors for the development of guideway or line-haul transit, and its ancillary Park-N-Ride lots and transit stations. 15. Design Standard Utilize OCTD's Design Guidelines for Bus Facilities in conjunction , with the County's Standard Plans in designing transit facilities. 16. Transportation Systems Management for Transit Encourage the implementation of transportation systems management ' techniques and other preferential treatment for transit (e.g. bus- exempt right turn lanes and adequate curb-side area for bus stops, ' channelization, synchronization of signals, and provisions for high occupancy vehicle lanes, etc.) in order to provide effective and efficient transit operation. ' TE-4-6 , ' MAP 4- 1 : A PRELIMINARY CONCEPT OF MULTI-MODAL NETWORK ' + + LEGEND WWW• + ARTERIAL HIGHWAYS i • RWtY•R. ---- ' + - ./ SEC ONO•R• .•-- + O �'�. I' �•�• •.� EawlrR Q� I TYPOM DSECTION O _.. +�� ` -904 Q cyr � \. Q� os a �t0���.t,sn • O��r :eh Is 00 is •e- \ i X Yll/ c1•mow M1191 •+.w dI i Q + eo (t � � + — + � dew s. •e� %iaoD.ao+'DADA•. X x�• QAx} POO %X I �� I R X •' g' 1 O sw�.Do.�ao••.R.•. 06, �• x +'� •x0. K, ,—__�__ OOQO I .I + i + O TRAN$PORTAfION CORRIOOR •• I _ �� _ E4IRY(o cac•.To�.ouAs '06+ +x. '} •1•IF + + - ` Y .O RIGHT OF WAY ' \•cQ • —" .Ey,H Q RESERVE a... x 00' } x } —O Q Q O xx, �.,-\-_ _ SWERSTREETS •# O STATE FREEWAYS - O - O CONSIRtICIEO OO ' ..UUPtfD pRopwo ic JC Q X.t �r 0 �' _�{ �,({• _ `• • ■ ♦ X X •Y�' V� OO x IRIVAIE•'StAIII'l ANIERIALD ---' C\'� OOp TA ,► }} O Q x: p x 000 ; *O O+ + + • + p, O Qp0 "' }}}r QO00 ♦�► "x,� O is O }Ir LEGEND: - _ m TRANSIT DEVELOPMENT PLANy } CERTIFICATION +++++ HOV FACILITIES PLAN COMMUTER RAIL PLAN (INTERCITY) MASTER PLAN OF ARTERIAL HIGHWAYS I � - 0oo HIGHWAY IMPROVEMENT PLAN (MIXED FLOW) COUNTY OF ORANGE, CALIFORNIA = - ^ _ _•r,__ TRANSPCRTATION PLANNING. ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT AGENCY TE-4-7 MPTS i I � APPENDIX 1 STATE FREEWAYS AND HIGHWAYS Overview Mobility to, from, and within Orange County is provided, to a large degree by a network of state freeways and highways. These facilities are the major regional circulation backbone of Orange County and are under the control of the California Department of Transportation (CalTrans). CalTrans established a new district, CalTrans District 12, in Orange County in 1987 to operate and oversee the expansion of the state freeway system in Orange County. The Orange County Transportation Commission (OCTC), another regional agency, aids in implementation of Orange County's state highways and freeways by programming State highway improvement projects through the State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP). The County's role in freeway and highway planning is subordinate to CalTrans. However, State highways are regarded as arterial highways and thus, are included in the MPAH. Therefore, in order to ensure an integrated and efficient overall system of surface transportation, County typically coordinates proposed improvements to highways with CalTrans. In addition, the County requires the development community to analyze, as part of their development impact analysis, traffic impacts on state highways. ' The County also requires dedication of right of way, if needed, to fully implement these facilities. State highway improvements are also included in some county road financing plans such as fee programs. State Highway and Freeway Conditions The present system of freeways in Orange County, consisting of 137 miles, is in need of repairs and expansion. In addition, inadequate capacity on the freeways is the single most significant factor in the transportation problem in Orange County. This is particularly evident during peak periods which are characterized by severe congestion and low travel speeds. One of the major reasons for the inadequacy and deterioration of the freeway system is its age. Over the years, the County's freeways have been patched, restriped, grooved, resurfaced, redesigned in spots, and subjected to a variety of other interim problem-solving remedies which have, at best, kept conditions from worsening. Within the last few years, however, renewed interest and activity has been focused on improving the capacity of these facilities. A car pool lane for two or more riders has been successfully implemented on SR-55. Similar facilities for I-405 opened in Summer, 1989 and are planned for other freeways in the near future. Today, plans are ' A-1-1 _ r under way to physically improve various freeway links and interchanges in the County. The most significant improvements are planned for SR-55 at I-5, ' and the I-5/SR-22/SR-57 interchanges. In the future, development and expansion of alternative transportation modes such as rail and transit facilities, along with transportation systems management strategies, will be the key to increased capacity in the circulation system. 1 r 1 r r 1 1 1 1 r . r A-1-2 r ' APPENDIX 2 ' RELATIONSHIP OF TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT TO OTHER GENERAL PLAN ELEMENTS 1 APPENDIX 2 RELATIONSHIP OF TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT TO OTHER GENERAL PLAN ELEMENTS The Transportation Element is an integral part of the Advance Planning Program of the County of Orange and has the same horizon year and growth assumptions as other elements so as to ensure internal consistency. The Advance Planning Program comprises three components: Long-Range Planning Framework, General Plan Elements, and Community Profiles. Component I, the Long-Range Planning Framework, provides the long-range framework and general goals for the Advance Planning Program. The document includes broad transportation goals that provide a basis for the specific goals and policies contained in the Transportation Element. The Transportation Element is a part of Component II. It is one part of a compendium of nine General Plan Elements which address projections for the next 15 to 20- year time frame. The Transportation Element provides a basis for transportation-related decisions, and complements the other General Plan elements. Specifically, it clarifies and addresses transportation issues raised in the other General Plan elements and offers guidance toward solutions. The Transportation Element, as an expression of County transportation policy, achieves consistency with other General Plan elements as well as Components I and III of the Advance Planning Program through the use of common demographic assumptions. These demographic projections have been adopted by the Board of Supervisors in the Orange County Preferred (OCP)-88 (modified), a single data reference used for County policy-making and planning. All long-range planning and budgeting activities by the County of Orange, Orange County Transportation Commission, and Orange County Transit District are based on these projections. This element is also responsive to the Growth Management Plan Element policies, Air Quality Management District (AQMD) objectives, and regional planning objectives of the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) and the Orange County Transportation Commission (OCTC). Component III, Community Profiles, is the most detailed portion of the Advance Planning Program. The Community Profiles are short-range in scope and focus on community-level policies and programs. They depict existing and planned freeways, state highways, transportation corridors, arterial highways, and bikeways. RELATED PLANNING AGENCIES AND PROGRAMS Orange County transportation planning activities and decisions are ' influenced by federal, state, regional and local government. A key objective of the Transportation Element is to encourage a high degree of intergovernmental coordination and cooperation in planning and implementing A-2-1 the County's regional transportation network. The following are some of the agencies whose policies and programs impact transportation activities in Orange County: INTER-AGENCY COORDINATION 1. Federal Agencies a. Federal Highway Administration (1) Operates under the legal authority of United States Code Title 23 Surface Transportation Act which defines Federal Highway programs (2) Transportation planning/facilities (3) Provides capital for State Highways, new corridors, local arterial programs and urban transit programs through revenue sources such as Federal-Aid Interstate and Federal-Aid Urban b. Urban Mass Transportation Agency (1) Transportation planning (2) Development of federal highways (3) Transportation funding c. Census Bureau (1) Coordination of socio-economic data related to transportation 2. State Agencies a. Transportation Commission b. State Office of Planning and Research (1) Coordinates and provides State assistance for transportation planning ' c. Department of Transportation (CalTrans) Division of Highways (1) Oversees the state highway system and directs planning; designing, building, operating and maintaining state highways and freeways. (2) The Federal Aid Urban Highway program helps loca:L agencies apply for federal grants to finance urban transportation projects, including bicycle lanes (3) Provides capital for urban transit programs such as bus A-2-2 transit and transitway through revenue sources such as State Transit assistance d. State Office of Local Governmental Affairs: (1) State Clearinghouse for environmental impact reports (EIR's) (2) Prepares guidelines for the preparation of mandatory elements of the General Plan (3) Coordinates and provides State assistance for land use planning e. Department of Finance (1) Coordinates socio-economic data related to ' transportation 3. Regional Agencies a. Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) ` (1) Regional growth forecast policy (2) Coordinates socio-economic projections related to transportation (3) Regional Air Quality, Transportation, and Housing Plans (4) Transportation Improvement Plans b. South Coast Air Quality Management Agency (1) Air quality management activities 4. Countywide Agencies a. Orange County Transportation Commission (OCTC) (1) Responsible for planning and programming of state and federal transportation funding in Orange County ib. Orange County Transit District (OG"fD) (1) Provides public transit to Orange County residents, including fixed route bus service and Dial-A-Ride (2) Responsible for construction of a countywide network of transitway and commuter lanes c. Transportation Corridor Agencies (1) Established by joint powers agreements between cities in Orange County and the County to collectively plan, design, construct and finance the Foothill, Eastern and A-2-3 the San Joaquin Hills corridors d. Orange County Subregional Planning Council (1) Advisory Countywide Planning Council comprised of the County of Orange and the cities of Orange County e. Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) (1) Coordinates local government and special districts' activities (2) Reviews city's sphere of influence areas and related activities 5. Private Organizations a. Amtrak b. Automobile Club of Southern California c. Community/Homeowners' Associations d. Public-interest organizations (e.g. , League of Women Voters, ' Orange County Historical Society, etc.) COUNTY ORGANIZATION 1. Environmental Management Agency (EMA) 2. County Administrative Office (CAO) a. Urban Monitoring and Analysis Center (1) Growth Management Program (GMP) (2) Development Monitoring Program (DMP) b. Forecast and Analysis Center (1) Population, employment and housing data (2) Base maps A-2-4 r ' r r r APPENDIX 3 GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN TRANSPORTATION IMPLEMENTATION MANUAL r C 0 U N T Y O F O. R A N G E GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN TRANSPORTATION IMPLEMENTATION MANUAL Adopted by the Board of Supervisors June 1989 A-3-1 i TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION DESCRIPTION PAGE I. INTRODUCTION 3 II. DEFINITIONS 4 A. CRITICAL MOVEMENT B. DEFICIENT INTERSECTION FUND C. DEFICIENT INTERSECTION LIST D. EXEMPT INTERSECTION E. LEVEL, OF SERVICE F. MAXIMUM FEASIBLE 'INTERSECTION G. MEASURABLE TRAFFIC H. SPHERE OF IMPACT I. TRAFFIC LEVEL OF SERVICE POLICY III. PROJECTS EXE P'T FROM THE GMP REQUIREMENTS 6 IV. TRAFFIC ANALYSIS METHODOLOGIES 8 A. LEVELS OF SERVICE B. FLOW RATES AND ADJUSTMENT FACTORS C. LOST TIME D. LANE DISTRIBUTION E. RIGHT TURNING TRAFFIC F. SIGNAL PHASING G. SANTIAGO CANYON ROAD V. !MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS OF GNP TRAFFIC ANALYSES 11 A. GENERAL 1. PROJECT DESCRIPTION 2. EXISTING CONDITIONS 3. FUTURE CONDITIONS 4. PROJECT TRIP GENERATION 5. PROJECT TRIP DISTRIBUTION 6. INTERSECTION ANALYSIS 7. SANTIAGO CANYON ROAD ANALYSIS 8. SUMMARY OF IMPACTS 9. MITIGATION MEASURES VI. DEFIC33= INTERSECTION LIST 14 A. GENERAL B. DEFICIENT INTERSECTIONS C. PROCEDURE TO MODIFY DEFICIENT INTERSECTIONS LIST VII. COUNTY TRAFFIC MONITORING PROGRAM 16 A-3-2 I. INTRODUCTION On March 1,1988 the Board of Supervisors approved a proposed Public Facilities and Growth Management Plan Concept and work program for its implementation. A week later, on March 9, the Board then established an Ad-Hoc Advisory Committee to develop the principles to be included in a Growth Management Plan (GMP) Element as part of the County's General Plan. After numerous meetings, the Ad-Hoc Advisory Committee presented the Board with its recommendations and a proposed GMP Element on August 3, 1988. Elements of the County General Plan are, of necessity, broad statements of policy, intent, and objectives. They are designed to be flexible and adaptable to a variety of situations. As a result, General Plan Elements and the policies contained within them lack specificity and detail about their application. To clarify the intent of the "Traffic Level of Service Policy" of the GMP Element, the EMA was directed to prepare a manual stating the procedures and local parameters for the implementation of this policy. This manual describes how the general traffic policies of the GMP Element are to be implemented on a site or project specific basis. It includes a listing of projects which are exempt from GMP traffic requirements, acceptable traffic analysis methodologies, minimum requirements of GMP traffic reports, and the traffic monitoring surveys the County will conduct to determine system performance. The GMP Element and this manual apply to Santiago Canyon Road and signalized intersections under the sole control of the County. Unsignalized intersections, intersections partially or totally under another agency's jurisdiction, or intersections under another agency's control are exempt from the requirements of the GMP*. In the case of unsignalized intersections where, in the County's judgment, signalization will occur within five years, the intersections shall be considered as signalized for the purposes of this manual. *It may be necessary to modify the application of this manual to intersections involving other jurisdictions if a growth management program is adopted _ countywide or in jurisdictions adjacent to the unincorporated County. A-3-3 t II. DEFINITIONS In addition to those terms defined in the GMP Element, for the purposes of this manual, the following terms shall have the following meanings: A. CRITICAL MOVEMENT: In the case of signalized intersections, any of the conflicting through or turning movements which determine the allocation of green signal time. In the case of Santiago Canyon Road, that direction of any two way peak hour flow which is greater. B. DEFICIENT INTERSECTION FUND (DIF): A trust fund established to cc•llect fees and implement the maximum improvements deemed feasible by the County to existing signalized intersections which do not meet: the Traffic Level of Service Policy for reasons beyond the County's coILtrol. All projects contributing measurable traffic to intersections on the Deficient Intersection List shall contribute to this fund on a pro-rata basis. C. DEFICIENT INTERSECTION LIST (DIL): A list of intersections within the jurisdiction of the County which does not meet the Traffic Level of Service Policy for reasons which are beyond the control of the County (e.g. , ramp metering effects, traffic generated outside the County's jurisdiction, etc.). The current list is included as Section VI of this manual. Additional intersections may be added by the County only as a result of conditions which are beyond the control of the County and after a public hearing. D. EXEMPT INTERSECTION: An unsignalized intersection or an intersection not under the sole control. or jurisdiction of the County of Orangf: or on the Deficient Intersection List. E. LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS): A measure of the operational quality of a road or intersection ranging from Level of Service A (best) to Le-rel of Service F (worst). F. MAXIMUM FEASIBLE INTERSECTION (MPI): The maximum condition an existing intersection may be widened or improved to, while still providing reasonable operational characteristics, given the nature of the surrounding land use. The MFI concept will apply. specifically to the DIL and the determination will be made by the County. G. MEASURABLE TRAFFIC: A traffic volume resulting in a 1X increasc in the volume/capacity ratio of the sum of all critical movements. Example: If the V/C of an intersection is 0.860, measurable traffic will be any addition of trips which will raise the V/C to 0.860+ 0.01 x 0.860, i.e. , 0.869. Fo-: an intersection operating at V/C - 0.860 (C. 1700), measurable traffic would then be any increase in traffic which adds (0.869 - 0.860) x 1700 - 15.3 or 15 or more vehicles to the critical movements. A-3-4 i H. SPHER OF IMPACT: That area within unincorporated Orange County to which a project contributes measurable traffic. I. TRAFFIC LEVEL OF SERVICE POLICY: Within three years of the issuance of the first use and occupancy permit for a development project or within five years of the issuance of a finished grading permit or building permit for said project, whichever occurs first, all necessary improvements to the non-exempt signalized intersections to which the project contributes measurable traffic shall be constructed and completed to attain Level of Service (LOS) "D" or better. LOS "C" shall be maintained on all uninterrupted links* of three miles in length or more on Santiago Canyon Road until such time as uninterrupted segments (i.e. between major signalized intersections) are reduced to less than three miles. A-3-5 III. PROJECTS EMQ'T FROM THE GMP REQUIREMENTS The following development projects have been deemed to have significant public benefit or little traffic impact and are exempt from the requirements of the GMP: A. Any development on an existing lot resulting in a total daily traffic generation of less than 200 trips. The following amounts of land use will each generate 200 trips. For other land uses, see "Daily Vehicle Trip Generation Rates" prepared by Orange County Multifamily residential 28.5 Dwelling Units Mobile Home 40 Dwelling Units Light Industrial 15,400 square feet Hotel/Motel 20 Rooms General Office 13,300 square feet Medical Office 2,600 square feet Neighborhood Commercial 1,480 square feet Convenience Market 360 square feet Fast Food Restaurant 222 square feet B. Any agricultural, open space, conservation, or passive park use. C. Any rebuilding of an existing development damaged or destroyed ty fire or natural disaster if uses and square footage remain substantially the same. D. Public health and safety facilities such as hospitals, police, f'.re and safety facilities, and schools. E. Government-owned facilities or utilities shall be exempt to the extent the facilities will not be used for generating revenue or commercial purposes. Examples of exempt public uses are city halls, park buildings, and other public buildings. Privately owned utilities will not be exempt from growth management requirements. Notwithstanding property tax exemptions, governmental-owned or constructed facilities (including but not limited to counties, cities and redevelopment agencies) which will generate revenue or be leased for commercial purposes shall be required to prepare the necessary reports and mitigate impacts as appropriate. Examples of this include the revenue generating portions of airports, train stations, stadiums, sports arenas, convention centers, bus terminals, hotels, or concessions on public lands. A-3-6 I F. Minor alterations and remodeling of existing structures resulting in no substantial change in traffic generation as determined by the Director, EMA. G. Places of worship, colleges, welfare, etc. to the extent such facilities are exempt from property tax levies. A-3-7 IV. TRAFFIC ANALYSIS METHODOLOGIES There is a wide variety of traffic: analysis methodologies available to traffic engineers. They range from specific procedures required by individual municipalities to standardized techniques used nationwide. In order to ensure all GMP analyses are consistent, accurate, and generally reproducible the ".ounty of Orange has adopted a set of procedures and acceptable methodologies th:Lt are representative of travel behavior in Southern California. For the analysis of GMP traffic impacts at intersections, the County of Orange requires either the Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) or Critical Movement Analysis (CMA) methodologies be used. ICU and CMA techniques are similar and rely on the same set of assumptions. If performed properly, both techniques will yield identical results. This manual assumes traffic engineers are familiar with the analysis techniques and need only be provided with the necessary assumptions regarding flow rates, clearance times, adjustment factors, etc. , to calculate level of service. The following is a list of the assumptions to be used for GMP intersection analysis. Any individuals attempting a GMP traffic analysis without E full understanding of the procedure are urged to contact EMA/Transportation Programs for clarification prior to performing any work. A. LEVELS OF SERVICE The Level Of Service (LOS) of a signalized intersection shall b,e based upon the sum of the volume-capacity ratios (V/C) of the critical movements. The County's definition of the overall LOS of an intersection is as follows: LEVEL OF SERVICE V/C RANGE A 0.00 - 0.60 B 0.61 - 0.70 C 0.71 - 0.80 D 0.81 - 0.90 E 0.91 - 1.00 F 1.00+ B. FLOV RATES AND ADJUSTMENT' FACTORS The saturation flow rate for intersections (also known as lane capacity) shall be 1700 vehicles per hour of green time per lane. This rate is the result of research done on intersections in Orange County during peak periods. This rate may be utilized on left, through, and ri.;ht turn lanes. Generally, no adjustment will be necessary for dual left turn lanes. However, the County reserves the right to require the use of adjustment factors where, in the County's opinion, unusual conditions exist. In these cases, the adjustment factors for such items as lan- width, trucks, grade, or pedestrian activity shall be as stated in th. 1985 "Highway Capacity Manual" or any subsequent revisions. A-3-8 C. LOST TIME Lost time (also known as "yellow time" or "clearance interval" in some analyses) is given a value of zero in GMP analyses. The flow rate used for lane capacity (1700 vehicles per hour of green time) reflects the effects of lost time during the signal cycles. D. LANE DISTRIBUTION In most cases, approach traffic may be assumed to be distributed evenly among all lanes serving a given movement (i.e. , left, through, or right). An exception to this may occur- in the case of split signal phasing which is further discussed below. In certain locations where unusual attractions may occur such . as a freeway ramp entrance or entrance to a shopping center, an unusually skewed distribution may occur. In such cases, the County shall specify the distribution to be used. E. RIGHT TURNING TRAFFIC If the distance from the inside edge of the outside through travel lane is at least 19 feet (see figure below) and no observable parking demand exists during the peak period, or parking is prohibited, right turning vehicles may be assumed to utilize this "unofficial" right turn lane. Otherwise, all right turn traffic shall be assigned to the outside through lane. If a right turn lane exists, right turn on red,if not prohibited at that location, may be assumed. However, the assumption of the number of vehicles turning right on red must be reasonable and not conflict with any other critical movements and is subject to the approval of EMA/Transportation. If a free right turn exists (right turns do not have to stop for the signal) a flow rate of 1700 vehicles per hour may be assumed for it. The analysis shall account for all right turning traffic, none shall be ignored. Any need for signal overlaps shall be clearly stated. F. SIGNAL PHASING At some intersections, split signal phasing may exist. At such locations optional through/left or through/right lanes may be present. Any analysis done for these situations must reflect the true distribution of the approach traffic into these optional lanes. This type of operation is often the most difficult to analyze and additional care should be taken to ensure correct results. There has been much controversy in recent years over the intersection methodology contained in the 1985 "Highway Capacity Manual" which is based upon average vehicle delay rather than percent of capacity. This is an excellent concept and provides a measure of service the average driver can easily grasp. The technique requires detailed information on the length of each signal phase, cycle length, and phase sequence, among - other items. If these data are known with reasonable certainty, reliable delay results can be produced. Unfortunately, in the case of Orange County, signal control equipment prevents predictable, reproducible signal timing data. A-3-9 Nearly all traffic signals in the unincorporated area are controlled by a central computer operated by EMA/Traffic Engineering. The computer directs traffic signals to operate in a coordinated manner designed to minimize motorist delay. Green lights are maximized to the 4:xtent possible. In so doing, the computer constantly adjusts the length of individual signal phases at each intersection and, at times, may :hange the overall cycle length. Since none of the timing data remains Eixed, the intersection methodology of the 1985 "Highway Capacity Manual" cannot be used as a reliable benchmark. It is also very difficult to predict with accuracy what future signal timing will be a.t new installations or even at existing locations as travel patterns change. There is work underway at the national level to revise this methodology. For the present, the 1985 "Highway Capacity Manual" intersection methodology is not considered acceptable for GMP analysis. G. SANTIAGO CANYON ROAD The majority of the road miles within the United States consist of two lane roadways. As a result, a great deal of work has bE:en done throughout the country regarding the capacity of two lane roads. The most current information and practice are reflected in the 1985 "Highway Capacity Manual". For GMP traffic analyses of Santiago Canyon Road, the methodology described in the 1985 "Highway Capacity Manual" (or any subsequent revisions) for rural tw-o lane highways shall be used, based v.pon peak hour volumes. The directional splits shall be as measured during the peak hours. All other adjustment factors shall be as described in the manual. �I r� A-3-10 V. MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS OF GMP TRAFFIC ANALYSES In order to ensure adequate information is provided to the County to judge the impacts of new development, the following minimum requirements are set forth for all traffic analyses of GMP traffic impacts. While the County does not seek to cause preparation of volumes of unnecessary reports, each application must pass a test of timeliness and content. Reports prepared at earlier levels of review may be used only if the information they contain is still representative of the project under consideration. A. GENERAL The report shall be prepared by, or under the supervision of, a Traffic Engineer registered by the State of California. The report shall bear the stamp of the responsible Traffic Engineer. No report shall be accepted for review if it does not bear the appropriate signature, stamp and expiration date. The report shall be divided into the following sections: 1. Project Description 2. Existing Conditions 3. Future Conditions 4. Project Trip Generation 5. Project Trip Distribution 6. Intersection Analysis 7. Santiago Canyon Road Analysis (if applicable) 8. Summary of Impacts 9. Mitigation The following is an elaboration of each section describing in more detail what should be covered. 1. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The project should be clearly described, stating the acreage, number of units or gross and net floor area, points of access, and planned usage. A location map should be included showing the project's relationship to the regional and local circulation systems. A feature plan, plot plan or site plan showing detail commensurate with the level of approval sought, including all pertinent transportation elements (e.g. arterials, streets, access locations, parking, driveways, etc.) must be part of the project description. 2. EXISTING CONDITIONS All existing traffic conditions within the project's sphere of impact must be clearly described and presented in a graphical - manner. Base condition traffic volumes, levels of service, critical movements, and Deficient Intersections will be available from the County. Tabular presentations may be used in addition to the graphical displays. These include: A-3-11 a. AM and PM peak hour, and daily traffic volumes. b. AM and PM peak level of service of all signalized intersections and identification of all critical movements. c. Deficient intersections. 3. FUTURE CONDITIONS The future conditions within the project's sphere of impact shall. be described in a graphical manner consistent with the level of entitlements for project plus existing, project plus three year projection, project plus five year projection from the date of the report. In addition, a buildout evaluation to establish gen,!ral plan consistency when appropriate will be required. The County •+ill provide the necessary background volume projections. The traffic projections shall be based upon the level of information available for the project and the analyses may be adjusted at the discretion of the Director of Transportation. The levels of service of all signalized intersections will be presented. Any planned road or intersection improvements scheduled within the upcoming five years shall be described and accounted for in the analysis. 4. PROJECT TRIP GENERATION The AM and PM peak hour and daily total traffic generation of the project shall be calculated using rates as specified by the County of Orange. In the event a land use is proposed for which no reliable generation rate is available from the County, the generation rate used may be derived from independent empirical studies subject to approval by the County. If the proposed project contains mixed land uses (such as commercial, residential, office or industrial) resulting in expected trips wholly internal to the project, the percentage of internal trips shall be approved by the County prior to proceeding with the analysis. 5. PROJECT TRIP DISTRIBUTION The project's trip distribution shall be presented in graphical form showing both the number of trips generated by the project aad the percentage of the project's total generation on each arterial link to the limit of the -project's sphere of impact. In the case of a project containing mixed land uses, a separate distribution shall be presented for each land use, in addition to the summation of the individual distributions. 6. INTERSECTION ANALYSIS My intersection to which the project contributes mea:curable traffic, either in the present or in the three or fiv,: year projections, must be further analyzed using the method)logies previously discussed. The levels of service for such inpacted A-3-12 intersections shall be calculated and reviewed to determine if any mitigation is required under the conditions of the GMP. If a project contributes measurable traffic to a Deficient Intersection, the analysis should show the project's total daily traffic contribution to the Deficient Intersection as well as the total traffic entering that intersection. 7. SANTIAGO CANYON ROAD ANALYSIS Projects which increase the critical movement (the higher of the two directional movements) as measured on April 24 1989, by one percent or more during the AM or PM peak hour on Santiago Canyon Road shall perform a level of service analysis using the previously specified methodology. The analysis shall address project plus existing, project plus three year projection, project plus five year projection in addition to buildout analyses required for general plan consistency evaluation. B. SUMMARY OF IMPACTS The report shall contain a listing of all adverse impacts created by the project. These include intersections presently operating at better than LOS D and projected to operate at worse than LOS D as a result of the project, intersections already operating at LOS D to which additional traffic is added by the project, and traffic added to Deficient Intersections. 9. MITIGATION lU;ASURBS If mitigations are required, their feasibility shall be determined. It is important to classify which mitigations: a. are solely in the control of the project proponent (such as widening adjacent to the proposed project), b. require approval of others or participation in a program (such as FCPP intersection widenings) c. require participation or regulatory action on the part of the County (such as prohibiting parking for intersection restripings). The last section of the report shall contain a detailed description of mitigation measures proposed by the project. A list of these measures shall also be included in a summary at the beginning of the report. A-3-13 VI. DEFICIENT INTERSECTION LIST A. GENERAL A deficient intersection is one that is under the sole control of the County which is currently operating at worse than LOS "D" as a result of factors outside the control of the County and which cannot be improved to at least LOS "D" solely by fees or improvements provided ty new i development. Each intersection must be studied to determine the M�.ximum Feasible Intersection (MFI) that could be reasonably expected I:o be built at the location if funding were available. This will serve as the basis for a cost estimate and the associated fee to be p;Lid by development which contributes measurable traffic to the intersection. The MFI is anticipated to be an at-grade intersection for purposes of this analysis. As part of the MFI study for each of the intersections on the Deficient Intersection List, the County will prepare cost estimates to modify the existing intersection to its MFI configuration. Any non-exempt development contributing measurable traffic to an intersection on the Deficient Intersection List shall contribute to the Deficient Intersection Fund in an amount equal to the amount of the prc,ject's traffic entering the intersection divided by the total traffic entering the intersection as measured in the 1990 Baselsine traffic counts (counts will be taken in the fall of 1989), multiplied by the es':imated cost to improve the intersection to its MFI condition as shown be.:ow: (Project Traffic / 1990 Baseline Traffic Volume) x (Total Improvement Cost) Vhen an intersection has been improved to its MFI condition, fees will no longer be collected for it. B. DEFICIENT INTERSECTIONS The following intersections constitute the present Deficient Intersection List: 1. Alicia Parkvay at Muirlands Boulevard 2. El Toro Road at Avenida de la Carlota 3. E1 Toro Road at Muirlands Boulevard 4. E1 Toro Road at Rockfield Boulevard 5. Lake Forest Drive at Rockfield Boulevard 6. Lake Forest Drive at Trabuco Road 7. Los Alisos Boulevard at Muirlands Boulevard A-3-14 C. PROCEDURE TO MODIFY DEFICIENT INTERSECTIONS LIST Before any additional intersections are placed on the Deficient Intersection List a public hearing must be held by the Board of Supervisors. The Board will be asked to make specific findings with respect to intersections proposed for inclusion on or exclusion from the list. Those findings will require that: 1. The intersection operates at level of service E or F as defined by the County level of service policy. Z. The contribution to the critical movement(s) which determines the level of service at the intersection is a direct result of actions or factors over which the County has no control (e.g., ramp metering, adverse signal timing by state or neighboring city, city trip generation which uses County roadways as primary access routes, emergency services activities, etc.). Such contribution shall be identified by traffic counts and origin/destination data as appropriate. Removal of an intersection from the Deficient Intersection List requires the Board of Supervisors find that one of the two above conditions no longer exists and is not expected to resume. A-3-15 i VII. COUNTY TRE►PPIC MONITORING PROGRAM In addition to the County's administration of the GMP, the County will b4! an active participant of the GMP by providing base condition traffic count:; and levels of service. The County will also make available forecasts as part oj`. the Development Monitoring Program (DMP) . Annually, from mid-September through mid-November, the EMA will take AM aj;d PM peak hour turning movement counts at all intersections that may be consideriA by the GMP. These will be analyzed to determine the base level of service and critical movements for the upcoming calendar year. The EMA will also take 24 hour directional traffic counts on Santiago C:Lnyon Road. Due to the sensitivity of this road and the rapidly increasing tr.Lffic volumes, counts will be taken every six months, in April and October. ILfter completion of all traffic counts, they will be incorporated into the Comity's latest Development Monitoring Report: each January. The DMP will include existing volumes and levels of service and projections of traffic volumes and leve:.s of service for periods of three and five years from present. It is from this basis project proponents should proceed with their analyses of the traffic impac-:s of their projects. A-3-16 f f f t 1 APPENDIX 4 PLANNING CRITERIA DBTBEtlIINING ARTERIAL EIGHVAY CLASSIFICATIONS f f f 1 ' APPENDIX 4 PLANNING CRITERIA DETERMINING ARTERIAL HIGHWAY CLASSIFICATIONS In order to evaluate the arterial classifications needed to serve current and future traffic conditions, certain criteria and assumptions are made regarding roadway capacities. The concept of capacity, and the relationship between capacity and traffic volumes is expressed by means of "levels of service". These recognize that, while there is an absolute limit to the amount of traffic that can travel through a given corridor (the "capacity"), conditions rapidly deteriorate as traffic reaches that level. As traffic approaches capacity, congested conditions are experienced. There is general instability in the traffic flow whereby small disruptions can cause considerable fluctuations in speeds and delays. Levels of Service (LOS) are usually defined as categories,'A' through 'F' . Beyond level of service 'E' , capacity has been exceeded, and arriving traffic will exceed the ability of a given street to accommodate it. A description of the meaning of the six Levels of Service follows: ILevel of Service 'A' indicates no physical restriction on operating speeds Level of Service 'B' indicates stable flow with few restrictions on operating speed Level of Service 'C, indicates stable flow, higher volume, and more restrictions on speed and lane changing Level of Service 'D' indicates approaching unstable flow, little freedom to maneuver, and conditions intolerable for short periods Level of Service 'E' indicates unstable flow, lower operating speeds than LOS 'D' , and some momentary stoppages Level of Service IF, indicates forced flow operation at low speeds where the highway acts as a storage area and there are many stoppages Tables A-4-1 and A-4-2 show the roadway capacity volumes the County utilizes for its circulation analysis for each type of facility. The data shown in both tables are intended to apply to General Plan level link volumes. (A link is the portion of the roadway between two arterial intersections.) Intersection capacities usually control overall roadway capacities; therefore, the County uses LOS 'C' for General Plan analysis purposes. Although LOS 'D' is more consistent with urban land uses, it has been found that using it uniformly tends to overload intersections (usually resulting in LOS 'E' or LOS 'F' at the intersections themselves). Therefore, the practice of the County when planning the arterial system is to use LOS 'C' for link capacities, with the intent of maintaining LOS 'D, through intersections. A-4-1 ROADYAY DESIGN STANDARDS Road Capacity Values* Table A-4-1: Freeway/Transportation Corridors Freeway Sizes At Level of Service D 4 lanes 65,000 6 lanes 115,000 8 lanes 145,000 10 lanes 175,000 12 lanes 205,000 Table A-4-2: Arterial Highvays Level of Service Type of Arterial A B C D B F 8 Lanes Divided 45,000 52,500 60,000 67,500 75,000 - 6 Lanes Divided 33,900 39,400 45,000 50,600 56,300 - 4 Lanes Divided 22,500 26,300 30,000 33,800 37,500 4 Lanes (Undivided) 15,000 17,500 20,000 22,500 25,000 - 2 Lanes (Undivided) 7,500 8,800 10,000 11,300 12,500 - *Maximum Average Daily Traffic (ADT) These roadway capacities are "rule of thumb" figures only, to be used at Cle General Plan level. They are affected by such factors as intersections (numbers & configuration), degree of access control, roadway grades, design geometri :s (horizontal 6 vertical alignment standards), sight distance, level of truck aid bus traffic, and level of pedestrian and bicycle traffic. A-4-2 o H ui H a a 0 w ma r �. APPENDIX 5 1 CRITERIA FOR ADDING FOR COMMUTER ARTERIALS TO MPAH MAP 1. Connects to facilities of two or more higher classification levels (primary arterial or higher level) and extends for more than one mile 2. Parallels a major arterial highway, and is longer than two miles 3. Has existing or projected ADT of 7,000 or more 4. Connects to a regional facility such as freeway or highway 5. Is a link to a major activity center (shopping centers, employment, etc.) 1 A-5-1 r APPENDIX 6 ' ARTERIAL HIGHVAY CROSS CLASSIFICATIONS r N r r r r i APPENDIX 6 COMPARISON OF COUNTY AND CITY CROSS-SECTIONS COUNTY ANAHEIM BREA BUENA PARK CLASSIFICATION Scenic Expressway R-O-W 148, A # LANES 6-divided CAPACITY ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ CLASSIFICATION Major Major Major Major R-O-W 120' 120' 120' 120, B # LANES 6-Divided 6-Divided 6-Divided 6-Divided CAPACITY 45,000 45,000 45,000 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ CLASSIFICATION Mod Major Hillside Major Mod Major R-O-W 100, 120' 100, C # LANES 6-Divided 6-Divided 6-Divided ---CAPACITY------ CLASSIFICATION Primary Primary Primary Primary R-O-W 100, 106, 100, 100, D # LANES 4-Divided 4-6 Divided 4-Divided 4-Divided CAPACITY 30,000 30,000 30,000 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ CLASSIFICATION Mod Primary Hillside Primary Mod Primary R-O-W 80, 106'-118, 80, E # LANES 4-Divided 6-Divided 4-Divided CAPACITY --------------------------------------------- CLASSIFICATION Secondary Secondary Secondary Secondary R-O-W 80, 90, 80, 80, F # LANES 4-Undivided 4-Undivided 4-Undivided 4-Undivided -^CAPACITY �- 20,000 20,000 20,000 CLASSIFICATION Hillside Hillside Secondary R-O-W 66'-78' G # LANES 4-Undivided CAPACITY CLASSIFICATION Commuter Commuter Commuter R-O-W 56' 64' 60'-80' H # LANES 2-Undivided 2-Undivided 2-Undivided ---CAPACITY ----------10,000 10,000 CLASSIFICATION Critical Intersection R-O-W 114'-Major I # LANES 1301-Primary CAPACITY 4-6 Divided ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ A-6-1 FOUNTAIN , COSTA MESA CYPRESS DANA POINT VALLEY FULLERTON CLASSIFICATION Major Major R-O-W 120, 120, A # LANES 6-Divided 6-Divided CAPACITY 45-000 ----------------------- --------------------------------------------- CLASSIFICATION Major Major Major R-O-W 120, 120, 100, B # LANES 6-Divided 6-Divided CAPACITY 45,000 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ CLASSIFICATION Primary Mod Major R-O-W 106' 100, C # LANES 6-Divided 6-Divided CAPACITY ------------------------------------ --------------------------------- CLASSIFICATION Primary Primary Primary Primary R-O-W 100, 100, 100, 80'-84' D # LANES 4-6 Divided 4-Divided 4-Divided ---CAPACITY --30,000 ------------------------------------ -------------------------------------- CLASSIFICATION Mod Primary R-O-W 80, E # LANES 4-Divided CAPACITY -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------- CLASSIFICATION Secondary Secondary Secondary Secondary Secondary R-O-W 84' 84' 80, 80, 80' 84, F # LANES 4-Undivided 4-6 Undivided 4-Undivided 4-Undivided CAPACITY 20,000 --- ------- ----- CLASSIFICATION R-O-W G # LANES CAPACITY ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ CLASSIFICATION Commuter Collector Commuter Commuter Local R-O-W 60, 64' 56, 56, 60'-64 H # LANES 2-Undivided 2-Undivided 2-Undivided 2-Undivided CAPACITY 10,000 10,000 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- CLASSIFICATION R-O-W I # LANES CAPACITY ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ A-6-2 GARDEN HUNTINGTON GROVE BEACH IRVINE LA HABRA LA PALMA CLASSIFICATION Super Street R-O-W 142, A # LANES CAPACITY ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ CLASSIFICATION Major Major Thruway Major Major R-O-W 120, 120, 132, 120, 120' B # LANES 6-Divided 6-Divided 6-Divided CAPACITY 45,000 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ CLASSIFICATION Mod Major R-O-W 100, C # LANES 6-Divided ---CAPACITY CLASSIFICATION Primary Primary Parkway Primary Primary R-O-W 100, 100, 116' 100, 100, D # LANES 4-Divided 4-Divided 4-Divided 4-Divided 4-Divided CAPACITY 30,000 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- CLASSIFICATION Mod Primary R-O-W 80, E # LANES 4-Divided CAPACITY CLASSIFICATION Secondary Secondary Collector Secondary Secondary R-O-W 80' 80, 100, 80, 80, F # LANES 4-Undivided 4-Undivided 4-Undivided 4-Undivided 4-Undivid ---CAPACITY ,000 -----------------------20------ --------------------------------------------------- CLASSIFICATION R-O-W G # LANES CAPACITY ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- CLASSIFICATION Local Street R-O-W 2-Undivided H # LANES CAPACITY -------------- CLASSIFICATIONR-O-W I # LANES CAPACITY ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- A-6-3 LAGUNA NIGUEL& LOS LAGUNA MISSION NEWPORT ALAMITOS BEACH VIEJO BEACH ORANGE CLASSIFICATION N/A Major Augmented Augmented Major R-O-W Variable 120, A # LANES 6-8-Divided 8-Divided CAPACITY--- --------- 52,000- CLASSIFICATION Major N/A Major Major Major R-O-W 120' 120, 128'-134' 120, B # LANES 6-Divided 6-Divided 6-Divided 6-Divided CAPACITY 45,000 45,000 45,000 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- CLASSIFICATION Mod Major N/A Mod Major Primary Augmented Augmented Primary R-O-W 100, 100, Variable 100, C # LANES 6-Divided 6-Divided 4-6-Divided 6-Divided CAPACITY 35,000 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- CLASSIFICATION Primary N/A Primary Primary Primary R-O-W 100, 100, 104'-108' 100, D # LANES 4-Divided 4-Divided 4-Divided 4-Divided CAPACITY 30,000 30,000 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ CLASSIFICATION Mod Primary N/A Mod Primary Augmnted Secondary R-O-W 80' 80, 80' E # LANES 4-Divided 4-Divided 4-Divided CAPACITY ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ CLASSIFICATION Secondary N/A Secondary Secondary Secondary R-O-W 80, 80, 84, 86, F #LANES 4-Undivided 4-Undivided 4-Undivided 4-Undivided CAPACITY -----20,000 20,000 20,000 ---- CLASSIFICATION N/A R-O-W G # LANES CAPACITY ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- CLASSIFICATION Commuter N/A Commuter Commuter R-O-W 2-Undivided 56, 66' H # LANES 10,000 2-Undivided 2-Undivided CAPACITY 10,000 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ CLASSIFICATION N/A 8-Lane Divided R-O-W 158' I # LANES 8 CAPACITY 60,000 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ A-6-4 SAN SAN JUAN SEAL PLACENTIA CLEMENTE CAPISTRANO SANTA ANA BEACH ' CLASSIFICATION R-O-W A # LANES -- CAPACITY -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- CLASSIFICATION Major Major Major Major R-O-W 120' 120' B # LANES 6-Divided 6-Divided 6-Divided 6-Divided CAPACITY -----------------------;------------------------------------------------------------------ CLASSIFICATION Mod Major R-O-W 100 C # LANES 6-Divided CAPACITY ------------------------------------------------------------------ CLASSIFICATION Primary Primary Primary Primary Primary R-O-W 100, 104, 100, D # LANES 4-Divided 4-Divided 4-Divided 4-Divided 4-Divided CAPACITY over 20,000 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ CLASSIFICATION Mod Primary R-O-W 80, E # LANES 4-Divided CAPACITY CLASSIFICATION Secondary Secondary Secondary Secondary Secondary R-O-W 80, 84, 80, F # LANES 4-Undivided 4-Undivided 4-Undivided 4-Undivided 20,000 CAPACITY ---------------------------- CLASSIFICATION Mod Secondary ' R-O-W 64' G # LANES 4-Undivided CAPACITY ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ CLASSIFICATION Local Art'l Commuter Tertiary Principal R-O-W 60, H # LANES 2-Undivided 2-Undivided 2-Undivided ' CAPACITY ----------7,000 -------------- CLASSIFICATION R-O-W I # LANES CAPACITY ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ A-6-5 i VILLA YORBA , STANTON TUSTIN PARK WESTMINSTER LINDA CLASSIFICATION R-O-W A # LANES CAPACITY ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ CLASSIFICATION Major Major Major Major R-O-W 120, 120' 120'-190' 120, B # LANES 6-Divided 6-Divided 6-Divided 6-Divided CAPACITY ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- CLASSIFICATION R-O-W , C # LANES CAPACITY --------------___-------______-------______-------______-------_________________..______ j CLASSIFICATION Primary Primary Primary Primary Primary R-O-W 100, 100, 100, 100, 100, D # LANES 4-Divided 4-Divided 4-Divided 4-6 Divided 4-Divided CAPACITY ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ CLASSIFICATION R-O-W E # LANES CAPACITY ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ , CLASSIFICATION Secondary Secondary Secondary Secondary Secondary R-O-W 80' 80' 80' 80' 80, F # LANES 4-Undivided 4-Undivided 4-Undivided 4-Undivided 4-Undivided CAPACITY ___ ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- CLASSIFICATION R-O-W G # LANES CAPACITY ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- CLASSIFICATION Local Streets R-O-W 60' H # LANES CAPACITY _______________________________________________________________________________.__ i CLASSIFICATION R-O-W I # LANES CAPACITY --- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- A-6-6 i i r r r APPENDIX 7 CRITERIA FOR MODIFIED ARTERIAL HIGHWAY FACILITIES r 1 1 i r 1 1 APPENDIX 7 ' CRITERIA FOR MODIFIED ARTERIAL HIGHWAY FACILITIES 1) Modified Major Arterials a. 100 feet ROW minimum b. 6 travel lanes c. No parking d. Capacity 45,000 ADT at LOS 'C' e. Separate left turn lane(s) 2) Modified Primary Arterials a. 80 feet ROW minimum b. 4 travel lanes c. No parking ( d. Capacity 30,000 ADT at LOS 'C' e. Separate left turn lane(s) General To find "modified" facilities, currently shown on the circulation plans of cities, consistent with similar facilities on the MPAH for the purposes of AHFP review, providing they meet these criteria. A-7-1 1 as a V � C7 C r r r r +� r� �■r r■� �r r r r s �r ar r� ■w �r �r APPENDIX 8 rCRITERIA FOR CHANGING CONGESTED INTERSECTION LIST 1 ' 1. Level of Service (LOS) is 'E' or 'F' r2. Maximum Feasible Intersection (MFI) not constructed r3. Intersection under the sole control of jurisdiction i r r r r 1 r r r 1 A-8-1 1 N N AA DC vv�� H W a a ' APPENDIX 9 ' CHAPTER 1000 - BIREVAY PLANNING AND DESIGN Topic 1001 - General Information ' The basis for the design of bikeways in Orange County is, in order of precedence, Chapter 1000 of the Orange County Highway Design Manual followed by Chapter 1000 of the Caltrans Highway Design Manual. ' Topic 1002 - General Planning Criteria The Master Plan of Countywide Bikevays (MPCB) should be consulted to determine if a master plan bikevay is planned on the highway being designed. If so, the design of the highway should conform to the Master Plan of Countywide Bikeways, as well as, the Master Plan of Arterial Highways. Additional right of way may be required for a Class I bikeway. ' Topic 1003 - Design Criteria 1003.1 Class I Bikevays (1) Widths The minimum paved width for a two-way Class I Bikevay as shown on the Master Plan of Countywide Bikeways, shall be 10 feet. A minimum 2-foot wide graded area measured from edge of pavement to hinge point shall be provided adjacent to each side of the trail pavement (see Figures 1003.1A and 1003.1B). Where the ' sideslope adjacent to the graded shoulder is steeper than 4:1, the dovnslope side shall have a 4-foot wide graded area measured from edge of pavement to hinge point adjacent to the trail pavement. For Master Plan Bikeways, where a deviation is allowed for widths less than 10 feet, a 3-foot wide graded area measured from edge of pavement to hinge point adjacent to each side of the trail pavement shall be provided. Paving is allowed within the graded area to reduce the maintainence costs or to provide for drainage facilities; e.g. curb and ' gutter (see Section 1003.1(14)). Where heavy bicycle volumes are anticipated and/or significant pedestrian traffic is expected, the paved width of a two-way path should be greater than 10 feet, preferably 12 feet or more. Dual use by pedestrians and bicycles is undesirable, and the tvo should be separated vherever possible. Additional pavement widening on the inside of horizontal curves may be required where the horizontal design speed criteria can't be met. (2) Clearance to Obstructions A minimum 2-foot horizontal clearance to obstructions shall be provided adjacent to the pavement (see Section 1003.1(14)). A 3-foot clearance is recommended. ' The minimum overhead clearance shall be 10 feet to account for the "shy factor" (e.g. bridge under crossings). Where a bike path doubles as a maintenance roadway, or where equestrians are present, overhead clearance shall be sufficient August 1989 ORANGE COUNTY BIGHVAY DESIGN MANUAL 1000-1 1 A-9-1 , u ,� v . C'G4 Y c,> ) v�J 8'(MIN.) 20/6 . t I10'MIN.WIDTH PAVED 1 T(MIN.) GRADED GRADED FIGURE 1003.1A , CLASS I BIKEWAY ON SEPARATE RIGHT OF WAY' TYPICAL SECTION 2'GRADED AREA(MIN.) EDGE OF SIDEWALK TOR 10'(MIN.) ' PAVEMENT HIGHWAY 20/0 5'(MIN.) BIKE PATH ' ONE-WAY:5'MINIMUM WIDTH TWO-WAY:10'MINIMUM WIDTH 5'SHALL BE MEASURED FROM CURB FACE,IF NO SIDEWALK REQUIRED ' FIGURE 1003.113 CLASS I BIKEWAY ALONG HIGHWAY TYPICAL SECTION August 1989 ORANGE COUNTY HIGHWAY DESIGN MANUAL 1000-2. ' A-9-2 to accommodate the anticipated maintenance vehicles or equestrian use. Minimum vertical clearance for equestrian use and for maintenance vehicles shall be 12 feet. (3) Striping and Signing A 4-inch yellow centerline stripe shall be placed to separate opposing directions of travel at bridge undercrossings or at other dips where bike trail gradient exceeds 5%. A 6-inch white edge stripe shall be placed for all trails with adjacent down slopes steeper than 4:1. ' Yellow painted word or symbol warning markings on the pavement and/or signs shall be used to alert bicyclists where caution is warranted, such as substandard horizontal or vertical alignment, barrier posts, etc. . The size of word and symbol markings shall conform to the stencil size used by EMA, Public Works Operations Division. (6) Bike Paths in the Median of Highways Bikevays shall not be permitted in any median. (7) Design Speed ' The proper design speed for a bike path is dependent on expected type of use and on the terrain. The minimum design speed for bike paths should be 20 mph. In ' the case of bike paths on long downgrades (steeper than 4% and longer than 500 ft.) the minimum design speed should be 30 mph. (12) Grades ' Maximum Desirable Sustained Maximum Desirable Grade (Percent) Length (Feet) ' 10.0 (use only in very 70 extraordinary situations) 7.0 (maximum for ramps) 120 ' 5.0 (maximum for normal 170 situations) 4.5 330 ' 4.0 600 3.5 850 3.0 1000 2.5 1300 ' 2.0 1700 Where grades steeper than 7% cannot be avoided, signs indicating "Steep Grade" shall be provided. (13) Structural Section The structural section of the bikeway shall be determined by the Orange County Materials Engineer. Portland Cement Concrete (PCC) shall be used where adequate drainage is not provided and/or high moisture content is known to be present, or ' anticipated, in the subgrade (subdrains should be provided in these areas). Asphalt concrete (AC) shall conform to the requirements of Standard Plan 1805. August 1989 ORANGE COUNTY HIGHWAY DESIGN MANUAL 1000-3 A-9-3 (14) Drainage The bikevay shall have a cross slope of 2% to facilitate drainage of the trail. , In addition, the graded shoulders adjacent to the bikevay shall slope avay from the trail at 2% minimum, 5X maximum. ' Minor drainage facilities are alloyed in the graded area (graded area is described in (1) above); for example a curb and gutter to convey drainage vould be allowed but the curb face shall be located no closer than the outside edge of ' the graded area (this actually requires extending the graded area further out in order to construct the curb). Drainage ditches shall not be located within this graded area unless the sideslope(s) of the ditch vithin the graded area is 51: or ' less. Drainage from areas adjacent to bikeways shall not be permitted to flov across the bikevay. Drainage ditches of suitable dimension shall be provided to intercept such drainage. Where necessary to carry intercepted water across -:he bikeway, catch basins vith drains (designed for "Q-10") shall be provided vhere a bike path crosses any drainage course. 1003.2 Class II Bikevays (1) Widths ' The vidth for a bike lane on a curbed street shall typically be 8 feet measured from the curb face, or 4 feet measured from the edge of pavement if there is no ' curb and gutter (see Figure 1003.2). A reduction in the bike lane vidth to 3 minimum of 5 feet, measured from the curb face, to facilitate restriping of 3n existing roadvay for added turning lanes, is acceptable. Bike lanes shall be one-vay facilities. 8' W MIN. ' VERTICAL CURB 6'SOLID WHITE STRIPE EDGE OF PAVEMENT TRAVELLANES ' 8'IS TYPICAL,ADDITIONAL WIDTH SHOULD BE PROVIDED IF PARKING IS ANTICIPATED. , 5'MINIMUM IS ACCEPTABLE IF MORE WIDTH IS NECESSARY IN THE TRAVEL WAY OF EXISTING ROADWAYS TO PROVIDE FOR ' ADDITIONAL TURN LANES. FIGURE 10032 CLASS 11 BIKEWAY ON HIGHWAY ' TYPICAL SECTION August 1989 ORANGE COUNTY HIGSOAT DESIGN MANUAL 10OD-4 A-9-4 I 1 ' APPENDIX 10 BIMAY DESIGNATION PLANNDIG GUIDELINES 1 ' APPENDIX 10 BI)MAY DESIGNATION PLANNIM GUIDELINES The following are basic guidelines which are used to plan the appropriate ' bikeway class designation. These guidelines, combined with safety factors, development feasibility, cost, and aesthetics are used to evaluate each route and assure the most compatible class of bikeway is developed. It is, ' however, to be recognized that constraints as to the amount of right-of-way available, topographic considerations, and other factors do not always permit strict conformance with these guidelines. CLASS I BIKEWAY (BIKE PATH OR TRAIL): 1. Motor vehicle average daily traffic (ADT) greater than 5,000 in the outside travel lane 2. Bicycle volume very high 3. Criteria for shared route or bicycle lane are not met 4. Availability of space for development 5. Serves schools and playgrounds in urban areas, if right-of-way is available 6. Serves a bicycle demand which would otherwise have to be served by a high speed arterial with heavy traffic volumes 7. Bypasses constructed areas where right-of-way constraints preclude the development of bicycle lanes 8. Along natural or man-made features which have few cross roads, such as streams, flood control channels, abandoned railroads, utility ease- ments, etc. , where these features correspond, to a reasonable degree, with desired routes for bicycle travel Class I Bikeway Vidth The minimum paved width of the two-way Class I Bikeways listed on the ' Master Plan of Countywide Bikeways shall be 10 feet with a 2-foot wide graded area immediately adjacent to each side of the trail pavement. In instances where there is restricted right-of-way due to physical limitations, such as a narrow bridge or severe topography, an 8-foot 1 wide bike path is permissible as necessary. In such instances the graded area adjacent to the bike path may be reduced as necessary from the required 2 feet. 1 A-10-1 CLASS II BIRSVAY (BIKE LANES): , 1. Motor vehicle ADT in the outside lane between 2,000 - 5000 ' 2. Bicycle volume high 3. 85th percentile speed of arterial of 40 mph or more ' 4. Heavy truck traffic of arterial at 5% of ADT or more 5. Adequate outside lane dimension ' Class II Bikevay Vidths ' A bicycle lane must be a minimum of 4 feet wide and should provide at least 3 feet between the traffic lane and the longitudinal joint at the concrete gutter, since the transition between the gutter and street may not be smooth. On arterial highways without curbs and gutters a minimum of 4 feet is required. ' Where parking is permitted, a minimum width of 12 feet is required to accommodate both the parking lane and the bike lane. The bike lane , must be at least 5 feet wide and located between the motor vehicle travel lane and the parking lane. If Bike lanes are to be located on one-way streets, they should be placed on the right side of the street minimizing left turn conflicts with motorists. ' CLASS III BIKEWAY (BIKE ROUTES): ' 1. Motor vehicle (ADT) in the outside lane less than 2,000 ' 2. Bicycle volume moderate 3. 85th percentile speed on adjacent lane of 32 mph or less ' 5. Adequate space available in the outside lane dimension A-10-2 ' 1 APPENDIX 11 ' BIMAY ROUTE ADDITION AMID DELETION CRITERIA 1 ' APPENDIX 11 BIRBBAY ROUTE ADDITION AND DELETION CRITERIA ' Amendments to the Master Plan of Countywide Bikeways(MPCB) may be processed up to a maximum of three times a year as an amendment to the Transportation ' Element. Such amendments can be generated through city requests, land use policy changes, cooperative transportation studies, and site planning (e.g. , Local Coastal Plans and corridor studies, etc.). ' When a new bicycle route is recommended for addition to the MPCB, it must meet at least three of the following criteria. All routes must meet the spacing or distance criterion, or service a major activity center. Those ' proposed under the major barrier criterion are given special consideration for their regional significance. All proposed routes will be evaluated for their continuity with the existing MPCB network. Criteria for adding a proposed route to the MPCB: 1. Continuity: Does the trail in question provide continuous travel from one regional route to another? Does it close gaps in the system? ' 2. Service to Major Activity Centers: Does the proposed trail provide access to one or more of the following: schools, commercial centers, industry, beaches, parks, etc.? ' 3. Intergovernmental Coordination: Are one or more agencies involved in planning or implementing the trail? 4. Connectivity: Does the trail provide access to other regional routes? 5. Spacing or Distances: Is the trail at least a mile or more apart from ' other parallel regional routes? (There are exceptions to this cri- terion, such as major barriers). 6. Major Barriers: Is the trail separated from an established parallel regional route by geographic barriers such as rivers, freeways, etc.? Projects must have regional significance for this criterion to apply. ' 7. Realigment: Does an alternative route with equal or better safety, right-of-way, or access considerations exist? ' Criteria for deleting routes from the MPCB. Proposed deletions should meet one or more of these four criteria: 1. Alternate Routes: An alternate route is proposed (where possible) for safety considerations and/or insufficient right-of-way both on and off A-11-1 I road to accommodate a bikeway. 2. Arterial Highvays: The trail was originally proposed to run on, or ' adjacent to a proposed arterial highway that has since been deleted from arterial highway plans. 3. Lack of Community Support: The trail was deleted by the appropriate city council and/or Board of Supervisors through citizen requests. 4. Physical Constraints: The trail is impractical due to relevant ' physical factors such as grade, right-of-way, or environmental resources, etc. 1 1 A-11-2 ' i APPENDIX 12 ' COUNTY DESIGNATED SCENIC HIGHWAYS AND CANDIDATE CORRIDORS I 1 APPENDIX 12 ' COUNTY DESIGNATED SCENIC HIGHWAYS The following routes are County designated scenic highways. TYPE 1: VIEVSCAPE CORRIDORS Antonio Pkwy From Avenida de las Banderas To Ortega Hwy ' Carbon Cyn Rd From Carbon Canyon Regional To San Bernardino Park County Line Chapman Ave From Newport Blvd To Veir Cyn Rd El Toro Rd From SJHTC To Laguna Cyn Rd From Santa Margarita Pkwy To Live Oak Cyn Rd Laguna Cyn Rd From Big Bend To Lake Forest Dr Live Oak Cyn Rd From Santiago Cyn Rd To O'Neill Park Newport Blvd From Crawford Cyn Rd To Santiago Cyn Rd Ortega Hwy From La Pata Ave To Riverside County Line Oso Pkwy From 2,000, e/o Olympiad Rd To Coto de Caza Dr ' PCH/San Diego Fwy From Los Angeles County Line To San Diego County Line Plano Trabuco Rd From Rose Cyn Rd To Coto de Caza Dr Riverside Fwy From Newport-Costa Mesa Fwy To Riverside County (SR-91) (SR-55) Line Rose Canyon Rd From Live Oak Cyn Rd To Plano Trabuco Rd Santa Margarita Pkwy From Melinda Rd To Avenida Empresa Santiago Cyn Rd From Weir Cyn Rd To Live Oak Cyn Rd Trabuco Creek Rd From San Diego Fwy To Crown Valley Pkwy Weir Canyon Rd From Santiago Cyn Rd To Riverside Fwy 1 � TYPE 2: LANDSCAPE CORRIDORS Alicia Pkwy From Aliso Creek Rd To Paseo de Valencia Antonio Pkwy From Avenida Empresa To Avenida de las Banderas Camino del Avion From Crown Valley Pkwy To Del Obispo St Crown Valley Pkwy From San Diego Fwy To PCH El Toro Rd From SJHTC To Santa Margarita Pkwy La Paz Rd From Crown Valley Pkwy To Paseo de Valencia Moulton Pkwy From Crown Valley Pkwy To San Diego Fwy Niguel Road From Crown Valley Pkwy To PCH Ortega Hwy From Antonio Pkwy To San Diego Fwy A-12-1 Oso Pkwy From Alicia Pkwy To 2,000, e/o ' Olympiad Rd San Joaquin Hills Rd From MacArthur Blvd To Sand Cyn Rd Santa Margarita Pkwy From El Toro Rd To Melinda Rd From Avenida Empresa To Plano Trabuco Rd ' St of the From Crown Valley Pkwy To Dana Point Harbor Golden Lantern Dr Trabuco Cyn Rd From Live Oat. Cyn Rd To Rose Cyn Rd , Unnamed Arterial From Santa Margarita Pkwy To Antonio Pkwy CANDIDATE CORRIDORS ' SJHTC From Bonita Cyn Dr To I-5 ' Sand Cyn Rd From SJHTC To Pacific Coast Hwy Laguna Cyn Rd From Existing To Pacific Coast Hwy Crown Valley Pkwy From Trabuco Creek Rd To Wagon Wheel Cyn Reg Park Antonio Pkwy From Existing To Southward Foothill TC From Eastern TC To S of County line ' Jeffrey Rd From Irvine :Blvd To Santiago Cyn Rd SR-57 From N of Hwy 90 To Carbon Cyn Reg Pk Tonner Cyn Rd From SR-57 To Carbon Cyn Reg Pk Eastern TC From I-5 To SR-91 r A-12-2 ' 1 1 1 ' APPENDIX 13 SCENIC HIGHWAYS CORRIDOR DiPLEMENTATION PLANNING GUIDELINES 1 1 I APPBNDI% 13 CSCENIC HIGHWAY CORRIDOR IMPLEMENTATION PLANNING GUIDELINES Scenic Highway Corridor implementation plans shall include, but not be limited to the following points: o A description of the location of the highway and reasonable boundaries of the scenic corridor and the scenic features to which the plan and development standards apply. o A description of how the scenic highway is integrated with the other General Plan Elements and on-going planning studies. o Specification of the treatment and protection the highway and corridor are to receive, i.e. land use controls, land acquisition needs, construction standards, and type and location of complementary facilities. Where applicable, establishment of regulations and guidelines regarding building heights and setbacks; signs and outdoor advertising; placement of utilities and undergrounding of utility lines; cover and screening of earthwork operations; erosion control; preservation of the natural conditions of bodies of water; preservation and restoration of plant material; clearing for views; site planning, and architectural and landscape design in private developments; property maintenance; and public uses within the corridor. o Identification of vista points, and roadside rest and parking areas which may be appropriate for development in the scenic corridor. o Specification of measures to be implemented to preserve outstanding scenic features within the scenic highway corridor which help to define the character of the corridor. o Specification of responsibility for implementing the features of the specific plan. o Specification of the source(s) of funding. tA-13-1 APPENDIX 14 CASE STUDY: laW OAK CANYON ROAD/TRABUCO CANYON ROAD APPENDIX 14 Case Study: Live Oak Canyon Road/ Trabuco Canyon Road INTRODUCTION: The Master Plan of Scenic Highways (MPSH) currently exhibits three scenic highway corridor links which do not appear on the Master Plan of Arterial Highways (MPAH). These corridors are: 1. Live Oak Canyon Road between Rose Canyon Road and Trabuco Canyon Road. 2. Trabuco Canyon Road between Rose Canyon Road and Robinson Ranch Road. 3. Trabuco Canyon Road between Live Oak Canyon Road and Rose Canyon Road. These links appear on the MPSH because of their scenic qualities, but lack the traffic volumes, width and/or turning radii to be considered arterial on the MPAH. DISCUSSION: Live Oak Canyon Road and Trabuco Canyon Road serve as scenic connections through Trabuco and Live Oak Canyons to O'Neill Park. These links also serve as an alternative through route from E1 Toro Road to Plano Trabuco/ Coto de Caza. The major through route, however, carrying heavier traffic volumes is Portola Parkway. Live Oak Canyon Road and Trabuco Canyon Road are not planned to be improved to arterial highway standards in the future and therefore are anticipated to remain rural scenic routes. The majority of scenic highways shown on the MPSH are also designated ar- terial highways on the MPAH. This MPAH/MPSH consistency is beneficial in that MPAH roadways have approved typical sections which can be used to set the basic parameters for scenic highway cross-sections. However, consis- tency with the MPAH is not a necessary prerequisite for placing a scenic highway on the MPSH. The three links described above, although they do not have MPAH status, were determined to exhibit unique and/or special visual features worth protecting thus meeting the goal of the Scenic Highways Component. Development of these three links as Scenic Highways is to be guided by a Specific plan as provided for in the Scenic Highway Implemen- tation Planning Guidelines (Appendix A) and subject to approval by the Directors of Regulation and Planning. ' A-14-1 APPENDIX 15 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS RESOLUTION, SEPTEMBER 22, 1981 1 2 3 RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF 4 ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA 5 September 22, 1981 6 On motion of Supervisor Clark, duly seconded and carried, the 7 following Resolution was adopted: 8 WHEREAS, the Environmental Management Agency and the Administrative 9 Office, pursuant to Board direction, have developed with the Orange 10 County Transit District a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) providing 11 for design guidelines and transit/land use coordination procedures 12 between the two agencies and said MOU has been presented this date to 13 this Board; 14 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that this Board hereby: 15 1. Authorizes the Chairman of this Board to sign the MOU on Y�y 16 behalf of the Board of Supervisors. •' z oz� 6; 17 2. Authorizes the Director of the Environmental Management 18 Agency to carry out the provisions of the MOU. � 19 20 AYES: SUPERVISORS RALPH B. CLARK, THO14AS F. RILEY, ROGER R. STANTON, 21 HARRIETT M. WIEDER, AND BRUCE NESTANDE NOES: SUPERVISORS NONE 22 ABSENT: SUPERVISORS NONE 23 , 24 25 26 27 Rf�f1�D 28 Resolution No. 81-1396 •�rp ,��, �`o� Transit District/Cc). PLwxdxig Coordi- nation MOU t o d CDB:hp -1- A-15-1 I � p I STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) ss 2 COUNTY OF ORANGE ) 3 I, JUNE ALEXANDER, Clerk of the Board of Supervisors of Orange 4 County, California, hereby certify that the above and foregoing Resolution �. S was duly and regularly adopted by -the said Board at a regular meeting 6 thereof held on the 22nd day of September 19 81, and passed 7 by a unanimous vote of ,said Board. 8 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and seal this 91_,12ndday of September 19 81 . 10 11 _ JUNE ALEXANDER 12 Clerk of the Board of Supervisors \ of Orange County, California 13 ' 14 h W 15 I _ ' 16 II � u o � 1% Y 18 j i9 I, 20 21 22 I! j 23 � t 24 5 i jr 26 i 1� 27 28 -2- A-1a-2 1 I 2 PREAMBLE 3 This memorandum of understanding is entered into this r 4 day of �,c.�,..�c.'_ /Vi , between the County of Orange (hereinafter 5 referred to as the County) and the Orange County Transit District 6 (hereinafter referred to as the District), a public transit 7 operator, for the purpose of assuring cooperative, effective and 8 coordinated land use and transit planning, within the County of 9 Orange. 10 II 11 RECITALS U 12 A. The County, which is recognized as a legal subdivision of the a 13 State of California pursuant to Section 23000 of the California V E+ 1 y 14 Government Code, is the agency responsible for comprehensive 15 planning within the County of Orange. E-1 16 B. The District, established pursuant to Section 40000 of the 17 California Public Utilities Code, is the principal provider of 18 public transit service within the County of Orange. 19 C. The District and the County have common interests in the 20 coordinated and balanced growth of the County of Orange and 21 under the provisions of Article 7, Section 65067 of the 22 California Govarnment -Code desire to coordinate land use and 23 transit planning within the County of Orange. 24 D. The County and the District also recognize that the rapid 25 growth and expansion of the County of Orange creates increased 26 demand for transit service and facilities and that the respons- A-15-3 1 ibility for meeting this demand should be shared by the private 2 sector. 3 III 4 COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT 5 Now, therefore, in consideration of the mutual benefits to the 6 parties hereto, to land use and mass transportation within the 7 County of Orange, and in consideration of the covenants and condi- 8 tions herein contained and all provisions required by Federal and 9 State laws, administrative directives and guidelines, the parties do 10 hereby agree as follows: 11 A. That the County shall coordinate and consult with the District — U 12 in the development of transportation/circulation and land use a� 8 q 13 elements, and any amendments thereof, of the General Plan. C��N H 14 B. That the County shall ensure that transit impacts are 0 &4 15 considered and addressed in any environmental documents 16 required by the County. 17 C. That the District shall provide the County the service and 18 design policies, guidelines and standards adopted by the 19 District's Board of Directors as the basis for determining 20 transit operation and facility requirements. The County shall 21 include those design standards it considers appropriate, with 22 modifications if necessary, in the County's Standard Plans. 23 D. That the County shall periodically review and update policies 24 which recognize the benefit of land uses that are supportive of 25 public transit such as high density development along existing 26 and proposed major transit corridors and routes, and to ensure A-15-4 1 that the site plans and land subdivisions provide reasonable 2 transit/pedestrian accessibility. 3 E. That the County shall coordinate the review of land development 4 plans with the District by notifying the District when a 5 development is proposed which could potentially affect existing 6 or proposed transit facilities and services. The proposal may 7 be in the form of a conceptual plan, general plan amendment, 8 zone change, subdivision map, conditional use permit or other 9 similar documents. The County shall notify the District in the 10 earliest development stage by referring a copy of the 11 development proposals to the District. 12 F. That upon review of the document submitted by the County, the a 13 District shall inform the County as to the locations and types H N 14 of transit facilities required or desired for the transit 0 service for the proposed development within the time limit 16 specified by the County. 17 G. That the County shall consider the District's recommendations 18 and may incorporate the necessary transit facilities into 19 developments by modifying the development plans or by placing 20 conditions, where feasible, on the development that will 21 require the developer to construct and dedicate or maintain 22 said facilities. The Count shall consult with the District, , 23 when it finds that deviation from the District's recommenda- 24 tions is appropriate. The County shall be responsible for 25 overseeing the implementation of those conditions which are _ 26 agreed upon. A-15-5 I H. That the County will consider the enactment of an ordinance 2 exercising the authority granted them by Section 66475.2 of the 3 California Government Code requiring the dedication of land in 4 certain development situations for transit facilities or 5 accessibility. 6 I. This Memorandum of Understanding may be amended only by 7 written agreement of both parties. J 8 Dated: j ,Jta�. ^. , 1981. 9 COUNTY OF ORANGE, a political sub- ORANGE COUNTY TRANSIT DISTRICT divis' n of the State of California 10 ' By _ By 11 Chairma , Boa d —of Supervisors Chai an, bard of Directors a 12 ST: ATTES U N ca 13 June Ale ander Patricia B. Scanlan94 ' � ?s 0 N 14 �erk of the Board of Supervisors Clerk of the B rd Direec�tor ``""'f C 15 RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL: RECO NDED FOR APPRO AL: BY By 9444;r- 16 Murray Storm Ja s P. Reichert, General Manager , Director, Environmental 17 Management Agency 18 APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPRO AS TO FORM: ADRIAN KUYPER, COUNTY COUNSEL 19 By Kennard R. Smart, Jr. 20 By General Counsel 21 Carol D. Brown, Deputy 22 23 24 25 26 A-15-6 APPENDIX 16 LIST OF MAJOR TRANSPORTATION STUDIES AND IMPLEMENTING PROGRAMS l 1� ar �i APPENDIX 16 LIST OF MAJOR TRANSPORTATION STUDIES AND IMPLEMENTATION PROGRAMS Below is a partial list of major transportation planning studies and existing implementing programs that affect transportation planning in Orange County. State Plans and Programs Responsible Agency Year Transportation Improvement CTC Annual Plan Regional Plans and Programs Responsible Agency Year Regional Transportation Plan SCAG Annual Regional Transportation SCAG Annual Improvement Plan Subregional Transportation Plans Responsible Agency Year Preliminary Transportation Plan County 1974 Multi-Modal Transportation Study OCTC 1980 Santa Ana Transportation Corridor OCTD/ 1981 Alternative Analysis OCTC North/South Central Orange County OCTC 1982 Corridor Study Beach Boulevard Corridor Study OCTC 1982 Route 55 Transportation Study Caltrans 1982 Route 5/55 Interchange Recon- Caltrans 1982 struction Study Pacific Coast Highway Widening EMA 1982 Feasibility Study Orange County Transportation OCTC Annual Improvement Plan Countywide Circulation Plans Responsible Agency Year Southeast Orange County EMA 1976 Circulation Study Northeast Orange County EMA 1978 Circulation Study Central Orange County EMA 1978 Capistrano Valley Circulation EMA 1979 Study San Joaquin Hills Transportation EMA/TCA 1979 Corridor Study A-16-1 San Clemente Hills Circulation ERA 1980 Study North Orange County Circulation EMA 1981 Study Foothill Transportation Corridor EMA/TCA 1981 Study Eastern Transportation Corridor TCA 1981 Study High Flow Arterial Concept OCTC 1982 Study Moulton Parkway Corridor Feasibility EMA 1982 Study Northern E1 Toro Traffic EMA 1987 Study E1 Toro/Laguna Hills Traffic EMA 1988 Study Foothill Circulation Phasing EMA 1988 Plan CARITS EMA 1988 Other Related Transportation Plans and Studies Responsible Agency Year v OCTD Alternative Transit OCTD 1974 Corridor Study Transfer Center Needs Study OCTD 1981 OCTD Short Range Transit Plan OCTD Annual Bicycle Trails - A Feasibility County 1973 Study of Bicycle System SR 57 Extension A-16-2 A DC H Mpy vH Qi FM bpi U � 1 ,� tow \ /� APPENDIX 17 CURRENT CONDITIONS AND FUTURE DEMAND A. GROWTH PATTERNS Since its official birth in 1889, Orange County has been transformed from a mere Los Angeles suburban area to a new and independent metropolitan area. The most significant growth has occurred with regard to population, housing and employment (Charts A-17-1 through A-17-3) which, in turn, affects transportation patterns and helps define the current transportation facilities and travel patterns. 1. Demographic Patterns Orange County's population growth rate reached its peak during the 1960's (over 20 percent per year), declined sharply during the 19701s, and has maintained at about 2 percent .per year during the 1980's (Chart A-17-1). While early population growth concentrated in the North County (north and east of SR's 55/91), recent growth has occurred in South County (east and south of SR's 55/91), shifting spatially the needs for roadways and other infrastructure facilities. 2. Housing Patterns The County's housing construction has recently caught up with its population growth rate (Chart A-17-2). The spatial distribution of recent housing construction is parallel to population and employment, oriented toward the south (Chart A-17-3). 3. Employment Patterns Historically, Orange County residents commuted to Los Angeles for job opportunities. More recently, the County's employment base has ex- panded significantly. Presently, almost three quarters of Orange County's residents work in the county as do many residents from the nearby counties of Riverside, Los Angeles, San Diego and San Bernardino. While peak hour directional orientation to and from employment centers in Los Angeles County still exists, it is in competition with trips to and from major employment centers within Orange County (Map A-17-12). In the past, employment and associated traffic patterns in the County centered on commercial and industrial uses adjacent to the Santa Ana Freeway Corridor. This pattern is becoming less pronounced as employment centers are being developed in areas away from this freeway corridor. Orange County's travel patterns can also be observed from the relati- onship between job availability and housing stock. Historically, Orange County was housing-rich and job-poor. This resulted in many of its residents commuting to work in Los Angeles County. However, in A-17-1 1984 Orange County reached a similar job/housing ratio to Los Angeles. This has reduced the number of work trips oriented to Los Angeles County from Orange County and encouraged reverse commuter trips to Orange County. Presently, Orange County is job-rich but housing-poor. As a result, an increasing number of residents of the neighboring counties of Riverside, Los Angeles, San Bernardino and San Diego commute to work in Orange County. B. RECENT TRANSPORTATION PLANNING EFFORTS 1. Overview Originally, the State freeway and highway programs for Orange County were administered by District 7, located in Los Angeles County. Growing awareness of local needs and opportunities led to the creation of District 12 in Orange County in 1988 (Assembly Bill 696). In recent years, the County has become actively involved in the planning of major transportation corridor facilities, traditionally the purview of the State and Federal government. Since the initial adoption of the Master Plan of Arterial Highways (MPAH) in 1956, several major circulation/transportation studies have been conducted by the County which have given direction to the evolution of the County's and cities' circulation plans and other transportation plans (see Appendix 16). In 1979, Orange County initiated a requirement for an Annual Monitoring Report (AMR) as part of the Development Monitoring Program to ensure consistency between land use, growth and the provision of infra- structure. This program was further defined on August 3, 1988, with adoption by the Board of Supervisors of the Growth Management Plan (GMP) Element and the GMP Transportation Implementation Manual on June 8, 1989. Currently, the (MPAH) serves as the Count 's regional circulation plan. The Orange County Environmental Management Agency (EMA) is responsible for the planning and implementation of this circulation plan in unincorporated areas, and works with cities and other agencies to implement the plan countywide. 2. Road Programs and Funds Traditionally, freeways and State highways have been financed by Federal and State funds collected through taxes on gasoline. These resources have dwindled by comparison to need for improvements. Increasingly, the County has sought financial alternatives such as developer contribution/fees to expedite local roadway improvements. New and innovative financing programs relating to provision of transportation facilities have been developed by the County to reduce the funding shortfall. Based on Government Code Sections 50029 and 66484.3, and California Constitution Article 11, Section 7, the County has adopted several Major Thoroughfare and Bridge Road Fee Programs. A-17-2 These include the Coastal Area Road Improvements and Traffic Signals (CARITS), Moulton Parkway/Laguna Niguel Fee Program (MPLN), Foothill Circulation Phasing Plan (FCPP), E1 Toro Road Fee Program, the San Joaquin Hills Transportation Corridor (SJHTC) and the Foothill/Eastern Transportation Corridor (FETC), to fund transportation improvements. These programs are financed largely by the contributions of new developments which benefit from the transportation facilities to be built. Besides fee programs, Orange County has three county-level matching fund programs for funding street and arterial highway projects. To encourage cities to develop and maintain circulation plans that are consistent with the MPAH, the County provides financial assistance through the Arterial Highway Financing Program (AHFP). Such funding is available for arterial highway projects only within cities that have circulation elements consistent with the County's MPAH. In addition to the County program, the Orange County Transportation Commission (OCTC) sponsors a similar program known as the Orange County Unified Transportation Trust Fund (OCUTT). OCTC is responsible for administering Federal Aid Urban (FAU) Funds for improvements to County arterial highways. C. EXISTING TRANSPORTATION FACILITIES AND CONDITIONS The majority of trips in Orange County are made by automobile, utilizing a system of freeways and arterial streets and highways. A fraction of the trips are made by other modes of transportation such as transit buses, commuter rail, bicycling and walking. Below is a brief description of the existing system of freeways, arterial highways, transitways and bikeways. 1. Existing Freeways and Highways The State Freeway and Expressway System, shown on Map A-17-13, illustrates existing and planned freeways and highways in Orange County. Transportation patterns are reflected in the distribution of existing roadway mileages, with 3,616 lane miles in North County and 1,183 lane miles in South County. The roadway system in North County was developed in a grid pattern and is essentially built. On the contrary, the roadway system in South County is irregular due to its topography, and continues to be built as development occurs. Delays in completing the planned freeways on the State Freeway and Expressway System in a timely manner has seriously impaired the traffic carrying capabilities of highway facilities in Orange County. The County's freeway system of 137 miles was constructed almost entirely between 1955 and 1965. Since 1966, only two new freeway projects have been added: 1) SR 57 was extended from SR 91 to I-5 near Anaheim Stadium; and 2) two miles of SR 73 were added near John Wayne Airport. Existing ADT volumes on some of the freeway system, as shown in Map A-17-3, far exceed the capacities of these facilities. This has resulted in poor levels of service, characterized by severe congestion and low travel speeds during peak periods. The rapid growth in employment and population, and the continued predominance of single occupant vehicle ridership has drastically increased the number of auto trips being made on the freeway and A-17-3 I 1 highway system, and is one of the primary factors contribution to the severe congestion experienced during peak hours. To cope with capacity deficiency on many freeways and highways, improvements and programs which emphasize the use of high occupancy vehicle ridership are being undertaken to improve the efficiency of travel in the County. 2. Arterial Highway System In North County, the system of arterials is essentially in place and is spaced at about one-mile intervals and laid out on a north/south and east/west grid pattern. In South County, however, the arterial network is in various stages of planning and development and is less structured than in North County, due to environmental constraints. Many arterial highways paralleling freeways and state highways experience severe congestion during peak hours. This is due to congestion on the freeway and highway system which results in traffic spilling over onto arterial highways. n order o alleviate the current congestion on the arterial system, I t g Y , the County and a number of cities have begun developing Transportation Systems Management (TSM) programs designed to improve the efficiency of travel and optimize the capacity of the highway network. TSM programs include such techniques as the removal of on-street parking to provide for additional travel lanes or dual left turn lanes; spot elimination of parking to provide for turning- lanes; upgrading of signals to better handle turn movements; coordination of signals to facilitate better flow; car and van pool commuter programs, and various traffic and access control measures. 3. Transit Service Transit service in Orange County is provided by a number of public transit agencies and private carriers. Regional service is primarily provided by the Southern California Rapid Transit District (which links Orange, Los Angeles and Riverside Counties), AMTRAK, and Greyhound serving San Diego, Orange and Los Angeles Counties. The Orange County Transit District (OCTD) provides public transit service within Orange County and to connections to adjacent of Los Angeles and Riverside counties. OCTD also coordinates and promotes a countywide ridesharing program. Additional local transit service is provided by the Laguna Beach Municipal Transit Lines. 4. Bikeways The existing bikeway system encompasses a coordinated system of state and county regional bikeways complemented by local bicycle routes. It provides an alternative transportation mode for commuting, shopping and traveling to educational institutions as well as recreational areas. D. GROWTH PROJECTIONS The horizon year of the County's General Plan buildout is Post 2010 (P2010). All projections and analyses of the physical and socioeconomic conditions in the County are keyed to this time frame. For referenced data, see Charts A-17-4 through A-17-11 at the end of this appendix. A-17-4 f iBelow is a discussion of future demographic, housing, employment and transportation trends in the County. 1. Demographic Trends While North County will retain the majority of Orange County's 1 population throughout the year 2010, the population growth trends indicate that in the immediate future the need for new transportation facilities will be more pronounced in South County than in North County. 2. Housing Trends: By the year 2000, Orange County is forecast to reach more than one million dwelling units. The spatial distribution of new residential construction is similar to population, skewed slightly toward South County. A transportation system to service this trend should be a key consideration in the overall future planning efforts of the County. 3. Employment Trends: Orange County is a major employment center in Southern California. By the year 2010, the County is forecast to provide more than 1.8 million jobs to its residents. South County is projected to receive about 50 percent of the new jobs created between 1990 and 2010. This will improve the job/housing balance in South County and may help to reduce long commute trips from southern county communities that is currently observed on the circulation system. E. PLANNED TRANSPORTATION FACILITIES Below is a description of on-going short and long range transportation planning programs that affect future transportation facilities and conditions in Orange County. 1. Short Range Short range roadway improvement plans in Orange County are typically adopted annually by each city, the County, CalTrans, the Orange County Transit District (OCTD) and the Orange County Transportation Commission (OCTC). Each jurisdiction or agency maintains this information for its area of responsibility. In the unincorporated County, short term programs have, historically, depended on anticipated gas tax revenue for the year. Because short term needs have vastly exceeded available funding, the Board of Supervisors has developed various sources of revenue to pay for significant addition to the roadway network. Two good examples of privately funded programs are the Foothill Circulation Phasing Plan (FCPP) and the Coastal Area Roadway Improvements and Traffic Signal (CARITS) Program. FCPP is designed to complete several road and intersection improvements in the Foothill area of South County. It relies on Mello-Roos/Community Facilities District financing for road improvement to be completed largely by 1992. A-17-5 CARITS is intended to provide for roadway improvements in the Coastal Area of South County. It is expected to finance construction of thirteen (13) new roadway links, six (6) intersection improvements and 29 new traffic signals. Most of: the improvements are expected to occur between 1990 and 1995. 2. Long Range Long range roadway improvements are also being planned by various jurisdictions, CalTrans, OCTC and OCTD. In addition to improvements of existing freeways and state highways, three major transportation corridors--Foothill, Eastern, ,and San Joaquin Hills corridors--are expected to begin construction during the 1990s. These corridors are shown in the MPAH map (Map 1-1). The Transportation Corridors are expected to help alleviate congestion on the Santa Ana (I-5), the Newport-Costa Mesa (SR-55), the Riverside (SR-91), and the San Diego (I--405) freeways. In addition, they will relieve traffic from congested arterial roads, such as Pacific Coast Highway, Irvine Center Drive/Moulton Parkway/Street of the Golden Lantern, and Irvine Boulevard. A-17-6 +� m is m m mom " " 4m 4M M SWIM no, •r PERCENT 25 20 15 10 D � 5 19�p 196p �g'I 198p 85 19$8 Source: U.S. Bureau of Census EMA/TP TT7/89 OCP-88 Modified OCP-88 Chart A- 17- 1 :ORANGE COUNTY POPULATION GROWTH PATTERNS Average Annual Growth Rate,1940-1988 PERCENT 4 3 2 •♦ • OD ' 1g81 10$Z 19a3 1g$A 1°�$� 1g$6 NCO lozll Source: California Department of Finance, Population Research Unit EMA/TP TT6/89 Chart A- 17-2: ORANGE COUNTY POPULATION AND HOUSING GROWTH PATTERNS Annual Growth Rate, 1981-1989 Legend: HOUSING ♦-—-—• POPULATION lwiiii an am. �•�% it met a* iys 'Am _Mw' No i11M lift, �' will; to an North County 74.8% POPULATION South County 25.2% North County 72.4% HOUSING South County 27.9% D j I� W North County 71% EMPLOYMENTrm South County 29% Source: OCP-88 EMA/TP TT7/89 Chart A- 17-3: DISTRIBUTION OF COUNTYWIDE GROWTH IN Orange County, 1985 PERCENT 2.0 1.5 • D 1.0 , �•���•_. v 0 0.5 g�.199� 9y.2��� 19 N9 2 2 Source: OCP-86 Modified EMA/TP TT7/89 ChartA- 17-4: ORANGE COUNTY POPULATION PROJECTIONS Average Annual Growth Rate, 1990-2010 Will TOTAL POPULATION (thousand) 3,000 2,500 2,000 1,500 1,000 D j 500 0 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 YEAR Source: OCP-88 Modified EMA/TP TT6/89 Chart A- 17-5: ORANGE COUNTY POPULATION PROJECTIONS, 1990-2010 Legend: ® NORTH COUNTY ® SOUTH COUNTY TOTAL DWELLING UNITS (thousand) 1,500 1,250 1,000 750 D 500 1 1 n� 250 0 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 YEAR Source: OCP-88 Modified EMA/TP TT6/89 Chart A- 17-6: ORANGE COUNTY HOUSING PROJECTIONS, 1990-2010 Legend: ® NORTH COUNTY ® SOUTH COUNTY i► �w +. r �. ,te so m am me i A, AM on, r. it `. m mom r m s* TOTAL JOBS (thousand) 2,000 1,750 1,500 1,250 1,000 750 D 500 W 250 0 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 YEAR Source: OCP-88 Modified EMA/TP TT6/89 Chart A- 17-7: ORANGE COUNTY EMPLOYMENT PROJECTIONS, 1990-2010 Legend: El NORTH COUNTY IM] SOUTH COUNTY JOB/HOUSING RATIO 1.8 1.7 1.6 1.5 1.4 1.3 D 1.2 � 1.1 1.0 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 YEAR Source: OCP-88 Modified EMA/TP TT6/89 Chart A- 17-8: ORANGE COUNTY JOB/HOUSING RATIO PROJECTIONS, 1990-2010 Legend: ®ORANGE COUNTY 110 SOUTH COUNTY 13 NORTH COUNTY EMPLOYMENT (RSA HOUSING 5%® Fullerton 0 3% 6%® Canyon 13% 22%o Santa Ana 10% 11% Anaheim ®6% 6%® W. Coast 9% 4%® Buena Park ® 2% D 9% Trabuco 15% ' 4 w 11%M1111111111 S. Coast 17% 11%11111111111111M El Toro 15% 15% 111111111111jiffffM C. Coast 10% Source: OCP-88 Modified EMA/TP T T6/89 ChartA- 17-9: DISTRIBUTION OF COUNTYWIDE GROWTH BY RSA Employment and Housing, 1990-2010 Legend: ® NORTH COUNTY ® SOUTH COUNTY North County 44% POPULATION South County 56% North County 43% HOUSING a South County 57% J V C °North ount 54/° Y EMPLOYMENTEll 111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 South County 46% Source: OCP-88 EMA/TP TT6/89 Chart A-17-19. DISTRIBUTION OF COUNTYWIDE GROWTH manna r_nm inty i AAn_7ni n r r• r r� M " on M Mao to Ir r M r r w M M Number of Employees NORTH COUNTY SOUTH COUNTY 100,000 1 1 80,000 1 1 1 I I 60,000 1 1 1 40,000 I I D 20,000 1 1 1 J I •1 1 oa .aor 5� cP° Goo , `� Employment Centers Source: OCP-88 Modified Legend ®NEW EMA/TP TT6/89 11M EXISTING Chart A-17-11: ORANGE COUNTY PROJECTIONS EMPLOYMENT AT MAJOR EMPLOYMENT CENTERS, 2010 q ANAHEIM STADIUM 0� NORTH MAIN STREET ♦♦ DOWNTOWN ANAHEIM %% ♦♦ �} `Q� • ♦♦♦ ; j, IRVINE BUSINESS COMPLEX NORTH 9 ♦ r ♦ � D �`J�P sgNTq ���� 00 ` IRVINE SPECTRUM FW ANAHEIM ANA 1 Y � of V COMMERCIAL/ �3 • rt1 (S) OD RECREATION i, (� ' y &AN THE CIFY CENTER .�� OQO SANTA ANA `Ap61 Q CITY CENTER 8AN DIEGO F.$y IRVINE BUSINESS COMPLEX SOUTH i (405) SOUTH COAST METRO 5 HIGHWAY GOP (�) PACIFIC KAmn A_17_10- (1RAnl(,r: 1 r)l IKITV NAA InD ArTI\/ITV (`CAITCDC i E Mao maw M " Mao r m w m w m so 1 1 m v� NWY so) 2 a Q\J��'3 ,�•�O 1 0 D 8ANTA ��>J l�'y '9j� f J' ANA ♦O FWY J p q0 09 > BAIy ` C`/00 ti p� Z � �y �(c� SAN GABRI`���Q `� > `CGy �FUDOR(73�0 � ?�7j RIVER FWY ,� ,< ��l �S C C� (005) OIEGO ` FWY .. �`Ri��'�vO <i O .. PSZ FWY (q06� CO HIGHWAY (1) PACIFIC i9J Map A-17-13: STATE FREEWAY AND EXPRESSWAY SYSTEM EXISTING --- PROPOSED l� 154 F� y 148 186 0 �•jp 230 { 201 197 ,y 202 g�0 208 O 193 199 sA NTA 83 13 P D 170 190 175 A .1 184 F W Y �1 183 ' 209 170 N ti 202 167 m 143 19 OJ 'n `Apb A 3AN GABRIEL A 194 * FW LAGUNA 26 187 O RIVER (806) V 147 160 FWY(133)FWY NCO 227 161 219 A IEO 64 284 226 253 N 151 A,� N f CORONA DEL MAR 38 FWY(73) GOpS� 39 (5) HIGHWAY 132 PACIFIC 51 (�� 129 Map A-17-14: EXISTING TRAFFIC FLOW (AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC) Number in thousands(000) of vehicles J °^URGE: TRAFFIC ENGINEERING, EMA,DECEMBER 1988. TRAFFIC FLOW MAP . oa � � S BIBLIOGRAPHY Board Resolution No. 87-1206 (Establishment of Transportation Function), September 2, 1987 California Department of Finance. Population Research Unit. Orange County Population and Housing Estimates (January 1, 1981 through January 1, 1989) 1 California Government Code: Circulation Element [65302(b)] , Scenic Highways Element [65302(h)], Transportation Element [653(c)], and Transit Element [653(d)] County of Orange. 1986 Annual Monitoring Report ------ Development Monitoring Program (1987), Volume 8 ------ Development Monitoring Program (1988), Volume 9 ------ Environmental Management Agency. Annual Report, 87-88 ------ Growth Management Plan Element (1988) ------ Growth Management Plan Transportation Implementation Manual (June,1989) ------ Housing Element (August, 1985) ------ Environmental Management Agency/ Advance Planning Division. Land Use Element (June 1982) ------ Environmental Management Agency/Advance Planning Division. Component I: Long Range Planning Framework (1985) ------ Noise Element (October, 1984) ------ "Orange County Preferred Projections 1988 (OCP-88)" (August, 1988) ------ "Orange County Preferred Projections 1988, Modified (OCP-88 Modified)" (May, 1989) ------ Public Services and Facilities Element (January, 1985) ------ Environmental Management Agency/ Advance Planning Division. Recreation Element (December, 1984) ------ Environmental Management Agency/ Advance Planning Division. Resources Element (1988) ------ Environmental Management Agency. Safety Element (February, 1975) ------ Environmental Management Agency. Transportation Element (September,1982) B-1 Orange County Local Transportation Authority Resolution No. 90-01 (Ordinance No. 1) Orange County Transportation Commission. MMTS Projections (1982) ------ Transportation Development Act: Guide (March, 1989) ------ Traffic Solutions (1989) ------ 20 Year Master Plan of Transportation Improvement (1989) Orange County Transportation District. A Transitway Development Program for Orange County: Concept Design Final Report (February, 1989) ------ At a Glance 1988-89 ------ "Short Range Transit Plan and Transportation Improvement Plan for FY 1990-1994" , ------ "Description of OCTD Facilities" ------ "Description of Planned/Proposed OCTD Facilities" Southern California Association of Governments. Growth Management Plan (February, 1989) ------ "Draft Review Regional Mobility Plan" (October, 1988) ------ "Draft Baseline Regional Strategic Plan" (1986) U.S. Department of Commerce. Bureau of the Census U.S. Department of Transportation. Good Practices Guide: Federal-Aid Urban , System Program (June, 1985) ------ Review of Federal-Aid Urban System Program (January, 1985) B-2 53 -J NY :177 SAFETY ELEMENT i 1 1 � ADVANCE PLANNING i PROGRAM i LLJ 1 z 1 O ' a 9<IYp , O ' ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT AGENCY A � COUNTY OF ORANGE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ' � f Roger R. Stanton Chairman , First District 1 Harriett M. Wieder 1992 Gaddi H. Vasquez Second District Third District 1 i k Don R,. Roth Thomas F. Riley Fourth District Fifth District 16 1 COMPONENT II ADVANCE PLANNING PROGRAM SAFETY ELEMENT a County of Orange Environmental Management Agency ' Advance Planning Division August 26, 1987 Board of Supervisors Resolution No. 87-1186 ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING, COMMISSION , First District A. Earl Wooden Second District Roger Slates Third District Clarice Blamer Fourth District Chuck McBurney Fifth District Thomas Moody ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT AGENCY Michael M. Ruane, Director Thomas B. Mathews, Director of Planning Joan S. Golding, Manager, Advance Planning Division MA:tk/2042809350341 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter One: Introduction A. Overview SAF-1-1 B. Scope and Purpose of Element SAF-1-1 C. Relationship to the Advance Planning Program SAF-1-3 1. Component I: Long-Range Planning Framework SAF-1-3 2. Component II: The General Plan Elements SAF-1-3 ' 3. Component III: Community Profiles SAF-1-3 D. Related Planning Programs and Agencies SAF-1-3 1. Orange County Preferred-85 Demographic Projections SAF-1-4 2. National and State Planning Agencies SAF-1-4 Chapter Two: Inventory of Current Conditions and Future Prospects A. Introduction SAF-2-1 B. County Growth Trends SAF-2-1 1. Data Sources SAF-2-1 2. Development Patterns and Trends SAF-2-1 C. Inventory of Existing and Potential Public SAF-2-12 Safety Issues/Hazards 1. Crime a. Introduction SAP-2-12 b. Existing Conditions SAF-2-13 c. Summary SAF-2-18 2. Fire 1 a. Introduction SAF-2-19 b. Existing Conditions SAF-2-19 c. Orange County Fire Department SAF-2-23 d. Summary SAF-2-24 3. Hazardous Materials (Introduction) SAF-2-26 a. Hazardous Materials 1) Description SAF-2-27 2) Sources/Locations of Hazardous Materials SAF-2-27 3) Transportation Routes SAF-2-27 4) Hazardous Materials Management SAF-2-28 b. Hazardous Wastes 1) Description SAF-2-30 2) Hazardous Waste Generation SAF-2-30 3) Hazardous Waste Disposal SAF-2-33 4) Transportation Routes SAP-2-37 5) Orange County Hazardous Waste Management SAF-2-38 c. Infectious Wastes 1) Description SAF-2-41 2) Sources/Location of Wastes SAP-2-42 3) Transportation Routes SAF-2-42 4) Infectious Waste Management SAF-2-42 d. Radioactive Material 1) Description SAF-2-43 2) Sources/Locations of Materials SAF-2-43 3) Transportation Routes SAP-2-43 4) Radioactive Materials Management SAF-2-44 -i- e. Nuclear Materials (San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station - SCNGS) 1) Description SAF-2-4i: 2) Sources/Location SAF-2-4!'l 3) Transportation/Routes SAF-2-41; 4) Nuclear Materials Management (SCNGS) SAF-2-4'? f. Summary SAF-2-50 4. Aircraft Environment a. Introduction SAF-2-5:. b. Existing Conditions SAF-2-5:. c. Aircraft Accident Potential SAF-2-5ii d. Aircraft Safety Management SAF-2-53 e. Summary SAF-2-6:. D. Inventory of Existing and Potential Natural Hazards 1. Flood Hazards ' a. Introduction SAF-2-6.? b. Orange County Flood History SAF-2-63 c. Description of Potential County Flood Threats SAF-2-61 d. Description of Orange County Flood Control Facilities SAF-2-7L e. Future Prospects SAF-2-71 2. Seismic Safety and Geologic Hazards a. Introduction SAF-2-75 b. Existing Conditions SAF-2-75 c. Seismic and Geologic Hazard Management SAF-2-9L d. Future Prospects SAF-2-91 Chapter Three: Constraints and Opportunities A. Overview SAF-3-1 B. Constraints 1. Environmental Constraints SAF-3-1 2. Fiscal Constraints SAF-3-2 3. Governmental Constraints SAF-3-2 4. Economic and Market Constraints SAF-3-3 C. Opportunities 1. Environmental Opportunities SAF-3-3 , 2. Governmental/Fiscal Opportunities SAF-3-3 3. Economic and Market Opportunities SAF-3-4 Chapter Four: Public Safety Component ' A. Overview SAF-4-1 B. Goals and Objectives SAF-4-1 C. Crime 1. Introduction SAF-4-1 2. Goals and Objectives SAF-4-2 ' 3. Policies SAF-4-2 4. Implementation Programs SAF-4-3 D. Fire 1. Introduction SAF-4-6 2. Goals, Objectives and Policies SAF-4-6 3. Implementation Programs SAF-4-E -ii- E. Hazardous Materials 1. Goals, Objectives and General Policies SAF-4-11 2. Hazardous Materials a. Introduction SAF-4-12 b. Policies SAF-4-12 c. Implementation Programs SAF-4-13 3. Hazardous Waste a. Introduction SAF-4-15 b. Policies SAF-4-15 c. Implementation Programs SAF-4-15 4. Infectious Wastes a. Introduction SAF-4-21 b. Policies SAF-4-21 c. Implementation Programs SAF-4-21 ' S. Radioactive Material a. Introduction SAP-4-22 b. Policies SAF-4-22 c. Implementation Programs SAP-4-22 6. Nuclear Materials (San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station - SONGS) a. Introduction SAP-4-23 b. Policies SAP-4-23 c. Implementation Programs SAP-4-24 F. Aircraft Environment 1. Overview SAF-4-29 2. Goals, Objectives and Policies SAF-4-29 3. Implementation Programs SAP-4-30 iChapter Five: Natural Hazards Casponent A. Overview SAF-5-1 B. Goals and Objectives SAF-5-1 C. Flood Hazards 1. Introduction SAP-5-1 ' 2. Goals, Objectives and Policies SAP-5-2 3. Implementation Programs SAF-5-3 D. Seismic Safety and Geologic Hazards 1. Introduction SAF-5-7 2. Goals and Objectives SAF-5-7 3. Policies SAF-5-7 4. Implementation Programs SAF-5-9 Appendices A. Safety Element Implementation Programs SAF-A-1 B. Related Planning Agencies SAP-B-1 C. List of Acronyms/Abbreviations SAF-C-1 D. Bibliography SAF-D-1 E. Resolution of the Board of Supervisors (No. 87-1186) SAF-E-1 I -iii- LIST OF TABLES, CeAItR'S AND MAPS Tables 2-1 Orange County Demographic Projections SAF-2-2 2-2 Projected Population Growth Trends SAF-2-5 North County vs. South County 1980-2010 2-3 Projected Housing Growth Trends SAF-2-7 North County vs. South County 1980-2010 2-4 Projected Employment Growth Trends SAF-2-9 North County vs. South County 1980-2010 2-5 Part I Offenses 1985 and 1986 SAF-2-14 2-6 Part II Offenses 1985 and 1986 SAF-2-15 2-7 Hazardous Waste Generation in California SAF-2-32 ' 2-8 Modified Mercalli Intensity Scale SAP-2-82 Charts 2-1 Orange County Socioeconomic Projections SAF-2-3 Maps 1-1 Orange County Regional Statistical Areas SAP-1-2 2-2 Population by Regional Statistical Area SAP-2-6 2-3 Housing Units by Regional Statistical Area SAF-2-8 2-4 Employment by Regional Statistical Area SAF-2-1C 2-5 Orange County Cities & Communities Served by Orange County SAF-2-17 Sheriff 2-6 Fire Hazard Severity Zoning SAF-2-20 2-7 Orange County Fire Departments SAP-2-25 2-8 Hazardous Waste Facilities - Needs Assessment Regions SAP-2-31 2-9 Statewide Hazardous Waste Facilities Class I Disposal SAF-2-34 2-10 Regional Class I Disposal Sites SAF-2-35 2-11 Orange County Superfund Sites SAP-2-3E , 2-12 E.P.Z. & P.E.Z. for San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station SAP-2-45 2-13 Major Regional Air Installations SAP-2-5's 2-14 Airport Safety Areas: MCAS, El Toro SAF-2-55 2-15 Orange County Air Traffic Control Areas SAF-2-60 2-16 Santa Ana River Overflow Area SAF-2-65 2-17 Santiago Creek Overflow Area SAP-2-6E 2-18 Major Orange County Water Courses SAF-2-6E ' 2-19 Prado Dam and Santiago Reservoir Inundation Areas SAF-2-70 2-20 Santa Ana River Main Stern Project SAF-2-7: 2-21 Fault Map SAF-2-71 2-22 7.5 Newport - Inglewood Fault Scenario SAF-2-75 2-23 8.3 San Andreas Fault Scenario SAF-2-8( 2-24 Soil Gas Accumulation Areas SAF-2-9t 2-25 Index to Special Studies Zones Maps in the Los Angeles SAF-2-9: Region CL:vmPA05-4 -iv- ' 7278 ' CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION A. Overview The Safety Element, one of eight elements of the General Plan, contains County policies on identified and potential hazards and safety considerations, their mitigation (i.e., reduction in damage and loss to real and personal property and minimization of adverse social and economic impacts) and implications for development. The eight elements of the General Plan provide the mid-range (15- to 20-year) portion of the planning program and focus on objectives and policies at the Regional Statistical Area (RSA) level. (See Map 1-1.) All elements have the same horizon year (2010) and growth assumptions to ensure internal consistency. The Safety Element references policies and programs in other County General Plan elements that affect safety issues and provides guidance for future safety- related planning studies. The Safety Element text is divided into five chapters. The first chapter provides an overview of the scope and purpose of the Safety Element. Chapter Two is an inventory of existing and projected growth; growth related development patterns; and characteristics of existing hazards and safety ' categories. Chapter Three considers future prospects, planning constraints and opportunities regarding safety-related activities and facilities. Chapters Four and Five ("The Components") focus on two broad safety or hazard categories: public safety (fire, crime, nuclear, hazardous waste and aircraft hazards) and natural hazards (flood and seismic/geologic hazards) . In addition to individual goals and objectives, these chapters provide implementation policies and programs that address the constraints and opportunities identified in Chapter Three. The appendices provide reference data for the Safety Element. B. Scope and Purpose of the Element The State Government Code requires general plans to include "a safety element for the protection of the community from any unreasonable risks associated with the effects of seismically induced surface rupture, ground shaking, ground failure, tsunami, seiche, and dam failure; slope instability leading to mudslides and landslides, subsidence and other geologic hazards known to the legislative body; flooding; and wildland and urban fires." As such, the Safety Element is a primary document for identifying hazards which must be considered in the physical development of a jurisdiction. While the Safety Element is required to focus on fire, flood and geologic hazards, the Government Code does make provision that a safety element may also address other locally relevant safety issues. A basic purpose of the Safety Element is to comprehensively inventory hazards which primarily impact persons and property in the unincorporated areas of Orange County. The scope of the Element also allows for a countywide perspective for other safety-related matters. This hazards inventory identifies information necessary for the development of goals, objectives, policies and implementation programs. The goals and objectives of the Safety Element are consistent with state requirements and are based on an assessment of safety-related needs, and the identification of problems impeding the resolution of hazards and safety concerns. The policies and programs of the element form an effective implementation plan to meet the SAF-1-1 1-B 44-E 43-C y Orange County Regional Statistical Areas m' established goals and objectives of the Element. The Safety Element serves to guide and direct local government decision-making in safety-related matters, and also foster coordination with regional, state, and federal policies and programs. ' C. Relationship to the Advance Planning Program 1. Component I: Long-Range Planning Framework Component I provides the long-range planning framework and general goals for the Advance Planning Program. Included within this document are broad safety goals that provide a basis for the more specific goals and policies contained in the Safety Element. ' 2. Component II: The General Plan Elements The General Plan addresses a 15- to 20-year time frame. Component II of the Advance Planning Program consists of the eight General Plan elements, including the Safety Element. A major goal of the Safety Element is to mitigate the effects of real and potential hazards and safety concerns and to minimize damage and loss to real and personal property and adverse social and economic consequences. While this goal is a high priority, it must be achieved while maintaining internal consistency among the other elements of the General Plan as required by state law. Therefore, the Safety Element does not replace or supersede any of the other General Plan elements; instead, the Safety Element addresses, amplifies and supports safety-related concerns identified in the other General Plan elements. The Safety Element is implemented by various coordinated programs that are developed to support and carry out its goals, objectives and policies. The Safety Element is the most current expression of County ' safety policies. It achieves internal consistency with the other General Plan elements through the use of common socio-economic projections and assumptions and the pursuit of common major goals such as compatibility between land use and natural or man-made hazards. 3. Component III: Community Profiles The Community Profiles are the most detailed portions of the Advance Planning Program. They are short-range in scope and focus on community- level policies and programs. The Community Profiles geographically depict existing geologic hazards and flood/slope constraints. D. Related Planning Programs and Agencies This section summarizes the various federal, state, regional, local, and non-governmental agencies and programs that influence County planning activities regarding natural or man-made hazards or other safety-related considerations. For a complete listing of planning agencies, see Appendix B. SAF-1-3 1. Orange County Preferred-1985 Demographic Projections Orange County Preferred-1985 (OCP-85) Demographic Projections provide ' housing-, population- and employment-projection data. The projections, which have been adopted by the Board of Supervisors, provide a single data reference for policy-making and program planning. OCP-85 is used throughout the General Plan (e.g., Land Use, Housing, ar.d Transportation elements) . Moreover, the projections are used by the ' Orange County Transportation Commission, Orange County Transit District., and County of Orange for all long-range planning and budgeting activities. , Regional Statistical Areas (RSAs) are the geographic units used for the! development of these policy projections. These projections are ' disaggregated to Community Analysis Areas (CAAs) for the purpose of performing Development Monitoring Program (DMP) and Areawide Fiscal Impact System (AFIS) analyses. DMP and AFIS analyses are conducted by the County Administrative Office in order to determine the impact of existing and projected development on infrastructure facilities and fiscal resources. CAA projections are disaggregated by EMA to the Traffic Analysis Zone (TAZ) level for transportation planning purposes., OCP-85 serves as the County's official input to the SCAG (Southern California Association of Governments) Regional Growth Forecast Policy,. Growth Forecast policy is implemented through SCAG's regional planning ' activities, project review, and coordination with city, county, state and federal governments. The adopted growth forecast is utilized in the development of the Air Quality Management Program and the Regional Transportation Plan, which are mandated by federal and state law. 2. National and State Planning Agencies The State Department of Mining and Geology provides Orange County with , Special Study Zones Maps in accordance with the Alquist-Priolo Geologic: Hazards Zone Act. , Project flood and 100-year flood plain maps are provided to Orange County by the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers (COE) ; Federal Insurance Rate Maps also provide information on 100-year flood plains. The amended Federal Resource and Conservation Recovery Act (RCRA) of 1976 establishes a hazardous waste program for the state. The Federal Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has permanently transferred the authority for program operation to the State Department of Health Services. In 1985, a Joint Powers Authority representing the Counties of Orange, ' Ventura, Santa Barbara, San Bernardino, Riverside, San Diego, Los Angeles, and Imperial was established to address the siting of hazardous facilities (treatment, storage and disposal) . SAP-1-4 ' r ' The California Resources Agency is an umbrella agency composed of the numerous state jurisdictions that either plan or manage the use and protection of California's resources. Included within this agency is the California Energy Commission. This agency, and the many others 1 located under the auspices of the Resources Agency, have considerable influence on County resource planning activities and often mandate specific county programs to promote statewide resource goals (e.g., Local Coastal Plan, Air Quality Management Plans) . The Southern California Association of Governments has long been concerned with the ability of the region's air carrier system to serve the anticipated growth in air travel demand. In 1978, the SCAG Executive Committee created the Aviation Work Program Committee (AWPCO) composed of local government representatives to re-examine the region's ' existing and planned air carrier capacity. A comprehensive listing of related planning agencies is provided in Appendix B of this text. i 1 PA53-1 SAF-1-5 7271 1 . ' CHAPTER TWO: INVENTORY OF CURRENT CONDITIONS AND FUTURE PROSPECTS A. Introduction This chapter provides an insight into current county growth conditions and the manner in which future growth may be influenced by the identification and mitigation of safety considerations such as the incidence of crime, fire, hazardous materials, flooding, seismic and geologic hazards, and aircraft hazards. The chapter is divided into two sections. The first section presents a detailed inventory of current conditions and projected levels of population, housing and employment. The second section presents an inventory and analysis of county hazards for both current and projected future conditions. ' B. County Growth Trends 1. Data Sources For the purposes of the General Plan, 1980 was selected as the baseline for data collection and analysis. The prime advantage of using 1980 as the base year is the availability of census data, which serve as benchmarks for population, housing, and income trends. In addition, the primary source of land use data -- the Orange County Land Cover Survey -- was compiled in 1980. This survey was conducted by the ' Environmental Systems Research Institute in cooperation with the County and Southern California Edison. The horizon year of the County's General Plan is 2010. All projections ' and analyses of physical and socioeconomic conditions in the county are keyed to this thirty-year time frame. Table 2-1 on the following page contains a summary of population, housing and employment trends that are expected to occur during the study period. These projections are broken down by Regional Statistical Area (RSA) . Chart 2-1 graphically illustrates the relationships between RSAs for these three variables. The source of the demographic projections is the Orange County Preferred (OCP) forecast. The most recent iteration known as Orange County Preferred Projections-1985 (OCP-85) was adopted by the Board of Supervisors on February 19, 1986. In addition to its use by County agencies, OCP-85 is the County's official input to the SCAG Regional Growth Forecast Policy. The OCP projections can be amended in the following ways: 1) concurrent with the processing of a project that is ' inconsistent with the projections; 2) through annual review as a part of the Development Monitoring Program; or 3) as part of the two- to three- year SCAG Regional Development Guide update process. 2. Development Patterns and Trends During the past 20 years, the focal point of Orange County's growth has shifted gradually southward. In the 1950s and 160s the majority of new development occurred in the northern areas of the county such as Anaheim, Fullerton, Orange, Westminster and Fountain Valley. During the ' 1970s, as vacant land became more scarce in these northern areas, the center of growth shifted to the south with the rise of new communities like Irvine, Mission Viejo, and Laguna Niguel. For analytical purposes, SAF-2-1 TABLE 2-1 ORANGE COUNTY DEMOGRAPHIC PROTECTIONS POPULATION HOUSING EMPLOYMENT RSA 1980a/ 2010b/ 1980a/ 2010b/ 1980a/ 2010b/ 35-J 156,248 165,400 52,454 59,800 55,200 86,400 36-A 168,782 202,300 64,578 80,900 100,600 125,600 37-H 338,682 389,200 124,875 145,700 146,000 212,000 38-I 321,137 378,900 119,038 150,900 90,300 133,500 39-F 170,644 257,400 74,920 112,500 146,800 237,200 40-D 134,696 279,800 66,072 134,600 32,600 109,900 41-B 116,686 245,900 39,276 86,200 54,900 94,200 N 42-G 377,316 488,800 130,103 167,400 211,600 336,100 N 43-C 95,954 242,300 32,885 93,500 17,400 62,800 44-E 52,564 181,100 17,313 69,200 60,000 172,800 COUNTY TOTAL 1,932,709 2,831,100 721,514 1,100,700 915,400 1,570,500 Sources: a/ 1980 Census b/ County of Orange: OCP-85 Projections P"-e1tPA40-8(1) 10/17/86 . . •:. 460, 420, .. _., wo 2. .. / / / �00 00 %% so- / /// /// /X. o 801. r/ 40— / % / 20 : : , OAAM3EFIS IN low , Oran • - County • • • • Projections • North County is generally considered to be the area north and west of , the Costa Mesa Freeway (State Highway 55) and contains RSAs 35-J, 36-A, 37-H, 38-I, 41-B, and 41-G. South County is represented by RSAs 39-F, 40-D, 43-C and 44-E. Table 2-2 and Map 2-2 compare the projected population growth trends ir, the north and south portions of the county. During the thirty-year study period, about 56 percent of the county's net population growth is: ' projected to occur in the southern RSAs. Although the rate of growth in North County is declining, this area will still contain the majority of the county's population throughout the study period. In 1980, 77 percent of the county's 1,932,709 people lived in the north. By 2010, it is expected that this figure will fall to 66 percent. The difference in growth between north and south becomes more apparent ' when the internal growth rates of the two areas are compared. Between 1980 and 2010, the population of the northern portion of the county is expected to grow by 391,649, or 26 percent. South County will add ' 506,742 persons during the same period; however, this represents an increase of 112 percent. The projected increase in the county's housing stock reflects the ' population trend identified above. (See Table 2-3 and Map 2-3.) Due 1:o a projected decline in the average household size from 2.68 to 2.57 persons per dwelling unit countywide, the number of new units expected , to be built between 1980 and 2010 represents a slightly higher percentage increase than that for the population itself. Consequently, while the county's population is projected to rise by 46 percent (898,391 persons) between 1980 and 2010, the housing stock is expected , to increase by 52 percent (379,186 units) over the same interval. During the period between 1980 and 2010, the spatial distribution of neew ' residential construction is expected to be skewed slightly toward South County. Fifty-eight percent of the projected 379,186 new units built :.n the County between 1980 and 2010 are expected to be located in the southern area. Although the northern portion of the county is growing ' much less rapidly than the south on a percentage basis, by 2010 nearly two-thirds (63 percent) of all housing units will still be found in the! northern RSAs. ; County employment patterns are very similar to the population and housing distributions described above. (See Table 2-4 and Map 2-4.) As. of 1980, 72 percent of the county's 915,400 jobs were located in North , County. This is very similar to the population distribution identified in Table 2-2. By 2010, a moderate southward shift in the employment distribution is projected to occur. The magnitude of this shift is ' nearly equal to the anticipated shift in population and housing. South County is projected to receive about 50 percent of the new jobs created between 1980 and 2010. Again, this figure is similar to the projected differential growth in population and housing. Overall, the county's ' employment base is projected to grow faster than population, with a 72 percent gain between 1980 and 2010. This compares to a projected population growth of 46 percent during the same period. ' SAF-2-4 ' i 1 TABLE 2-2 PROJECTED POPULATION GROWTH TRENDS NORTH COUNTY vs. SOUTH COUNTY 1980 - 2010 North Countya/ South Countyb/ County Total 1980 2010 Change 1980 2010 Change 1980 2010 Change Total Population 1,478,851 1,870,500 +26% 453,858 960,600 +112% 1,932,709 2,831,100 +46% Pct. of Total 77% 66% -11% 23% 34% +11% 100% 100% - Population aD Growth - - 391,649 - - 506,742 - - 898,391 1 N 1 °i Pct. of Growth - - 44% - - 56% - - 100% Average Household Size 2.79 2.71 - 0.08 2.37 2.34 -0.03 2.68 2.57 -0.11 Notes: a/ Includes RSAs 35-J, 36-A, 37-H, 38-I, 41-B and 42-G b/ Includes RSAs 39-F, 40-D, 43-C and 44-E Sources: 1980 Census County of Orange: OCP-85 Projections Orange County EMA/Advance Planning Division PA40-8(2) 6290 2010 41-8lam >>< tiLUN •• N 1 0 44—E 43—C 3T—H r <:2_ 35—J ` 38-1 POPULATION By Regional Statistical Area OCP-85 2-2 TABLE 2-3 PROJECTED HOUSING GROWTH TRENDS NORTH COUNTY vs. SOUTH COUNTY 1980 - 2010 North Countya/ South Countyb/ County Total 1980 2010 Change 1980 2010 Change 1980 2010 Change Total Units 530,324 690,900 +30% 191,190 409,800 +114% 721,514 1,100,700 +53% Pct. of Total 74% 63% -11% 26% 37% +11% 100% 100% - ca a Growth - - 160,576 - - 218,610 - - 379,186 N Pct. of Growth - - 42% - - 58% - - 100% Notes: a/ Includes RSAs 35-J, 36-A, 37-H, 38-I, 41-B and 42-G b/ Includes RSAs 39-F, 40-D, 43-C and 44-E Sources: 1980 Census County of Orange: OCP-85 Projections Orange County EMA/Advance Planning Division PA40-8(3) 6290 2010 • fOgOm 41-B 0 36-A 43-C T-H 42-G 35-J 39-F X 40-D 38-1 L-I^llolkltl-% 1lkll"r4o MAP I IW%J*Jll'V%A WINN I %,.f By Regional Statistical Area F- OCP-85 2-3 J TABLE 2-4 PROJECTED EMPLOYMENT GROWTH TRENDS NORTH COUNTY vs. SOUTH COUNTY 1980 - 2010 North Countya/ South CountyY County Total 1980 2010 Change 1980 2010 Change 1980 2010 Change Total Employment 658,600 987,800 +50% 256,800 582,700 +127% 915,400 1,570,500 +72% Pct. of Total Employment 72% 63% -98 28% 37% +98 100% 100% - Growth - - 329,200 - - 325,900 - - 655,100 N 1 m Pct. of Growth - - 50% - - 50% - - 100% i Notes: a/ Includes RSAs 35-J, 36-A, 37-H, 38-I, 41-B and 42-G b/ Includes RSAs 39-F, 40-D, 43-C and 44-E Sources: Orange County EMA/Advance Planning Division County of Orange OCP-85 PA40-8(4) 6290 41 Eli @Dow 4 4 43-C 37 I-X TO 35-J 38-1 40-1 mPLOYMENT By Regional Statistical Area OCP-85 2-4 As the County continues to grow, the demand for public safety will increase. Services and programs designed to improve the safety of Orange County residents as the urbanized areas expand will experience increasing pressure. This pressure will be met through various methods. ' For example, adequate methods of crime protection already exists in the urbanized areas, but it is necessary that affirmative steps be taken to inform the public of available services and programs. The demand for other safety related services, such as flood control, cannot be met enirely within the borders of Orange County. The County must ultimately depend on cooperation with other counties and agencies for the provision of an adequate supply of this service. One of the major purposes of the ' Safety Element is to provide a clear statement of County policy so that timely steps can be taken to ensure that an adequate supply of all necessary services and facilities will be available to meet the County's ' growth needs. 1 1 1 1 1 1 SAF-2-11 1 1 C. Inventory of Existing and Potential Public Safety Issues/Hazards ' Public safety considerations in planning provide protection for people and property from loss due to natural or man-induced hazards or illegal acts. ' This section focuses upon four public safety concerns that affect the physical and social development of Orange County. They include crime, fires , hazards, hazardous materials and aircraft. The information presented in tte following section provides background data for the goals, objective policies and programs beginning on page SAF-4-1. 1. Crime ' a. Introduction ' A review of the nation's crime statistics for the past decade reveals a steady increase in virtually every significant crime category. The rise in crime is alarming and disturbing. ' A basic ingredient of the quality of life sought by existing and potential residents of an area like Orange County rests in the ' feeling that a community is secure and safe from criminal activity. To a growing urban place like Orange County, the concern of law enforcement is to devise measures for reducing the level of crime activities and to promote the idea that Orange County is a safe , place to raise families, conduct business and recreate. The two primary forms of crime deterrence most commonly used are suppression and prevention. Crime suppression may be defined as tie ' application of proactive FLnd investigative techniques by which law violators are aggressively identified, arrested and prosecuted. By contrast, the traditional law enforcement approach to crime is ' reactive. With the exception of crimes committed in the presence :)f an officer, the police usually investigate major crimes after the fact. Proactive police efforts are usually limited to narcotics aid , crimes of vice. There are two interrelated aspects of prevention which deserve ' discussion. First is prevention of crime, a major concern of policing and prosecution agencies. This aspect focuses on offenses and is directly related to crime reduction. Second is the prevention of criminality which focuses upon the offender. ' Responsibility for this aspect of prevention is placed on society as a whole, specifically on social and correctional agencies and the courts. ' In 1983, Orange County law enforcement agencies participated in the Orange County Crime Reduction Program. The program was designed to fine-tune the investigative techniques and crime prevention , practices of the participating agencies through the initiation of proactive efforts for the control and prevention of offenses. Additional goals of the pcogram include activities to increase ' arrests; improved methods to clear cases and prosecutions; programs to promote citizen involvement; methods to increase the recovery cf :GAF-2-12 ' stolen property; and methods that improve the operational -� effectiveness of criminal justice personnel. b. Existing Conditions 1) Crime Statistics The Orange County Sheriff's Department maintains detailed records on crimes committed within its service areas in Orange County. The records are divided into two major categories: Part I and Part II offenses. Part I offenses consist of the most serious crimes including homicide, rape, robbery, assault, burglary, larceny, and auto theft. The more serious Part I crimes not only present the greatest threat to the public safety due to frequency of occurrence, but also pose the greatest problem in apprehension and arrest. Part II offenses include forgery, counterfeiting, stolen property, etc. In 1985, 11,725 ' Part I offenses and 65,076 Part II offenses were committed in the unincorporated area of Orange County and the contracting cities of San Juan Capistrano and Villa Park. Of these totals, arrests were made in 2,328 Part I and 59,981 Part II cases. The crime statistics for 1986 reveal that Part I and Part II offenses have increased by 918 and 13,491 respectively since 1985. Arrests in these two categories were also increased for the same period. In 1986, 3,242 arrests were made for Part I offenses and 70,047 Part II arrests were made. (see Tables 2-5 and 2-6) The Orange County Sheriff Department plans to increase its efforts in the reduction of narcotics and narcotic-related crimes. Though narcotics are not a major problem in the County, they are a contributing factor in various other crimes. In 1986, the Sheriff Department and the police forces of Anaheim, Santa Ana and Huntington Beach initiated the Regional Narcotics Suppression Program. The program currently includes 11 local and 3 federal agencies enjoined to reduce narcotics and its influences within the crime environment. It is anticipated that a youth-oriented drug education program will also be developed by the Sheriff's Department. This program will be designed to involve students in an "Anti-Drug Campaign" focusing primarily on Orange County public schools. D SAF-2-13 TABLE 2-5 1985 1986 Actual Number Percent Actual Number Percent PART I OFFENSES Offenses Cleared Cleared Offenses Cleared Cleared F NAL HOMICIDE: urder & Non-egligent Manslaughter 6 3 50.0 8 5 62.5 B. Negligent Manslaughter 2 0 0.0 2 3 150.0 2. RAPE: A. Forcible 36 25 69.4 44 30 68.2 B. Attempt Rape 25 9 36.0 No Statistics Available 3. ROBBERY: A. Weapon 119 40 33.6 119 58 48.7 B. Strongarm 56 21 37.5 97 43 44.3 4. AGGRAVATED ASSAULT 429 304 70.9 621 424 68.3 5. BURGLARY: A. Residence 2,685 324 12.1 2,808 448 16.0 B. Non-Residence 1,173 329 28.0 1,361 326 24.0 C. Locked Vehicle 1,772 67 3.8 1,732 73 4.2 6. LARCENY: A. Grand Theft 1,227 117 9.5 1,230 558 45.4 B. Petty Theft 3,427 940 27.4 3,624 1,073 29.6 7. AUTO THEFT: A. Felony 768 149 19.4 997 201 20.2 GRAND TOTAL 11,725 2,328 19.8 12,643 3,242 25.6 SOURCE: Orange County Sheriff Biennial Report 1985-1986 SA.F-2-14 . TABLE 2-6 i ' 1985 1986 PART II OFFENSES Actual Number Percent Actual Number Percent Offenses 'Cleared Cleared Offenses Cleared Cleared 8. OTHER ASSAULTS 1,314 1,096 83.4 1,975 1,638 85.2 9. FORGERY & COUNTERFEITING 1,694 1,410 83.2 1,932 2,193 113.5 10, EMBEZZLEMENT & FRAUD 98 54 55.1 11 50 10.4 11. STOLLEN PROPERTY - REC. LOSS 31 32 103.2 57 39 68.4 12. WEAPONS LAWS 247 230 93.1 311 244 78.5 13. PROSTITUTION/COMMERCIAL VICE 4 4 100.0 3 1 33.3 14. SEX OFFENSES (Except 2/13) 539 215 39.9 718 319 44.4 15. OFFENSES AGAINST FAMILY-CHILD 1,135 914 80.5 1,417 1,124 79.3 16. NARCOTIC LAWS 1,304 920 70.6 1,395 865 62.0 17. LIQUOR LAWS 761 761 100.0 929 879 94.6 18. DRUNKENNESS 116 112 96.6 103 94 91.3 19. DISORDERLY CONDUCT 434 130 30.0 679 147 21.6 20. VAGRANCY 242 72 29.8 227 53 23.3 21. GAMBLING LAWS 15 0 0.0 0 0 0.0 22. DRIVING WHILE INTOXICATED 173 150 86.7 193 159 82.7 23. ROAD/DRIVING VIOLATIONS 6,335 6,118 96.6 5,598 5,411 96.7 24. PARKING VIOLATIONS 31,058 31,058 100.0 40.767 40,767 100.0 25. OTHER VEHICLE LAWS 15,938 14,774 92.7 18,001 14,189 78.8 26. MISCELLANEOUS VIOLATIONS 3,638 1,931 53.1 4,191 1,830 43.7 GRAND TOTAL 65,076 59,981 92.2 78,567 70,047 89.2 SOURCE: Orange County Sheriff Biennial Report 1985-1986 SAF-2-16 2) Sheriff's Department Since the 1940s, the Sheriff's Department has grown from a small, rural, county police force to a modern law enforcement agency employing nearly 1,500 people. Currently, the Orange County Sheriff-Coroner Department (OCSCD) provides police patrol and investigative services to the unincorporated areas of Orancte County and the contracting cities of San Juan Capistrano and Villa Park. (See Map 2-5) . In addition, the OCSCD has developed a Mutual Aid Plan with each of the 26 law enforcement: agencies in the incorporated cities. Under the Mutual Aid Plait, formalized in March 1968 by the Orange County Chiefs of Police and Sheriff's Association, law enforcement agencies agree to provide additional necessary assistance during immediate local police emergencies. The Department's patrol function is organized geographically into two divisions, the North and Soui:h Operations Divisions. A North Operations Division is stationed in the Sheriff's permit- nent headquarters in the City of Santa Ana. This division's service territory covers the unincorporated County islands, John Wayne Airport, areas north of Brea and Yorba Linda, the foothi::l area east of Orange and north of Tustin, the Irvine Coastal area north of Laguna Beach, and the City of Villa Park. As of 1984 , the total population served was approximately 101,000. A South Operations Division is headquartered at the Sheriff's substation in Laguna Niguel. The service territory for this division covers generally the areas east of Irvine and south o:' Laguna Beach. Major communities served with contiguous patrol service include El Toro; Laguna Hills; Mission Viejo; Laguna Niguel; South Laguna; Dana Point; Capistrano Beach; the Foothill area of the Santa Ana Mountains; Rancho Santa Margarita and thle City of San Juan Capistrano. As of 1984, the total population served was about 215,000. Patrol services in this area accoun-: for 70% of patrol activity in unincorporated Orange County. The Orange County Sheriff's Department maintains a number of specialty divisions and agencies. These specialty units were established to specifically address the wide variety of policiiig and investigative needs of the County's growing population. These units include the Investigative Division, responsible fo:: case follow-up and development for prosecution; the Air Suppor•_ Bureau, providing aerial support for County fire units as well as their law enforcement duties; the Hazardous Devices Squad, responding to calls of suspected bombs, explosive materials, acid abandoned military or other ordinance; the Forensic Science Services Division, responsible for evidence collection, scene reconstruction, interpretation, and specimen analyses; the Coroner Division, responsible for investigating all violent, sudden, unexpected and unexplained deaths; the Transportation Bureau, responsible for routing of inmates to county and state facilities; and the Harbor Patrol, responsible for law enforcement, fire fighting on both land and water, and cliff/water rescues. SAF-2-16 , ;i (o ::•. •.... .- morthAouth o00ratlon Division ! 6111.0 and OOnnYnMhO served br O.C.Sheriff Petrol 400, t, �t jjj7j,tplf.: t> t { t, ✓' ) ) ) ) NOTE: This map ie for ttfomlaftul puposas any and Is noe a pare of this aismar& ORANGE COUNTY CITIES & COMMUNITIES SERVED BY O.C. SHERIFF somw-- ono•c«•fty MAP 2—5 c. Summary Orange County is a rowing urban community. As its population growing Y grows, the incidence of c:cime is expected to increase. The degree to which crime influences the growth and development of Orange County is in part the responsibility of the Sheriff's Department. The effectiveness of existing and future programs will be a key ingredient in the communities' perception that Orange County is a safe and secure place. SAF-2-18 1 2. Fire a. Introduction This section of the Safety Element examines the threat of fire to urban areas, wildlands and the urban/wildlands interface. Fire is a constant threat in all parts of the county. Map 2-6 depicts the fire hazard areas identified by the Orange County Fire Service. It is the responsibility of the Orange County Fire Department to meet the fire threat challenge for present and future development and residents. Information pertinent to fire department facilities and facilities planning may be found in the Public Services and Facilities Element of the General Plan. b. Existing Conditions 1) Wildland Fires The major objective of wildland fire defense planning is to prevent wildland fires from starting and, if unsuccessful, to minimize the damage to natural resources and structures once a wildland fire starts. Some of the more successful programs/ordinances currently in effect which contribute to the success of wildland fire prevention activities are: - Closure of private lands in hazardous fire areas to public access.- Uniform Building Code prohibition of combustible roof covering materials. - Construction and maintenance of community and private fuel modification programs. Vegetative Management Program (controlled burning) - Weed Abatement Program - Fire Prevention Education Programs There are a number of natural conditions which might increase the possibility of wildland fires. Three such conditions are the type and condition of wildland vegetation, the topography of the area and weather elements. A relatively large portion of the county is covered by natural (though modified) vegetation. Of these different vegetation types, coastal sage scrub, chaparral and grasslands reach some degree of flammability during the dry summer months and, under the right conditions, during the winter months. For example, as chaparral gets older, twigs and branches within the plants die and are held in place. A stand of brush 10 to 20-years of age usually has enough SAF-2-19 � et\ J■f► a■bid ■■t� y elan■. ■■/� ./G{I1Wiper ■■■� ■■►. as t7■ago TMOINOU-so \� \mina■■1„ • `■tt/ .. .■t■■ Mm �■/■■■t■ant■et■■itr ��tt■■■■■m!/f■■■ttte �■/tt■tttt■tt■tat►. �/■■■■■m■■■t■KAI �I■!■■■t■t■■■Patl1 , • 36iiiiiiSaiiiiF •■■t■/Jana■■■ . Nor f■tnr.rm■ntt■e � � � t■■C,■■tti!■■/ �II'riG■I■■■■■' • ■rant■■■:■■■a' oIlr , ,l............ ■••■!■■■■■OW nnit■/n■!!ltna i!/■■■//■/■■■■I "n■!�t■■ttm■ltttm 1 I■■!■O■/■■■■!m!■ mm■/ttitt■tm■m■tt 'fit■n■■■/t►1■■■■■t!. '�t■■■■/■t■■■tt■w► lfti■■w■■■■■m■tti •i �iw. ■t■mf■t■■m■■m■■■, ■tt■■\7■■wm■t■■I' • ' e� ``■am//■•l:mumr •� Piiiii!tidmw::mi .■lntr,at■fmlm■■m► olr./■!■!■/■■!a■, i■/.•at//■■■o/■t■■a► � its■ntt:ttt■■■■/tt/■tt■n■■ atitn■t■nntttt■t■!■/nttnntli . tra�■■ltt�■�■t■■!t■■ant■■■tni ins■ ■tt■■ttt]■■nt■■■■■■Mn■■■tt■ Iltf■ ■/t■■//N■!/■■/manna/■■■!�■ rti■■■■t swtt■■a:I■■inn■■■t■/nt■■tm■ II a■t■/■t■ ■/t1•/■■:■tttt■t■■t/t■■tttt a■w■■t■!■!■ /tt■■■�a■■■!■■■att/■■■ttt■ it■nt3■�anan ■atn/:n/!■■!■■■■■■■/■■name • �■■tt■■■w■t■ ■■!/�ta■a■■tt■■■■a/t■■ttm• �■ittnt■■tit ■tCa■■■■■ti■■■■!■■■■■■■■■mCUMMN .psi■■■■■■t■■/■■I allumman �flitannnntnws�tt/' ` dead material to produce rates of spread about the same as in grass fires when the fuels have dried out. In severe drought years, additional plant material may die, contributing to the fuel load. There will normally be enough dead fuel accumulated in 20- to 30-year old brush to give rates of spread about twice as fast as in a grass fire. Under moderate weather conditions that produce a spread rate of one-half foot per second in grass, a 20- to 30-year old stand of chaparral may have a rate of fire spread of about one foot per second. Fire spread in old brush (40 years or older) has been measured at eight times as fast as in grass, about four feet per second. Under extreme weather conditions, the fastest fire spread in grass is 12 feet per second or about eight miles per hour. Topography has considerable effect.on wildland fire behavior and on the ability of firefighters and their equipment to take action to suppress those fires. A fire starting in the bottom of a canyon may rush quickly to the ridge and become large, before initial attack forces can arrive, simply because of topography. Rough topography greatly limits road construction and road standards and accessibility by ground equipment. Steep topography also channels air flow, creating extremely erratic winds on lee slopes and in canyons. Weather elements have many complex and important effects on fire intensity and behavior. Wind is of prime importance; as wind velocity increases, the rate of fire spread also increases. Relative humidity (i.e., relative dryness of the air) also affects fire intensity and behavior. Drier air leads to drier vegetation and increases the likelihood that the vegetation will ignite and burn. Precipitation (its annual total, seasonal distribution, and storm intensity) has further effects on the moisture content of vegetation and hence important effects on fire ignition and behavior. Many wildland fires have been associated with adverse weather conditions. In the 1982 Gypsum Canyon fire, 17 homes were lost and 18,000 acres were burned, leaving an estimated 16 million dollars in damage. The Santa Ana Winds during the time of the fire were approximated at 50-55 mph, making the fire difficult to contain. Reasons for control difficulty associated with wildland fires include the following: o Adverse weather conditions o Large quantities of combustible fuel o Inaccessible terrain o Nonexistent or very limited water supply o Large fire frontage-dispersing fire forces SAF-2-21 2) Urban Fires Fire prevention is the major fire department activity in urban areas. The fire department objective is to prevent fires from startinc;. Once a fire starts the object is to minimize the damage to life and property. Urban fire prevention programs that are designed to achieve this fire prevention objective are as follows: Adoption and aggressive enforcement of the most recent Uniform Fire Code. - Development of a comprehensive master plan to ensure that staffing and facilities keep pace with growth. - Plan check of new construction to ensure that all construction features meet code requirements. - Active participation in Subdivision Committee and other planning activities. Some of the most difficult fire protection problems in the urban area are as ;Follows: - Multiple story,, wood frame, high density apartment developments - Large contiguous developed areas with combustible roof-• covering materials - Storage, handling, and use of hazardous materials on 9 9 site - Natural disasters The character of the existing built-up area and future lane. use determines the location of fire stations, number of companies, manning of such companies, and future fire protection facility needs. Structural conditions also influence the quantity of water needed for fire protection (fire flow) and hydrant distribution. Features of structural conditions that affect fire control include the following: o Type of construction and use of buildings o Area of building (ground floor area) o Number of stories o Type of roof covering material o Exposures to the building The Uniform Building Code regulates all of the above features and requires certain built-in fire protection devices when maximum allowable areas or heights are exceeded or the building use presents a life or property protection SPF-2-22 problem. Automatic fire extinguishing systems provide an effective and successful private fire protection system which can minimize loss of life and property caused by fires. These systems operate with 94-97% efficiency thereby reducing the demands or public fire protection needs. Other f ibute to major principal actors that can contribute a�or fire protection problems include the following: o Delayed detection of emergencies o Delayed notification of the fire agency o Response time of emergency equipment o Street structure (private, curvilinear and dead-ended) o Multiple-story, frame, apartment and condominium units o Inadequate and unreliable water supply with poor hydrant distribution o Inadequate code enforcement and code revisions which lag behind fire prevention knowledge 3) Urban/Wildlands Interface In an effort to alleviate fire dangers near the interface between urban development and wildlands, the construction of fuel modification zones (firebreak, fuelbreak or greenbelt) has been required. The continued application of this method does have drawbacks and, therefore, is not the only acceptable solution. In addition to the associated impacts created by some fuelbreak installations, there are usually impacts on wildlife, unique vegetation and, in some cases, to the watershed cover as deep-rooted chaparral species are replaced by shallow-rooted grasses. Fuelbreaks are costly to install, require expensive maintenance to insure their success during a wildfire, and offer protection primarily to structures with direct exposure to the wildland. This inequity in protection versus installation/maintenance costs represents a very important point regarding the natural resource/urban development interface conflict. Fire prevention measures to reduce the level of risk to structures with wildland exposure must be developed within the design of the residential development rather than in the natural resource. c. Orange County Fire Department The Orange County Fire Department is entrusted with the protection of a large segment of the County's population and land area. The Orange County Fire Department currently serves a population in excess of 600,000 people and protects an area of approximately 526 square miles, including the unincorporated county areas and the cities of Cypress, Irvine, La Palma, Los Alamitos, Placentia, San Juan Capistrano, Tustin, Villa Park, Seal Beach, Yorba Linda and portions of Newport Beach. The County provides fire and emergency medical services with approximately 600 full-time personnel and an equal number of volunteers who live in these communities. The Orange County SAF-2-23 Fire Department also provides paramedic service to Laguna Beach ' and a portion of Stanton. There are presently six stations located specifically in or adjacent to the wildland areas. Nine new stations are needed within the next 4 years in order to provide an adequate level of fire protection and paramedic services in Orange County (see Map 2-7) . Orange County's firefighters are technically trained and highly skilled fire protection professionals. They provide a multitude of services. Comprehensive pre-emergency planning, fire protection engineering and training programs currently in progress will ensure the department's ability to meet future service demands. d. Summary Effective fire control and prevention depends upon understanding the nature of fire and :its environment. Within wildland areas, the fire environment is a complex system of topography, weather and fuel. Topographic and weather factors are variables generally beyond man's :influence. However, man can and does affect vegetation which is commonly the fuel in wildland fires. Proper land management and construction techniques with wildland fire areas can reduce the incidence and severity of wildland fires. Urban fires pose a growing threat to property and life within Orange County. As the county urbanizes, the incidence of structural fires increases. Within urban areas, building materials, stored materials, materials used in commercial and industrial operations, density and intensity of development pose difficult fire protection problems. Improving the planning and construction of new developments (e.g., use of fire safe materials, fire detection and fire protection devices) coupled with public education and the retrofitting of older structures with fire protection devices are viewed as means to reduce the incidence and effects of urban fires. Fires which occur along the urban/wildlands interface combine the threats posed by urban and wildland fires. Techniques necessary to reduce the effects of these two types of fires must be used in combination i:o reduce the effects of fires along the interface. SAF-2-24 J FIRE BATTALION BOUNDARIES FIRE BATTALIONS FIRE STATIONS • EXISTING FIRE STATIONS • 1983 EXISTINO TEMPORARY FIRE STATIONS* O PROJECTED FIRE STATIONS —CONTRACTING CITIES FULL SERVICE -.-. CONTRACTING CITIES PARTIAL SERVICE •oral)LaWA g •v ve F � •ID ,3 •1. •a. rla[Ir14 0.8 ai• •la 2 Vll� •ii •la •t 42 •la T O •.a I u el A 4 0 8 Iblr1 to Ou ,i unlra .•:jji Ou boa •at •r. Is i�rrw� .t. •to H L crrnr '••y,'S�I•l 5 •• •lr � ulviq •• sa —�laiurla •ti �tr •• 1 O— —Aa �.. sul uulcunl urlo u Oat N4 raa �,• '19f1 avaofwK , '�'•. y�.l �... r.f'J icllrla once'•. O •IlrrOaM�alnlpr M1l IvIMIDra I•M IOCnIrD.l Yrla •10•Cn11D N MIIDe Note: This map Is for Informational purposes only. source: COUNTY OF ORANGE map ORANGE COUNTY FIRE DEPARTMENT 2_7 3. Hazardous Materials Orange County, among the most rapidly rowing counties in California, P Y 9 continues to experience residential, employment and economic growth. However, this growth does have its costs. Virtually all sectors of the County's economy are users of materials that, if improperly handled, stored, or disposed of, can pose health and environmental problems. No master list of hazardous materials exists which can be agreed upon by all agencies that manage or regulate them. Lists which exist will change as more is learned about the effects of hazardous substances or as new substances become part of our technology. In addition, definitions of hazardous materials also vary from source to source. Thee current descriptions used in Federal and State legislation include the following: a. A hazardous material is one which is either ignitable, reactive, corrosive, toxic, or any combination of these properties (Resource Conservation and Recovery Act) . b. A hazardous material is a substance or combination of substances which, because of its quantity, concentration or physical, chemical or infectious characteristics may either: o Cause, or significantly contribute to an increase in mortality, or an increase in serious irreversible or incapacitating reversible illness; or o Pose a substantial present or potential hazard to humans or the environment (State Health and Safety Code, Chapter 6.5) . c. A hazardous material is an injurious substance, including pesticides, herbicides, toxic metals and chemicals, liquified material gas, explosives, volatile chemicals and nuclear fuels (California Government Code) . Exposure to some hazardous substances can result in acute or chronic health effects for the public such as respiratory problems or carcinogenicity. For example, over a long period of time, ingestion of drinking water contaminated by accidentally or illegally discharged hazardous waste can result in <<dverse health effects. Recognizing, therefore, the importance of providing for the safe management of hazardous materials, it is the purpose of this section of the Safety Element to discuss five major <<spects of the broad hazardous materials environment: hazardous materials, hazardous waste, infectious waste, radioactive material and nucleZLr materials (San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station) . These discussions also recognize the need for public access to general, unbi<Lsed information concerning all aspects cf hazardous materials. Related hazardous materials issues involving siting of management facilities or land planning policy will be addressed as appropriate in the General Plan Land Use and the Public Services and Facilities (PSF) elements. SAP-2-26 a. Hazardous Materials 1) Description Hazardous materials are usable substances which, when put in contact with the environment, can adversely affect living organisms. Health effects can develop due to short- or long- term exposure. Hazardous materials, which can be ignitable, reactive, corrosive or toxic, can also cause contamination of the environment when releases occur. 2) Sources/Locations of Hazardous Materials Hazardous materials are used in all segments of our society. Hazardous material users include manufacturing and service industries, agriculture, military bases, hospitals, schools and households. Hazardous materials used by these societal segments are normally stored in secured, on-site areas, in small containers or large aboveground or underground storage tanks. There are approximately 9,500 underground storage tanks storing over 60 million gallons of hazardous materials at 2,875 facilities in Orange County. 3) Transportation/Routes The major transportation routes in Orange County include the freeway system, surface streets, and railroads. These routes are used daily to transport hazardous materials from suppliers to users. On these routes, transportation accidents involving hazardous materials can occur. The threats posed by a transportation accident involving hazardous materials include explosions, physical contact by emergency response personnel, and exposure to the public via airborne exposure. The Federal Department of Transportation (DOT)is the primary regulatory authority for the interstate transport of hazardous materials. The DOT regulations establish criteria for safe handling procedures (e.g., packaging, marking, labeling, placarding, and routing) . Criteria also exist regarding personnel qualifications and training, inspection requirements, and equipment specifications. The California Highway Patrol enforces the intrastate transport of hazardous materials and hazardous wastes. Another major hazardous materials transportation mode in Orange County is that of underground pipelines. These pipelines predominately transport crude or refined petroleum, gasoline, and jet fuel. The major threats posed by this transportation method include explosions, fire and contamination of groundwater potentially used as a source of drinking water. SAF-2-27 The regulatory agency responsible for enforcement as well as inspection of pipelines transporting hazardous materials is the California State Fire Marshall's Office, Hazardous Liquid Pipeline Division. Under mandate from Title 49 of the Code of Federal Regulation, the agency is charged with compliance review: o Inspection and enforcement o Pipeline failure and investigation o Pipeline training and certification Locally, the Orange County Fire Department has emergency response authority. Major pipeline spills or leaks occurring in the county which cause fire, explosion, injury, or fatality muse: be reported to the National Department of Transportation located in Washington, D.C. and to the State Office of Emergency Services. 4) Hazardous Materials Management a) Underground Storage Tank Program The Orange County Health Care Agency (OCHCA) has been designated by the Board of Supervisors as the agency to enforce the Underground Storage Tank (UST) program. The OCHCA Underground Storage Tank Program regulates approximately 7,000 of the 9,500 underground tanks in Orange County. This program does not regulate underground tanks in the cities of Santa Ana and Orange which implement their owli programs. The program was established in 1984 in accordance with the State Underground Storage Tank Law which mandated counties or cities to establish such a program. The State mandate was in response to the increasing incidences of groundwater contamination by leaking underground tanks statewide. The purpose of the Underground Storage Tank Program is to protect public health and the environment from potential sources of contamination of the groundwater by regulating underground storage tanks containing hazardous materials. The comprehensive program implemented by OCHCA includes conducting regular inspections of underground tanks; oversight of new tank installations; issuance of permits; regulation of repair and closure of tanks; ensuring the _ mitigation of leaking underground storage tanks; pursuing enforcement action; and, educating and assisting the industries and general public as to the laws and regulations governing underground storage tanks. SJUI-2-28 b) Hazardous Materials Disclosure Program The Hazardous Materials Disclosure Program began as a direct result of two major hazardous materials incidents: the tragedy in Bhopal, India in December 1984, and the three day fire at the Larry Fricker pesticide warehouse in Anaheim in June, 1985. Under mandate from the California Health and Safety Code, the Orange County Fire Department is the designated Agency to 1) inventory the distribution of hazardous materials in commercial or industrial occupancies, 2) develop and implement area emergency plans to respond to a hazardous materials incident, and 3) require businesses that handle hazardous materials to develop business emergency plans to deal with a fire or release of these materials. The information disclosed by the industrial community is stored in a computerized data base and is made available to fire and police response personnel, the Sheriff-Coroner Department, the Health Care Agency, all hazardous materials response teams in the county, and the planning departments of the cities served by the Orange County Fire Department. Title 4 of the Orange County Codified Ordinances mandates an orderly program for the acquisition of basic information on the use and disposal of hazardous materials in the county. By contractual agreement or resolution of the individual city, the Orange County Fire Department administers the pro- visions of the State law (AB 2185 amended by AB 2187 and 3777) and County Ordinance 3552 in the unincorporated areas and in thirteen of the incorporated cities of the county. The remaining thirteen cities have adopted their own ordi- nances and are administering similar programs themselves. c) Hazardous Materials Planning and Coordination On February 7, 1984, the Orange County Board of Supervisors established the Hazardous Materials Task Force (HMTF) to review the County's hazardous materials activities and make recommendations to ensure effective coordination and control of countywide resources. The work begun by the ENT continues under the Hazardous Materials Program Office (HMPO) of the Orange County Fire Department. The functions and responsibilities of the Hazardous Materials Program Office include the following: o Facilitate the coordination of various parts of the County's hazardous materials program; assist in coordinating County hazardous materials activities with outside agencies and organizations including various State, Federal, special districts, industry and community agencies and groups that impact or are involved with hazardous materials management issues/activities. SAF-2-29 o Provide comprehensive, coordinated analysis of hazardous materials issues including the needs and priorities of all the various organizations involved in hazardous materials activities. o Direct the preparation, implementation and modification of the County's Hazardous Waste Management Plan as required by State law (Tanner Bill, AB 2948) . o Act as a clearinghouse for information and increase public awarenes;a of hazardous materials issues/ activities. b. Hazardous Wastes 1) Description The use of hazardous materials in the manufacture and use of many products considered essential to our economy result in the production of hazardous wastes which must be handled and disposed of in a safe mwinner to avoid harming human health and the environment. Hazardous wastes are commonly hazardous materials for which no further use is intended. Hazardous wastes can be solids, liquids, gases or sludges. A major issue concerning hazardous wastes is the potential accidental release of these substances. These releases can occur during any stage of handling, but particularly during storage and disposal. 2) Hazardous Waste Generation Orange County, considered part of the Los Angeles region, is within the third highest: hazardous waste generation area in California. The Department of Health Services (DOHS) rankings identify the Southern San Joaquin Valley as the second highest generator and the San Francisco Bay area as the highest. Together, these three regions account for 90% of the statewide annual hazardous waste c;eneration. (See map 2-8.) In 1983, 10.2 million tons of hazardous waste were estimated by the DOHS to be produced in California each year, the Los Angeles region accounting for 2,110,451 tons per year (21.5%) with 489,041 tons (5%) coming from Orange County alone. (See Table 2-7.) In 1986, on passage of the Tanner Bill, State and local agencies began a process aimed at: developing concise statewide hazardous waste management. The Tanner process will help to create a more comprehensive means of recording hazardous waste generation and tracking hazardous waste! disposal. Currently, the 1983 DOHS County data is being updated for inclusion in the County Hazardous Waste Management Plan (presently in draft form) . More than 5,000 Orange County businesses - from yacht repair shops to defense contractors - produce wastes that can pose dangers as immediate as burns or as latent as cancer, if they are disposed of improperly. These 5,000 firms currently generate approximately 1.00-150 million gallons of hazardous waste annually. The majority of hazardous waste generators are SAF-2-3 0 r».t San Francisco Bar Region Los Angeles Region Sacramento Region Tt■•.• San Diego Region NY..Y Socitta" San 3oaquin Region .•tM Nan-slwified Region .1■\M Adkvb w\ •Y tNYM Y•Y.w -� t.u1M wtW .I.won N.tq -To /r��l. •YVM YIYt•.N• \/1R=ICE♦ ��\i1I✓�i��i�iv� ` 1 1 rl`'II�/♦ ��`l�l�/\1�1_ `iNI/�\�'/,1\/�11�/1�11�1'�yI\li\i��`�\!1�1 `I\��� �• 1.1\%11, �/��/�/`/1=•/=1,/, Ili/.��;I,` ;;\i I•I�/ •\ i��l,l��1��/ �r1'1`/�I% 1011,1�1; �I1NO\�. III/.W 0 O O �I miles Note: This map is for informational purposes only. source: map HAZARDOUS WASTE FACILITIES STATE DEPARTMENT OF NEEDS ASSESSMENT REGIONS HEALTH SERVICES 1983 2-8 SAF-2—3 1 Table 2-7 Hazardous Waste Generaticm in California (Tonsaear) LOS ANGELES REGION WASTE MANAGED WASTE SENT TOTAL COUNTY ON SITE OFF SITE WASTES Los Angeles 1,073,282 420,732 1,494,014 Orange 446,345 42,696 489,041 Riverside 5,732 25,236 30,968 San Bernardino 43,503 18,756 62,259 Ventura 11,255 22,920 34,175 Regional Totals 1,580,117 530,340 2,110,457 SACRAMENTO REGION WASTE MANAGED WASTE SENT TOTAL COUNTY ON SITE _ OFF SITE WASTES E1 Dorado - - - Placer 43 264 307 Sacramento 127,588 23,340 150,928 San Joaquin 17,780 15,492 33,272 Sutter 1 60 61 Yolo 15 528 543 Regional Totals 145,427 39,684 185,111 SAN DIEGO REGION WASTE MANAGED WASTE SENT TOTAL COUNTY ON SITE OFF SITE WASTES San Diego 290,187 44,268 334,455 Regional Totals 290,187 44,268 334,455 SAN FRANCISCO BAY REGION WASTE MANAGED WASTE SENT TOTAL COUNTY ON SITE _ OFF SITE WASTES Alameda 391,871 43,536 435,407 Contra Costa 2,617,098 181,752 2,796,850 Mar in 118 516 634 San Francisco 9,547 5,388 14,935 San Mateo 206,346 16,584 222,930 Santa Clara 1,235,800 79,740 1,315,540 Solano 71,179 19,032 90,211 Regional Totals 4,531,959 346,548 4,878,507 S0UTHERN SAN JOAQUIN REGION WASTE MANAGED WASTE SENT TOTAL COUNTY ON SITE OFF SITE WASTES Fresno 2,804 41,280 44,084 Kern 2,084,285 157,752 2,242,037 King 2,000 6,684 8,684 Regional Totals 2,089,089 205,716 2,294,805 Sources Statewide Assessment of Hazardous Waste Management Facility Siting Requirements, State Department of Health Services, September 1983. 8AF-2-32 located in three cities well-known for their industrial activities - Santa Ana, Anaheim and Irvine. However, all of the cities in Orange County have a number of hazardous waste generators, mostly small quantity generators. Of the 5000 permitted hazardous waste generators, approximately 4,500 of these are small quantity generators; for example, automotive body shops, dry cleaners, photo labs, etc. There is a growing need to develop affordable treatment alternatives to avert the potential cumulative effects of disposal by small quantity waste generators. 3) Hazardous Waste Disposal a) Disposal Facilities Hazardous waste land disposal facilities are classified by the State Water Resources Control Board as Class I or Class II-1, based on each site's hydrogeological characteristics and projected waste acceptance. Prior to the 1984 Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) amendments which call for a phased ban on land disposal of untreated waste, Class I facilities could accept virtually all types of hazardous waste, while Class II-1 facilities were allowed to accept only specified types of hazardous waste. Until November 30, 1984, California had seven operating Class I land disposal facilities (Map 2-9) . Since that time, the BRR Landfill in West Covina has been closed due to increasingly restrictive State regulations, the harsh economics of hazardous waste land disposal and the threat of potential future liabilities. Much of the hazardous waste produced in Orange County and the rest of Southern California was transported to the BRR site. Since the closure of the BRR site, Orange I County's hazardous waste is transported to the nearest sites at Casmalia in northern Santa Barbara County and at Rettleman Hills in Rings County, as depicted in Map 2-10, or to facilities in other states. In Orange County, there are a number of sites where hazardous waste has been disposed of both legally and illegally which requires cleanup or mitigation. Currently, nine (9) sites have been identified in Orange County as abandoned hazardous waste sites which are eligible to be funded for cleanup pursuant to the State Hazardous Substances Cleanup Bond Act of 1984 (Superfund) (see Map 2-11) . In addition to these nine (9) sites, 800 additional abandoned sites are being examined by the State DOHS as potentially containing hazardous wastes. Furthermore, an OCHCA survey of all dumps and landfills located in the county was conducted in 1980, this survey report identified 92 waste disposal sites in the county, the majority of which have been used for the disposal of municipal refuse and inert materials. A small percentage of hazardous waste is suspected to be present as a result of disposal of household hazardous waste. SAF-2-33 i ..�. u...... w.. Key .—.... 1 - Big Blue Hills (open 4 weeWyear) (Closed) 2 - BKK Landfill, West Covina 3 - Casmalia Disposal Company, Casmalia 4 - IT Environmental, Martinez 3 - R Environmental, Benicia «•", 6 - Liquid Waste Disposal, M.... Kettleman Hills -`•w....« y - WCCC Sanitary Landfill, Itidtmond r 4� Now ■ ........ ..r.. *08"— •6 &A w".F... ..M W M..wr. 3 2• Oak 180 miles Note: This map is for informational purposes only. STATEWIDE HAZARDOUS WASTE sour GOVENOR'S OFFICE OF male FACILITIES CLASS I DISPOSAL APPROPRIATE TECHNOLOGY 1981 SA F—2-34 Note: This map Is for Informational purposes only. KINGS OUNT •Kettl an ti Hills �L,9 0,9 *Casmaifa SANTA BARBARA LOS ANGELES COUNTY COUNTY (A BKK Wes Covina w losed) a > ORANGE COUNTY' p z D O0 e 01. ao 01) miles MEXICO REGIONAL CLASS I DISPOSAL SITES ORANGE COUNTY H.M.P.O. 1986 210 1 • 1�1►000 �j.��� 100 �� ��•,►+te0+0+ •r.+gin�.�, ,�,�1��A co 00 CL Cl) o to cr .. ., co Z ca co 0 -0 cri '��' • � y � •- Also of significance are 285 sites in the county that have been identified as hazardous waste sites as a result of underground tanks leaking and contaminating either the soil and/or groundwater. This number has been increasing and is expected to continue to increase in the foreseeable future. In recognition of the importance of responsible hazardous waste management, the County is undertaking several activities to address hazardous waste issues and to eliminate the potential for misuse of existing sanitary landfills for hazardous waste disposal. Past efforts have included both the adoption of the County Industrial Waste Ordinance and establishment of the Water Pollution Department. Currently, increasing State and local regulation, hazardous waste management codes, liability and financial cost are creating pressure on the generators of hazardous waste to either reduce, recycle or treat the hazardous waste being generated. b) Illegal Dumping Illegal dumping takes on many forms including disposal on plant property, on vacant land or to the sewers. In addition, the Orange County Water District has identified incidences of localized groundwater contamination resulting from inadvertent release of virgin hazardous materials. The number of hazardous waste sites requiring cleanup is expected to increase due to the following: a possible increase in illegal disposal due to the phased closure of most of the hazardous waste landfills to untreated hazardous waste and a significant increase in costs to dispose, treat, or recycle; increased awareness and reporting by the public; and greater implementation of programs by OCHCA and other agencies. In addition, the mitigation of such sites is technically complex and can take several years. This can result in costs to responsible parties, if they can be identified, that are prohibitive. However, monitoring of storm sewers by EMA and the groundwater by the Orange County Water District has indicated that any widespread illegal disposal of hazardous waste to the groundwater has not endangered this resource to a significant extent. 4) Transportation Routes The major transportation routes in Orange County include the freeway system and the surface streets. These routes are used daily to transport hazardous waste for disposal. The threats posed by an accident involving hazardous waste include explosions, physical contact by emergency response personnel, and exposure to the public via airborne exposure. The Department of Transportation (DOT) has established criteria for safe handling procedures during intra- and interstate transport, i.e., packaging, marking, labeling, placarding, and SAP-2-37 routing. Criteria also exist regarding personnel qualifications and training, inspection requirements, and equipment specifications. Hazardous waste haulers must be registered wits the State Department of Health Services and inspected by the California Highway Patrol. 5) Orange County Hazardous Waste Management a) Hazardous Waste Management Plan Development r Because past hazardous waste management practices failed to assess, in many cases, the long-range health risks to the general population of prolonged exposure to toxic substances, stricter regulatory standards and more sophisticated measuring techniques are being applied to old hazardous waste landfill operations. As a result, significant contamination is being found. As a means of mitigation, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA) , also referred to as the Superfund, is actively pursuing a program of uncontrolled hazardous waste site assessment; stabilization of sites imminently threatening to public health; and, remedial cleanup of sites receiving priority :ranking. In California, the State has identified over 200 sites. EPA's cleanup costs average $7.2 million per site from whict the State has earmarked up to $10 million per year for cleanups since 1981. To date, few cleanups have been completed due to a :Lack of consensus on 'how clean is clean' and what is the best technology to use to actually clean up sites. 1980 also saw the implementation of far reaching regulations to control the disposal of hazardous wastes. One such piece of legislation was the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) Amendments of 1984. These amendments radically changed hazardous waste management and considerably improved the control of hazardous wastes. The new RCRA includes 48 congressionally mandated statutory deadlines that go into effect either before the end of 1987 or by early 1988. The most well known of these provisions is the 1990 ban on disposal of untreated hazardous waste to landfills. Additionally, after this date interstate shipment of hazardous wastes is prohibited from states which have not developed a plan to manage the treatment and storage of hazardous waste generated within its boundaries. In anticipation of the shortage of hazardous waste disposal facilities in Southern California, State and local elected officials initiated a Southern California Hazardous Waste Facility Study in 1981. By 1985, Orange County and six other counties (Imperial, Riverside, San Bernardino, San Diego, Santa Barbara and Ventura; plus representation from cities in those counties) founded the Southern California SAP-2-38 Hazardous Waste Management Authority. Los Angeles County and Kern County attend meetings, but have not officially joined the Authority. The purpose of the Authority is to provide local jurisdictions a framework within which to establish and implement an equitable allocation of hazardous waste management facilities called for in the regional Action Program. The role of the Authority is to coordinate implementation of programs and siting of facilities sufficient to safely manage hazardous waste in Southern California. As part of its participation in the Authority, Orange County drafted a hazardous waste management plan to serve as a beginning point for discussing and developing a comprehensive system of hazardous waste management for the County. At the same time the Draft Plan project was approved by the Board of Supervisors, the Governor signed the Tanner Bill, AB 2948. This bill established a State policy on the use of hazardous waste landfills and provided a schedule for moving away from their use as disposal sites for raw, untreated chemical wastes. This law created a set of programs and procedures to facilitate the siting and permitting of treatment and residual repository facilities through local level hazardous waste management planning. The Tanner Bill also provides for the establishment of an Advisory Committee comprised of members representing different sectors of society. The Committee is responsible for overseeing the Draft Plan development and approval process. Provisions dealing with an expeditious administrative process for appealing land use decisions for off-site, multi-user hazardous waste facilities and extending some 'seed money' to assist in their planning 1 efforts were also established in this bill. The Board of Supervisors endorsed the provisions of the Tanner Process on February 24, 1987 (Resolution #87-221) . The Board concluded that implementation of the Tanner Process would enhance the hazardous waste management planning activities already begun through the auspices of the Southern California Hazardous Waste Management Authority. The Tanner Bill process includes a time frame that must be adhered to by Orange County and other authorities submitting plans. The process culminates in the DOHS approving or disapproving the submitted Hazardous Waste Management Plan (HWMP) . Within 90 days after DOHS approval of plan, the County shall either incorporate the plan by reference into their general plan or enact an ordinance requiring all applicable zoning, subdivision, conditional use permits and variance decisions be made consistent with the HWMP. SAP-2-39 In accordance with the Tanner Bill time frame and in order to offer an option to previous forms of hazardous waste disposal, the Orange County Hazardous Materials Program Office established a two phase project. The first phase consisted of a series of one-day events called toxic Roundups at which residents disposed of unwanted houshold toxics. The Toxic Roundups were a means of providing public: education to increase public awareness in segregation, disposal and proper handling of household hazardous waste, and water quality issues. As an ongoing program, 4-5 collection stations will be j established throughout the county by October, 1987 for the - collection of household and small generator wastes. The program will be a joint venture of the County, cities and solid waste haulers. Each collection station will offer Saturday collection hours 4-5 times a year. b) Orange County Health Care Agency (OCHCA) Hazardous Waste Program In 1982, OCHCA conducted a study in Orange County to determine the number of hazardous waste generators, the amount of hazardous waste being generated, and the means of storage and disposal. The study concluded that there was a large volume of hazardous waste being generated and disposed of illegally and that there was a need for a comprehensive hazardous waste management program in Orange County. In response to these findings, the Orange County Board of Supervisors in 1983 established the OCHCA Hazardous Waste Management Program to reduce the threat of exposure to the general public and to protect the environment. The purpose of the Waste Management Program is to protect the public and the environment from exposure to hazardous wastes and hazardous materials stored in leaking or potentially leaking underground storage tanks. The comprehensive program includes conducting routine inspections of hazardous waste generators; conducting investigations of complaints of illegal hazardous waste storage and disposal; responding to emergency incidents involving both hazardous materials and hazardous waste; and oversight of cleanups from leaking underground storage tanks; and hazardous waste. This program is also responsible for pursuing enforcement action, where warranted, and educating and assisting the industries and general public as to the laws and regulations governing hazardous wastes. The laws and regulations governing hazardous waste are the California) Health and Safety Code, Chapter 6.5 and the California Administrative Code, Title 22. c) Proposition 65 Program The Environmental Health Division of the Orange County Health Care Agency also oversees the implementation and SAF-2-40 / r enforcement of Proposition 65, the Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act of 1986. Section 4 of this law requires designated government employees, as of January 1, 1987, to disclose illegal discharges or threatened illegal 1 discharges of hazardous waste likely to cause substantial injury to public health and safety. Information is to be reported to the Health Officer and Board of Supervisors within seventy-two (72) hours or criminal and civil penalties could be faced. The Health Officer in turn makes the information available to the news media and the public. Under the mandate of Proposition 65, OCHCA/Environmental Health has been designated by the Health Officer to receive the reports of hazardous waste discharges from all designated employees. The Proposition 65 Compliance Program implemented by OCHCA includes assessing these hazardous waste discharge reports, utilizing approved guidelines and criteria to determine if the discharge poses a threat to public health and safety; updating the Board of Supervisors as required; ensuring those discharges requiring additional follow-up or enforcement will be referred to the appropriate regulatory agency as needed; and, if necessary, reporting the discharge to the news media to be made available to the public. c. Infectious Wastes 1) Description Infectious wastes are defined as those medical wastes which contain potentially communicable pathogenic organisms. These medical wastes could include the following: laboratory wastes; pathologic specimens (including human or animal tissues and blood elements) ; surgical specimens; equipment, instruments, utensils, and other disposable materials likely to transmit etiologic agents; human dialysis waste materials; carcasses of animals infected with etiologic agents; and any other material which, in the determination of the facility infection control staff, presents a significant danger of infection because it is contaminated with etiologic agents. Etiologic agents are defined as those types of microorganisms or viruses which cause, or significantly contribute to the cause of, increased morbidity or mortality of human beings. 2) Sources/Location of Wastes Currently there are approximately 163 regulated facilities in Orange County which generate in excess of 4,500 tons of infectious waste annually. These facilities include hospitals, 1 doctors' offices, the County Morgue, laboratories, etc. Potential hazards at these locations range from improper identification of infectious waste to a spillage of liquid etiologic cultures in areas accessible to the public. Exposure to these types of waste could lead to the public contracting a SAF-2-41 r disease depending upon the agent and exposure. Additionally, the public may be exposed to human pathogens as a result of accidents in the work palace, streets and highways, etc. The County Fire Department has developed emergency procedures for contact and clean-up. 3) Transportation Routes The major transportation routes in Orange County include both the freeway system and :surface streets used daily to transport infectious waste for di:;posal. Potential accidents involving infectious waste can occur on these transportation routes. The number of accidents which occur and the amount of infectious waste spilled is unknown due to the fact that this information has never been compiled.. The major threat posed by a transportation accident involving infectious waste is exposure �. to emergency response workers and the public which could result in contraction of a widen range of diseases. 4) Infectious Waste Management The OCHCA Infectious Waste Program was established in 1982 in response to a large increase in the number of incidents -� involving the illegal disposal of infectious wastes in County landfills, on roadways, etc. This potential exposure to infectious waste was recognized as a threat to landfill workers and citizens of the County. The purpose of the Infectious Waste Program is to protect the public from exposure to etiologic agents which cause disease by detecting and reducing the incidences of illegal storage and disposal of infectious waste. The Infectious Waste Program implemented by OCHCA includes conducting regular inspections of infectious waste generating facilities, investigating complaints regarding illegal storage disposal of infectious waste, pursuing enforcement action where warranted and educating facilities and the public as to the laws and regulations governing infectious wastes activities. The laws and regulations governing infectious waste are the California Health and Safety Code, Chapter 6.5, and the California Administrative Code, Title 22, Article 13. d. Radioactive Material 1) Description Radioactive material, another form of hazardous substance, is any material which emits; ionization radiation spontaneously. The increasing volume and variety of high and low level radioactive materials that are generated, stored, or transported in Orange County create potential hazards, due to the threat of accidental release of radiation. Ionizing radiation can damage living cells, leading to somatic injury or harmful genetic effects. Excessive amounts of radiation can contribute to or cause an increase in serious illness and/or mortality. Sources of potential exposure reinge from a small spill inside a facility to a radioactive plume of smoke from a major fire. SAF-2-42 Radioactive material incidents require specialized technical expertise which varies depending on the materials involved and the type of incident. The resources and personnel required to react to a radioactive materials incident may involve various local, special district, state and federal agencies. The specific outline of first responders can be found in the Orange County Emergency Plan. 2) Sources/Locations of Materials Radioactive materials are used in all segments of our society. The county has 175 specific licensees who use sealed and unsealed sources of radiation. Sources of radioactive material users include manufacturing and service industries, agriculture, hospitals, schools, and military bases. The military bases in Orange County all have the potential to store and transport radioactive material in the form of fissionable material. The county also has a large gamma ray sterilization facility located ,I in the Irvine-Tustin area that utilizes radioactive materials to ■ sterilize equipment and food. 3) Transportation Routes Freeways The major transportation routes in Orange County are the freeway systems and the surface streets. These routes are used daily to transport radioactive materials from suppliers to users. More than 10 transportation accidents involving radioactive material are estimated per year (not including minor traffic accidents) . The threats posed by a transportation accident involving radioactive materials include physical contact by emergency response personnel and exposure to the public via airborne exposure. Railroads Although railroad shipment accidents are of concern, accidents involving train derailments and content exposure are rare in Orange County. Sources of radioactivity (small or large sources) are rarely carried by train. 4) Radioactive Materials Management The Radioactive Materials Management Program was initiated in 1 November 1963 when the Board of Supervisors approved the first annual contract between the County and the State for local enforcement of the laws and regulations of radioactive materials. It was felt that the local enforcement would provide better service to radioactive material users, mainly the medical community and a higher level of protection to the County's citizens. The purpose of the Radioactive Materials Program is to protect public health and the environment from potential sources of SAP-2-43 1 contamination and exposure from radioactive materials. The objectives of the program are accomplished through assuring compliance with all State radiation control regulations by licensed and registered users of radioactive materials and machines; assuring immediate correction of all conditions causing accidental radiation; and monitoring and continuing surveillance of the Ora:�ge County environment for possible ' excessive radiation levels. e. Nuclear Materials (San Onof:ce Nuclear Generating Station-SONGS) 1) Description Naturally occurring radiation is in the air we breathe, the food we eat, in our homes, and even in our bodies. This "natural background' radiation i:; the largest contributor to a person's average radiation dose. Radiation can affect the body cells and, in excessive amounts, can be injurious. The nuclear power industry contributes less than 1% of the radiation to which we are regularly exposed and yet is the one source that generates the greatest concern ami�ng the general public. The primary difference between nuclear power plants and other power plants is that the fissioning of uranium provides the heat. required to generate st(aam to drive the turbine generator, whereas combustion of fuel oil and natural gas provide the heat source for fossil-fueled power plants. During the process of releasing heat from uranium, fission by-products are formed. Most of these fission by-products are radioactive and emit extra energy in the form of radiation. 2) Sources/Location a) Sources Radioactive by-products are contained within the plant, except for small quantities of radioactive gases released into the air and liquids released into the ocean. Such releases occur continuously and are monitored by the plant personnel in accordance with strict government standards. The releases are controlled to ensure a person's added radiation exposure flue to material released to the environment is considerably less than the typical exposure from natural background radiation. The two most likely sources of radiation contamination from SONGS are transportation accidents involving shipments of nuclear materials, .and uncontrolled airborne releases from the plant site. Nuclear Materials/Wastes at SONGS o Low-level waste;;: The largest volumes of such wastes are disposable protective clothing (e.g. towels, gloves, shoe covers) , tools and containers that have SAF-2-44 been used by radiation workers inside the plant and which usually exhibit very little radioactivity. Also included are demineralizing and filtering materials used to purify water in the reactor coolant systems. These wastes contain very small to moderate amounts of radioactive materials. o High-level wastes: These wastes generally consist of highly concentrated radioactive fission and activation products created during nuclear fission in a reactor. Generally, this consists of used nuclear fuel elements. Such wastes will eventually require long term isolation from the environment and, until the Federal Government is ready to accept them for permanent disposal, they will be held at the plant site. o New fuel elements: New fuel elements are the source material used in a nuclear fission reactor. They are not highly radioactive and do not present a serious radiation hazard. However, they must be shipped in accordance with strict federal standards. b) Location The San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station (SONGS) , located next to San Onofre State Beach, is on the Camp Pendleton U.S. Marine Corps Base in San Diego County. SONGS is approximately five miles south of the City of San Clemente. SONGS Unit 1 began commercial operation in January 1968 and has a net generating capacity of 456 megawatts. Units Two and Three went into commercial operation in August 1983 and April 1984, respectively. Each has a generating capacity of 1,127 megawatts. All three units employ pressurized water reactor technology whereby water, under pressure, is heated by nuclear fission and is piped in a totally enclosed system to a steam generator where heat turns fresh water in a 1 separate, closed system, into steam. The fresh water, never in contact with radioactive materials, is then piped to a turbine generator where its energy spins a turbine to generate electricity. Used fuel assemblies at SONGS are stored in carefully constructed, water-filled pools until they can be shipped to federally-licensed centers for permanent disposal. During this lengthy storage process, the radioactivity diminishes considerably. 3) Transportation/Routes a) Transportation o Low-level waste: Such wastes from SONGS are routinely transported by truck to licensed nuclear waste disposal facilities in Richland, Washington; Beatty, Nevada; or possibly Barnwell, South Carolina. These wastes are then buried in trenches to isolate them from the environment. SAF-2-45 They are transpDrted in 55-gallon drums, metal boxes or cans aboard vehicles used only for transporting low- level radioactive wastes. These shipments must meet strict United States Department of Transportation Standards, as well as applicable California codes. By state and federal requirements, liquid waste cannot be shipped. If a waste is more than one percent liquid, it must be process.ad to either remove the liquid or , solidify it. o High-level waste: Although high-level nuclear waste from SONGS is currently stored on-site in deep water pools for eventual shipment to federally-licensed disposal sites, current procedures for transporting highly radioactive wastes are considered more than adequate by federal authorities to protect against : leaks, even under extreme conditions. b) Routes o Highways: Currently, federal regulations allow the interstate highway system to be used for the transportation of any radioactive wastes, including high-level wastes. For high-level shipments, states are given the authority to identify and select alternate routes that are at least as safe as interstate routes. In California, despite a series of hearings dating back to 1982, regulations concerning alternate routes as , proposed by the California Highway Patrol have not as yet been adopted. o Railroads: Railroad shipment accidents are of concern, although train derailments and content exposure are rare in Orange County. Railroad shipment casks for spent nuclear fuel from SONGS must meet the same criteria as truck shipment casks. It should be noted the federal government will not be accepting shipments of spent nuclear fuel un Ul at least 1998 and, therefore, on-site storage is expected to be utilized until that time. 4) Nuclear Materials ManagE!ment (SONGS) a) Regulation/Agencies o U. S. Nuclear REegulatory Commission (NRC) : Before nuclear power plants are allowed to operate, their owners must demonstrate to the NRC, an independent federal agency, that construction and operation of their nuclear plants will not present an undue risk to public , health and safety by meeting the most comprehensive set of standards and regulations of any industrial activity. SAF-2-46 There are several permanent NRC inspectors assigned to SONGS. In addition, other NRC inspectors make frequent visits, announced and unannounced, to ensure that safety standards are being met in operating the plants. On an ongoing basis, the NRC is the primary regulator of an operating nuclear power plant. o U.S. Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) : The administration of the regulations, commonly referred to as NUREG 0654/FEMA-REP1, is the primary responsibility of the Federal Emergency Management Agency. Coupled with the regulation of on-site operations, these regulations are directed to the off-site protection of public health and safety, in the event of an accident, through extensive coordinated plans of the several primary local response agencies. o California Office of Emergency Services (OES) : The OES is dedicated to coordinating State resources in the event of an accident and is primarily responsible for monitoring at SONGS or any other nuclear power generating station. The OES is also responsible for recovery activities within a 50-mile zone surrounding SONGS, known as the Ingestion Pathway Zone (IPZ) . Radiation sources, if released in uncontrolled quantities within the IPZ, could enter and contaminate the food chain. o Interjurisdictional Planning Committee (IPC) : While the local governments and agencies surrounding SONGS do not have authority to regulate plant operations, they have responsibilities for protecting the public health and safety of their constituents and, accordingly, are intimately involved in emergency planning and response activities. The primary response agencies include Orange and San Di--go Counties, the cities of San Juan Capistrano and San Clemente, Marine Corps Base Camp Pendleton, and the local office of the State Parks and Recreation Department. In 1983, these agencies established the Interjurisdictional Planning Committee (IPC) which meets regularly to coordinate their emergency plans, train, exercise, and resolve matters of mutual concern. b) Programs (1) Emergency Zones Response Program In an effort to prepare those who live and work in areas outside, but adjacent to SONGS, the federal and state governments have established three levels of emergency zones. Although it is very unlikely an emergency might arise, these zones are devised to maximize protection of public health and well-being; communicate the levels of emergency; and, outline steps the public can take to SAF-2-47 avoid or greatly reduce the potential effects of a radioactive material release. o Emergency Planning Zone: The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory ;5ommission has established an area surrounding every nuclear generating station identified •as an Emergency Planning Zone (EPZ) . (See Map 2-12) . At SONGS, the EPZ encompasses portions of Orange and San Diego counties, the cities and ,communities of San Clemente, San Juan Capistrano ,and Dana Point, portions of the Camp Pendleton Marine Corps Base, and several beaches and parks operated by the State Department of Parks and Recreation (i.e. San Onofre State Beach, San Clemente State Beach and Doheny State Beach) . While a serious emergency situation at SONGS is considerec highly unlikely, extensive planning efforts within the EPZ provide for emergency protective actions such as sheltering or, in very extreme emergencies, evacuation. Public information brochures are distributed periodically to every resident and business owner within the EPZ. Included is information on radiological emergencies, protective action procedures, location of transportation assembly areas, evacuation routes, designated reception centers, and Emergency Broadcast stations. o Public Education Zone (PEZ) : The State of California has defined an area outside and adjacent to the federal EPZ as the Public Education Zone. Al: SONGS, the PEZ encompasses the communities of Laguna Beach, Laguna Hills, Laguna Niguel, South Laguna, E:. Toro and Mission Viejo in Orange County; portions of the Cleveland National Forest in Riverside, Orange and San Diego counties; and additional portions of the Camp Pendleton Marine Corps Base and the communities of Oceanside, Fallbrook, Bonsall, Carlsbad and Vista in San Diego County. (See Map 2•- 12) . o Ingestion Pathway Zone (IPZ) : The Federal Government has established an area with a 50-mile radius around every nuclear generating station as an - Ingestion Pathway Zone (IPZ) . At SONGS, the IPZ encompasses all of Orange County and parts of San Diego, Los Angeles, San Bernardino and Riverside counties. This zone is established for the purpose of , monitoring and decision-making specifically to avoid the ingestion of deposited radioactive materials by humans and livestock. The State of California, Department of Health Services, has the primary SAF-2-4 8 , °� San Bernadino ' .."County ---------i-- ------ ---------------- Los Angeles ; i f ;Orange County`. �. t I I 4 . -- �:� 5 —CO Q• co: :NE RT BEACH � • LAGUNA HIL IEJO�.:::':::?......... ::::•:1 ::::':::::.:. 15 lf :::::...... AG NA U LAG BL. w Emergency- SOUTH , ` •GAPISTRANfl - ;. '.:::`;`:`:F. -Planning -1§an » : DAN P Iounty Ot'e •:i::; SA CLE = :::::.::::::: .:::: :. Ki FALLBROQK'• ::.--- ::�::' S A N ONO : #: i`:Caio:�i.: ::: .: A :�:O:I 8 :...... if. f.... OCEA S :.RVISTA: Arver•`'•••- CAR NO SCALE OC 78 Na 7 Note: This map Is for Informational purposes only. E.P.Z.& P.E.Z. FOR SAN ONOFRE source: map NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 2- 1 2 S A F —2-49 I responsibility for operations in the Recovery Phase of a nuclear power plant accident and is assisted by the Health Department from each of the affected counties. f. Summary Local hazardous waste management planning has been increasing in recent years. In an effort. to increase local awareness of hazardou;; waste management problems, the Tanner Bill will provide the funds for and require all counties in California to prepare a County Hazardous Waste Management Plan to serve as the primary planning document for hazardous waste management in the county. State and local efforts in hazardous waste management will continue to lay foundations for development of comprehensive legislation and implementation programs. The Tanner process will serve to direct these efforts toward reduction of interagency redundancy; eventual creation of compatible State and local data; development of long- range, focused plans; and development of technologies aiding in waste treatment and source reduction. Information made readily available and accessible on comprehensive hazardous materials management issues can help citizens come to understand the importance of providing for the safe management of hazardous materials. This interaction can help to ensure that alternative technologies acid management policies being implemented represent the highest degree of cooperation and coordination between government agencies, private industries and the public sector. PA53-1 SILF-2-50 7278 4. Aircraft Environment I a. Introduction Aircraft provide a valuable and necessary service to Orange County residents and businesses. Orange County is unique among most counties in California because commercial, general, and military aviation facilities are located within its borders (see Map 2-13) . These facilities generate a high level of air traffic which is further influenced by aircraft transiting through the County en route to destinations elsewhere. The sheer number of aircraft ' operating within the County and the air routes covering the County heightens the chances of aircraft accidents, yet aircraft accidents occur infrequently when compared to the number of air operations. This section of the Safety Element explores the aircraft environment of Orange County. To do so, it focuses on commercial, general and military aviation operations either by fixed-wing aircraft or helicopters. The section does not discuss aircraft noise. Information pertaining to aircraft noise may be found in the Noise Element of the General Plan. 1 b. Existing Conditions 1) Commercial Aviation o John Wayne Airport (JWA) is the only commercial service airport in Orange County. It is served by nine commercial air carriers and five commuter airlines. In 1986, 4 million passengers used the airport. It is estimated that the current level of demand for service exceeds 7.0 million persons; however, the Airline Access Plan limits the maximum number of passengers through John Wayne Airport. Those passengers not served at John Wayne obtain air service from airports outside the County. Estimates for the year 2000 indicate that almost 20.0 million total passengers will be generated by the population of the County; however, 8.4 million annual passengers is the maximum number of passengers. From January 1986 to December 1986, over 550,000 airplanes -large and small - landed at or left John Wayne; this is an average of 1,500 planes a day. o Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) is a regional air transportation facility covering over 1,500 acres of west Los Angeles. There are currently over 500,000 flight operations a year at the airport; total average daily 1 passenger traffic is over 81,000 people. The cities and communities surrounding LAX are largely built-out and consist primarily of residential land uses. The land uses immediately surrounding the airport consist primarily of commercial and industrial uses. o Ontario International Airport is a regional air transportation facility covering over 1,100 acres of the City of Ontario. There are currently 110,000 flight SAF-2-51 101 r� 0 134 V�U W�O a210 1pl � 10 yW 10 h J �D� .JSAN ^ I ORANGE C.\ I AIR FACILITIES OG�\ \ �r N 1 Burbank s . © 1 a2 Los Angeles 9 3 Long Beach 4 Los Alamitos S John Wayne 22 6 MCAS, El Toro 7 MCAS, Tustin s' yti © 'r L 8 Fullerton 9 Ontario NO SCALE Note: This map Is for Informatlonal purposes only. SCAC MAJOR REGIONAL AIR INSTALLATIONS study (AIMMS) 2_ 1 3 December, 1986 MM It MM M MM r A M "' M " M M 'M r M memo M r operations a year at the airport; total average daily passenger traffic is over 7,000 people. At present, the areas to the west and north of the airport are largely built-out or approved for development, where the areas to the east and south are largely undeveloped. o Long Beach Airport is a sub-regional air transportation facility operated by the City of Long Beach. The airport covers approximately 1,100 acres north of the San Diego Freeway. There are approximately 1,500 passengers daily with an average of 18 daily commercial aircraft departures. o Burbank-Glendale-Pasadena Airport is a regional airport located south of the Verdugo Mountain range. There are currently over 37,000 annual flight operations with an estimated projection of over 50,000 by the year 2000. Total average daily passenger traffic is currently over 8,000 people. The fleet mix at Burbank Airport includes the following: B-737s; DC-9s; MD-80s; and B-727s. Anticipated is the conversion of the noisier B-727, B-737 and DC-9 to the quieter departing B-737-300, B-757 and BAe-146. 2) General Aviation John Wayne Airport serves as the home base for approximately 1,000 personal and business ("general aviation") aircraft. During calendar year 1986 there were approximately 5,000 business jet departures. Within Orange County there are more than 2,600 aircraft registered to personal and corporate owners; yet, there are only two other airports for these types of aircraft within the County besides JWA--Fullerton Municipal, with 590 based aircraft, and the privately owned Meadowlark Airport in Huntington Beach with approximately 300 aircraft. All other private aircraft flying to or through Orange County are home based at airports outside Orange County. The use of helicopters in business and pleasure has grown enormously in the last decade. With no room to expand, urban airports have had to fit helicopter takeoff and landing areas next to busy airliner runways, taxiways and fueling ramps. Though helicopter pilots and airline pilots are under the guidance of air traffic controllers, they are, depending on the airport, generally communicating on separate radio frequencies. In Southern California, where an estimated 167,000 helicopter flights occur each year, finding locations for new heliports is a growing concern. There are already 203 heliports within the region, including a growing number in Orange County, most of which are privately owned and operated. About 30 helicopters are based at JWA. SAF-2-53 I r 3) Military Aviation a) MCAS E1 Toro Marine Corps Air Station (MCAS) E1 Toro is one of two active Marine Corps master jet air stations in the U.S. and the only one located on the west coast. The installation is located in south central Orange County, 10 miles east of the City of Santa Ana and eight miles north of the Pacific Ocean. MCAS El Toro serves as a tactical base for the following types of high perfo::mance jet aircraft; F-4 Phantom; F/A-18 Hornet, A-4 Skyhawk, A-6 Intruder. The installation also bases RC-130 Hercules aircraft. These four-engine turbopror. aircraft are used primarily for aerial refueling of fighter, attack and helicopter aircraft. Other aircraft assigned to the base include T-39 and C-12 fixed wing aircraft and UH-111 helicopters. The airspace surrounding MCAS E1 Toro is highly utilized ane. consequently very congested. Several factors contribute to this congestion. A:cording to the Air Installation Compatible Use Zone (AICUZ) study prepared for MCAS E1 Toro (PRC Speas Associates, 1981) , annual jet operations average 72,000. Approximately 50,000 additional operations per year are generated by helicopter, propeller and general aviation aircraft. Aircraft currently using MCAS E1 Toro operate in a very restricted environment for noise abatement purposes. Durincl normal conditions (wind permitting) approaches are made to Runway 34R, and departures are made from Runway 7. Aircraft: operating on Runways 16 and 25 would have more favorable winds, but would also have a greater noise impact on sur- rounding residential areas. According to the Southern California Aviation Study Technical Report issued by SCAG in July 1980 and later revised in the Supplement Technical Report of June 1982, thi! E1 Toro landing approach to the north on Runway 34 does not conflict with other airport flight paths. It does cross the busy V23 airway near the coastline, but transiting aircraft are assigned to altitudes above the E1 Toro approach. The E1 Toro missed approach for Runway 34 has been designed to avoid conflict with instrument approaches to MCAS Tustin and JWA. The 1981 Air Installation Compatible Use Zone (AICUZ) study defined and identified accident potential zones in the vicinity of MCAS El Toro. These are based on specific accident data for E1 Toro as well as guidelines developed during a tri-service study effort. Nearly all accident potential zones are contained within the 65 dB Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL) noise contours. Map 2-14 depicts the current accident potential zones for MCAS, E1 Toro. SAF-2-54 i Note: This map Is for Informational purposes only. .,00,000000. 1 o CLEAR ZONE ' - ACCIDENT POTENTIAL ZON4 t to QO y a oe p / P 0 6000 MEOW feet SOURCE: Western Division m a p AIRPORT SAFETY AREAS: MCAS, EL TORO Naval Facilities Engineering' 2_ q Command March, 1981 Located at MCAS, E1 Toro is the FAA's Coast Terminal Radar Control (TRACON) with jurisdictional control for the airspace between San Diego and Los Angeles. TRACON is forecast to have military and civilian instrument flight rule (IFR) traffic volumes greater than IFR control capacity in the 1990s. While the TRACON would not exceed capacity ir practice, the large traffic volumes suggest extensive aircraft delays, es;�ecially during peak periods and poor weather. MCAS, E1 Toro is the Marines' major tactical jet air base on the West Coast. Its aircraft, therefore, must be able to become airborne as soon as possible in a national emergency, as well as during practices for such emergencies. Military aircraft using MCAS, E1 Toro often carry live ordnance. A greater potential for ground damage exists for these aircraft than for aircraft not carrying any ordnance. b) MCAS Tustin Marine Corps Air Station, Tustin is located in close proximity to John Wayne Airport. From this installation, the Marines operate a variety of medium and heavy-lift helicopters. Among them are the twin-rotored CH-46 Sea Knight, CH-53 Sea Stallion and CH-53E Super Sea Stallion. In 1986, Tustin generated 124,000 air operations, of which only 20 percent departed the local (on-base) traffic pattern. c) Los Alamitos Armed Forces Reserve Center Los Alamitos Armed Forces Reserve Center (AFRO) , twelve miles from JWA, is located in central Orange County within the City of Los Alamitos. On-site facilities presently include two runways and associated taxiways, ramp space, and hangars. The AFRC is primarily used for helicopter training missions. There are approximately 80,000 yearly flight operations at the facility (SCAG, 1980) . d) MCAS Camp Pendleton The air station within Marine Corp Base (MCB) Camp Pendleton is located 50 miles southeast of JWA. MCB Camp Pendleton serves as the primary west coast training facility for all elements of Marine Corps and Navy amphibious assault training and support missions. Marine Corps Air Station Camp Pendleton operates light assault aircraft, including the OV-10 Bronco, the AH-lJ Cobra and the UH-lN Huey helicopters. Over 120,000 operations were generated by this airfield in 1986. c. Aircraft Accident Potential. Orange County is located ir. one of the busiest aviation areas in ths world (two of the busiest 10 airports in the United States are SAF-2-56 within a 50-mile radius) along with a multitude of transient traffic. Currently, incoming traffic to JWA crosses airspace above Huntington Beach and Newport Beach that is also used by planes preparing to land at Long Beach Municipal Airport. In addition to Long Beach and John Wayne Airports and El Toro Marine Corps Air Station, commercial traffic coming and going from Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) adds to the aerial congestion above Orange County (40 percent of departing LAX passenger jets are routed south over Seal Beach and then east over E1 Toro or further south to San Diego) . However, many of the flights are flying at altitudes in excess of 10,000 feet. o Air Installations Accident Potential Descriptions A concern of the general public living in the proximity of an airport or under the aircraft flight paths is the incident of an aircraft accident resulting in ground damage. Airports and air carriers share much this same concern although their motivation is generally to promote positive public sentiment. The air installations within Orange County maintain records which detail the aviation accidents that have occurred within the air space surrounding the facility. They provide important information to evaluate the relative air safety within Orange County. Below is information describing the accident potentials for the five primary air installations within the County. 1) John Wayne Airport (JWA) - In early 1985 the Board of Supervisors adopted an Airport Master Plan for John Wayne Airport. The plan was the subject of extensive environmental documentation, including an evaluation of aircraft accidents. The environmental document (EIR 508) ' based on the only accident statistics obtainable from the National Transportation Safety Board for the period of 1972 to 1981 revealed that 54 accidents have occurred during 5.9 million operations (arrivals and departures) or .9 accidents per 100,000 operations. 2) Fullerton Airport - The Airport's Noise and Safety Committee has compiled accident records for the period of 1960 through 1987. The records for this 26 year period reveals 28 accidents. The airport averages approximately 212,000 operations a year with an accident rate of approximately .5 accident per 100,000 operations. In no instance has an accident resulted in the death of anyone on the ground. 3) Marine Corps Air Station, El Toro - Accident records for this facility are maintained in compliance with Department of Defense (DOD) criteria. In accordance with the DOD 1 criteria, there have been 33 accidents involving Marine Corps aircraft within the five-mile airport traffic area since 1964. Nine of the accidents involved helicopters and fifteen of the aircraft accidents were confined to the base. Since the adoption of AICUZ in 1981 the base has conducted approximately 72,000 jet aircraft flight operations and an SAF-2-57 I additional 50,000 non-jet aircraft operations. Total flight operations for the base since 1964 is approximately 2.9 million. The accident rate for E1 Toro given the annual operations and number of accidents for this period is approximately .9 accidents per 100,000 operations. 4) Marine Corps Air Stition, Tustin - This facility operates exclusively helicopters. Accident records are maintained in accordance with Depirtment of Defense criteria. Since 1964, there have been twelve accidents involving helicopters from this base operating within a five-mile airport traffic area. Six of the accident:3 have occurred within the boundaries of the base. Since 1964, it is estimated that 3.18 million operations have involved helicopters from the base with an accident rate of approximately .4 accidents per 100,000 operations. 5) Los Alamitos Army Air Field - Accident records maintained by this facility are subject to Department of Defense criteria in the same manner as the records maintained by the two Marine Corps Air Stations. Though minor mishaps causing less than 10,000 dollars in damage to aircraft have occurred on the air field premises, no accidents have occurred which have resulted in loss of life or major ground damage in the last ten years. d. Aircraft Safety Management 1) Regulations , Through the Federal Aviation Act of 1958, as amended, and numerous Grant-in-aid programs for airport development, the federal government has exercised a strong legal and practical preemption over state and local authority in the areas of airspace use and management, air traffic control, aviation safety, and the regulation of aircraft noise at its source. The federal government also controls interstate and foreign air commerce. State and local governments which are not airport proprietors are largely limited to protecting their citizens through land use controls, or other police powers which do not affect aircraft operations directly or indirectly. The airport proprietor has, with certain limitations, the right to determine the type of service his airport will provide as well as the type of aircraft to utilize his airport facilities. The actual scope of proprietor authority over airport and aircraft operations hats been the subject of substantial litigation in recent years, yet, the scope of the proprietor's authority remains imprecisely defined. The dividing lines between federal, state and local government, and airport proprietor responsibilities and authority, are not clear and ace subject to different interpretations. SPY-2-58 Certain standards are specified in Part 77 of the Federal Aviation Regulations to define airspace around an airport that should be free of obstructions to air navigation. Ideally no obstructions should penetrate these "imaginary surfaces" surrounding the airport as defined in Part 77. 2) Programs Air Traffic Control Areas and Designated Authorities Orange County is crisscrossed by a complex system of air traffic corridors and landing and take-off patterns. Much of Orange County commercial air traffic flies across complex air spaces controlled by various Federal Aviation Administration facilities. These facilities include the following: Los Angeles Terminal Radar Approach Control (LA TRACON) Center; Los Angeles Air Route Traffic Control Center (LA Center) at Palmdale; and the Coast Terminal Radar Approach Control (Coast TRACON) located at MCAS, E1 Toro. LA TRACON daily handles the approach and departure routes for more than 1,700 flights arriving and departing from Los Angeles International (LAX) . The Los Angeles Air Route Traffic Control Center at Palmdale controls as many as 300 aircraft at a time in an oblong 180,000-square-mile rectangle of airspace covering southwest Utah, southern Nevada, western Arizona, Southern California and a stretch of the Pacific Ocean reaching 200 miles out to sea. Coast TRACON covers a 3,000-square-mile area including most of Orange County. TRACONS utilize computer- enhanced radar images to guide pilots through the Los Angeles- Orange County basin until airport tower controllers take over during final approach. These facilities guide thousands of planes through various types of airspace above Orange County. Among these types of airspace are the following: Terminal Control Areas (TCAs) , Airport Radar Service Areas (ARSAs) , and Airport Traffic Areas (ATAs) . (See Map 2-15) The Los Angeles TCA is 52 miles long, 24 miles wide and is separated into 12 zones. A pilot may not enter any part of the TCA unless he first receives a clearance from air traffic controllers. A pilot must also possess a two-way radio, VOR (very high frequency omnidirectional radio) receiver, a transponder and an encoding altimeter. An Airport Radar Service Area (ARSA) consists of controlled airspace extending upward from the surface or higher elevation to specified altitudes, within which all aircraft are subject to the operating rules and pilot and equipment requirement specified by Federal Aviation Regulations (FAR Part 91) . An AMA exists in Orange County for the airspace surrounding MCAS El Toro. SAP-2-59 ,+dNt3tCH� �, lob 400,00 t { 1 L r ' Muni miles. r 77 7. Mr.yi rr ii�M r �f '.w� „A01 eA MA TCA - LOS ANGELES ! AASA ' MCAS EL TORO f � 7 ��� / 1 f_.',.....;:. ..W.+ ATA ORANGE COUNTY AREA ` r / low Note: This map Is for Informational purposes only. I r'M low"* mars ORANGE COUNTY AIR TRAFFIC SOURCE: US Dept. of Commerce, CONTROL AREAS NOAA July, 1986 1 Airport Traffic Areas (ATAs) consist of the airspace within a horizontal radius of 5 statute miles from the geographical center of any airport with an operating control tower extending from the surface up to, but not including, an altitude of 3,000 ' feet above the elevation of the airport. e. Summary As described in this section, the airways above Orange County are heavily travelled by aircraft originating or arriving in Orange County or transmitting through the County to other destinations. 1 Despite the heavy travel, aircraft accidents occur infrequently due in part to Orange County's status as a "positive control area" created by the network of air traffic control areas. Aircraft flying within Orange County are routinely in contact with air traffic controllers. In the future, the Federal Aviation Administration plans to study an expanded terminal control area for the region as a possible means of streamlining and improving the control of air traffic. The FAA is also evaluating revised air routes in southern California to minimize the number of commercial aircraft flying above heavily populated areas. In the future, there may be new FAA requirements that aircraft be equipped with improved transponders which enhance identification and recognition thereby reducing accident potentials. SAF-2-61 D. Inventory of Existing and Potential Natural Hazards Natural hazards present in Orange County are due in part to the County's geography, geology and climate; and, may be exacerbated by the urbanization , process that diverts watercourses, .covers alluvial soils, builds adjacent to potentially unstable slopes and near possible fault traces. The natural hazards section focuses upon the two most significant natural hazards; floods and seismic/geologic hazards. 1. Flood Hazards a. Introduction Orange County's geography and climate increases its susceptibility to flooding. Commonly, where a broad alluvial plain exists such as the one created by the Santa Ana River there has been and is a con- tinual expansion of urban development. The change from agriculture to urban development increases the amount of impermeable surfaces and raises flood potential. Whenever ground surfaces are covered by pavement or other impermeable surfaces, direct absorption of pre- cipitation by the underlying soil is precluded, and runoff increase: and creates a potential threat of flooding. This condition is further aggravated during peak rain periods when absorptive ground becomes saturated, increasing the rate of storm runoff. The hazard of dam failure is another major flood threat. The threat is primarily one of sudden downstream flooding, which could be disastrous if it occurs when a dam's impoundment volume is near capacity. Disaster potential is high since flood inundation could occur with minimal warning. Another type of flooding occurs from the blockage of a flowing stream by a landslide. A natural dam may be created by the landslide temporarily impounding water. As a result of erosion, these flood flows are released downstream. Seiching, an earthquake- induced wave within a lake, reservoir or harbor, may cause flooding, though its occurrence in Orange County would be considered rare. Coastal flood inundation is another hazard. In response to the problems of planning, designing and construction of structures and coastal flood control devices, Orange County undertook a study of Coastal Flood Plain Development. The Study completed in 1985 provides technical criteria and guidelines for the review of structures and coastal protective devices in Orange County. The comprehensive study is intended to supplement zoning, land use, specific plans and Local Coastal Programs, and should be updated at appropriate intervals to remain current in the face of shoreline position changes and sea level fluctuations. The primary flood effects caused by inundation, erosion and sedimentation are potential loss of life and property damage. Ther(! are other, less well-known effects that may be equally threatening and damaging. Among these are disruptions of commerce; disruptions to emergency transportation; pollution of drinking water caused by , broken sewage lines; and strains placed upon the emergency services needed to respond to a flood emergency. SAV-2-62 b. Orange County Flood History Periods of sustained or intense precipitation are commonly ' associated with generating flood conditions. Precipitation within Orange County is generally the result of three distinct storm mechanisms. The most important mechanism is convergence associated with general winter storms. These storms originate as low pressure cells in Southern Alaska. On occasion they move far enough south to carry widespread precipitation across southern California. The second mechanism, also associated with general winter storms, is ' caused by orographic uplift. Mountain masses (i.e., Santa Ana Mountains) present a natural barrier to moisture laden air masses and deflect them upward increasing condensation and precipitation. The third mechanism causing intense precipitation is convection. Thunderstorms, which may produce intense rainfall for relatively short duration are caused by the rapid heating and cooling of moisture laden air (i.e., convection) . General winter storms, which cause most of the major floods in the Santa Ana River basin, usually occur between the months of November through April. Flooding within the basin may be the result of one or successive storms of differing duration and intensity which compounds their effects. The heavy rainfall of the second or third storm may create a severe flood condition. The history of floods in southern California begins in the year 1825. Prior to this date, very little data exists recording ' flood damage or inundation. Between 1825 and the turn of the century three floods occurring in the years 1825, 1862 and 1891 caused widespread flooding in the southern California region. In this century storm-caused flooding has been reported in Orange County for the years 1903, 1910, 1914, 1916, 1921, 1922, 1927, 1938, 1943, 1965, 1966, 1969, 1976, 1978, 1980, and 1983. Seven of these storms, 1916, 1938, 1969, 1974, 1978, 1980 and 1983, have produced widespread flooding in the County. Two measurements commonly used to describe floods are flood frequency and flood size. Flood frequency refers to the chance in any given year that a flood of a given size could occur in a given watershed. A 60-year flood, then, is a flood which has a one in 60 chance of occurring in any year in a specific watershed. There are three measurements for determining flood size: base flood, standard project flood and probable maximum flood. A base flood refers to the flood having a one percent chance of being equaled or exceeded in any year, a.k.a. 100-year flood. A standard project flood is a flood that would result from the most severe combination of meteorological and hydrological conditions considered reasonably characteristic of the geographic area. A probable maximum flood is estimated to be two to two-and-one-half times greater than a standard project flood. SAF-2-63 c. Description of Potential County Flood Threats ' 1) Flood Inundation a) Santa Ana River The Santa Ana River basin is the largest watershed area in Southern California encompassing approximately 3,200 square miles. The river represents the greatest flood hazard west of the Mississippi :River because of the urban development present within its expansive watershed. The watershed area is separated into an upper and lower basin roughly divided by Prado Dam and Reservoir near the City of Corona. The Santa Ana River flows through the principal urban centers oi` San Bernardino and :Riverside counties in the upper basin and , most of the major cities of Orange County in the lower basin. Within Orange County, the overflow area for a standard project flood includes the following cities: Costit Mesa; Newport Beach; Santa Ana; Orange; Anaheim; Garden , Grove; Fullerton; Buena Park; Cypress; Los Alamitos; Huntington Beach; Surfside; Seal Beach; and, adjacent unincorporated areas (see Map 2-16) . According to a 1975 U.S. Corps of Engineers' report on the Santa Ana River Main Stem and Santiago Creek, under the most severe conditions likely, floodwaters would cover over 100,000 acres to an average depth of 3 feet. Some areas would be much deeper (for example, Huntington Beach's low area would be under 6 feet of water) . The deepest floodwaters, about 7 feet deep, would occur on land areas near the Pacific Coast Highway ' where the waters would dam against the beach berm. Such a flood could affect -as many as 500,000 homes and 2,000,000 people. b) Santiago Creek Santiago Creek (see Map 2-17) , a principal tributary of the Santa Ana River, rises on the western slopes of the Santa Ana Mountains and receives intermittent flows from several smaller canyons, including Black Star, Baker, Silverado, Modjeska, and Harding. The creek cuts a course 28 miles long from its headwaters near Santiago Peak to its confluence with the Santa Ana River. It drains a total of 102 square miles. Irvine Lake, also referred to as Santiago Reservoir, is formel behind Santiago Dam. From Santiago Dam, Santiago Creek courses northwestward through Irvine Regional Park to Villa Park Reservoir formed behind Villa Park Dam. It then courses southwestward through the cities of Villa Park, Orange, and Santa Ana. The creek joins the Santa Ana River just below the Garden Grove Freeway near thi- borders of the cities of Orange, Santa Ana, and Garden Grave. Below Villa Park, the creek flood plain is heavily urbanized; above this point, it remains largely in its natural state. , SAI'-2-64 �� SIR SO RISC . w µ km y�o k CORPSsource: U.S. ARMY • • ENGINEERS. • :0 • VILLA PARK' -� O LU ,. LU ORANGE AN 01 NnNax — `•as`` Santian Creek .••� : —FREE A miles TUSTIN DIEGO source: U.S. ARMY 1 ` \ CORPSSANTIAGO CREEK OF : • c) Other Orange County Creeks In addition to the major water courses of the Santa Ana River and Santiago Creek, other streams and creeks possess potential flood problems. These flood potentials are of a more localized nature as opposed to the more extensive hazard presented by the Santa Ana River and Santiago Creek. In North County perhaps the greatest flood potential exists from the Huntington Beach/Fountain Valley Channels; the East ' Garden Grave-Wintersburg Channel; Carbon Creek Channel; Anaheim/Barber City Channel; San Diego Creek; and Peter's Canyon Wash (see Map 2-18) . Flood control improvements for these facilities were developed in accordance with earlier ' design criteria intended to meet flood threats expected to occur within a predominately rural agricultural county as it developed upon the broad alluvial fan of the Santa Ana River. South County is crisscrossed by creeks which are integrated with existing and future development. The most noteworthy 1 creeks are: Aliso Creek, Trabuco Creek, Oso Creek and San Juan Creek (see Map 2-18) . The water courses are generally left in their natural condition because these creek channels and other lesser ones are predominantly incised arroyos. As necessary, various flood control facilities to mitigate the flood threat have been constructed in conjunction with urban development. S SAF-2-67 � T � .�,`I���� ! ��� �� a �. �� •I�r e� r as ♦ I_ �' t ' to,�♦!;4�wI►�!y♦♦♦<<�i, +�,,� !•►��►�u,°� 1 � �. 'off' - ' , MA all top MCI I NO • NMI . - • • • . 1) Dam Inundation a) Prado Dam ' Prado dam and reservoir, completed by the Corps of Engineers in 1941, are intended to provide flood protection to the Lower Santa Ana River basin. The earthen dam and its reservoir were designed in the 1930s to control floods of magnitudes that could be reasonably expected to occur under anticipated future development of the watershed (typically a 200-year flood) . Since Prado Dam was built, however, changes have occurred in the drainage area. Historical data on rainfall and runoff, coupled with advances in predicting future flood potential, have shown Prado Dam to presently offer only 70-year flood protection. In addition, intensive urbanization within the drainage area has occurred, further complicating this problem. Another serious concern is that the existing Prado Dam and spillway could not accommodate a probable maximum flood, resulting in overtopping of the dam. Map 2-19 depicts the potential flood hazards that might occur from a failure of Prado Dam. b) Santiago Creek Dam Santiago Creek Dam is an earthen dam which impounds water forming Irvine Lake. The dam provides water conservation as a primary benefit, flood control as a secondary function, and promotes recreational activities within the lake. Flooding would be exacerbated by the failure downstream of Villa Park Dam. Map 2-19 depicts the flood hazard potential that could happen should the dams fail. ' c) Villa Park Dam Villa Park Dam is an earthen dam located downstream from Santiago Creek Dam. This facility is the principle flood protection along Santiago Creek. Failure of this dam would pose a flood hazard impacting the downstream communities of Villa Park, Tustin, Orange, Santa Ana and Irvine. d) Other Dams In addition to the flood control protection provided by Prado Dam on the Santa Ana River, and Santiago Creek Dam and Villa Park Dam on Santiago Creek, there are additional dams within Orange County constructed for flood protection purposes. Fullerton Dam, Brea Dam and Carbon Canyon Dam in North County are earthen dams constructed and operated by the Army Corps of Engineers to provide flood protection to urban development along Fullerton Creek, Brea Creek and Carbon Canyon. SAF-2-69 1 . PRADO DA RESERVOIR IMMlII� I� VIIIII���! VILLA PARK ANGE VILLA PARK NA kk , I ,.. I_ •_�,� �_� aaaas,► �� •����aatr aaaas• I ■��a ar aaaatn Ili; G I • ������a����■ III'I' PRADO DAM r AREA \\4 MESA I R v I N I.' �. ■s � VILLA PARK DAM- c • RESERVOIR1�1 - INUNDATION AREA •■ • • Canyon and San Diego Crook '14, NEWPORT Note: This map Is REACti for Informational purposes PRADO DAM AND • RESERVOIR N ON ARMY CORPSOF C ` d. Description of Orange County Flood Control Facilities Actions to reduce flood potential in Orange County are shared by the federal government, the Orange County Flood Control District and ' local jurisdictions. 1) Federal Government The federal government assists local jurisdictions to implement major flood control facilities. In Orange County the most significant of these flood control facilities is the Santa Ana ' River system. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, beginning in 1975, recommended the implementation of the Santa Ana River Main Stem Federal Project (previously the All-River Plan) , over four other options, as the preferred means of providing main-stream physical control over potential Santa Ana River flood waters in the event of a Standard Project Flood (SPF) . The plan calls for significant improvements to the Santa Ana River system. The Santa Ana River Main Stem Federal Project (see Map 2-20) , contained in the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (PL 99- 662) , was signed by the President on November 17, 1986. As 1 signed by the President, the Act authorizes the following Santa Ana River improvements: o Raise Prado Dam and increase reservoir capacity; ' o Construct a new dam to be called 'Seven Oaks Dam" on the Santa Ana River northeasterly of the communities of East Highlands and Mentone; o Implement flood plain management between Seven Oaks and Prado dams; o Acquire the floodway in the Santa Ana Canyon reach of the river to carry the water releases from Prado Dam, providing some structural protection along certain bends in the river, but maintaining the natural conditions as much as possible as a floodway and for environmental enhancement; o Construct channel improvements in the Coastal Plain reach of the river below Santa Ana Canyon, on Santiago Creek (in Santa Ana, Orange, and Villa Park) , and on Oak Street Drain ' (in Corona) ; and o Reconstruct existing recreational facilities. SAF-2-71 1 Proposed Seven Oaks Dam Mentone SAN ,BERNADINO COUNTY an Bernadino Prado Dam ' —'..—'—t •'— & Reservoir -—-— f \ �00 Riverside LOS ANGELES COUNTY 1 ORANGE COUNTY �_ ! 'Norco n Corona .14 • OO Qom C ee �O Irvine Lake Q� k i Del IMPROVEMENTS Santa Ana Cam' 11111111 FLOOD PLAIN MANAGEMENT i y� llullil OPEN SPACE PRESERVATION • WILDLIFE MITIGATION A� !New o rt Beach _ a PRESERVATION AREA DATA NOT TO SCALE 4 NOTE This map Is for Womwftul puposss only mar Ll ANTA ANA RIVER MAIN STEM PROJECT SOURCE Orange 2- 20 2) Regional System Orange County Flood Control District ' The Orange County Flood Control District (OCFCD) is empowered to construct and maintain flood control works to prevent or minimize loss of life and property caused by flooding and to conserve water. The Environmental Management Agency (EMA) implements the Flood Control District's funded activities program which includes the design, construction, operation and maintenance of regional flood control facilities. ' The Flood Control District program is assisted by the City Engineers Flood Control Advisory Committee (CEFCAC) , which is ' composed of one City Engineer from each Supervisorial District appointed by the Orange County Division, League of California Cities and a County representative designated by the Director, EMA. Project proposals from all sources are analyzed by Flood Control District staff and submitted to CEFCAC for project recommendations and priorities. The recommendations are utilized by EMA in preparing the annual Flood Control District 1 budget request. Flood Control District revenue is obtained mainly from property taxes. Under the provisions of Section 97 and 98 of the Revenue and Taxation Code, the amount of Flood Control District revenue derived from property taxes is based on the average percentage received during the three years prior to the passage of ' Proposition 13, plus a proportionate share of the subsequent tax base growth. Subsequent to the passage of Proposition 13, State Special District augmentation funds have also been received. Orange County Floodplain Management Floodplain management is a key component to effective flood ' control within Orange County. The Federal Insurance Administration delineates through official maps, Flood Insurance Rate Map (F.I.R.M) and Flood Boundary and Floodway Map, areas of special flood hazard, the risk premium zones and floodways applicable to a community. These maps form the basis for Orange county's flood plain management program implemented through zoning regulations. These zoning regulations (Section 7-9-113 ' of the Orange County Zoning Code) are intended to be applied to those areas which are subject to periodic flooding and accompanying hazards. ' Three levels of floodplain protection are identified. The FP-1 designation is applied to the 'floodway,' the channel of a river or other watercourse and that part of the floodplain reasonably ' required to safely discharge the base flood, as shown on the federal Flood Boundary and Floodway Maps or areas the County has identified as a floodway. The FP-1 designation permits private flood control facilities, general open space uses and public/private utility structures. The FP-2 designation is applied to areas identified on Federal Flood Insurance Rate Maps ' SAF-2-73 i _ 1 or areas identified by the County to be within a special flood ' hazard area. Development is permitted within FP-2 areas in compliance with specific; development standards, including construction and design elements that minimize flood damage, and raising the :Lowest floor of a building including a basement or ' cellar one foot above the flood level. The FP-3 designation is applied to a::eas shown on the Flood Insurance Rate Maps or designated b:'r the County to be susceptible to coastal flooding by the 'Coastal Flood Plain Development Study." Development is permitted within the FP--3 areas subject to satisfaction of design crite::ia contained in the 'Coastal Flood Plain Development ,study.' ' The purposes of floodplain zoning regulations as applied by the County include prevention of loss of life and property and to ' minimize economic loss caused by flood flows; establishment of criteria for land management and land use in flood-prone areas that are consistent with the criteria promulgated by the Federal Insurance Administration for the purpose of providing flood ' insurance eligibility for property owners; regulation and control of u;se of land below the elevation of the design flood flow within the floodplain; and, compliance with the Cobey- ' Alquist Floodplain Management Act requirements for floodplain management regulations. Adherence to the Act's provisions entitles a local jurisdiction to receive state financial assistance for flood control project rights-of-way costs. ' Local Drainac;e Program The County's Local Drainage Program constructs storm drain , facilities in the unincorporated portions of the County in order to correct localized flooding problems which are not of sufficient magnitude to include in the Flood Control District Program. A ;similar local drainage program is carried out by each of the :26 cities in the county. Storm drains are normally smaller facilities which collect drainage from local streets. In new developments, local drainage facilities are constructed by developers in accordance with master -plans of drainage. However, in many older parts of ' Orange County, local systems were not built due to lack of major systems to ai:cept their discharge. This program allows for implementation of the needed local drainage facilities as County General Fund:a are made ,available. ' e. Future Prospects As urban development occurs and replaces soils with impervious ' surfaces in the Santa Ana River watershed and other Orange County watershed areas, storm runoff will increase. When stream flows exceed channel capacity or exceed reservoir and dam capacity, river:; overflow their banks onto their floodplains. Options to reduce flood losses involve the control of development within floodplains, land management throughout the watershed to reduce flood volumes vial soils. retention ,and construction of facilities to convey or retard flows for the physical control of potential flood waters. SAF-2-74 ' 1 ' The implementation of the Santa Ana River Main Stem Federal Project and other Santa Ana River improvements along with regional and local flood control facilities should provide Orange County with appropriate flood protection safeguards. Due to fiscal constraints, the approximate $1.2 billion backlog of regional and local improvements implemented at a rate of $10 million a year will take well into the next century to construct. However, long-term protection and improved coordination between local, state and federal governments should allow continued development of communities within the watershed with minimal adverse impacts. SAF-2-75 2. Seismic Safety and Geologic Hazards ' a. Introduction Orange County, like most regions that border the Pacific Ocean, is a , region of high seismic activity and, therefore, is subject to potentially destructive earthquakes. Earthquakes are the result of an abrupt release of energy stored in the earth. This energy is generated from the forces which cause the continents to change their relative position on the earth's surface; this process is called "plate tectonics.' Large earthquakes are caused by the rupturing of great rock masses under strain within the earth's crust. This ' usually takes the form of abrupt slipping or sliding along a rupturt! plane (fault) . Each time two segments of the earth's crust suddenly shift past one another along a fault, an earthquake occurs. Major ' earthquakes are :ommonly accompanied by foreshocks and aftershocks which are usually less intense and represent local yielding and adjustments of rock masses along the main zone of faulting. Earthquakes create two types of hazards: primary and secondary. i Primary seismic hazards include ground shaking, ground displacement, subsidence and uplift due to the seismic episode. Primary hazards , can, in turn, induce secondary hazards. These include the following: ground failure (lurch cracking, lateral spreading and slope failure) , liquefaction, seismically induced water waves (tsunamis and seiches) , movement on nearby independent faults , (sympathetic fault movement) and dam failure. Orange County residents are exposed to other geologic hazards not ' necessarily associated with earthquakes. Landslides result from the., movement of slope-forming earth or rock materials downward under the influence of gravity. A landslide may take the form of a flow, slide, fall, or a combination of the three. This form of earth ' movement is the most costly of the non-seismic geologic hazards. Two other geologic hazards, subsidence and uplift, are caused by vertical mass movements of earth materials with little or no latera:. movement. Erosion of fields, cliffs and stream channels has been of concern tc► man for centuries. The process of erosion occurs naturally in nature; however, it can be induced and encouraged by man's activities. One example is river channelization which impedes transportation of sediments to the coast. Since beaches depend on ' sediments to replenish sand supply, sediment reduction leads to beach and cliff erosion, a major County safety concern. A final non-seismic hazard described in this section is associated with soi:. characteristics. , b. Existing Conditions 1) Seismic ' Orange County is more fortunate from a seismic safety standpoin+: than some of its neighboring counties. Two potentially hazardous fault zones run along the coastal and inland edges of SA]?-2-7 6 r r� r r r rr �r rr rr rr r r rr rr rr rr r r it if `�► `:•:o�eyPl �4% LOS ANGELES SAN BERNADINO `•:I ;, � ♦' COUNTY COUNTY Will �, ♦♦` 8�H VENTURA ♦♦ 8,t ,♦� N COUNTY ♦_DABR�EL ♦♦ i •Ventura ��� MA ♦$an Bernadino so NOW Los Angeles e es • W 8 h ► • / • 7 . .. .. Riverside �N � i e.. .. R N 7 r Lon > •� Beac r>rt '.l ? RIVERSIDE ♦ d t COUNTY .......... N � , O qp 09 �4W4 .... �, ♦, �''o miles %; % ♦, ����� SAN DIEGO COUNTY MAJOR FAULTS ---------------------- INFERRED FAULTS OR OFFSHORE ESCARPMENTS Note: This map Is for Informational purposes only. Source: FAULT MAP ORANGE COUNTY EMERGENCY map MGMT. DIVISION 1986 2—2 1 the County. (See Map 2•-21.) The best known of the two faults , is the Newpo�:t-Inglewood Fault, which angles from offshore near Dana Point, :inland through what is now the City of Newport Beach, on into Los Angeles County through the cities of Long Beach and To::rance. Th:is fault zone produced the catastrophic 1933 Long Beach earthquake with a Richter scale magnitude of 6.3. It is believed this fault is capable of generating a maximum credible 7.5 magnitude earthquake. Paralleling this fault :.one across the northeasterly edge of the County is th,a Whittier Fault, believed to be the main spur from the larger Elsinore Fault which follows a general line easterly ' of the Santa Ana Mountains into Mexico. Most recorded shocks ir. this zone range from 4.0 to 5.0 magnitude, which is considered moderately a,^tive. However, in 1910 an earthquake registering ' 6.0 on the Richter scat: hit Riverside County in the vicinity of Lake Elsinore. It is estimated that the maximum credible earthquake capable from the Whittier-Elsinore Fault Zone is 7.0 magnitude. ' Earthquakes on faults located outside the county can cause damage within the county. Depending on their magnitude, earthquakes generated within a fifty-mile radius of a given point are considered noteworthy and could cause minor to moderate damage. For Orange County, these perimeter faults are : San Andreas; San Jacinto (including Imperial and Superstition ' Hills) ; Malibu-Coast-Raymond; Palos Verdes; San Gabriel; and, Sierra Madre-Santa Susana-Cucamonga faults (including "San Fernando") . The Norwalk and-El Modeno Faults, located within ' Orange County, between the Whittier and Newport-Inglewood faults, are both considered inactive. Additional faults located in the Los Angeles County region which are capable of generatirnl destructive earthquakes and surface rupture can be seen on ' Map 2-21. Due to the proximity of active and potentially active faults in ' and around Grange County and its degree of urbanization, the risk of structural damage and loss of life due to ground shaking is considerable. The risk of secondary hazards is also great. ' According to various geologic experts, much of Orange County is highly susceptible to slope failure (activated by ground shaking) , lurching and displacement. Another secondary hazard of particular concern to some portions of Orange County is that ' of liquefaction. Liquefaction is a prolx!rty of saturated sand or coarse silt. When these materials are vibrated, they often behave as a heavy liquid. Liquefaction occurs when saturated soil changes from a solid to a fluid condition as a result of excess pore pressures caused by dynamic or static loading. Liquefaction depends on ' the relative density (degree of soil compaction) of the material before it wits saturated, the average grain diameter, grain size distribution, and the duration and intensity of shaking induced , by the quake. Maps 2-22 and 2-23 show the areas of liquefaction and degree of ground shaking for various areas around Orange SAP-2-78 ' 2WA I MAP v,•� OF MA Mao ARE ORANGE COUNTY FIRE- 7.5 - • - • • D FAULT EMERGENCY MGMT. DIV 1 ez tot .. _.LIQUEFACTION AREA MODIFIED MERCALLI SANDYGRANULAR SOIL WITH HIGH WATER CONTENT (SEE TEXT)INTENSITY SCALE miles purposesNote: This map Is for Informational source: ANDREAS FAULTORANGE COUNTY DIVISION ' County in the event of a maximum credible earthquake on the San Andreas or Newport-Inglewood faults. Table 2-8 describes the effects experienced during varying degrees of ground shaking. The numbers down the left hand side (1 to 12) represent the ' Mercalli Scale while the numbers in parentheses represent comparable ground shaking as recorded on the Richter Scale. The Mercalli and Richter scales are two means of measuring ground ' shaking during an earthquake. Another potential secondary source of damage is from the generation of seiches and tsunamis. A seiche is the oscillation ' or sloshing of water caused by seismic activity or landsliding. It may occur in a lake, bay or other enclosed body of water. It may result in damage to peripheral shore development or to downstream development if water tops a dam. Orange County's greatest potential damage from dam failure comes from just outside the county: Prado Dam on the Santa Ana River. Irvine ' Dam poses another threat along Santiago Creek. While the possibility of its failure is much greater than that of Prado Dam, the resultant damage would be less. A comprehensive discussion of dam failure can be found in the Flood Hazards Section of this Element. Tsunamis, or seismic sea waves, may be generated by an undersea earthquake, landslide or by volcanic activity. Tsunamis are waves generated by the displacement of a body of water. These waves travel in the open ocean at speeds approaching 500 miles per hour. As the wave approaches the shore, the ocean bottom ' shallows and the energy carried by the wave is funneled into the shallower water thus causing the wave heights to increase. The Orange County coastline is shielded to the west by the Channel Islands and to the north by Point Conception from most sources of tsunamis, thereby reducing the threat of damage. Another serious secondary water damage hazard emanates from linear systems failure. This condition involves the bursting of underground water pipes and mains. Its effects may be widespread, crippling entire communities. If failures occur on main trunk lines, entire regions of Orange County may be without public services. These types of failures could result in situations ranging from contamination of drinking water to an inability to successfully fight fires which may be caused by other linear system failures, such as gas or oil lines or electrical transmission lines. 2) Non-Seismic In addition to the safety hazards posed by seismic activity, other types of geologic features also occur which pose a ' potential threat to the well-being of county residents, their homes and businesses. These geologic events include landslides, subsidence and uplift, natural erosive forces, and potentially ' dangerous soil characteristics (expansive, peat, sulfate, gaseous and corrosive soils, and soils subject to hydroconsolidation) . ' SAF-2-81 TABLE 2-8 MODIFIED MERCALLI INTENSITY SCALE , 1. Not felt except by a vary few, and only under special circumstances. (Below ' 3.0 magnitude on Richter Scale.) 2. Felt by persons at rest: and on uprer floors. (3.0-3.9 magnitude on Richter ' Scale.) 3. Felt indoors. Hanging objects swing slightly. Vibration feels like passinc• of light trucks. May not be recognized as an earthquake. (3.0-3.9 ' magnitude on Richter Scale.) 4. Hanging objects swing noticeably. Vibration like passing of heavy trucks. Standing automobiles rack. Windows, dishes, doors rattle. Glasses clink. , Wooden walls and frames creak. (4.0-4.9 magnitude on Richter Scale.) 5. Felt outdoors by most people. Sleepers awakened. Liquids may spill. Smal.. ' unstable objects displaced. Doors swing, close, open. Pictures move. Some breakage of plaster. (4.0-4.9 magnitude on Richter Scale.) 6. Felt by all. Persons tralk unsteadily. Windows, dishes, glassware broken. ' Objects, books, etc., cuff shelves. Pictures off walls. Furniture moved or overturned. Weak plaster and masonry cracked. Small bells ring (church, school). Trees, busheto shaken visibly. (5.0-5.9 magnitude on Richter ' Scale.) 7. Difficult to stand. Noticed by drivers of automobiles. Hanging objects shake. Furniture broken. Weak chimneys broken at roof line. Fall of ' plaster, loose bricks, stones, tiles, cornices; also unbraced parapets and architectural ornaments. Waves on ponds; water turbid with mud. Small slides and caving in a:.ong sand and gravel banks. Large bells ring. Concrete irrigation ditches damaged. (6.0-6.9 magnitude on Richter Scale.) 8. Steering of automobiles affected. Fall of stucco and some masonry walls. Twisting, fall of chimneys, factory stacks, monuments, towers, elevated ' tanks. Frame houses moved on foundation if not bolted down; loose panel walls thrown out. Branches broken from trees. Cracks in wet ground and on steep slopes. (6.0-6.9 magnitude on Richter Scale.) 9. General panic. Masonry destroyed or heavily damaged. General damage to ' foundations. Frames clacked. Serious damage to reservoirs. Underground pipes broken. Conspictious cracks in ground. (7.0-7.9 magnitude on Richter ' Scale.) 10. Most masonry and frame structures destroyed with their foundations. Some well built wooden structures and triages destroyed. Serious damage to dams, ' dikes, embankments. Large landslides. Water thrown on banks of canals, rivers, lakes, etc. Sand and mud shifted horizontally on beaches and flat land. Rails bent slightly. (7.0-•7.9 magnitude on Richter Scale.) ' 11. Rails bent greatly. Underground pipelines completely out of service. Damage severe to wood frame structures, especially near shock centers. Few, if any masonry structures remain :standing. Large, well built bridges ' destroyed by the wreck.Lng of supporting piers or pillars. (8.0-8.9 magnitude on Richter Scale.) 12. Damage nearly total. large rock masses displaced. Lines of sight and level ' distorted. Objects thrown into air. (8.0-8.9 magnitude on Richter Scale.) Source: Orange County Fire Department:, Emergency Management Division, 1986. ' SAP-2-82 ' a) Landslides: Landslides may be divided principally into three overlapping categories: surficial failures, rotational slides, and planar slides. Surficial failures, the most common failures, occur generally within four to ' five feet of ground surface. In rotational slides the failure surface takes an arcuate shape both in horizontal and vertical profile. Planar slides result when natural planes of weakness within a rock formation are exposed either by the natural process of erosion or during grading operations. A major factor contributing to these three types of slides is the process of grading. The lack of precautionary measures to stabilize slopes or cutting into the failure plane of an existing landslide can result in the failure of material or slopes. ' Another common thread of similarity among all three categories of slides is that water saturation of all or part of the materials is involved. When water saturation of soil occurs, the soil's carrying capacity is decreased. This ' weakening, coupled with gravitational factors and the various characteristics of the soil material, leads to destructive outcomes. ' Other types of sliding that occur are mudflows, debris avalanches, rockfalls, rockslides, and gravity sliding. These landslides are either variations between or gradations within the three individual categories. Devastation and economic setback from landslides were exhibited in the October 1978 Laguna Beach/Bluebird Hill slide in which 25 homes were lost and 15 million dollars in damage was done. The slide area covered 3.5 acres--part of a five-acre ancient slide area. In February 1980, Laguna Beach was struck by mudslides which damaged 117 homes and 35 businesses and totaled an estimated 5 million dollars in damage. In May 1983, several private homes in Silverado ' Canyon were severely damaged by rock and debris flow. These residences were evacuated and the public road use was restricted to local residents and essential traffic. Because of recurring rockfall and debris flows endangering life and property of residents in Silverado Canyon, the Board of Supervisors authorized, on May 18, 1983, a geotechnical review of the mud/debris flow and rockfall hazards. On a more recent note, San Clemente--dubbed by geologists as physically "least stable' of Orange County cities due to its propensity for unstable slopes--was hit on September 4, 1986, by a landslide. This slide caused five ' homes in the Shorecliffs development to be evacuated after they were left teetering on an 80 foot high precipice. Many other incidences of landslides have been recorded and other ' areas identified as ancient landslide sites which are dormant but can become active again, much like volcanoes. SAF-2-83 Most of Orange County--which like the rest of the state is characterized by active earthquake fault lines and ancient volcanic, activity--is covered by soils deposited by surface water, ::and, ancient landslides and dry deposits that constantly expand and contract with the addition and remova:. ' of moisture. Orange County has a commitment to an intensive effort to examine landslide potential. The lead agency in this effort is the Grading Section of the Orange County EMA. ' This division is responsible for the following: 1) the critique! of consultant work on various construction projects; 2) the production of soil and geologic reports; and 3) the implementation of landslide mitigation measures. ' Major policy aiding in the efforts of the grading section include the Orange County Grading and Excavation Code, ' adopted by the Board of Supervisors for the purpose of safeguarding life, land, property, and public welfare by regulat:Lng grading on private property in the unincorporated areas off Orange County. The Grading and Excavation Code , sets foi:th rules and regulations to control excavation, grading and earthwork construction, including fills and embankments, and e:;tablishes administrative requirements fcr ' issuance of permit:3 and approval of plans and inspection of grading construction in accordance with the requirements fcr grading and excavation as contained in the Uniform Buildinc Code. ' The Grading Manual, another tool adopted by the Board of Supervisors, is to assist users of the grading code by supplementing it with detailed information regarding rules, ' interpretations, standard specifications, procedures, requirements, forms and other information applicable to control excavation, grading and earthwork construction in ' unincorporated Orange County. b) Land Subsidence and Uplift: Subsidence and uplift are terns ' used to describe changes in elevation occurring over reasonably large areas. Subsidence can be either caused by forces within the earth's crust or by withdrawal of fluids such as oil or water, or solids such as soil or rock. Oil extraction differs from groundwater extraction mainly because much greater depths, greater pressures, and a greater danger of subsidence are involved. Uplift on the other rand, is the! result of the injection of water or another liquid, into the ground to replace material remove1. Orange County monitors subsidence occurring in the County ' and publishes the findings in its annual Subsidence Study. According to the report released in 1984, a notable case of subsidence is occurring in Huntington Beach. In an area along pacific Coast Highway near Goldenwest Boulevard, the ground has subsided approximately 11 inches due to the pumping of oil from the ground. Although water is being , pumped back into the ground to recharge the well pressure, subsidence continues to occur at a rate of approximately cne SAP-2-84 ' inch per year. There are currently no mitigation measures being imposed by the County; however, oil companies operating in the area are monitoring the situation. c) Erosion: Erosion is the process by which earth and rock materials are worn away and transported by the action of water, wind or ice. Beach erosion has damaged or destroyed both functional structures and appurtenant erosion protection devices. Topsoil loss due to erosion in agricultural areas led to the formation of the Federal Soil Conservation Service, which conducts research and provides consultation to minimize this loss. Stream erosion and siltation have long constituted major hazards to cities and to man-made facilities situated alongside or straddling water-courses. Soil loss and stream erosion are addressed in the Resources Element of the Orange ' County General Plan. Beach erosion problems, however, are considered in this element. (1) Beach and Cliff Erosion ' Beach and cliff erosion problems are a major concern in Orange County. This process is influenced to the greatest degree by man-made changes and obstructions in the ocean affecting the coastline. Other factors are wind, interference with stream processes, wave height and direction, tides, and sand lost to deep ocean basins. Whenever waves are present, sand moves on or off beaches. Major movements often occur during wave storms. Waves are more energetic than usual then, and storm-induced, longshore and offshore-directed currents provide a means to transport the wave-mobilized sand away from or towards the beach. This movement is wholly or partially reversible in that the sand volume lost from the beach during the storm may be partially or completely returned to the beach after the storm. In general, seasonal changes in the beach profile will be much greater than the net yearly change that occurs over a period of many years. The sand supply is also renewed by the sediment load of rivers and streams emptying into the ocean. This latter process does not occur at a constant rate. Although influenced by such factors as ' the lining of flood control channels, the damming of rivers and streams is a much more important factor in reducing the amount of sediment carried to the ocean. ' Beach cliff erosion is a major concern to development along coastal Orange County. The erosion of cliff sides causes landslides and subsequent problems to hillside ' development. The erosion rate in Orange County is considered moderate countywide (approximately 1" per year) . Although various development and zoning ' SAP-2-85 1 standards have been devised, no programs have been devised to specifically control beach cliff erosion. Technical criteria and guidelines were prepared for Orarnie County EDIA Flood Control by Moffat and Nichol ' Engineers. This; study, "Coastal Flood Plain Development, Or<<nge County Coastline," was created for the review of structures and coastal protection devices ' at five coastal reaches in Orange County. Using 1984 coas':al design data, Moffat and Nichol developed three recommendations for improving beach erosion protection: (a) lstablish a methodology to update and improve the ' coastal design data sets as new information becomes ;available; ' (b) :3stablish a procedure to obtain local information using a combination of trained County staff and beach-resident volunteers; and , (c) :Establish a geotechnical data bank for coastal lesign review purposes. The implementation of recommendation one has occurred through the creation of floodplain zones and other appropriate policy. The implementation of the remaininc t recommendations would ensure an improved data set will be available for future design purposes, including beact. restoration and maintenance. ' d) Soil Characteristics Expansi Soils: These are soils which incorporate water ' into their mineral structure. This process causes swelling of mineral grains and an increase in soil volume. The degree of soil expansion is determined by the percentage and ' types of minerals in the soil. in addition, the amount of water a soil can incorporate depends on the stress on the grains created by the combined weight of soil and man-made structures. ' Much of Orange County is covered by soil that experts say may cause cracking in concrete foundations. The most ' prevalent problems stem from clay or "expansive" soil which expands and contracts with moisture, causing building foundations, sidewalks and swimming pools to lift and crack. Geologists indicate that three predominant soil conditions ' exist in residential areas of Orange County. Possible effects of "expansive" soil conditions exist in each of the three predominant :,oil conditions: ' 1 SAF-2-86 ' (1) Differential Swell Differential Swell The thicker zone of expansive soil causes more swelling at one side of the residence exp6tstiAeet_�;a4k ` �. :r ... than at the other. " ~�� (2) Concentric Swell Concentric Swell Water migration beneath a foundation causes swelling in its center. t:a :�► . Slope Yielding (3) Slope Yielding The soil shifts downslope, tilting the foundation. Problems attributed to expansive soils are usually related to improperly designed or constructed foundations. Due to the diversity of soil conditions in Orange County, experts ' agree that no residence is completely safe from cracking, slipping or sinking to some degree, regardless of the residence's age or location. Currently, problems attributed to expansive soils are being mitigated through structural and design regulations as well as through soil treatment techniques. I Peat Formations In the process of coal formation from masses of vegetation, peat is the earliest stage of conversion. It consists of mats of partly decayed vegetable matter which may or may not be covered by sediment. Accumulation of peat can occur in various ways including sand beach bars blocking coastal streams; generation of sag ponds by faulting; and, historically common in Orange County, abandonment of stream meanders by a river cutting a new path. The hazards are created when structures are placed on a land surface underlain by a peat deposit. The structure may be damaged by collapse of the peat mat or by fires generated by accumulation of methane gas beneath the structure. Currently, hazards caused by peat deposits are mitigated through initial consolidation or removal of the peat material prior to construction. SAF-2-87 i Sulfate Soils Soil cortaining an unusually high sulfate content can cause the concrete slab upon which houses are built to crack, crumble and break apart. This is due to the presence of ' destructive sulfates - a salt-like substance derived from sulfuric acid. It is most notably detected by telltale cracks in the concrete which is accompanied by a characteristic white, powdery substance. In Orange County this problem is particularly prevalent in La Palma where 50 to 100 homes in a single tract were affected in late 1985. As many as 100 additional homes may have cracked and, in some cases, crumbling floors. without repairs to replace the concrete slab, the entire structure of the houses can be endangered. Many reasons have been offered by various engineers as to why there are high sulfate soils in some areas and not others. These experts cite explanations which range from factors associated with previous usage of the property (e.g., dairy operations which have large volumes of animal droppings) , to usage of cement additives which react negatively with the soil. Presently, regulations and designs standards in the Uniform Building Code describe specific cement types to be used in construction which is directly exposed to soil or water containing sulfate concentrations. Gaseous Soils In March 1985, a fire and explosion in the Fairfax area of , Los Angeles occurred, drawing attention to a potential safety hazard caused by the natural accumulation of gas within the soil. Naturally occurring gas within the soil i;3 often caused by bacterial activity (i.e., biogenic gas) and is not associated with petroleum. In an effort to preclude further occurrences, the State legislature enacted Senate Bill SB 1458 (Roberti) directing the Department of Conservation, Division of Oil and Gas to select and survey areas suspected of containing the greates-: potential for hazardous gas accumulations. Three criteria were utilized to identify suspected areas: 1) the areas must be urban; 2) the areas must have oil and gas wells tha`: were abandoned prior to 1930; and 3) the areas must have a history of natural oil and/or gas seepage. Based upon the three criteria, eight high risk areas were identified within Southern California. Three sites were identified within Orange County: Newport oil field (City of Newport Beach) ; Brea-Olinda oil field (City of Brea) ; and Huntington Beach oil field (City of Huntington Beach) (see Map 2-24) . The conditions involving � 9 Newport Beach and Huntington Beach are similar. Residents in the two areas have reported seepage problems. In both areas, methane gas monitors are seen as a feasible means of monitoring gas accumulations coupled with a program of vent wells to release gas. SAP'-2-8 8 The Brea-Olinda oil field, located in an undeveloped portion .� of the county, is faced with steadily encroaching development. The recommendation of the study report prepared in October 1986 for the Department of Conservation suggests there are no clear economically feasible methods to remove or mitigate the problems at this site. Further, the report concludes that residential and commercial uses should not be developed until significant mitigation measures are taken. Corrosive Soils Soils become corrosive to metals when they are abnormally acidic (low PH) or saline (high chlorine content with low resistance to electrical current) . Metallic pipes and structures can be protected by various coatings, wrappings and cathotic devices. Without this protection, the life of the metallic structures are greatly shortened with resulting �. cost increases. Hydroconsolidation Hydroconsolidation is a condition which occurs closer to the ground surface as compared to the similar condition of subsidence. The honeycomb-like composition of the soil contributes greatly to the failure of the soil. When built upon or covered over with fill, this weakly supported soil collapses immediately when put in contact with water. e) Seismic and Geologic Mapping The California Division of Mines and Geology (CDMG) has produced a series of maps depicting the environmental geology of Orange County. This ten plate set depicts faulting; recency of faulting; earthquake epicenters; liquefaction potential; relative seismic shaking; massive bedrock landslides; mud-debris flows and rockfall; expansitivity potential of soils and rock units; distribution of peat deposits; and, tsunami risk. These maps can be reviewed at the Orange County Environmental Management Agency. c. Seismic and Geologic Hazard Management 1) Alquist-Priolo Special Study Zone The State legislature enacted the Alquist-Priolo Special Studies Zone Act in 1972 to assure that homes, offices, hospitals, public buildings, and other structures for human occupancy are not built on active faults. The act includes special study zone criteria and requires a geological investigation before a local government can approve most development projects in a special study zone. SAP-2-89 rti r BREA J � � l HUNTINGTON NEWPORT BEACH BEACH Note: This map Is for Informational purposes only. source: STATE DEPARTMENT map SOIL GAS ACCUMULATION AREAS OF CONSERVATION 2P4 lr II■� 1�1 >t, 1� ! al>~ ffl� SIR >�: �� rw•, s As required under the Act, the State Geologist initiated a 1 program early in 1973 to delineate Special Study Zones which encompass potentially and recently active traces of four major faults (San Andreas, Calaveras, Hayward, and San Jacinto) as well as other "sufficiently active and well defined" faults. There are eight Special Studies zones which partially include areas bordering Orange County. Specific locations of these zones can be found on Map 2-25. Modifications were made to the study zone surrounding the Newport-Inglewood Fault extending into the Newport Beach quadrangle. This modification, made by CDMG, July 1, 1986, narrowed the study zone from several thousand feet to 700 feet and shortened the zone which now stops just north of Atlanta Avenue in Huntington Beach. Currently, the only Orange County area which incorporates Alquist-Priolo requirements is Bolsa Chica. County programs and policy for implementation of Alquist-Priolo requirements are found in the Bolsa Chica Local Coastal Plan. 2) Orange County/Southern California Earthquake Preparedness Project (SCEPP) The Southern California Earthquake Preparedness Project (SCEPP) is a State and Federally funded effort to encourage local jurisdictions to prepare for predicted or unpredicted "catastrophic" earthquakes in the Southern California area. SCEPP operates under the auspices of the California Seismic Safety Commission (CSSC) and is concerned with a broad range of issues related to earthquake preparedness planning. The project works directly with local governments, private industry and volunteer groups in a cooperative planning effort, and addresses the full range of earthquake strategies including mitigation (long term prediction response) , short-term prediction response, emergency response, and recovery. Recommendations put forth to the Board of Supervisors by the Emergency Management Council (EMC) in 1984 were adopted, spurring the development of a work plan for SCEPP in Orange County. Through a series of committees established and directed by Fire/Emergency Management Division (EMD) from 1984 to 1985, Orange County/SCEPP drafted 39 recommendations ranging from developing procedures for turning off utilities in all County buildings after a major earthquake, to identifying and correcting non-structural hazards in all County-owned and leased facilities. These recommendations were submitted to the Board of Supervisors in June of 1986 together with plan and cost estimates for those recommendations requiring funding. The implementation schedule has been time-phased over a 10 year period in order to prioritize tasks and manage County financial resources. This program is on-going. Further information or clarification regarding this project should be directed to the Orange County Fire/EMD. SAF-2-91 u� c CO (V N a y yyf3�? 0 yo?a! °J o ,r us W�JH I O. S 1 H Q z I/r�byS H N 6,ya,: b QJ'bJ �l'J b9'y�, bJyd C Q Q ti0�b b 5003 I p7�'yH0 b%604 �O��nJi E T H b S p C6 1I N cc �y6�b$°� "aa o�sA b0�o�� / z p c Q) m tior� 36� yayl J d W III I N I ?�J7 ?HO�� \`' �OboJ W E OryO t! _ 0 C7 H f0 7bJ�bJ I ybS✓ 1 0"ab z L � � H l041769 d G7 Q y W 0 O J ♦ z S 0 b l ab b I J 3 A H O 7 b N ! err H 4f/r p W b�?Oiy d S�J?Ny b+'B? • ! y r I o Q b 1 b y 0 00 � O � c 0 0 L J S M l 7 7 I J d 6 4' . / n 0 � o o ? s 0 3 d S '^ H V/ L SJH O Sl 9 � d 7 w 7 H H d b 9 7 7 B Z y V I 0 N 6 cc b 7 N b i 6 i / I W uj i Q J <..... V Q fat%'.•''::��'•;�:;:: Z H Q z 0 , Q W > I r'�;:y`;.!,::?:.:o,�{..};:n}::}}.v..�:N.•iS}'r$:•�ii:r:•Y.•'::$i iiS:::!$•{:!M�:}�{}�,,.} •�: :i�•'y,:n�'�S'i:i•:'.•ti�{ice}::�%�}i Yn.♦{:;.•::.;;!:::;!r;¢:'ii'•}i:•:in•} a ii7 � v:};{Y;�4,:'�;i:!:v l•�ij j:}titi:y;}}y:;r:i:::i�\v+:��'$i:{{\i��i::ij�:,v,:�-�j,,., Z a Q ..:✓::%:...i%J... X Co d of �• co '•:.F>:': .'rr^.�i:`v!5rr%¢{:...•r.. :rx;..r..•:•7:...r.,•..;...:.i..;C^••.';;:;3:y::�<};`�: :Vi:.;i:$}<'i:}•iY{l�'<%}.:: f:r•.`;::'•:%: ♦}\::•:4::+!•:Y4i4!;yr,.:%Q;CAi�•:4Y?•>?•:. ..Mv. SAF-2-—2 3) Buyer Notification Program The County Buyer Notification Program, established by the Board of Supervisors, is intended to provide prospective home buyers with appropriate information about future development and public facilities planned for the area surrounding a residential subdivision project. information concerning locations of key facilities are provided on a community project map. 4) Erosion Control Erosion control measures in Orange County are not confined to beach and cliff erosion, but extend to agricultural lands and bay/estuary protection. Such control measures can be found in the comprehensive erosion control program in effect in the Newport Bay watershed area. This program is voluntary and incorporates a variety of individual elements aimed at specific erosion concerns: a) Agricultural Best Management Practices (BMP) - This program instructs farmers in various land management practices to reduce soil loss. Because agricultural practices are considered a non-point source of soil erosion, complete reduction of agricultural soil loss is extremely difficult; b) Construction Activities - This element acts in conjunction with the County's grading ordinance to reduce soil erosion; c) Foothill Basins Program - This program is aimed at controlling erosion within the foothills; as of yet, the program has not been implemented; d) In-channel Sediment Control - Sediment control is enhanced through deposition of sediment in the Lower San Diego Creek; e) Upper Bay Control - Sediment is captured before it migrates to the Upper Bay; and f) Localization - Sediment is actively managed locally to minimize wide-spread project administration areas. These programs/elements are monitored by the Environmental Resources Section of the County's Environmental Management Agency. Other methods of controlling erosion in Orange County exist, including the County's Grading Ordinance which strictly regulates hillside grading with regard to soil stability. It provides for erosion control measures at the time of development. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers addresses shoreline erosion through participation in shoreline facility construction, management efforts, beach erosion studies, and other shoreline issues. SAF-2-93 d. Future Prospec-:s In view of the County's susceptibility and vulnerability to natural hazards, both :seismically and geologically induced, continuing emphasis will be placed on emergency planning; training of full- time, auxiliary► and reserve personnel; public awareness and education; and securing sufficient resources to cope with such hazards. Emphasis will also be placed on mitigation measures to reduce losses :`rom hazards. Planning for these interrelated elements will necessitate coordination on the part of County, City and State agencies charged with the protection of life and property. County agencies will continue to coordinate their efforts through mitigation measures anc� hazard plans aimed at maximizing this protection. ,S 1 I PA53-1 S.AF-2-94 7295 I CHAPTER THREE: CONSTRAINTS AND OPPORTUNITIES A. Overview This chapter identifies existing and potential constraints to and opportunities for satisfying the projected safety demands for Orange County. While constraints do not always represent absolute barriers, they may inhibit the timely achievement of important safety objectives. The element's policies and implementation programs contained in Chapters Four and Five (the 'Components') are intended to minimize the constraints and to promote the identified safety opportunities. B. Constraints 1. Environmental Constraints a. Public Safety: Public safety concerns addressed in this element include crime, fire, hazardous materials and aircraft. The timely achievement of public safety objectives may be negatively affected by geography, geology and climate combined with the inability to predict an occurrence. Fire suppression, for example, is constrained by topography when it precludes or inhibits firefighters from reaching a fire. Wind shifts and other climate changes may also negatively effect fire suppression. Hazardous materials pose very profound environmental consequences. Their presence in the environment can degrade air-quality and groundwater, severely damaging the food chain. Because of their affects, special care is required to transport, store and dispose of these materials to ensure they do not enter the environment. Aircraft accidents are unpredictable. Although many accidents occur due to pilot error or aircraft failure, accidents also occur due to the influences of climatic changes and geography. Mountains are natural barriers which establish certain aviator routes. Aircraft straying from established routes or flying in poor visibility conditions heighten the chances of an accident. b. Natural Hazards: Two natural hazard areas are discussed in this element. They are flood hazards and seismic and geologic hazards. The natural environment affects the ability to predict the extent and magnitude of a natural disaster. Flood hazard protection is planned and implemented for major stream courses within Orange County. Flood protection devices are normally implemented to mitigate the effects of a predicted event. There is no certainty when such an event will occur and the extent of damage. The same predictability problems exist for seismic hazards. Although fault traces have been identified within Orange County, an earthquake is an unpredictable occurrence. 2. Fiscal Constraints While operating and capital expenses for many safety related operations have risen, many traditional revenue sources have been cut or impaired, SAF-3-1 i . and spending limitations have been imposed on local governments, thus leaving them faced with reduced revenues for safety related planning at a time of growing need and public awareness. Major fiscal factors constraining local governments today in the provision of safety-related services, programs and facilities include the following: a. Proposition 13: The passage of Proposition 13 in 1978 seriously limited local property taxes as a major revenue source for local governments. The effects of Proposition 13 are strongly felt by safety service: and programs provided by the Orange County Sheriff/Coroner Department, the Orange County Fire Department, the Orange County Flood Control District and other County General Fund users. b. Proposition 4 :the Gann Initiative) : Passage of the Gann Initiative in 1979 placed constitutional limitations on the annual appropriations that can be made by each state and local government entity. The appropriations limit for each fiscal year is based upon the prior fiscal year increased by a factor for inflation and population growth. Excess, revenues over appropriation limits must i be returned to the taxpayers within the next two years. The effect:; of the Gann initiative are. felt by the Orange County Flood Control District, County General Fund and Fire Department funds and manifests itself in restrictions and reductions in safety related plans, programs and facilities. c. City Redevelopment Agencies: Redevelopment agencies within Orange County rely heavily on tag—increment financing as a primary revenue source. Under tax-increment financing, the redevelopment agency receives that portion of the property tax levy for an area which exceeds the levy for the base year. The increment represents the property tax revenue that otherwise would have been allocated to each of the area's taxing agents (e.g., Orange County General Fund, Orange County Fire Department and Orange County Flood Control District) . r. 3. Governmental Constraints a. Conflicting Otjectives and Priorities: Competing public needs can result in conflicting priorities and programs. Further, the maze cf regulations ar.d standards overseen by a myriad of agencies can result in conflicting purposes, confusion and ineffective programs. b. Intergovernmental Coordination: It is very important for the federal, statei, county, cities and special districts to continue to communicate arid to strive for greater coordination and cooperation in order to achieve common goals and objectives relative to safety- related planning. 4. Economic and Market Constraints a. Hazardous Was*:e Disposal: Historically hazardous wastes have generally been disposed of in designated landfills. More recently , landfill closure and costs associated with landfill disposal have forced hazardous waste producers to look elsewhere to dispose of their wastes, including cm-site treatment prior to disposal. SAP-3-2 �. C. Opportunities 1. Environmental Opportunities a. Land Availability: The amount of undeveloped land in Orange County, particularly in the unincorporated area, can provide unique opportunities to consider, address and initiate improved safety- sensitive planning through innovative land use planning and developments which promote maximum public protection. b. Environmental Quality: Statutory requirements protecting environmental quality (e.g., NEPA, CEQA, Federal 208 Water Quality Standards) aid in the early identification and mitigation of safety- related impacts. Through the environmental documentation process appropriate mitigation measures or planning alternatives can be implemented to avoid or minimize future impacts. 2. Governmental/Fiscal Opportunities a. Innovative Financing: Despite the loss of conventional funding sources, there exists the potential to expand existing financial resources and to identify and utilize new resources to supplement existing ones. These resources may include the increased use of the following: user fees; nonproperty-based taxes and miscellaneous revenues; developer financing for on-site and off-site improvements which promote safety; benefit assessment bonds; revenue bonds; and joint funding of safety improvements. b. Federal and State Financing: The mandate for improved safety-related planning, management and implementation is sometimes accompanied by Federal and State funds. Within the realm of hazardous materials planning, prioritized programs are being earmarked for funding. Under provision of AB 2948 (the Tanner Bill) , the preparation of a hazardous waste management plan is reimbursable from the State. Elsewhere, the Federal government has established funds for the implementation of the Santa Ana River Main Stem Project in Orange County and neighboring counties. c. Coordinated Planning Objectives and Standards: Orange County encourages long-range planning for the coordination of State and local government and private sector aims with the objective of phasing development in accordance with the consideration and provision of adequate safety measures. Orange County has taken a leadership role to promote safety-related programs, including hazardous waste management planning, hazardous materials disclosure, earthquake preparedness and flood control. d. Disaster Coordination: The County of Orange recognizes the need for adequate disaster response planning. The opportunities and organizational structure exist to further coordinate emergency response to all natural disasters. The 'Emergency Response Plan" of the County consists of both a detailed summary of the Countywide organization and a detailed description of the responsibility of each component agency in time of a disaster. SAF-3-3 3. Economic and Market Opportunitie:3 a. Hazardous Materials: The closure of Class I landfills and the increase in hazardous materials disposal restrictions is giving impetus to new technologies. Combined with requirements of AB 2948 (Tanner Bill) this may give added incentives to private industry to develop additional technologies for the treatment and disposal of hazardous materials. PA69-2 SAF-3-4 7271 CHAPTER FOUR: Public Safety Component A. Overview The Public Safety Component responds to State Government Code Section 65302 (g) which delineates the required contents of safety elements. Specifically, this component addresses locally relevant issues other than seismic and other geologic hazards which would impact upon the degree of safety of Orange County residents. Contained within the Public Safety component are goals, objectives and policies for the crime, fire, nuclear, hazardous waste and aircraft environment. B. Goals and Objectives Goal 1: Provide for a safe living and working environment consistent with available resources. Objective 1: To identify Public Safety hazards and determine the relative threat to people and property in Orange County. Goal 2: Minimize the effects of public safety hazards through implementation of appropriate regulations and standards which maximize protection of life and property. ' Objective 2.1: To create and maintain plans and programs which mitigate the effects of Public Safety hazards. Objective 2.2: To encourage the development and utilization of technologies which minimize the effects of Public Safety hazards. Goal 3: Raise the awareness of Orange County residents, workers and visitors to the potential threat of Public Safety hazards. 3: o provide information training and assistance to reduce objectiveT p , g loss of life and injury and to protect private and public property from public safety dangers. C. Crime 1. Introduction 1 The discussion of crime in this component covers two important aspects of prevention: prevention of crime, which focuses on offenses, and prevention of criminality, which focuses upon the offenders. Population growth in Orange County has increased concern over crime incidences and the timely and efficient investigation of criminal activity. The Orange County Sheriff-Coroner Department provides increasing police services to the unincorporated areas of Orange County and contracting cities. The purpose of the crime section of the Public Safety Component is to emphasize the importance of crime prevention in Orange County in order to maximize public safety. It clarifies current issues and concerns while setting forth direction, priorities, and management steps regarding crime prevention in Orange County. SAF-4-1 2. Goals and Objectives Goal: Public Safety goals and objectives may be found on page SAF-4-1. The objective below relates specifically to crime. Objective: To maintain adequate levels of Sheriff patrol services through coordinated land use and facility planning efforts. 3. Policies a. To determine those areas of investigation where land use regulation can most effectively reduce incidence of crime. b. To provide coordination to all agencies within the County to assist in the prevention of crime. c. To monitor and evaluate studies of crime prevention through land use and development :standards to determine future regulations and programs. d. To encourage development of programs and practices which incorporate crime prevention methods, techniques and experience into the planning process., e. To continue to coordinate land use proposal reviews with the County Sheriff-Coroner Department to assure that Sheriff patrol services , are adequately addressed. f. To maintain mutual aid agreements with incorporated cities to assure efficient service delivery for the County Islands. � SAF-4-2 1 4. Implementation Programs a. Public education/information 1) Action: Support the safety awareness efforts of the Sheriff/Coroner's Department and other agencies through public information and educational activities. 2) Discussion: This program is intended to increase the community's awareness of the need for crime prevention and provide educational assistance to residences and businesses. 3) New or Existing Program: Existing 4) Implementation Schedule: Ongoing 5) Responsible Agency: Sheriff/Coroner Department 6) Source of Funds: County General Fund SAF-4-3 b. Neighborhood Watch 1) Action: The Neighborhoo3 Watch Program prescribes three actions to be taken by the Office of the Sheriff-Coroner: a) Citizens and their neighbors work in a program of mutual assistance. b) Encourage citizens/neighbors to participate in training in order to recognize and report suspicious activities in their neighborhoods. c) Encourage citizens to also implement crime prevention techniques such as home security, Operation Identification, etc. 2) Discussion: Neighborhood Watch is an organization involving citizens and neighbors within a community. This prevention program enlists the support of these citizens by having them work with lay► enforcement to reduce crime in their communities. 3) New or Existing Program: Existing 4) Implementation Schedule:: Ongoing 5) Responsible Jkgency: Orange County Sheriff-Coroner 6) Source of Funds: County General Fund SPY-4-4 c. Sheriff's Reserve Bureau 1 1) Action: Sheriff's Reserve volunteers will continue to serve in seven specialized units which are organized to provide particular kinds of support for law enforcement activities. 2) Discussion: The Reserve Bureau consists of deputies who volunteer their time and experience to the Sheriff-Coroner Department as needed. Most reserve deputies are employed full- time in various civilian occupations and professions. 3) New or Existing Program: Existing 4) Implementation Schedule: Ongoing 5) Responsible Agency: Orange County Sheriff-Coroner 6) Source of Funds: County General Fund SAF-4-5 D. Fire 1. Introduction As described in Chapter Two, Fire Section, three major fire categories ' pose safety threats within Orange County: wildland, urban and wildland/urban interface. It is the Orange County Fire Department's (OCFD) responsibility to provide fire protection and paramedic services to the unincorporated County and contracting cities. The OCFD utilizes mutual aid and automatic aid agreements to improve fire protection services within County Islands and contracting cities. The State Department of Forestry also contracts with the OCFD for service in the suppression of wildland fires within the Cleveland National Forest. This section of the Safety Element sets forth fire safety policies for Orange County and implementation programs to implement these policies. 2. Goals, Objectives and Policies The following specific: fire safety goal is in addition to the Public Safety goals and objectives found on page SAF-4-1. a. Goal Provide a safe living environment ensuring adequate fire protection facilities and resources to prevent and minimize the loss of life and property from structural and wildland, urban and wildland/urban fire damages. b. Policies 1) To encourage periodic updating of fire hazard mapping and continue to ar..alyze existing fire hazard data as it pertains to Orange County. 2) To establish improved development standards for location of new construction, structural design, emergency vehicular access and detection hardware. 3) To improve building code regulations to provide increased built- in fire protection. 4) To improve mutual aid and inter-agency automatic aid programs to maximize utilization of existing facilities. 5) To continue to improve the minimum water system design , requirements for fire protection in wildland and remote areas. 6) To provide technical and .policy information regarding structural and wildland fire hazards to developers, interested parties and the general public through all available media. SAP-4-6 7) To increase public awareness through educational programs which promote fire safe practices and fire prevention. 8) To inform the public of Fire Department emergency services with special emphasis on prompt notification. 9) To encourage improvement of fire defense systems in hazardous areas. 10) To encourage the continued training of police officers and firefighters in arson detection to expand capabilities of the agencies in their detection and investigation of incendiary fires. 11) To maintain fire hazard information in the County's Buyer Notification Program. 12) To plan for the lowest fire insurance rating based on fiscal considerations and physical limitations (e.g. , topography, response time.) 13) To improve emergency response times for emergency responders through the use of computer-aided dispatch system and "preempt traffic signal control" system. 14) To promote increased volunteerism in the various fire protection fields (e.g. , education, paid call firefighters and support services) . 15) To incorporate helicopter support facilities in the planning of fire service facilities as a means to improve medical, disaster and fire services. SAF-4-7 i 3. Implementation Programs The implementation programs discussed below implement the County's fire policies and promote fire safe practices and strategies. a. Public Education/Information ` 1) Action: Supp3rt the fire safety awareness efforts of the Orange County Fire Department and other agencies through public information and educational activities. 2) Discussion: The Orange county Fire Department conducts programs , and provides Information and assistance to promote public awareness coni:erning fire hazards and fire safe practices. 3) New or Existing Program: Existing 4) Implementation Schedule: Ongoing 5) Responsible Agency: Orange County Fire Department 6) Source of Funds: County General Fund b. Site Design Review 1) Action: Review and impose conditions of approval of the appropriate project development level to assure that adequate site design fire safe construction materials and fire detection and protection devices are incorporated into the proposal in order to achieve maximum fire protection and to minimize extent of loss associated with fire incidence. 2) Discussion: The Orange County Fire Department reviews all land use proposals including subdivisions and site development permits for adequate site design and implementation. 3) New or Existir.g Program: Existing 4) Implementation Schedule: Ongoing 5) Responsible Agency: County Fire Department 6) Source of Funds: Structural Fire Fund SAP-4-8 c. Comprehensive Fire Master Plan 1) Action: Develop further and update, as necessary, elements of a ' Comprehensive Fire Master Plan to address short-range and long- range fire safety measures. 2) Discussion: In compliance with National Fire Academy guidelines, a comprehensive fire master plan provides detailed information concerning future Fire Department needs as well as information pertaining to current operation levels. The plan contains information, detailing population growth areas, future fire station sites, emergency response times statistics, available fire fighting water sources and supplies, fire personnel training and automation and other fire service improvements which promote fire safety in Orange County. 3) New or Existing Program: Expand existing program. 4) Responsible Agencies: a) County Fire Department b) EMA 5) Source of Funds: a) Structural Fire Fund b) County General Fund SAF-4-9 d. Hazardous Materials Disclosure Ordinance 1) Action: Continue to encourage the enforcement of the provisions of disclosure ordinances adopted by cities contracting services with the Orange County Fire Department. Promotion of the adoption of :*.uch ordinances by the remainder of the County's ` cities will also be encouraged. 2) Discussion: In the wake of the 1985 Fricker Chemical fire, Orange County enacted the Hazardous Material Disclosure Ordinance, requiring companies to disclose the hazardous materials they handle so that firefighters will know what confronts them in the event of an emergency. Implementation of the ordinances will include maintenance of relevant data on a Fire Department computer system. 3) New or Existing Program: Existing 4) Implementation Schedule: Ongoing, upon adoption of ordinances 5) Responsible P.gency: Orange County Fire Department 6) Source of Funds: Fees paid by persons reporting the presence of hazardous materials. Fees are based upon the number and quantities of materials reported. SAF-4-10 E. Hazardous Materials Hazardous materials management has emerged over the past decade as an important environmental issue. Society's advanced technological culture and high standard of living have led to dependence on products containing hazardous substances. There has been an increase in the use of these substances in manufacturing and the provision of daily essentials such as electricity. The need for use of hazardous materials and the generation of hazardous waste will not diminish, but rather increase along with the need for adequate management of such materials and waste within the County. The policies of this section of the Public Safety Component focus on potential hazards from the broad area of hazardous materials. Topics discussed in this area include hazardous materials, hazardous waste, infectious wastes, radioactive material and nuclear material. Permitting and siting issues are important aspects of hazardous material management and will be referenced in the Land Use, Resources, and Public Services and Facilities elements on an as need basis. The purpose of this section is to set forth a comprehensive and integrated strategy for future hazardous material management planning and to ensure a point of coordination of County policy with existing and developing hazardous material management plans. 1. Goals, Objectives and General Policies General goals and objectives may be found on page SAF-4-1. a. To provide consultation, assistance, and education to the public, industries, and other agencies regarding the applicable laws and regulations of hazardous materials (including underground storage tanks) , hazardous waste, infectious waste, radioactive materials and nuclear materials. b. To respond to all emergency incidents to oversee and ensure that these incidents involving hazardous waste, infectious waste, and radioactive materials are properly mitigated. c. To investigate all complaints involving hazardous waste, infectious 1 waste and radioactive materials, and take enforcement action as needed. d. To inspect, evaluate, and maintain an adequate surveillance of hazardous materials, hazardous waste, infectious waste and radioactive materials in order to ensure full compliance with the laws and regulations. fe. To secure and maintain complete and accurate information on the identity, volume, location and management methods of all hazardous materials, hazardous waste, infectious waste and radioactive materials in Orange County. This will aid in management planning and emergency response. f. To implement and administer all mandated laws, regulations and ordinances relating to hazardous materials, hazardous waste, infectious waste and radioactive materials. 1 SAP-4-11 g. To create and/or support legislation which reduces the various levels of risk posed by hazardous materials, hazardous waste, infectious waste, and radioactive materials to the public and to industries and businesses. h. To provide training to designated personnel to keep them up-to-date, regarding new equipment and technology, on the reduction of risks of hazardous materiels (including those stored in underground storage tanks) , hazardous; waste, infectious waste and radioactive materials. i. To implement the Orange County Emergency Plan particularly sections addressing hazardous waste, infectious waste, radioactive materials and nuclear materials incidences. This will help to foster participation in countywide planning efforts. 2. Hazardous Materials a. Introduction As described in Chapter Two. Public Safety section discussion of hazardous materi<ls management has just recently begun to emerge in light of potential threat to public safety. Exposure to hazardous materials can cause chronic health effects leading to poisoning and possible death. The need for comprehensive hazardous material management is clear, and solutions and responsibilities for the many complex issues inherent in hazardous material management are evolving. The policies of this section of the Public Safety Component focus on potential hazards from hazardous materials. In view of planning needs, it is the purpose of this section to set out strategies addressing both agency and project specific concerns. b. Policies The following specific hazardous material policy is in addition to the general hazardous materials policies found on page SAF-4-11. 1) Conduct plan checks of all new and existing underground storage tank installations to assure compliance with construction and monitoring standards. SAF-4-12 , I 1 c. Implementation Programs 1) Hazardous Material Disclosure Ordinance and AB 2185 �1 a) Action: Continue to encourage the enforcement of the provisions of disclosure ordinances adopted by cities contracting services with the Orange County Fire Department. Promotion of the adoption of such ordinances by the remainder of the County's cities will also be encouraged. b) Discussion: On November 5, 1985, the Board of Supervisors adopted an ordinance relating to hazardous materials disclosure /(Orange County Code, title 4, Division 3, Article 4) . It requires that businesses using or handling a minimum of 500 pounds or 55 gallons of hazardous material must provide disclosure information to the Orange County Fire Department. Businesses will be required to file 1 biannually and within 15 days of any significant changes. Once accumulated, data is accessible to various emergency response personnel to handle hazardous material incidents in the most expedient and appropriate manner. Additionally, disclosure information will identify facilities handling hazardous material so that potential problem areas can be pinpointed. Under AB 2185 (California Health and Safety Code, Section 25500 et. seq.) , any business that handles hazardous material is required to submit a business emergency plan, which will be approved and maintained by Orange County Fire Department. The business plans also serve as a tool for the expedient and appropriate handling of local hazardous material incidents. c) New or Existing Program: Existing d) Implementation Schedule: Ongoing, upon adoption of ordinances e) Responsible Agency: Orange County Fire Department f) Source of Funds: Fees are paid by persons reporting the presence of hazardous materials. Fees are based upon the number and quantities of materials reported. r SAF-4-13 2. Underground Storage Tank Program a) Action: Continue to implement the Underground Storage Tank Program. b) Discussion: The purpose of the Underground Storage Tank (UST) Program is to protect public health and the environment from potential sources of contamination of the groundwater by regulating underground storage tanks containing hazardous materials. c) New or Existing Program: Existing d) Implementation Schedule: Ongoing e) Responsible Agency: Orange County Health Care Agency f) Source of Funds: Completely funded by fees collected from the UST owners. i 1 i SAP-4-•14 3. Hazardous Waste a. Introduction As described in Chapter Two, Public Safety Section, hazardous wastes are by-products from the increased usage of hazardous material in the manufacture of products important to our personal and economic needs. Hazardous wastes will continue to cause great public concern as the effects of hazardous waste continue to damage the environment and injure personal health. ' The policies of this section of the Public Safety Component focus on potential hazards from hazardous wastes. In view of planning needs, it is the purpose of this section to set out strategies addressing both agency and project specific concerns. b. Policies The following specific hazardous waste policies are in addition to general hazardous materials policies found on page SAF-4-11. 1) To support regional efforts as needed to plan for and facilitate the establishment of regional treatment facilities to manage the hazardous, infectious and radioactive wastes which are generated 1 within this county. 2) To make available to the public and news media information on hazardous waste discharges likely to cause substantial injury to public health or safety. 3) To implement the Tanner Process for Hazardous Waste Management 1 planning. c. Implementation Programs 1) Public Education/Information a) Action: Support the efforts of the Fire Department's Hazardous Materials Program Office (HMPO) and other agencies through public information and educational activities. b) Discussion: This program is intended to increase the community's awareness of the need for proper disposal of hazardous waste and provide educational assistance to residences and businesses. c) New or Existing Program: Existing d) Implementation Schedule: Ongoing e) Responsible Agency: Fire Department/HMPO f) Source of Funds: (1) County General Fund (2) Hazardous Waste Generator Fees SAP-4-15 I 2) Household Hazardous Waste Collection Program a) Action: Continue to promote the efforts of the County Hazardous: Materials Program Office (M00) in organizing collection of household toxic wastes on a regular basis. b) Discussion: This effort is aimed at securing the proper disposal of household chemicals considered dangerous to the environment, particularly ground water supplies. The first phase consisted of a series of one-day events called Toxic Roundups at which residents disposed of unwanted household toxics. As an ongoing program, 4-5 collection stations will be established throughout the county for the collection of household and small quantity generator wastes. A joint venture of the County, cities and solid waste haulers, each collection station will offer Saturday collection hours 4-5 times a year. c) New or Existing Program: New d) Implementation Schedule: Ongoing; Second phase to commence upon establishment of collection stations; targeted for October 1987. e) Responsible Agency: HMPO f) Source of Funds: (1) Fees from the Waste Management Enterprise Fund (2) Orange County Sanitation District (3) User Fees r r r SAF-4-].6 i 3) Hazardous Materials Management Coordination a) Action: Continue to promote the efforts of the Hazardous Materials Program Office (HMPO) in reviewing the County's hazardous materials activities and in making recommendations to ensure effective coordination and control of countywide resources. b) Discussion: In furthering the efforts to adequately and effectively manage the hazardous materials/waste stream in Orange County, the Hazardous Materials Program Office (HMPO) of the Orange County Fire Department facilitates the coordination of various parts of the County's hazardous materials program both within the county and with outside organizations. This organization is accomplished through the following: o Explanation and interpretation of policies and priorities established by the State and the County; o Establishment and direction of both ongoing and ad hoc committees of working level staff from many agencies to address specific issues or procedures; o Facilitating the exchange or sharing of information, concerns and priorities between staff of different agencies; o Establishing and maintaining regular contact and involvement with regional, State and Federal agencies and officials involved in hazardous materials issues. c) New or Existing Program: Existing d) Implementation Schedule: Ongoing e) Responsible Agency: HMPO f) Source of Funds: (1) County General Fund (2) Hazardous Waste Generator Fees 1 SAF-4-17 4) Buyer Notification Program a) Action: Continue t:,ie administration of the Buyer Notification Program as designated by Board of Supervisors ResolutiDn 82-1368. Land use maps and planning information required by the guidelines shall be updated yearly by the subdivider/developer-, or more often, if the Director of Planning/ MA is aware of planning changes which affect the subdivision and makes the update a condition of his approval of the map. b) Discussion: The Buyer Notification Program is intended to provide prospective home buyers with an appropriate overview of nearby planning and development. Information provided in the distributed packets includes the location of such facilities as fire stations and critical utility facilities. c) New or Existing Program: Existing d) Implementation Schedule: Ongoing e) Responsible Agency: EMA f) Source of Funds: County General Fund SAF-4•-18 , 5) Hazardous Waste Program a) Action: Continue to implement the Waste Management Program. The program includes the Hazardous Waste Generator Program, the Emergency Response Program and the Underground Storage Tank Program. b) Discussion: The purpose of the Hazardous Waste Program is to protect the public and the environment from exposure to hazardous waste and hazardous materials stored in ' underground storage tanks. Maximization of protection is accomplished through surveillance and enforcement of hazardous waste generators. 1 c) New or Existing: Existing d) Implementation Schedule: Ongoing e) Responsible Agency: Orange County Health Care Agency f) Source of Funds: Completely funded by fees collected from the generators of hazardous waste. SAF-4-19 1 6) Proposition 155 Compliance Program a) Action: Continue to implement the Proposition 65 Compliance Program. b) Discussion: This program is to inform the public of illegal or threatened illegal discharges of hazardous waste that are likely to cause substantial injury to public health or safety. c) New or Existing: Existing , d) Implementation Schedule: Ongoing e) Responsible Agency: Orange County Health Care Agency f) Source of Funds: Completely funded by fees collected from the generators of haardous waste and by fees collected from the UST owners. i 1 . 1 SAP-4-.20 1 4. Infectious Wastes a. Introduction As described in Chapter Two, Public Safety Section, infectious wastes are wastes which potentially carry communicable pathogenic organisms. Though not as celebrated as other type of hazardous waste, infectious wastes also pose a potential public health and safety risk, therefore warranting careful management. ' The policies of this section of the Public Safety Component focus on potential hazards from infectious wastes. In view of planning needs, it is the purpose of this section to set out strategies addressing both agency and project specific concerns. b. Policies General hazardous materials policies may be found on page SAF-4-11. c. Implementation Programs 1) Infectious Waste Program a) Action: Continue to implement the Infectious Waste Program. ' b) Discussion: The purpose of the Infectious Waste Program is to protect the public health by detecting and reducing the incidents of illegal storage and disposal of infectious waste. c) New or Existing: Existing d) Implementation Schedule: Ongoing e) Responsible Agency: Orange County Health Care Agency tf) Source of Funds: Completely funded by fees collected from the generators of infectious wastes. i 1 SAF-4-21 r 5. Radioactive Material a. Introduction As described in 2hapter Two, Public Safety Section, radioactive materials pose a threat to public safety due to potential accidental release of these materials. Radiation can affect body cells and, in excessive amounts, contribute to or cause an increase in mortality, , and an increase in serious :illness. The policies of •_his section of the Public Safety Component focus on , potential hazards, from radioactive material. In view of planning needs, it is the purpose of this section to set out strategies addressing both ;agency and project specific concerns. b. Policies The following specific radioactive material policies are in addition to general Hazardous Materials policies found on page SAF-4-11. 1) To encourage development: of emergency evacuation procedures for areas immediately surrounding facilities storing, handling or processing radioactive material. 2) Evaluate new equipment and technology used in the handling, , storage, transport and disposal of radioactive materials. c. Implementation Programs 1) Radioactive materials Program a) Action: Continue tc implement the Radioactive Materials Program. b) Discussion: The purpose of the Radioactive Material Program is to protect public health and the environment from potential sources of contamination and exposure from radioactive materials. Maximization of protection is accomplished through inspection of radioactive materials users. c) New or Existing: Existing d) Implementation Schedule: Ongoing e) Responsible Agency: Orange County Health Care Agency f) Source of Funds: Funded through contract with the State which collects fees from the users of radioactive materials. This program is also reimbursed by the State Nuclear Power Plan Fund created by SB 1473 for any activities related to the operation of San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station. SAF-4-22 1 6. Nuclear Materials (San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station - SONGS) a. Introduction The Federal government mandates licensees of nuclear power plants to arrange through local governmental jurisdictions a level of emergency planning that will provide for the implementation of public protective actions in the event of an accident that could involve the extraordinary release of radioactivity. The subsections which follow address, in particular, planning policies and the programs currently in place to implement those policies to ensure the safety of the public. It should be noted that these programs contemplate coordinated roles between the utility and the affected local governments including the County of Orange. b. Policies The following specific nuclear materials policies are in addition to general hazardous materials policies found on page SAF-4-11. 1) To cooperate in providing coordinated emergency plans specific i to the San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station. 2) To participate in mechanisms for coordinated emergency planning and response among the utility and other governmental jurisdictions. 3) To participate in and provide training to Orange County emergency responders and decision-makers to ensure ongoing proficiency in managing all aspects of a nuclear power plant emergency. 4) To encourage and participate in public education in advance of need with respect to notification of a nuclear power plant emergency and proper public protective actions. SAF-4-23 c. Implementation Programs 1) Emergency Pl<<ns a) Action: Continue tc evaluate Orange County's Incident Response Plan for the San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station (SONGS) and update annually, as appropriate. b) Discussicn: Southern California Edison and each primary �. response agency, including the County of Orange, is responsible for the ;preparation of its own emergency plans concerning a nuclear power plant accident. Orange County's Incident Response Plan for SONGS is updated regularly and must be coordinated with the plans of other jurisdictions with which there are common responsibilities. Inter- jurisdictional procedures have evolved to cover these responsibilities. Because t:ze possible danger to the public resulting from an j accident at SONGS diminishes significantly as the distance from the plant increases, the level of planning and possible response actions is highest in the 10-mile Emergency Planning :;one surrounding the plant site and also varies with the :severity of an accident. Emergency Planning Zone (EPZ) : The federal government has established an area with an approximate 10-mile radius around every nuclear generating station as an Emergency Planning gone (EPZ) . At SONGS, the EPZ encompasses portions , of Orange and San Diego counties; the entire cities and communities of San Clemente, San Juan Capistrano and Dana Point; portions of the Camp Pendleton Marine Corps Base; and several beaches and parks operated by the State Department of Parks and Recreation (San Onofre State Beach, San Clemente :Mate Beach and Doheny State Beach) . Public Education Zone (PEZ) : The State of California Office of Emergency Services has defined an area outside of and adjacent to the federal Emergency Planning Zone as the Public Education Zone (PEZ) . At SONGS, the PEZ encompasses the communities of Laguna Beach, South Laguna, Laguna Hills, Laguna Niguel, E1 Toro and Mission Viejo in Orange County; portions of the Cleveland National Forest in Riverside and San Diego counties; additional portions of Camp Pendleton Marine Corps Base; and the communities of Oceanside, Fallbrook, Bonsall, Carlsbad and Vista in San Diego County. Emergency Classifications: An emergency is a problem or potential problem at the plant that could eventually affect public safety. Emergency conditions are classified into four categories by the federal government (standard for all nuclear power plants .in the nation) according to the severity of possible accidents. They are as follows: SAF-4-24 (1) Unusual Event: Abnormal plant condition which by ` themselves do not constitute significant emergency condition nor any hazard to the public. (2) Alert: Events that involve actual or potential deterioration of plant safety. There is potential damage to one of three safety barriers. Local ' government officials are notified and response facilities are activated. ' (3) Site Area Emergency: Events involving actual or probable major failures of plant functions needed to protect the public. Local public agencies would prepare for the possibility of a more serious situation. Regular news briefings are held with the news media. (4) General Emergency: Events which would involve an actual or imminent release of large amounts of radioactive material to the environment outside the plant boundary. Utility experts, regulatory agencies and local officials determine if public protective actions are necessary. Protective Action Guidelines are set very conservatively by the federal government. Additionally, the utility is required to notify the primary response agencies within the EPZ of any of the four categories of events within 15 minutes of the declaration of the event. This combination is intended to provide early mobilization of appropriate resources and lead time for making assessments and carrying out public protective actions, if any are required. Emergency protective actions which the public in the Emergency Planning Zone may be asked to take by the local governing officials include sheltering and, only in very extreme emergencies, evacuation. On the other hand, in the unlikely event of an extreme nuclear power plant emergency, sheltering may be the only protective action those in the Public Education Zone could be asked to take by local governing officials. c) New or Existing: Existing d) Implementation Schedule: Ongoing e) Responsible Agency: OCFD/Emergency Management Division f) Source of Funds: Reimburseable from utility-funded account administered by State Office of Emergency Services. i SAF-4-25 2) Interjurisdictional Planning Committee (IPC) a) Action: Participate in the deliberations of the Interjurisdictional Planning Committee and encourage cooperative planning, decision-making, and response actions among all participating agencies. b) Discussi-3n: The primary response agencies and jurisdictions , include ;3outhern California Edison Company, Orange and San Diego counties, San Clemente, San Juan Capistrano, Camp Pendleton Marine Corps Base, and the local office of the , State Parks and Recreation Department. Other participating agencies are the American Red Cross and the California Highway Patrol. While local governments and agencies surrounding SONGS do not have authority t:o regulate plant operations, they do have responsibilities for protecting the public health and safety of their constituents should there be an extraordinary release of radioactivity. Accordingly, the IPC meets regularly to coordinate their emergency plans, train, exercise and resolve matters of mutual ccncern. c) New or Existing: Existing d) Implementation Schedule: Ongoing , e) Responsible Agency: OCFD/Emergency Management Division f) Source of Funds: Reimburseable from utility-funded account administered by State Office of Emergency Services. i SAF-ol-26 3) Training a) Action: Provide training to emergency responders and others responsible for making decisions that affect appropriate public protective actions and participate in joint exercises i of nuclear power plant emergency plans. b) Discussion: In any emergency situation, the utility only has the authority to advise local governments of plant status and to make recommendations. Overall coordination is ' facilitated by agency representatives at the joint Emergency Operations Facility, the Emergency News Center, and a dedicated decision-making communications network. These facilities are exercised regularly by the local jurisdictions and agencies who are evaluated periodically by the Federal Emergency Management Agency. Significant local training activities include: (1) Periodic Drills: Simulated drills to test specific components of the emergency plans; (2) Regular Exercises: Full-scale exercises of both on- site and off-site emergency plans at least every two ' years, and more frequently if required. On-site performance is evaluated by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and off-site response is monitored and evaluated by the Federal Emergency Management Agency; ' and, (3) Community Alert Siren/Emergency Broadcast Systems Test: I Annual full-scale activation of the Community Alert Siren System together with activation of the Emergency Broadcast System. c) New or Existing: Existing d) Implementation Schedule: ongoing e) Responsible Agency: OCFD/Emergency Management Division f) Source of Funds: Reimburseable from utility-funded account administered by State office of Emergency Services. SAP-4-27 i 4) Public Educa-:ion a) Action: Provide information materials upon request and participate in nuclear power plant emergency education forums with Southern California Edison and other primary response jurisdictions as appropriate. b) Discussion: Responding appropriately in an emergency , depends riot only on cooperation of the primary responders, but on art informed public. Accordingly, public education is required by federal regulators for the 10-mile emergency , Planning Zone (EPZ) surrounding SONGS, and by State regulators for the Public Education Zone (PEZ) surrounding the EPZ. Education; Resources: Within the Emergency Planning Zone an Emergency Information Booklet is mailed by Southern California Edison tc every residential and business address within the EPZ containing information on radiological emergencies. The same information is sent to every new utility customer in the EPZ. Other resources include a Speakers' Bureau, school programs, tours, telephone directory instructions, beach posters and hotel and motel placards. Within the Public Education Zone (PEZ) every residential and business address in the Public Education Zone is periodically mailed an Emergency Information Handbook. The handbook provides information about the emergency plans, agencies involved, the nature of radiation and the effectiveness of sheltering should public protective action ever be required. The handbook is also mailed to new customers within the PEZ on a regular basis. c) New or Existing: Existing d) Implementation Schedule: Ongoing e) Responsible Agency: Southern California Edison Company and, where appropriate, OCTD/Emergency Management Division. f) Source of Funds: Reimburseable from utility-funded account administe::ed by State Office of Emergency Services. ' SAF-4-28 G. Aircraft Environment 1. Overview As discussed in Chapter Two "Aircraft Environmental," Orange County is unique among California counties because commercial, general and military aviation installations are located within its boundaries. Air traffic generated by these facilities, coupled with air traffic transiting through the county, presents an image of crowded skies heightening the chances of aircraft accidents. However, accidents occur ' infrequently compared to the number of operations. This section of the Safety Element presents a specific aircraft safety goal and policies intended to minimize existing aircraft hazards and ' promote aviation safety. 2. Goals, Objectives and Policies The following specific goal is in addition to the Public Safety goals and objectives found on page SAF-4-1. a. Goal: To protect the health, safety, and general welfare by ensuring the orderly expansion of airports and the adoption of measures that minimize the public's exposure to safety hazards within areas around airports. b. Policies ' 1) To utilize the most recent adopted Air Installations Compatible Use Zone (AICUZ) studies for military air installations (i.e. , MCAS, E1 Toro, MCAS, Tustin and Los Alamitos Army Airfield) as ' the basis for safety compatibility planning in the vicinity of each facility. 2) To refer projects, as required by Section 21676 of the Public Utilities Code, to the Airport Land Use Commission for Orange County prior to their adoption or approval to determine consistency of the projects with the Airport Environs Land Use Plan (AELUP) . 3) To support the creation of regulations requiring aircraft detection equipment. 4) To encourage the creation and updating of detailed flight charts and publications for the airspace in Orange County. 5) To encourage cooperative agreements between the County and the air installations to provide relief services in times of natural disaster. ' SAF-4-29 3. Implementation Programs , The following section identifies existing programs which promote aviation safety and enhance public awareness. a. Public Information and Community Liaison 1) Action: Support expanded public information and community , liaison services as a means to public awareness. 2) Discussion: This program promotes community awareness of , aviation operations and safety. As an example, open houses held annually by the three military air installations (MCAS, E1 Toro, MCAS, Tustin and Los Alamitos Army Airfield) enhance community liaison. Public information and public involvement in the planning and operation of the County air installation is also promoted through the Airport Land Use Commission, Airport Commission and liaison :services to local jurisdictions' councils. 3) New or Existing Program: Existing 4) Implementation Schedule: Ongoing, expand as necessary 5) Responsible :agencies: a) John Wayne Airport/Airport Commission b) Department of Defense 4:) Airport Land Use Commission d) Federal Aviation Administration 6) Source of Ftmids: a) Federal Government b) County General Fund c) Airport Funds 1 r SAP-4-30 , ' b. Air Installations Compatible Use Zones (AICIIZ) Program 1) Action: Continue to utilize and maintain the AICIIZ to ensure ' compatible development in airport areas and to minimize public exposure to potential safety hazards associated with aircraft operations. 2) Discussion: This program addresses compatibility problems arising between military air installation flight operations and urban development. The program strives to maintain the mission ' of an air installation and to protect surrounding communities from potential aircraft hazards. 3) New or Existing Programs: Existing 4) Implementation Schedule: Ongoing 5) Responsible Agency: Department of Defense 6) Sources of Funds: a) Department of Defense b) County General Fund I i 1 i 1 i 1 SAP-4-31 c. Buyer Notification Program 1) Action: Continue the administration of the Buyer Notification Program as designated by the Board of Supervisors Resolution 82-1368. Land use maps and planning information required by the guidelines shall be updated yearly by the subdivider/developer or, more often, if the Director of Planning/EMA is aware of planning changes which affect the subdivision and make the update a condition of his approval of the map. 2) Discussion: The Buyer Notification Program provides prospective home buyers and businesses with an overview of nearby planning and development. Information provided includes public facilities, demographics, and land use data, including the , location of air installations. 3) New or Existing Program: Existing 4) Implementation Schedule: Ongoing 5) Responsible Agency: EMh 6) Source of Funds: County General Funds i i SAF-4-3 2 ' 1 d. Airport Environs Land Use Plan (AELUP) 1) Action: To continue to refer projects as deferred by Section 21676 of the Public Utilities Code and within the planning areas of the Airport Land Use Commission to the commission to determine consistency with the Airport Environs Land Use Plan. 2) Discussion: This program aims to safeguard the general welfare of inhabitants within the vicinities of airports and to ensure ' the continued compatible operation of existing and future airports including heliports and helipads within Orange County. The plan seeks to ensure that urban development and air installation facilities are not concentrated in areas susceptible to potential aircraft hazards and to guard against structures or activities that adversely affect navigable airspace. 3) New or Existing Program: Existing 4) Implementation Schedule: Ongoing 5) Responsible Agency: Airport Land Use Commission ' 6) Source of Funds: a) John Wayne Airport b) County ' PA53-1 SAP-4-33 7271 ` CHAPTER FIVE: Natural Hazards Component A. Overview This component contains goals and policies and provides implementation programs to reduce the threat of natural hazards. The natural hazards discussed in this component are related to Orange County's geography, geology and climate. The component is divided into two major topics, Flood Hazards and Seismic and Geologic Hazards. B. Goals and Objectives The following goals and objectives relate to the broader natural hazards topic from which are derived the policies described in the Flood Hazards and Seismic and Geologic Hazards sections. Goal 1: Provide for a safe living and working environment consistent with available resources. ' Objective 1: To identify natural hazards and determine the relative threat to people and property in Orange County. Goal 2: Minimize the effects of natural safety hazards through implementation of appropriate regulations and standards which maximize protection of life and property. rObjective 2.1: To create and maintain plans and programs which mitigate the effects of natural hazards. ' Objective 2.2: To support the development and utilization of technologies which minimize the effects of natural hazards. Goal 3: Raise the awareness of Orange County residents, workers and visitors to the potential threat of natural hazards. ' Objective 3: To provide information, training and assistance to reduce loss of life and to protect private and public property from environmental hazards. ' C. Flood Hazards 1. Introduction As described in Chapter Two, Flood Hazards Section, flood and dam inundation pose potential threats to life and property in a large portion of Orange County. In response to the threat, federal, state and regional/local plans and programs have been prepared to minimize the threat of flooding. The Flood Component seeks to maximize protection and minimize damage from future potential flood hazards. This component outlines goals, objectives and policies that operate in conjunction with the broader environmental hazards goals and objectives to establish an implementation program framework to address flood hazards and diminish threat of life and property losses attributed to flooding. SAF-5-1 2. Goals, Objectives any Policies The goals and objectives of this section support the goals and objectives of the FIDod Control System Component of the Public Services ' and Facilities Eleme:zt. They are in addition to the general environmental hazards goals and objectives described on SAF-5-1. Together, this component and this Flood Control System Component provide a strategy for addressing and mitigating potential flood hazards. a. Goals and Objectives Goal: Provide effective and efficient flood protection throughout M Orange County. Objective 1: To implement the improvements for the Santa Ana River Main Stem. Federal Project. Objective 2: To develop and enhance intergovernmental relations ' for flood protection programs in Orange County. Objective 3: To implement flood control facilities which protect both existing and proposed development. b. Policies 1) To phase improvements to Flood Control District facilities consistent with funding capabilities: (1) implement them within the time frame of the Szlnta Ana River Main Stem Federal Project ' for equivalent capacities; (2) provide as a goal 100-year flood protection for residences and other non-floodproof structures; and (3) complete links in the system that have not been provided by new development. ' 2) To encourage and promote! coordination between regional/local flood control. agencies and the State/Federal agencies for ' optimum flock[ prevention programs and protection devices. 3) To regulate development of major watercourses and floodplains through application of appropriate land use measures. 4) To identify areas subject to inundation due to base flood runoff. ' 5) To identify areas subject, to inundation due to dam failure. 6) To limit erosion and sediment transport from development areas to bays and harbors. 7) To permit reasonable movement of sediment to the open ocean for ' beach sand replenishment through remedial measures. 8) To provide technical and policy information regarding flood hazards to developers, interested parties, and the general public. SAF-5-2 ' r ' 9) To disseminate information regarding hazards and mitigating measures through all available media. 10) To monitor and evaluate studies of the use of non-structural alternatives, including more compatible land use planning adjacent to watercourses, for flood control purposes. ' 11) To provide guidance during and after flood disaster and promote interagency agency assistance for persons affected. 12) To create design criteria which minimizes or mitigates impacts associated with crossing of flood plains by development. ' 13) To appropriate funds for the Santa Ana River Main Stem Federal Project and expedite construction. 3. Implementation Programs ' The following programs are designed and intended to advance Orange County's flood protection. The intergovernmental coordination, All- River Plan, and Local Drainage Basins and Orange County Flood Control District System programs support the implementation programs of the Public Services and Facilities Element. ' a. Intergovernmental Coordination 1) Action: Continue to develop intergovernmental relations toward ' achieving flood protection goals and objectives. 2) Discussion: The Orange County Flood Control District (OCFCD) currently cooperates with various levels of government including federal, state and local agencies. For instance, local projects are analyzed and prioritized by various agencies for budget and implementation purposes requiring effective agency coordination. ' In addition, the primary regional project, the Santa Ana River Main Stem Federal Project which received Congressional approval, is dependent upon OCFCD coordination with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers for project development and implementation and ' local funding. Cooperation among affected counties (Riverside, San Bernardino and Orange Counties) will also be important for project phasing and implementation. Continued and expanded cooperation among agencies will provide a coordinated effort toward achieving flood protection funding, phasing and implementation goals and objectives. 3) New or Existing Program: Existing 4) Implementation Schedule: Ongoing 5) Responsible Agency: EMA 6) Source of Funds: Various Funding Sources SAF-5-3 I b. Coastal Flood Plain Development , 1) Action: Utilize the Coastal Flood Plain Development Study to evaluate projects in areas prone to coastal flooding and update the report as often as warranted. 2) Discussion: The Coastal Flood Plain Development Study, approvec. ' in 1985, addressed Orange County's requirement for technical criteria and standards for the review of structures and protective devices on coastal property designed to mitigate and minimize coastal flooding. ' The report serves as a working base to be expanded and improved upon through periodic updating, new coastal data and new method: ' to analyze coastal flooding. 3) New or Existing program: Existing, expand and update as appropriate. ' 4) Implementation Schedule: Ongoing 5) Responsibile Agencies: EMA , 6) Scource of Funds: County General Fund SAF'-5-4 ' ' c. Santa Ana River Main Stem Federal Project (previously the All-River Plan) 1) Action: Expedite to the greatest extent feasible the implementation of the Santa Ana River Main Stem Federal Project as an integral flood control management program. ' 2) Discussion: The Santa Ana River Main Stem Federal Project is a comprehensive flood control program focusing on improvements along the Santa Ana River beginning at its headwaters in San ' Bernardino County to its ocean mouth in Orange County. The Santa Ana River Main Stem Federal Project was approved by the federal government in 1980 and funding authorized in 1986. ' Features of the plan include construction of the Seven Oaks Dam in San Bernardino County; improvement to Prado Dam in Riverside County; and channel improvements to the river and Santiago Creek in Orange County. Construction of a separable element of the project could begin as early as 1989. 3) New or Existing Program: Existing 4) Implementation Schedule: Ongoing 5) Responsible Agencies: (a) O.S. Army Corps of Engineers (b) Orange County Flood Control District 6) Source of Funds: Various Funding Sources I ' SAP-5-5 d. Orange County F].00d Control District System , 1) Action: Continue to provide efficient and effective flood control protection for Orange County residents. ' 2) Discussion: The Orange County Flood Control District is empowered to construct and maintain flood control works for water conser-iation and ;to prevent or minimize loss of life and property caused by flooding. The Environmental Management Agency (EMA) is responsible for implementing the Flood Control District's program which includes the design, construction, ' operation and maintenance of regional flood control facilities. 3) New or Existing Program: Existing 4) Implementation Schedule: Ongoing ' 5) Responsible Agencies: (1) O.C. Flood Control District (2) EMA 6) Source of Funds: Various Funding Sources SAF-5-6 i D. Seismic Safety and Geologic Hazards 1. Introduction Two fault zones located within Orange County are believed to be potentially hazardous: the Newport-Inglewood Fault and the Whittier ' Fault. These faults are capable of producing 7.5 and 7.0 earthquakes respectively. Earthquakes of such magnitudes, due to their locations and the degree of urbanization, represent a considerable risk of structural damage and loss of life. In addition, Orange County residents are exposed to other geologic hazards not necessarily associated with earthquakes: landsliding, downward movement of earth and rock materials; subsidence and uplift, a vertical mass movement of earth; erosion, including beach erosion; and potentially dangerous soil characteristics (expansive, peat, sulfate ' gaseous, and corrosive soils and soils subject to hydroconsolidation) . This component provides a basis for programs which serve to implement natural hazards related safety goals and objectives, seismic and geologic safety policies, and to establish a framework for additional inventory and residence planning efforts. This component also serves to ensure that an adequate level of measures is implemented to minimize the loss of life and property due to seismic and non-seismic hazards in Orange County. 2. Goals and Objectives Natural Hazards goals and objectives may be found on page SAF-5-1. 3. Policies a. To provide emergency planners with ongoing and up-to-date information about private utilities' emergency planning to accommodate and maintain resource sharing between the public and private sector. b. To continue the development and implementation of earthquake mitigation, preparedness, response and recovery through the Orange County/Southern California Earthquake Preparedness Project process. C. To promote public awareness and preparedness in the area of seismic safety in Orange County. d. To implement ordinances, regulations and procedures which mandate the review, evaluation and restriction of land use due to possible undue geologic threat. e. To encourage establishment (through the Orange County/Southern California Earthquake Preparedness Project process and other resources) of seismic design criteria and standards for county facilities (e.g., transmission lines, water and sewage systems, and highways) , any structures housing necessary mobile units and support 1 SAF-5-7 1 1 equipment, and other vital resources which would be needed following ' an earthquake (e.g., "back-up" power generation facilities and water storage) . f. To periodically update maps of existing faults, slide areas, and other geographi.�ally unstable areas in and around Orange County. g. To monitor, evaluate, and analyze existing seismic and geological , data as it pertains to Orange County to determine future regulation;; and programs. h. To establish development standards for land use, new construction and proposed improvements to ensure proper design and location of structures. i. To provide coordination to all agencies within the county to assist in the mitigation of geologic and seismic hazards and to educate those agencies in preparedness, response and recovery from a major , earthquake. j. To provide technical and policy information regarding geological and ' seismic hazards to developers, interested parties and the general public through t:ze Orange County Buyer Notification Program. k. To ensure coordination and consistency between the the Orange County ' General Plan and the County Emergency Plan. SAF-5-8 ' ' 4. Implementation Programs a. Public Education/Information ' 1) Action: Support the safety awareness efforts of the Emergency Management Division/County of Orange and other agencies through public information and educational activities. 1 2) Discussion: This program is intended to increase the Community's awareness of the need for disaster preparedness and 1 provide educational assistance to residences and business. 3) New or Existing Program: Existing ' 4) Implementation Schedule: Ongoing 5) Responsible Agency: Orange County Fire Department/Emergency 1 Management Division 6) Source of Funds: County General Fund 1 i 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 SAF-5-9 b. Comprehensive Erosion Control Program 1 1) Action: Support the comprehensive erosion control program 1 efforts of the Environmental Resources Section of EMA to preserve Orange County beaches, cliffs, bays and estuaries, and agricultural lands. 2) Discussion: Individual erosion control programs include , Agricultural Best Management Practices aimed at instructing farmers in land management practices; construction activity ' guidelines; +:he Foothill Basins Program, aimed at controlling erosion with::n the foothills; in-channel sediment control; upper bay control; and localized sediment control. 3) New or Existing Program: Existing/New (foothill basins) , 4) Implementation Schedule: Ongoing 5) Responsible Agency: EMA-Environmental Resources Section 6) Source of Funds: County General Fund 1 1 1 i i 1 1 SAP-5-10 ' 1 1 ' c. Alquist-Priolo Program 1) Action: Continue to administer Alquist-Priolo requirements in designated special study zones as dictated in Orange County policy. 2) Discussion: As required under the 1972 Alquist-Priolo Special ' Studies Zone Act, the Office of the State Geologist delineated Special Study Zones which encompass potentially and recently active traces of four major faults (San Andreas, Calaveras, 1 Hayward and San Jacinto) . The Alquist-Priolo Special Study Zone is enforced to assure that homes, offices, hospitals, public buildings, and other structures for human occupancy are not 1 built on or nearby active faults. 3) New or Existing Program: Existing 4) Implementation Schedule: Ongoing 5) Responsible Agency: a) California Division of Mines and 1 Geology b) EMA 6) Source of Funds: County General Fund 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 i SAF-5-11 1 d. Orange County/Southern California Earthquake Preparedness Project ' (SCEPP) 1) Action: Continue to administer and expand implementation of th(: 1 Orange County/SCEPP plan through the Public Information Office Committee ar-d other organizations and agencies. Implementation should include public education awareness and response ' motivation. 2) Discussion: Guided by the California Seismic Safety Commission (SSC) , SCEPP is concerned with a broad range of issues related ' to earthquake preparedness. There are two concepts associated with SCEPP: a) The project works directly with local governments, private , industry and volunteer groups in a cooperative planning effort, and b) The SCEPI? approach addresses the full range of earthquake strategies including mitigation, short-term prediction response,. emergency response, and recovery. ' 3) New or Existing Program: New 4) Implementation Schedule: Ongoing ' 5) Responsible Pgency: County Fire Department/Emergency Management Division 1 6) Source of Funds: County General Fund i i 1 1 1 1 SAF-5-12 ' i e. Buyer Notification Program 1) Action: Continue the administration of the Buyer Notification ' Program as designated by the Board of Supervisors Resolution 82-1368. Land Use :naps and planning information required by the guidelines shall be updated yearly by the subdivider/developer, ' or more often if the Director of Planning/EMA is aware of planning changes which affect the subdivision and makes the update a condition of his approval of the map. 2) Discussion: The Buyer Notification Program is intended to provide prospective home buyers with an appropriate overview of nearby planning and development. Rey information denoted on Buyer Notification maps includes location of service facilities and life-sustaining infrastructure (e.g., fire stations, hospitals, utilities) . ' 3) New or Existing Program: Existing 4) Implementation Schedule: Ongoing 5) Responsible Agency: EMA 6) Source of Funds: County General Fund ' SAP-5-13 f. Intergovernmental Coordination ' 1) Action: Continue to develop intergovernmental relations toward achieving seismic and non-seismic protection goals, objectives ' and policies. 2) Discussion: With regards to handling seismic and non-seismic ' matters, Orange County cooperates with various levels of government including federal, state and local agencies. For instance, SCITP is a state and federally funded effort to spur local jurisdictions to prepare for predicted and unpredicted 'catastrophic' earthquakes in the Los Angeles metropolitan area. Continued anti expanded cooperation among agencies will provide a coordinated effort toward achieving seismic and non-seismic protection funding, phasing and implementation. 3) New or Existing Program: Existing 4) Implementation Schedule: Ongoing 5) Responsible Agency: EMA 6) Source of Funds: County General Fund 1 1 SAP-5-14 ' l g. Master Environmental Assessment (MEA) 1) Action: Apply mitigation measures to projects to reduce or eliminate impacts and maximize public safety through the use of the Master Environmental Assessment (MEA) . Evaluate the expansion of MEA functions through the establishment of support systems (e.g., Block and Module Grid) to further provide methods to monitor the County's seismically or geologically hazardous areas. 2) Discussion: The MEA provides a resource data base to evaluate the potential impact of natural hazards which could affect siting of proposed development. Through the MEA, the impact of potential hazards created by the encroachment of development on the natural surroundings (e.g., areas prone to geologic hazard) can be identified and mitigated. In addition, the MEA will continually reinforce the intent and focus of the Safety Element's Implementation programs. 3) New or Existing Program: Existing 4) Implementation Schedule: Ongoing 5) Responsible Agency: Environmental Management Agency 6) Source of Funds: County General Fund i ' PA53-1 SAF-5-15 7278 1 I ` APPENDIX A SAFETY ELEMENT IMPLEMENTATION PROGRAMS 1. General Plan Consistency Program a. Action: Continue review of public and private projects for consistency with the-Orange County General Plan as required by state law (Government Code Section 65400 et seq.) . EMA policy and procedures and memorandums of understanding (MOOS) between functions will be revised and maintained. b. Discussion: This program satisfies the state law requirement that private and public projects must be consistent with the local government's general plan in order to be approved. All public works projects, development projects, discretionary permits, capital improvement plans and other private and public agency proposals are reviewed for consistency. The consistency review process will be conducted in accordance with the Advance Planning Program Manual prepared by EMA. c. New or Existing Program: Existing d. Implementation Schedule: Ongoing e. Responsible Agency: Environmental Management Agency f. Source of Funds: County General Fund 2. Intergovernmental Coordination and Public Participation a. Action: Intergovernmental coordination and public participation are existing components of the Advance Planning Program. Intergovernmental and intragovernmental coordination will be improved through increased cooperation and contact with federal, state, regional, countywide, and Orange County agencies which impact or influence Safety Element implementation. For a list of related planning agencies, see I� Appendix B. i b. Discussion: This program facilitates both intra- and intergovernmental coordination and citizen participation in order to promote a greater understanding of the County General Plan. Appropriate governmental agencies, organizations and citizens are provided an opportunity to review documents and provide input during the General Plan revision and amendment process. Appropriate agencies are also consulted regarding and involved in many of the implementation programs defined in this document. c. New or Existing Program: Existing d. Implementation Schedule: Ongoing e. Responsible Agency: Environmental Management Agency 1 SAF-A-1 f. Source of Funds: County General Fund 3. Emergency Management Program a. Action: Continue to implement emergency mitigation measures as outli.led in the California Emergency Plan, the California Master Mutual Aid Agreement, the Orange County Emergency Plan, and other emergency management plans. Coordination and implementation will be improved through increased contact with all agencies and organizations which impact or influence emergency response planning. b. Discussion: This p::ogram focuses primarily upon the County's planned response to extraordinary emergency situations associated with natural disasters, technological incidents, and nuclear protection operations. Such disasters pose major threats to life and property and can impact the well-being of large numbers of people. To reduce the county's susceptibility and vulnerability to extraordinary emergency situations, continuing emphasis is placed on the following: emergency planning; training of full time, auxiliary and reserve personnel; public awareness and education; and assuring the adequacy and availability of sufficient resources to cope with such emergencies. Normal day-to-day emergencies and the well-established and routine procedures used in response to such emergencies are addressed in the implementation programs found in this element and in the daily procedures of the various responsible agencies. Emergency Response In the event of a disaster which generates the need for unusual emergency response, a pre-selected emergency management staff would be mobilized (see chart A-1) . The staff would consist of representatives from all County agencies. Its purpose would be to organize overall emergency operations and coordination. The staff would be directed by an Operational Area Coordinator (OAC) , who is the chairman of the Board of Supervisors (or su:cessor) . The OAC would be responsive to the directives of the County Governing Body. The Emergency Operations Center (EOC) is designed to operate as the central control and coordination point for all County operations should a disaster or major emergency occur. Once activated, the heads and designated support staff from all County agencies, along with representatives from the State and Federal government and private relief groups will report to the EOC to gather information and begin the task of responding to the emergency or disaster. As there are various levels of emergencies which can require the activation of the EOC, some emergency incidences do not necessitate activation or only necessitate operation of the facility with a limited emergency management staff. Emergency functions to be performed by various agencies during an extraordinary emergency are outlined below. Additional emergency information may be found in the County's Emergency Response Plan , maintained by the Emer<lency Management Division of the Orange County Fire Department. SAF-A-2 1) Recovery and Reconstruction Coordinator: County Administrative Officer Staff Source: CAO, CSA, EMA, Assessor, County Counsel, Agricultural Commissioner, Auditor-Controller, Fire Department/EMD, Recorder, Treasurer-Tax Collector, other departments as needed. Primary Tasks: Perform recovery and reconstruction planning; initiate planning during emergency response phase. Evaluate damage assessment reports. Provide advice on priority areas for emergency response in order to enhance short-term recovery activities and long-term reconstruction and mitigation activities. Post disaster, review possible mitigation actions to determine how the threat or consequences of the hazard could be reduced in the future. 2) I:oergency Communications Officer: Manager, GSA/Communications Division Staff Source: Communications Division, GSA/Telephone, Fire Department/EMD, Sheriff. Primary Tasks: Furnish communications service necessary for the County Emergency Organization to cope with the disaster. Provide, maintain and coordinate countywide public safety radio systems. Provide, manage and maintain Emergency Operations Center (EOC) communications facilities and system. 3) Alerting and Warning Officer: Manager, GSA/Communications Division Staff Source: Communications Division, GSA/Telephone, Fire Department/EMD, Sheriff. Primary Tasks: Receive and disseminate alerts and warnings to designated County officials and agencies, all jurisdictions and public safety entities. Provide notification service for EOC activation. 4) Situation Analysis and Reporting Officer: Director, EMA/Regulation Staff Source: EMA/Regulation, EMA/Public Works (roads, bridges, dams, flood control facilities) , GSA/Facilities and Real Property, Assessor, Fire/EMD, HCA/Environmental Health, Sheriff, CAO, Board of Supervisors, GSA/Communications (RACES) . Primary Tasks: Provide, manage and coordinate the Structural Safety and Damage Assessment System. Prioritize activities. Collect and consolidate initial reconnaissance information from departments which have units in the field. Assess safety and damage for both SAP-A-3 i public and priirate sectors. Identify and post structures and facilities which are unsafe. Request damage information from other County departments which hale response units in the field. Collect, evaluate, consolidate and display safety/damage assessment information for the Direction arni Control (D&C) Group. Prepare consolidated damage reports, includ:.ng dollar amounts, for the D&C Group and for transmittal to the State Office of Emergency Services (OES) . 5) Paergency Public Information Section 3-1-7 01 the Orange County Code requires that all emergency information, press releases and public statements will be coordinated through a single entity. Until the County EOC is activated, the Emergency Public Information function will be the responsibility of the primary response agency, as appropriate to the type of emergency situation confronting the county. When the County , EOC is activated:, the County Public Information Officer (PIO) will be responsible for public information activities. Officer: County PIO Staff Source: Public Information Office, PIO's of all County departments, EMD, Board of Supervisors, Emergency Management Council. Primary Tasks: Prepare and disseminate emergency public information. Establish an Emergency Information Center for the neFs media. Prepare J.nformation for the Rumor Control Center in the EOC. Provide advice on news media and public information in general. Accredit and accommodate out-of-area news media. 6) Radiological Protection Officer: County Health Officer Staff Source: HCA/Radiological Health, EMD, Fire Department, GSA/Communications, Agricultural Commissioner, other County personnel trained as radiological monitors. Primary Tasks: Manage the radiation monitoring and reporting system. Evaluate and disseminate radiation information. Assess radiation threat. Provide technical guidance on measures to counter the effects of radiation. 7) Fire and Rescue OFkerations Coordinator: Director of Fire Services Staff Source: Fire Department (career and paid call) , Fire Explorers, EMA/Public Works, Sheriff, HCA/Public Health and Medical, GSA/Waste Management (heavy equipment) . SAF-A-4 Primary Tasks: Suppress and prevent fires. Conduct field emergency medical care. Protect life and property at hazardous material spills and releases. Conduct fire-related rescue, medical-related rescue, hazardous material-related rescue, and heavy rescue (collapsed buildings, etc.) . 8) Law Enforcement and Traffic Control Operations Coordinator: Sheriff-Coroner Staff Source: Sheriff Department, Sheriff Reserves and Explorers, Marshal, District Attorney, Probation, Public Defender, Courts, EMA/Public Works, and Fire Department. Primary Tasks: Protect life and property. Enforce laws, rules and regulations. Provide security for areas, facilities and resources. Control vehicular traffic and pedestrian movement. Enforce vehicular traffic laws and regulations. Coordinate countywide vehicular traffic controls. 9) Medical Operations Coordinator: Director, Health Care Agency Staff Source: HCA, Fire, Sheriff, CSA. Primary Tasks: Provide medical care and treatment for ill and injured persons, and provide crisis intervention services. Manage medical services, activities, facilities and resources. Provide for transportation of casualties and medical resources. Coordinate activities of private medical facilities. Provide for relocation of patients as necessary. Coordinate activation and operation of Casualty Collection Points. Provide advice and guidance on the mental health aspects of a disaster. Provide preventive mental health services (for both public and emergency responders) . Provide mental health services at all disaster-related facilities and sites. Treat and rehabilitate victims of post-disaster psychiatric trauma. Provide specialized mental health services for special population groups (unaccompanied children, aged, disabled, etc.) . 10) Public Health Operations Coordinator: Director, Health Care Agency Staff Source: HCA, Fire, EMA/Regulation, Agricultural Commissioner. Primary Tasks: Provide public health and environmental sanitation services. Determine and control public health hazards. Prevent and control communicable disease. Mitigate effects of radiological, biological and chemical spills or emissions. SAF-A-5 11) Coroner Operations Coordinator: Sheriff-Coroner Staff Source: Sheriff-Coroner/Forensic Services, other Sheriff personnel, Fire, HCA. Primary Tasks: Collect, identify, certify cause of death and dispose of fata*A ties, and process their personal effects. Provide evidence and instructions on handling of fatalities. 12) Care and Shelter Operations All peacetime care and shelter operations will be performed in coordination and cooperation with the American Red Cross or by assisting the Rea Cross. Coordinator: Di:-ector, Social Services Agency Staff Source: S.,A, CSA, GSA/Real Estate, EMA/Parks and Recreation, EMA/Regulation, EICA/Environmental Health, Fire Department. Primary Tasks: Assess mass care needs and housing requirements. Provide shelter, food, clothing and registration for impacted persons. Manage and operate evacuation centers, reception centers, mass care centers, and public shelters, including fallout shelters. Inventory and allocate temporary lodging. Register displaced persons, casualties and other victims. Provide locator services and handling of disaster welfare inquiries. Provide for financial assistance, rehab::litation and counseling services. Provide specialized services as required for the care of special population groups (unaccompanied children, aged, disabled, etc.) . 13) Movement Operations Coordinator: Sheriff-Coroner Staff Source: Sheriff, Sheriff Reserves and Explorers, HCA/Animal Control, EMA/Publii: Works, GSA/Communications, GSA/Transportation, Fire Department, P:10, other departments as needed. - Primary Tasks: Provide for evacuation and relocation of persons from threatened or affected areas and buildings to safer, lower risk areas. 14) Rescue Operations Coordinator: Sheriff-Coroner Staff Source: Sheriff, Fire, Sheriff Reserves and Explorers, EMA/Public Works, HCA/Public Health and Medical. Primary Tasks: During disasters, provide coordinated light search and rescue operations for the location, safe removal and immediate care of endangered, entrapped, injured and isolated persons. Assist in heavy rescue operations. SAF-A-6 ` 15) Construction, Engineering and Utilities Operations Coordinator: Director, Environmental Management Agency Staff Source: EMA, Fire, Sheriff (for inmates) , GSA/Waste Management (heavy equipment) , Special Districts governed by the Board of Supervisors. Primary Tasks: Restore, maintain and operate essential facilities. Clear and dispose of debris to abate hazards. Clear roads and bridges for route recovery. Repair and construct emergency facilities, including expedient shelters. Repair or reinforce damaged roads and bridges. Provide supervision over all emergency construction. Demolish or otherwise abate hazard of damaged buildings and structures which pose a threat to pubic safety. Conduct flood fighting operations. Coordinate the continued operation or restoration of electric, gas and water utilities, and coordinate redirection of services as required. 16) Resources and Support Operations Coordinator: Director, General Services Agency Primary Tasks: Assisted by the following Support Officers, manage and coordinate the provision, allocation, distribution and use of essential resources and services to support emergency operations. 17) Military Raergency Operations In the event of an extraordinary emergency situation requiring an unusual emergency response, the three military air installations within Orange County may be available to provide significant assistance. Marine Corps Air Stations, El Toro and Tustin and Los Alamitos Army Airfield each may provide additional communication centers, medical facilities (Los Alamitos houses an emergency field hospital) and evacuation equipment in the forms of helicopters, aircraft and vehicles. Military personnel can also be mobilized to augment the ranks of emergency personnel. Also, each military installation maintains its own emergency response plan that addresses on-and-off post emergency incidences which could be drawn upon in a County disaster situation. PA05-4 SAF-A-7 7171 APPENDIX B \ Related Planning Agencies A. Overview Intergovernmental coordination facilitates cooperative planning with federal, state, regional, and Orange County agencies involved in Safety Element implementation or which influence the implementation of this element by their actions. This appendix identifies federal, state, regional and countywide agencies involved in General Plan implementation and their respective responsibilities. B. Inter-Agency Coordination 1. Federal Agencies a. Army Corps of Engineers: (1) Development and distribution of flood and dam inundation maps (2) Flood Control facilities (3) Major public works projects b. Department of Defense (Tustin and E1 Toro Marine Corps Air Stations and Los Alamitos Army Airfield) : (1) Airport/land use compatibility (2) Interface with County noise control and abatement programs c. Department of Transportation: (1) Intra- and Interstate transport of hazardous materials d. Environmental Protection Agency: (1) Environmental Review Process (2) Air quality, hazardous waste, and water quality programs e. Federal Aviation Administration: (1) National aircraft/air carrier administration f. Federal Emergency Management Administration: (1) Administration and oversight of hazardous material legislation (2) Main federal government contact during natural disasters and nuclear defense emergencies g. Federal Insurance Administration: (1) Delineation of special flood hazard areas, risk premium zones and floodways through the Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) and Flood Boundary and Floodway Map ' SAF-B-1 h. Nuclear Regulatory Commission: (1) Oversight of nation's nuclear power plant facilities (2) Inspection of nuclear facilities 2. State Agencies a. California Energy Commission: (1) Responsible for development and conservation of California's energy resources b. California Resources Agency: Umbrella agency for State's major environmental agencies, including: (1) California Air Resources Board: (a) State .air pollution control agency responsible for implementation of federal air pollution acts (2) California coastal Commission: (a) Coordinates implementation and administration of the Coastal. Act in Orange County (3) California Coastal Conservancy: (a) Land acquisition and management in conformity with the Coastal Act on a local coastal program (LCP) (4) Department of Conservation: (a) Mineral and geologic resource planning �- (5) Department of Water Resources: a Develop, protect, conserve and manage California's water ( ) P� P . 9 resources c. California Seismic Safety Commission: (1) Oversight of Southern California Earthquake Preparedness Project (SCEPP) d. California State Fire Marshall's Office (Hazardous Liquid Pipeline Division) : (1) Compliance rei►iew, for inspection and enforcement; pipeline failure and investigation; and, pipeline training and certification e. California Waste Management Board: (1) Waste management regulation and funding programs SAP-B-2 f. Department of Health Services: (1) Hazardous materials, hazardous waste, infectious wastes, and radioactive materials control g. Department of Mines and Geology: (1) Development of Alquist-Priolo Special Study Zone maps (2) Administration of geologic legislation h. Department of Transportation - CalTrans : (1) Division of Aeronautics responsible for heliport and helipad location and development ii. Office of Emergency Services: (1) Administration of state emergency plans and preparation (2) Coordinate statewide emergency operations including mutual aid j. Office of Planning and Research: (1) State clearinghouse for environmental impact reports (EIRs) (2) Prepares guidelines for the preparation of mandatory elements of the General Plan (except the Housing Element) k. Public Utilities Commission: (1) Lead agency on major energy facility (power plant) siting 1. State Water Resources Control Board: (1) Responsible for water rights and water pollution control (2) Enforces water quality standards and administers federal clean water laws �1 3. Regional Agencies a. Aviation Work Program Committee: (1) Regional air carrier capacity b. Interjurisdictional Planning Committee: (1) Coordinate emergency plans, training and exercises (2) Resolve matters of mutual concern c. Joint Powers Authority: (1) Oversight of Hazardous Materials Management Plan d. South Coast Air Quality Management District: (1) Air Quality management activities SAP-B-3 e. Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) : (1) Coordination of regional water quality and energy planning efforts (2) Clearinghouse for federally funded projects (3) Regional Air Quality, Transportation, and Housing Plans (4) Transportation Improvement Plans (5) Regional G::owth Policy f. Southern California Edison: (1) Operation of San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station (SONGS) g. Southern California Hazardous Waste Management Authority ' (1) Coordinaticn and implementation of hazardous waste management programs and siting of facilities h. Water Districts: (1) Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (2) Orange County Water District (3) Coastal Mun::cipal Water District (4) California Water Quality Control Board: (a) DesigniLtes regional boards which are responsible for the mainter..ance of water quality 4. Local Agencies a. City Engineers Flood Control Advisory Committee (CEFCAC) : (1) Flood control project recommendations and prioritization of project prop3sals submitted by Flood Control District 5. Private Organizations a. Community/Homeowners' Associations b. Institute of Nuclear Power Operations (INPO) : (1) Establishes industry-wide standards in nuclear power operations (2) Conduct independent evaluations to assist utilities in meeting industry-wide standards c. Nuclear Safety Analysis Center: (1) Provides updated technical information on nuclear safety to affected industry sources d. Public-interest organizations (e.g. , League of Women Voters) PA05-4 SAF-B-4 7188 - APPENDIX C LIST OF ACRONYMS/ABBREVIATIONS AELUP Airport Environs Land Use Plan AFIS Areawide Fiscal Impact System AICUZ Air Installation Compatible Use Zone ALUC Airport Land Use Commission AWPC Aviation Work Program Committee BMP Best Management Practices (Agricultural) CAA Community Analysis Areas CAO County Administrative Officer CDMG California Division of Mines and Geology CERCLA Comprehensive Environmental Response. Compensation and Liability Act COE Corps of Engineers (U.S. Army) CSA Community Services Agency DMP Development Monitoring Program DOHS Department of Health Services DOT Department of Transportation EMA Environmental Management Agency EMC Emergency Management Council EMD Emergency Management Division EOC Emergency Operations Center EPA Environmental Protection Agency EPZ Emergency Planning Zone FAA Federal Aviation Administration FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency GSA General Services Agency HMPO Hazardous Materials Program Office HMTF Hazardous Materials Task Force HWCA Hazardous Waste Control Act HWMP Hazardous Waste Management Plan INPO Institute of Nuclear Power Operations IPC Interjurisdictional Planning Committee IPZ Ingestion Pathway Zone JWA John Wayne Airport MCAS Marine Corps Air Station MOU Memorandum of Understanding SAF-C-1 NPL National Priority List ' NRC Nuclear Regulatory Commission NSAC Nuclear Safety Analysis Center OCHCA Orange County Health Care Agency OCP-85 Orange County Preferred - 1985 (Demographic Projections) OCSCD Orange County Sheriff - Coroner Department OES Office of Emergency Services PEZ Public Education Zone PIO Public Information Officer PSF Public Services and Facilities (Element) RCRA Resource and Conservation Recovery Act RSA Regional Statistical Area SCAG Southern California. Association of Governments SCEPP Southern California Earthquake Preparedness Project SONGS San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station SSA Social Services Agency SSC Seismic Safety Commission TAZ Traffic Analysis Zone UST Underground Storage Tank CL:PA05-4/C SAP-C-2 7197 LAPPENDIX D B I B L I O G R A P H Y General References Environmental Management Agency. Buyer Notification Program Guidelines, Board of Supervisors Resolution No. 82-1368, January 1985. ------ Component II Advance Planning Program: Public Services and Facilities Element. Orange County, January 9, 1985. Component II Advance Planning Program: Resources Element. Orange County, April 18, 1984. t ------ Orange County General Plan Safety Element and Technical Report. Orange County, February 1975. Monterey County Planning Department. Monterey County General Plan. The County, September 1982. State of California Office of Emergency Services. Multi-hazard Functional Planning Guidance, Vols. 1 and 2. The Office, 1985. ' Public Safety City of Long Beach City Planning Department. Public Safety Element Draft. The City, May, 1985. Crime Kenney, John P., Gennero Vito, Dennis Longmire. Orange County Crime Reduction Program: Final Report. Long Beach: California State University Long Beach, May 1981. Orange County Sheriff-Coroner Technical Services Reserve Unit. Orange County Sheriff-Coroner Department Biennial Report 1984-1985. United States Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice. Factors Influencing Crime and Instability in Urban Housing Developments. Washington, D.C.: U. S. Government Printing Office, 1980. Washins, G. Citizen Involvement in Crime Prevention. Lexington: D. C. Heath and Company, 1976. Whisenand, P. Crime Prevention. Boston: Holbrook Press, Inc. 1977. Fire ' Fire Protection Planning Task Force. Background Report and Recommendations for the Reduction of Fire Hazard at the Natural Open Space/Urban Development Interface. Orange County, September 1976. t , 1 Ring, Peter and Roxane Arnold. "Fire Damage Put at $20 Million." Los Angeles Times, October 11, 1982. pp 2, 18, 19. Ring, Peter H. "525 Anaheim Apartments Lost in Fire." Los Angeles Timer_, Early edition, April 22, 1982. pp 3, 13, 18, 19. Wolinsky, Leo C. and .Peter H. Ring. "Anaheim Fire Spurs Proposal." Los Angeles Times, Late edition, April 22, 1981. pp 10,18. Hazardous Waste American Nuclear Society. "Nuclear Energy Facts". The Society, 1977. Berger, Louis and Associates, Inc. Hazardous Waste Facilities Siting Manual. ERM West, Jar..uary 1985. ------ The Problems and Needs for the Management of Hazardous Wastes in Southern California. ERM West, January 1985. Hazardous Materials Program Office. Draft Orange County Hazardous Waste Management Plan. HMPO, July 1986; Rpt. September 1986. Hazardous Materials Task Force. Hazardous Materials Management Report. HMTF, October 1984. Hazardous Waste Management Council. Draft Hazardous Waste Management Plat. Sacramento: State of California, January 1984. Hazardous Wastes: The Search for Solutions. PBS Program 1982. Orange County Fire Depe:rtment, Emergency Management Division. Emergency Services Plan Draft, IS186. Orange County, September 1986. Science Applications Inc. A Liquid and Hazardous Wastes Study for Orange County. SAI, April 25, 1975. Southern California Edison. Emergency Information Handbook, San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station. Rosemead, California. -----. "To Help Meet Southern California Power Needs, San Onofre Nuclear r. Generating Station, Units 1, 2, and 30. SCE. Aircraft Environment ' Airport Land Use Commission. Airport Environs Land Use Plan, First Reviset! Edition. The Commission, June 1983. CH2M Hill Inc. Final E]R 508 and Final EIS for John Wayne Airport Master Plan and Santa Ana Heigt!ts Land Use Compatibility Program, Volumes 1 and 2. , Newport Beach: CH2M Hill, February 26, 1985. PRC Speas Associates. Air Installations Compatible Use Zones Study, MCAS E1 Toro, Santa Ana, California. Los Angeles: PRC, March 1981. SAF D-2 I ------ Master Plan and 1984 Addendum MCAF, Camp Pendleton, California. Los Angeles: PRC, September 1982. ------ Master Plan, MCAS (H) Tustin, California. Los Angeles: PRC, August 1983. Southern California Association of Governments. Airport Impact Mitigation ' and Management Study (AIMMS) . SCAG, December 1985. -----. Southern California Aviation System Study: Supplemental Technical ' Report. SCAG, June 1982. Flood Flood Management Conference Proceeding Report No. 44. 24-25 October 1978. Sacramento, March 1979. Moffat and Nichol Engineers. Coastal Flood Plain Development, Orange County Coastline. County of Orange, January 1985. Orange County Flood Control District. An Investigation of Flood Control and Water Conservation Deficiencies within Orange County. The County, April 1964. ------ Flood Control System Damages. The County, March 1, 1983. U. S. Army Corps of Engineers. Review Report on the Santa Ana River Main Stem and Santiago Creek, Appendix 1, Volume 1, Draft. Los Angeles: The Corps, August 1975. ------ Review Report on the Santa Ana River Main Stem including Santiago Creek and Oak Street Drain-Final Environmental Statement. Los Angeles: The Corps, September ;1977. ' -----. Santa Ana River-Phase I GDM on the Santa Ana River Main Stem including Santiago Creek and Oak Street Drain-Information Brochure. Los Angeles: The Corps, February 1979. ' ------ Santa Ana River-Phase I GDM on the Santa Ana River Main Stem including Santiago Creek and Oak Street Drain-Information Brochure. Los Angeles: The Corps. July 1980. ------ Santa Ana River-Phase I GDM on the Santa Ana River Main Stem including Santiago Creek and Oak Street Drain-Main Report Draft. Los Angeles: The Corps, July 1980. Survey Report. The Corps. 1975. ' Weisz, Dorothy. Flood Control System Status Report. County of Orange, December 1984. SAP-D-3 Seismic/Non-seismic Berry, Kristina and Cynthia Lomas. Earthquake Preparedness: An Examination of Plan Content vs. Implementation. Thesis. California Polytechnic State University, City and Regional Planning Department, June 1984. Foraker, Joseph W. W1,at You Should Know About Earthquakes: It Could Save_ Your Life. Mission Viejo, CA 1983. , Hart, Earl W., State Geologist. Fault-Rupture Hazard Zones in California,_ Alquist-Priolo Special Studies Zones Act of 1971. Department of , Conservation, Department of Mines and Geology, 1985. Joint Committee on Seismic safety. Meeting the Earthquake Challenge: Filial Report to the Legislature, State of California. Sacramento: California Division of Mines and Geology, January 1974. Los Angeles County Planning Department. Seismic Safety Element, Proposed ' Element Draft EIR-Los hngeles County General Plan. The County, October 11, 1974. Orange County Emergency Management Council. Orange County/Southern , California Earthquake reparedness Project (SCEPP) Recommendations for Phase 1, Earthquake Preparedness. Orange County Fire/Emergency Management Division, June 1986. Scott, Stanley. Policies for Seismic Safety: Elements of a State Governmental Program. Berkeley: Institute of Governmental Studies, U. C. Berkeley, 1979. ------ What Decision Makers Need to Know: Policy and Social Science Research on Seismic Safe. Berkeley: Institute of Governmental Studies, U. S. Berkeley, 1979. Sterling, Jerry, EMA/Grading Section. Silverado Canyon Geological Hazards Report. Orange County I'MA, October 1983. Ziony, J. I. Evaluating Earthquake Hazards in the Los Angeles Region: An Earth-Science Perspecti�re, USGS Professional Paper 1360. Washington, DC: U. S. Government Printing Office, 1985. r PA05-4 SAF-D-4 t 7271 Y 1 APPENDIX E � 2 3 RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 4 ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA 5 August 26, 1987 6 On motion of Supervisor Riley, duly seconded and carried, the ' 7 following Resolution was adopted: 8 WHEREAS,the County of Orange has an adopted General Plan; and 9 WHEREAS, pursuant to the Planning and Zoning Law of the State of ' 10 California, this Board has reviewed the publicly-initiated Safety 11 Element amendment 1987-1 (S 87-1) ; and 12 WHEREAS, orientation sessions were held by the Planning Commission 13 on this element amendment on February 24 and April 7, 1987; and 14 WHEREAS, in compliance with the Planning and Zoning Law of the 15 State of California, public hearings were held by the Planning Commissio 60 ; W 16 on this element amendment on May 19, July 1 and 28, 1987; and F u zz 0g 17 WHEREAS, Negative Declaration No. IP 87-027 was prepared for the 18 Safety- Element Amendment 1987-1 (S 87-1) ; and 19 WHEREAS, this Board has duly considered Safety Element Amendment 20 1987-1 (S 87-1) and finds that the public interest, health, comfort, ' 21 convenience, safety, order, general welfare and peace will be more 22 adequately served thereby; and 23 WHEREAS, this Board has complied with the State and County environ- 24 mental procedures by reviewing and considering Negative Declaration 25 No. IP 87-027. 26 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that this Board has evaluated ' A , 27 Negative Declaration No. IP 87-027 and ha:, determined it to be adequate - 28 and complete for this project and satisfies the requirements of x �V v Resolution No. 87 1186 �e 1 Adopt Comp. Amend. to SAF-E-1 S JRG:h Safety Element of Gen. Plan �''�` " 1 I California Environmental Quality Act. , 2 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Board of Supervisors of the County 3 of Orange hereby adopts Safety Element Amendment 1987-1 (S 87-1 ) of ' 4 the General Plan as recommended by the Orange County Planning Commission 5 6 7 s 9 10 11 12 13 14 W H Z; 15 �o oW iWW 16 AYES: SUPERVISORS z THOMAS F. RILEY, DON R. ROTH, HARRIETT M. iIIEDER o¢ 17 AND ROGER R. STANTON uo NOES: SUPERVISORS t 18 NONE 19 ABSENT: SUPERVISORS GADDI H. VASQUEZ 20 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) ) ss. 21 COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ' 22 I, LINDA D. ROBERTS, Clerk of the Board of Supervisors of Oxarge County, California, hereby certify that the above and foregoing 23 Resolution was duly 4nd regularly adopted by the said Board at a , regular meeting thereof held on the 26th day of August 24 19__aZ, and passed by a unanimous vote of said Board members present 25 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and seal this 20titt► day of August 19B-Z-. 26 N , 0 27 LINDA D. ROBE �7 ® 28 )Clerk of the Board o pervisorNq of Orange County, CaliforniacF' SAF-E-2 54 i NOISE ELEMENT 1 1 LLI AD V ANCE PLANNING PROGRAM O i a O v ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT AGENCY COUNTY OF ORANGE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS � i w y{gl F Harriett M. Wieder ���- ` Chairman w. Second District i Roger R. Stanton 1993 Gaddi H. Vasquez First District Third District i i Y William G. Steiner Thomas F. Riley ' Fourth District Fifth District r . 1 ' COMPONENT II ADVANCE PLANNING PROGRAM NOISE ELEMENT III 1 I ' COUNTY OF ORANGE ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT AGENCY ADVANCE PLANNING DIVISION March 27, 1984 (General Plan Modernization) BOARD OF SUPERVISORS RESOLUTION No. 84-435 Revised: 10/31/84 Resolution No. 84-1570/N84-2 ' 11/13/85 Resolution No. 85-1620/N85-1 11/19/86 Resolution No. 86-1474/N86-1 02/02/93 Resolution No. 93-121/N92-1 MA:tk/3021709550426 ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION First District A. Earl Wooden Second District Roger Slates ' Third District Clarice Blamer Fourth District Chuck McBurney Fifth District Thomas Moody ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT AGENCY ' Mic'zael M. Ruane, Director Thomas B. Mathews, Director of Planning Joan S. Golding, Manager, Advance Planning Division MA:tk/2042809350341 ' 1 ' TABLE OF CONTENTS ' Chapter One: Introduction ' A. Overview N-1-1 B. Scope and Purpose of Element N-1-1 C. Relationship to the Advance Planning Program N-1-2 D. Relationship to Federal, State and Local Agency Plans and Programs N-1-3 Chapter Two: Inventory of Current Conditions and Projected Growth A. Introduction N-2-1 B. County Growth Trends N-2-1 1. Data Sources N-2-1 2. Development Patterns and Trends N-2-5 3. Travel Demand N-2-10 C. The Nature of Sound N-2-13 D. Characteristics of the Existing Noise Environment N-2-15 E. Estimates of Affected Population N-2-24 ' Chapter Three: Analysis of Future conditions ' A. Overview N-3-1 B. Analysis of Future Conditions N-3-1 C. Noise Referral Zones N-3-2 Chapter Four: Objectives and Policies A. Overview N-4-1 B. Objectives, Assumptions and Definitions N-4-1 C. Implementation Policies N-4-5 1. Intergovernmental Cooperation N-4-7 ' 2. Public Information and Notification N-4-7 3. Transportation System Noise Control N-4-8 4. Noise Monitoring and Abatement N-4-9 5. Noise/Land Use Planning Integration N-4-9 6. Noise Sensitive Land Uses N-4-10 Appendix A - Definitions and Acronyms N-A-1 MA:tk 3021714162344 i LI3T OF TABLES, MAPS, CHARTS AND FIGURES ' Table Title Page , 2-1 Orange County Oemographic Projections N-2-2 , 2-2 Projected Popuiation Growth Trends N-2-6 2-3 Projected Housing Growth Trends N-2-8 2-4 Projected Employment Growth Trends N-2-11 2-5 Population Potentially Affected by CNEL Levels N-2-25 ' 4-1 Compatibility 14atrix N-4-2 4-2 Explanation and Definitions N-4-3 Ma ' 2-1 Orange County Regional Statistical Areas N-2-3 ' 2-2 Population N-2-7 2-3 Housing Units N-2-9 2-4 Employment N-2-12 2-5 CNEL Contours :`rom Air Facilities N-2-19 2-6 CNEL Contours .:rom Existing Arterial Highways N-2-22 2-7 CNEL Contours :`rom Arterial Highways - 2000 N-2-23 2-8 CNEL Contours ::rom Through Railroads N-2-26 Chart ' 2-1 Orange County :socioeconomic Projections N-2-4 2-2 Examples of OuAoor CNELs N-2-18 Figure 2-1 Effect of Speed on CNEL N-2-20 2-2 Typical Noise !litigation Measures N-2-21 MA: tk ' 3021714162344 ii CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION ' A. Overview The Noise Element, which is a mandatory component of the General Plan, contains data and analyses, policies and implementation program information that relate to the noise environment in the unincorporated sections of Orange County. ' Specifically, this Noise Element responds to the requirements of Section 65302(f) of the California government Code. In so doing, the guidance ' provided by the State in "Guidelines for the Preparation and Content of Noise Elements of the General Plan" (February, 1976) has been adhered to. The policies which relate to managing the County's noise environment are found in Chapter Four of this document. They reflect a series of decisions by elected officials based in part on studies which incorporate increasingly sophisticated measurements and analyses. In total, they provide a means of ' relating the broad goals and patterns depicted in the General Plan to the County's project-specific responsibilities. Definitions for a number of key terms related to the measurement and evaluation of noise are contained in Appendix A. The terms are arranged in alphabetical order in one location to allow for greater clarity and brevity in the Noise Element text itself. ' B. Scope and Purpose of the Element The scope of the element includes- the unincorporated portions of the County of Orange. As with all elements of the General Plan, the Noise Element provides the mid-range (15- to 20-year) portion of the planning program and focuses on objectives and policies at the Regional Statistical Area (RSA) ' level. (See Map 2-1.) All elements have the same horizon year (2000) and growth assumptions to enhance internal consistency. The purpose of the Noise Element is to provide a statement of public policy ' and a decision framework for the maintenance of a quiet environment. The Noise Element identifies the sources of noise, analyzes the extent of the noise intrusion and estimates its potential impact upon the County. This identification process in turn provides the basis for goals, policies and ' implementation programs designed to preserve, where possible, a quiet environment in the County of Orange. The objectives achieved by the development of the Noise Element are: o Identification in quantitative, numerical terms, of existing and projected noise levels, noise sources, and noise-sensitive land uses in the County. o Direction for implementation programs which may be used to achieve ' and maintain a desirable noise environment. ' N-1-1 r This effort integrates the County's noise planning into the Advance Planning ' Program in a format that is consistent with the other General Plan elerents and other component,; of the Advance Planning Program. , C. Relationship to the Advance Planning Program There are three levels, or components, to the Advance Planning Program. Component I provider the long-range planning framework and general goa:.s for the Advance Planning Program. Included within this document are broad goals which provide a bas:.s for the more specific goals and policies containE:d in , the Noise Element. Component II consists of the elements of the General Plan. The broad, noise-related goal (found in Component I, page I-3-5) of the County of Orange is to: Protect the health, safety and general welfare of County residents by , reducing noise levels and establishing compatible land uses in noise-impacted z.reas. This goal promotes the amelioration of noise impacts by both reducing the ' noise produced by various sources and by guiding land uses so they are compatible with existing (or projected) long-term average noise levels. While this goal has a high priority, it must be achieved while maintaining internal consistency among the other elements of the General Plan as required by state law. Therefore, the Noise Element does not replace cr , supersede any of the other General Plan elements; instead, the Element addresses, amplifies and supports other elements as they relate to noise issues. The Land Use and Noise Elements are strongly interrelated. The Noise ' Element identifies land uses which are considered sensitive to noise and contains guidelines for achieving compatibility between land use and ' community noise levels. This information is intended to provide guidance in land use decisions including the general distribution, location and intensity of land uses. A significant relationship also exists between the Transportation and Noise , Elements. Because transportation systems are a major source of noise, their location, capacity, and design often determine the extent of noise impacts ' on surrounding land uses. Once commitment is made on transportation systems, land uses should be examined to identify compatibility with predicted noise levels generated by that system. The Noise Element relates to the Transportation Element through proposed policies for design. ' location, and fiscal considerations in the construction of new facilities. The Housing Element is indirectly affected by the Noise Element through the ' Land Use Element. Residences are identified as some of the most noise- sensitive uses. The Noise Element suggests location and design conside-a- tions for housing, a.; well as attenuation measures to reduce interior noise levels. Land that i.3 considered marginal for residential use because of ' N-1-2 ' ' existing or projected noise impacts may provide an opportunity for residential use through careful design. Such design considerations include ' measures to insure that interior and exterior noise levels are satisfactorily attenuated to meet County standards. The Noise Element is also closely related to the Resources Element, since ' noise can adversely affect the enjoyment of quiet activities in open space. Conversely, open space can be employed to buffer noise-sensitive land uses through separation and extension landscaping. ' The Community Profiles, Component III, are the most detailed portions of the Advance Planning Program. The Profiles are short-range in scope and focus on community-level policies and programs. The Community Profiles depict ' existing and proposed land uses and transportation facilities as well as inventories of environmental data. Appropriate noise-related information will be incorporated into the Community Profiles. D. Relationship to Federal, State and Local Agency Plans and Programs The purpose of this section is to provide a general overview as to the ' noise-related roles and responsibilities of different levels of government as they relate to environmental noise. ' At the federal level, there are three separate agencies which have a significant impact on Orange County's noise environment. They are the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the Department of Defense and the Department of Transportation (DOT). In addition, the Department of Housing ' and Urban Development and the Federal Housing Administration establish standards for projects which receive their financial support. The stated role for EPA has been to provide leadership in the national noise abatement effort. While not as extensive as it was during the 1970s, a key aspect of this effort has been sponsorship of scientific studies of the relationships between noise levels and human response. Another key role of ' EPA has been in assisting other federal agencies, states, and local jurisdictions in taking steps to ensure as healthy an environment as is feasible. ' The Department of Defense (DOD) is important with respect to the Noise Element because it operates two facilities in Orange County, the Marine Corps Air Station (MCAS) at E1 Toro and the one at Tustin. These bases, especially MCAS, E1 Toro, have a very significant noise impact on surrounding areas. DOD sponsors a number of programs to attempt to minimize negative impacts of each of the bases' operations. (DOD in conjunction with the State of California National Guard Bureau also operates an air instal- lation at Los Alamitos. Noise effects from operations at Los Alamitos are not significant on unincorporated areas, however. ) The Department of Transportation is significant in that its operating agencies are involved in setting standards and safety regulations for civil ' N-1-3 aviation, railroad:3, transit facilities and vehicles, and those freewzys that are a part of the Interstate System. These agencies are the Federal Aviation Administration, the Federal Railway Administration, the Urbar. Mass ' Transportation Administration and the Federal Highway Administration. The State of California is responsible for establishing regulations fcr ' noise control where not pre-empted by the federal government. The feceral government has largely pre-empted control of noise from aircraft, railroads, and federal highways. The State regulates noise levels of motor vehicles, motorcycles, motor boats, and freeway noise as it affects classrooms, and I has set noise insulation standards for multi-family dwellings, hotels and motels. The State also has established noise impact boundaries arounc airports, and noise planning standards. ' Of particular importance is the State requirement for the preparation of each local jurisdiction's noise element (California Government Code, :ection 65302(f)), noise insulation standards (California Administrative Code, Title ' 25) and the noise standards related to airports and their environs (Title 21). The state, through CALTRANS and the California Transportation Commission, also exerts significant influence on the noise environment ' through the financ'..ng, construction, and maintenance of the state higrway system. Local jurisdictions share the responsibility of maintaining the healtt and ' welfare of their residents. This responsibility is discharged largely through land use planning and control. The normal approach taken at the local level is a preventative one in which care is taken to avoid the ' development of neighboring uses that are inconsistent. Retroactive action to correct an inconsistent pattern is generally limited to voluntary programs in which land owners are encouraged to take steps to reduce the noise impact on their property. ' The County of Orange has an additional role in that it is the owner/orerator of John Wayne Airport. In this role, the County can influence the noise ' environment, although only insofar as its actions are in accord with federal and state regulations. 1 LC:tk ' 2101613525856 N-1-4 CHAPTER TWO: INVENTORY OF CURRENT CONDITIONS AND PROJECTED GROWTH 1 A. Introduction ' This chapter describes the current and projected pattern of growth for all of Orange County. In addition, the location and extent of the area potentially exceeding a Community Noise Equivalent Level of 60 decibels have been mapped. These maps include only unincorporated areas and have been prepared based on noise from air, road and rail sources. Estimates of the population, both current and projected, residing in these potentially- impacted areas have been prepared. ' B. County Growth Trends 1. Data Sources ' For the purposes of the General Plan, 1980 was selected as the baseline year for data collection and analysis. The prime advantage of using 1980 as the base year was the availability of Census data, which serve as benchmarks for population, housing, and employment trends. In addition, the primary source of land use data -- the Orange County Land Cover Survey -- was compiled in 1980. This survey was conducted by the ' Environmental Systems Research Institute in cooperation with the County and Southern California Edison. The horizon year of the County's General Plan is 2010. All projections and analyses of physical and socioeconomic conditions in the county are keyed to this 30-year time frame. Table 2-1 contains a summary of population, housing and employment trends that are projected to occur during the study period. These projections are broken down by ten geographical areas called Regional Statistical Areas (RSAs). They are shown on Map 2-1. In addition, Chart 2-1 graphically illustrates the relationships between RSAs for the three variables. The source of the demographic projections is the Orange County Preferred-1985 (OCP-85) forecast, which was adopted by the Board of ' Supervisors on February 19, 1985. In addition to its use by all County agencies, OCP-85 is the County's official input to SCAG Regional Growth Forecast Policy. The OCP projections can be amended in the following ' ways: 1) concurrent with the processing of a project that is inconsistent with the projections; 2) through annual review as a part of the Development Monitoring Program; or 3) as part of the two-to three- year SCAG Regional Development Guide update process. , ' N-2-1 TABLE 2-1 ORANGE COUNTY DEMOGRAPHIC PROJECTIONS POPULATION HOUSING EMPLOYMENT RSA 1980a/ 2010b/ 1980a/ 2010b/ 1980a/ 2010b/ '« 249 165,400 52,454 59,800 55,200 86,400 36-A 168,782 202,300 64,578 80,900 1?5.600 37-H 338,682 389,200 124,875 145,700 146,000 212,000 38-I 321,137 378,900 119,038 150,900 90,300 133,500 39-F 170,644 257,400 74,920 112,500 146,800 237,200 40-D 134,696 279,800 66,072 134,600 32,600 109,900 z 41-B 116,686 245,900 39,276 86,200 54,900 94,200 N 42-G 377,316 488,800 130,103 167,400 211,600 336,100 N 43-C 95,954 242,300 32,885 93,500 17,400 62,800 44-E 52,564 181,100 17,313 69,200 60,000 172,800 COUNTY TOTAL 1,932,709 2,831,100 721,514 1,100,700 915,400 1,570,500 Sources: a/ 1980 Census County of Orange: OCP-85 Projections F' 1tPA40-8(1) 10/17/86 e� 1-B r 44-E� 43-C � y r �35 � ,�✓%� - � . Orange County Regional Statistical Areas - -- - - - = 2"; . . .. 460, 420, .. / so- 20 i/.i Jv • (NUMBERS ... Orange County • • • Economic • Another advantage of using 2010 as the horizon year for the General Plan is the availability of other planning studies that use a similar time ' frame. These studies include the Development Monitoring Program (DMP), the Areawide Fiscal Impact System (AFIS), the 208 Water Quality Plan, the Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP) and the Foothill Corridor ' Transportation Study. 2 Development Patterns and Trends During the past 20 years the focal point of Orange County's growth has shifted gradually southward. In the 1950s and 60s the majority of new development occurred in the northern areas of the county such as the cities of Anaheim, Fullerton, Orange, Westminster and Fountain Valley. ' During the 1970s, as vacant land became more scarce in these northern areas, the center of growth shifted to the south with the development of new communities like Irvine, Mission Viejo, and Laguna Niguel. For ' analytical purposes, North County is generally considered to be the area north and west of the Costa Mesa Freeway (State Highway 55) and contains RSAs 35-J, 36-A, 37-H, 38-I, 41-B, and 42-G. South County is represented by RSAs 39-F, 40-D, 43-C and 44-E. 1 Table 2-2 and Map 2-2 compare the projected population growth trends in the north and south portions of the county. During the 25-year study ' period, about 56 percent of the county's net population growth is projected to occur in the southern RSAs. Although the rate of growth in North County is declining, this area will still contain the majority of the county's population throughout the study period. In 1980, 77 ' percent of the county's 1,932,709 people lived in the northern RSAs. By 2010 it is expected that this figure will fall to 67 percent. ' The difference in growth between north and south becomes more apparent when the internal growth rates of the two areas are compared. Between 1980 and 2010, the population of the northern portion of the county is expected to grow by 391,649, or 26 percent. South County will add 506,742 persons during the same period; this represents an increase of 112 percent, however. ' The projected increase in the county's housing stock reflects the population trend identified above. (See Table 2-3 and Map 2-3. ) Due to a projected decline in the average household size from 2.68 to 2.57 persons per dwelling unit county-wide, the number of new units expected ' to be built between 1980 and 2010 represents a slightly higher percentage increase than that for the population itself. Consequently, while the county's population is projected to increase by 46 percent ' (898,391 persons) between 1980 and 2010, the housing stock is expected to increase by 52 percent (379,186 units) over the same interval. During the next three decades, the geographical distribution of new ' residential construction is expected to shift slightly toward South County. Just over half (58 percent) of the projected 379,186 new units built in the county between 1980 and 2010 are expected to be located in 1 N-2-5 TABLE 2-2 PROJECTED POPULATION GROWTH TRENDS NORTH COUNTY vs. SOUTH COUNTY 1980 - 2010 North County South County County Total 1980 2010 Change 19136 2010 Change 1980 2010 Change Total Population 1,478,851 1,870,500 +26% 453,858 960,600 +112% 1,932,709 2,831,100 +46% Pct. of Total 77% 66% -11% 23% 34% +11% 100% 100% - Population Z Growth - - 391,649 - - 506,742 - - 898,391 1 N 1 Pct. of Growth - - 44% - - 56% - - 100% Average Household Size 2.79 2.71 - 0.08 2.37 2.34 -0.03 2.68 2.57 -0.11 Notes: a/ Includes RSAs 35-J, 36-A, 37-H, 38-I, 41-B and 42-G Includes RSAs 39-F, 40-D, 43-C and 44-E Sources: 1980 Census County of Orange: OCP-85 Projections vLQ.;y� ^^ ^� ► P14A/Advance Planning Division PA40-8(2) 6290 � � � � � � �• � � � �' � � � � � � � � + 4 41-B \ _2010 �EIJ \ m go ��K�._��� __. z \yd 44-k 4- 37 H /� � /7 e» . XX d i 3-F \ of. a8| POPULATION SOURCE: orange county M A P By Regional Statistical Area O C P—8 5 2-2 TABLE 2-3 PROJECTED HOUSING GROWTH TRENDS NORTH COUNTY vs. SOUTH COUNTY 1980 - 2010 North Countya/ South County!/ County Total 1980 2010 Change 1980 2010 Liiatiyc i984 2010 Change Total Units 530,324 690,900 +30% 191,190 409,800 +114% 721,514 1,100,700 +53% Pct. of Total 74% 63% -11% 26% 37% +11% 100% 100% - Growth - - 160,576 - - 218,610 - - 379,186 z i N Pct. of Growth - - 42$ - - 588 - - 100$ Notes: a/ Includes RSAs 35-J, 36-A, 37-H, 38-I, 41-D and 42-G &/ Includes RSAs 39-F, 40-D, 43-C and 44-E Sources: 1980 Census County of Orange: OCP-85 Projections Orange County EMA/Advance Planning Division PA40-8(3) 6290 = M EM r M � M AW. r M- M m mom m r m m 4 2010 1 M� " 41-8 64000 1 LLOCS;80,006 DWILL02 6111TO P 38-A\ z77- 44-E 43-C T-H 42-G 35-J ` "r 39 •F 40-D 38-1 1 M. 1 HOUSING UNITS SOURCE: Orange County MAP By Regional Statistical Area OCP-85 2-3 the southern area. Although the northern portion of the county is ' growing much less rapidly than the south on a percentage basis, by 2010 nearly two-thir6s (63 percent) of all housing units will still be found in northern Orar..ge County. County employmer..t patterns are very similar to the population and housing distribt.tions described above. (See Table 2-4 and Map 2-4). As of 1980, 72 percent of the County's 915,400 jobs were located in Ncrth County. This is very similar to the population distribution identified in Table 2-2. Ly 2000, a moderate southward shift in the employment ' distribution is projected to occur. The magnitude of this shift is nearly equal to the anticipated shift in population and housing. south County is projected to receive about 50 percent of the new jobs created between 1980 anc. 2010. Again, this figure is similar to the projected growth in population and housing. Overall, the county's employment base is projected to grow faster than population, with a 72 percent gair. between 1980 anc. 2010. This rate of increase compares to a projected population growth of 42 percent during the same period. The growth patterns described above have obvious implications for environmental noise. Vith more population, and higher levels of commercial and industrial activity, the potential for adverse noise: impacts will increase. As vacant land is developed, natural buffer zones disappear. The trend toward higher-density residential development means that a larger population will, at least potentia:.ly, be affected within any given noise impact area. The result of there trends may lead to increasing conflicts between different types of land use activities. New technology may help to ameliorate these noise impacts. The neii generation of commercial jets which comply with the most rigorous noise standards of the: Federal Aviation Regulations is a significant exaiiple of this technology. In addition, there may be reductions in noise from motor vehicles. Man-made buffers will continue to replace open spiLce as noise attenuation measures. 3. Travel Demand Travel demand forecasts have been prepared by the County of Orange for various future 1:ime periods. Since the horizon year of the Genera:. Plan is the year 2010 estimates of the travel on freeways and arterial streets and highways are of particular concern. The Master Plan o ' Arterial Highways (MPAH) represents the system required to meet th'? ultimate development of the county. Those arterials that are required to meet development levels of the year 2000 will be developed for :hat time period. The Transportation Element identifies level of service assumptions for the operation of arterial highways. (See pages MPAH-A-1 and 2 in :he Transportation Element. ) These assumptions have been used in proj ?cting future noise levels. N-2-10 TABLE 2-4 PROJECTED EMPLOYMENT GROWTH TRENDS NORTH COUNTY vs. SOUTH COUNTY 1980 - 2010 North Countya/ South County!/ County Total 1980 2010 Change 1980 2010 Change 1980 2010 Change Total Employment 658,600 987,800 +50% 256,800 582,700 +127% 915,400 1,570,500 +72% Pct. of Total Employment 72% 63% -98 28% 37% +9% 100% 100% - z t Growth - - 329,200 - - 325,900 - - 655,100 N t Pct. of Growth - - 50% - - 50% - - 100% Notes: a/ Includes RSAs 35-J, 36-A, 37-H, 38-I, 41-B and 42-G b/ Includes RSAs 39-F, 40-D, 43-C and 44-E Sources: Orange County EMA/Advance Planning Division County of Orange OCP-85 PA40-8(4) 6290 2010 E0 41-B ...1=000 6— F.7 7 64000 0 I @LOCK:so.*"4008 43—C 37- 35-J 39-F 38- 40- EMPLOYMENT SOURCE: Orange County MAP A By Regional-gional StatisticalWea OCP-85 2-4 fib m � m, = no 1 - " m No ` Assumptions regarding the future of airports underlie the OCP-85 policy projections. they are as follows:* o John Wayne Airport will remain as the principal public carrier airport in the county. o Marine Corps Air Station E1 Toro and Marine Corps Air Station (Helicopter) Tustin will remain in government ownership and use during the period of these projections. Future levels of rail operations are derived from studies done by the Southern California Association of Governments. A high speed rail facility between Los Angeles and San Diego has not been included in these projections. C. The Nature of Sound rFor the purpose of this Noise Element, sound may be described as a disturbance in the pressure of the air. Sound waves propagate in a predictable manner from a source to a receiver or observer. A person listening to a sound converts the miniscule pressure variations to signals that may be interpreted in various ways depending on the person's individual perception of the sound. Sounds are often described by qualitative terms such as annoying or pleasant, loud or soft, noisy or quiet, or high-frequency or low-frequency. Qualitative judgments of a sound may generally be quantified by measurements of three primary quantities; amplitude, frequency, and temporal pattern or duration. o Amplitude in decibels (dB)**. The strength of a sound depends on the pressure exerted by the sound waves. The greater the pressure, the louder the sound. o Frequency, or pitch, in Hertz (Hz). High frequency sounds are produced by rapidly vibrating objects and low frequency sounds by slowly vibrating objects. o Temporal pattern or duration. The pattern and length of time associated within a sound. A sound pressure level of zero decibels corresponds, approximately, to the faintest sound perceptible, on the average, by persons with excellent hearing. Human judgments of the noisiness of a sound depend on the overall level of the sound, the distribution of sound pressure level with frequency, and the duration of the sound (or series of sounds). *The full set of assumptions is contained in Appendix C of the Land Use Element. **NOTE: words or phrases that are defined in APPENDIX A - DEFINITIONS AND ACRONYMS, are underlined the first time they occur in this section. N-2-13 1 1 1 As a result of extensive laboratory experiments and experience in the Uiited States and in other countries, it has been found that use of a frequency- ' weighted sound pressure level provides measurements which correlate well with judgments of the noisiness or annoyance of a sound. That frequency weighting is, by international agreement, called the A-frequency weighting or A-weighting. A-weighting reduces the amplitude of the low frequency components of a sound relative to the mid- and high-frequency components. For the purpose of assuring compatibility between the long-term outdoor noise level and projected, or actual, land uses, the measures of noise level referred to in this Noise Element are either the A-weighted Community noise Equivalent Level (CNEL), in decibels, or a time-average equivalent sourd level, also in deci'els. Everyday sounds normally range from 30 decibels (very quiet) to 100 decibels ` (very loud). Chart 2-2 shows Community Noise Equivalent Levels from a variety of noise sources. The values range from 35 decibels in the qu:.et of a wilderness to approximately 85 decibels in noisy environments. The transmission of sound involves three components: source, transmis:>ion path, and receiver. These sound components are not independent, but a-e subject to interaction. For example, a person (source) will raise his voice if he is aware that his listener (receiver) is hard of hearing. To reduce the noise level inside a dwelling from the effects of a high-noise source - traffic or.. a road, for example - either the source can be modified (by adding sound-absorbing material inside the engine compartment) or the transmission path can be adjusted by taking such measures as installing a wall or berm or providing structural modifications such as double-glazed windows and well-sealed doors in the dwelling. The documented effects of excessive noise on people range from annoyance and inconvenience to temporary or permanent hearing loss. But, as the EnNiron- mental Protection Agency* notes, the problems associated with noise ale much more widespread: Except for the serious problem of hearing loss, there is no human illness known to be directly caused by noise. But throughout dozens of studies, noise has been clearly identified as an important cause of physical and psychological stress, and stress has been directly kinked with many of our most common health problems. Thus, noise can be associated with may of these disabilities and diseases, which include heart disease, high blood pressure, headaches, fatigue and irrita)ility- Noise is also suspected to interfere with children's learning and with ' normal development of the unborn child. Noise is reported to have triggered extremely hostile behavior among persons presumably suffering from emotional. illness. It is suspected to lower our resistance, in some cases, to the onset of infection and disease. *EPA, NOISE: A Health Problem, August 1978, page 23. N-2-14 1 • In view of the limitation on our state of knowledge concerning noise, and the variability of human response to noise, the inaction of community noise programs is a difficult process. The search for meaningful standards must distinguish between what is merely interesting information and what is truly useful knowledge for the protection of the community welfare. A number of factors affect the measurement and control of noise sources. There are thousands of permanent stationary noise sources and several hundred thousand mobile noise sources within nearly any area. Transmission characteristics of sound are directly affected by the size, shape, and density of the thousands of barriers, structures, and topographical features in the county. Complicating the transmission paths is the fact that localized meteorological conditions may distort the sound wave in unpredictable ways. For these reasons, the Noise Element is concerned with the major predictable sound sources such as airplanes, highways, and railroads as well as certain stationary sources. Considerations of the distortions of sound by natural and man-made features were only generally considered in the evaluation and mapping of the noise impacted areas in the context of this Element. It is for these reasons that elsewhere in this document "worst case" assumptions have been made. Thus, there are noise levels at which a detailed acoustical analysis on a project-specific basis is required. In general, this occurs if there is any question about the noise impacts associated with a development proposal. (See Section C in Chapter Three.) D. Characteristics of the Existing Noise Environment Noise is generated by numerous sources which are found near places where people both live and work. Of particular concern are those sources generating noise levels above the prevailing background noise level. the most common mobile noise sources in the county are transportation- related (automobiles, trucks, motorcycles, railroads, and aircraft). Motor vehicle noise is of concern because it is characterized by a high number of individual events, which often create a sustained noise level, and because of its proximity to areas sensitive to noise exposure. Rail and aircraft operations, though infrequent, may generate extremely high noise levels that can be disruptive to human activity. Aircraft noise appears to produce the greatest community anti-noise response, although the duration of the noise from a single airplane is much less, for example, than that from a freight train. Of the airports and air stations in Orange County, only two have a significant impact on unincorporated areas - MCAS. El Toro and John Wayne Airport (JWA). Other facilities have significant impacts only on incorporated areas, for which the various cities have responsibility. The primary focus of Noise Element Amendment 1979-2 was on the area surrounding MCAS, E1 Toro. As a result of that action, a policy implementation line was defined which corresponded to the Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL) contour of 65 decibels. Other CNEL contours were N-2-15 1 also plotted, but the key ones are the 65-decibel line and the 60-decibf:l noise referral zone boundary. The basis for the 65-decibel CNEL line i:: the Air Installation Compatible Use Zone (AICUZ) Study. Noise contours tend to be very broad estimates of sound levels. In actuality, contour lines float over a defined area. Therefore, the use of zones provides a better method than contour lines for reflecting the tree varying nature of sound. However, in order to promote equitable and consistent noise/land use determinations, the policy implementation line has been adopted around MCAS, El Toro. The lines correspond to the CNEL contours in effect at the time of their adoption (October 10, 1979). Tiese contours were projected based on an assumption of 72,000 annual operations. That number reflects an increase over the actual 1979 level. nevertheless, the policy implementation lines remain fixed as to location until modified by a Noise Element Amendment. In February, 1985, the Board of Supervisors adopted the John Wayne Airport Master Plan (AMP) and the Santa Ana Heights Land Use Compatibility Program (LUCP). The Airport Master Plan includes an ultimate limit of 73 average daily departures (AEDs) for most commercial jet operations. In preparing the LUCP a projected 65 decibel CNEL noise contour reflecting expected future flight level: and a reasonable mix of aircraft types was utilized. This contour, referred to as the Project Case and depicted in EIR 508 (prepared jointly for the AMP and LUCP), was approved by the Board of Supervisors as the implementation line for two noise compatibility proirams: Purchase Assurance etnd Acoustical Insulation. It was also utilized in the preparation and Board adoption of a land use plan (Land Use Element ani Community Profile amendments) for unincorporated areas of Santa Ana Heights. This contour line remains fixed as to location until modified by a Noi.ve Element Amendment. Consideration of a future revision to the Project Case Contour would probably occur subsequent to full implementation of Phas(! II of the JWA Master P:_an. Map 2-5 depicts the current noise contours which surround John Wayne A:.rport and MCAS, E1 Toro, :is well as the policy implementation line for both facilities. Map 2-'5 also represents the future levels of aircraft noi::e because of the assumption of 72,000 operations per year established as a part of the amendment in 1979. (See the AICUZ> study for MCAS, E1 Toro for details.) This map also depicts the Project Case Contour for John Way:ie Airport as adopted ':)y the Santa Ana Heights Land Use Compatibility Pro:,ram and the John Wayne .Airport Master Plan. Precise noise contour maps ar.e available from the Environmental Management Agency (EMA) which depict these two areas with the nap accuracy standards that are required for project- specific evaluations. Information in the section that follows includes typical noise contours as projected for traffic on arterial highways. Figure 2-1 shows typical :ross- sections of arterial highways, which depict how noise levels vary with distance and speed. Figure 2-2 is a generalized view of how noise from the assumed speed and volume of traffic might be affected by topography or by man-made features. The intent is to portray typical measures which may N-2-16 reduce the "worst case" noise impact area. (Note: Figures 2-1 and 2-2 have been prepared only for illustrative purposes. They are not intended to represent noise control policy. ) Map 2-6 shows the facilities on the MPAH. Those that existed in 1980, in unincorporated areas, have estimated noise contours shown. Map 2-7 is a similar map depicting conditions expected in the year 2000. The contours are based on assumptions related to the speed and volume of traffic that is a worst case. Heavier traffic at a lower speed or lighter traffic at a higher speed would each result in a smaller area impacted (i.e. , narrower contours). Standard rights-of-way have also been assumed. r N-2-17 1 CHART 2-2 CNEL in [lecibels Outdoor Location -90- AkxV Side a Busy Freeway �— 3/4 Mile From Touchdown at Major Airport -80- Downtown With Some Construction Activity Urban High Density Apartment -70- Urban Row Housing on Major Avenue -61?' Old Urban Residential Area I - -6,�_ Wooded Residential -C Agricultural Crop Land Rural Residential Wilderness Ambient _a c, Examples of Outdoor Community Noise Equivalent Level,, Measured at Various Locations Based on: U.S. Envircaunental Protection Agency.Protective Noise Levels.Condensed Version of t EPA Levels Doisunent' 1878, Figure 4. r N-2-18 r r M m r m m mom M M lMx 1b, ""' ere+wr,o eawr. fit Z3 Z b `f�• �'�• . �� et' �AG'b ttR{,tl �� ti' Y O h 't '!f�• � jS�C �3�t�� a r��j/r� �: � � ��f'y ��.s;� 'i{ ♦I�'if�r.r-'Yi�, l `��?`r Y3 R.�/�,r' �5� ;• �,i�y �y j w,` �� f!r Mtn/ Y.j(• r 7� '�f�!,V,�y It �' r r RO t:1;l � �k� ti,�i `'Y�,�'!iC '��J,,�•�' ��S�l,t �t�� t k TO MCAs` . 72 QD it �; ".- zi�H,e .y � xi . �,:�ar a` •o ,,� ix r R�, :;} P 3'•�3'>�i.r'���' t �.c�.ty�� � ��lR f '���.�i �, ,l,,t i' r►. ��( ` t:tT � f.r•.'i L' 1 V •i ,4 Y-, ti 7�3,'j[f"" f ve 1'AI%i ti ti .fry`.L,1•.a•��:�t ��art� f ��`�'r ��J7!`• r Incorporated Area m x Generalized Community Noise Equivalent Level. (CNEL) Contours From Air FacilitiesJ.-4. Figure 2-1 Effect of Speed on Community Noise Equivalent Levels rt so 66 70 i 70 86 80 dB CNEL t t 40 MPH VW t q 80 I 70 I 0 86 610 dB CNEL hi 35 MPH 1 z I N 1 0 80 6,5 '0 8p dB CNEL 25 MPH _— w o' too' zoo 60' try" PRIMARY ARTERIAL HIGHWAY 30,000 Average Daily Traffic NOTES: Calculations based on hard site, flat terrain, lWangle of view, standard County truck/auto mix, 0-2%roadway gradient, roadway at level of service C, and no contributions from other noise sources. V Center Line ROW: Riot-of-Way Line c• r rir rr� �r rr r r r r rs it rr r r r� r r r � Figure 2-2 Typical Noise Mitigation Measures 4, 1 st�u�tu>� 1 1 1 i PoJtPuaFt OR WALL INT�RV�fJING Z yrRu�-tuR� N N 1 1 1 4. � d�i'RJ:55�D V-AR' W 13,5KH ALI&NMENT maT TO 5GALE Generalized Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL) Contours Fro, Existing Arterial Highways 2-6 a - ' ►�� ► �� *• *•� �t OD CD 06 CD 0 M Ar k'j CD o �.� co NO ti, Under the assumptions, the 70-decibel CNEL contour for secondary and pr:.mary arterials falls within the right-of-way, if not within the roadway itse..f. Those contours are nit depicted on Maps 2-6 and 2-7 for clarity of , presentation. Their addition would not serve to depict residential areas so impacted and would only clutter the maps further. The CNEL resulting from the noise produced by many sources is not depicted. Thus, there are separate maps for each major source. Also, only an approximation has been made in the vicinity of intersections. Community noise in such areas is a complex phenomenon and can be evaluated only by detailed measurements and analysis of the noise at a specific location of interest. Map 2-8 depicts noise contours for through railroad facilities in the unincorported parts of the county. The contours are based on only a mcdest increase in the level of railroad operations. At the General Plan level of detail, there is no real difference in the location of the contours for the years 1980 and 2000. The contours plotted represent levels of activit} for the year 2000. Thus, 1980 lines would be slightly inside those shown cn Map 2-8. The location cf the contours for the year 2000 would require recalculation if there were a significant shift in rail activity. As noted above (on page N-2-1.3 a new high speed rail facility between Los Angelus and San Diego is not one! of the assumptions underlying the Noise Element. Other noise sources in a community include industry, construction, and people and are often referred to as "fixed" sources. Industrial noise generated by processing and operations, is usually of long duration at relatively low frequencies. Construction noise sources (diesel engine:;, air compressors, electr:.c motors, etc. ) generate noise for extended period:; of time with intermittent high noise levels. Population noise represents the noise generated by Human activity in the community. Sources include air conditioners, lawn mowers, radio/stereo/television, sports arenas, sch)ols and other entertainment and commercial activities. In general, the control of noise from these sources is addressed in the County Noise Ordinalce which is administered by the County's Health Care Agency. E. Estimates of Affected Population Table 2-5 contains the estimates (existing and future) of population residing in the potential noise-impacted areas. It must be stressed that these estimates are based on unmitigated situations, so that the number of people actually affected will be less depending on mitigation measures employed. This table is based on data from the 1980 census of Population and Housing data and from OCP-III' projections of dwelling units, usk in conjunction with the maps previously described. Standard factors for the population per household were applied to derive the population estimates. Once again, it must be stressed that this represents a "worst case" situation. NOTE: (') Table will be updated to reflect OCP-85 in subsequent amendment. N-2-24 1 TABLE 2-5 1 POPULATION POTENTIALLY AFFECTED BY COMMUNITY NOISE EQUIVALENT LEVELS (In Thousands) 70 decibels 65 decibels 60 decibels and higher and higher(') and higher(Z) SOURCE 1980 2000 1980 2000 1980 2000 Roads 4 19 18 100 51 258 Rail * * 3 3 4 4 ' Air 4 5 9 27 42 140 Composite(3) 5 20 25 120 80 37 * Less than one thousand people Notes: ( ') Includes those potentially impacted by more than 70 decibels. (Z) Includes those potentially impacted by more than 65 decibels. (3) Composite value is not a total in that certain areas are impacted by more than one source. r N-2-25 Areas are those potentially affected by CNEL of 60 or more decibels . Unincorporated area only. Not for analytical use. Typical Area u — o i �. 65 Z N \ �,� / > 1 ;,, yr;� �•� `.. � .� ,` �- • r ,\ - 1, ,'";�' � � : ; ;'` `�• •>! \ •a l \4 1, i 1' �: Generalized Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL) Contours �Ap Fror Through Railroads For Year 20"0 � w Ir r �r r r ws r �■r wr �llr �Ii� Ir r Ir r Iw r 1 CHAPTER THREE: ANALYSIS OF FUTURE CONDITIONS ' A. Overview By the year 2010, the horizon year of this Element, there will be more people in Orange County, more economic activity, and more traffic of all types. Increased development will lead to more transportation facilities. Overall, the county will exhibit higher population densities. All of these factors will lead to situations in which a greater number of people will reside in areas potentially subject to higher noise impacts. For the unincorporated area of Orange County, a relatively high percentage of this development will have occurred subsequent to the adoption of land use-noise compatibility policies and standards (the Noise Element was originally adopted in 1975). As a result, more of the dwellings, offices, ' and other inhabited structures will have been built in accordance with the policies and standards that are contained in this Noise Element. ' B. Analysis of Future Conditions An estimate of the potential population residing in noise impacted areas was prepared and presented above (on page N-2-25). That estimate represents the maximum number of people likely to live in those areas. The usefulness of the estimate is for comparative, rather than absolute evaluations. The actual number of affected residents will be less (and probably significantly less), although there will be some Orange County residents who will reside in areas that are noisier than is desired. Some of the factors that may influence how many people actually will live in noisy areas are discussed in the paragraphs that follow. ' Some planning constraints exist. Local jurisdictions have control over only some factors which influence the level of noise in an area. Noise compatible land use planning and the discretionary review of project applications are probably the best noise prevention and control tools available to the County. However, these mechanisms are of limited effectiveness in dealing with those instances in which a pre-existing noise- land use incompatibility exists. Unless a development proposal involving a discretionary approval is made, there are no mechanisms to ensure that corrective action will be taken. The structure of the county's economy could change significantly. While this is a remote possibility within the time horizon of the Noise Element, such shifts are conceivable. If so, there could be new sources of communi.r_y ' noise. Similar changes could occur in the temporal work patterns associated with the local economy. If more multiple work shifts were to occur, then the proportion of traffic occurring during the evening (7 - 10 p.m. ) or night (10 p.m. - 7 a.m.) time periods may increase. While these changes would probably have a beneficial effect on peak period traffic congestion, they could increase Community Noise Equivalent Levels due to the additional weight given to noise that occurs during the evening and nighttime periods. ' It is ,also possible for the level of activity at Marine Corps Air Station, El Toro to increase significantly, in response to changes in the world situation. N-3-1 r . Technological changes are a possibility as they relate to transportation facilities. Reductions in the noise from automobiles and trucks are certainly possible. Quieter tires or quieter engines could each lead t.o a , significant reduction in the areas affected by noise from arterial highways. Neither of these tcpics is subject to local control nor are the effect:: of local influence very great. As a result, the assumption made in this , document is that the noise levels associated with the current vehicle :sleet are the appropriate ones to use. When conclusive evidence is availably? that supports different assumptions, then they will be incorporated in a subsequent amendment to this Element. A similar set of uncertainties exists as relates to noise characteristics of future generations of aircraft, both civilian and military. Once again, the assumptions utilized here will be changed when the characteristics and utilization rates of such new aircraft are known. Another technological change that may have an impact on the future noise environment is the role of telecommunications in the lifestyle of county residents. If thei.e should be a significant substitution of communications for transportation., then the traffic volumes and the level of noise from , arterial highways might be less than forecast. Careful attention to, and observation of, changing traffic patterns will be required prior to adjusting the community noise estimates. A final technologi.=al factor is the absolute accuracy of the estimates of future noise environments. Analytical models used to develop estimates will be improved as new evidence becomes available. The accuracy of the dz.ta base will be improved by the acquisition of new data through various national and international efforts. When improved analytical models i.re available, it may be appropriate to recalculate the noise contours contained in this document. ' There are fiscal constraints which affect the future noise environmen-: as well. Attenuation measures all have a cost associated with them. Those that are to be paid for by public agencies (such as acoustical barrie::s along freeways or arterial highways) must compete for scarce resource:; with other public needs. Cost considerations are particularly critical fo: retroactive improvements. , C. Noise Referral Zones The noise contour:: depicted on the maps in Chapter Two of this Element reflect transportation noise sources (i.e. , arterial highways, rail lines and airports) which are, and are expected to remain, major sources of noise in unincorporated areas of Orange County. , The contours shown on the maps indicate noise-affected areas which constitute Noise Referral Zones for purposes of this Element. Such a zone is defined as that area with a -:otal noise environment of 60 decibels Community Noise Equivalent Level 1;CNEL) or more. It is the level at which either State or Federal laws and :standards related to land use become important and, in some cases, supersede :Local laws and regulations. Any development proposed which may be impacted by a CNEL from a combination of all noise sources eqtaling 60 or more decibels rill be evaluated on a project specific basis. N-3-2 As explained in Chapter Two, the contour maps for railroads and arterial highways depict a "worst case" situation. As used here, "worst case" means the maximum area that might be impacted, given that: (a) no sound absorbing or attenuating effects of topography or man-made features have been considered; and, (2) the contours reflect operation of the facilities at ' their design level (which may be greater than the current level of traffic and may be less than that generated if the facility were upgraded after adoption of this Element). The Noise Referral Zone boundaries for John Wayne Airport and for the Marine Corps Air Station, E1 Toro are based on a set of specific assumptions that are discussed in Chapter Two (see p. N-2-13). The boundaries are not based on generalized, "worst case" assumptions. The intent of the Noise Referral Zone is to act as a triggering mechanism or flag for development proposals in areas potentially adversely affected by ' high noise levels. If a development proposal falls within a Noise Referral Zone, it will be subject to evaluation and review to determine whether the project is indeed within an area where the CNEL is 60 or more decibels. ' It is during this initial evaluation of a project that the effect of existing development, topographic features, or other such noise attenuation measures is considered, although at a very general level of detail. ' Acoustical analysis reports shall be prepared in any instance where there is the possibility of unacceptable noise impacts. Thus, unless it can be shown with certainty that the project is outside the area that has a CNEL of 60 or ' more decibels, an acoustical analysis report will be required. I 1 r LC:tk 2102009511318 N-3-3 (Revised) ' CHAPTER FOUR: OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES A. Overview This chapter contains the key objectives and assumptions that have guided ' the development of the Noise Element. They are either explained fully or are referenced with information as to where a full explanation can be found. As noted in Chapter Two, a unifying characteristic of all assumptions is that they are consistent with those used in other elements of the General Plan. B. Objectives, Assumptions and Definitions ' A key objective of this Noise Element is to ensure that each county resident's quality of life is not affected adversely by high noise levels. Thus mitigation of noise is of paramount importance. Noise affects all land uses. Residential uses are the most noise sensitive because of structural design, 24-hour per day duration of use and because ' such uses typically need, and are designed to incorporate, outdoor living areas. Other noise sensitive uses include schools, hospitals, and places of worship. While mitigation of the effects of excessive noise in enclosed or interior areas is feasible (if expensive), it becomes more difficult for ' outdoor areas (particularly for aircraft noise sources). In general, any development that results in a situation where there is an unacceptable level of noise in any living area (interior or exterior) must be mitigated or the project or use revised to avoid the conflict. Aircraft noise as it affects outdoor living areas* is particularly critical ' because it is generally impracticable to provide sufficient noise control to achieve an acceptable noise environment. ' *Outdoor living area is a term used by the County of Orange to define spaces that are associated with residential land uses typically used for passive recreational activities or other noise-sensitive uses. Such spaces include patio areas, barbecue areas, jacuzzi areas, etc. associated with residential uses; outdoor patient recovery or resting areas associated with hospitals, convalescent hospitals, or rest homes; outdoor areas associated with places of worship which have a significant role in services or other noise-sensitive activities; and outdoor school facilities routinely used for educational purposes which may be adversely impacted by noise. Outdoor areas usually not included in this definition are: front yard areas, driveways, greenbelts, 1 maintenance areas, and storage areas associated with residential land uses; exterior areas at hospitals that are not used for patient activities; outdoor areas associated with places of worship and principally used for short-term social gatherings; and, outdoor areas associated with school facilities that are not typically associated with educational uses prone to adverse noise impacts (for example, school play yard areas). N-4-1 TABLE 4-1 ' COMPATIBILITY MATRIX FOR LAND USES AND 'OMMUNITY NOISE EQUIVALENT LEVELS , (CNEL) 65+ decibels CNEL 60 to 65 decibel:: CNEL , TYPE OF USE Residential 3a, b, a 2a, e , Commercial 2c 2c , Employment 2c 2c Open Space Local 2c 2c Community 2c 2c ' Regional 2c 2c Educational Facilities Schools (R through 12) 2c, d, e, 2c, d, Preschool, college, other 2c, d, a 2c, d, i! Places of Worship 2c, d, a 2c, d, , Hospitals General 2a, c, d, a 2a, c, 1, e , Convalescent 2a, c, d, a 2a, c, 1, e Group Quarters la, b, c, a 2a, c, e , Hotels/Motels 2a, c 2a, c Accessory Uses Executive Apartments la, b, a 2a, e Caretakers la, b, c, a 2a, c, e Note: See Table 4-2 ::or definitions of the entries in this table. , N-4-2 , 1 1 TABLE 4-2- EXPLANATION AND DEFINITIONS ON TABLE 4-1 ' ACTION REQUIRED TO ENSURE COMPATIBILITY BETWEEN LAND USE AND NOISE FROM EXTERNAL SOURCES ' 1 = Allowed if interior and exterior community noise levels can be mitigated. 2 = Allowed if interior levels can be mitigated. 3 - New residential uses are prohibited in areas within the 65-decibel CNEL ' contour from any airport or air station; allowed in other areas if interior and exterior community noise levels can be mitigated. The prohibition against new residential development excludes limited 'infill' development within an established neighborhood. ' STANDARDS REQUIRED FOR COMPATIBILITY OF LAND USE AND NOISE ' a = Interior Standard: CNEL of less than 45 decibels (habitable rooms only). b - Exterior Standard: CNEL of less than 65 decibels in outdoor living areas. c - Interior Standard: Leq(h)=45 to 65 decibels interior noise level, depending on interior use. d = Exterior Standard: Leq(h) of less than 65 decibels in outdoor living areas. e = Interior Standard: As approved by the Board of Supervisors for sound events of short duration such as aircraft flyovers or individual passing railroad trains. ' KEY DEFINITIONS Habitable Room - Any room meeting the requirements of the Uniform Building Code or other applicable regulations which is intended to be used for sleeping, living, cooking or dining purposes, excluding such enclosed spaces as closets, pantries, bath or toilet rooms, service rooms, connecting corridors, laundries, unfinished attics, foyers, storage spaces, cellars, utility rooms and similar spaces. Interior - Spaces that are covered and largely enclosed by walls. Lie (h) - The A-weighted equivalent sound level averaged over a period of 'h' hourEr An example would be Leq(12) where the equivalent sound level is the average over a specified 12-hour period (such as 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m.). ' Typically, time period 'h' is defined to match the hours of operation of a given type of use. Outdoor Living Area - Outdoor living area is a term used by the County of Orange ' to define spaces that are associated with residential land uses typically used for passive recreational activities or other noise-sensitive uses. Such spaces include patio areas, barbecue areas, jacuzzi areas, etc. associated with residential uses; outdoor patient recovery or resting areas associated with hospitals, convalescent hospitals, or rest homes; outdoor areas associated with ' places of worship which have a significant role in services or other noise sensitive activities; and outdoor school facilities routinely used for educational purposes which may be adversely impacted by noise. Outdoor areas usually not included in this definition are: front yard areas, driveways, greenbelts, maintenance areas, and storage areas associated with residential land uses; exterior areas at hospitals that are not used for patient activities; outdoor areas associated with places of worship and principally used for short- term social gatherings; and, outdoor areas associated with school facilities that are not typically associated with educational uses prone to adverse noise ' impacts (for example, school play yard areas). N-4-3 Noise sensitive lard uses are defined as those specific land uses which have associated indoor z.nd/or outdoor human activities that may be subject to stress and/or significant interference from noise produced by community sound sources. Such human activity typically occurs daily for continu•)us periods of 24 hours: or is of such a nature that noise is significantly disruptive to activities that occur for shorter periods. Specifically, ' noise sensitive land uses include: residences of all types, hospitals, rest homes, convalescent: hospitals, places of worship and schools. Development in this: context refers to the initial development of land from , an unimproved state, to the redevelopment of land in which one use is replaced by another, or to a significant intensification in an existing use (e.g. , replacing a single family dwelling unit with a four-plex). These types of development are the ones on which the County takes discretionary action. Table 4-1 depicts major uses in terms of noise sensitivity. For the purpose of complying with the Table 4-1 criteria, the noise from all sources will be combined and rated in terms of Community Noise Equivalent ' Level (CNEL). For multiple noise sources, all sources can either be mathematically combined or the CNEL rating can be calculated in the following manner. A primary, or loudest, noise source will be identified. All other sources dill then be considered secondary noise sources. Secondary noise sources that are at least 10 decibels less than the primary source can be considered to have an acoustically insignificant effect on the noise level rating and therefore will not need to be included in the CNEL calculations. If -the primary source requires abatement to comply Witt. Table 4-1 requirements, then the abated CNEL rating for the primary source Fill be used to determine the significance of any secondary source. For example, if , the primary source is 75dB CNEL and requires abatement to 65dB CNEL, then any secondary source of 55dB CNEL or less can be considered acoustically insignificant. Th,arefore, a secondary source of 60dB CNEL would requ .re abatement to a 55d:3 CNEL rating thereby making that acoustically ' insignificant. Residential land use is the most sensitive because of the nature of activities which occur over a 24-hour period as well as the generally accepted need for, and design incorporating, outdoor living areas. ' An upper CNEL limit of 65 decibels was chosen above which noise is ex :remely annoying. Previous policy decisions by the Board of Supervisors have endorsed the 65-decibel CNEL as the critical sound-level criterion in guiding planning decisions for sensitive land uses. ' As a result of action by the County Board of Supervisors on Noise Eleisent Amendment 1979-2, a policy implementation line was defined which corresponded to the 65-decibel CNEL contour projected around MCAS, E1 Toro. As a result of the Board of Supervisors adoption of the Santa Ana Hei„hts Land Use Compatibility Plan (LUCP) a projected 65 decibel CNEL noise :ontour was adopted for John Wayne Airport reflecting expected future flight levels and a reasonable mix of aircraft types. The policy implementation lines can only be changed as part of a Noise Element Amendment. The County als) has a regular program of monitoring noise in the vicinity of John Wayne Airport. ' The noise monitoring program is used to provide supporting data to colfirm applicability of the fixed policy implementation lines. The locations of other CNEL contours are plotted for both of these facilities, as well. The N-4-4 ' 60-decibel CNEL contour is the boundary of the noise referral zone. The other contours are not as important for land use planning purposes since key ' development policies are not based upon them. All new residential uses, schools, places of worship and convalescent ' hospitals are generally incompatible within the 65-decibel CNEL policy implementation line as defined for MCAS, El Toro and within the 65-decibel CNEL contour for any other airport or air station or for any other source of noise. These uses normally require outdoor living areas for functional or therapeutic purposes or, in the case of nearly all residential projects, to afford the full life style that is the goal of the County's General Plan. For these reasons, the ability to mitigate the effects of noise on these ' outdoor living areas is of paramount importance. Since it is generally impracticable to mitigate aircraft-induced noise in outdoor living areas, such uses are normally incompatible. Noise sensitive uses which have no outdoor living areas may be compatible. These uses shall be considered compatible if and only if all standards contained in this element are met. Non-noise sensitive uses are compatible so long as interior noise levels meet the policies and standards established by this Noise Element. ' C. Implementation Policies The policies listed below help guide the implementation of the Noise 1 Element. They provide the link between the noise-related goals of the General Plan (which are found in Component I of the Advance Planning Program) and the programs that have been designed to accomplish the goals. ' Tables 4-1 and 4-2 were derived from the policies that are contained in narrative form in this chapter, from state requirements and standards and from other policies of the Board of Supervisors that relate to noise ' environments. The tables are meant to convey, in objective terms, the compatibility of, and standards for, the integration of land use planning and either calculated or measured noise environments. Three general types of noise-impact and noise-mitigation situations can be identified and related to the noise environment. First are those situations where a new use is being proposed that is impacted by an existing noise source. "New" in this context refers both to the initial development of land from an unimproved state and to the redevelopment of land in which one use is replaced by another. This is the most common situation and is typified by a residential tract adjacent to, and impacted by, noise from an ' arterial highway*. Mitigation of project noise through project design in this situation is clearly a preventative approach to assure compatibility of land use with long-term outdoor noise. ' *An arterial highway, as long as it is shown on the Master Plan of Arterial Highways, may exist in its ultimate form, may exist in a partial configuration ' or may only be planned. Designation of the arterial highway on the plan and the traffic and noise projections which accompany this designation are, in this context, the "existing noise source." ' N-4-5 1 A second situation occurs when an existing use is impacted by a new or expanded source of noise. This situation is typified by general planning of a new transportation facility close enough to existing uses to have noise impacts on them, or the expansion of such a facility beyond currently planned levels. Again, noise mitigation through project design is a ' preventative approa,:h in that noise/land use incompatibilities are avoided. This situation is one in which the project proponent is obliged to mitigate the impacts of the :.iew source of noise. For the first two situations, the applicable standards are depicted on , Tables 4-1 and 4-2. In the first situation, any project that is approved must meet the standards specified through appropriate noise mitigation , measures, or the project must be modified to ensure consistency with the Noise Element. In the second situation, there must be a similar appli,:ation of noise mitigations or other steps taken by the project proponent to ,avoid the inconsistency. In either case, the acceptable levels of noise in affected areas are as specified on Tables 4-1 and 4-2. The third situation is one in which land uses and noise sources were established prior to adoption of noise policies and standards and are thus rendered incompatible "after the fact." (The noise Element's initial ' adoption was in 1975.) This situation is one in which existing uses are located within noise impact areas from existing sources. In most instances, these inconsistenc`.es predate both the current knowledge of, and concern for, the deleterious effects of noise and the resulting statutes (e.g. , the 1 California Environmental Quality Act and planning laws related to loce.l general plans). Remedial action would be required to obtain consistency with the Noise Element's standards identified on Tables 4-1 and 4-2. Such ' action would lead to retroactive compatibility. While County policy stresses the desirability of such steps, they are voluntary on the part of individual property owners or project proponents. i 1 1 1 1 N-4-6 ' 1 Policy Statements ' 1. Intergovernmental Cooperation To cooperate with other County agencies and levels of government to bring about a comprehensive and coordinated effort to reduce noise levels. ' 1.1 To recommend needed changes in Federal and State legislation which will be effective in reducing noise and can be efficiently administered. ' 1.2 to cooperate in efforts to develop mechanisms to assure coordination of all governmental jurisdictions in the field of noise control. , These policies involve cooperative efforts with other jurisdictions in order to achieve greater compatibility between noise and land uses. They acknowledge the ' regional aspects of many noise-related issues. They are implemented primarily through existing cooperative mechanisms such as Southern California Association of Governments and the County Supervisors Association of California. ' 2. Public Information and Notification To disseminate public information regarding noise and programs to reduce noise levels and their impacts. 2.1 To provide information to the public regarding the health effects of high noise levels and means of mitigating such levels. ' 2.2 To provide information regarding Noise Referral Zones and noise attenuation measures to developers and the public. 2.3 To cooperate with industry to develop public information programs on noise abatement. 2.4 To require that prospective purchasers or end users of property be notified of overflight, sight and sound of routine aircraft operations by all effective means including: (a) Requiring new residential subdivisions which are located within the 60-decibel CNEL noise contour or is subject to overflight, sight and sound of aircraft operating from MCAS, ' El Toro or John Wayne Airport to have such information included in the State of California Final Subdivision Public Report. ' (b) Requiring that Declaration and Notification of Aircraft Noise and Environmental Impacts be recorded and available to prospective purchasers or end users of property located within the 60-decibel CNEL noise contour for any airport or air station or is subject to routine aircraft overflight. N-4-7 r (c) Requiring an Avigation Easement across property that is within ' the 6C-decibel CNEL noise contour for any airport or air staticn or is subject to routing aircraft overflight. , (d) Requiring the posting of noise impact notification signs in all sE.les offices associated with new residential development ' that is located within the 63-decibel CNEL contour from zmy airport or air station. (e) Any ol:her appropriate means as specifically directed by -:he , Board of Supervisors. These policies are implemented at various stages of the development review , process. The intent of this section is to utilize the most efficient mean; of providing appropriate noticing. Thus, some of these steps occur at the tract map stage; others at the building permit stage. General information is also included in the Community Profiles, Component III of the Advance Planning Program. 3. Transportation System Noise Control , To encourage the control of noise from transportation systems as the most efficient and effective means of reducing noise at the source . 3.1 To enforce noise sections of the State Motor Vehicle Code. 3.2 To encourage the State to require adequate noise suppression , devices (mufflers, etc.) for all motor vehicles operated within the County. 3.3 To restrict the use of trail bikes, mini-bikes and other off.-road ' motor vehicles in areas of the county except where designated for that purpose. 3.4 To study .:ommercial truck movements and operations in the county ' and establish truck routes away from noise-sensitive areas where feasible. 3.5 To encourage development of a mass multi-modal transit system with reduced noise emission characteristics. 3.6 To review the Federal Railroad Noise Standards of 1974 for Fossible ' adoption by Orange County. 3.7 To contir..ue the current policy of encouraging the use of no'.se , reducing modifications to jet engines and the use of quieter jet aircraft at John Wayne Airport. 3.8 To emplo-y noise mitigation measures in the design of new ar :erials , consistent with funding capability and to support efforts b;1 the State Department of Transportation for remedial acoustical protection for existing highways where needed by the County. , N-4-8 ' Since the County has little direct control over vehicle noise-level standards, cooperative efforts with state and federal offices are important. In those ' instances where the County is directly involved (usage in county parks, for example), these policies are implemented through ordinances and operating procedures. ' 4. Noise Monitoring and Abatement To monitor noise levels, adopt and enforce noise abatement programs. ' 4.1 To enforce the County's Noise Ordinance to prohibit or mitigate harmful and unnecessary noise within the County. ' 4.2 To encourage Orange County cities to adopt the County's model noise ordinance. ' 4.3 To develop and enforce standards in addition to those presently included in the Noise Ordinance to regulate noise from construction and maintenance activities and commercial, public, and industrial ' land uses. 4.4 To consider noise reduction as a factor in the purchase of County maintenance equipment and the use of such equipment by County contractors and permittees. 4.5 To require that noise from motors, appliances, air conditioners, ' and other consumer products does not disturb the occupants of surrounding properties. 4.6 To continue identification of noise-producing sources, such as helicopter operations, as part of subsequent amendments to the Noise Element. 1 These policies are implemented jointly by the County Health Services Agency and the Environmental Management Agency through the Noise Ordinance, and by the General Services Agency in its procurement process for new and replacement vehicles and equipment. ' 5. Noise/Land Use Planning Integration To fully integrate noise considerations in land use planning to prevent new noise/land use conflicts. 5.1 To utilize the criteria of acceptable noise levels for various types of land uses as depicted on Tables 4-1 and 4-2 in the review of development proposals. ' 5.2 To prohibit new residential land uses within the 65-decibel CNEL contour from any airport .or air station. 5.3 To limit new non-residential noise-sensitive land uses that are ' within a 65-decibel CNEL area from any source. Noise sensitive land uses will be permitted if, and only if, appropriate mitigation measures are included such that the standards contained in this ' N-4-9 Element and in appropriate State and Federal Codes are met. Specifically, non-residential noise-sensitive land uses incline: ' hospitals, rest homes, convalescent hospitals, places of worsLip and schools. 5.4 To stress the importance of building and design techniques in future site planning for noise reduction. 5.5 To utilize. the California Noise Standards for Airports in planning ' for areas surrounding military as well as civilian airports. These policies are implemented at different stages in the review of projects on , which the County takes discretionary action. Tables 4-1 and 4-2 succinctly depict the County policies related to land uses and acceptable noise levels. The tables are the primary tools which allow EMA to ensure integrated planning for compatibility between land uses and outdoor noise. 6. Noise Sensitive Land Uses To identify and employ mitigation measures in order to reduce the impact ' of noise levels and attain the standards established by the Noise Element, for both interior areas and outdoor living areas for noi::e sensitive land uses. , 6.1 To encourage all property owners within the identified Noise Referral Zones to acoustically insulate all living quarters. This ' will be optional to the property owner. 6.2 To contir..ue enforcement of Chapter 35 of the Uniform Building Code, currently adopted edition, and the California Noise InsulatiDn ' Standard!: (Title 25 California Administrative Code). 6.3 To require that all new residential units have an interior noise ' level in living areas that is not greater than 45 decibels CNEL with it being understood that standard construction practices reduce the noise level by 12 decibels CNEL with the windows open and 20 decibels CNEL with the windows closed. Higher attenuation ' than listed above may be claimed if adequate field monitorir.g or acoustical studies are provided to and approved by the County. 6.4 To require that all new residential units have an interior 1loise ' level in habitable rooms that does not exceed acceptable le,rels as caused by aircraft fly-overs or as caused by individual pas:;ing railroad trains. ' 6.5 All outdoor living areas associated with new residential uses shall be atter..uated to less than 65 decibels CNEL. 6.6 To urge the use of acoustical insulation programs for schools located in the county, and where subject to County approval, to insure that new buildings for school uses meet state and local ' acoustical standards. N-4-10 ' 6.7 To apply noise standards as defined in the Noise Element for noise- sensitive land uses. These policies also are reflected in Tables 4-1 and 4-2. They are implemented in all phases of project review. 1 ' tk 21016 101614260452 N-4-11 i d X eH i�i W a �� ��, �� �:. :;'. f �, !�: ,.� ,. i t � � ��' � � � � � � � � � � i � � � � � � •i I , I APPENDIX A - DEFINITIONS AND ACRONYMS ADD - Average Daily Departure - is computed on an annual basis, from April 1 of each year to March 31 of the following year ("the Plan Year"). One ADD is ' equal to 365 departures by Class A or Class AA aircraft (') during each Plan Year (or 366 departures in any "leap year"), subject to any adjustments which may result from the implementation or enforcement of any County regulation for JWA or the Judgment of the United States District Central District of California for the Commercial Airline Access Plan for JWA (except that no ADD shall consist of more departures in a Plan Year than there are days in that year). ' ADT - AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC - Usually an annual average value which reflects the total number of vehicles of all types which travel on a particular link of ' an arterial highway. AICUZ - Air Installation Compatible Use Zone - Acronym for a study conducted to determine zones in which land uses around aircraft facilities operated by ' branches of the Department of Defense will be compatible with the long-term average sound levels produced by the various types of aircraft operated from the facility. For MCAS E1 Toro, the AICUZ study was conducted for the ' Department of the Navy and yielded contours of community noise equivalent level around the air base. AIRCRAFT FLYOVER - This term is defined as any aircraft which is measurable by a standard sound level meter using an A-weighted filter, set on a "slow" response. ALUC - Airport Land Use Commission. A-WEIGHTED SOUND LEVEL - The ear does not respond equally to all frequencies, , but is less efficient at low and high frequencies than it is at medium or speech range frequencies. Thus, to obtain a single number representing the sound level of a noise containing a wide range of frequencies in a manner representative of the ear's response, it is necessary to reduce the effects of the low and high frequencies with respect to the medium frequencies. The resultant sound level is said to be A-weighted, and the units are decibel (dB). A popular method of indicating the A-weighted units is dBA. Sound level meters have an A-weighted network for measuring A-weighted sound level. CNEL - Community Noise Equivalent Level (see below). COMMUNITY NOISE EQUIVALENT LEVEL - (CNEL) The 24-hour average A-weighted sound level, in decibels, obtained after addition of five decibels to those sound levels occurring in the three evening hours from 7:00 P.M. to 10:00 P.M. and ten decibels to those sound levels occurring in the nine nighttime hours from ' 10:00 P.M. to midnight and from midnight to 7:00 A.M. When Community Noise Equivalent Level is measured, it is not necessary that the measurement period begin at midnight. Thus, CNEL takes into account people's lower tolerance to ' noise during evening and nighttime periods. The State Department of Aeronautics and the California Commission of Housing and Community Development have adopted the CNEL ' (')The ADD classification is based on the noise emission characteristics of the aircraft. ADD's of a particular class are the basis for allocating flights to commercial air carriers operating at JWA. ' N-A-1 DECIBEL (dB) - Thf? unit of any acoustical level such as sound pressure level or sound power level, with or without frequency weighting. The decibel is ' measured on a logarithmic scale with respect to a standard reference value. The symbol for de=ibel is dB. dBA - A-weighted sound level (see definition above). ' EQUIVALENT SOUND LEVEL - In decibels, time average of instantaneous Jk-weighted sound pressure over a period of time, the duration of which shall be stated. ' The Symbol is Leq. FREQUENCY - The number of times per second that a sound pressure sigial oscillates about the prevailing atmosphere pressure. The unit of frequency is ' the hertz. The abbreviation is Hz. HABITABLE ROOM: Any room meeting the requirements of the Uniform Building Code , or other applicable regulations which is intended to be used for sleeping, living, cooking or dining purposes, excluding such enclosed spaces as closets, pantries, bath or toilet rooms, service rooms, connecting corridors, laundries, unfinished atticn, foyers, storage spaces, cellars, utility rooms ar.d similar ' spaces. HERTZ - Unit of measurement of frequency, numerically equal to cycles per , second. Hz - Hertz (see iefinition above). Leq - Equivalent Sound Level (see definition above). ' Leq h) - The A-weighted equivalent sound level averaged over a period of "h" ' hou s. An example would be Leq(12), where the equivalent sound level is the average over a specified 12-hour period (such as 7:00 A.M. to 7:00 P.M.). Typically, time period "h" is defined to match the hours of operation of a given type of use. LOUDNESS - The =udgment of intensity of a sound by a human being. Loudness depends primarily upon the sound pressure of the stimulus. Over much of the ' loudness range '.t takes about a threefold increase in sound pressure (approximately A decibels) to produce a doubling of loudness. NOISE - Unwanted sound. The State Noise Control Act defines noise as ". . .excessive widesirable sound. . ." (sec. 46022). NOISE ATTENUATIJN - The ability of a material, substance, or mediwa to reduce the noise level from one place to another or between one room and ;another. Noise attenuation is specified in decibels. NOISE CONTOUR - A line on a map connecting points of equal noise level. J ' NOISE REFERRAL ZONE - Such zones are defined as the area within the contour defining a Community Noise Equivalent Level exceeding 60 decibels. It is the , level at which either State or Federal laws and standards related to land use become important and, in some cases, supersede local laws and regulations. Any development proposed which may be impacted by a total noise envircnment from a , combination of all noise sources equaling 60 or more decibels CNEI, will be evaluated on a project specific basis. N-A-2 ' �v+�lF-.- _-�-: '"-^x.--. ...r,-.---" -. .. ......:-..... ..r_ ..._.. -.- •-•_•_ - - - -- -- - -ems NOISE-SENSITIVE LAND USE - Those specific land uses which have associated ' indoor and/or outdoor human activities that may be subject to stress and/or significant interference from noise produced by community sound sources. Such human activity typically occurs daily for continuous periods of 24 hours or is of such a nature that noise is significantly disruptive to activities that 1 occur for shorter periods. Specifically, noise sensitive land uses include: residences of all types, hospitals, rest homes, convalescent hospitals, places of worship and schools. ' OCP-III - Orange County Preferred III - The projections of future population and housing that are used in all County planning projects. ' OUTDOOR LIVING AREA - Outdoor spaces that are associated with residential land uses typically used for passive recreational activities or other noise- sensitive uses. Such spaces include patio areas, barbecue areas, jacuzzi ' areas, etc. associated with residential uses; outdoor patient recovery or resting areas associated with hospitals, convalescent hospitals, or rest homes; outdoor areas associated with places of worship which have a significant role in services or other noise-sensitive activities; and outdoor school facilities ' routinely used for educational purposes ;which may be adversely impacted by noise. Outdoor areas usually not included in this definition are: front yard areas, driveways, greenbelts, maintenance areas and storage areas associated ' with residential land uses; exterior areas at hospitals that are not used for patient activities; outdoor areas associated with places of worship and principally used for short-term social gatherings; and, outdoor areas associated with school facilities that are not typically associated with ' educational uses prone to adverse noise impacts (for example, school play yard areas). POLICY IMPLEMENTATION LINE (MCAS, El Toro) - A line adopted by the Orange County Board of Supervisors in 1979 which corresponds to the location of the 65-decibel CNEL contour projected for MCAS, E1 Toro based on a total of 72,000 annual operations. POLICY IMPLEMENTATION LINE (John Wayne Airport) - A line adopted by the Orange County Board of Supervisors in 1985 which coincides with the predicted location of the 65-decibel CNEL contour for John Wayne Airport based on 73 Class A (100-89.5 decibel level aircraft) Average Daily Departures (ADD). RETROFIT - Retroactive modification of an existing building to increase its noise attenuation or the modification of an existing machine to reduce its output of noise. SCAG - Southern California Association of Governments - The regional planning agency for our region. SOUND INSULATION - (1) The use of structures and materials designed to reduce ' the transmission of sound from one room or area to another or from the exterior to the interior of a building. (2) The degree by which sound transmission is reduced by means of sound insulating structures and materials. SOUND LEVEL (NOISE LEVEL) - The weighted sound pressure level obtained by use of a sound level meter having a standard frequency-filter for attenuating part of the sound spectrum. N-A-3 SOUND LEVEL METER - An instrument, comprising a microphone, an amplifier, an output meter, and frequency-weighting networks, that is used for the ! measurement of noise and sound levels in a specified manner. WAVELENGTH - For a periodic wave (such as sound in air), the perpendicilar , distance between analogous points on any two successive waves. The wavelength of sound on air or in water is inversely proportional to the frequency of the sound. Thus, the lower the frequency, the longer the wavelength. ! 1 i 1 . 1 1 ! ! 1 1 1 LC:tk 1 1121220190287 N-A-4 55 t HOUSING ELEMENT 1 L � r � Z � ADVANCE PLANNING PROGRAM 1 O a r ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT AGENCY i i COUNTY OF ORANGE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Y� 77 II F, Harriett M. Wieder Chairman . ' Second District Roger R. Stanton Gaddi H. Vasquez First District Third District 1993 _ a� r k{ n d William G. Steiner Thomas F. Riley FOUrth District Fifth District a COMPONENT II ADVANCE PLANNING PROGRAM HOUSING ELEMENT County of Orange Environmental Management Agency Advance Planning Division September 14, 1993 Board of Supervisors Resolution No. 93-1006 i ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION Michael Potts First District Shirley Commons-Long Second District Clarice Blamer Third District Chuck McBurney Fourth District Thomas Moody Fifth District 13NVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT AGENCY ~ Michael M. Ruane Director, EMA Thomas B. Mathews Director of Planning Joan S. Golding Manager, Advance Planning Division Robert Aldrich Chief, Element Planning Section Cindy Lomas Project Manager, H 89-1 Mark Morgan Project Manager, H 93-1 HOUSING ELEMENT CHRONOLOGY H 92-1 (B/!; Reso. No. 93-1006) - September 14, 1993 ' H 89-1 (B/;; Reso. No. 89-0961) - June 21, 1989 H 86-1 (B/:; Reso. No. 86-0779) - June 11, 1986 H 85-1 (B/:; Reso. No. 85-1284) - August 28, 1985 ' H 84-1 (B/;> Reso. No. 84-0587) - April 25, 1984 H 83-1 (B/,S Reso. No. 83-0759) - May 18, 1983 H 80-1 (B/S Reso. No. 80-0208) - February 6, 1980 H 79-1 (B/S Reso. No. 79-0161) - January 31, 1979 H 71-1 (B/S Reso. No. 71-1136) - October 6, 1971 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Chapter One: Introduction H 1-1 A. Overview H 1-1 B. Purpose and Scope of the Element H 1-1 C. Relationship to Other Elements H 1-2 1. Component I: Long-Range Planning Framework H 1-2 2. Component II: The General Plan Elements H 1-2 3. Component III: Community Profiles H 1-3 D. Related Planning Activities H 1-3 1. Orange County Projections - 1988 Demographic Forecast H 1-3 2. Federal and State Housing Programs H 1-3 3. Regional Housing Plan H 1-4 Chapter Two: Inventory of Existing Conditions and Future Trends H 2-1 A. Introduction H 2-1 B. County Growth Trends H 2-1 1. Overview H 2-1 2. Population, Housing, and Employment Growth Trends and Projections H 2-3 1� C. Population Characteristics H 2-14 1. General Characteristics H 2-14 2. Household Characteristics H 2-15 3. Special Needs H 2-17 D. Housing Stock Characteristics H 2-24 1. Structure Type and Tenure H 2-24 2. Overcrowding Status H 2-25 3. Condition of Housing Stock H 2-25 -f- TABLE OF CONTENTS (cont.) Page E. Housing Cost H 2-26 1. Existing Home Pr':ces H 2-26 2. Financing Costs H 2-26 3. Housing Costs vs. Ability to Pay H 2-26 4. Residential Energy Costs H 2-27 F. Regional Housing Needs Assessment H 2-27 1. Current Needs H 2-31 2. Future Needs H 2-31 Chapter Three: Potential Constraints on Housing Developnent and Improvement H 3-1 A. Land Use Controls, 'wand Availability and Suitable Sites H 3-1 1. Land Use Controls: Public and Private H 3-1 2. Adequacy of Residential Land Approvals and Inventory of Residential Sites H 3-3 3. Agricultural Preserves H 3-4 B. Site Improvement Requirements, Fees and Exactions H 3-4 1. Grading H 3 2. Historic Sites H 3 �f 3. Regional Park ,and Open Space Requirements H 3-1 4. Archaeological/Paleontological Sites H 3-5 5. Landscaping Requirements H 3-5 6. Parks and Recreation Requirements H 3-6 7. Transportation Facilities Requirements H 3-6 8. Site Development Standards H 3-6 C. Building Code and Enforcement H 3-6 -ii- TABLE OF CONTENTS (cont.) Pam. D. Processing Requirements H 3-7 E. State-imposed Requirements H 3-7 1. California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) H 3-7 2. Article 34 H 3-9 3. Building Energy Standards for Residential Development (Title 24) H 3-10 F. Cost of Land, Construction and Financing H 3-10 1. Cost of Land H 3-10 2. Construction Costs H 3-10 3. Financing Costs H 3-11 Chapter Four: Goals, Quantified Objectives and Policies H 4-1 A. Goals H 4-1 B. Quantified Objectives H 4-1 1. New Construction H 4-2 2. Existing Units Rehabilitated and Conserved H 4-4 C. Policies H 4-5 1. Housing Supply and Residential Choice Policies H 4-5 2. Equal Housing Opportunities Policies H 4-7 3. Housing Conservation and Neighborhood Preservation Policies H 4-8 4. Housing Conservation and Coordination Policies H 4-8 �. Chapter Five: Implementation Programs H 5-1 A. Underlying Principles H 5-1 B. Program Descriptions H 5-1 1. Aftercare Rental Assistance Program H 5-2 -iii- TABLE OF CONTENTS (cont.) Page 2. Block Grant Home Improvement Program H 5-3 3. Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program H 5-4 4. Consistency Review Program H 5-5 5. Countywide Homeless Family Transitional Housing Initiative H 5-6 6. Development Processing System Review H 5-7 7. Federal Housing :?rograms H 5-8 8. Homeless Issues coordination H 5-9 9. Housing Development Finance Program H 5-11 10. Housing Discrimination/Affirmative Action H 5-12 11. Housing Element Periodic Review and Update H 5-13 12. Housing Opportunities Program H 5-14 13. Housing Referral. Directory H 5-1( 14. Infrastructure Provision and Financing H 5-1,' 15. Intergovernmental Advocacy with HUD/FHA H 5-111 16. Land Acquisition for Housing H 5-11) 17. Neighborhood Development and Preservation Program H 5-2) 18. Residential Energy and Hater Conservation Retrofit H 5-21 19. Section 8 Existing Rental Assistance Program H 5-22 20. State of California Housing Programs H 5-24 21. Stewart McKinney Homeless Assistance Act H 5-:.5 22. Tax-exempt Housing Revenue Bonds H 5-26 23. Preservation of Assisted Rental Units Program H 5-1 7 -iv- TABLE OF CONTENTS (cont.) Appendices Page A. List of Abbreviations H A-1 B. Land Inventory and Site Availability H B-1 C. Orange County Agencies Involved in Housing Development, Improvement or Assistance H C-1 D. Housing Opportunities Program: Policies and Guidelines H D-1 E. Energy Conservation: Building Energy Standards (Title 24) H E-1 F. Housing Element Review and Evaluation H F-1 G. Preservation of Assisted Rental Units Program H G-1 H. Board of Supervisors Resolution H H-1 Tables Page 2-1 Population Growth Trends: Orange County, California, United States, 1900-2010 H 2-2 2-2 Projected Population Growth Trends, North County vs. South County. 1980-2010 H 2-5 2-3 Orange County Population Trends by RSA, 1980-2000 H 2-7 2-4 Projected Housing Growth Trend North County vs. South County, 1980-2010 H 2-8 2-5 Orange County Housing Stock Trends by RSA, 1980-2000 H 2-9 2-6 Projected Employment Growth Trends North County vs. South County, 1980-2010 H 2-10 2-7 Orange County Employment Trends by RSA 1980-2120 H 2-12 2-8 Comparison of Jobs to Housing Balance by RSA, 1983-2000 H 2-13 2-9 Orange County Median Family Income H 2-16 2-10 Price Distribution of Existing Single Family Detached Home Sales - Orange County, July-August 1988 H 2-28 2-11 Monthly Payments and Household Income Required to Purchase a Median-priced New Home in Orange County, Attached vs. Detached H 2-29 TABLE OF CONTENTS cont. Page ` 2-12 Residential Rent Index 1978-1988 Los Angeles/Orange County MSAs H 2-30 2-13 Household Income by Selected Monthly Owners Costs as Percentage of Income: Owner-occupied, Non-condominium Housing Units, Orange County and California, 1979 H 2-32 2-14 Household Income by Gross Rent as Percentage of Income: Renter Occupied Housing Units: Orange County California, 1979 H 2-33 2-15 Tenure by Average Monthly Residential Energy Costs as Percentage of Income - Orange County, 1979 H 2-34 2-16 Regional Housing Needs Assessment for Unincorporated Orange County, 1988 H 2-35 4-1 Quantified Objectives: July 1989-June 1994 H 4-3 B-1 Residential Land Inventory: Orange County Unincorporated Area, 1989 H B-2 B-2 Residential Land Inventory: Orange County Unincorporated Islands, 1988-1994 H B-7 F-1 Housing Performance Summary: Orange County Unincorporated Area, July 1982 - June 1988 H F-8 F-2 Progress in Implementing Housing Element Program Objectives H F-9 F-3 Coastal Zone Housing Approvals with Affordable Housing Requirements: Orange County Unincorporated Area, 1982-1988 H F-15 F-4 Coastal Zone Demolitions and Conversions: Orange County Unincorporated Area, 1982-1988 H F-15 G-1 Inventory of Assisted Low-Income Rental Units with Expiring Affordability Restrictions (July 1989 - June 1994) H G-1 H-1 Inventory of Assisted Low-Income Rental Units with Expiring Affordability Restrictions (July 1994 - June 1999) H G-2 Maps 2-1 Orange County Regional Statistical Areas H 2-4 B-1 Planned Communities with Affordable Requirements H B-9 B-2 Redevelopment Areas H B-10 -vi- TABLE OF CONTENTS (cont.) Page B-3 Annexations/Incorporations 1987-1994 H B-12 Figures 3-1 Comparative Development Processing Time Limits H 3-8 E-1 Prescriptive Packages for Climate Zone 8: Non-coastal Orange County H E-3 HBM:mbm/tk 2051808464000 -vii- CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION A. Overview The state legislature has found that the availability of housing in a suitable living environment is of vital statewide importance and a priority of the highest order. The legislature also charges local government with the responsibility to address this priority while considering economic, environmental, and fiscal factors, and community goals set forth in the General Plan. The fundamental goal of the Housing Element is to promote the provision of a wide variety of housing opportunities to meet the needs of all economic segments of the community. While this goal is a high priority, it must be achieved while maintaining internal consistency among the other elements of the General Plan as required by state law. The Housing Element is divided into five chapters. The first chapter provides an overview of the scope and purpose of the Housing Element. Chapter Two is an inventory of existing and projected growth; growth-related development patterns; and the regional and local housing needs assessment. Chapter Three considers governmental and non-governmental opportunities for and impediments to the maintenance, improvement and development of housing. Chapter Four focuses on the County's goals, quantified objectives and policies with regard to the provision of housing. Chapter Five contains descriptions of the County's implementation programs. The appendices provide reference material for the Housing Element as well as in-depth discussion of the Housing Opportunities Program, a voluntary program for provision of affordable housing. B. Purpose and Scope of the Element The Housing Element is the comprehensive statement by Orange County government to the public of its broad and specific commitments to facilitate the development of housing in the unincorporated area. These commitments are expressed within an integrated framework of goals, policies and programs. The goals of the element are primarily based on state law, assessment of shelter needs, and identified opportunities for and constraints on the development and improvement of housing. The policies and programs of the element, taken together, form an implementation strategy to meet the goals established. As such, the element serves to guide and direct local government decision-making in all shelter-related matters. It should be noted that the General Plan (each of its nine elements) is a land use policy document and does not address social service issues. The line between these two areas is not always distinct, however, and it is the County's policy to avoid conflicts between land use and social service programs whenever possible in order to maximize the overall effectiveness of these efforts. �. H 1-1 State Government Code Section 65588(a) provides that each local government shall review its housing element as frequently as appropriate to evaluate the following: o the appropriateness of the housing goals, objectives, and policies in ' contributing to the attainment of the state housing goal. o the effectiveness of the housing element in attainment of the community's housing goals and objectives. o the progress of the local agency in implementation of the housing element. It is also the purpose of this element to outline the findings of this evaluation and any revisions to existing policies and programs that ar'e adopted in response to these findings. _ C. Relationship to Other Elements The Advance Planning Program is composed of three components each with a focused time frame and geographic area. 1. Component I: Long-Range Planning Framework Component I provides the long-range planning framework and genera]. goals for the jkdvance Planning Program. Included within this document are broad housing goals that provide a basis for the more specific: goals and polii:ies contained in the Housing Element. 2. Component II: The General Plan Elements The General Plan addresses a 15- to 20- year time frame. Component II consists of the nine elements of the General Plan, including the Housing Element. The Housing Element is implemented by developing various coordinated programs that support and carry out its goals, quantified objectives and policies. At the time of its adoption, the Housing Element is the most current Expression of County housing policies and achieves internal consistency with other General Plan elements by: a. Utilization of the same socioeconomic projections and assumpl:ions as in other County planning documents. b. The pursuit of major goals such as balanced land use. This ;;oal is intended to encourage a balance within each regional statistical area (RSA) of housing, employment, shopping, recreation and civic uses to serve the needs of residents. Thus, in balanced communities, land use and transportation policies are integrated through this common goal. H 1-2 ic. Identifying contradictory goals or policies within different elements of the General Plan. For example, an Open Space Element may strive to preserve maximum acreage for open space or recreational uses while the Housing Element may strive to maximize acreage available for housing production. 3. Component III: Community Profiles The Community Profiles are the most detailed portions of the Advance Planning Program. They are short-range in scope and focus on community-level policies and programs. The Community Profiles provide general information on housing density which can be used as a reference point for identifying areas of possible affordable units. D. Related Planning Activities 1. Orange County Projections-1988 Demographic Forecast Orange County Projections-1988 (OCP-88) contains projections for population, housing, and employment. The projections, which are adopted by the Board of Supervisors, provide a single data reference for policy-making and program planning as per direction by the Board of Supervisors (Minute Order of August 9 1988). OCP-88 is used throughout the General Plan (e.g. , Land Use, Housing, and Transportation elements). Moreover, the projections are used by the Orange County Transportation Commission, Orange County Transit District, and other County agencies for all long-range planning and budgeting activities. Regional statistical areas (RSAs) are the geographic units used for the development of these policy projections. The projections are then disaggregated to community analysis areas (CAAs) for the purpose of performing Development Monitoring Program (DMP) analyses. The DMP analysis is conducted by the County Administrative Office in order to determine the impact of existing and projected development on infrastructure facilities and fiscal resources. The CAA projections are then disaggregated by EMA to the traffic analysis zone level for transportation planning efforts. OCP-88 served as the County's official input to the SCAG Regional Growth Forecast Policy. The Growth Forecast Policy is implemented through SCAG's regional planning activities, project review, and coordination with city, county, state and federal governments. The adopted growth forecast is utilized in the development of the Air Quality Management Program and the Regional Transportation Plan, which are mandated by federal and state law. 2. Federal and State Housing Programs In recent years, the federal government has eliminated or substantially reduced a number of Department of Housing and Urban H 1-3 Development (HUD) programs. The future role of the federal government ' in housing and community development activities is expected to decrease or remain constant at best in the near term due to federal budget constraints. The County's efforts to provide and maintain housing for low-income households is heavily dependent upon federal and state grants since direct financial. subsidies are generally required to serve this need. Federal program:; which the County participates in include Section F Existing Rental Assistance (including Section 8 Certificate and Section 8 Voucher) and Community Development Block Grant (CDBG). State programs include the CDBG Nonentitlement Program, California Housing Finance Agency (CHFA) tax-exempt mortgage revenue bonds, California Housing Assistance Service Grants, the Predevelopment L)an Program, and the Aftercare Rental Assistance Program. These programs are discussed in Chapter 5. 3. Regional Housing Plan The Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) determines regional housing need and the share of the regional need to be addressed by Orange County. A key element in SCAG's housing role is the Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA). The RHNA identifies current and projected five-year housing needs within the SCAG region. Factors considered in determining the regional housing need are market demand, employment opportunities, the availability of suitable sites and public facilities, commuting patterns, and the needs of farmworkers. The regional need, once determined is then distributed to each jurisdiction in the SCAG region, each of which receives '.ts "fair share allocation" of the overall regional need. The RHNA iiust be considered and incorporated into the Housing Element's assessiaent of housing need. As the regional planning and coordinating agency, SCAG prepares the Regional Housing Element, which is a plan and strategy for meeting housing needs in the region as a whole. The Los Angeles/Orange County/Rivers:ide/San Bernardino urbanized area constitutes a sirgle housing market and a regional approach such as provided by SCAG is essential if the housing elements of local jurisdictions are to be realistically related to regional housing market forces. CTL:ltPA01-299/9177 i 9011200220754 H 1-4 i CHAPTER TWO: INVENTORY OF EXISTING CONDITIONS AND FUTURE TRENDS A. Introduction The purpose of this section of the Housing Element is to examine the current conditions and the manner in which future growth is expected to be influenced by the policies of the Housing Element and other General Plan elements. This review is divided into several sections. The first presents a synopsis of county growth trends and projections of future levels of population, housing, and employment. The following sections identify current characteristics of the county's population, housing stock, and the local housing market. The final section briefly touches upon current and future needs as presented in the Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA). B. County Growth Trends 1. Overview One of the most noteworthy attributes of Orange County has been its dramatic growth. From its beginnings as an agricultural region, the 1 county's economic emphasis has steadily shifted to high-technology and financial operations, first as a suburb of Los Angeles and later as an important urban center. The County's population growth can best be put into perspective by comparing it to California and the nation as a whole (see Table 2-1). Between 1900 and 1980, the United States as a whole grew at an average compound rate of 1.4 percent per year while the State of California increased an average of 3.5 percent each year. In Orange County, however, the population gained an average of 5.9 percent annually, more than four times the national average. The post-war decades between 1950 and 1970 were years of spectacular growth for the county. In 1950 just over 216,000 persons lived here; by 1970 the population had growth to over 1.4 million. Since 1970, Orange County's growth rate has dropped off substantially, although it still has exceeded state and national growth rates. Population projections for the county anticipate this decline in the rate of increase to continue through 2010. After the turn of the century Orange County's growth rate should parallel the state as a whole. For analytical purposes, the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) has divided its six-county region into geographic 1 units called regional statistical area (RSAs). Orange County's ten RSAs are shown on Map 2-1. Most of the demographic and economic analyses presented in the following sections refer to data at the RSA level. H 2-1 TABLE 2-1 Population Growth Trends Orange County, California and United States 1900-2010 Population Annual Growth Rate Year Orange Co. Caliornia U. S. Orange Co. California U. S. 1900 19,696 1,435,053 75,994,575 - - - 1910 34,436 2,377,549 91,972,266 5.7 4.8 1.9 1920 61,375 3,426,861 105,710,620 5.9 3.7 1.4 1930 118,674 5,677,251 122,775,046 6.8 5.2 1.5 1940 130,760 6,907,387 131,669,275 1.0 2.0 0.7 1950 216,224 10,586,223 151,325,798 5.2 4.4 1.4 1960 703,925 15,i17,204 179,323,175 12.5 4.0 1.7 1970 1,420,386 19,971,069 203,302,031 7.3 2.4 1.3 1976 1,772,094 N.A. N.A. 3.8 N.A. N.A.. 1980 1,932,709 23,667,902 226,504,825 2.2 1.7 1.3 1985 2,130,000 26,365,000 239,279,000 2.0 2.3 1.1. 1990 2,302,100 28,771,000 250,410,000 1.6 1.8 0.9 1995 2,463,800 30,956,000 260,138,000 1.4 1.5 0.19 2000 2,599,200 32,853,000 268,266,000 1.1 1.2 O.'i 2005 2,718,800 34,546,000 275,604,000 0.9 1.0 0. 5 2010 2,833,800 36,277,000 282,575,000 0.8 1.0 0. 5 Note: Growth rates represent average annual compound rates of increase. Sources: U.S. Census California Department of finance Orange County Preferred-88 Forecast EMA/Advance Planning Division H 2-2 There are several advantages to using RSA data in planning studies: consistent geographic areas are maintained, allowing comparisons between different time periods; the RSAs are small enough to ensure relative homogeneity within areas and to identify major sub-regional differences; and data coordination is possible with other agencies and studies such as SCAG, the County Administrative Office's Development Monitoring 1 Program (DMP) and Areawide Fiscal Impact System (AFIS), and the Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP). This type of intergovernmental coordination helps to improve the effectiveness of the planning process. Host of the demographic projections used in the County General Plan, including the Housing Elements, are based upon the Orange County Preferred-88 (OCP-88) forecast. These projections were adopted by the Board of Supervisors on August 9, 1988. The OCP forecast can be amended in several ways: concurrent with the processing of a project that is inconsistent with the projections; through annual review as part of the Development Monitoring Program; or as part of the SCAG Regional Development Guide update process. 2. Population, Housing, and Employment Growth Trends and Projections a. Population Distribution Patterns During the past 20 years the focal point of Orange County's growth has shifted gradually southward. In the 1950s and 160s the majority of new development occurred in the northern areas of the County such as Anaheim, Fullerton, Orange, Westminster and Fountain Valley. During the 1970s, as vacant land became more scarce in these northern areas, the center of growth shifted to the south with the rise of new communities like Irvine, Mission Viejo, and Laguna Niguel. For analytical purposes, North County is generally considered to be the area north and west of the Costa Mesa Freeway (State Highway 55) and contains RSAs 35-J, 36-A, 37-H, 38-I, 41-B, and 42-G (see Hap 2-1). South County is represented by RSAs 39-F, 40-D, 43-C and 44-E. Table 2-2 highlights the projected population growth trends in the north and south portions of the county. The source of these figures is the OCP-88 forecast. During the 30-years study period about 56 percent of the county's net population growth is projected to occur in the southern RSAs. Although the rate of growth in north county is declining, this area will still contain the majority of the county's population throughout the study period. In 1980, 77 percent of the county's 1,932,709 people lived in the north. By 2010, it is expected that this figure will fall to 66 percent. �i The difference in growth between north and south is made more apparent when the growth rates of the two areas are compared. Between 1980 and 2010 the population of the northern portion of county is expected to increase by 393,949, a gain of 27 percent. South County will add 507,142 persons during the same period representing a growth of 112 percent. H 2-3 �� • `���W TABLE 2-2 PROJECTED POPULATION GROWTH TRENDS NORTH COUNTY vs. SOUTH COUNTY 1980 - 2010 North Countya/ South Countyb/ County Total 1980 2010 Change 1980 2010 Change 1980 2010 Change Total Population 1,478,851 1,872,800 +27% 453,858 961,000 +112% 1,932,709 2,833,800 +47% Pct. of Total Population 77% 66% -11% 23% 34% +11% 100% 100% - Growth - - 393,949 - - 507,142 - - 901,091 Pct. of Growth - - 44% - - 56% - - 100% Average Household Size 2.79 2.70 -0.09 2.37 2.34 -0.03 2.68 2.52 -0.16 Notes: a/ Incldes RSAs 35-J, 36-A, 37-H, 38-I, 41-B and 42-G b/ Includes RSAs 39-F- 40-D, 43-C and 44-E Sources: 1980 Census County of Orange: OCP-88 Projections Orange County EMA/Advance Planning Division CL:1tPA01-299/9180 9030608312513 H 2-5 b. Population Trends by RSA Table 2-3 identifies recent and projected growth trends in population for each of Orange County's ten RSAs. Subtotals are a' so provided for the incorporated and unincorporated portions of the county. As can be seen from the table RSAs 37-H (Anaheim), 38-I (North Coast) and 42-G (Santa Ana) are the most heavily populated areas of Country. The eastern and southern areas (RSAs 40-D, 41-B, 43-C and 44-E;t are expected to register the largest gains, however, both in percentage terms and raw numbers between 1980 and 2010. Even with their larger growth increments, these rapidly developing areas are still expected to contain fewer people in 2010 than most of the northern and central RSAs. c. Housing Distribution Patterns The projected increase in the housing stock reflects the population trend identified above (see Tables 2-4 and 2-5). Due to a decline in average household size from 2.68 to 2.52 persons per dwelling unit countywide, the number of new units expected to be built between 1980 and 2010 represents a slightly higher percentage increase than for the population itself. Consequently, while tLe county's population is projected to rise by 47 percent (901,091 persons) during this period, the housing stock will increase by 53 percent (381,986 units) over the same interval. The spatial distribution of new residential construction is expected to be skewed. toward south county. About 57 percent of the new units built in the: county between 1980 and 2010 are expected to be located in the southern area. Although the northern portion of the county is growing rauch less rapidly than the south on a percentage basis, by 2010 nea;:ly two-thirds (63 percent) of housing units will still be found in the northern RSAs. d. Countywide Employment Trends and Distribution Patterns Employment trends are extremely important in determining the county's overall growth pattern and, therefore, play an important role in developing county policies for housing. Orange County has enjoyed a strong economy during the past seieral decades due to its advantageous location and climate. Total `obs are projected to increase by 103 percent between 1980 and 2016 (see Table 2-6). As of 1980, 72 percent of the county's 915,400 jobs were located in (' North County. This is very similar to the population pattern identified. in Table 2-2. By 2010, a modest southward shift in the employment: distribution is projected to occur. However, the magnitude of this shift will be somewhat less than the shift in population and housing distributions. Whereas South County is projected to receive 56 percent of the county's population growth H 2-6 TABLE 2-3 Orange County Population Trends by RSA 1980-2000 1980-83 1983-88 1988-95 1995-2000 RSA 19801 19833Z Growth (%)* 1988L Growth (t)* 19951 Growth 1%)* 20001 Growth (t)* 35-J 156,248 161,005 4,757 (0.1%) 161,983 978 (0.1%) 167,800 5,817 (0.5t) 168,600 800 (0.101) 36-A 168,782 176,918 8,136 (1.6t) 183,494 6,576 (0.7%) 186,100 2,606 (0.2t) 188,900 2,800 (0.30t) 37-H 338,682 355,132 16,450 (1.6t) 367,761 12,629 (0.7t) 373,200 5,439 (0.2t) 379,100 5,900 (0.32t) 38-i 321,137 334,726 13,589 (1.4i) 343,148 8,422 (0.5t) 355,000 11,852 (0.5%) 363,100 8,100 (0.46i) 39-F 170,644 182,257 11,613 (2.2t) 195,570 13,313 (1.5%) 223,400 27,830 (2.0t) 235,600 12,200 (1.09t) 40-D 134,696 151,545 16,849 (4.0t) 188,775 37,230 (4.9t) 225,300 36,525 (2.8t) 247,200 21,900 (1.94%) 41-B 116,686 128,839 12,153 (3.34) 150,381 21,542 (3.3%) 186,000 35,619 (3.4%) 210,800 24,800 (2.67%) 42-G 377,316 400,931 23,615 (2.0%) 415,765 14,834 (0.7i) 439,200 23,435 (0.8t) 449,300 10,100 (0.46t) 43-C 95,954 109,325 13,371 (4.4i) 145,964 36,639 (6.73) 190,700 44,736 (4.4E) 212,700 22,000 (2.31t) 44-E 52,564 63,422 10,858 (6.4t) 85,936 22,514 (7.14) 117,100 31,164 (5.2%) 143,900 26,800 (4.58t) Incorp 1,665,384 1,777,656 112,272 12.2%) 1,975,703 198,047 (2.2i) 2,095,033 119,330 (0.9t) 2,146,604 51,571 (0.491) vnincorp 267,325 286,444 19,119 (2.3t) 263,074 -23,370 (-1.6%) 368,767 105,693 (5.7t) 452,596 83,829 (4.55i) County Total 1,932,709 2,064,100 131,391 2,238,777 174,677 (1.72) 2,463,800 225,023 (1.4t) 2,599,200 135,400 (1.101) *Growth rates represent average annual compound rates of increase. Sources: 1/ Census data as of April 1, 1980 2/ Estimates based on adopted OCP-85 Projections EMA/Advance Planning Division 3/ Orange County Progress Report 1988-89, Vol. 25: Estimates reflect the March 31, 1988 incorporation of the City of Mission Viejo 4/ Estimates based on adopted OCP-88 Projections and include City of Dana Point CL:ltPA01-299/9180 9030609292906 H 2-7 TABLE 2-4 PROJECTED HOUSING GROWTH TRENDS NORTH COUNTY vs. SOUTH COUNTY 1980-2010 North County a/ South Countyb/ County Total 1980 2010 Change 1980 2010 Change 1980 2010 Change Total Units 530,324 692,900 +31% 191,190 410,600 +114% 721,514 1,103,500 +53% Pct. of Total 74Z 63% -11% 26%, ;7; :11Z inny. 100% - Growth - - 162,576 - - 219,410 - - 381,986 Pct. of Growth - - 43% - - 57% - - 100% Notes: a/ Includes RSAs 35-J, 36-A, 37-H, 38-I, 41-B and 42-G b/ Includes RSAs 39-F- 40-D, 43-C and 44-E Sources: 1980 Census County of Orange: OCP-88 Projections Orange County EMA/Advance Planning Division CL:ltPA01-299/9180 S V&306063 :� M O H96 M M ,M M r M SO M I; TABLE 2-5 Orange County Housing Stock Trends by RSA 1980-2000 1980-83 1983-88 1988-85 1995-2000 RSA 19801/ 19832/ Growth (t) 19883/- Growth (t►* 1995 Growth (t)* 2000 Growth (t)• 35-J 52,454 53,382 928 (1.8t) 54,714 1,332 (0.5) 58,400 3,686 (1.0) 59,500 1,100 (0.38) 36-A 64,578 66,691 2,113 (3.3t) 69,408 2,717 (0.8) 73,500 4,092 (0.8) 75,900 2,400 (0.65) 37-H 124,875 126,070 3,195 (2.6t) 133,239 5,169 (0.8) 139,200 5,961 (0.6) 142,500 3,300 (0.47) 38-1 119,038 122,675 3,637 (3.0t) 128,071 5,396 (0.9) 138,900 10,829 (1.2) 143,600 4,700 (0.68) 39-F 74,920 77,968 3,048 (4.1t) 84,314 6,346 (1.6) 96,900 12,586 (2.1) 102,300 5,600 (1.16) 40-D 66,072 72,089 6,017 (9.1t) 87,990 15,901 (4.4) 107,800 19,810 (3.2) 117,000 11,600 (1.71) 41-B 39,276 42,710 3,434 (8.7t) 50,468 7,758 (3.6) 64,300 13,832 (3.9) 73,900 9,600 (2.99) 42-G 130,103 134,361 4,258 (3.31) 139,876 5,515 (0.8) 148,500 8,624 (0.9) 154,000 5,600 (0.74) 43-C 32,885 37,154 4,269 13.0%) 51,766 14,612 (7.9) 69,000 17,234 (4.8) 79,400 10,400 (2.96) 44-E 17,313 20,905 3,592 (20.7%) 29,410 8,505 (8.1) 42,400 12,990 (6.3) 54,000 12,000 (5.47) Incorp 610,899 648,389 29,490 (4.8t) 725,621 77,232 (2.4) 792,711 67,090 (1.3) 823,404 30,693 (0.77) Unincorp 102,615 107,616 5,001 (4.9t) 103,635 -3,981 (-0.7) 146,189 42,554 (5.9) 178,696 32,507 (4.45) County 721,514 756,005 34,491 (4.8t) $29,256 73,251 (1.9) 938,900 109,644 (1.9) 1,002,100 63,200 (1.35) *Growth rates represent average annual compound rates of increase Sources: 1/ U. S. Census Bureau; Orange County Administrative Office 2/ Orange County Administrative Office, OCP-85 Projections (Interpolation) 3/ Orange County Administrative Office, OCP-88 Projections. Estimates reflect the March 31, 1988 incorporation of the City of Mission Viejo, but include the City of Dana Point. CL:1tPA01-299/9180 9030611204938 H 2-9 TABLE 2-6 PROJECTED EMPLOYMENT GROWTH TRENDS NORTH COUNTY vs. SOUTH COUNTY 1980-2010 North Countya/ South Countyb/ County Total 1980 2010 Change 1980 2010 Change 1980 2010 Change Total Employment 658,600 1,164,900 +77%, 256,800 690,600 +168% 915,400 1,855,500 +103% Pct. of Total Employment 72% 63% -9Y 28% 37% +9Y 100% 100% - Growth - - 506,300 - - 433,800 - - 940,100 Pct. of Growth - - 54% - - 46% - - 100% Notes: a/ Includes RSAs 35-J, 36-A, 37-H, 38-I, 41-B and 42-G b/ Includes RSAs 39-F, 40-D, 43-C and 44-E Sources: Orange County EMA/Advance Planning Division County of Orange OCP-88 CL:ltPA01-299/9180 90306' 11462 between 1980 and 2010, only 46 percent of new jobs are expected to be located in this area. According to a study released by the Orange County Transportation Commission, this trend is explained by a competitive advantage enjoyed by the established employment centers in North County. The major reasons for this advantage are access to labor supply, access to markets in the greater Los Angeles area, availability of competitively-priced land for new office and industrial developments, and the efforts of redevelopment agencies to attract new projects. During the 1990s the focus of growth will shift to the presently less-developed areas of the county. The primary reason for this shift are that by the 1990s the developing county area will have an increased population and the older established areas will have relatively fewer competitive sites remaining for development. Overall, the county's employment base is projected to grow considerably faster than the population as a whole. This compares to a 47 percent population increase during the same period. Two trends help to explain this difference: 1) an increasing labor force participation rate, particularly among women; and 2) more Orange County workers commuting from Los Angeles, Riverside, San Bernardino and San Diego counties. Table 2-7 contains employment trends by RSA for the period 1970-1988. e. Comparison of Jobs to Housing Balance One of the explicit implementation policies of the Land Use Element of the General Plan is "to plan urban land uses with a balance of residential, industrial, commercial and public land uses." Table 2-8 summarizes the jobs-to-housing balance between different geographic areas and helps in evaluating the county's growth trend in terms of the balanced land use policy. If there were an equal number of job opportunities and housing units throughout the county, the job/housing ratio would be 1.0. An examination of Table 2-8 reveals that most RSAs show some degree of imbalance between housing and jobs. Only RSAs 35-J (Buena Park), 37-H (Anaheim) and 41-B (Canyon) show a consistent balance between housing and employment. The remaining RSAs are equally divided between "employment surplus" and "employment deficit" areas. Employment surplus areas--those where the proportion of jobs is substantially greater than housing--include RSAs 36-A (Fullerton), 39-F (Central Coast), 42-G (Santa Ana) and 44-E (El Toro). On the other hand, RSAs 38-I (North Coast), 40-D (South Coast) and 43-C (Trabuco) all contain significant employment deficits. H 2-11 i TABLE 2-7 Orange County Employment Trends by RSA 1980-2010 RSA 1980 1988 1995 2005 201C 35-J 55,200 70,800 75,800 86,500 93,100 36-A 100,600 115,220 132,600 143,200 146,700 37-H 146,000 186,340 195,800 226,000 241,700 38-I 90,300 114,780 122,600 139,500 150,200 39-F 146,800 192,780 231,300 270,300 282,900 40-D 32,600 52,700 78,900 110,400 119,500 41-B 54,900 72,340 84,500 101,800 107, 200 ' 42-G 211,600 273,860 341,600 397,200 426, )00 43-C 17,400 26,080 51,200 76,600 85, 100 44-E 60,000 100,140 159,500 187,900 202,400 County 915,400 1,205,040 1,473,800 1,613,000 1,855,500 Total Sources: OCP-88 County Administrative Office ENA/Advance Planning Division 1 1 CL:1tPA01-299/9180 9030614531680 H 2-12 r ■r � .�r �s � rr. it r� � ,� � � � ur s � •r A r J TABLE 2-8 Comparison of Jobs to Housing Balance by RSA 1983-2000 1983 1988 1995 2000 RSA Emp Ratio Emp DU Ratio Emp DU Ratio Emp DU Ratio 35-J 57,248 53,382 1.07 70,800 55,440 1.30 75,800 58,400 1.30 80,800 59,500 1.36 36-A 98,262 66,691 1.50 115,220 69,900 1.64 132,600 73 5 1.80 00 136 600 75 900 1.80 , , , 37-H 150,824 128,070 1.18 186,340 131,880 1.41 195,800 139,200 1.41 208,900 142,500 1.47 38-I 95,216 122,675 0.80 114,780 130,140 0.88 122,600 138,900 .88 128,000 143,600 .89 39-F 152,558 77,968 2.00 192,780 85,760 2.24 231,300 96,700 2.39 257,500 102,300 2.52 40-D 43,300 72,089 0.60 52,700 84,260 0.63 78,900 105,400 .75 98,400 117,000 .84 41-B 56,538 42,710 1.32 72,340 51,300 1.41 84,500 64,300 1.31 93,000 73,900 1.26 42-G 218,676 134,361 1.63 273,860 142,360 2.02 341,600 148,400 2.30 367,500 154,000 2.39 43-C 22,762 37,154 0.61 26,080 47,560 0.54 51,200 69,000 .74 68,400 79,400 .86 44-E 64,816 20,905 3.10 100,140 28,580 3.50 159,500 42,000 3.80 173,900 54,000 3.22 County Total 960,200 756,005 1.30 1,205,040 827,180 1.46 1,473,800 935,800 1.57 1,613,000 1,002,100 1.61 Note: Ratio represents the number of employment opportunities per dwelling unit. Sources: County of Orange, EMA-Advance Planning Division OCP-85 Forecast OCP-88 Forecast CL:1tPA01-299/9180 9030615270777 H 2-13 i The relationship between housing and employment within the county's ' RSAs should be considered when Housing Element policies and program:; are being developed with a goal of encouraging residential development in areas where an employment surplus is projected. C. Population Characteristics 1. General Characteristics According to the State of California Department of Finance, Orange County's population, as of January 1, 1989 was 2,280,405. The cities in Orange County contain 85 percent of this population with the remaining 1� percent residing in the county's unincorporated areas. According to the 1980 census, Orange County contained 687,059 households in 1980. It is estimated that the number of households will increase tc 863,084 countywide by 1994 which represents 129,463 , in the unincorporated area. This estimation is a straight extrapolation based upon a projected annual growth rate of 1.83 for the years between 1980 and 1995. The term "household" is defined by the Census Bureau as all persons who occupy a housing unit. A householder is the person in whose name the home is owned or rented. Household types in the County are subdivided into three groups: (1) Family households: those which consist of a householder living with one or more persons related to him or her by birth, marriage, or adoption. (2) Non-family households: those which consist of a householder living alonE: or with non-relatives only. (3) Group quarters: all persons not living in households are classified by the Census Bureau as living in group quarters. Two general categories of persons in group quarters are recognized: 1) Inmates or institutions, and 2) Other, such as rooming houses, communes and workers' dormitories. In 1980, persons in family households comprised 85 percent of the county's total population and 87 percent of the population in the unincorporated Rrea. Non-family households contained 259,691 persons (13 percent of the total county population) with 30,737 living in the unincorporated area. Slightly more of these households were headed by women than by men. Applying the same percentages to A94 estimates, non-family households will contain 314,433 persons with 37,732 living in the unincorporated area. Persons occupying group quarters represented less than 2 percent of , both the county and unincorporated area populations. H 2-14 2. Household Characteristics a. Household Composition In 1980, 72 percent of the county's housing units were occupied by family households. This percentage was substantially higher than the statewide figure of 69 percent but below the unincorporated area figure of nearly 76 percent. Non-family households represented 28 percent of the county total, which was substantially lower than the statewide figure of 31 percent but higher than the unincorporated figure of 24 percent. According to the 1980 census, married couples comprised 60 percent of the county's total households and one-half of these had children under 18 living with them. Families headed by women represented 9 percent of all county households, with two-thirds of these women having children under 18 living with them. In 1994, it is estimated that 517,850 households will be comprised of married couples with 258,925 of these households with children under 18 living with them. Families headed by women would represent 77,677 of the County's households, with 51,785 of the households with children under 18. Countywide, non-family households are almost evenly split between male and female householders, each comprising about 14 percent of all county households. b. Income Characteristics Households include all occupied housing units, while families are defined as two or more persons related by birth, marriage or adoption. According to the Chapman College Center for Economic Research, as of January 1, 1989, the Orange County median family income was $48,123, which is significantly higher than the California median income. Table 2-9 shows Orange County median family income statistics for the years 1975 through 1989. Section F of this Chapter (Regional Housing Needs Assesment) further discusses overpayment and the current and future housing needs of the unincorporated county. H 2-15 TABLE 2-9 Orange County Median Family Income Median Family Annual Year Income Change (01 1975 Actual $16,379 - 1976 Actual $17,933 9.5 1977 Actual $20,122 12.2 1978 Actual $22,583 12.2 1979 Actual $25,499 12.9 1980 Estimate $28,705 12.6 1981 Estimate $31,900 11.1 1982 Estimate $32,815 2.9 1983 Estimate $34,371 4.7 1984 Estimate $37,025 7.7 1985 Estimate $39,941 7.9 1986 Estimate $41,537 4.0 1987 Estimate $43,112 3.8 1988 Forecast $45,176 4.8 1989 Forecast $49,916 10.5 Note: a/ Average annual compound rate of increase , Sources: Economic and Business Review, June 1988, Center for Economic Research Chapman College. Orange County Progress Report 1988-89, Vol. 25 p.149 County of Orange-, EMA/Advance Planning Division H 2-16 3. Special Needs a. Elderly and Handicapped According to the County's 1988-91 Housing Assistance Plan, there are 4,420 lower-income elderly and 4,431 handicapped households in need of housing assistance in the unincorporated area. The elderly population is comprised of persons who are 60 years of age and older. According to the State Department of Finance, 90 percent of elderly persons are homeowners and 10 percent are renters. Since most of the elderly persons are homeowners, they are less affected by housing market conditions. While appreciation of a home is a plus, the negative aspect of ownership includes lack of funds due to a fixed income to provide needed maintenance. Many elderly persons also live in housing too large for their current needs. Though property taxes have been reduced due to Proposition 13 for some, taxes and insurance are a substantial portion of the elderly household's limited budget. The 22,704 elderly renters countywide are most seriously impacted by the housing market. For senior citizens dependent on a fixed Social Security allocation, little remains for other necessary expenses. Moreover, 3,503* senior citizens live in mobile homes and feel the 1 impact of increased space rental and conversion of parks to non-residential use (Note: *This number has decreased due to recent incorporations). SB 1553 of 1984 (Govt. Code Sec. 65915) requires that local governments grant density bonuses or other incentives to developers who construct housing projects in which 50 percent or more of the units are for senior citizens. The County will encourage the development of housing for the elderly in compliance with this legislation, as described in Chapter Five (Meeting Special Housing Needs). According to United Way (1986), there are approximately 330,000 disabled persons residing in Orange County (approximately 15% of the overall County population). The State Department of Rehabilitation estimates that this includes 230,000 physically disabled and 130,000 developmentally disabled persons (60,000 are both physically and developmentally disabled). This is probably a conservative estimate due to the fact that the attractive benefits package and mild climate draw a high number people with disabilities to Orange County. Another critical subgroup in the disabled classification is the mentally ill. As mental illness is not necessarily a visible 1 handicap, the mentally ill are often an invisible population within the disabled community. As a result, the seriously and persistently mentally ill are often overlooked and fail to reap their fair share of all levels of low-income housing. H 2-17 What was once thought of as fatal disabling trauma or birth defect is now often responsive to medical treatment. As medical science advances, the probability of disabled persons surviving their disability is increasing in the same way that longevity for elder::y persons is increasing. Therefore the needs of disabled persons will also continue to increase. The two major housing needs of the disabled--particularly physically disabled persons--are affordability and accessibility. A majority of Orange County's disabled residents' incomes fall below ' 50 percent of the County's median income. As recipients of Supplemental Social Security Income (SSI), many are on a fixed income, per month, which places them at a disadvantage when facei. with inflation and rising housing costs. Since most disabled persons cannot qualify for home ownership, they are forced into the already-crowded rental housing market. On January 23, 1989 HUD published final rules implementing the 1988 Federal Fair Housing Act. Under this law, the disabled have bee. added as a protected class. A big concession was given to apartnent owners in allowing them to collect special deposits for disabled tenants modifying apartments to make them more accessible. The new law gives disabled tenants the right to demand alterations to units , without letting management increase their security deposits. Landlords, however, may negotiate with tenants to set up separate interest-bearing escrows to cover cost of restoring modifications when tenants vacate. The following conditions are also outlinei. in the HUD final rules: 1. Escrow payments may be negotiated only where it is reasonab:.e to do so. 2. Disabled residents must obtain landlord's permission before proceeding with modifications. 3. The apartment owner may not require tenants to follow a detailed approval process; permission to make modifications may be oral. 4. Owner me:y withhold permission until renter selects a responsible contractor to do the work. 5. Management may condition approval on renter providing reasonable description of planned alterations and assurances that necessary building permits will be obtained. An aid in the provision of housing for the mentally ill has been HOMES, Inc. (Helping Our Mentally ill Experience Success). HOMES is a non-profit corporation organized in 1985 with the goal of providing an array of housing options for the mentally ill. H 2-18 i HOMES currently provides three houses at the semi-independent level with supportive services in Orange County for mentally ill adults. The current program is considered transitional, and residents move on to independent living when their Section 8 certificates become available to them. Sources: Dayle McIntosh Center United Way State Dept. of Rehabilitation H.O.M.E.S. Inc. O.C. HCA, Mental Health Services b. Large-Family Households Families of five or more members are classified as large families. Large-family household need is dictated by three factors: (1) size of family; (2) family income; and (3) cost of housing. The Housing Assistance Plan (HAP) for 1988-1991 identifies 2,999 lower-income large families in the unincorporated county area with an unmet housing need. The 1980 Census stated that there were 90,657 large 1 families within Orange County, with 11,496 of these in the unincorporated area. Sources: Housing Assistance Plan 1988-1991 C. Single Heads of Household The single employed parent typically desires minimal maintenance housing, primarily two-bedroom units near place of employment, schools, shopping and recreational activities. One of the main priorities is a safe neighborhood; however, with limited income, affordable housing is often available only in less-desirable areas of the county. Although data on single male-headed households is unavailable, the 1980 Census reported that in the unincorporated County 4,279 female householders had children under 18 years of age. Using the same ratios as in 1989, it is estimated that in 1994, female-headed households with children under 18, in the unincorporated areas, will total 5,437. 11 HUD published final rule concessions to the 1988 Federal Fair Housing Act (January 23, 1989) implementing amendments that add families with children as a protected class under the federal housing law. Although the regulations offer retirement communities more leeway in types of facilities and services they must offer to be exempt from admitting children, this leeway is not extended to mobile home park operators. The act only provides exemptions for all-adult communities for preretirees at least 55 years old and elderly 62 or older. Also HUD rejects suggestion that mobile homes and conventional multi-family housing be allowed to designate floors or buildings in developments for elderly and others for families with children. This would be blatantly discriminatory. H 2-19 d. Military Personnel Marine Corps Air Station (MCAS) E1 Toro is located in unincorpora:ed Orange County within Irvine's sphere of influence and MCAS Tustin is in the adjoining City of Tustin. As of October 1988, approximately 1,770 civilians and 6,300 military were on the E1 Toro base, and L30 civilians and 3,900 military were on the Tustin base, totaling 12,100 personr..el for both bases. The number of bachelor units in barracks on the E1 Toro base is approximately 4,000, and 1,800 units exist on the Tustin base. The number of family units available on the E1 Toro base is currently 1,252 and 1,259 are located on the Tustin base. This means that approximately 3,800 military households (bath single person and family) must seek housing off-base. There is currently a waiting list of six months to three years for on-base housing. Future plans include the constructior. of 100 family horsing units in 1989 and 118 units in 1990, all on tt.e Tustin base. Additionally, 64 family housing units will be relocated from E1 Toro to Tustin during 1989. Over 50% of t:ae military personnel at E1 Toro and Tustin are married. According to the Tustin and E1 Toro Stations, most military personnel are stationed for two or three years, which makes them a highly mobile population. Military personnel find that with very limited incomes it is increasingly difficult to find housing in Orange County. Clearly more available low-cost housing is necessary for the military. Source: J.H. Wagner, Colonel, U.S. Marine Corps Community Plans and Liaison Officer e. Farmworkers In recent years, there has been a shift from traditional agricultural to Special Agricultural Workers (SAWS). This shift refers to agricultural workers as defined by the Immigration anc. Naturalization Service (INS) in implementing the Immigration Reform and Control jlct of 1986 (IRCA). The passage )y Congress of IRCA was intended to permit legaliza-:ion of individuals who had lived or worked in the United State for specific periods of time. It also tightened requirements for employers to document the legal status of new employees and pro-lided for the sanction of those employers found to be knowingly emploling undocumented aliens. IRCA, then, was an opportunity for eligible illegal aliens to legalize their status and eventually become citizens. At the same time, it was intended to discourage future illegal immigration by preventing their employment in the United States. Agricultural. employment accounts for less than 1 percent of total county employment. The California Employment Development Department reported thRt the agricultural employment average in Orange Cot.nty for 1988 was 8,100 employees. In April 1988 the seasonal peak for agricultural employment which usually occur betweens April and June, H 2-20 was 10,900 employees. These figures do not include those classified as SAWs in the county. This number is unclear. The Department of Health in Sacramento estimates that there are 19,195 SAWs in all agricultural pursuits in this county. This figure was derived from the demographics created in estimating funding and is considered very high by legalization staff at INS. ' f. Homeless Individuals and Families Existing service agencies indicate that a growing need exists for limited-term shelter facilities for individuals and families with no available shelter due to the following constraints: limited/fixed income (e.g., SSI recipient); unemployment; recent eviction, rent raise, or home foreclosure; low vacancy rate; emotional/mental problems; family violence; or difficulty adapting to a new culture. The target group (some of whom are chronically homeless and some of whom are temporarily homeless) consists of men and women of all ages. Current Needs The most recent statistics regarding the magnitude of homelessness and existing resources were compiled by EMA-HCD as part of the County's Comprehensive Homeless Assistance Plan (CHAP). The CHAP was prepared in 1987 in support of the County's Emergency Homeless Shelter Grant application under the McKinney Act (see program description on P. H-5-25). It should be noted that the following ' statistics apply to the entire county, not the unincorporated area. The CHAP indicated that the total number of homeless in Orange County is unknown, but the Homeless Issues Task Force estimates this figure to be 8,000 to 10,000. The following information was compiled by one service provider based on 5,940 homeless clients served during one month: o Of the 5,940 persons assisted, 4,572 (77%) were families with children. 42% of the total (2,524) were children. The remaining 23% were individual adults. o 60% had lived in Orange County at least 10 years. o 40% were mentally disabled, and 10% of those also had physical or sensory disabilities. o Many were employed full-time. o Many were not receiving governmental assistance (AFDC, General Relief, etc. ) due to ignorance of these programs or processing requirements. o Those wishing to work had difficulty finding jobs due to lack of a mailing address, phone, bathing facilities, and in the case of single parents, low-cost child care facilities. H 2-21 The Homeless Issues Task Force, in cooperation with the County, is currently (June 1989) preparing a survey of homeless persons. The results of this survey should be available by September 1989. In addition, the 1990 Census will aggressively attempt to enumerate ':he homeless. Existing Services and Facilities ' The Comprehensive Homeless Assistance Plan includes an inventory 3f existing facilities that provide services and shelter to the homeless. These facilities are summarized below: o Women's Transitional Living Center (domestic violence) 75 beds o Christian Temporary Housing Facility 60 teds o Interval House (domestic violence) 24 beds o Orange Coa:>t Interfaith Shelter 20 beds o Dayle McIntosh Center (handicapped) 6 Reds o Episcopal Service Alliance, Martha House (women) 10 ')eds o Orangewood Childrens Home (dependent children) 186 )eds o Emergency Shelter Housing (children) 98 beds o Irvine Temporary Housing 20 beds o Brothers cf Charity 30 beds o YMCA (women) 20 beds o Salvation Army 76 beds o Alcohol Program (de-tox/recovery) 154 beds o Drug Residential Program 131 beds , o Psychiatric Inpatient Hospitalization 299 beds o Transitional Living Center (mentally ill adults) 30 beds , Total 1,239 beds In addition to these facilities, the National Guard Armories provide 250 beds during harsh weather conditions. Two county parks, Featherly and O'Neill, are used for overnight camping. Approximately 5 percent of the campsites are used by the homeless (3A*; at Featherly and 2% at O'Neill). Camping stay is limited to 15 days maximum within any calendar month. Extension of H 2-22 the camping stay limit has been considered but no time frame has been established. Motels offer a supply of temporary family housing but even modest units may cost $30 per day and, in many cases, are not in livable condition. ' Orange County Housing Authority maintains an inventory of Emergency/Temporary Housing Facilities (see P. H 5-16, Housing Referral Directory). Revenue sharing funds and private donations provide most of the funding used for emergency housing. Community Development Block Grant funding has been used for acquisition of two battered women's facilities, one family facility, and a facility for children. Costs incurred by service agencies can be divided into facility costs and maintenance costs. The Christian Temporary Housing Facility budget states a cost of $10.00 a day per person, excluding the retirement of building loan and up-front structure costs. g. Asian Pacific Immigrants and Refugees During the past five years, between 100,000 and 200,000 Asian- Pacific immigrants and refugees have settled in Orange County. The majority of these people have settled in the northern part of the county, specifically in the cities of Anaheim, Costa Mesa, Fountain Valley, Fullerton, Garden Grove, Huntington Beach, Orange, Santa Ana, and Westminster. However, a large number of these people have migrated to South County cities and unincorporated areas such as Irvine, Mission Viejo, San Clemente, Lake Forest, E1 Toro, Saddleback Valley and Laguna Hills. In addition to those immigrants and refugees who have settled in Orange County in the past five years, a new influx of Taiwanese and Chinese immigrants has begun. This influx is coming from Los Angeles County cities bordering on the Orange County line. As ' affordable housing opportunities in these border cities (predominantly Cerritos, Hacienda Heights and La Puente) become scarce, the newly arrived immigrants and refugees move into Orange County cities, most notably Brea, Cypress, La Habra and Yorba Linda. This influx of refugees has exacerbated the tight housing market for low- and moderatly-low-income families. Immigrants and refugees are particularly hand-hit because they tend to have larger households than the county as a whole and for most, for an initial period of time, also undergo a naturalization process. The supply of large family houses and apartments affordable to low-income households is inadequate, resulting in frequent cases of overcrowding and other poor living conditions which result in additional personal problems. H 2-23 1 . In January 1981, the Orange County Human Relations Commission published a "Report on the Impact of Refugee Resettlement in Orange County" that examined the problems of refugees in the areas of education, housing, employment, health, criminal justice and public assistance. In reviewing the housing problems of refugees, the report concluc.ed that the housing problems of refugees could not be isolated from those of other groups and "that the refugee-specific ' problems could only be solved through a comprehensive and aggressive approach to the countywide housing situation." Overall, the :influx of newly arrived Asian-Pacific groups from at , least 16 different countries in the Pacific Rim will continue to exacerbate the lack of affordable low-income housing in all area.,: of the County. It is projected that the number of Asian-Pacifics, 1:he fastest growing ethnic group in Southern California, will contimce to increase over the next few years creating a critical need to focus housing assistance in provision of affordable low-income units. D. Housing Stock Characteristics 1. Structure Type ar..d Tenure Large multi-unit structures represent the largest share of annual added units in Orange County between January 1, 1987 and January 1, 1988, followed by sing::e family units. In the unincorporated areas, a total of 128,454 residential units were located there as of January 1, 19f:8. Single family detached homes represented the majority of units at 76,603. Units in large multi-family structures totaled 25,690, fol:owed by single family attached units at 13,156, the duplex to fourplex category at 10,733 and mobile homes at 2,302. Rentals represent a significant number of the affordable units planned and constructed to meet the County's affordable housing requirements. This is particularly true as evidenced by recent activity under the Housing Opportunity Program (HOP). The County's Multi-family Revenue Bond Program has also functioned as a stimulus for the production of rentals in Orange County. This program was implemented in 1982 to provide below market financing to buildf.rs for the construction of multiple family rental units in participating cities and the unincorporated area of the County. Information summarizing the Multi-family Revenue Bond Program is found on page H 3-12 of this document. The Orange County Assessor File was used to provide an updated estimate of the number of rental units in the County as of March 31, 1988. Households filing a homeowner exemption with the County Assessor were separated from all households in order to obtain an estimate of rental units vs. owner-occupied units in Orange County. While homeowner exemptions are not filed by every homeowner in the County, those that do not file are not believed to be significant in number. H 2-24 Of the total households reflected on the March 1988 Assessor's roll countywide, 47 percent filed homeowner exemptions, while 53 percent are assumed to be renters. In the unincorporated area, 43 percent of the households are estimated renters, while 57 percent are homeowners. 2. Overcrowding Status The standard measure of overcrowded housing used by the U.S. Census Bureau is a ratio of more than one person per room, excluding kitchens and bathrooms. For example, a typical two-bedroom apartment with living room, kitchen and one bathroom (three rooms total) would be considered overcrowded if it were occupied by more than three persons. According to the 1980 Census, overcrowding (1.01 or more person per room) is much more prevalent among renters at all geographic levels. The Census data also showed that overcrowded housing was much less of a problem in unincorporated areas of the county than in the county as a whole. Among rental units, almost 10 percent were defined as overcrowded countywide, while in unincorporated areas this figure was only 6 percent. Overcrowding was almost non-existent among owner- occupied units in unincorporated areas (1 percent); countywide the figure was 3 percent. It should be noted that for purposes of determining compliance with fair housing laws, different definitions of overcrowding are used. For example, the State Department of Fair Employment and Housing utilizes a threshold of two persons per bedroom plus one additional person, with occupancy limits more restrictive than this raising a potential discrimination challenge. The Uniform Housing Code states: "Every dwelling unit shall have at least one room which shall have not less than 150 square feet of floor area. Other habitable rooms, except kitchens, shall have an area of not less than 70 square feet. Where more than two persons occupy a room used for sleeping purposes, the required floor area shall be increased at the rate of 50 square feet for each additional occupant in excess of two." 3. Condition of Housing Stock A direct measure of housing stock condition is not available. A field survey of housing condition is not practical given the size of the geographic area involved, staff and budget constraints. Orange County's housing stock is in better condition than that of California as a whole. One indicator of housing stock condition is units defined as substandard. The Housing Assistance Plan, in determining the number of units suitable for rehabilitation, uses 1980 Census data as adjusted by the Southern California Association of Governments. Substandard units are those that do not comply with Section 8 Existing Housing Quality Standards for occupancy. The 1988 Housing Assistance Plan states that 17,657 units are classified as substandard, broken down as follows: H 2-25 Substandard dwelling units total: 17,657 Owner-occupied: 998 Vacant: 555 Renter-occupied: 7,659 Vacant: 388 Suitable for rehabilitation and occupied: 8,398 Low-income occupant: 1,446 Vacant: 391 Renter-Occupied: 6,532 Lower-income occupant: 2,644 Vacant: 234 A second definition of substandard units employed by the County is "substandard beyond repair." This includes units that are not economically feas:lble to repair (i.e. , the rehabilitation costs exceed the appraised value of the property minus the lot). The number of substandard units in this latter category is unknown. E. Housing Cost 1. Existing Home Prizes Data regarding sales prices for existing single family detached hous.as is shown in Table 2-10. Sales price distribution is compiled from transactions that occurred during 1988. The table indicates that 33 percent of all units were priced at $250,000 and over. Only 45 percent of transactions involved homes priced below $200,000. 2. Financing Costs The full impact of rising mortgage rates upon potential homebuyers becomes apparent when hypothetical monthly payment schedules are examined. Table 2-11 shows the monthly payments and annual household incomes required to qualify for loans at interest rates ranging front 8 to 13 percent. For example, a family seeking to buy an averaged-priced housing unit in Orange County in 1988, with the payment required with a 10 percent interest rate would be about $1,827 per month; at 13 percent the monthly payment becomes $2,237. These hypothetical cases under:;core the critical importance of financing in the real estate market. 3. Housing Costs vs. Ability to Pay The spectacular increase in home values in Orange County has not been matched in the rental market. As Table 2-12 indicates, rent increa;;es have been rather modest by comparison. Vhile homes were appreciati-ig at annual rates above 20 percent during the late 1970s, rents were typically increasing 8-10 percent annually. H 2-26 1 . TABLE 2-10 Price Distribution of Existing Single-Family Detached Home Sales* Orange County 1988 ' Price Sales Percent Under $ 50,000 6 0.04 ' $ 50,000 - 59,000 14 0.09 $ 60,000 - 69,000 20 0.14 $ 70,000 - 79,000 58 0.39 $ 80,000 - 89,000 76 0.52 $ 90,000 - 99,000 124 0.84 $ 100,000 - 119,000 457 3.10 $ 120,000 - 139,000 952 5.45 $ 140,000 - 159,000 1,325 8.98 $ 160,000 - 179,000 1,797 12.18 $ 180,000 - 199,000 1,816 12.31 $ 200,000 - 249,000 3,199 21.69 $ 250,000 and over 4,905 33.26 Total 14,749 100.00 * Based on a monthly sales survey of existing homes conducted by California Association of Realtors using data on closed escrow sales provided by various boards of realtors. Sources: California Association of Realtors. EMA/Advance Planning Division. i H 2-27 TABLE 2-11 Monthly Payments and Household Income Required to Purchase a Average-Priced New Home in Orange County* February 1989 Interest Rate Monthly Payment a/ Annual Income Required b/ 8% $1,569 $65,898 9% $1,696 $71,232 10% $1,827 $76,734 11% $1,961 $82,362 ' 12% $2,097 $88,074 13% $2,237 $93,954 * Average price for recorded new and existing homes sales for the month o:` February 1989 was $224,057, per TRH. Notes: a/ Assumes a 30-year fixed rate mortgage with 20% down payment, property tax of 1.2% of home value per year, $30 monthly property insurance. A monthly homeowners association dues is not take into account. b/ Assumes 3.5-to-1 income to payment qualifying ratio. Source: TRN Real Estate Market Information EMA/Advance Planning Division H 2-28 TABLE 2-12 Residential Rent Index: 1978-1988 Los Angeles/Orange County MSAs a/ Annual b/ Year Index- Charge (X)— ' 1978 61.4 - 1979 68.0 10.7 1980 76.6 12.6 1981 85.3 11.4 1982 93.5 9.6 1983 99.6 6.5 1984 106.9 7.3 1985 115.6 8.1 1986 123.8 7.1 1987 130.5 5.4 1988�/ 135.8 4.5 Note: a/ This index is a component of the consumer Price Index. b/ Average Annual compound rate of income. ' c/ Through September only Sources: Real Estate Research Council of Southern California Real Estate and Construction Report, Third Quarter 1988, p.42. ' County of Orange, EMA/Advance Planning Division H 2-29 Home price and ren-: statistics tell only half the story on housing costs. Although p;:ices and rents in Orange County are high in comparison to other: areas, incomes are also higher than average. In order to accurately evaluate shelter costs it is important to compare monthly housing expenditures to incomes. In general, financial advisors recommend that housing expenditures should not exceed 25 to 30 percent of gross household income. Expense ratios above this standard are considered overpayment. In middle- and upper-income categories this situation may be only a temporary inconvenience, such as when young professionals stretch to buy their first house. For low-income households, however, overpayment for housing may result in an inadequatte budget for food, clothing, health care or other necessities. Table 2-13 presents housing cost to income ratios for owner occupied units. These statistics are derived from 1980 Census data, which utilize 1979 calendar year income figures. As Table 2-13 illustrates, median monthly housing expenses for owner-occupied units in the unincorporated area exceeded 25 percent of income in all but the highest , ($20,000+) income category. In the county as a whole, overpayment was somewhat less common, although still the norm in low-income households. The 1980 census statistics for renter-occupied units are very similar to those for owner-occupied units, although low-income renters generally paid a higher proportion of their income for housing than owners in similar financial brackets (see Table 2-14). This situation was , reversed in the upper-income category, however, where renters generally paid a slightly sa.aller portion of their income for housing than did owners. 4. Residential Energy Cost The distribution of household energy costs as a percentage of income for Orange County residents is presented in Table 2-15. According to the 1980 census, in both renter- and owner-occupied categories, the medie.n energy cost was 1.5 percent of income. This relationship was true f(.r both the unincorporated area and the county as a whole. F. Regional Housing Needs Assessment Current and projected housing needs for the unincorporated area are derived , from the Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) prepared by the Southe).n California Association of Governments (SCAG). RHNA projections are a direct indication of overpayment (i.e. , household paying more than 30 percent o:' their income for housing). The current RHNA figures, shown in Table 2-16, were released in June 1988. The RHNA is composed Df two parts: Current needs and future needs. ' H 2-30 , TABLE 2-13 Household Income by Selected Monthly Owner Costs as percentage of Income Owner-occupied Non-Condominium Housing Units Orange County and California 1979 Orange County Unincorporated Area Orange County California Pct. of Income Households Percent Households Percent Households Percent Less than $5,000 1,520 100.0 10,476 100.0 219,010 100.0 Less than 20% 47 3.1 826 7.9 29,306 13.4 ' 20 to 24% 54 3.6 626 6.0 18,456 8.4 25 to 34% 94 6.2 788 7.5 25,767 11.8 35% or more 937 61.6 6,206 59.2 114,577 52.3 ' Not computed 388 25.5 2,030 19.4 30,904 14.1 Median Over 35% Over 35% Over 35% $5,000 to $9,999 1.871 100.0 14,856 100.0 332,502 100.0 Less than 20% 296 15.8 4,243 28.6 144,279 43.4 20 to 24% 89 4.8 1,154 7.8 31.189 9.4 25 to 34% 251 13.4 2,111 14.2 46,354 13.9 35% or more 1,235 66.0 7,348 49.4 110,679 33.3 Not computed Median Over 35% 34.1 23.2 ' $10,000 to $14,999 2,655 100.0 20,271 100.0 390,440 100.0 Less than 20% 721 27.2 7,251 35.8 195,713 50.1 20 to 24% 240 9.0 2,228 11.0 41,110 10.5 ' 25 to 34% 455 17.1 3,035 15.0 56,415 14.5 35% or more 1,239 46.7 7,757 38.2 97,202 24.9 Not computed -- -- -- -- -- -- Median 32.6 26.7 Less than 20% $15,000 to $19,999 3,576 100.0 25,781 100.0 446,484 100.0 Less than 20% 1,200 33.6 11,421 42.7 236,941 53.1 ' 20 to 24% 381 10.7 2,922 10.9 50,551 11.3 25 to 34% 525 14.7 4,339 16.2 75,044 16.8 35% or more 1,470 41.0 8,099 30.2 83,948 18.8 Not computed -- -- -- -- -- -- Median 29.4 22.9 Less than 20% $20,000 or More 40,119 100.0 236,261 100.0 2,443,058 100.0 Less than 20% 20,606 51.4 145,398 61.6 1,678,993 68.7 20 to 24% 5,295 13.2 29,603 12.5 287,079 11.8 25 to 34% 8,149 20.3 38,046 16.1 323,007 13.2 35% or more 6,069 15.1 23,214 9.8 153,979 6.3 ' Not computed -- -- -- -- -- -- Median Less than 20% Less than 20% Less than 20% Sources: 1980 Census, STF 3, Table 139 Orange County Administrative Office Orange County EMA/Advance Planning Division H 2-31 TABLE 2-14 , Household Income by Selected Monthly Owner Costs as percentage of Income , Renter-Occupied Housing Units Orange County and California 1979 Orange County , Uninco:.porated Area Orange County California Pct. of Income Households Percent Households Percent Households Percent ' Less than $5,000 2,166 100.0 29,869 100.0 673,053 100.0 Less than 20% 6 0.3 173 0.6 11,165 1..7 20 to 24% :28 1.3 393 1.3 21,300 `;.2 ' 25 to 34% 154 3.0 923 3.1 43,496 6.5 35% or more 1,631 77.5 23,993 80.3 5102,000 74F.6 Not computed 137 17.9 4,387 14.7 95,092 jjF.l , Median Over 35% Over 35% Over '15% $5,000 to $9,999 3,4.59 100.0 44,429 100.0 794,235 100.0 Less than 20% 100 2.9 776 1.7 47,839 6.0 20 to 24% 144 4.2 1,365 3.1 160,809 ►.7 25 to 34% 471 13.6 4,943 11.1 183,259 23.1 35% or more 2,650 76.6 36,600 82.4 481,665 60.7 ' Not computed 94 2.7 745 1.7 20,663 2.6 Median Over 35% Over 35% Over .15% $10,000 to $14,999 4,299 100.0 52,287 100.0 731,277 1010.0 ' Less than 20% 273 6.4 2,659 5.1 139,349 13.1 20 to 24% 346 8.0 5,397 10.3 145,911 2).0 25 to 34% 1,228 28.6 21,561 41.2 257,337 35.2 , 35% or more 2.367 55.0 22,064 42.2 172,384 23.6 Not computed 85 2.0 606 1.2 16,296 Z.2 Median Over 35% 32.7 27.3 $15,000 to $19,999 3,659 100.0 46,150 100.0 550,865 103.0 Less than 20% 609 16.6 8,745 18.9 2130,246 41.8 20 to 24% 788 21.5 13,932 30.2 137,500 25.0 , 25 to 34% 1,374 37.6 17,259 137.5 129,340 23.5 35% or more 619 22.4 5,822 12.6 42,924 7.8 Not computed 69 1.9 392 0.8 10,855 2.0 Median 27.4 24.6 21.3 $20,000 or More 9,°.18 100.0 94,494 100.0 958,021 1CO.0 Less than 20% 5,151 58.3 62,161 65.7 708,517 74.0 20 to 24% 1,986 20.9 19,165 20.3 142,531 14.9 25 to 34% 1,675 17.6 11,428 12.1 81,066 8.5 35% or more 1.79 1.9 825 0.9 5,773 0.6 Not computed 1.27 1.3 915 1.0 20,134 2.1 , Median Less than 20% Less than 20% Less than 20% Sources: 1980 Census, STF 3, Table 139 ' Orange County Administrative Office Orange County EMA/Advance Planning Division H 2-32 ' TABLE 2-15 Tenure by Average Monthly Residential Energy Costs as Percentage of Income Orange County 1979 Orange County Orange County Unincorporated Area Percent of Income Households Percent Households Percent Owner-Occupied 415,127 100.0 72,088 100.0 No Charge 2,127 0.5 380 0.5 ' 0.1 to 2% 265,384 63.9 47,951 66.5 3 to 4% 85,547 20.6 14,134 19.6 5 to 9% 41,174 9.9 6,076 8.4 ' 10 to 14% 8,817 2.1 1,482 2.1 15 to 19% 3,083 0.7 441 0.6 20% or more 5,803 1.4 874 1.2 Not computed 3,192 0.8 750 1.0 ' Median 1.5% 1.5% Renter-Occupied 271,140 100.0 23,709 100.0 ' No Charge 36,721 13.5 2,880 12.1 0.1 to 2% 139,610 51.5 12,138 51.2 3 to 4% 45,615 16.8 4,279 18.0 ' 5 to 9% 30,274 11.2 2,691 11.4 10 to 14% 7,180 2.6 675 2.8 15 to 19% 2,778 1.0 256 1.1 20% or more 5,011 1.8 445 1.9 Not computed 3,951 1.5 345 1.5 Median 1.5% 1.5% 4 1 Sources: 1980 Census, STF A, Table HA 35 ' Orange County EMA/Advance Planning Division H 2-33 1 TABLE 2-16 Regional Housing Needs Assessment for Unincorporated Orange County 1988 Current Need Very Low Income Low Income ' Owner Renter Owner Renter Total 2,415 4,619 1,828 3,780 12,642 ' Future Need , Very Low Low Hod High Total 3,556 4,620 5,008 11,007 24,191 ' Source: Regional Hou::ing Needs Assessment for Southern California, , Southern California Association of Governments, June 1988. 1 H 2-34 1. Current needs According to the RHNA, in the unincorporated area there are currently (1988) a total of 123,246 households. Of these, 12,640 (10%) are lower-income households "in need" (households paying an inordinate amount for housing) in the unincorporated areas of Orange County (Table 2-16). These households are distributed according to income category (low vs. very low) and tenure. ' (Note: These figures include the incorporated cities of Mission Viejo and Dana Point.) 2. Future needs Projected future needs, presented in Table 2-16, are based upon the projected five-year growth in the unincorporated area, adjusted for ' vacancy and the local income distribution. For the 1989-94 period, it is estimated that 24,191 housing units will be required in the unincorporated area. This growth need is distributed according to income category as follows: ' 5-Year Growth Need Income Category Units Pct. of Total ' Very low (0-50%) 3,556 14.7 Low (50%-80%) 4,620 19.1 Moderate (90-120%) 5,008 20.7 ' Upper (Over 120%) 11,007 45.5 24,191 100.00 1 1 ' CL:lt/jcPA01-299/9191 9020617162368 H 2-35 CHAPTER THREE: POTENTIAL CONSTRAINTS ON HOUSING DEVELOPMENT AND IMPROVEMENT A. Land Use Controls, Land Availability and Suitable Sites I. Land Use Controls: Public and Private ' a. Public Land use controls can pose a potential constraint to development. On the one hand, to the extent that such controls reflect underlying physical constraints, infrastructure capacity limitation and market demand, they do not, in themselves, constrain development or add to its cost. On the other hand, to ' the extent that such controls are independent of, or in excess of, more fundamental constraints, they can unnecessarily constrain a competitive land market and otherwise impede feasible development, thus adding to shelter costs. While the extent of such effects is controversial, there is general recognition that they may be significant. Identifying, understanding, and addressing these constraints is essential in order to carry out the County's commitment to facilitate adequate housing development. Under state law, local government must plan and control the use of ' all private and public land. With landowner and public participation, the County determines broad land use designations and specific zoning for the unincorporated area. ' The Land Use Element (LUE) map identifies potential areas for development. Within general public facility constraints, market forces will determine the exact location and timing of development. The Land Use Element has eight land use designations. Residential development is permitted in the following categories at indicated densities: Categories Dwelling Units Per Acre ' Rural Residential 0.025 - 0.5 Suburban Residential 0.5 - 18 Urban Residential 18 and above Urban Activity Center Per Zoning Regulations The Rural Residential category is applied to areas in which limited residential use is compatible with the natural character of the terrain and availability of infrastructure. The intensity of development of these areas is thus severely constrained. ' The Suburban Residential category is characterized by a wide range of housing types from estate to attached dwelling units (townhomes, condominiums, apartments and clustered arrangements). This category permits considerable flexibility for residential development. Site-specific considerations and infrastructure capacity will determine densities permitted for project proposal. H 3-1 The Urban Residential category is applied to areas where intensive residential development is compatible with surrounding urban ' development. Development within this category is characterized )y intensive multiple-family residential uses such as apartment, condominium, townhouse and clustered residential units. Though this category is the most conducive for affordable housing, it is also the most demanding on infrastructure capacity. The Urban Activity Center category is intended to facilitate ' high-intensity focal points for the community, with a mix of residential, business, cultural, and public facilities. These centers are located adjacent to major transportation corridors t) allow the most efficient use of the circulation system, includin.; , transit. Urban Activity Centers, due to their diversity of uses, are, at ' times, located in areas significantly impacted by noise. The major sources of significant noise in Orange County are aircraft and highway vehicles. While both can usually be mitigated to acceptable levels indoors, aircraft noise cannot be mitigated outdoors because of its overhead source. State law and County policy prohibit residential development and similar uses in high-noise (+65 CNEL) areas near E1 Toro Marine Corps Air Station ' and John Wayne Airport. (Residential land use is the most sensitive because of the nature of activities which occur over a 24-hour period as well as the generally accepted need for, and design incorporating, outdoor living areas.) These policies thus preclude residential development in certain areas or, if approvel, may increase development costs due to required attenuation measures. ' The Orange County Zoning Code enables implementation of the General Plan through either conventional or planned community zoning. The nature and complexity of zoning can be a short-term ' constraint to development if project design is inconsistent with zoning. The zoning of property is a local option granted to each ' jurisdiction by state legislation. The County of Orange has opted to zone property and has wide discretion regarding the substance of its code (e.g. , type and intensity of uses permitted, site , development standards, etc.). It may permit uses outright or by further discretionary review, e.g. , by use permit. The County has moved away from a rigid code and, instead, has granted greater ; flexibility via use permits and site plans. Such flexibility comes at a cost, however, because discretionary review prolongs processing time and does not assure a specific outcome. b. Private , The unincorporated area is characterized by several large ' landowners that plan, develop, market and, in some cases, build housing. These planned communities have been a widely noted H 3-2 , I _ feature of the county's development. They have greatly facilitated the implementation of many County policies such as the General Plan's balanced land use objectives and Growth Management Program, since the County can essentially work with one large developer instead of many small developers. At the same time, planned community owners/developers have independent strategies ' and quality standards for development that may impose constraints beyond those contained in County land use regulations. 2. Adequacy of Residential Land Approvals and Inventory of Residential ' Sites. The General Plan Land Use Element commits the County to the following ' policy: To provide a variety of residential densities that permit a mix of housing opportunities affordable to the county's labor force. rThe Growth Management Program (GHP), described in the Land Use Element, implements Phased Development requiring project proponents to submit annual monitoring reports (AMRs) which project future development activity, identify public service deficiencies, and identify mitigation measures. This practice of submitting AMRs is intended to enable the County and the private sector to identify and ' resolve potential deficiencies before they restrict development. This is essential for continued availability of land for residential development. The GMP will be evaluated periodically to determine if ' the goal is being adequately met. The County, on August 3, 1988, adopted a new Growth Management Plan Element (GMPE) which is the most current expression of county growth management policies and is an extension of the LUE Growth Management Program. The Element contains County policies on the planning and provision of traffic improvements and public facilities that are ' necessary for orderly growth and development. A major goal of the Growth Management Plan Element is to ensure that traffic improvements and public facilities are planned and implemented in an efficient, timely manner to meet the current and projected needs of Orange County. The County recognizes that whether projected needs are met will depend r on many factors in addition to the adequacy of residential development approvals. These other factors include market conditions, governmental financial constraints, and private development decisions. Together with infrastructure availability, interest rates, etc. , these factors will also determine the pace of housing development. As required by Government Code Section 65583(a)(3), the County has prepared a detailed inventory of land suitable for residential development or redevelopment, along with an estimate of the amount of growth that can be accommodated during the time frame of the Housing Element (1989-94). This material is contained in Appendix B. The r ' H 3-3 I r purpose of this i.nventory is to demonstrate that the County has ' designated and planned for sufficient residential sites to accommodate the level of groi►th indicated in the Regional Housing Needs Assessment and the County's quantified objectives for new housing development. , 3. Agricultural Preserves The County's agricultural preserve policy implemented in 1969 was , intended to provide time to plan and develop mechanisms to preserve agricultural land. These policies are contained in the Resources Element of the General Plan. ' The state enacted the Williamson Act in 1965 in response to increasing land taxes which were forcing agricultural land into more intensive uses. The act assesses agricultural land at a lower rate than non-agricultural land. In exchange, landowners enter an agreement with the local jurisdiction to limit uses on the contracted land for at least 10 years.. There are approximately 63,000 acres within the , county held as agricultural preserves under Williamson Act provisions. Since 1980, approximately 13,000 acres have been removed from agricultural preserves and subsequently planned for urban development. , The land inventory analysis contained in Appendix B concludes that there currently are sufficient residential sites designated for development (i.e. , General Plan and zoning entitlements) to , accommodate future 5-year needs, and agricultural preserves do not pose a constraint: to development. If this situation were to change in the future, the County's agricultural preserve policy may need to be ' reconsidered. B. Site Improvement Requirements, Fees and Exactions The General Plan, the: Zoning Ordinance, planned community regulations, coastal plans and specific plans provide the goals, policies and regulations for planning and development in Orange County. ' The primary purpose of Orange County's planning process is to provide a balanced living environment so that all economic segments may enjoy a fL11 complement of public services. To achieve this goal, the County imposes , site improvement requirements upon new development projects. As part of its project review and approval procedures, the County ' frequently recommends: conditions of approval for General Plan amendments , zone changes, discretionary permits (e.g. , use permits, site plans, etc. ) and subdivision maps. These conditions are imposed in accordance with state law and County policy, and they address matters of public concern as they relate to specific projects. Most development conditions have beer standardized to ensure equitable administration of the approval process. Development conditions are reviewed on a regular basis by the County to , ensure that they are applied consistently and that they are reasonably related to the use for which the property is intended. H 3-4 ' The following are examples of development conditions imposed upon residential projects. When not precluded by public safety considerations, modifications of these requirements are granted by the County in order to reduce project development costs and increase affordable housing production. ' 1. Grading These requirements address both geological conditions and aesthetic impacts, e.g. , preservation/enhancement of views, landforms, screening, landscaping, etc. They are usually applied at the site- specific level. Modifications in the form of less contour grading, fewer manufactured berms, increased grading area allowances, etc. have been approved for affordable housing projects. 2. Historic Sites ' Requirements addressing conservation of historic resources located within proposed projects are usually applied at the site-specific level of approval. Reduction of standards for the size of sites to be preserved or restricted from development have been approved for affordable housing projects. ' 3. Regional Park and Open Space Requirements In conjunction with the approval of residential General Plan amendments or zone change, regional park and open space requirements are imposed for the dedications of regional and community open space and recreation areas. Since the cost of housing may be affected by the size and value of such dedication areas, reductions in ' requirements and increases in density have been provided to effect cost savings. Reduced park and open space dedication requirements and the corresponding cost savings are achieved at the expense of environmental quality, however. 4. Archaeological/Paleontological Sites ' These requirements address reporting, preservation, and salvage of sites and artifacts. Changes to substantive reporting requirements and the preservation of sites in lieu of salvage excavation and/or the capping and developing of sites have been approved for some projects ' to cut costs. Board of Supervisors policy permits the County to pay the cost of salvage when funds have been budgeted from building permit fees for that purpose. The possibility was explored in 1986-87 for budgeting H/CD funds for payment of salvage on affordable housing projects but was found infeasible. ' 5. Landscaping Requirements ' These requirements address screening and scenic enhancement and are usually applied at the site-specific level. ' H 3-5 1 r Modifications have been permitted for some projects in the form of ' reduced plant coverage and the use of less expensive species. Lowered landscaping cost:: help reduce the cost of affordable housing. ' 6. Parks and Recreation Requirements These requirements apply to local parks and park improvements. County , exactions for parkland are guided by the appropriate sections of the state Subdivision Map Act (California Government Code Section 66475-66478) incorporating provisions of the Quimby Act (SB 1785), ' which permit locE:l agencies to require developers to provide parkland at the rate of up to three acres per thousand population. The County requires two and one-half acres of parkland per thousand population, which is less than the maximum permitted by state law. In addition, ' policies contained in the Recreation Element allow up to 25 percent of this requirement to be satisfied by private recreational facilities within planned communities and up to 100 percent of the requirement in ' other areas. 7. Transportation Facilities Requirements These requirements consist of private sector assistance through the ' County's Major Thoroughfare and Bridge Fee Program. Payment of fees has been postponed for affordable housing projects resulting in , development cost savings. 8. Site Development Standards These requirements are established through land use regulations. ' Modification of standards for building height, setback, and parking requirements often results in cost savings for affordable housing , projects. In response to the need for affordable housing, the County adopted an Affordable Housing Incentive Use Permit procedure (Section 7-9-140 cf ' the Orange County Zoning Code). The purpose of this ordinance is tc permit deviation!: from site development standards that provide flexibility for guilders in order to deliver a more affordable ' product. The extent to which the site development requirements discussed abo%e are applied to residential projects is based upon an evaluation by , decision makers (of their effect upon the quality, quantity and cost of housing to be produced. C. Building Code and Enforcement ' The basic purpose of the Building Code and its enforcement is to protect the public from unsafe buildings and unsafe conditions associated with construction. However, constantly changing materials and construction techniques make it essential to continually review and update the Building Code to avoid obsolescence and ensure that health and safety standards are ' maintained. Such code maintenance also provides an opportunity to ensure that the code does not mandate unnecessarily costly materials or H 3-6 ' construction techniques. Accordingly, the Building Code is similar to those used by other local agencies in California, and does not present any special constraints to the development of housing. D. Processing Requirements ' The California Government Code establishes permitted time periods for local agencies to review and act upon private development proposals. Examples of such restrictions for several discretionary permits are ' identified in Figure 3-1, "Comparative Development Processing Time Limits." Typically, state restrictions, especially those imposed by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), are much less stringent than those set by County policy. The county strives to complete all project ' reviews within the time limitations defined by County policy regardless of state allowances. ' An amendment to the California Government Code (Section 65862) permits concurrent processing of applications for general plan amendments and zone changes when inconsistency between the general plan and zoning is the result of a general plan amendment or element adoption. The Board of ' Supervisors, in 1980, approved a policy to encourage concurrent processing of development proposals, when appropriate, in order to reduce processing time. Concurrent processing is permitted for the following actions: ' 1. Zone Change - use permit - tentative tract map 2. Zone Change - tentative tract map 3. Zone Change - use permit ' 4. Zone Change - site plan 5. Zone Change - -tentative tract map use permit site plan (These planning activities may also include a general plan amendment as cited in Section 65862 of the California Government Code.) E. State-Imposed Requirements 1. California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) ' The environmental review process generally constrains the development process by increasing project processing time. CEQA review, which is mandated by the state, can cause unavoidable processing delays that ' ultimately result in additional costs to the home buyers. In an effort to streamline the environmental review process, the county implemented the Master Environmental Assessment (MEA) Program ' to achieve the following goals: a. Centralize and improve data accessibility. b. Expedite the environmental review process. ' H 3-7 FIGURE 3-1 , COMPARATIVE DEVELOPMENT PROCESSING TIME LIMITS ' Item State Maximum County Policy , General Plan Amendments None None Zone Changes None None ' Subdivisions o Action on Tentative flaps 50 days 50 days ' Environmental Documentation ' o Additional Data Needed -- Notice to Applicant 30 days 5 working days o Determination of Neg<<tive Declaration ' or EIR Requirement for project 45 days 20 working day: o Completion of Negative Declarations 60 days 14 days , o Certification of Finill EIR 1 year 1 year Variances, Use Permits, ' Site Plans, Grading Perm'..ts o Additional Data needed -- , Notice to applicant 30 days 30 days o Final Action on Project 1 year 1 year ' Building Permits None None 1 H 3-8 1 c. Minimize development costs. d. Ensure responsible development patterns. e. Develop more specific performance standards from which to assess the viability of projects. ' The MEA serves to streamline the environmental review process from the research and analysis stage of a project through the decision-making phase. This results in shorter processing times, which is ultimately a cost cutting measure resulting in lower unit prices or rents. In Fiscal Year 1987-88 projects were submitted to the Environmental and Special Projects Division (ESP) for environmental review. Of the total number of projects submitted, 2 were determined to have the potential for significant impact on the environment and were required ' to submit an EIR. In Orange County unincorporated areas, delays caused as a result of the EIR process affect a minor portion of projects submitted for processing. ' 2. Article 34 Article 34 of the California Constitution requires that any low-rent ' housing projects "developed, constructed, or acquired in any manner" by any state public agency receive voter approval. A voter referendum must be held whether or not there are local costs associated with development and operation. The requirements of Article 34 have imposed a barrier to development of housing for low-income families by state and local agencies not ' generally incurred by comparable development undertaken by the private sector. This requirement has discouraged many communities from seeking federal and state housing assistance. In addition, the resulting delays are a major factor in the already difficult task of developing affordable housing for those of low income. Article 34 was designed by its backers as a mechanism for constraining the development of the traditional public housing projects, and in most instances has accomplished that end. Although these provisions have slowed the development of housing for low-income, aged, and handicapped persons, many communities have gone to the electorate and ' received approval for public housing developments. In June 1980, a general Article 34 authorization was passed in the ' unincorporated county and 11 cities. The effectiveness of such an election is now questionable in light of the recent California Supreme Court case of Davis vs. the City of Berkeley (1988) 47 Cal. 3d 512 which invalidated a general authorization adopted by Berkeley voters. That decision is currently being reheared by the Supreme Court. ' H 3-9 3. Building Energy Standards for Residential Development (Title 24) ' On September 25, 1981 the state Building Standards Commission adopted revised building energy standards for new residential development. These standards, which went into effect on July 13, 1982, established energy budgets (maximum energy use levels) for residential buildings for each of the 15 established climate zones in California. ' The cost of complying with these standards can range from $500 to $17,000 depending on the package type and climate zone. ' Additional information regarding energy conservation is provided in ' Appendix E. F. Cost of Land, Construction and Financing 1. Cost of Land ' Residential land prices in Orange County have risen dramatically sinl:e the early 1980s. According to the Construction Industry Research Board, the cost of improved land in 1989 accounts for 35% of the total ' cost of a single family house compared to 27.8% in 1980. 2. Construction Costs ' Construction costs for residential units have increased rapidly over the past decade. Land prices, together with construction costs, have pushed up the cost of housing greatly. ' In a market study prepared for the County in 1983, the Land Economic,; Group developed six construction scenarios based on types of units aid ' quality of constraction. Square foot costs were translated into construction cost by unit adjusted for Orange County. Average construction cost in Orange County during 1983 for a single family detached dwelling was $46 per square foot; for a condominium ' townhouse, it was $32 per square foot, and apartment averaged $37 pe: square foot. Hinimum prices ranged from $40,670 to $51,640 per unit for an apartment, $40,190 to $68,900 for a townhouse, and $58,590 to ' $70,980 for a single-family detached house. Lower sales prices could result from a reduction in amenities or quality of materials (above a minimum level consistent with health aid , safety and adequate performance). To the developer and home-buyer, interest rates have the greatest impact on the ability to construct )r purchase a home. Interest rates, however, are determined by national ' policies and economic conditions, and there is little that local governments can dD to affect these rates. ' Title 24 compliance costs based upon CEC (low end) and Southern California builders (high end) estimates. H 3-10 3. Financing Costs a. Orange County Revenue Bond Program ' The County of Orange has established two revenue bond housing programs to increase the supply of affordable housing stock in the ' county. Under these programs, tax-exempt bonds are issued to provide funds for construction and mortgage loans to encourage developers to provide both rental and for sale housing which is affordable to income qualified families and individuals. Authority for use of tax-exempt financing is governed by the Internal Revenue Code which sets a ceiling or cap on the volume of tax-exempt "private activity bonds" that each state can issue each year. Private activity bonds include qualified mortgage bonds issued for private uses and other projects such as Industrial Development Bonds and student loans. Each state can choose the ' volume of each bond type it issues, as long as the overall cap is not exceeded. For the calendar year 1988 the statewide ceiling was $1,349,050,000. By setting a nationwide volume cap, the ' Federal Government controls the amount of tax-exempt private activity bonds available. The volume cap is not an allocation of Federal dollars, but rather a limit on the authority to issue these types of bonds. ' The funding for these projects comes from the investors who purchase these bonds and receive in return interest earnings that ' are exempt from Federal Income taxation. Debt service for principal and interest payments to the investors is paid back by the home mortgage payments in the case of single family issues or the rental payments in the case of multi-family bond issues. ' (1) Single Family Residential Mortgage Revenue Bond Program The Single Family Residential Mortgage Revenue Bond Program has existed in Orange County since 1980. The program is designed to provide mortgage loans to first-time homebuyers whose incomes do not exceed maximum Federal limits. Buyers ' must also intend to live in the homes as their principal residence. Mortgage loans offered under the bond program generally have lower interest rates than conventional loans. Loans are made available for attached and detached single family residences primarily in eligible developments at various locations throughout the County. A smaller portion of funds is available for existing or resale units Countywide. ' Since the inception of the Program, lower cost mortgage loans have been made available for approximately seven thousand single family residences. (Statistics represent data through June 1988). The following is a summary of the Single Family Residential ' Mortgage Revenue Bond issues by year. ' H 3-11 1 Year Number of Issues Total Bond Issues 1980 1 $100,000,000 1982 3 129,345,000 ' 1983 2 147,800,000 1984 1 55,800,00 1985 1 58,999,870 ' 1987 1 32,194,540 1988 1 27,687,744 TOTAL 10 $551,827,154 ' (2) Multi-family Revenue Bond Program The Multi-family Revenue Bond Program was developed in Orange County in 1982. This program is designed to make financing available to developers for the construction of multi-family residential rental units in the County. In order to receive ' financing through the bond program, developers must reserve fo 10 years, 20 percent of the units for rental by families or individuals who earn 80 percent or less of the median family ' income in Orange County. In addition, for recent projects, half of the so-designated units must be reserved for occupany on a priority basis for tenants who generally earn 50 percent or less of the median income. Furthermore, projects financed ' after the passage of the 1986 Tax Reform Act must commit 20 percent of the total units for income qualified tenants for a period of 15 years. Since the inception of the program, the ' County has issued bonds totaling $1,096,086,876 to develop 16,706 a.partment units throughout the County. Of these, 3,991 have been designated for occupany by income qualified tenants. The following is a summary of the Multi-family Revenue Bond ' Program by year: Year Number of Issues Total Bond Issues ' 1982 4 $ 40,137,200 1983 1 55,500,000 1984 8 115,690,000 ' 1985 28 856,609,676 1986 1 7,000,000 1988 1 21,150,000 ' TOTAL 43 $1,096,086,876 Note: Statistics represent data through June 1988. The program is designed for new projects that have not begin , construction before County approval of a bond inducement resolution. (The County can issue bonds for existing rental developments provided the project is acquired after the da :e of inducement and at least 15% of the bond proceeds are spent to rehabilitate the property. ) H 3-12 ' b. Tax Increment Funds Except as otherwise provided in Health and Safety Code Section 33334.2, not less then twenty percent (209:) of all taxes which are allocated to the Agency pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 33670 shall be used by the Agency for the purpose of increasing and improving the County's supply of housing for persons and families of low or moderate income and very low-income households. The housing set-aside funds shall be placed in separate fund and taken off the top of tax increment received each year by the Agency prior to establishing an expenditure program for public works and other Agency activities each fiscal year. The funds available annually will depend upon the rate of property value appreciation within the project area. In addition to the mandatory set-aside requirement, the Neighborhood Development and Preservation (NDAPP) Plan calls for housing improvement and development as a central activity of the program. (1) Home Improvement Program (HIP) The Housing Improvement Program has as its goal the rehabilitation of existing homes that have deteriorated because of age, use, or deferred maintenance. The Program will provide low-interest loans, deferred payments loans, and grants for a variety of improvements aimed at bringing these homes to current standards for decent, safe, and sanitary housing. Assistance will be directed to single-family and multi-family rental and ownership units under procedures established by the County Housing and Community Development Department (H/CD). Loans will be made through private financial institutions where appropriate agreements can be developed. Grants will be made directly to property owners. Specific activities will include home improvements, reconstruction and additions, site improvements, loan processing and refinancing, contract administration, and construction inspection. Estimated production is based on the needs established by the current Housing Assistance Plan approved by the Board of Supervisors. (2) New Housing Development Program (NHD) The County's current H/CD program to promote the production of housing for low and moderate income residents of Orange County will continue under the Neighborhood Preservation and Improvement Plan. The New Housing Program assists private developers and non-profit. CTL:ltPA01-299/9177 9020617265000 H 3-13 CHAPTER FOUR: GOALS, QUANTIFIED OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES � A. Goals The overall goal of the County Housing Element is as follows: Provide decent and adequate housing with respect to selection by type, price, and tenure in a satisfying environment for all persons regardless of age, race, sex, marital status, ethnic background, socioeconomic status, or disability. More specific goals and policies are described below. Goal 1: HOUSING SUPPLY AND RESIDENTIAL CHOICE An adequate supply of housing that varies sufficiently in cost, style, tenure, and neighborhood type to meet the economic and social needs of every existing and future resident of the county; and which provides sufficient housing opportunities for employees of county businesses and public service providers to ensure the continued economic vitality of the county. Goal 2: EQUAL HOUSING OPPORTUNITY Equal housing opportunities available to all persons without discrimination on the basis of race, religion, ethnicity, sex, age, marital status, or household composition. Goal 3: HOUSING CONSERVATION AND NEIGHBORHOOD PRESERVATION A structurally sound and well-maintained housing stock, and residential neighborhoods with adequate and coordinated public and private services and facilities, clean air, quiet and pleasant surroundings, reasonable assurances of safety and security, and a sense of community identity. Goal 4: HOUSING COOPERATION AND COORDINATION Countywide and regional coordination of housing, community and economic development activities, with private sector and citizen involvement. B. Quantified Objectives The California Government Code mandates specific Housing Element requirements, one of which is to establish: "A statement of the community's goals, quantified objectives, and policies relative to the maintenance, preservation, improvement and development of housing. It is recognized that the total housing needs identified may exceed available resources and the community's ability to satisfy this need within the context of the general plan requirements. Under these circumstances, the quantified objectives need not be identical to the total housing needs. The quantified objectives shall establish the maximum number of housing units by income category that can be constructed, rehabilitated, and conserved over a five-year time frame." (Section 65583(b), revised effective 1-1-92). H 4-1 The following quantified objectives have been developed in consideration of the County's goals, its fair share allocation of regional housing needs, and available financial resources and regulatory mechanisms. Quantified objectives by income category are established as follows for the period July 1989 to June 1994 and are summarized in Table 4-1. Note: The following modifications to the quantified objectives were mad.: in 1993: 1) quantified objectives were added for the very-low and above-moderate income categories; 2) the existing quantified objectives were broken down to show the number of units to be constructed, rehabilitated and conserved by income category; and 3) the number of units to be conserved was increased to include t.iose units to be conserved under the new Preservation of Assisted Rental Units Program. Other than these modifications, the quantified objectives are the same as those established for the unincorporated area as it existed in July 1989. Since that time, the communities of Dana Point, La;;una Niguel, Laguna Hills and Lake Forest have incorporated, and Gypsum Canyon and Aegean Hills have been annexed to the Cities of Anaheim and Mission Viejo, respectively. These incorporations and annexations have decreased the unincorporated area by 25,402 acre.;. The quantified objectives will be proposed for amendment in 1994, as part of the five-year comprehensive Housing Element update, to reflect incorporations and annexations. 1. New Construction a. Total New Units Added: 24,134 - This forecast is consistent with current County policy and Land i1se Element assumptions. It includes only the unincorporated area alid has and will continue to be affected by annexations and incorporations (see note above). b. New Affordable Units Added: 6,033 Of the 24,134 new units added to the housing stock during the 1989-1994 time frame, 25 percent are designated as affordable to low- and moderate-income households. Low and moderate income is defined as 121) percent or less of the county median. Of this 25 percent, 10 percent (2,413) are designated for households earning; 80 percent or less of the median income ("Low"), 10 percent (2,413) are designated for households earning between 81 and 100 percent of median income ("Moderate I") and 5 percent (1,207) are designated for households earning between 101 and 120 percent of median income ("Moderate II"). H 4-2 I TABLE 4-1 QUANTIFIED OBJECTIVES July 1989 - June 1994 Income Level (X of median) Nev Construction Rehabilitation Conservation Very-low income 150 375 400 (50% and below) Low-Income 2,263 650 413 (50.1-80.0%) Low Income Subtotal 2,413 1,025 813 Moderate-I 2,413 200 0 (80.1-100.0%) Moderate-II 1,207 75 0 (100.1-120.0%) Above moderate 18,101 0 0 (above 120.0%) Total 24,134 1,300 813 MBM:mbm 2081714320945 H 4-3 This affordable housing objective includes units built pursuant to the Housing Opportunities Program, as well as Community Developrent Block Grant (CDBG) and redevelopment-funded units. It is recognized that significant financial subsidies and incentives will be necessary to achieve these objectives, especially in the low and very low income categories. In conjunction with Housing Element Amendment 1993-1, the Board of Supervisors established quantified objectives for the very-low Z.nd above-moderate income categories (50 percent or less, and above 120 percent of the County's median income, respectively). The very-low-ina)me objective is based upon reasonable expectations of the financial resources available during the five year period. 2. Existing Units Rehabilitated and Conserved a. Units Rehabilitated: 1,300 Programs that: assist in the rehabilitation of substandard housir.g include the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Home Improvement Program, the Rental Rehabilitation Program, and the Neighborhood Development and Preservation Program (redevelopment ). The objective for the number of units to be rehabilitated under these programs for the 1989-94 period is 1,300. This objective assumes the continuance of federal and state funcing at current levels. b. Units Conserved: 813 This objective addresses programs that encourage the maintenance of affordable housing units. The three major programs that serve this function are the Section 8 Existing Rental Assistance Program, the Aftercare Rental Assistance Program and Preservation of Assisted Rental Units Program. All three of these programs are administered by EMA/Housing and Redevelopment which includes the Orange County Housing Authority (OCHA). It is estimated that 377 units will be available under the Section 8 Existing Rental Assistance program (353 Certificates and 24 Vouchers), and 23 units will be available under the Aftercare Rental Assistance Program during this five-year time frame. These programs are discussee more fully in Chapter 5. Since these programs require certain property maintenance standards, they encourage conservation of these existing units. H 4-4 The objective of the Preservation of Assisted Rental Units Program (see Appendix G) is to conserve all of the 413 units which are at risk of converting to market-rate rents due to expiring affordability restrictions during the five-year period. All of the units at risk during the 5-year period were assisted under the County's Inclusionary Housing Program/Housing Opportunities Program. In addition to these government programs to encourage conservation, there are private property maintenance agreements contained in condominium and planned-unit-development covenants, conditions and restrictions (CC&Rs). According to the Census Bureau, 17 percent of all housing units in the unincorporated county area were identified as condominiums in 1980. It is estimated that the majority of residential units built since then are also covered under CC&Rs, and this trend is expected to continue. These private maintenance agreements augment the County's conservation efforts because they require continuing maintenance and repair of the housing stock. C. Policies The following policies are intended to provide direction in decision-making and development of specific programs in support of the goals and quantified objectives. 1. Housing Supply and Residential Choice Policies 1-A To continue to support programs aimed at making affordable housing units available at a monthly cost no more than 25 percent to 30 percent of each households gross monthly income, depending on income category. (See definitions in Appendix D, Housing Opportunities Program, Policies and Guidelines.) 1-B To continue to encourage coordination and uniformity in all regulations relating to housing in order to minimize processing times and costs. 1-C To continue to provide opportunities for new construction methods and housing types to increase the supply of housing for all segments of the population. 1-D To continue to implement existing financing mechanisms and stimulate the development of innovative financial techniques that will reduce housing cost. 1-E To continue to seek ways to reduce development processing and review time by County government to the maximum extent feasible, with special processing assistance for affordable housing projects. 1-F To maintain effective mechanisms for ensuring that the maximum feasible housing benefit is realized from public funds used to assist builders or consumers of housing, and to investigate mechanisms to recapture public funds when directly subsidized units Are prematurely sold or otherwise withdrawn from the subsidizing program. H 4-5 l� 1-G To consider a zoning code amendment to allow transitional housing facilities a,s a permitted use in appropriate zoning districts without requiring a use permit. 1-H To continue to pursue land use policies and regulations which encourage manufactured housing as a means of reducing housing costs. i 1-I To consider a zoning code amendment to amend selective existing commercial districts to allow residential use. 1-J To consider a density incentive for apartments, i.e. , grant apartments a higher density than condominiums so apartment builc.ers I� can better compete for available land. 1-K To consider establishing a minimum density "floor" below which ]and suitable for apartments could not be developed. The intent is to discourage the down-zoning of such parcels to lower density sini-le- family residential uses. 1-L To continue to utilize County mortgage revenue bond financing of private sector lending for economically feasible apartment construction. 1-M To continue to coordinate infrastructure financing measures in order to reduce housing construction costs and minimize the financial burden on homeowners and renters. 1-N To continue to pursue all available state and federal financial assistance for the provision of very low-, low- and moderate-income housing. 1-0 To continue to plan and zone land to encourage a wide variety of neighborhood:: and housing opportunities affordable to the county's labor force. 1-P To continue to coordinate the location of major housing developments, particularly affordable housing and multi-family units, with Existing and proposed highway and transit routes, major employment centers, shopping facilities, and other services. 1-0 To continue t.o encourage residential infill development to make efficient uses of existing public facilities. 1-R To continue to support programs that address the housing needs of special groups such as the elderly, physically, mentally and developmentally disabled, farmworkers, those in need of temporary shelter, single-parent families, military personnel, large families, and. refugees. 1-S To develop an. in-lieu fee policy as an alternative method of complying with affordable housing requirements. r� H 4-6 1 1-T To work with the BIA and other housing advocates to support increased state and federal tax incentives to encourage low-income housing construction and handicapped-accessible housing. 1-U To investigate the feasibility of participating in a regional employee/housing linkage program based on a survey of employee needs to assist in providing housing affordable to very-low and low-income workers. 1-V To preserve the affordability of existing low-income multi-family rental units assisted through federal, state and local programs which have expiring affordability restrictions and which are at risk of converting to market rate units. 1-V To identify sites that are now available or easily made available for transitional shelters for homeless families. 2. Equal Housing Opportunity Policies 2-A To continue to support actions to reduce regulatory constraints to housing which impede equal housing opportunities. 2-B To continue affirmative action efforts to provide equal opportunity in housing. 2-C To continue to support adequate relocation assistance to persons and families displaced by demolition or conversion of residential structures. 2-D To continue to encourage builders to provide ground floor units of rental and condominium projects which have one wheelchair accessible entrance and at least one bathroom that accommodates wheelchairs by: o Providing incentives and assistance to builders willing to build such units. o Distributing information to builders and offering them technical support in the design of adaptable/accessible building units. o Undertaking a demonstration project with a willing builder and documenting and disseminating the results to other builders. 2-E To consider support of just cause eviction legislation at the state and federal level. H 4-7 r 3. Housing Conservation and Neighborhood Preservation Policies i 3-A To continue 1:o promote the adequate provision of public facilities for all residents, especially to those whose needs are greatest. 3-B To continue -:o promote new housing that conserves land and resources and is cost efficient. 3-C To continue :o support programs designed to encourage the maintenance and minor repair of structurally sound housing units to prevent their deterioration. 3-D To continue to support programs designed to rehabilitate deteriorated units. 3-E To continue to promote development design which provides for _ maximum possible residential security and safety. 3-F To continue to ensure that the conversion of rental units or mobile home parks n ownership or other uses occurs in a responsible manner to protect the rights of both owners and tenants. - T continue to encourage voluntary compliance with weather roof:.n 3 G o u g y p p g measures to reduce utility costs, specifically: water heater insulation blankets, low-flow shower heads, ceiling insulation, caulking and weather stripping, and duct insulation. 4. Housing Cooperation and Coordination Policies 4-A To continue to monitor and participate in the activities of local governments, citizen groups and the private sector, as appropriate, to encourage the provision of adequate housing for all households. 4-B To continue to encourage coordination of housing, community and economic development activities among local governments in the county's housing market area. 4-C To continue to encourage recommendations from housing industry professionals in identifying opportunities for cost savings whi=h will not adversely affect public health and safety. 4-D To support the establishment of a countywide housing task force and trust fund to assist in the development of transitional housing for homeless families and to assist the production of housing for very-low and low-income households, and support the efforts of existing local and regional non-profit housing development corporations to implement this policy. Potential funding sources could include CDBG monies, employment-housing linkage fees, hotel bed taxes, recapture of public funds, affordable housing in-lieu fees, state/federal grants, private donations, etc. JD/MBM:mbm/tk 2042210084035 H 4-8 CHAPTER FIVE: IMPLEMENTATION PROGRAMS A. Underlying Principles The Orange County Housing Element is based on the following basic principles which govern its implementation programs. 1. The General Plan establishes the basic tenet of the Housing Element -- specifically, a balanced community concept that maximizes the availability of housing opportunities. A primary focus of County policy is to facilitate an adequate total supply of housing. 2. The Housing Element must be framed in such a way that it allows the public sector and the private sector to contribute to solutions by doing what each does best. 3. It is important to focus energies toward satisfying housing need on what can be done most effectively now, and programming activities beyond existing capability for later resource commitment and attention. 4. It is essential to conserve the valuable existing housing stock through a high degree of responsibility on the part of individual owners for maintaining the condition of existing housing, regardless of age. 5. It is essential to recognize that it has never been possible to build new for-sale housing at affordable prices for all income levels, and that housing for those households with lower incomes has traditionally been provided by the resale and rental market and by various government subsidy programs. 6. Orange County's housing and economic market forces should be used to the maximum extent to reach goals dealing with affordable housing. 7. The major thrust of investment of public fund in solving housing problems should be targeted specifically to those households having an annual income of less than 80 percent of the county's median family income. B. Program Descriptions In order to make adequate provision for the housing needs of all economic segments of the community, and meet or exceed the quantified objectives set forth in Chapter 4, the programs described on the following pages have been established. H 5-1 1. Aftercare Rental Assistance Program a. Action: Provide rental assistance to handicapped and disabled very-low-income persons. b. Discussion: This is the only rental assistance program being implemented to serve disabled households earning less than 50% of the county median income (as established by HUD). The Aftercare Program w.is established through the state Department of Housing and Community Development (state HCD) in conjunction with the state Department of Health Federal funding is provided to state HCD from HUD. The progr;Lm operates in the same manner as the Section 8 Existing Rental Assistance? Program (see p. H 5-22). Rental assistance is provided to eligible handicapped persons as an alternative to institutional living. A total of 166 units are administered by OCHA countywide under this program, with 23 of these in the unincorporated area. c. Source of Funds: HUD/State HCD d. New or Existing Program: Existing e. Implementation Schedule: Ongoing f. Responsible Agency: Orange County Housing Authority g. Program Objectives: (1) Maintain and increase, if possible, the availability of rental assistanc? to handicapped very-low-income persons. The specific objective for the 1989-94 period is 23 units based on current funding levels. j H 5-2 , ` 2. Block Grand Home Improvement Program a. Action: The Home Improvement Program of the Housing and Community Development Program provides low-interest loans and grants to owner-occupants and investor-owners to rehabilitate residential units and owner-occupied mobile homes in unincorporated county areas and in cities contracting with the County for administration of their rehabilitation programs. Cities currently contracting with the County are Cypress, Dana Point, Laguna Beach, La Palma, Los Alamitos, Mission Viejo, Placentia, San Clemente, Seal Beach, Stanton, Tustin, and Yorba Linda. Specific unincorporated areas that receive housing services are Anaheim Island, Ball/Brookhurst, Colonia Independencia, Southwest Anaheim, E1 Toro, E1 Modena, Midway City, Olive Island, Modjeska Canyon, Trabuco Canyon, Silverado Canyon, Santa Ana Heights, and West Garden Grove Island. Additionally, any eligible low/moderate-income family living in any unincorporated area may receive assistance from the "spot" rehabilitation program to correct code or incipient code violations. b. Discussion: Many tract homes in Orange County are over twenty years old; rehabilitation of homes is needed and will continue to be needed. Also, given the excessive cost of housing, families that would formerly have "moved upward" are having to remain in their homes. Energy conservation measures will continue to be a component of all home improvement projects. Rehabilitation of multi-family units is a i, relatively new program, and it will continue to grow in the next five years. c. Source of Funds: HUD/CDBG Lending Institutions d. New or Existing Program: Existing e. Implementation Schedule: Ongoing f. Responsible Agency: EMA/HCD g. Program Objectives: Prevent deterioration of neighborhoods and preserve existing affordable housing. Approximately 850 rehabilitated low- and very-low-income units are expected to be completed under this program during the 5-year time frame of the element. H 5-3 3. Community Development Elock Grand (CDBG) Program a. Action: The Community Development Block Grant Program is expedited arnl augmented so that the funds are leveraged or used to the greatest possible benefit in meeting low- and very-low-income housing needs. b. Discussion: The Community Development Block Grant Program is an important part of the County's efforts in meeting low- and very-low-income needs. This program is administered by the EMA/HCD Program Office. CDBG funds are utilized to provide low-income housing rehabilitation, community improvements, land writedowns, and other incentives for new low- and very-low-income housing through public/private cooperative agreements. c. Source of Funds: Federal Government (HUD) d. New of Existing Program: Existing e. Implementation Schedule: Ongoing f. Responsible Agency: EMA/HCD g. Program Objectives: (1) Construct and rehabilitate housing for low- and very-low-income households. Approximately 850 rehabilitated and 500 newly constructed low- and very-low-income units are anticipated to be accomplished under this progran during the 5-year time frame of the element. (2) Provide community improvements to prevent neighborhood deterioration. H 5-4 4. Consistency Review Program a. Action: Preparation and distribution of General Plan consistency manual and subsequent updates and revisions. The manual provides uniform basis for General Plan consistency determinations and facilitates streamlined processing of housing development. b. Discussion: State law requires that private and public projects be consistent with the General Plan. As the consistency process is simplified, development processing time (and holding costs) can be minimized. c. Source of Funds: General Fund d. New or Existing Program: Existing e. Implementation Schedule: Ongoing f. Responsible Agency: EMA/Planning g. Program Objectives: (1) Ensure that discretionary approvals are consistent with the General Plan and zoning regulations. �. (2) Minimize permit processing time. H 5-5 1 5. Countywide Homeless Family Transitional Housing Initiative a. Action: Explore the feasibility of creating a regional pool of CDBG funds for the purpose of developing and assisting transitional housing programs for homeless families. b. Discussion: Homeless families in need of temporary shelter are a growing segment of the county's special housing needs. This program would explore the feasibility of a countywide approach to the problem by pooling financial resources and coordinating assistance efforts. The purpose of this program would be to provide low-cost shelter where families could stay a few months while accumulating enough savings to move into traditional rental housing. For example, if the county and each block grant entitlement city were to set aside 7.5 percent of its annual CDBG budget, a total of about $1.4 million would be available each year to support these programs. State law requires local agencies to address the needs of these homeless families. Since the problem does not follow jurisdictional boundaries, this countywide approach would enable each jurisdiction to provide meaningful assistance toward addressing this need. c. Source of Funds: CDBG d. New of Existing Program: New e. Implementation Schedule: 1989-90 f. Responsible Agency: CAO EMA-Housing/Community Development Office g. Program Objectives: (1) Establish a countywide fund for , assisting the development of transitional housing facilities. H 5-6 6. Development Processing System Review a. Action: Review and evaluate development processing procedures and standards on a regular basis in order to minimize delays or unnecessary requirements that can result in higher development costs. b. Discussion: Cutting processing time and eliminating unnecessary requirements will reduce the developer's holding costs for land, design, engineering and the like which in turn directly affect the final costs of the housing product. Efforts the County has already undertaken include creation of the Development Processing Center, a "one stop shop" for all development permits and information, and a simplified Consolidated Planning Application Form. The County also formed the Development Processing Review Committee, made up of local building industry representatives and County management, for the purpose of reviewing new procedures and regulations prior to their adoption, and recommending modification or deletion of unnecessary standards. 1 c. Source of Funds: General Fund Development Fees d. New or Existing Program: Existing e. Implementation Schedule: Existing f. Responsible Agency: EMA/Planning (lead) EMA/Regulations g. Program Objectives: (1) Minimize processing time for development permits. (2) Modify or eliminate unnecessary requirements and standards that increase housing costs. �, H 5-7 7. Federal Housing Programs a. Action: The County of Orange takes every step necessary to encourage and connect the developer with the most feasible of the currently available housing programs of the federal government which meet the needs of Orange County existing and future residents. The County assists developers in pre-design of projects to assure compliance with federal minimum prc,perty standards. b. Discussion: HUD/FFIA currently has a number of programs which can be used if the cost of housing can be brought into the affordable range. Sections 203(b), 225, 245, 223(f) and the standard 202 and 207 are all available. Except for the 203(b) and 235 programs, all processing is accomplished in the Los Angeles area office. Other large federal programs such as CDBG and Section 8 are described separately in this Chapter. c. Source of Funds: Private Mortgage Lenders Federal Housing Programs d. New or Exiting Program: Existing e. Implementation Schedule: Ongoing f. Responsible Agency: EMA/HCD g. Program Objectives: Provide financing for purchase, construction, or rehabilitation of low-income housing. H 5-8 i 8. Homeless Issues Coordination a. Action: The CAO, with the assistance of the Interagency Coordinating Committee, has been directed to identify a series of issues related to the coordination of County resources for the homeless and to submit conclusions to the Board of Supervisors in June of 1989. b. Discussion: Homelessness has become a major concern on a national 1 level. Orange County is not immune to the problem of homelessness. Commitment to help address this issue of concern has continued to increase throughout the county. The Orange County Homeless Issues Task Force, once a group of service providers and involved support organizations, has evolved into a cohesive entity with a Task Force coordinator, membership structure, and five-year General Plan. In January, representatives of the Building Industry Association (BIA) began meeting with representatives of Board offices and County staff to follow through on their commitment of philanthropic involvement. The 1988-89 Orange County Grand Jury identified homeless families as a problem which warranted study and recently released a report with recommendations on the subject. With the evidence of community and private sector commitment and governmental participation, it is time for the County government to assess present and potential resources and to direct its energies toward better coordination. The County cannot and should not assume the full responsibility of serving the homeless. However, it must be part of an integrated partnership with nonprofit providers, governmental entities, private sector and others to serve the homeless people. Orange County government has a record of creative partnerships which lead to noteworthy accomplishments. c. Source of Funds: General Fund d. New or Existing Program: New e. Implementation Schedule: 1989-90 f. Responsible Agency: CAO g. Program Objectives: (1) Restructure the Interagency Coordinating Committee, established on 5/22184, to include, but not be limited to, directors from HCA, SSA, CSA, EMA, and representation from all Board offices. H 5-9 (2) To ensure effective coordination the CAO will serve as Chairman and designate a staff member to serve as the County representative on homeless issues. (3) Effectively coordinate the County's limited resources to better serve the homeless. i . 1 H 5-10 9. Housing Development Finance Program a. Action: Initiated in the spring of 1988, this new Orange County Housing Authority (OCHA) activity is designed to stimulate the development and preservation of low-income rental housing throughout Orange County. b. Discussion: The program is based on the Housing Action Strategy, a long range framework of OCHA objectives, guidelines, financing approaches and program initiatives approved by the Board of Commissioners in February, 1988. The Housing Development Finance Program offers financial and technical assistance aimed at producing and/or preserving affordable rental housing opportunities, as follows: *financial assistance in the form of secondary loans or loan guarantees to developers of privately-owned rental housing in which a portion of the development is reserved for very-low-income tenants, and ' *technical assistance to OCHA member jurisdictions and developers regarding available techniques and resources (such as tax credits, tax exempt bonds and redevelopment funds) which support affordable housing development. c. Source of Funds: OCHA's surplus operating reserve funds (accumulated as a result of efficient management of all OCHA programs). d. New or Existing Program: New e. Implementation Schedule: 1988 start-up f. Responsible Agency: OCHA g. Program Objectives: (1) Provide loans to secure new or existing rental units affordable to very-low-income households. (2) Provide ongoing technical assistance to OCHA's 25 member jurisdictions and local developers seeking financial resources for affordable housing. H 5-11 10. Housing Discrimination,'Affirmative Action a. Action: The County continues to fund a strong and active Fair Housing Council, Human Relations Commission and other organizations concerned with the problems of low- and moderate-income households in the county. b. Discussion: These organizations serve as a necessary county-balance insofar as county housing problems are concerned. c. Source of Funds: Community Development Block Grant Other Subventions d. New or Existing Prcgram: Existing e. Implementation Schedule: Ongoing g f. Responsible Agency: EMA/HCD (lead) Orange County Fair Housing Council Orange County Human Relations Commission g. Program Objectives: Prevent discrimination and promote equal housing opportunities. 1 1 H 5-12 , 11. Housing Element Periodic Review and Update a. Action: Periodically review and update the Housing Element of the General Plan as required by state law. b. Discussion: State Law requires each local jurisdictions to evaluate its Housing Element every five years to determine 1) the effectiveness of the element in achieving stated goals and objectives; 2) the progress in implementing the element's policies and programs; and 3) the appropriateness of the element's goals, objectives, policies, and programs. As part of this effort, the County reexamines its housing needs; resources available for housing production, including the adequacy of the land inventory; and constraints on the conservation and development of housing. c. Source of Funds: General Fund d. New or Existing Program: Existing e. Implementation Schedule: 1989 and every five years thereafter f. Responsible Agencies: EMA/Planning (lead) CAO/Bond/Capital Finance Program CAO/Forecast and Analysis Center CAO/Management and Budget EMA/HCD Program Office OCHA SSA g. Program Objectives: (1) Maintain the Housing Element of the General Plan in compliance with state law. H 5-13 12. Housing Opportunities Program a. Action: A key component of the County's overall housing strategy is to encourage the production of market-rate housing that is affordable to households with incomes of 120 percent or less of the county median. "t is recognized that significant financial subsidies are generally required in order for new very-low-income housing to be economically feasible. The primary objective of the Housing Opportunities Program :.s the production of 2.5 percent of all new housing units within the affordable category. b. Discussion: A full description of the Housing Opportunities Program i;: included in Appendix D. c. Source of Funds: (1) For Housing Private Mortgage Lenders Development: HUD/FHA Revenue Bonds California Housing Finance Agency (CHFA) (2) For Program Expertise General Fund and Capability: Community Development Block Grant d. New or Existing Program: Existing e. Implementation Schedule: Ongoing f. Responsible Agency: EMA/Planning (lead) CAO/Bond/Capital Finance Program g. Program Objectives: (1) To ensure that at least 25% of new housing units in the unincorporated area are affordable to households with incomes of 120 percent or less of the county median, further prescribed as follows: - 10% Low (80% or less of median income) - 10% Moderate I (81-100% of median income) - 5% Moderate II (101-120% of median income) H 5-14 , (2) Implement appropriate measures to ensure that permit processing time for affordable housing developments is minimized. (3) Periodically review codes and standards to ensure that these requirements do not pose an unreasonable obstacle to affordable housing production. (4) Periodically review General Plan and zoning designations to ensure that sufficient land is designated to meet affordable housing production objectives. (5) Provide sufficient incentives to ensure that affordable housing productions is financially feasible. i ' H 5-15 13. Housing Referral Directory a. Action: Maintain a resource directory of housing programs and services to assist the consumer in securing housing services. b. Discussion: The referral directory provides concise information regarding current services available in the county and cities. Primarily targeted for renters and homeowners of low to median income, it has special emphasis on meeting the needs of the homeless. The directory serves as a tool for persons working with the public, enabling them to answer questions and direct inquiries to the proper sources of service. c. Source of Funds: Orange County Housing Authority d. New or Existing Program: Existing e. Implementation Schedule: Ongoing f. Responsible Agency: OCHA g. Program Objectives: (1) Maintain a resource directory of housing programs and services. H 5-16 , 14. Infrastructure Provision and Financing a. Action: Coordination of infrastructure planning, financing, and construction in order to minimize the potential financial burden on homeowners and renters. Two activities will effectuate this objective: (1) Analyze existing and potential infrastructure financing measures for their ability to meet infrastructure needs without an adverse impact on housing costs, and modify the existing infrastructure 1 planning and financing process as necessary. (2) Evaluate measures which reduce infrastructure demands and, consequently, the need for public facilities to serve residential development. b. Discussion: The County's ability to fund or finance the infrastructure ' necessary for residential development through the general property tax levy has diminished in recent years. In order to satisfy existing and future infrastructure needs, the County should consider measures which address these needs without causing a significant increase in housing costs. c. Source of Funds: General Fund BCD Block Grant d. New or Existing Program: Existing. Expand effort and commit new resources to program. e. Implementation Schedule: Ongoing f. Responsible Agencies: CAO/Bond/Capital Finance Program (lead) EMA/Planning g. Program Objectives: (1) Minimize infrastructure costs for ' residential development. (2) Coordinate and streamline infrastructure financing programs. H 5-17 15. Intergovernmental Advo:acy with HUD/FHA a. Action: Persuasiv-a and strong effort is undertaken by the County of Orange, its staff, congressional representatives, and lobbyist to persuade HUD/FHA to: (1) Make multi-year commitments of units for large planned communitie:> which have or will make a substantial commitment to affordable housing. (2) Liberalize applicability of minimum property standards for local , flexibility to avoid features which may increase the costs of producing the units rather than achieve a more affordable unit. (3) Streamline processing of existing and available programs so that developers are less frustrated and more inclined to use the subsidy program. (4) Return processing of a wider range of programs to the Santa Ana F11A insuring office. (5) Assist in funding preparation of a community-wide economic and environmental study to avoid lengthy project reviews. b. Discussion: A great number of units were federally financed and mortgage loan guarantees made in Orange County since 1950. This intergovernmental advocacy will assist cooperating developers with using a variety of tools to build and produce affordable housing. The local program coordination will assist in dispersing the units in a logical way to meet the most serious needs. c. Source of Funds: Developer Fees General Fund CDBG d. New or Existing Program: Existing r e. Implementation Schedule: Ongoing ' f. Responsible Agency: Board of Supervisors with EMA - H/CD support. g. Program Objectives: Maximize the availability of HUD/FHA programs and funding in Orange County. r r H 5-18 . 1 r r16. Land Acquisition for Housing a. Action: Inventory and make available surplus, publicly-owned lands (including state and federal owned land) for low and moderate income housing projects. Provide or otherwise make available sites or land acquired previously for development of affordable housing through the use of all available funds as appropriate and feasible. Aggressively pursue a land banking program to provide sites for development or for which trades could be consummated to provide better located low- and moderate- or very-low-income housing sites. b. Discussion: The strategic acquisition of land for housing for low- and moderate- and very-lov-income households should be given a high priority to augment the Housing Opportunities Program. The priority sites are those already in public ownership which are surplus or can be reused. For instance, undeveloped land in tax default or which is surplus, might be made available. The local HCD Program also addresses the need for providing sites. Orange County General Services Agency currently reviews surplus sites with interested County offices to determine whether any are appropriate for development of low-income housing. c. Source of Funds: CDBG Orange County Development Agency d. New or Existing Program: Existing e. Implementation Schedule: Ongoing f. Responsible Agency: EMA/HCD (lead) GSA g. Program Objectives: (1) Make surplus government-owned property available for low-income housing development where feasible. (2) Acquire and hold property to be used for low-income housing development. 1 r r H 5-19 i 17. Neighborhood Development and Preservation Program a. Action: The Orange County Neighborhood Development and Preservation Project was adopted by the Board of Supervisors/Development Agency Board on June 22, 1988. this project will bring to bear the tools of California Redevelopment Law to address the community needs of thirteen areas within unincorporated Orange County. b. Discussion: These areas contain the largest concentrations of very-low-, low-, and moderate-income populations. The funds from this project have been targeted for community preservation and improvement. This will include activities directed toward facilitating enhancement, rehabilitation, and repair of the existing housing stock, most of which is low-income, and the production of additional very-low-, low-, and moderate-income housing throughout Orange County. This effort will greatly increase the traditional HCD Block Grant efforts in these areas and allow for new and expanded projects to make housing opportunities available to the target population and other low- and moderate-income households in Orange County. c. Source of Funds: Property tax subventions Development Agency bonds Other debt d. New or Existing Program: New e. Responsible Agencies: EMA/HCD Program Office CAO/Bond/Capital Finance Program f. Implementation Schedule: Ongoing g. Program Objectives: Provide funding assistance for very-low-, low- and moderate-income housing rehabilitation and construction, and neighborhood preservation efforts. Approximately 200 rehabilitated units and 50 new very-low-income units are expected to be accomplished under this program. H 5-20 18. Residential Energy and Water Conservation Retrofit a. Action: Establish an energy and water conservation program for existing residential units in Orange County. This objective will be effectuated through the following actions: (1) Monitoring of existing and proposed utility and water district program. (2) Coordination of existing housing and community development activities with energy and water conservation programs for existing residential units. (3) Development of a comprehensive utility cost reduction program utilizing utility, waster district, and County staff and resources, if existing utility programs are not effective. b. Discussion: Rising utility bills have caused an increase in the monthly costs of owning or renting a home in Orange County. As a result, a utility cost reduction program is an essential component to efforts to reduce or maintain monthly housing costs for Orange County residents. c. Source of Funds: General Fund L BCD Block Grant Potential utility, waster district, and State funding or assistance d. New or Existing Program: Existing. Integrate efforts and commit existing resources to program. e. Implementation Schedule: Action 1 and Action 2: 1983. Action 3: Uncertain depends on effectiveness of existing utility programs. f. Responsible Agencies: EMA and CAO g. Program Objectives: Minimize utility costs for existing residential units. H 5-21 19. Section 8 Existing Rer..tal Assistance Program a. Action: Provide rental assistance to very-low-income households. b. Discussion: This is the primary program serving families earning less than 50% of the county median income. The Orange County Housing Authority (OCHA) offers affordable rental housing to qualified county residents through both the Section 8 Certificate and Section 8 Voucher programs. Both programs rely on the , private sector to supply rental units for very-low-income families, the handicapped, and elderly. The source of funding is the federal Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), which is used to supplement rent payments of program participants. Payments are processed by the Housing Authority and forwarded directly to landlords for the subsidized portion of the rent. HUD funding is based in population needs and administrative effectiveness of the local housing agency. OCHA administers Section 8 programs on behalf of the county unincorporated area and the 24 cities that do not have independent housing authorities. (Anaheim, Brea, Garden Grove, and Santa Ana maintain separate :programs.) In order to participate in the Certificate or Voucher programs, tenants may earn no more than 50 percent of the HUD-determined median income, adjusted for family size (for Fiscal 1989, $46,900 for a family of four). Families who are determined to be eligible for renal assistance are issued either a Certificate or a Voucher, depending on their choice and funding availability. As of January 1, 1989, 5,200 tenants countywide were being assisted by OCHA under the Section 8 Certificate Program. By comparison, 440 tenants were being assisted under the Section 8 Voucher ]grogram. Vouchers were offered to applicants from OCHA's waiting lis-: for the first time in April 1987. Section 8 Certificate Program Landlords who are grilling to offer units within HUD-established fair market rent limits and meet certain minimum property standards are eligible to participate in this program. Landlords list their vacant units with the Housing Authority and select tenants who have received ;t certificate. Tenants pay 30 percent of their income toward rent with the difference paid by OCHA. Under this program, tenants are free to move to any qualified unit within OCHA's jurisdiction. As of January :L, 1989, about 340 Certificate families resided in the county unincorporated aree:. H 5-22 Section 8 Voucher Program The Voucher Program differs from the Certificate Program in three significant ways: 1) there are no rent limits established by HUD for the program; 2) families may pay either more or less than 30 percent of their net monthly income for rent, but never less than 10 percent of their gross income; 3) families may move to any jurisdiction that participates in the Voucher Program. ' c. Source of Funds: Federal Government (HUD) d. New or Existing Program: Existing e. Implementation Schedule: Ongoing f. Responsible Agency: Orange County Housing Authority g. Program Objectives: (1) Maintain and increase, if possible, the availability of rental subsidies to very-low-income families. Specific objectives for the 1989-94 period area: (a) Section 8 Certificates: 353 (b) Section 8 Vouchers: 24 r H 5-23 1 20. State of California Housing Programs ' a. Action: The County of Orange uses all available California Department: , of Housing and Community Development and California Housing Finance Agency programs iri the systematic approach to solving the County's housing problem. , b. Discussion: The :state housing programs and activities are more limitf!d in scope and funding than federal housing programs. One organization closely involved in housing is the California Department of Housing a:id Community Development (CHCD). It currently sponsors or operates the Urban Predevelopmcnt Loan Fund, Home Management Training and Counseling, and the Aftercare Rental Assistance program directed at disabled persons. The other state agency directly involved with housing is thf.0 California Housing; Finance Agency (CHFA) which currently offers direct loans and purchase of single-family mortgages. Specific state programs the County will apply for will be determined upon availability of the programs and the specific need of each proje-:t. - c. Source of Funds: California Housing 5 Community Development Department California Housing Finance Agency The County is also pursuing State grant funds under the Proposition 77 and 84 bond program. d. New or Existing Program: Existing e. Implementation Schedule: Ongoing f. Responsible Agency: EMA/HCD OCHA g. Program Objectives: (1) Provide financial assistance for low- and moderate-income housing. (2) Pursue funding for homeless assistance. H 5-24 1 21. Stewart McKinney Homeless Assistance Act a. Action: This act made a limited amount of federal funds available to help improve the quality of emergency shelters for the homeless, make available additional emergency shelters, and meet the costs of operating emergency shelters and providing essential social services to homeless individuals. This act helps individuals to have access not only to safe and sanitary shelter, but also to the supportive services and other types of assistance they need to improve their situations. ' b. Discussion: These funds first became available in 1987. The County of Orange has received 100% of its allocation fixed by HUD and has distributed these monies to provide non-profit agencies and to the Armory Shelter effort sponsored by the County. These funds are administered by EMA/HCD and the United Way. c. Source of Funds: HUD under McKinney Act d. New or Existing: New ' e. Responsible Agency: EMA/HCD United clay ' f. Implementation Schedule: On-going g. Program Objectives: Provide development and operation funding assistance for emergency shelters for the homeless. 1 ' H 5-25 22. Tax-Exempt Housing Rcvenue Bonds a. Action: The Cour!ty continues to use its authority to issue tax exempt revenue bonds to finance both single- and multiple-family developments which provide defined affordable housing. b. Discussion: This is an existing program. Over $1.6 billion in , bond proceeds have been issued to finance more than 11,000 affordable units. Subject to federal and state legislation, and bond market conditions, the program can continue to support the ' Housing Elements new construction policies to increase the supply and affordability of modestly priced for-sale housing and apartments. C. Source of Funds: Tax-exempt single-family mortgage revenue bond issues Tax exempt apartment revenue bond issues d. New or Existing Program: Existing , e. Implementation Schedule: Ongoing, conditioned upon federal and state authority and the status of the bond market. f. Responsible Agencies: CAO/Bond Capital Finance Program ' g. Program Objectives: (1) Provide tax-exempt bond financed mortgages for low- and moderate-income first-time home , buyers. (2) Provide tax-exempt bond financed loans to developers of mixed- income, rental housing, which includes at least 20 percent very-low-income units. , H 5-26 i L 23. Preservation of Assisted Rental Units Program ' a. Action: Initiated in 1993, as required by Government Code 65583, this program is designed to provide for the continued affordability of low-income, multi-family rental units which received governmental assistance. Projects included in this program are those which received assistance through any federal or state programs, the County's Multi-family Housing Revenue Bond Program, the County's Inclusionary Housing Program/Housing Opportunities ' Program, redevelopment programs and projects which received a density bonus with direct governmental financial contribution per Government Code Section 85916. The program includes an inventory ' of assisted multi-family rental units with restrictions expiring during the next 10-years. This inventory will be updated as part of each 5-year comprehensive Housing Element update. ' b. Discussion: A full description of this program is included in Appendix G. c. Source of Funds: Federal and State Housing Programs OCHAs Surplus Operating Reserve Orange County Development Agency Tax Exempt Multi-family Revenue Bonds d. New or Existing Program: New e. Implementation Schedule: Ongoing, dependent on when affordability restrictions on individual projects expire f. Responsible Agency EMA/Housing and Redevelopment Orange County Housing Authority Orange County Development Agency CAO/Public Finance and Advocacy EMA/Advance Planning Division g. Program Objectives: (1) Maintain an inventory of multi-family rental projects which receive governmental assistance and which have expiring affordability restrictions. (2) Utilize all potential funding sources and strategies to ensure the continued affordability of these units (see Appendix G). MBM:mbm/tk 2062310440100 H 5-27 fN W U H i I W f� a APPENDIX A LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS AC Acre AFIS Areavide Fiscal Impact System AHIS Affordable Housing Information Supplement AHIUP Affordable Housing Incentive Use Permit AMR Annual Monitoring Report ' AQMD Air Quality Management District ' AP Area Plan ARB Air Resources Board (State) ' B/S Board of Supervisors BIA Building Industry Association CAA Community Analysis Area CAO County Administrative Office CDBG Community Development Block Grant ' CT Census Tract CEQA California Environmental Quality Act CDBG Community Development Block Grant CHFA California Housing Finance Agency DMP Development Monitoring Program DPC Development Processing Center DU Duelling Unit EAD Environmental Analysis Division EIR Environmental Impact Report (State) ' EIS Environmental Impact Statement (Federal) EMA Environmental Management Agency ' H A-1 FAC Forecast and Analysis Center FHA Federal Housing Administration FHLBB Federal Home Loan Bank Board FHLMC Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation ("Freddie Mac") ' FNMA Federal National Mortgage Association (Fannie Mae") GNMA Government National Mortgage Association ("Ginnie Mae") , GPA General Plan Amendment GMP Growth Management Program GMPE Growth Management Plan Element , HAP Housing Assistance Plan (County) H/TAG Housing Technical Advisory Group , H/CD Housing/Community Development HE Housing Element HIP Housing Implementation Plan/Home Improvement Program , HOHI Home Ownership and Home Improvement HOP Housing Opportunities Program , HRC Human Relations Commission HUD Housing and Urban Development (U.S. Department of) , IHDO Information and Housing Development Office IHP Inclusionary Housing Program , LCP Local Coastal Program LUE Land Use Element MEA Master Environmental Assessment ' MMTS Multi-Modal Transportation Study MPAH Master Plan of Arterial Highways MSA Metropolitai.i Statistical Area i H A-2 ' r ND Negative Declaration NDAPP Neighborhood Development and Preservation Project NEPA National Environmental Policy Act NHD Nev Housing Development Program OCDA Orange County Development Agency ' OCFHC Orange County Fair Housing Council OCHA Orange County Housing Authority ' OCHC Orange County Housing (Finance) Corporation ' ORCHID Orange County Housing Information Directory OCP-88 Orange County Projections-1988 1 PA Planning Area P.C. Planning Commission ' PC Planned Community PCMS Planned Community Monitoring System ' RFD Request for Proposals RHNA Regional Housing Needs Assessment RPAA Residential Processing Assistance Agreement ' RSA Regional Statistical Area SCAG Southern California Association of Government ' Sec. 8 Section 8 (of the U.S. Housing Act) SMSA Standard Metropolitan Statistical Area TPM Tentative Parcel Map ' TT Tentative Tract UDAG Urban Development Action Grant UP Use Permit VA Variance ' ZC Zone Change CTL:1tPA01-382/9177 9030918522349 H A-3 APPENDIX B LAND INVENTORY AND SITE AVAILABILITY ' A. Introduction The purpose of this Appendix is to provide a land inventory and identify suitable sites for housing development as required by Government Code Section 65583. This discussion also highlights key aspects of the County's affordable housing program; and provides an overview of significant "sites" ' (which at the geographical scale of the county includes: planned communities, redevelopment areas and Community Development Block Grant areas). ' B. Residential Land Inventory 1. Overview ' Most of the buildable land currently zoned for development in the unincorporated area is found within planned communities, which are ' usually large parcels planned and developed by a single landowner with a unified set of zoning regulations covering the entire project. For most of these large projects, the County requires the developer to submit "annual monitoring reports" (AMRs) to discuss the existing and ' anticipated level of development along with an analysis of public services and infrastructure availability. Because of this unified planning, zoning, and monitoring system, it is relatively easy to ' maintain a land inventory for these areas as required by state Housing Element law. In addition to these large planned communities, which are mostly located ' in the southeastern portion of the county, there are several unincorporated "islands" in the older areas in the northwestern portion of the county. These islands are conventionally zones (R-2, C-1, etc.) ' and are made up of thousands of separate parcels. It is much more time-consuming to compile a detailed inventory of land in these areas. 2. Planned Community Inventory ' Table B-1 on the following page contains an inventory of existing and potential residential development within the planned communities in the Orange County unincorporated area. This table indicates that there are a total of about 11,800 acres of undeveloped land zoned for residential use within these planned communities, which can accommodate about 34,000 single-family units and 50,000 multiple-family units. The allowable 1 density range for single-family development is generally less than 6 units per acre, although some projects may be a high as 8 to 9 units per acre. The density for multiple-family project is generally from 10 to ' 30 units per acre, although higher density may be permitted in designated areas such as urban activity centers (see discussion under "Land Use Controls" in Chapter 3) H-B-1 1 TABLE B-1 RESIDENTIAL LAND INVENTORY ORANGE COUNTY UNINCORPORATED AREA 1989 Existing Development Maximum Development Potential New Development Planned Communities SF Units SF Acres MF Units MF Acres SF Units SF Acres MF Units MF Acres SF Units SF Acres MP Units MF Acres Alicia Croak 88 22.3 1,011 1,346 88 22.3 1,063 1,349 0 0 52 2.9 Aliso Viejo 774 225.4 2,107 182.4 7,995 1,230 19,062 1,059 7,221 1,004.6 16,955 876.6 Bear Brand 165 70.7 543 40 679 290.8 1,028 755 514 220.1 485 35.5 Bear Brand (Parcel 5)4 40 64 79 24 50 80 79 24 10 16 0 0 Bear Brand Hill 239 51 0 0 518 119 0 0 279 68 0 0 Borchers 0 0 0 0 113 46.7 0 0 113 46.7 0 0 Colinas ae capistrano7 ioi ai"a.o :,...: ��.. ��nee e,o > > 397 04.0 97 39.3 0 0 Country Home Proportion 0 0 0 0 142 92.9 0 0 142 92.9 0 0 Country Village 1,203 273* 989 129.8 1,984 375.6* 3,115 185.9 781 102.6 2,126 .56.1 Coto de Casa10 1,222 742.5 462 69.3 3,239 1,968 3,180 477 2,017 1,225.5 2,718 407 Dove Canyon11 0 0 0 0 683 200 738 109 683 200 738 109 Foothill Ranch12 0 0 0 0 1,231 238 2,669 292 1,231 238 2,669 292 Holtz13 0 0 0 0 67 67.0 0 0 67 67.0 0 0 Irvine Coast14 0 0 0 0 800 1,672 1,800 240 800 1,672 1,800 240 Laguna Laurel15 0 0 0 0 956 227 697 217 956 227 697 217 Laguna Heights 16 0 0 0 0 108 35.47 0 0 108 35.47 0 0 Laguna Niguel17 includes: Arc. A 969 160.5 0 0 1,460 241.8 1,590 81.4 491 81.3 11590 81.4 Areas D-1, D-2, D-3, 0, 0-3, o-4 1,431 363.8 24 3.4 9,365 625.95 1,846 187.6 7,934 262.15 1,822 184.2 Area DA (Marina Hills) 200 74.1 128 46.0 815 234.5 1,500 142.3 615 160.4 1,372 96.3 Area E-2 t E-3 76 12.9 353 76.8 235 39.0 1,070 232.6 159 26.1 717 155.8 Area 1/1-10, 11 4 16 161 2.0 86 30.2 328 32.3 250 59.3 167 30.3 164 29.1 (Stein-Brie!) Area I/11 and 14 0 0 45 3.6 0 0 1,542 124.8 0 0 1,497 121.2 (B.H. Mortgage) Area M 166 44.9 98 26.5 376 101.6 318 41.82 210 56.7 2120 15.32 Lyon Ranch is 0 0 0 0 78 60* 0 0 78 60* 0 0 Mort Hermann19 0 0 0 0 173 43.3 57 7.0 173 43.3 57 7.0 Moulton Ranch20 150 43 100 15 525 150.6 100 15.0 375 107.6 0 0 H-B-2 r r� rr rr rr �r r r r� r rr r r rr r r r rr r� 'LE B-1 RESIDENTIAL LAND INVENTORY ORANGE COUNTY UNINCORPORATED AREA 1989 Existing Development Maximum Development Potential New Development Planned Communities SF Units SF Acres MF Units MF Acres SP Units SF Acres MF Units MF Acres SF Units SF Acres MF Units MF Acres Portola Hills21 275 33 407 40 1,215 114 985 96 940 81 578 56 Rancho Cielo22 0 0 0 0 240 56.0 0 0 240 56.0 0 0 Rancho de Los Alisos23 1,186 155 2,644 328 1,264 180 3,560 334 78 25 916 6 Rancho Santa Margarita24 557 62.8 804 76.6 2,943 228.9 8,138 378.0 2,386 166.1 7,334 302.2 Ranch Trabuco25 0 0 0 0 1,618 465.7 2,126 218.6 1,618 465.7 2,126 218.6 Robinson Ranch26 689 200t 184 27t 1,216 318t 184 27t 527 118t 0 0 Saddleback Meadows27 0 0 0 0 714 148.8 0 0 714 148.8 0 0 Santiago EstatesZ8 0 0 0 0 25 45.0 0 0 25 46.0 0 0 Santiago Ranch29 0 0 0 0 162 102 0 0 162 102 0 0 Serrano Highlands30 129 46.8 365 97.1 129 46.8 866 142.8 0 0 501 45.7 Telega Valley31 0 0 0 0 2,197 355.1 3,068 432.2 2,197 355.1 3,068 432.2 Watson32 0 0 0 0 80 49.6 0 0 80 49.6 0 0 Zadeh33 0 0 0 0 20 22.0 0 0 20 22.0 0 0 4S Ranch (Edgar)34 0 0 0 0 178 91.3 0 0 178 91.3 0 0 Total 10,681 3,027.5t 11,826 2,656.6t 45,067 10,835.1 62,028 7,324 34 386 7 808.6 50 202 t t 3,987.1 SA:1tPA01-417/9181 9032819055455 H-B-3 ENDNOTEs FOR TABLE B-1 ' 1. Alicia Creek - Annual Monitoring Report (AMR) for Alicia Creek Planned Community, County of orange 3987. January 1988 aerial photographs show that all of the planned community is built-out except for planning area "D". 2. Aliso Viejo - Telephone conversation with Alison Martin of the Mission Viejo Company, March 21, 1989. 3. Bear Brand - Annual Monitoring Report (AMR) for Bear Brand Planned Coamttnity, County of Orange, 1987. , "1987 AMR Socioeconomic Data Summary", March 22, 1988. Existing acreage was determined by taking tha proportion of units to build-out. 4. Bear Brand (Parcel 5) - Annual Monitoring Report (AMR) for Bear Brand (Parcel 5) Planned Com m nity, :ounty of orange, 1987. 5. Bear Brand - Annual Monitori:g Report (AMR) for Bear Brand Planned Community, County of Orange, 1987. "3987 AMR Socioeconomic Data Summary", March 22, 1988. Existing acreage was determined by taking tho proportion of units to build-out. 6. Borchers - Orange County Planning Commission Staff Report for ZC 87-19 and Community Profile Ammmendmmout , CPA 87-11. 7. Colinas de Capistrano - Annual Monitoring Report (AMR) for Bear Brand Planned Community, County of Orange, , 1987. "1987 AMR Socioeconomic Data Summary", March 22, 1988. Existing acreage was determined by taking the proportion of units to build-out. 8. Country Home Properties - Land Use Amendment 83-2, November 16, 1983. 9. Country Village - Annual Monitoring Report (AMR) for Country Village Planned Community, County of orange, , 1987. Multi-family categories include rental units. 10. Coto de Casa - Annual Monitoring Report (AMR) for Coto de Caza Planned Community, County of Orange, 1187. "1987 AMR Socioeconomic Data Summary", March 22, 1988. Existing acreage was determined by taking the , proportion of units to build-)ut. 11. Dove Canyon - Annual Monitoring Report (AMR) for Dove Canyon Planned Community, County of Orange 1987 12. Foothill Ranch - ,Foothill Ranch Planned Community, Area Plan, Planning Areas 1, 2, 17, 18, 19, 20. 21, Development Plan, Statistical Summary, County of orange, April 1988. 13. Holtz Ranch - Zone Change 87-14, March 21, 1989. 14. Irvine Coast - Annual Monitoring Report (AMR) for Irvine Coast Planned Community, County of Orange, 1987. ' 15. Laguna Laurel - Annual Monitoring Report IAMR) for Laguna Laurel Planned Community, County of Orange, 1987. Laguna Laurel Feature Plan, September 26, 1986. 16. Laguna Heights - Annual Monitoring Report (AMR) for Laguna Heights Pla :::d Community, County of Orange, 1987. ' 17. Laguna Niguel - There are seven planning areas in the Laguna Niguel Pl...-Ad Community which are curren:ly required to submit AMRS. For +fie purposes of Table B-1 it is assumed that it is within these planning areas that future residential develo)m»nt will occur. Area A - Annual Monitoring Report (AM) for Laguna Niguel Planned Commm= ty, Area A County of Orange, :.987. Areas D-1, D-2, D-3, Annual Monitoring Report (AMR) for Laguna Niguel Planned Community, Areas D-1, D-: , D-3, County of Orange, 1987. ' Area G - Annual Monitoring Repert (AMR) for Laguna Niguel Planned Community, Area G County of orange, 3987. Area 0-3, 0-4 - Annual Monitoring Report (AMR) for Laguna Niguel Planned Community, Areas 0-2, 0-3, County of Orange, 1987. ' Area D (Marina Hills) - Annual .Konitoring Report (AMR) for Laguna Niguel Planned Community, Area D-4, (Ylarina Hills), County of Orange, 1987. Multi-family categories include rental units. Areas E-2, E-3 - Annual Monitoring Report (AMR) for Laguna Niguel Planned Community, Areas E-2, E-3, Co my of Orange, 1987. Existing acreage was determined by taking the proportion of units to acre at built-out. January 1988 aerial photographs show that area E-2 is approximately 33% built. Areas I/1-10, 11, 16 (Stein-Briamf) - Annual Monitoring Report (AMR) for Laguna Niguel Planned Commumity Areas ' I/1-10, 11, 16, County of Orange, 1987. Areas I/11, 14 (B. H. Mortgage) - Annual Monitoring Report (AMR) for Laguna Niguel Planned Community, 1Ueas I/11, 14, County of Orange, 1981. H-B-4 ' Area M - L&M Niguel Planned Cosmmity, Area M Area Plan, County of Orange, Approved July 16, 1987. Acreage —y for existing categories was calculated as a proportion of build-out. 18. Lyon Ranch - Annual Monitoring Report (AMR) for Lyon Ranch Planned Community, County of Orange, 1987. ' 19. Mort Horan, - Land Use Element Amendment 1984-3, December 12, 1984. 20. Moulton Ranch - Annual Monitoring Report (AMR) for Moulton Ranch Planned Community, County of Orange, 1987. 21. Portola Hills - Annual Monitoring Report (AMR) for Portola Hills Planned Community, County of Orange, 1987. 22. Rancho Cialo - Annual Monitoring Report (AM02) for Rancho Cielo Planned Community, County of Orange, 1987. 23. Rancho de Los Alisos - Annual Monitoring Report (AMR) for Rancho de Los Alisos Planned Community, County of Orange, 1987. 24. Rancho Santa Margarita - Correspondence to Peter Hersh, EMk/Advance Planning, from Kari Kilstrom, Santa Margarita Company, "Subject: Annual Review of Development Agreement (DA 87-1)", March 30, 1989. ' 25. Ranch Trabuco - Annual Monitoring Report (AMR) for Rancho Trabuco Planned Community, County of Orange, 1987. 26. Robinson Ranch - annual Monitoring Report (AMR) for Robinson Ranch Planned Community, county of Orange, 1987. 27, Saddleback Meadows - Saddleback Meadows Planned Community Development Plan, Juum 25, 1984, 28. Santiago Estates - Land Use Element Amendment 1978-2, December 1978, and Zone Change 81-5, June 1981. 29. Santiago Ranch - Land Use Amendment 82-1, June 6, 1982. 30. Serrano Highlands - Annual Monitoring Report (AMR) for Serrano Highlands Planned Community, County of Orange, 1987. 31. Telaga valley - Annual Monitoring Report (AMR) for Telaga Valley Planned Community, County of Orange, 1987. 32. Watson - Land Use Amendment 83-2, November 16, 1983. 33. Zadeh - Zoning Map, Tentative Tract 12365. ' 34. 4S Ranch (Edgar) - Land Use Amendment 83-2, November 16, 1983. 1 ' CL:1tPA01-417/9177 9062622005694 H-H--5 3. Infill and Redevelopment Inventory ' In addition to the inventory of land in planned communities, a smaller inventory exists within the unincorporated islands. An evaluation of , these sites is summarized by community analysis area in Table B-2. This analysis indicates that 8,446 new units are anticipated within these areas during the 1989-94 period. Although no detailed breakdown is ' available, it is expected that the majority of these will be multiple-family units. For further information regarding potential redevelopment sites, please refer to Section C, below. 4. Infrastructure Capacity and Financing ' a. Capacity The Land Use Element's Growth Management Program implements the ' Phased Development and Land Use/Transportation Integration policies of the LUE 'by requiring proponents of major land use projects to ' submit annual reports that project future development activity, identify public service deficiencies, and provide mitigation measures. , The primary purpose of this program is to enable the County to anticipate *potential shortfalls in infrastructure capacity so that steps can be taken to correct imbalances before they hinder development. b. Financing The growing cost of public facilities combined with reductions in state and federal funding for public facility development have made the provision of infrastructure a difficult task for local ' government. The tax revolt of the late 1970s and the resultant tax and expenditure limitations (Propositions 4 and 13) have further constrained the ability of local governments to provide the regional and sub-regional public facilities necessary to serve existing and ' future developments. As a result of these factors, local governments have canceled or ' deferred many essential public facility projects and shifted the responsibility for the provision of major public facilities to developers. While developers historically have provided local improvements (e.g. , local streets, sidewalks), their responsibility t for the provision of major regional public facilities has increased significantly. The additional burden of infrastructure financing increases the t risks and c.)sts for residential developers in Orange County. Some of the incr,sased costs of infrastructure financing will be borne by new homebuy.ers both directly (e.g. , homeowners association fees, , assessments) and indirectly as costs reflected in house prices. t H-B-6 t I r..,� TABLE B-2 RESIDENTIAL LAND INVENTORY ' ORANGE COUNTY UNINCORPORATED ISLANDS* BY COMMUNITY ANALYSIS AREA (CAA) 1988-1994 ' CAA Potential Nev Dwelling Units 1 64 2 313 3 799 ' 4 20 4 5 4 7 4 9 1,481 10 0 11 0 13 15 14 0 16 0 17 0 18 499 ' 19 16 20 16 22 3 24 59 ' ZS 1 26 8 28 429 ' 29 963 32 63 34 1,336 37 39 ' 42 383 43 391 44 10 ' 45 77 46 365 47 970 tTOTAL 8,446 * Excludes Planned Communities and major developments. Source: OCP-88 Population & Housing Projections, CAO. EMA/Advance Planning. ' H-B-7 In order to facilitate the provision of community and regional ' facilities, the County has an active public infrastructure finance program to debt-finance needed facilities through mechanisms such as Mello-Roos Community Facilities Districts. County-issued tax-exempt ' bonds enable facilities to be financed at lower interest rates with repayment wade over a number of years by property owners who use or are benefited by the facilities. These special tax payments are also tax-deductible. The County supports the formation of ' Mello-Roos CFDs in order to minimize the impact of infrastructure costs on housing prices. C. Affordable Housing Sites ' In 1979, the County adopted the Inclusionary Housing Program (IHP), which essentially required developers to provide 25% of all new dwellings within , the affordable category (i.e. , 120% or less of median income). In 1982 , the IHP was replaced by the Housing Opportunities Program (HOP), which phased out mandatory requirements over a three-year period in favor of voluntary ' compliance with affordable housing objectives encouraged by County incentives and market forces. The adoption of the HOP did not alter tfe existing mandatory affordable housing requirements placed on projects a.s conditions of approval under the IHP. A total of 26,907 mandatory affordable units have been required to date. as part of General Plan amendments or zone changes. The vast majority of these (24,268) are found within planned communities, with the remainder scattered in conventionally-zoned parcels. Map B-1 shows the location of these planned communities along with the number of affordable units required in each. , Of the 26,907 affordable units required, 12,274 had been built as of June 30, 1988, with 14,633 additional units remaining to be built. These ' remaining units represent designated sites for affordable housing development. Planned communities contain most of the available affordable housing sites, , as they account for 90% of the total new affordable housing requirement for the unincorporated areas (26,907 total vs. 24,268 for major planned communities). ' In addition to these affordable housing requirements, two redevelopment projects have been adopted with a combined area of 13,167 acres. Within these projects, individual project areas vary in size, composition, ane potential for affordable housing sites. However, redevelopment law recuires that not less than 20% of the taxes collected by the Orange County Neighborhood Development and Preservation Agency shall be used for ' increasing the supply of affordable housing in the county. This program is intended in part to compensate for the anticipated reduction in the levels of Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funding. Map B-2 shows the location of the redevelopment areas along with an inventory of the dwelling ' units and acreage within each area. r H-B-8 , PLANNED YIREQUIRED: CREEK 33 I HILLS 296 45 I VIEJO 5ODD 35 BEACON HILLS 231 BRAND54 BEAR 171 39 BEAR 1 HILL 50 1 COLINAS DE CAPISTRANO 844 17 CO TO 1 56 YI 137 CUTRY VILLAGE on COAST 1 13 MISSION VI1 3DOO 44 'I' I C I 51 RANCHO 30 RANCHO DIE LOS ALISOS on 46 -11""MEADOWS 472 31 FOOTHILL RANCH(WHITING) 1365 TOTAL 24269 W UP IN �►.� '�►����,. �!�° �� ■■ � •-��-�• � I III �I�� J,: �w''I� I►�I II ���♦ � i �♦ � ��:�'. ImYll..11l�l it now= � � ► REDEVELOPMENT AREAS .'MAP B-2 COUNTY OF ORANGE d 11 a 11EptVtL0nMlNT A1111I1a Sion- ■1.T1- WILE: 10 P U116S FUIIT FIAILT NDIES VACANT IOIAI matl AKA It 1.SMA AINI TEIMS 11/1.08 110.00 23.0 1.00 7.01 1071.00 IMAC1 AREA 113 1 1.11101kT CUT 20T2.00 112.21 35.30 21.22 4.23 373.00 2.NEST SAAOEN 000E ISLAND 317.00 $3.51 1.36 0.00 O.A woo 3.ANMEIN IMAM 411.01 14.11 1.17 1.00 0.00 n.00 0 1.SOIIIN NEST WKIII ISLAND U4.00 n.71 6.01 0.00 1.00 40.00 13 S.AMIN 11OOKM I I70S.00 2A.ST 1.04 4.00 2.n 112.10 R /.tOIaIA INDEDE1MIA 310.00 S2.51 0.11 1.01 6.49 11.00 7.am$$Ill 01.01 111.11 12.74 0.00 I.S2 In.00 I.OEIMii STSSET ISLAND 11.00 $.11 0.21 0.00 2.10 1.00 1 �1► 1.OLIVE ISLAND In.a 17.n 3.84 0.00 1.41 37.00 10.E1100fM1 113.08 10.05 22.12 0.10 IA 102.00 10� !.EK"IN I KTIwEL wrA Im NIIRNOS 71.0 1006.0 31.58 0 0 .006 6.0 0 3M7.00 12, 13.a T111 2251.00 216.50 2+.50 0.57 1.4 SU.00 1 P 11. IAIa-CANTONS m.a An./2 1.0/ NIX IIS1./0 1521.00 3102ECI TOIAL 10122.00 7111.01 IS2.11 1A.31 1E41.11 12001.00 0/1` am r07A1 11262.00 791.01 17SA SA.31 IIri.71 13167.00 oov 1 D. Annexations/Incorporations An important factor which affects site availability (and Housing need) ' in the county unincorporated area is the continued incorporation and annexation of formerly unincorporated areas. Over the past few years, the communities listed below have been annexed or incorporated which has resulted in a reduction of 43,700 acres in the county unincorporated area. These areas are shown on Map B-3. Community Year of Annexation/Incorporation Approximate Acres* ' South Laguna 1987 1,300 Mission Viejo 1988 17,000 Dana Point 1989 3,200 ' Laguna Niguel 1989 9,400 Laguna Hills 1991 3,200 Lake Forest 1991 6,600 Gypsum Canyon 1992 2,340 ' Aegean Hills 1992 662 ---------------------------------------------------------------�---- Total ---- 43,702 *Source: Orange County Local Agency Formation Commission E. Low-Income Housing Sites Site identification for low-income housing development is an ongoing program of the EMA Housing and Redevelopment (H/R) Function. All property ' to be acquired with Community Development Block Grant funding requires H/R site review and approval. This includes environmental, land use, and financial feasibility considerations. In addition, CDBG program regulations require "principal benefit" to low- and moderate-income households (80 percent and less of the HUD-published median income). 1 r ' H-B-11 , 1 ' AM {�� rrsf s� i/"'Siss3Y // 5/y�t� �yf "�'�` / /%i. /J•s j IM t :1 �/i � • � 'i'�13f/f� /is/ sr'£/�i/�/f/,f•! //'lfs s1 ff��s r, ;. � /�//Nj i�/,fj,✓ s y%f'� rrc".Jrtc%!y'�H9 1: 1 6> l`P S/ t :;: 5 t / / s / // s✓�//a i h /.Ga .,I 1' � /N r� '/r�/./fits/ qi7 ss ihsr,J��iiir Ys��'s f.Y�tf�y�'S'gsf't sf�s s p sites/sK sy ..11 ✓�F / / � y / U�/� ,J�y �y'Yi�, / //3/i/ t� lyf w _ 1 • F. Surplus Government Property P ' Surplus properties of federal, state and county governments and local school districts are periodically monitored for potential housing use, as are County Public Guardian estate real property, sales and tax-deeded properties offered by the County's Assessor's Office. There are special problems applicable to each of these areas. For example, surplus school properties are generally located in highly urbanized districts where the potential enrollment is deemed to have already peaked. Such cities are ' generally in older Orange County cities that are not under County zoning control and are often surrounded by established single-family neighborhoods whose residents may strenuously oppose any multi-family intrusion. Lastly, school districts want "top dollar" for their resources ' and often expect bids above fair market value. With estate sales, the Public Guardian is legally obligated to secure the maximum return to potential heirs and creditors and sets a minimum bid. ' Also, most estate properties are older single-family detached homes or small businesses that are not suited to more intensive residential use. t On tax-deeded properties, those few properties that are more than strips of land resulting from subdivision surveying errors may be redeemed by their owners up to the date of sale or auction. Also, properties on which people refuse to pay their taxes are generally not developable without substantial time and money to provide infrastructure or improve access. Despite all these problems, the County has managed to make surplus ' property available for potential housing sites. Of the current County surplus properties, several have limited potential for multi-family housing. A 21-acre inactive solid waste disposal site between the Santa Ana River and Riverside Freeway is at the end of an industrial road and is ' still settling, but remains a possibility--subject to the zoning authority of the City of Anaheim in which it is located. Many County-owned parcels are similarly located within independent cities exercising their own responsibilities as to zoning requirements. For example, a 1.43-acre site between the San Diego Freeway Edison Company powerline easement and a flood control channel in Westminster is not feasible to develop because the City insists on an access road constructed to standard width--to serve ' about five units. Every other remaining parcel under County control presents serious development obstacles. A 0.34-acre site suitable for a duplex above the Chapman Avenue road cut in Orange Park Acres has an irregular slope of volcanic bedrock. A small parcel in Capistrano Beach adjacent to San Juan Creek is subject to flooding and has no public road access. Lastly, 16.51 1 1 H-B-13 1 acres between Santiago Canyon Road and Santiago Creek within the City of ' Orange is another inactive disposal site that is still settling, but has long-term possibilities. Among County-owned properties not previously considered for housing are , parcels or portions of parcels acquired for parks but not yet developed. Some of these have been suggested as sites for less permanent housing types such as manufactured or mobile housing for 5 to 20 years. ' However, land acquired for recreation use may not be available for other uses due to legal prohibition, public resistance, and lack of infrastructure availability. , G. Mobile Homes and Manufactured Housing As provided by state law and the Orange County Zoning Code, mobile or ' manufactured homes are permitted in all single-family zoning districts subject to certain minimum development standards. These standards are only intended to insure that such units meet health and safety standares, ' and are compatible with surrounding neighborhoods. Mobile and manufactured housing developments are also permitted in multiple-family districts subject to the prevailing density or minimum ' site area regulations. H. Transitional Housing and Shelters for the Homeless The Orange County Zoning Code establishes siting requirements for thesE! types of uses under the definition of "Community care facilities." Such facilities serving 12 or less persons are permitted in any residential ' district subject to the prevailing site development standards. JD/MBM:mbm/tk ' 2051108072676 1 ` H-B-14 ' i APPENDIX C Orange County Agencies Involved in Housing Provision ! This appendix contains descriptions of County agencies or agencies with specialized services which aid in the provision of housing. These agencies administer a variety of programs which, to some degree, are part of the County's efforts to achieve its 5-year quantified objectives while implementing this element. i i i ! ! r H C-1 i COKKUNITY SERVICES AGENCY (CSA) A. Human Relations Commission (HRC) Address: 1300 S. Grand, Bldg. B, Santa Ana, CA 92705 Phone: (714) 567-7470 Executive Director: Rusty Kennedy Summary of Purpose and Function HRC promotes socioeconomic and political opportunity including equity in housing. The Housing; Committee: "Advocates for decent shelter and suitable living environment fur every person in Orange County, regardless of socioeconomic status. " The HRC Housing Committee objectives are: To work toward provision of local programs that increase and/or preserve ' low-income housing. To increase publ:ic and private sector awareness and involvement in implementation o:` programs to assist the homeless in the County. To increase public awareness and involvement in programs aimed at preventing residential displacement in low-income and/or minority neighborhoods. The population served by the HRC Housing Committee is Orange County residents with empha:;is on the low-income and minority population. An estimated 500 personas are served each month. Fifty persons are given d'.rect personal assistance; an estimated 450 persons are assisted indirectly by technical advice and help of the housing specialist. HRC Housing staff works with County staff from CSA, the Environmental Management Agency (E:NA), Health Care Agency (HCA), County Administrativ+: Office (CAO) and the Social Services Agency (SSA) as well as numerous agencies and community groups. Community groups include: Housing Coalition, Community Development Council, Interfaith Housing Association, American Association of University Women, Dayle McIntosh Center for the Disabled, Fair Housing Council, Share Ourselves, Orange Counter Renters Association, Coalition for the Homeless, League of Women Voters, Feedba,:k Foundation and St. Anselm's Refugee Center. Funding Appropriation General Fund H C-2 B. Orange County Housing Authority (OCHA) Address: 2043 N. Broadway, Santa Ana 92706 Phone: (714) 836-3033 Executive Director: Sandra J. McClymonds Summary of Purpose and Function The Orange County Housing Authority was created by the Board of Supervisors on November 24, 1971 (Resolution #71-1366), to address the problem of shortage of rental dwelling units and financial resources to assist low- income persons residing in Orange County. The powers which a housing authority may exercise are set forth in the California Health and Safety Code, Section 34200. Broadly stated, an authority may acquire, lease and operate housing projects for persons of low-income; provide counseling, referral and advisory services to person and ' families of low- or moderate-income in connection with purchase, rental, occupancy, maintenance or repair of housing; and administer rental assistance programs. ' An authority may also investigate living conditions and means and methods of improving such conditions. Finally, an authority may issue bonds for any of its purposes. The Orange County Housing Authority is governed by a five-member Board of Commissioners comprised of the elected members of the Orange County Board of Supervisors. A seven-member, Board-appointed Housing Commission, which advises the Board of Commissioners, is comprised of two tenant representatives and two League of Cities' representatives; the three remaining representatives are selected at-large by the Board of Supervisors. Under cooperative agreements and authorizing resolutions, the Housing Authority services twenty-four (24) of the County's twenty-eight (28) cities ' and the County unincorporated area (Anaheim, Brea, Garden Grove, and Santa Ana have their own housing authorities). An Advisory Committee, comprised of one representative from each city and the unincorporated area of the county, meets monthly and makes recommendations to the Housing Commission on housing-related matters. Funding The Housing Authority administers Section 8 Programs, the Housing Development Finance Program, and other housing support service programs. The primary funding source for the Orange County Housing Authority is the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. The Authority administers over $30,000,000 in rental assistance payments annually. Administrative costs of the Authority are paid from administrative fees earned. Other programs of the Authority are financed through direct fee charges, rental income, and the use of Authority reserves. ' H C-3 C. Area Agency on Aging Address: 1300 S. Grand Avenue, Building B, Santa Ana, CA 92705 Phone: (714) 567-7418 Manager: Peggy Weatherspoon Summary of Purpose and Function The Area Agency on Aging is responsible for developing a comprehensive and coordinated system of services for older adults (age 60+) within the County of Orange. The agency contracts with 26 service provider organizations for congregate and home delivered meals, and a myriad of social and supportive service.; including transportation, legal, case management, homemaker, minority outreach, employment, social day care, long term care ombudsman, and information and referral. Services operated directly by the Area Agenc:1 include a 200 client case management program called MSSP, and the Senior ' Shared Housing Coordination Program which coordinates shared housing intakes and matches for 18 city-based Senior Shared Housing Programs. The Senior Shared Housing Coordinator also staffs the Senior Citizens Advisory Council Housing Committee, comprised of senior advocates and professional personnel from the mobile home industry and housing community. The primary focus of the committee is to advocate for affordable housing for older adults. With over 325,000 individuals residing in Orange County age 60+, 8% are estimated to be minority persons, and about 25% are at or near the poverty level. Individuals on fixed incomes residing in this high-cost-of-living-county struggle against soaring housing and rental increases. Thus, the Housing Committee serves as a chief advocate for this growing population of older adults. Funding The annual budget of $8,000,000 is derived from Older Americans Act funds, state general funds, a Health Care Financing Administration waiver, and client donations for services. H C-4 r D. Special Programs Division Address: 1300 S. Grand Avenue, Building B, Santa Ana, CA 92705 Phone: (714) 567-7370 Division Manager: Jane O'Grady Summary of Purpose and Function The Community Services Agency (CSA), Special Programs Office is charged with administering three housing-related programs: General Revenue Sharing Housing-Related Programs, Domestic Violence Program and the County Justice System Subvention (AB 90). Under the General Revenue Sharing Program, County federal revenue sharing dollars available, with few restrictions, are allocated to social programs and County land, capital and operation expenditures, at the discretion of the Board of Supervisors. The Special Programs Office is responsible for administering Revenue Sharing Funds and for contract development and monitoring of social programs funded through Revenue Sharing. Projects completed under this program since its inception in 1980 include: Feedback 1 Foundation Inc. - hotel relocation; CPC-Juvenile Alternative Care Center; C.S.P. Inc. - South County Youth Shelter, Laguna Beach; Child or Parental Emergency Services (C.O.P.E.S.); Casa de Bienvenidos; Turning Point/Amparo - Shelter Care Program; and, South County YMCA (Residential Hotel). Domestic Violence funds are generated from a special assessment fee for the issuance of a marriage license and for the filing of a Certificate of Marriage. Senate Bill 1364 (Presley) enacted May 10, 1984 authorizes a fee of $19.00 to be collected for Domestic Violence Centers. The legislation imposes restrictions on the use of funds which include: 24 hour a day shelter, temporary housing, food, psychological support and peer counseling, referral and emergency services. Victims of domestic violence and their children are provided the above services via three 24 hour a day shelters and a motel voucher program. Ninety-three beds are available for the former and motel beds are available as needed. Victims sheltered July 1, 1987 to June 30, 1988 numbered 944; victims estimated to be sheltered July 1, 1988 through June 30, 1989 are 1,032. AB 90 provides funding for programs relating to crime and delinquency prevention. Community-based programs include youth shelters for youth who are in crisis (runaways, abused, incorrigible), emancipation training for youth ages sixteen to seventeen who cannot live at home, and a residential community corrections program designed as an alternative to County jail and as a resource for probationers in transition from institutionalization to society. In FY 1987/88, 757 youth and 181 adults received residential services. In FY 1988/89, it is projected that 944 youth and 175 adults will receive residential assistance. A final housing-related program which CSA/Special Programs Office helps to administer is emergency shelter and services as provided through the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). The FEMA Local Board consists of individuals affiliated with United Way, the Salvation Army, National Council of Churches, National Council of Catholic Charities, Council of Jewish ' H C-5 Federation, American Red Cross and the highest ranking local government official, who is Chairman of the Board of Supervisors, and is represented on the local FEMA Board by Joan Connery of the Special Programs Office. FEMA provides to lou- income persons emergency food and shelter assistance. The Local Board sets local priorities, reviews RFPs, recommends allocation levels to National FEMA Board and monitors local programs receiving funds. The FEMA funds appropriated for 1988 provided 112,278 nights lodging. Nights lodging projected for 1989 is 97,132. 1988 1989 Mass Shelter (large facility) 21,681 nights 26,536 nights Other Shelter (motel, camp, park) 32,633 36,996 Rent and mortgage 57,964 33,600 Total 112,278 nights 97,132 lights Fund 1. General Revenue Sharing Programs: Revenue Sharing Funds 2. Domestic Violence Program: Marriage License Fees 3. County Justice System Subvention Program: State Appropriation (AB 90) 4. Federal Emergency Management Agency: Federal Appropriation H C-6 , COUNTY ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE (CAO) A. Bond/Capital Finance Program Address: 10 Civic Center Plaza, 3rd Floor, Santa Ana, CA 92701 Phone: (714) 834-4775 Manager: Stephen V. Kozak, Jr. Housing Program Contact: Susan Steinfeld Summary of Purpose and Function The CAO Bond Capital Finance Program identifies, evaluates, implements, and manages unique or alternative financing programs to meet the County's long-term financing needs. The County of Orange has established two housing revenue bond programs to increase the supply of housing stock in participating cities and the unincorporated areas of the County. Under these programs, tax-exempt bonds are used to provide funds for construction loans and mortgages to encourage developers to provide both rental and for-sale housing which is affordable to lower income families and individuals. Single Family Residential Mortgage Revenue Bond Program The Single Family Residential Mortgage Revenue Bond Program has existed in Orange County since 1980. The Program is designed to provide mortgage loans to first-time home buyers whose incomes do not exceed maximum federal limits. Buyers must also intend to live in the homes as their principal residence. Mortgage loans offered under the bond program generally have lower interest rates than conventional loans. Loans are made available for attached and detached single family residences primarily in eligible new ' developments at various locations throughout the county. A smaller portion of funds is available for existing or resale units countywide. Since the inception of the program, approximately $532 million has been made available to finance mortgage loans for approximately 7,103 new and resale residences. Multi-Family Apartment Revenue Bond Program r s The Multi-Family Apartment Development Revenue Bond Program was developed in Orange County in 1982. This Program is designed to make financing available to developers for the construction of multi-family residential rental units in the county. In order to receive financing through this program, developers must reserve 20 percent of the units for 15 years for rental by families or individuals who earn 50 percent or less of the federal median income. Since the inception of the program, the County has issued bonds totaling $1.1 billion to develop 16,726 apartment units throughout the county. Of these, 3,991 apartments have been designated for occupancy by income qualified tenants. The Tax Reform Act of 1986 significantly changed the requirements and procedures for the issuance of tax-exempt multi-family bonds. Since 1986, the increased restrictions imposed at the Federal and State level have ' significantly slowed the interest on the part of apartment developers for this program. 1 H C-7 1 ii Additionally, the single family bond program has also experienced decre.3sed activity. The single family program is patterned after the Federal Housing Authority (FHA) Home Mortgage Program because of the government backed securities that insure these mortgages. The FHA maximum loan limit for 1989 is $101,250. The rising cost of land in Orange County has reduced the number of single family units available within this price range and accounts for the reduced activity in the single family bond program. Funding The financing for the housing revenue bond programs comes from the sale of municipal revenue bonds to investors. Investors receive interest on their investment which is tax-exempt at the Federal and California State levels. The bonds are repaid from the mortgage loans originated under the single " family housing bond program and loan payments from the developers of the multi-family apartment units. The County, State, or Federal Government provides no repayment obligation nor any pledge of its revenues, taxes Dr assets. j 1 t 1 H C-8 1 ' ENVIRONKBNTAL KANAGEMENT AGENCY (EMA) A. Advance Planning Division Address: 12 Civic Center Plaza, Room 243, Santa Ana, CA 92701 Phone: (714) 834-5380 Manager: Joan S. Golding Summary of Purpose and Function EMA/Advance Planning Division, Element Planning Section is charged with the updating of all elements of the General Plan (excluding the Transportation Element). State law requires a comprehensive 5-year review and update of the County's Housing Element. This review must include the following: o The appropriateness of the housing goals, objectives, and policies in contributing to the attainment of the state housing goal. o The effectiveness of the housing element in attainment of the community's housing goals and objectives. o The progress of the County in implementation of the housing element. One of the key components of the process is a public participation program ' that seeks to involve all economic segments of the community in the Housing Element evaluation and update. A technical advisory committee is established and public workshops are held in order to solicit suggestions regarding the Housing Element. i Another function of the Advance Planning Division is the administration of the Housing Opportunities Program. A key component of the County's overall I housing strategy is to encourage the production of market-rate housing that is affordable to households with incomes under 120 percent of the County median. In undertaking this program, the County commits itself to the ' following: o Ensuring that it has authorized development of all types of housing in areas appropriate for residential development and at sufficient densities to permit the program's performance objective to be met; o Developing the necessary program capability and expertise to carry out its role and meet its commitment to the Housing Opportunities Program; and o Developing and implementing support and incentive mechanisms to ' assist private developers in achieving the program's performance objectives. Finally, the Advance Planning Division is responsible for the incorporation into its affordable housing program of data from the Housing Affordability Monitoring System (HAMS) Report. This document, in previous years prepared by the County Administrative Office, provides the Board of Supervisors with a periodically updated data source regarding the state of housing in Orange County. The main focus of the report is to present information pertaining to the production of affordable housing within the County's unincorporated H C-9 I I area. The HAMS Report provides a convenient reference document for ' decision-makers to assess the progress achieved toward meeting specific objectives included in the Housing Element of the County's General Plan. This report was created in response to Resolution 83-184, which directel the compilation of an objective data base and monitoring system in order to ascertain the progress attained toward meeting the following goals: - The production of housing units affordable to households with a broad range of income levels. - The need and provision of housing for all segments of the population. - The establishment of communities with a balance of jobs and housing. The HAMS Report presents data reflecting affordable housing production under the County's Inclusi.onary Housing Program (IHP), adopted in 1979, and the Housing Opportunities Program (HOP) which replaces the IHP under revised Housing Element H KII-1. Fun_ , (1) For General Plan Update County General Fund (2) For Housing Development Private Mortgage Lenders (HOP) HUD/FHA Revenue Bonds California Housing Finance Agency (C][FA) For Program Expertise Count General Fund '(3) o ogra Exp_ t y and Capability (HOP) Community Development Block Grant ' 1 1 H C-10 ' 1 ' B. Housing and Community Development (H/CD) Address: 1200 N. Main, Suite 600, Santa Ana, CA 92701 Phone: (714) 568-4199 Director: Dhongchai (Bob) Pusavat Summary of Purpose and Function The Housing and Community Development (H/CD) Program is a federally funded program developed to address some of the low and moderate income family needs related to housing and community development. The County of Orange prepares the application annually for submittal to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). Typically, these funds are used for basic programs including: 1. Rehabilitation of Homes The County has a Home Improvement Program for low-moderate income areas. The Home Improvement Program provides low interest loans, deferred payment loans and grants (when necessary) to assist qualified low income I homeowners, tenants and landlords to correct code violations, repair hazards and provide necessary home improvements. Properties should be located in target areas within the unincorporated County or contracting cities. Typical financing may include: LOW INTEREST LOANS - 15 year loan term DEFERRED PAYMENT LOANS - Zero interest, due in full only upon sale or transfer. OVNER REBATES - for necessary improvements GRANTS - Emergency repairs, health and safety hazards RENTAL REHABILITATION PROGRAM ONLY - To benefit low income renters 3% to 9% interest, 15 year loan term Deferred payment loans, 2% interest, 10 year loan term 50% Cash Rebate up to $5000 per rental unit 2. Public Improvements in Support of Neighborhood Preservation These projects can consist of: a. Street improvements, lights, traffic signals b. Sidewalks, curbs, gutters, storm drains 3. Community Facilities in Support of Neighborhood Preservation These projects can consist of: a. Rehabilitation or construction of community centers b. Improvements to playground and parks H C-11 4. Grant Assistance to Non-Profit Organizations/Groups Direct and staff assistance may be provided to non-profit organiza-:ions serving low-income persons in the areas of discrimination, housing, employment, training, health care, day care and community activiti-:s. The primary participants and beneficiaries of the H/CD Program are low- and moderate-income residents. It is the intent of the program, however, that all segments of the affected community participate in community revitalization and the housing programs. The unincorporated areas which submitted proposals for the thirteenth Block Grant year (Fiscal Year 1988-1989) were: Anaheim Independencia, Anaheim Island, Brookhurst/Ball, Capistrano Beach, , Cypress Island, Denni Street, Dana Point, E1 Modena, E1 Toro, Inter-Canyons (Modjeska, Silverado, Trabuco), Mac Island, Northeast El Modena, Orange-Olive, Rustic Lane, Southwest Anaheim, Sherwood Forest, Santa Ana Heights, and West Carden Grove. Participating cities with populations under 50,000 include: Brea Los Alamitos Seal Beach Cypress Placentia Stanton Laguna Beach San Clemente Tustin La Habra San Juan Capistrano Villa Park La Palma Yorba Linda Residents within participating cities may contact their city administrator for specific city II/CD information. Funding 1. Annual Federal Block Grant (CDBG) allocation for unincorporated 0::ange County and participating cities. 2. Tax Increment Funds from the newly adopted Orange County Neighbor:iood Development and Preservation Project under California Predevelopmant Law. H C-12 HEALTH CARE AGENCY (HCA) A. Adult Community Mental Health Services ' Address: 515 No. Sycamore Street, Santa Ana, CA 92701 Phone: (714) 834-5904 Manager: Doug Barton Summary of Purpose and Function Adult Community Health Services administers three housing-related programs: Homeless Mentally Disabled Program, the Transitional Living Center and Case Management Services (Placement Services). The Homeless Mentally Disabled Program is a comprehensive system of services for homeless mentally disabled adults which has three basic components: Case Management/Outreach, Housing, and Multi-Service Centers. A centralized County staff of outreach workers links homeless persons with seven contracted shelter facilities and three multi-service centers. The centers provide socialization, laundry and shower facilities, hot meals, ' transportation and vocational services. Services may be accessed by contacting the program at (714) 568-4252. The Transitional Living Center is a 29-bed licensed Adult Residential Care ' facility which provides a supportive home environment, 24-hour supervision, daily activities and transportation for mentally disabled adults. Services may be accessed by contacting Anaheim Case Management at (714) 447-7200. Case Management or placement services are services which provide for continuity of care for severely and persistently mentally disabled adults within the Mental Health system and related social service systems. Services include placement, hospital discharge planning, development of individual service plan, crisis intervention and assistance in daily living. Placement services may be accessed by contacting the Mental Health Case Management unit nearest to the clients residence: Fullerton (714) 447-7000 Anaheim (714) 447-7200 ' Santa Ana (714) 834-8250 Westminster (714) 896-7540 Garden Grove (714) 636-7300 1 Costa Mesa (714) 850-8461 Funding Short-Doyle Funds Homeless Categorical Funds i ' H C-13 I r SOCIAL SERVICES AGENCY i,SSA) , A. AFDC Homeless Assisi:ance Program Address: 1055 N. !lain Street , Phone: (714) 541.-7700 Director: Larry Leaman Summary of Purpose <<nd Function This program assists homeless families with children who are AFDC eligible. Families who meet AFDC criteria may receive up to 4 weeks of payments (based on family size) for temporary shelter and last month's rent and deposits for permanent shelter il: the rent is no more than 80% of an AFDC grant for the family. No family may receive this assistance more than once in 12 calendar months. All of the offices listed below take and process applications for AFDC Homeless Assistance. East District Refugee District , 2020 W. Walnut 1619 V. 17th Street Santa Ana, CA 9270 Santa Ana, CA 92706 (714) 834-8902 (714) 834-7073 ' South District Vest District 290 Fisher Avenue 9191 Westminster Avenue ' Costa Mesa, CA 926e'.6 Garden Grove, CA 92644 (714) 850-8500 (714) 896-7799 San Juan Capistrano District North District 32118 Paseo Adelantc, Suite 1-A 1133 Homer Street San Juan Capistrano, CA 92675 Anaheim, CA 92801 (714) 496-3514 (714) 490-5160 Funding This statewide program was implemented February 1, 1988 and utilizes funds according to the AFUC sharing ratio of approximately 50% federal, 45% state and 5% county dollars. Although the program is proposed for continuance through January 31, 1990, federal participation is not assured. Under current state law this program would have to be discontinued if federal funds become unavailable. i H C-14 B. Emergency Shelter for the Homeless ' Address: 1055 N. Main Street Phone: (714) 541-7700 Director: Larry Leaman ' Summary of Purpose and Function In 1987, the governor authorized the use of National Guard Armories to house the homeless on an emergency basis when night temperatures dropped to 40 degrees or below or temperatures were 50 degrees accompanied by rain. SSA has the lead role in arranging armory operations, but active participation by other agencies and community groups has been the key to ' keeping this service functional. When evening weather forecasts indicate a need for opening the armories, agencies who provide for the homeless are notified. Bus transportation from a series of pick-up points is provided. The shelters open at 6:00 p.m. and close at 7:30 a.m. Dinner and breakfast are provided by Feedback Foundation; volunteers assist in serving meals and clean-up activities. Red ' Cross provides cots, blankets, and towels. Shower facilities are available on site. SSA and other County agencies and certain city managers provide on-site supervision throughout the night. SSA also handles laundry, ' storage, and security arrangements. In 1988-1989, the armories have accommodated 5,821 homeless people and churches, which are used on an emergency overflow basis, have accommodated another 1,165 persons. National Guard Armory National Guard Armory ' 612 E. Warner 400 S. Brookhurst Santa Ana, CA 92707 Fullerton, CA 92633 Funding Homeless Shelter Charitable Trust Fund Federal Emergency Management Act Funds ' Stewart McKinney monies Donations and Contributions by: Feedback Foundation California National Guard O.C. Chapter of the Red Cross O.C. Sheriff's Department j O.C. Marshal's Office City of Santa Ana Park Rangers H C-15 ORANGE COUNTY HOMELESS ISSUES TASK FORCE Address: 13252 Garden Grove Blvd. , Suite 200, Garden Grove, CA 92643 Phone: (714) 740-1157 Executive Board (1983-1989): Chairman: Scott Mather (S.O.S. , Orange Coast Interfaith Shelter) Vice-Chairman: Alison Klakovich (Rainbows to End Hunger) Secretary: Kelley Sullivan (Food Distribution Center) Committee Chairmen: By-Laws and Membership: Janie Arnold (Sen. Marian Bergeson's Office) Education: Dianne Russell (YWCA) Kathie Murtey (Public Guardian) Housing: Jinn Miller (Housing) Research: Alison Klakovich (Rainbows to End Hunger) Resource: Maria Mendoza (County Administrative Office) Fiscal: Dan Harney (St. Vincent de Paul Society) Legislative: Lee Podolak (League of Women Voters) Staff: Susan Oakson Summary of Purpose oind Function , Founded in 1985 by Senator Marian Bergeson (R-Newport Beach), the purpose of the Task Force is t3 provide regional leadership and direction in crea-:ing a working coalition and partnership between homeless persons, service providers, advocates, government, and public representatives as they identify and address the issue of homelessness. Further, the Task Force aims to be a catalyst in securing positive solutions for homelessness that use the financial and human resources of Orange County's public, nan-profit, religious and private organizations and groups. The Task Force will. address homelessness through emergency care, transitional shelters, and low-income housing. Finally, the Task Force strives to end involuntary homelessness in OrE.nge County. Funding Hands Across America Grant Private donations i H C-16 , H.O.M.E.S., (HELPING OUR MENTAL iLL EXPERIENCE SUCCESS) Address: 1905 East 17th Street, Suite 217, Santa Ana, CA 92705 ' Phone: (714) 836-6543 Board of Directors (1989): President: Ramona Schneider (California Council on Mental Health, Alliance for the Mentally Ill - Orange County) Vice President: Marie McNabola, Ph.D. (Orange County Mental Health Advisory Board) Secretary-Treasurer: Nancy Weir (Alliance for the Mentally Ill - Orange County) Beverly Cunningham (Alliance for the Mentally Ill - Orange County) Mildred Garcia (Board S Care Quality Assurance Committee for the Mentally Ill) Pat Lenard (Consultant) Eileen Miller (Orange County Mental Health Advisory Board) Jim Nantais (Developer) Allan Rawland (Professor, Graduate School of Social Work - Cal State, Long Beach) Chris St. Clare (Partner, Accounting firm) Summary of Purpose and Function HOMES is a non-profit corporation organized in 1985 with the goal of ' providing an array of housing options for the mentally ill. HOMES currently provides three houses at the semi-independent level with supportive services in Orange County for mentally ill adults. The current program is considered transitional, and residents move on to independent living when their Section 8 certificates become available to them. Funding (Fiscal year 1988-89) Private donations Revenue Sharing ' Rent from residents 1 CTL:k1PA01-395/9191 H C-17 9031613261113 r ' APPENDIX D 1 ORANGE COUNTY HOUSING OPPORTUNITIES PROGRAM r Policies and Guidelines r 1 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS ' Section Title Page ' A. Program Rationale H-D-1 ' B. Guiding Principles for the Housing Opportunities Program H-D-2 C. Definitions H-D-3 ' D. Program Description H-D-5 E. County Support and Incentives to Affordable Housing H-D-7 1 ' A. Program Rationale WHEREAS, the price of housing in Orange County has increased rapidly in the past several years; and, WHEREAS, substantial numbers of Orange County low-income households are ' paying in excess of 35% of their limited incomes for housing; and, WHEREAS, as a result of the above, there is a high demand for low- and moderate-income for-sale and rental housing in the County; and, ' WHEREAS, there are significant and expanding industrial and service employment needs and opportunities for workers with incomes at or below the ' County median who cannot find affordable housing in reasonable proximity to their work and thus must commute excessive distance; and, WHEREAS, such commute distance has had and will have an increasing ' negative impact on the County's transportation system, air quality and energy consumption; and, ' WHEREAS, public housing and housing subsidy programs can meet only a small portion of the need for low- and moderate-income housing; and, WHEREAS, the vast majority of housing units have been and will continue ' to be produced by the private housing industry; and, WHEREAS, this industry has the knowledge and ability to produce housing in the affordable range given supportive government policies and incentives; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to state law, the County has an obligation to make ' adequate provision for the housing needs of all economic segments of the community; and, WHEREAS, the County has required the provision of affordable housing through the Inclusionary Housing Program (IHP) from 1979 to 1983 and the Housing Opportunities Program (HOP) from 1983 to the present; and, ' WHEREAS, the County has met and exceeded previous low- and moderate-income production objectives, and, WHEREAS, it is the goal of the County to continue the production of housing units affordable to households in a broad range of income levels; and, WHEREAS, the County has established commitments under both IHP and HOP for a majority of the unincorporated area that remains to be developed, and the commitments will remain in effect assuring a continued supply of affordable housing in the short- and long-term future consistent with this goal; and WHEREAS, County efforts to encourage construction of affordable housing should be focused on the segment of the population with the greatest need, i.e. . low- and very-low-income households. ' H-D-1 1 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, for those areas of the County not , covered by affordable housing commitments, the County will continue to pursue a voluntary program for affordable housing consistent with the County objective and will evaluate it tc. assure that the County objective continues to be met. ' BE IT FURTHER FESOLVED, the County will continue to monitor the provision of affordablE. housing to insure compliance with existing requirements and program objectives. BE IT FURTHER FESOLVED, the Housing Opportunities Program shall include the policies, guidelines, objectives, and criteria stated below and shall , supersede any earlier adopted Resolutions regarding affordable housing. B. Guiding Principles for the Housing Opportunities Program ' 1. A joint and balanced commitment by developers and the County to affordable housing objectives is essential to a successful housing program. Therefore: ' a. Program emphasis is placed on engaging the resources of the private housing industry in devising workable methods for achieving , affordable housing objectives; b. The program is based on recognition that housing projects must be economically feasible, i.e. , the developer should have an opportunity to make a reasonable profit; c. The County should seek affordable housing commitments, whether voluntary or mandatory, at the largest possible scale and at the earliest possible stage of the development process so that housing types, densities, etc. , can be planned to support and implement the program's affordable objectives. Concurrently, it should identify and apply those incentives and support programs, which will be provided to complement developer commitments. 2. The program should contain strategies to reduce housing costs through all available techniques. 3. The objective of the Housing Opportunities Program is that at least 25% of the new housing built in the unincorporated area be affordable to households earning no more than 120% of the County Median Income and be further allocated as follows: 10% - Low 10% - Moderate I 5% - Moderate II 4. Primary emphasis in the investment of public funds should be to provide housing for households in greatest need, i.e. , 80% of median incone and , below. 5. Depending on project scale, the affordable units should be designed to satisfy the widest possible range of housing needs: e.g. , singles, elderly, disabled, couples, and families with children. H-D-2 ' 6. Affordable units should be located and designed so that they are compatible with their surroundings. Adequate provision should be made for imaginative architectural and site design, landscaping and maintenance of common areas to meet this objective. 7. Affordable units should be distributed throughout the community in such a manner that undue concentration of such units is avoided and buyers/ renters have reasonable access to community employment opportunities, services, facilities and public transportation. ' 8. Since economic integration of diverse income groups is not the program's purpose or goal, it is not necessary that every planning area or development project contain a mix of affordable and "non-affordable" units, provided that a plan for the dispersal of the required affordable units over a larger project area has been adopted. 9. The program should be sensitive to changing market conditions and be designed to minimize County and private industry overhead expenditures. 10. The County should provide technical information to cities that wish to ' undertake affordable housing programs and offer them an opportunity to participate in joint programs when feasible, e.g. , revenue bond financing and the Community Development Block Grant Program. ' 11. Although state law permits affordable housing requirements to be met by rental units, developers are encouraged to satisfy at least one-half of a project's Moderate I requirement and three-quarters of the Moderate II requirement with for-sale units in order to provide appropriate home ownership opportunities for households of moderate means. 12. To implement the Housing Opportunities Program, the Director, EHA, ' shall prepare appropriate standard conditions for the Manual of Standard Conditions of Approval. ' 13. Families of five or more persons should be given priority in buying or renting affordable units with three or more bedrooms. 14. The County requires that an affordable unit be owner occupied. However, blood relatives not living in the affordable unit may cosign a loan to allow a buyer to qualify. ' C. Definitions Affordable Housing Implementation Plan (AHIP): A document which defines the method(s) of compliance with the mandatory affordable housing requirements ' of a residential development. Also known as Housing Element Implementation Plan. AHIPs may include/require Housing Program Reports, Rental Agreements, and Transfer of Credit Reports. ' H-D-3 Affordable Unit: ' ° Rental: Any multiple-family structure built pursuant to the Inclusionary housing Program or Housing Opportunities Program for rental ' purposes. ° For-Sale: ' Income Based - A unit that is sold to and occupied by a household in an income category established by the Housing Affordability Table. , Cost Based A unit whose cost after a 10% down payment, given the best available fixed-rate fully amortized 30-year loan, including principle, interest, taxes, insurance, and homeowner association dues, would not exceed the ma:KiMUM monthly mortgage payment established by the Housing Affordability Table, regardless of occupant income. Alternative financing mechanisms (e.g. , adjustable rate mortgages) may be usod by ' purchasers, but calculations for purposes of certifying affordab:.lity shall be based on prevailing fixed-rate terms. Density Bonus: An increase in the density of a residential project above ' that normally pernitted by zoning in order to facilitate the provision of affordable housing. The standard density bonus is 25% above zoning. No additional density bonus shall be granted where increased density ha:; been approved and specifically conditioned in writing to facilitate affordable housing as part of a previous Land Use Element amendment or zone charge. Excess Affordable Unit Credit: An affordable unit which is not needed to ' satisfy the affordable unit requirements of the Inclusionary Housing Program or Housing Opportunity Program. These credits may be transferred only within the Planned Community in which they were generated to satisfy affordable housing requirements. Housing Affordability Table: A computation of maximum income levels and maximum monthly mortgage or rental payments based upon the County Median , Income prepared by the Manager, Advance Planning Division according to the following methodology: ° Income-Based Calculation: Affordable income-based definitions are ' calculated by using 80% of the median income as the maximum allowable income for Low-income households, 100% of the median income as the maximum allowable income for Moderate I households, and 120% of the median income as the maximum allowable income for Moderate II households. ° Cost-Based Calculation: The cost-based portion of the Housing ' Affordability Table (HAT) indicates the maximum monthly payment permitted in each affordable income category (see definition under "Affordable Cnit"). The maximum monthly payment is calculated by taking ' 30% for rental units or 33% for for-sale units of the maximum income permitted for each category and dividing by 12. H-D-4 ' ' Housing Program Report: A detailed report regarding the provision of mandatory affordable housing in a residential development which specifies the affordable requirement, on-site or off-site compliance, and the type of housing product. Inclusionary Housing Program: The mandatory affordable housing program adopted in 1979 and superseded by the Housing Opportunities Program in 1983. ' Income, Median: That figure published and periodically updated for Orange County as a whole by the Chapman College Center for Economic Research or another source determined to be more appropriate by the Director, EMA. ' Income, Very Low: 50% or less of median income. ' Income, Low: 51% to 80% of median income. Income, Moderate: 81% to 120% of median income. This income range is further subdivided as follows: ' Moderate I: 81% to 100% of median income. ' Moderate II: 101% to 120% of median income. Rental Agreement: An agreement to satisfy affordable housing requirements by providing rental units. ' Vested Excess Affordable Unit Credit: An "excess affordable unit credit" created prior to July 17, 1986 and part of a tentative tract map, use ' permit, or site plan approved prior to July 17, 1983. Vested credits may be transferred anywhere within the unincorporated area regardless of where they were generated. ' D. Program Description The Housing Opportunities Program consists of both mandatory and voluntary ' components in which County regulatory powers are combined with specified incentives to achieve program objectives. 1. Mandatory Component: The County recognizes that there is a committed ' supply of mandatory affordable housing in previously approved Inclusionary Housing Program and Housing Opportunities Program projects. Applications to amend those commitments with respect to the number or ' percentage of affordable housing units required under those previous approvals will be discouraged. a. Although the dispersal of affordable units is desirable, it is not 1 required that every project provide affordable units on-site. Developers may transfer excess affordable unit credits of any income category from other projects which have produced excess affordable ' credits. ' H-D-5 b. It is recognized that development phasing depends on available ' infrastructure and physical constraints, and that affordable ho-ising sites may not always be appropriate for the initial phase of development. However, to the extent feasible, the desired percentage of affordable units should be constructed as early as possible anil prior to the last development phase of the "non-afford<ble" units. , c. Provision will be made for the certification of affordable units produced under the program. The Director, EMA is responsible for establishing administrative mechanisms for this purpose and wi:.l , ensure that these mechanisms are as simple and inexpensive to ripply as possible. d. Implementation of the mandatory component is via Affordable Ho-ising ' Implementation Plans. When such documents are clearly consistent with all provisions of the Housing Element, they may be approved by the Director, EMA. Otherwise, they shall be considered by the Board of Supervisors. e. If a new unit has been offered for sale to eligible buyers pursuant , to both income-based and cost-based criteria and the unit remg.ins unsold after 90 days, then: (1) The unit may be sold to anyone at the same price it was offered , to eligible buyers, and (2) The builder will be given affordable credit for the unit within ' the applicable affordability category based on cost base) criteria only. f. If a new unit has been offered for rent to eligible renters pursuant , to both income-based and cost-based criteria and the unit remains unrented for 30 days, then: (1) The unit may be rented to anyone at the same rate that it was ' offered to eligible renters. (2) If the builder is able to document that a good faith at':empt ' was made to rent to target income groups for 30 days, then affordable credit will be given for the unit at the level of rent or the gross income of the renter, whichever is lo-wer. , g. If there are no subsidy programs available and other incentives are not sufficient to make compliance economically feasible, all or a , portion of mandatory low-income units may be satisfied by the provision of units at the Moderate I level. This provision should be utilized as a last resort once all avenues of assistance, incentives and marketing considerations have been adequately explored and found not feasible for a particular project. h. Families of five or more persons shall be given priority in buying , or renti:ag units with three or more bedrooms. If after 90 days (for-sale) or 30 days (rental) such units remain unsold or lnrented. then they may be sold or rented to households of any size. H-D-6 , 2. Voluntary Component: This component is intended to complement the mandatory requirements of the Housing Opportunities Program. Any affordable units provided in excess of requirements are voluntary ' affordable units. A unit may not be counted as voluntary if it is used or transferred to meet mandatory requirements. ' In order to monitor the provision of voluntary affordable units, builders will be required to provide information on buyer incomes and selling prices or rents of all residential developments of 5 units or more. The Director, ERA, is responsible for establishing administrative mechanisms for this purpose and will ensure that these mechanisms are as simple and inexpensive to apply as possible. ' The information received in compliance with this condition will be kept confidential except for its annual use in compiling aggregate affordable housing production statistics. ' E. County Support and Incentives to Affordable Housing Developers agreeing to provide units affordable to households earning not ' more than 120% of the median income will be evaluated on the basis of need for County incentives outlined below. Special consideration for County incentives will be made for developers agreeing to provide units affordable to households earning 80% of median income or less. ' 1. Criteria for which affordable housing will be evaluated for County support include the following: ' a. Affordability - The extent to which the project provides affordable dwelling units responsive to the needs defined in the Housing Element. b. Infrastructure Capacity - The degree to which infrastructure components within the area in which the project is located are ' capable of accommodating the proposed densities. c. Speculation Control/Continued Affordability - The extent to which the project prevents first buyer speculation gain and/or provides ' for the long-term availability of the affordable units. d. Location - The proximity of the project to public services and ' facilities, employment centers, and commercial centers required for the expected needs of project residents of affordable units. e. Accessibility to the Disabled - The extent to which projects ' incorporate accessible design configuations in excess of minimum standards. ' 2. Increased incentives may be provided to developers in exchange for additional public benefits such as the following: a. Providing more than the minimum required residential units proposed ' as Low Income. H-D-7 b. Providing low-income senior citizen housing. ' c. Providing very-low-income units (50% or less of the county median income. ' d. Providing low-income three- and four-bedroom rental units. e. Maintaining the affordability of rental units for a period greater I than the m:inimum required. f. Providing Handicapped-accessible low- and very-low-income units in ' excess of minimum requirements. g. Combinations of the above public benefits. 3. The specific incentives to be provided for a project will be dete:-mined on a case-by-case basis. Incentives which may be made available Include the following: a. County housing revenue bond financing for all of the affordable units to be constructed, as needed in times of high interest rates. ' b. Density bonus or relaxation in site development standards per Zoning Code Section 7-9-140. c. Land writ:-down through use of CDBG funds or other revenue sources. ' d. Elimination or reduction of non-park open space requirements on land ' which is :not environmentally sensitive. e. Elimination or reduction of off-site improvements and public facility requirements or fees which are not generated by or , essential to the proposed project or necessary for the publi : health and safety such as libraries, trail improvements, landscapin.;, etc. f. Provide public financing of residential infrastructure and form ' special e:ssessment districts. g. Secure federal or state housing program funds. , Consideration shall be given to other incentives not listed which are feasible, do not create a burden on other housing projects, and which do not jeopardize the public health and safety. H-D-8 FM(JD):jnPA01-431/9:L79 9040521275214 APPENDIX E Energy Conservation: Building Energy Standard for Residential Development (Title 24) 1 1 APPENDIX E Energy Conservation: Building Energy Standard for Residential ' Development (Title 24) Building energy standards for new residential development establish "energy ' budgets", or maximum energy use levels, for three types of residential buildings applicable to each of 16 climate zones within California. These standards supersede local regulations, and state requirements mandate their implementation by local jurisdictions. Consequently, any further analysis of energy conservation beyond the Title 24 standards is unnecessary. Furthermore, any locally adopted conservation measures to achieve energy savings beyond the Title 24 Standards would conflict with housing cost reduction objectives. ' In meeting the standards, builders can use either the "performance" or the "prescriptive" approach. ' Performance Approach: The performance approach provides the builder with the greatest flexibility in that the builder determines which mix of design and equipment technologies will be used in meeting the specified energy budget. The builder, however, must be able to demonstrate, through the application of state-approved calculation methods, that the proposed building will consume no more energy than the energy budget allows. Prescriptive Approach: The prescriptive approach will probably be the most common because it does not require computerized calculations. The prescriptive approach involves the use of one of five packages which can be characterized as the simplest and least flexible compliance path. The only choice involved in the prescriptive approach is the selection of which package to use within the designated climate zone. Each package may be generally described according to the conservation strategy it emphasizes in meeting the budget: ' Package A: A passive solar building that is designed to take advantage of the direct rays of the sun for heating purposes, or be protected from the sun for cooling purposes through proper solar orientation, appropriate selection of building materials and a moderate amount of insulation; Package B: A non-active solar building which allows a fairly small area of total glazing and requires R-19 walls in most climate zones. On the other hand, no thermal mass is required, and minimum HVAC efficiencies may be used. "Light mass" wall and "heavy mass" wall R-value requirements are available as alternatives to the frame wall insulation requirements; Package C: This package essentially exchanges a requirement for solar hot water for less insulation as compared with Package B; ' Package D: This package is tailored to slab floor buildings and trades higher HVAC efficiencies and exposed thermal mass area for more glazing and ' R-11 wall insulation in most climate zones. No slab edge insulation is required except in Climate Zones 1 and 16; Package E: This package applies to raised floor buildings and is identical to Package D except that it requires R-19 floor insulation and less exposed thermal mass area. ' H E-1 (See Figure E-1 for the application of each package to the non-coastal area of Orange County.) Additionally, all new residential buildings must include minimum levels cf wall ' and ceiling insulation (R-19 ceiling and R-11 wall insulation for frame construction), infiltl:ation control measures, vapor barriers (in certain climate zones), duct insulation, proper sizing of space conditioning equipment, setback thermostats, and enerlW-efficient lighting. The cost of complying with the new standards ranges from $500 to $17,000 per , unit depending on the package type and climate zone. (See Chapter Three: Constraints and Opportunities: E. State-Imposed Requirements. ) The costs of complian.:e associated with the Title 24 Building Standards will ' influence the costs of constructing and purchasing or renting a new home in Orange County. However, as energy prices rise, homeowners and renters w:.11 most , likely spend an increasing proportion of household income for utility bills. This may cause housing to become even less affordable than it is now and further constrain residents' ability to meet monthly mortgage or rental payments . H E-2 n r ' FIGURE E-1: PRESCRIPTIVE PACKAGES FOR CLIMATE ZONE 8 (Non-Coastal Orange Co.) Package Package Package Package Package Component A B C D E BUILDING ENVELOPE ' Insulation Minimums: Ceiling R-30 R-30 R-30 R-30 R-30 Wall R-11 R-19 R-11 R-11 R-11 "Heavy" Wall (R-1.6) (R-1.6) (R-1.4) N/A N/A "Light Mass" Wall 1IR-4.0" "R-4.5" "R-3.5" N/A N/A Slab Floor Perimeter R-7 R-7 R-7 NR N/A Raised Floor R-11 R-19 R-11 N/A R-19 ' GLAZING Maximum U-Value 1.10 0.65 1.10 0.65 0.65 Maximum Total Area NR 14% 14% 20% 20% Maximum Total Nonsouth Facing Area 9.6% N/A N/A N/A N/A ' Minimum South Facing Area 6.4% NR NR NR NR SHADING COEFFICIENT South Facing Glazing 0.36/ 0.36/ 0.36/ 0.662 0.662 ' Opt.Ov. Opt.Ov. Opt.Ov. West Facing Glazing 0.36 0.36 0.36 0.36 0.36 East Facing Glazing NR NR NR 0.36 0.36 North Facing Glazing NR NR NR 0.66 0.66 THERMAL MASS REQ NR NR 25% 10% INFILTRATION CONTROL Continuous Barrier NR NR NR NR NR Air-to-Air Heat Enhanger NR NR NR NR NR SPACE HEATING SYSTEM If Gas, Seasral Efficiency= 71% 71% 71% 72% 72% j If Heat Pump , ACOP= MIN MIN MIN 2.5 2.5 ' SPACE COOLING SYSTEM 6 If Air Conditioner , SEER= MIN MIN MIN 8.9 8.9 DOMESTIC VATER HEATING TYPE ' System must meet budget, ANY ANY Solar w/ ANY ANY sec §2-5351(b) and 2-5351(f)(8) Any Backup LEGEND: NR = Not Required; N/A = Not Applicable; REQ = Required 1. The value in parentheses is the minimum R-value for the entire wall assembly excluding interior and exterior air films if the wall weight ' exceeds 40 pounds per square foot. The value in quotation marks is the minimum R-value for the entire assembly if the heat capacity of the wall meets or exceeds the result of multiplying the bracketed minimum R-value by 0.65. The insulation must be integral with or installed on the outside ' of the exterior mass. The inside surface of the thermal mass, including plaster or gypsum board in direct contract with the masonry wall, shall be exposed to the room air. The exterior wall used to meet the R-Value in ' parentheses cannot also be used to meet the above thermal mass requirement. 2. No specific shading must be installed with double glazing to meet the 0.66 ' shading coefficient requirement which assumes light drapery. ' H E-3 I I 1 3. To calculate the amount of thermal mass required for Package A, use the method set forth in §2-5351(f)4. Package D (for slab floor buildings) requires 25 percent of the ground floor area directly exposed to the conditioned sp<<ce. Uncarpeted (e.g. , linoleum or tiled) ground floor area, such as entry ways, kitchens, bathrooms, and conditioned utility rooms or closets may all be counted towards this requirement. Package E (for raised floor buildings) requires a thermal mass area equal to 10 , percent of the ground floor area. To qualify for thermal mass, the material used crust have a performance equivalent to a two inch thick mass element with a volumetric heat capacity of 28 Btu/ft3-*F. , a thernal conductivity oi: 0.98 Btu/ft-OF. , and a surface area directly exposed to the room air oi` the required percentage of the ground floor. 4. The 71% SE requirements are superseded by the Appliance Efficiency , Standards which require that all nonweatherproof control gas furn<<ces of less than 175,000 Btu/hr manufactured on or after January 1, 1988 have a rating of 72% :iE or higher. Automatic setback thermostats must bey installed in conjunction with all space heating systems except th(Ise noted , in Section 2.3. 5. Heat pumps must meet the minimum 6.6 HSPF (Heating Seasonal Performance ' Factor) value :specified in the Appliance Efficiency Standards as hell as the ACOP (Adju:sted Coefficient of Performance) listed in the Tables. 6. Both air conditioners and the cooling cycle of heat pumps must meet the listed SEER (Seasonal Energy Efficiency Ratio) listed in the Table. Any equipment which meets the Appliance Efficiency Standards also meets the "MIN" package requirement for cooling. ' = - r CTL:ltPA01-299/9177 9020118135401 H E-4 APPENDIX F ' HOUSING ELEMENT REVIEW AND EVALUATION ' California Government Code Section 65588 requires each local government to review its Housing Element at least once every five years to determine the appropriateness on the element's goals, objectives and policies; the effectiveness of the element in attaining the community's goals and objectives; ' and the jurisdiction's progress in implementing the element. This appendix contains a summary of the County's Housing Element Review. ' State law specifies that jurisdictions within the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) region must complete their Housing Element updates by July 1, 1989. In late 1988, County staff prepared a work program for the project and submitted it to the Planning Commission for approval. The work program included a technical advisory committee made up of County agencies, private organizations, housing interest groups, and building industry representatives. This technical advisory committee held a series of public ' workshops intended to solicit information and recommendations from all economic segments of the community, as required by Government Code Sec. 65583(c). A list of technical advisory committee members is provided on the credits page inside the front cover of the element. Following the technical advisory committee public workshops, County staff prepared a new draft Housing Element, which was circulated to the state ' Department of Housing and Community Development and to local organizations and persons for review and comment. A series of public hearings was held before the Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors to discuss the revised element. The following sections describe the analysis that was conducted prior to final adoption of the new element. A. Appropriateness of Goals, Objectives, Policies and Programs ' In drafting the revised element, staff evaluated the appropriateness of existing goals, objectives, policies, and programs to determine what modifications were needed in response to new circumstances and the County's performance during the previous five years. The significant changes and the rationale in support of these changes are discussed below. ' 1. Goals (Page H 4-1) The five previous goals have been consolidated into four goals to avoid duplication. Goal 1 also includes a new statement regarding adequate ' housing for employees of county firms and public service providers. This reflects the increased public concern over the rapid escalation in housing costs in the county during the past few years, making it ' increasingly difficult for employers to attract and retain qualified workers. This is especially true for the growing service sector of the economy. ' H-F-1 2. Objectives (Page H 4-1) ' Quantified objectives are broken down into three components: new housing construction, housing conservation and rehabilitation. Th? new ' objective for total housing production is based on the most recent Board-adopted growth forecast, Orange County Projections - 1988 (OCP-88). This objective reflects anticipated growth in the ' unincorporated area for the period of 1989-1994. A separate objective is stated for new affordable housing production, which is defined as housing affordable to households with incomes Df ' 120 percent or less of the County median. This objective is 25 percent of new housing units built, unchanged from the previous element. The new element also retains the previous objectives for 10 percent of all ' new units in the Low category (80 percent or less of median income), 10 percent in the Moderate I category 81-100 percent of median income), and 5 percent in the Moderate II category (101-120 percent of median income). The element was revised in conjunction with Housing Element Amendment 1993-1 to establish a new objective for very-low-income housing (50 percent or less of median income). This objective was determined based on an evaluation of available resources. A key ' assumption of the Housing Element continues to be that the majority of very low-, low- and moderate income needs are met by existing, rather than new housing. The previous element contained a quantified objective for new units , assisted with federal Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds. Since these units must be affordable to low- and moderate-income ' households, this objective is now included within the affordable housing quantified objective. The quantified objective for rehabilitation and conservation of existing ' units has been updated to reflect the most current funding expectations. Finally, the program objectives for Chapter 4 of the previous elertent ' have been reformatted and are included either as policy statements (Chapter 4) or in the individual program descriptions (Chapter 5) of tht revised element. 3. Policies (Page H 4-4) , Policy statements have been reviewed and updated to reflect the revised goals and chanlres in circumstances. Many policy statements were consolidated o;: revised to eliminate duplication or ambiguity. Ir. addition the following new policy statements have been added in response to needs identified during the amendment process: ' a. Policy 1-F includes a provision for the recapture of direct public subsidies :if units are prematurely withdrawn from the subsidising ' program. H-F-2 ' r ' b. In response to a recommendation from the technical advisory committee, Policy 1-G has been revised to initiate consideration of a zoning code amendment that would allow administrative approval of transitional housing in appropriate districts. C. Policy 1-I commits the County to consider a zoning code amendment to allow residential uses in appropriate commercial districts to ' facilitate the production of affordable housing and transitional shelters close to employment opportunities and major transportation routes. ' d. Policy 1-S directs staff to develop an in-lieu fee policy as an alternative method of complying with affordable housing requirements. ' e. Policy 1-T commits the County to support increased state and federal tax incentives to encourage low-income housing construction and ' handicapped-accessible housing. f. Policy 1-U indicates the County will investigate the feasibility of participating in a regional employment/housing linkage program that ' would assist in providing housing affordable to low- and very-low-income workers. ' g. Policy I-V commits the County to continue to inventory and preserve existing low-income housing units that were assisted through federal, state and local programs and which are eligible to convert to market-rate housing due to expiring affordability restrictions. (Note: This program has been established in conjunction with the adoption of Housing Element Amendment 1993-1. See Appendix G: Preservation of Assisted Rental Units Program.) ' h. Policy 1-W directs staff to identify sites for transitional shelters for homeless families that are now available or easily made ' available. i. Policy 2-E directs the County to consider support of just cause eviction legislation at the state and federal level. ' j . Policy 4-D supports the establishment of a countywide housing task force and trust fund to assist the production of low-income housing and transitional housing for homeless families. ' H-F-3 4. Programs (Chapter 5) ' In the previous element, individual program descriptions were listed in Appendix C. The revised element contains a complete listing of u.3dated , programs in Chapter 5. a. New Programs ' The revised element contains the following new program descriptions. (Note: With the exception of the Preservation of Assisted Rental Units Program which was added in 1993 in conjunction with Housing ' Element Amendment 1993-1, all of these programs were added in 1989 in conjunction with Housing Element Amendment 1989-1. ) o Aftercare Rental Assistance Program (p. H 5-2) ' This is an existing program that was inadvertently omitted from the previous element's catalogue of programs. t o County-wide Homeless Family Transition Housing Initiative (p• H 1-6) 1 In response to the growing need for temporary shelter, the Board of Supervisors recently directed County staff to explore the feasibility of creating a Countywide pool of CDBG funds to support: a joint city-county program to assist the developrtent of transitional housing facilities for homeless families. o Homeless Issues Coordination (p. H 5-2) This new program was created to provide a mechanism to cocrdinate the activities of various County departments in their programs to assist the homeless. o Housing; Development Finance Program (p. H 5-11) This new program administered by the Orange County Housing Author'.ty is intended to support the production and preservation of low--income rental housing. It is funded through OCHA's surplus operating reserve. o Housing; Element Periodic Review and Update (p. H 5-13) This i:> an existing activity mandated by state law. The r�ew element elevates this activity to program status, and incorporated other previous programs such as the Housing Affordability Monitoring System, Land Availability, and Economic Analysis of Land Use. o Neighborhood Development and Preservation Project (p. H 5_20) This now program will utilize redevelopment financing mechanisms to sup:.3ort construction, rehabilitation, and neighborhood improv.ament efforts in selected areas. H-F-4 II o Stewart McKinney Homeless Assistance Act (p. H 5-25) This program was recently established to utilize federal grants for improvement and operation of emergency shelters for the homeless. o Preservation of Assisted Rental Units Program (p. H 5-27 and Appendix G) This program was established in conjunction with Housing Element Amendment 1993-1 to provide for the continued affordability of dwelling units assisted through federal, state and local programs which have expiring affordability restrictions and are at risk of converting to market rate units. b. Programs Discontinued or Redesignated Several Programs have been deleted from the new element to eliminate redundancy. These programs are identified below. o Building Code Review and Revision This activity is incorporated within both the Development Processing System, Review Program (p. H 5-6) and the Housing Opportunities Program (p. H 5-12, Appendix D). o Controlling Speculation This activity is included within the Housing Opportunities program (p. H 5-12, Appendix D) o Econoidic Analysis of Land Use This activity is included within the Housing Element Periodic Review and Update (p. H 5-13). o Housing Affordability Monitoring System This activity has been incorporated into the Housing Element Periodic Review and Update program (p. H 5-13). o Housing Outreach and Education This activity is included within other programs such as CDBG (p. H 5-4), other federal housing programs (P. H 5-8), the Housing Development Finance Program (p. H 5-11) and the Housing Referral Directory (p. H 5-16). o Housing Program Performance Report This activity is included within the Housing Element Periodic 1 Review and Update (p. H 5-13 and the Community Development Block Grant Program (p. H 5-4). H-F-5 1 o Land Availability This activity is included within the Housing Element Periodic Review .and Update (p. H 5-13) o Liaison With Other Local Agencies This activity is included within each of the programs that involve other agencies, such as the Countywide Homeless Family Transit:ional Housing Initiative (p. H 5-6), the CDBG progre.m (p. H 5--4), and the Housing Element Periodic Review and Update (p. H 5- 13). o Master Environmental Assessment This activity is included within the Development Processing System Leview Program (p. H 5-6) and the Housing Opportunities Program (p. H 5-12, Appendix D). o Meeting Special Housing Needs These efforts are included within the CDBG program (p. H 5-4), the Aftercare Rental Assistance Program (p. H 5-2), and various state and federal programs. o Modification of Development Standards This activity is included within the Development Processing System Review Program (p. H 5-6) and the Housing Opportunities Program (p. H 5-12, Appendix D). o Housing Information System This activity is included within the Housing Element Periodic Review and Update Program (p. H 5-13). o Reduction of Processing Time This activity has been incorporated into the Consistency Review Program (p. H 5-5) and the Development Processing System Review program (p. H 5-7). The descriptions of remaining programs have been updated to reflect current activities and funding levels. B. Effectiveness of the Housing Element in Attainment of Housing Goals an( Objectives. Table F-1 summarizes the County's performance compared to quantified objectives during the period 1982-1988. As indicated in this table, all of the new housing production objectives were exceeded by a considerable margin. Even constriction of new low-income units, which is the most difficult to achieve, exceeded the objective by 50 percent. H-F-6 i Construction of new CDBG units was slightly less than the objective (85Y.), but this was attributable to a cut in federal funding in 1984. Conservation and rehabilitation efforts exceeded the objectives by 24 percent. C. Progress in Housing Element Implementation In addition to evaluating the County's performance with respect to the quantified objectives, the previous element's program objectives were reviewed to determine the level of progress in achieving these objectives. The results of this review are presented in Table F-2. D. New and Replacement Units in the Coastal Zone For localities with territory in the coastal zone, Government Code Sec. 65588 (c) and (d) require that the housing element report on housing production activities within the coastal zone. Table F-3 contains statistics regarding new housing production in the coastal zone during the 1982-1988 period. During this time a total of 3,746 new affordable units were required. Table F-4 provides information on demolitions and conversions within the unincorporated coastal zone for the year 1982-1988. According to records kept by the County Administrative Office, a total of 9 units were added due to conversion, 4 units were deleted due to conversion and 29 units were deleted due to demolition or fire. JD/MBM:mbm/tk 2051108070050 H-F-7 I TABLE F-1 Housing Performance Summary Orange County Unincorporated Area July 1983 - June 1988 PerformancB Housing Elem37t (% of Total Units Objective _ Objective)_ 1. Total Units Built 29,194 1/ 22,638 129% y� 2. Affordable Units Built and Certified 10,014 -/ 5,660 177% Low 7/ 3,402 2,264 150% Mod-I 3,597 2,264 159% Mod-II 3,015 1,132 266% 3. New CDBG Units Buill:3/ 424 500 85% New 413 375 Infi116/ 11 125 4. Units Conserved or 1,199 3/ 8/ 965 124% Rehabilitated CDBG Funded 3/ 812 600 HUD Funded 4/ 364 345 Aftercare 4/ 23 20 Sources/Notes: 1/ CAO, Housing Inventory System 2/ EMA, Advance Planning Division D EMA, Housing/Community Development Office 4/ Orange County Housing Authority S/ County of Orange, Housing Element H 86-1, P. H 4-1 6/ The Urban Infill Program was projected to accomplish approximately ?5 new units per year in 1983. H/CD had 30 units in process during 1984 w3en a federal CDBG regulation amendment sequestered future funds for this activity. H/CD finished 11 units prior to the federal determination. 7/ Includes CDBG units. JD:lt/crPA01-384/9195 9031308101386 H-F-8 4BLE F-2 PROGRESS IN IMPLEMENTING HOUSING ELEMENT PROGRAM OBJECTIVES Program Objectives Progress I.1. Completion and operation of a housing information In February 1983, the Board of Supervisors System satisfying all local, state and federal established the Housing Affordability Monitoring requirements for data compatibility, currency, System (Resolution No. 83-184), which serves as a updating capability and retrieval to document and comprehensive data source for evaluating the monitor housing needs. County's housing needs and progres in implementing goals. This document is updated annually and serves as the County primary housing data reference source. I.2. Implementation of Consistency Assessment. The Consistency Review Section has been created within the Planning Function to evaluate consistency of permit applications with the General Plan and zoning regulations. I.3. Implementation of a New Construction Housing See discussion under Section B(1) and Table E-1. Program yielding 25 percent of new units constructed in the affordable price range. I.4. Definition of Community Development Block Grant Housing and Community Development Block Grant Programs and related budgets which respond to funds have been used as seed money in financing appropriate policies in the Housing Element. rehabilitation, replacing deteriorated housing, and development of new units for low- and moderate-income families. I.5. Continuation of Section 8 Existing Program. The Section 8 Existing Program has been expanded in funding levels, staffing, numbers of projects processed and types of projects utilizing these funds. I.6. Implementation of a coordinating mechanism to As part of the Housing Element periodic review and directly involve business and industry in solving update, representatives of the business community the housing needs and problems of their employees and building industry were invited to participate and involving the building industry in satisfying in the develoment of programs to address employee the need. housing needs. H-F-9 TABLE F-2 (Continued) Program Objectives Progress I.7. Transportation Element interface (e.g. , employer- This program objective is implemented through the residence proximity, encouraging balanced Balanced Land Use Policy of the Land Use Element. communities, implications of high density All communities in the unincorporated area are residential development on transportation planned with a mix of land uses so that residents facilities). have the opportunity to work, shop and play within a short distance of their homes. II.1. Housing Information System See comment I.1. II.2. Maintain a land inventory of all government- and An inventory has been completed and additional publicly-owned surplus sites (including state- sites deemed surplus are evaluated and added to and federally-owned land) in the county, which the inventory by HCD. have potential for residential development for low- and moderate-income households. II.3. Consistency Assessment See comment I.2. II.4. Establishment of a system for continuous building A Planning Regulation Review Committee has been code and regulatory review for flexibility in established to oversee streamlining of the zoning building standards and pilot projects. code and other regulatory mechanisms (e.g. , specific plans, planned communities). II.5. Housing Opportunities Program See comment I.3. II.6. Continue reduction of proce: :.ng times program With recent revisions to the Zoning Code (#3499) under way with continued monitoring of which streamlined the regulations and with performance. concurrent processing of project approvals, processing times have been reduced. H-F-10 r ow, No M. i r No Now NIla 06ow 10 WK, 00 TABLE F-2 (Continued) Program Objectives Progress 11.7. L%AaaNQ y&vv;u" vy icucaoi, Z CA, aAIU iv%.Qt LAIC L.VUIILy IIdJ 1JJUCU UVCL ?L.0 U11lion of housing and revenue bond programs. tax-exempt revenue bonds to provide below-market loans for more than 11,000 units. II.8. Continue to implement and expand the Land The Land Acquisition Program has continued at the Acquisition Program (HCD activity) so as to same scope and funding level. provide additional sites for residential development for low- and moderate-income households. II.9. Contingent upon funding availability, initiate No federal funding has been available for this Section 8 projects under both new and substantial program. rehabilitation provisions. II.10. Consider revisions to the Zoning Code to allow In 1984, a comprehensive Zoning code amendment was mixed uses and temporary housing facilities, and approved (#3499), which contained provisions to facilitate apartment construction. permit mixed-use development and community care facilities(temporary housing) with a use permit or site development permit. This revision also increased permissible density and building height and reduced processing time and fees for apartment construction. II.11. Review and revise speculation control and To control speculation, in the grant deed of each continuing affordability mechanisms to conform to bond-financed unit is a statement of owner intent modified policy. to occupy the unit. Continued affordability is facilitated by restricting loans to low- and moderate-income buyers only and by requiring pre-payment penalties on bond-financed units. II.12. Pursue alternative financing mechanisms for The County has explored possible funding Infill Program if UUD funds are reduced. alternatives, however none has been found to date. H-F-11 TABLE F-2 (Continued) Program Objectives Progress II.13. Continue implementation of Tax Exempt Revenue See comment II.7. Bonds Program. II.14. Prepare and adopt the Public Facilities Element The Public Services and Facilities Element was as a new element of the general plan. adopted by the Board of Supervisors on January 9, 1985 (Resolution No. 85-54). II.15. Conduct Infrastructure Studies. The Countv conducts several nrnvramc rn Pnc,irp_ that adequate infrastructure is availableto support new development. The CAO's Development Monitoring program annually evaluates the capacity of key systems, including water, wastewater, schools, roads, libraries, flood control and fire protection. In addition, the Public Services and Facilities Element of the General Plan establishes the policy frame-work for the development of infrastructure systems. III.1. Maintain housing affirmative action - H/CD funded the Fair Housing Council to monitor nondiscrimination program at existing resources both for-sale and rental units for affirmative and staff levels. action and discrimination. III.2. New Construction Housing Program See comment I.3. III.3. Community Development Block Grant Programs See comment I.4. III.4. Implement housing outreach and education program Outreach and education programs operate to inform the public of housing opportunities continuously through flyers and community available to eligible households. meetings. H-F-12 TABLE F-2 (Continued) Program Objectives Progress III.5. To support and undertake programs which reduce No new programs have been initiated. housing costs by making better use of existing housing resources. III.6. Consider a Zoning Code amendment to permit second The Zoning Code has been amended to allow second units on lots zoned single-family. units in single-family districts (Sec. 7-9-146.5). III.7. To provide the extension of the camp site time In 1984, the Harbors, Beaches and Parks Commission frame to 30 days for a specific number of rejected this proposal as an inappropriate use of available camp sites. park facilities. IV.1. Maintain rehabilitation support in target areas The Housing and Community Development Block Grant under Housing and Community Development Block Program has continued rehabilitation support at Grant Program. the same funding level, scope and scale. IV.2. Implement Residential Energy and Water All housing rehabilitation coordinated through Conservation Retrofit Program. H/CD implement energy-saver improvements including windows, faucets, toilets, insulation and electronic ignitions. IV.3. Implement Block Grant Home Improvement Program. The Block Grant Home Improvement Program has been implemented (see program description on p. H 5-3). IV.4. To consider revision of the Zoning Code to secure The State Government Code (Section 65863.7) tenant relocation safeguards when a mobile home addresses this subject. The Board of Supervisors park is converted to a commercial use. has determined that no additional County zoning regulations are necessary. IV.5. Earmark a portion of available rehabilitation The Dale McIntosh Center for handicapped persons funds for use in modifying (retrofitting) was completed in early 1985 with H/CD existing rental or ownership units to make them rehabilitation funds. The Center provides accessible. emergency housing for the handicapped. H-F-13 TABLE F-2 (Continued) Program Objectives Progress V.1. Interface with industry and business See comment I.6. organizations, especially those composed of employers. V.2. Interface with cities in the forum provided by The County is a member of the Southern California the SCAG Sub-Regional Planning Council. Assoc. of Governments (SCAG), the regional council of governments for Los Angles, Orange, Riverside, Can RnrnnrAinn. Vsantiorn nnA Tmnnrinl nmintioc The County participates in any SCAG programs that relate to Orange County planning issues. V.3. Share with cities information and experience See comment V.2. regarding special topics (e.g. , granny housing). V.4. Identify the Shared Emergency housing Task (SET) In 1984 OCHA subsidized the computerization of force as the clearinghouse for information and SET's Shared Housing Directory. This directory referral. Recommend OCHA interface with SET as lists clients, sponsoring agencies, rent and other the public sector liaison. information so that compatible roommates can be matched. The target group is seniors. SET is also updating its Emergency Housing Referral Directory. The SET Director is appointed by the Director of the OCHA. JD:1tPAUI-384/9181 0'11310202229 H-F-14 TABLE F-3 Coastal Zone Housing Approvals with Affordable Housing Requirements Orange County Unincorporated Area 1982-1988 New Projects Total Units Affordable Project Authorized Units Required Comments 1982 TT 11632 9 3 - TP 82-114/UP 82-8P 1 0 Exempt from replacement requirement TT 11711/UP 82-3P 46 12 Transfer affordable credits used UP 82-72P/SP 82-70P 4 0 - SP 82-56P 1 0 - TT 11594 119 0 Afford. units not req'd; CAA objective met TT 11799 384 225 - TT 8735 (2nd rev.) 80 20 - TP 82-138/UP 82-12P 4 0 - 2 82-108 2 0 - TP 82-160 2 0 - TP 82-148 2 0 - 1982 Subtotal 654 260 1983 UP 83-8P/VA 87-4P/ - GPI 83-2P 2 0 TT 11843/UP 82-81P/ - SP 82-77P 40 40 TT 11985/SP 83-68P 32 8 Transfer affordable credits used 1` UP 83-41P/SP 83-44P/ CD 83-7P/TP 83-121 24 24 - TP 82-158 1 0 - 1983 Subtotal 99 72 r H-F-15 TABLE F-3 (Continued) New Projects Total Units Affordable Project Authorized Units Required Comments 1984 UP 84-90P/SP 84-11OP/ CD 84-52P 1 0 - SP 84-86P/CD 84-41P 29 0 Timeshare project SP 84-64P/VA 84-11P/ CD 84-23P 68 0 Timeshare project AP 84-18P/FP 84-8A 450 113 Not all units are in coastal zaie UP 84-65P/CD 84-40P 2 0 - TT 8735 (6th rev.) 119 30 Transfer affordable credits used UP 83-95P/SP 83-118P/ CD 83-51P 2 0 _ UP 84-85P - - Exempt from replacement requirement UP 84-62P - - Exempt from replacement requirement ' 1984 Subtotal 671 143 1985 TT 9702 35 4 - TT 110802/SP 83-156P 108 11 Transfer of vested coastal credi : TT 11578 63 - Affordable objective met alterna :ive CD 85-56P/VA 84-20P 71 71 On-site TT 12366/SP 85-9P 450 12 -5 On site TT 11578 180 45 Transfer coastal excess affordable credit TT 12376 190 48 Transfer coastal excess affordable credit TT 12604 111 27 On-site or transfer 1985 Subtotal 1,208 331 H-F-16 TABLE F-3 (Continued) i New Projects Total Units Affordable Project Authorized Units Required Comments 1986 TT 12577 68 17 Transfer or on-site TT 8551/CD 86-06P/ YA 86-06P 100 100 Laguna Sur Rental Agreement TT 12709/CD 85-48P/ - SP 86-90P 116 29 TT 12764 76 19 - TT 12765 112 28 Compliance with AHIP TT 12590/CD 86-58P - SP 86-110P 70 18 TT 12666 65 16 - '986 Subtotal 607 227 1987 TT 12708 82 20 - 1987 Subtotal 82 20 1988* TT 13434 325 125 - TT 8551/VA 88-05P 100 100 Density Bonus 1988 Subtotal 425 225 1982-1988 Total 3,746 1,278 *1988 information is through July 1, 1988. Sources: EMA/Advance Planning EMA/Current Planning & Development Assistance H-F-17 TABLE F-4 Coastal Zone Demolitions and Conversions Orange County Unincorporated Area 1982-1988 Unit:: Added Units Deleted Units Deleted Year Due to Conversion Due to Conversion Due to Demolition or Fire 1982 - - 3 1983 2 1 - 1984 2 1985 - - - 1986 3 1 3 1987 - - 12 1988 _4 2 9 TOTAL 9 4 29 Note: The above information is recorded by transportation analysis zone which in some cases extend inland or beyond the coastal zone. Therefore, there may actually be fewer demolition and conversions than reflected in this table. Sources: CAO/Forecast and Analysis EMA/Advance Planning SA:ltPA01-384/9181 9040619044299 H-F-18 APPENDIX G PRESERVATION OF ASSISTED RENTAL UNITS PROGRAM APPENDIX G PRESERVATION OF ASSISTED RENTAL UNITS PROGRAM A. Background In October 1991, SB 1019 (L. Greene) amended Government Code Section 65583 to require local jurisdictions to include within their Housing Elements an analysis of assisted housing developments that are eligible to change from low-income use during the next 10 years due to termination of subsidy contracts, mortgage prepayment, or expiration of restrictions on use. "Assisted housing developments" are defined as multi-family rental housing that received governmental assistance under any federal programs, state and local multi-family revenue bond programs, local redevelopment programs, local in-lieu fees, local inclusionary housing programs, and projects which obtained a density bonus with direct governmental assistance pursuant to Government Code Section 65916 (participation in the cost of infrastructure, write-down of land costs or subsidizing construction costs). The follows is a summary of the components which are required to be following q included in the Housing Element. 'these requirements were added to Government Code Section 65583 in October 1991 by SB 1019 (Greene). o An inventory of units at risk of losing affordability restrictions. o A cost analysis of preserving the at-risk units versus replacing them. o A listing of non-profit entities capable of acquiring and managing at-risk projects. o Potential funding sources for preserving at-risk units. o Quantified objectives for the number of at-risk projects to be preserved. o Program efforts to preserve assisted units. B. Inventory of Units At Risk of Losing Affordability Restrictions For purposes of the County's Housing Element, the inventory includes assisted projects which have affordability controls which may expire (or have expired) during the period from July 1, 1989 (the date of the last comprehensive Housing Element Amendment) through June 30, 1999. The inventory includes projects in the unincorporated area which were assisted under federal programs, the Multi.-Family Housing Revenue Bond Program, or the County's former Inclusionary Housing Program. There are no projects within the unincorporated area with use restrictions which may expire during the 10-year period which received government assistance through redevelopment, in-lieu fees or a density bonus with a direct governmental financial contribution per Government Code Section 65916. H-G-1 Tables G-1 and G-2 include an inventory of each development by project name, project address, the type of governmental assistance provided, th,a earliest possible date of conversion from low-income use and the total number of elderly or non-elderly units that could be lost from the Coun:y's low-income housing stock. Government Code Section 65583 requires the inventory to be broken down into two, five-year increments. Table G-1 includes those projects with affordability restrictions expiring during the period from July 1, .1989 through June 30, 1994, while Table G-2 include:; those projects with ,affordability restrictions expiring during the period from July 1, 1994 th;:ough June 30, 1999. A particular project may appee.r in the inventory more than once since the project has affordability restrictions under more than one federal, state or local housing prograa and since the affordability restrictions expire at different points in time. C. Analysis of Program A.estrictions and Peak Periods of Affordability Expiration To understand the various program restrictions, one must first gain an understanding of how affordability is defined under each of these programs. All housing assistance programs other than the County's IHP/HOP Program (e.g. , state and federal housing programs, redevelopment, Multi-Family Revenue Bond Program, etc.) use a definition of affordability as established by the Federal Department of Housing and Community Development (HUD). A low-income household as defined by the IHP/HOP has a higher income than a low-income household as defined by HUD. While the HUD median income is higher then the median income as determined by Chapman University for the IHP/HOP, HUD uses adjustments for family size which result in lower income limits than these for the IHP/HOP. The current HUD-estimated median income for Orange County for Fiscal Year 1993 is $56,500, compared with the Chapman University median income of 54,380 (for the period July through September 1993). The HUD definition )f a low-income household is based on 80 percent of the area median income with adjustments for family size. Currently, HUD defines an Orange Count, family of four earning $39,700 or less as a low-income household, compared with $43,504 under the IHP/HOP. In addition, since 1986, 20 percent of the units financed through Multi-Family Revenue Bond financing must be affordable to very-low-income households, as defined by HUD. Currently, HUD defines an Orange County family of four earning $28,250 or less as a very-low-income household. H-G-2 ' AX G-1: LOW-INCOME MULTI-FAMILr RENTAL UNITS WITH AFFORDA9I. RESTRICTIONS EZPIRING FROM JULY 1, 1989 THROUGH JUNE 30, 19. Earliest Possible Type(s) of Government Expiration of Number of Low-income Units Project Name Project Location/Address Assistance used Restrictions Elderly Non-elderly Las Colinas 25631 Indian Hill Ln. IHP/HOP 10-13-89 0 14 Aliso Viejo Villa La Pas 2 Via Amistosa IHP/HOP 11-12-90 0 25 Rancho Santa Margarita Aliso Creek Villas 24152 Hollyoak IHP/HOP 06-10-91 0 143 Aliso Viejo Trabuco Highlands Apts. 31872 Joshua Dr. IHP/HOP 11-15-93 0 51 Trabuco Canyon Villa Aliento 114 Aliento IHP/HOP 12-31-93 0 180 Rancho Santa Margarita SUBTOTALS IHP/HOP 0 413 TOTALS 0 413 Key to abbreviations: IHP/HOP - Inclusionary Housing Program/Housing Opportunities Program MBM:mbm/tk 2051410384772 H-G-3 TABLE G-2: LOW-INCOME MULTI-FAMILY RENTAL UNITS WITH AFFORDABILITY RESTRICTIONS EXPIRING FROM JULY 1, 1994 THROUGH JUNE 30, 1999 Earliest Possible Types► of Government Expiration of Number of Low-Income Units Project Naga Project Location/Addcoss Assistance Used Restrictions Bldsrly lion-elderly Villa Serena 111 Via Serena IHP/HOP 11-30-94 0 301 Rancho Santa Margarita Foothill Oaks Foothill Ranch PC, PA 2A IHP/HOP 02-13-95 0 106 Foothill Ranch Barcelona 23592 Windsong IHP/HOP 06-05-95 0 52 Aliso Viejo ialume our !L Z6571 ialums ZHr/flVf VO-V7-77 ll 19u Foothill Ranch Innsbruck 23412 Pacific Park Dr. IHP/HOP 06-05-95 0 124 Aliso Viejo St. Moritz 23411 Summerfield IHP/HOP 06-05-95 0 239 Aliso Viejo Pacific Terrace 15000 Pacific HUD Section 8 05-21-96 97 0 Midway City Aliso Creek Villas 24152 Hollyoak MFR Bond 11-11-96 0 107 Aliso Viejo Villa La Paz 2 Via Amistosa MFR Bond 02-15-97 0 100 Rancho Santa Margarita Trabuco Highlands Apts. 31871 Joshua Dr. MPR Bond 01-01-98 0 37 Trabuco Canyon Villa Aliento 114 Aliento MPR Bond 07-30-98 0 45 Rancho Santa Margarita (See Totals on Following Pagel H Mao, M i on " M M M " M 1w W, M M M w B G-2: L #-INCOME MULTI-FAMILY RENTAL UNITS WITH AFFORDABI' RESTRICTIONS EXPIRING FROM JULY 1, 1994 THROUGH JUNE 30, 191 Earliest Possible Type(s) of Government Expiration or Number of Low-Income Units Project nano Project Location/Address Assistance Used Restrictions Elderly Non-elderly SUBTOTAL IHP/HOP 0 962 MFR Bond 0 289 HUD section 8 97 0 TOTAL 97 1,251 Key to Abbreviations: HOP - Housing Opportunities Program HUD - U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development IHP - Inclusionary Housing Program MFR Bonds - Multi-Family Revenue Bonds PA - Planning Area MBM:mbm/tk 2060SO6160286 H-G-5 1. Federal Programs , The Pacific Terrace Apartment project is the only federally assistel project within the unincorporated area which has affordability restrictions expiring during the 10-year period. This project utilized Section 8; Rental Assistance. The affordability restrictions on the Pacific Terrace Apartments expired on May 21, 1991, but were automatically renewed for an additional five years since the owners did not provide a 1-year notice of intent to opt out of the program. Tie owners will be required to provide a 1-year notice of intent in 199.5 if they intend to opt out of the Section 8 Rental Assistance Progran in 1996 and convert the units to market-rate rents. 2. Multi-Family Revenue Bond Program Prior to 1986, band-financed developments were required to provide ,It least 20 percent of the total units for lower-income households, although the rents for these units were unrestricted. All of the projects included in the inventory were financed prior to 1986. However, the market rents for all of the bond-financed units currently meet the HUD affordability standard for a low-income household of f.)ur persons. On January 1, 1986, the Tax Reform Act of 1986 required tie bond-financed developments to provide at least 20% of the total units for very-low-income persons at affordable rents as defined by HUD. Developers utilizing bond financing were required to enter into regulatory agreenents with the County to retain the units as affordable for a period of 10 to 15 years after 50 percent of the units were first occupied. For purposes of this analysis, the expiration date in tM regulatory agreement was considered to be the earliest possible date! for the expiration of affordability restrictions. Between July 1981 and July 1994, no bond-financed units are at risk (see Table G-1). Between July 1994 and July 1999, 289 bond-financed units are at risk of converting to market-rate rents (see Table G-2). 3. Inclusionary Housing Program/Housing Opportunities Program The County's Inclusionary Housing Program (IHP) was a mandatory affordable housing program which was in effect from 1979 until 1983. It was superseded by the Housing Opportunities Program (HOP) which incrementally phased out the mandatory requirements. No mandatory affordable housing requirements have been in effect since 1986; however, projects approved under the mandatory requirements in effe,:t prior to 1986 are still subject to those requirements. (For a complete description of the Housing Opportunities Program, see Appendix D. ) Developers of projects with mandatory requirements under the IHP/HO" were required (through conditions of approval) to enter into agreements with the County to ensure the continued affordability of these unit;; for a 5-year period. Only those units which have low-income affordability restrictions (as opposed to Moderate I and Moderate I:i) are included in the inventory. H-G-6 r r As defined by the HOP, low-income units are those which are affordable to households earning 80 percent or less of the County's median household income. The County's median household income, as published and periodically updated by Chapman University, is currently $54,380 (for the period from July through September 1993). Currently rents which do not exceed $1,088 per month are considered to be affordable to low-income households under the IHP/HOP. Since July 1989, the affordability restrictions have expired on 182 low-income IHP/HOP units. The affordability restrictions on 231 units will expire between July 1993 through June 1994, while the restrictions on 962 units will expire between July 1994 and July 1999. The peak period for potential conversion is June 1995 when 555 units are at risk. Even though these units are technically at risk of converting from low-income use, it should be noted that market-rate rents within the county currently average $784 per month (Research Network Limited). In addition, County staff has contacted the management of each of the 3 apartment complexes on which the affordability restrictions have already expired (182 rental units). The following is a listing of the current market-rate rents at each of these projects: Project Name/ Monthly Rent (Range) Monthly Rent (Range) (Number of Units) 1-bedroom units 2-bedroom units Las Colinas (14) $810 to $830 $930 to $975 Aliso Viejo Villa La Paz (25) $595 to $690 $775 to $875 Rancho Santa Margarita Aliso Creek Villas (143) $700 to 725 $925 to 970 As demonstrated above, these rents are below the current IHP/HOP low-income rental restriction of $1,088 per month. Even if the units with affordability restrictions that have not yet expired convert to market-rate rents, under current market conditions the units would continue to be affordable to low-income households per the definition of affordability included in the IHP/HOP (see Appendix D). D. Cost Analysis of Preserving vs. Replacing At-Risk Units EMA/Housing and Redevelopment staff have estimated the cost of subsidizing a low-income rental unit for 15 years to be approximately $15,000, while the estimated cost of producing a new, low-income rental unit is approximately $85,000. During the period from July 1, 1994 to June 30, 1999, 289 units financed through the Multi-Family Revenue Bond Program are at risk of converting from low-income use. The County may potentially refund (refinance) the bond issues which financed these developments and extend the regulatory period to maintain these units as affordable for low-income households. H-G-7 As previously noted, all of these units were bond-financed prior to 19E6 and had no rent restrictions. These projects could potentially be reftnded under the current Multi-Family Revenue Bond Program requirements which , stipulate that 20 percent of the units be reserved for very-low-income households, thereby strengthening the affordability restrictions on these units. Since the bend issues include the costs of issuance, such refundings would result in no net costs to the the County. The cost o?' replacing these units with new units would be approximately $24,565,000. During the period from July 1, 1989 through June 30, 1994, the affordability restrictions on 413 units under the IHP/HOP will expire. Of this total, the restrictions on 182 units have already expired and the units have converted to market-rate rents. The cost of replacing these 413 units with new units would be approximately $35,105,000. Between July 1, 1994 and June 30, 1999, the affordability restrictions on 962 IHP/HOP snits will expire. The cost of replacing these units would be approximately $81,770,000. As noted above, market-rate rents for the IHP/HOP units are currently lower than the low-income- affordability restriction. Since the low-income affordability restriction for IHP/HOP units (currently $1,088.00 per month) is based upon the c:ounty's median income, it is unlikely that market-rate rents will increase so as to exceed the low-income rental restriction. Even if market-rate rents were to increase to exceed the current rental restriction of $1,088.00 per month, it is likely that the low-income rental restriction will a:.so experience a commensurate increase since it is Lased on the county's median income. Although market-rate rents could increase due to market conditions anc., thereby, exceed the affordability restriction, it is not feasible to estimate the cost of preserving these units as affordable since the potential differemze between the future market-rate rents and the future low-income rental limit is unknown. (See additional discussion below under Section H: "Program Efforts to Preserve Assisted Units: Monitoring Market-Rate Rents. ") During the period from July 1, 1994 to June 30, 1999, 97 federally assisted units are at risk of converting from low-income use. The cost of preserving these units as affordable would be approximately $1,455,001) assuming a $15,000 subsidy per unit. The cost of replacing these units is approximately $8,245,000. In summary, the least costly approach to preserve the federally assisted and bond-financed units with expiring affordability restrictions would be to refinance the units and extend the affordability controls for another 10-15 years. The most costly approach would be to replace the units with new rental units. E. Resources for Prevervation As required by Government Code Section 65583, the following is a list of public and private nonprofit corporations which are known to have legal and managerial capaci-:y to acquire and manage the housing developments with H-G-8 , expiring affordability restrictions. (It should be noted that State law currently precludes the Orange County Development Agency from using 1 redevelopment set-aside funds outside of the redevelopment area unless the Board of Supervisors adopts a resolution finding that the use of funds outside the redevelopment area will benefit the redevelopment area itself.) Orange County Housing Authority Orange County Development Agency 2043 N. Broadway 1200 N. Main Street, Suite 600 Santa Ana, CA 92706 P.O. Box 4048 Santa Ana, CA 92702 Civic Center Barrio Housing Corp. Colonia Service Committee 431 S. Bristol Colonia Community Center Santa Ana, CA 92703 10871 Garza Ave. Anaheim, CA 92804 Dayle McIntosh Ctr. for the Disabled Episcopal Service Alliance 150 W. Cerritos, Bldg. # 4 23421 S. Pointe Drive, Ste. 130 Anaheim, CA 92805 Laguna Hills, CA 92653 Habitat for Humanity of O.C. , Inc. Home Aid P.O. Box 7086 2001 E. 4th Street, #224 Orange, CA 92613 Santa Ana, CA 92705 O.C. County Community Housing Corp. 1833 E. 17th Street, Suite 207 Santa Ana, CA 92701 F. Estimates of Available Funds As required by Government Code Section 65583, the following is a discussion of potential funding sources which could be used to preserve assisted units with expiring affordability restrictions. 1. Multi-Family Revenue Bond Program Since there are many influencing factors affecting bond financing, the County cannot estimate the amount of funding which may be available to finance new units or refinance existing units in order to extend the affordability restrictions. Initially, a developer must apply to the County to utilize multi-family revenue bond financing. The County must then apply to the California Debt Limit Allocation Committee (CDLAC) for individual allocations for all new financings through private activity bonds, including housing revenue bonds. According to CDLAC staff, the annual State limit for private activity bond authority totals $50 per capita, currently about $1.5 billion, of which about $1.2 billion (80X) will be annually available for housing revenue bonds. The critical factor for this type of financing is that the project must meet loan-underwriting standards and obtain credit support for the bond issue from a private lender/guarantor or mortgage insurer. Generally H-G-9 bonds cannot be rated solely on the basis of the security revenueY y provided by the value of the apartment development, but must have some form of third-party guarantee. It has become increasingly difficult for developers -to obtain the necessary credit enhancement to support a bond issuance. Recently, lenders are often unwilling to offer support in amounts sufficient to finance larger apartment developments. 2. Federal Programs, State Programs, Redevelopment Funds and OCRA Operating Reserves The following is an estimate of funds (other than Multi-Family Revenue Bonds) available from federal, state and local programs to address new and continued housing affordability. The funds apply to the unincorporated area only and are estimated in two, five-year increments. A portion of these funds could be used to preserve units with expiring affordability restrictions or to provide replacement units. It should be noted that the estimates for the state and federal programs are bE.sed on the assumption that funding for these programs will continue at current levels. BSTINATBD FUNDS AVAILABLE PROGRAK 7-1-89 TO 6-30-94 7-1-94 TO 6-30-99 _ CDBG $20,075,000. $27,075,000. Redevelopment , Agency 35,000,000. 45,000,000. Federal HOMES 9,125,000. 9,125,000. OCHA Reserve 2,450,000. 1,750,000. Other 1,825,000. 1,825,000. ' Total 68,475,000. 84,775,000. 1Source: HMA/Housing and Redevelopment 20ther funds include those available through other state and i:ederal housing assistance programs. G. Quantified Objectives: Number of At-Risk Units to be Preserved Government Code Section 65583 requires jurisdictions to establish quantified objectives for the number of units to be constructed, rehabilitated and conserved over a five-year period. The quantified objectives are included in Chapter 4. The objective for units to be conserved includes a subtotal for the number of at-risk units to be preserved. H-G-10 1 As noted above, the restrictions on 413 IHP/HOP units will expire during the period from July 1989 through June 1994. Of this total, the affordability restrictions on 182 units have already expired and the units have converted to market-rate rents. The County's objective is to conserve all of these units as affordable per the criteria of the IHP and HOP programs. Currently, market-rate rents for the IHP/HOP units are lower than the low-income rental restrictions for these units. Should market-rate rents rise above the limit for low-income rental units, the County will examine the potential to extend the affordability controls on these units through refinancing, use of rent subsidies or other incentives. No bond-financed or federally assisted units at at risk during the five-year period. H. Program Efforts to Preserve At-Risk Units 1. Provision of Rental Assistance Prior to the expiration of the affordability restrictions on projects included in the inventory (with the exception IHP/HOP projects and projects financed with Multi-Family Revenue Bonds), EMA/Housing and Redevelopment shall coordinate with affected owners to determine the owners intent with regard to the assisted units. For those projects where the rents will convert and will no longer be affordable to low-income households, EMA/Housing and Redevelopment will examine the possibility of providing rental assistance or economic incentives to the apartment owners in order to retain these units as affordable. Potential funding sources for these incentives or rental assistance include federal HOME funds, OCHA Operating Reserves, and redevelopment set-aside funds. 2. Multi-Family Revenue Bond Program CAO/Public Finance and Advocacy will survey owners of those units financed through the Multi-Family Revenue Bond Program which have the potential to convert to non-low-income use and examine the feasibility of refunding (refinancing) these projects with Multi-Family Revenue Bonds. CAO/Public Finance may issue tax-exempt housing revenue bonds to retain the supply of rental housing for low-income persons. Existing, bond-financed units may be refunded to extend the affordability restrictions. Bond financing or refunding may also be used for projects which have additional funding, such as redevelopment tax increment, CDBG or Section 8 Operating Reserve funds. This additional funding may assist developers to secure the necessary credit support and increase the number of affordable units developed or retained for low- and very-low-income persons. CAO/Public Finance may also request that EMA/Housing and Redevelopment consider providing rent subsidies or incentives for the bond-financed projects upon expiration of the affordability restrictions. H-G-11 3. Monitor Market-Rate Rents As discussed above, units with affordability restrictions under the IHI or HOP are technically at risk; however, market-rate rents are presently well belcw the low-income rental restriction of $1,088 per month. No programs: are necessary at this time to preserve these units for low-income households (as defined by the IHP/HOP). However, EMA/Advance Planning Division will continue to monitor market rate rents on an annual basis. Should market-rate rents rise above the limit for the low-income units then at risk, the County will consider the use of other programs (CDBG, Operating Reserves, etc.) to preservf, these units as affordable to low-income households. 4. Notification of Nonprofit Entities Pursuant to state law, all of the projects included in the inventory (with the exception of bond-financed and IHP/HOP projects) are required to submit notices of intent to the local government one year in advance of the expiration of the affordability restrictions. Upon receipt o:` these individual notices, EMA/Housing and Redevelopment shall notify the the listed Nonprofit Entities to determine if they are interestei in acquiring and managing such projects. EMA/Housing and Redevelopment shall also consider the possibility of acquiring and managing these projects. 5. Update Inventory of Projects with Expiring Affordability Restrictions In conjunction with each comprehensive 5-year Housing Element update, , EMA/Advance Planning Division will update the Inventory of Assisted Rental Units (Tables G-1 and G-2) to include those projects assisted through federal, state and local programs which are eligible to cor.vert from low-income use during the following 10-year period. Any nece:;sary revisions to the Preservation of Assisted Rental Units Program (Appendix G) will be made in conjunction with these updates. MBM:mbm/tk 2051108084869 H-G-12 t i i APPENDIX H Board of Supervisors' Resolution No. 93-1006 September 14, 1993 H H-1 A 1 ,1 3 RESOLUTION OF' THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS- 4 ORANGE COUNTT, CALIFORNIA 5 September 14, 1993 h On the motion of Supervisor Wieder duly seconded and carried, the following Resolution was adopted. 7 WHEREAS, pursuant to California Government Code Section 65000 et seq. , 8 the County of Orange has an adopted General Plan; and 9 VHEREAS, SB 1019 (L. Greene, 1991) amended Government Code Section 65583 ' to require local jurisdictions to include within their Housing Elements: 1) an 10 inventory of government-assisted, low-income, multi-family rental units which have affordability restrictions expiring during the next ten years; 2) program 11 efforts to preserve these assisted units as affordable for low-income households; and 3) a breakdown of the quantified objectives for the number of 12 housing units to be constructed, rehabilitated and conserved by income category; .13 VHEREAS, in conformance with State law and the Orange_County Zoning Code, a legally noticed public hearing was held by the Orange County Planning 14 Commission to consider Housing Element Amendment 1993-1 on July 27, 1993; and ZZ 15 VHEREAS, the Planning Commission acted on this project on July 27, 1993 oo and adopted Planning Commission Resolution No. 93-10 recommending the Board of W 16 Supervisors adopt Housing Element Amendment 1993-1; � ' u �000 17 VHEREAS, in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (California Public Resources Code Sections 21000, et seq.) and the State CEQA 18 Guidelines (California Administrative Code Sections 15000, et seq.) , Negative Declaration IF 92-52 has been prepared to address the potential adverse 19 environmental impacts of the proposed project. It was posted for public review on January 20, 1993; 20 WHEREAS, in compliance vith' California Government Code, the Environmental 21 Management Agency transmitted Draft Housing Element Amendment 1993-1 to the State Department of Housing and Community Development for review and report of 22 its advisory findings; and 23 . VHEREAS, the Department of Housing and Community Development's comments on Draft Housing Element Amendment 1993-1 were 'reviewed and considered by the 24 Board of Supervisors. The Draft Housing Element was revised to address these comments; 25 NOV, THEREFORE BE' IT RESOLVED, that the Orange County Board of 26 Supervisors finds that Negative Declaration No. IF 92-52 satisfies the requirements of CEQA for this project and is therefore approved. It was 17 considered and found adequate in addressing the environmental impacts for the project prior to its approval. The Negative Declaration r lects the 28 independent judgment of the Lead Agency. eh E C E I V E D Resolution No. 93-1006 . 1 Public Bearing -- Housing Element Amerximent SEP 2 2 1993 No. 1-993-I (H93-1) -- Negative Declaration 1. No. 9 2-52 BPD:ep EMA i 1 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Orange County Board of Supervisors finds, pursuant to Section 711.4 of the Fish and Game 2 Code, that the project: is exempt from the required fees as it ha: been determined that no adverse impact to wildlife resources will. 3 result from the project. 4 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Orange County Board of Supervisors adopts Housing Element 1993-1. 5 6 1 y Chairman of the Board of Superviscrs 8 9 SIGNED AND CERTIFIED THAT A COPY I OF THIS DOCUMENT HAS BEEN DELIVERED 10 TO THE CHAIRMAN OF THE BOARD i2 YLLIS A. HEND?ERSON , Cler of the Board of Supervisors 13 Orange County, California 14 I i W . AYES: SUPERVISORS HARRIETT M. WIEDER, WILLIAM G. STEINER, FOGER , , z 15 R. STANTON, GADDI H. VASQUEZ, AND THOMAS F. 053 4o ° RILEY 16` > W o1 : NOES: SUPERVISOR: NONE oa 17 ABSENT: SUPERVISORS NONE 18 19 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) ) ss. 20 COUNTY OF ORANGE } ' 21 I, PHYLLIS A. HENDERSON, Clerk of the Board of Supervisors of Orange County, California, hereby certify that the above and 22 foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly adopted by the said Board 23 at a regular meeting thereof held on the 14th day of September-, 1993, f and passed by a unanimous vote of said Board. 24 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and seal this ^ 25 14th day of September, 1993. 26 U. 27 PH LIS A. HENDERSON ® 28 Clerk o the Board of Supervisors of Orange County, California I 2. ' i 56 SENT BY:Dept Parks & Recreatio; B-10-88 :11 :02AM 9166539824-4 310 859 2325;# 2 r STATa OF CM. OIA--141"W ROU AGWY PETS WILSON,Gwonw OFFICE OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION bikA P.O.BOX$428" SACRAMENTO0420! =1 (918)"94000 FAX:(918)323-6377 \ RF3?'LY TO: 0=10124 A PUbrvary 6, 3.991 rCharles M. Holt, Chief RegulaIns Angeles District ' V.S. Arne► Corps of Engineers P.O. Soot 2711 Las Angeles, Ch 90053-2325 Attn: Stemn Dibble RE: Bolsa Chica, 404 Permit Application 091-081-M, Wetlands Mrbamtic n Project, Oranp Oauity, California Dear r 7he State t of Histwic Preservaticn (CHP) has reviewed and world like to ar-mant an the permit application in a cordarm With 36 CPR 800, of the Advisory Camcil a1 Historic Preservation. In order to x v.,Sod father in this consultation prooese, informat.icn is aefrea=t d y the 800.4(a)] �� that nmb historic Ap i with s mo be dk&miled of the S�f�=��� ject which wasPlease rotpermit application. �e�pm ■sattacbed to cur the doriptian inaluft ales state=t of the Ares of R*m* al E fe t: (APE) -A i j judIgI q from the excloaoa map, appaam-to k oluda the uplwd as am adjaoarlt to the 1w1wds. Pleaate clarify this issetWf. We are %"All red aba4-th*-status o Section 106 omplialm cn this project. HIt a is c5W do�a lsoUrgft that ; is of there a 1 of,research in t�. aortaian pangsbe c w&wted in the(AYZ ccrmltad. y We urqb all partic� in this parojagt rich inolmde 00�, the cali4brnia Coastal-Cc avlarsias and sib Iadmrk to their di sajoul with C>8P sal part of lOd aampliaros ec further im>apacsta, iuch as arvhaao ao=vat&xw, we limited to the'ooetant nmeeded to satisfy all y recluirl ta, not just local Wl sdictl c mal conmoerrma. 7hie oormecltaticn prooeas is designed comw�� the early plarmin g stare of projects to aw , later on. SENT BY:Dept Parks & Recreatio; 8-10-88 ;11 :03AM 9156539824-4 310 859 2325;# 3 . q Ill receipt of this inlC4'l!flltim we will amtinus the revim of the im-0 '1c 1]OtiDa. 1l7ank ycu loC G0�7sj.dA�{TlJ prc�p�ti,ei dl�irly peGc plarmiM. Wd look lord to reoaivinq Zwthw atim & sot. If you have arW quastiarm, please Oi01'Ytact staff mAubez imlie at (916) 522-%02. sinorrelly, F Rat2nyn OmItiasi State Ilistario Preeervation otliow ■ cc.. C._a\Aw SRO--cla44t ,.\ Cohn c ■ t i i i I SENT BY:Dept Parks & Recreatio; 8-10-88 ;11 :03AM 9166539824-4 310 859 2325;# 4 UM OF CAUFORMA—TN[MOM=AUNOY PUB WI WON,soY�mx OFFICE OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION EPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION 1 .0.BOX 042896 ACRAMENTO 9429"001 916)448.8008 �AX:(918)2224LW February 7, 1991 Raw TO: CEMI=4A C'harlea M. Bolt, Chia! Regulatory Branch ' 148 AAngaim Distrust U.S. A=W Corps of Enginows P.O. Hoot 2721 rM ANEMS C IL 90053-2325 Atthu Stews Dibble REh W e& Chic a j 404 Peewit Application Weatlarrs IAstaration Project, Ceara Syr California i Dear Wo Holt: The WAtS OftiM of Histwia Preservation (CUP) is exhwaly as cerned about the whder aking for whidh the eAI permit application has been sahlao4ltted. Tths CHP has been in touch with the Caalifort%ta Ooastal Oxmiesion aonom:ning the treatment at arch&='ogical properties in the area of the propOred ' unc� taisirhq. F� what we lostw of its undWUlciag, 9"dh prcpasee a majaoc wetlarde festorratioa ProjeuC ard rea4dont4Al developwt of the lowlands and the upland bluPPi, the eftlrs area peghoeer! toter ca*aina some extremely iup=tm* ad=' . father, dais treat each site irh this ah:+aa in a pieoeaeal ta■hiC1h wi repeatffi feet ahc�avatiarhe by a variety of arcgani$ations, we u r" you to crassidoor a loos destructive approach to serau�s and view the area as an o district. l Given the irhYatmatian we have redeved *ddh b ieates that c aideorable cgice invsstigatiass havm o==ed arhd may continue to o=3r in tih" area it in iMprctent for us to ask whether the Orrpe wnald consider ' acting in the capacity of a aoarrdir>atinq agwicy to bring prim together in some coherent wny. 7 he mold um its authority as a rvgulatcxy agency and try to gain the ooc�poratial of the other Tagenoiea Co.nvoly which inoludde the California Ooastal Oommiesion easel S �4�tliCo with, the test would be able to unrroise its Eec�tiah 106 grey degree of f l adbil ty. The CM ooneiderrs this urdeortaltishg and all ageraios involved in it as an wdc rly ihrportant am given the eodsting h oological valuers. We urge tine agencies to pull teget2hw at this point and'recommend that all Awl iorA SENT BY:Dept ParKs & Recreatio; 8-10-83 ;11 :04AM 9156539824-+ 310 859 2325;ii 5 r W. Charles M. Holt Foffivaiy 7, 3.993. pop two r on aY iaao iaal work be Amd until dism-4cns are hall. 7ha CUP is willing to assist the C=pspentpwin afting in this c opacity. We suggest you ta3X with Moq vauqbn at the OmWal Ommiseim as soon as possible as they too are ==Lmsd about msatitrq their Section 106 in the most ammd4 ticus muwmr �. with the ],oast c3asttvctian of . Your p�o�t reeporme to azs inquiry is reTAnted. If you have any , quea�plrease aantaat staff wmiid r Lmaie Ha tzell at (916) 322-9602. Sinaaaly, Mftyn caualtieri State Histw c Preservation Officer oc. Calilamia Coastal Omm i"'en Signal Iaramrk � r . r r r , r r r r r SENT BY:Dept Parks & Recreatio; 6-10-88 ;11 :04AM 9166539824-4 310 859 2325;# 6 I STATE OF CALIFOANIA—THR MOMS$AQENCY PULL WILSON,Gov mw OFFICE OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION + P.O.BOX 942896 SACRAMENTO 04296-0001 I(916)44"006 FAX:(9 1 6)322.6377 AFRM 4, 1991 CCIE91=4A BCEM CffiM APPL 91-on-M of aicd�aeozo)FIIsUa>sy g3,c$]. research an the Was thus ]desa a)ad Axtbaso3oui cal Site C'h-C - o tte "Gbgged SLOW Sites" City of >rnmtir gtoe Heath, (t>nioarpwated) Ct-mge axoity, ca lifoornia Califaamia Coastal CO=4 sion Permits applicable: AppLiCatiarri NO. 3-83-984 Original Permit APPlicaticn No. 5-99-773 Permit in pr� of aWmval U.S. Army Oomph of Engine , Xm Angeles District Permit Applicatien No. 91-081-MD i• Copy of this t Dibble the LA �i �licatian was forwarded to the C� by Steve Coocpe on January 24, 1991 Permit calls for the GegreqptiM of 1312.4 acmes of lowland vatlands and non tlarxda iTmo and 162.1 acres of residential uses and 40.9 acres of regional infrastructure iuvrovemmts. It is not clear trtimm the i enclosed map of the permit area gather site CRA-83 is part of this land or not. Richard P+arxy is exposed to send A latter to use shortly which spells our the Corps positiaa7 on this permit and how they,d like to handle it. we need to clarify which sites are involved under the Corps jurisdiction Fbllm-up &= can free Rich-ad Peony info=d me that uway wmld include the mesa as Plat of the APE as it waa W=m as the project area and pcevicus information frtm Signal dioomaeed the vutlar ritatian as beirq tied to the devalogW t of houseing on the mesa. Site Ch-CW"3 1960-61 Private inV*8ti9atien, rnWbQr of artifacts x+WWvd from site, 137 were =Platte or fairly large fragronta of cogged stones, also private ' collection on site throughout this time paricd 1964 Sits "off icialltiy" reccrded by Doc. Faith Di3= and Dr. Hal P.Uertuut 2968 Dr'. Eberhaxt led field ad=1 trcm CS College, Ias Angeles SENT BY;Dept Parks & Recreatio; B-10-811 ;11 :05AM 9166539824-� 310 859 2325; 7 . Name Data Page Two Did this result in z report? Are the artifacts available for analysis? Did SW examine any of this collection? 1970 SigrAl Lw4mark, Inc. acquired the site and sponsored exmvaticra 3"0 Bolaa Chica region, Zefft+er Ross and Roger DeSautels surveyed all , recorded prehistoric sites 3.971, 2974, 1973 Tvwt acavations cartducted by owl of archaeologists, including Atrhaeclagical. Research, Inc. and Jearm Manz Ms Report mynthasizirrct aril evaluating the previous surface Collections and tact excavations preparicd by Marie oottrall and Glen Rios 1981 Pacific Coast Arduteologic aal Society and the kdgm de Bolan Chica filed rumination to the Nat:.oml Register for CRA-83 in July 1980. Mw lwj&w er (Signal) and the ;0tate were not merle aware of this nomination until the followingyear utum it cams before the State Historical Resources, 03maission at a hosting in JWgust 1981. Ctimnission rejected n=iriation due to site-'s lack of integrity, 198I--82 ScieritifiC Reso=a Surveys, Inc. under Nancy De9auto]" eructed acrchival reswrch on pant disturbances to the site attapting to identify locations with least disttz xnoa and highest research potential 1982 WAS requested the Camnission to reccnaidert the nomination; it was not m*portad by the Omnisscicn. 1983 CHP reviewer Bill Said&' provided a staff evaluation date october , 2.3, i90 which stated that ''Ihe integrity of thief site is questionahle at this time as is its Lability to yield additional information Uportant, to the prwhistory of Ctrs Vs,, Clcunty'• fitly, staff reootnmsrrla against Wrova►l of this ncrninaticr, on these gr=xis. However, the site staw].d be fwctrAr irriestigated if it is apt to be destroyed as there is a reasonable possibility that the site could yield itportant information. Staff also notes that the sits 'has yielded information invortant to the prehistory of the mil and is famous within the history of soulw= California Azdhaeology. Qmseque=ly staff reca=ends for approval of the nomination an these�i at the local level of significance." Iha avalua Zo stater that the p—cpoHed revearch design was not part of tra package he reviewed. im Seidel followed t 1i.s evaluation with a addan&= wlzich stated that "it is our opinion that the Keeper will not list this site on the National Register if naninated cm tress grounds". He was refering to the reference that the site "had y1elded11 information izvmtant on prehistory. 2M PCAS petitioned the emmni.ssicai for the thind tirm in Novamter 1983 , and again the Cormdasion declined to forward the petition to the Natia)al Register. SENT BY:Dept Parks & Recreatio; 6-10-88 ;11c05AM 9166539824y 310 859 2325;8 8 Naga Date page 1W 1983 Coastal Permit No. 5-83-984 %-OU fed to SRS to =r&r t the "Final Phial' pol andin a Recovery �'• Ow first p� was conducted =Ier 1984 Resaarch design by SRS reviewed by PCAS and O U=z and approved prior to M beg, IRZm I excavations at CPA-83 that year. i at Ott Sit= en Bolm Cbim RzItingtan plain og3,ca1 mmoesugetiam related to Holes Oita r SENT BY:Dept ParK9 & Recreatio; 8-10-88 ;11 :06AM 9166539824-* 310 859 2325;# 9 STATE OF OALIFORNIA—TMI ROMMCn ANNOY PETS VALSON,Qov mor OFFICE OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION P.O.sox 9""" SACRAMENTO 94290-Ml (919)445-8009 FAX:(010)3224277 AWil 17, 1991 R12W m: CKW102 4i Richard Pwry, Archaeologist ' hqulatary Branch Los Angeles Diatriat U.S. Army Coops of Seginswn P.O. Boot 273.1 LOB ANGELES CA 90053-2325 ' RE: Balsa Chios (Ora-63) and BSUAmd Bides P mit AM IrmoUrnf 91-�81�D, GERMS Chas*W, callifarnia Dear Rid ard, ' As You revasted, the following list is suwlisd for your oonsideration , in enrpiling amoe== On the state of ardmeolo research, aor ducted at Cra-83. I an enclosing a partially ocnpleted 13 of the histi=y of research at Holes Chita which Vve su®arized fma the muerous saunas provided by Susan Hari, PCAS and otlws. It is useful for giving scan idea of the infarmat.ian potential that has been acquired through the axtensive research over the years at the site. It is rx* clear u aather soo is of the findings have bowwritten. Psemmably the artifacts are ll availed& for inclusion in a eaoapz dm sivo site monograph. Appareartly, SRS has eommined sma of tbam alse■dy. My gain amomn is that: the emoavatiom at am-$3 shatt ld Trot Ia _ ,oeeed the following issmB am addressW � yF reommy Who ld be peo pprpiate laysls and types adresearch and site evaluation, addrassirg relevant aspects of local history and ' pdistary, the local ernrirormeayt, and mathoclologi cal issues pertir mli to the research tapirs to be addressed, integrity of the site, eta. Second, acWlakim of an apprmed data reoovwy plan with to pmvvisions far analysis rep=ting, and cLatJxm are esm t.ial. �hfa plan must have a*licit deadiic�s for oonple�ti on of each step in the prooaes. MA data the standards and Wi�lin■s foe+ Archaeological Doa�e�ntat ai which a of the t* iminiaum inGludss the folloviml Discussion of the research questions to be addressed threugh the data with an Justification of their relevance 8id DesiGript ton of the xeouvery methods to be used, with an eacplanatioa Of ' their psrtirax»a to the research questicna; 1 SENT BY:Dept Parks & Recreatio; 8-10-38 ;11 ;06AM 9166539824-+ 310 859 2325410 Nate Date paw 7 I 1 Description of tlA metJmds to be umod in analysis, data mar nt, and disseanirsatian of data, inalx1ing a sc3aedulai tsfaormatian on arran gstents for wW regular proguma reports or mashirgs, to )Deep agw y maa.vgws and others up to date an the c=-m of the WCCk1 ' A of the p:posad disposition of recovered materials and records, slang with svidenoa of acRament regarding curatorial , raspcmh�ti�ss j :Mgzosedd m�iods far alsaeninatirg results of the work to the interested Pr posed motrx�ds by &Lch any relevant Ddian tribes, local goverrimerlts, a»d other epeaific cgroaps will be kept informed of the work. I'd like to turn to specific iss m regal rdirrg data reowvery, analysis and writs up. Ohs follovin; ocaments are rat in ary particular ardor. In Dr. Namy D&SMAsss laattar of April 3 1991, she mentions that the cogged stp�eist is crow bring iraooa y=Prted ho the trio " esc ribiM a , -i f erctaI and practical rs ffiins under the category of stone industries". VdA i, an zp mvwmt free the MS ovor-awhasis on st m as e focus of tbaa000avationa at the sit& wd the major question (as th PM alzriat4P Pointed ). Ong to zv pxm imm m satious with her, the artitaoGs r000vaered , from the, latest aocavatia s in 1490 are aatralogued but no anaivaia has been dons. MW mmential ly stoapad au work an the p�oct 'd= tre scastal Ciamiss ion put swcrything a a hold with the permit Imam I thirk the artifacts should ba analysel pric r to wW more& emmyation. eta side thor br the ]eight �► did inq in a gaaatbasologist to 'write the section an soil gbxlies and they hevs mcpanded their investlgatians of . Otis is a prCWaing line of research. Ma map platting bAl farmer coastline and the distribution bf sites in various habitats is a beginning. A map with no a Vlanatoay toast, hmmrm, does not rvpsak for itdsll. Further research 15 headed. Her mz ces for oagwxUng an this research seem app� ts. It's now a math of what will she do with these sautoes in writing�this .bif=mation. My fadirq is that the writs-gyp of the the Hoke China embayment should be =mistsd immediately as it does not1iinge exclusively an the analysis of new , mmavated materials. Cn pegs Mae of DQMAWls April 3, 1991 letter, she mentions that direct artifact owtpatrisans will be made with at Least twenty (20) well- docmm=uted Killirugastone Hoa^Lam sit"...and a list is given. I would like to see a specific plan for ixst an3 wtusn this analysis/catpnriam will be 1 SENT BY:Dept Parks & Recreatio; 8-10-88 ;11 :07AM 9166539824y 310 859 2325 411 Nmas Date Page 7W conducted. Stdc h classes, of artifacts and contexts will be conpared. thicrh portions of the Qm-83 collection Will be used in this a arisen? Will the oatpariean only use the artifacts MW excavated in 19" 1990 or will it include, the artifacts from previous aoocxtvaticns that are housed In institutions in the area? I would think a study w=Id be apt date since it appears that the earlier mmovatiens haw yet to be written up and reported cn. Se seems to have a jump on this given the mzary of artifacts listed in the tabLa titled "Surface and subsurface Artifacts Collected tram cars-63" in her t packet of information. I do not hates a probl m with the fact that DeSmitels wants to ]Deep hear reseed questions open and flexible with new linos of questions being added ' as the inctreased data bass permits. I haw a problem with thean scaling of tbme corganiaation All arrs questions or .tqpim�questiiom a s frequently quite specificers toto oar tool types and marnfacturii that dxx" be rmted into larger Her reference an three 5 the April 3, 1991 latter to the new questions cn beads and that marnufactutre is an e of how her notions of research questions tenids to equally weight all i of inquiry. Turning back to the questions discussed by Fms in their review of sm's 1986 report they mention first the general with the research design which poaoriy justified the field and labar�methods that wens used. It appears that Desautels has addressed sa some_of the pr+ablems by shifting away tram a pure salvage of cogged storm "s=ggLd stcInes m�oh ke to broader issues of the pa]soonvironment, for aasmple. prefe r&1a as it puts the pm awe of cogged storm in the site and regim-al context. I think this new to be encouzaged. The most reeen Latter fran the psw servidwers trip to ara,83 addresses methodological iroeam as to where to dig, how, ate. 7heir auggestioans address PEMS second major concern with DeSaatels "bias" against analyzing ' the "disinzbed" particn of the site, i.e. the plaaad field area. The Peer Payi.wwors suQges1 1 -m to 1MXcve an the data reoawy in this area are eppropriato. I agree with PCAS rovimm s that just boomm m it's distarbed does not mean that theme is no lcrzjw any infix nation ---rticulArly since the site appears to be singl*Vhased, primarily. You t�� out as well that Moratto's sturdy indicated the cdgpth of deposit in Plowed fietld is sufficient to expect un isturbad contexts in laww depths. Men stratuff paraposed by the Peer RaAwwmm abeil'A deal with Morattole issue. 7he PCA9 reviswaocs named that there is iriRwffiaient attention to the historic resources dating fr m 1927. MW pointed out that the historic materials ware disaissed in the contact of site distxabanos. Moratto has a good seatian an the histcxie o=Waticn an the Mena. Under 36 CM 800, the historic resources will have to be addressed and evaluated for significance, ' The original notninat m for 0ra-83 did not address the significance of historic properties at the site. It only addressed the prebiat�aric acmpano *. The salvage/mitigation plan that follawad again m mluded the SENT BY:Dept Parks & Recreatio; 8-10-88 ;11 :08AM 9156539824- 310 859 2325412 ' c e ' • f hO. iData PageT 1 historic eospahent. If the vztire sift and the aurora Mesa are to be examined urhdeo` tM 404 PlaMit, this im>ra QQI d be better addressed, not t'1Aoe mare y by MW War the PCAS roviswets rotas on miecellanea w imam, they d oo= tap related iseves of l twcy analysed plaimod and the all icaticra of personnal used by SM. I think it reasonable for Deft tole to provide a Ust of analyses to be ccWA tod and writM up by opecifia deadlitw and a fiat of persons to o0rWk= This research and their qualificiatict s. Any fundable grant Mftitted to the Nrrticnal Science Fourdatim far raviaat must provide the same iaa=twi atri attadi vita of each perteon scb@MI ed to aamplete analysis of obsidiim, faw al analyses, soils, eta. During my p%Ma oonv�saticrl with Dnr].w[a, Susau and Nat�ay, we , discussed fhe mimumlysis of materials that the XM rawiewers req rated. DaSautels said that they took wmplas of :";;ad storm w d Ingutorm gut. du rirq the 1990 exaavaticne, for poLlan study. Mis is good. tigherh will the analysis be aorActed, howeiwr and by %d= and by what date? M%is too , should be required prior to Mtiatinq farther research. As a liml point, can you gat any irnfarmatiarh rrCM the Gbastal Oam►imion as to why the salvage nit.igatian must be done far the entire , site. Can any of the site be set as and left wdsv+aloped? This was t up by the POS rew wars at the close of their letter. a s leant portion of midlen exists in the Tm ar pole yard as seen in a illustrated in MorattoIs report. Is it necessary to eummte more in , the groove area or as mch as is beirg proposed? Mat altermtivies art still available for pr,■serviM part of the site? will try other sites en the M■sa be involved in the coastal cam dusion pumit or is it only c m-w? ' WAt are the develapmant lawn for the other sites? Do they fall vndar the 404 Peormit for the Cups? Can thhsy bs evaltated by another amtLa or ather than SRO? Basically, I dcn't understand the plan and jurisdiction over the other sites. , I hops these 0=2ritir are of some halp to you in drafting your letter to us. I I'm iii h a WWI [carted mass and very dapresainq to know that aver if the methods, analyses, abc. are inproved, the report will sti11 be poorly written and justified due to the quid and sloppy warm traditiorhally seen by SM staff. Hopefully some of the wank can be w2 r— t'raat+ad cut • to if people. R , � Desautalssantmostroa�iequits an �tahe �� Hoot wishes, Project Rsnriaw ' 1 SENT BY:Dept Parks & Recreatio: 8-10-88 ;11 :08AM 9166539824-► 310 859 2325413 OTATR OF CALIFORNIA—THi RUOURO[!A*rNCY PETE WILSON.Qowma OFFICE OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION ' P.O.DOX 942896 BACRAMiNTO D429 "O" let a)445-secs FAX:(018)3224377 June 11, 1991 REPLY TO: C'OR910124A Charles M. Holt, Chief Regulatory Branch Los Angeles District ' U.S. Army Corps of Engineers P.O. Box 2711 LOS ANGELES CA 90053-2325 ' Attnt Richard Perry REt Balsa Chita, 404 permit Application #91-081--30, wetlands Rs+storation Project, Oranga County, California Dear Mr. Holt: We recently received from your office a copy of a letter dated May 31, 1991 from Susan Hari of Pacne Callahan, McHolm and Winton law office to Steve Dibble and Richard Perry of your staff regarding "Public interest Concerns Raised by the Halt to Archaeological Excavations at ORA-63 and the Huntington Beach ' Mesa at Balsa Chica". Also received was .a copy of a letter written to OHP staff archaeologist Leslie Hartzell requesting that we comment on the scope of work proposed for ORA-63 and on the boundary survey work at Huntington Mesa. It further requested that the OHP comments be submitted to the Corps for inclusion in a submittal to the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation. Our views and recommendations on various issues appear below. PROJECT APB Before discussing the specifics in the request from Signal Landmark Co. to complete excavations at Balsa Chica and define site boundaries at Huntington Mesa, we would like to address a larger issue which relates to the proposed scope of work. We are concerned with how the Area of Potential Effects (APE) is ' being defined by the permit applicant for this project. The proposed project involves development of wetlands between Balsa Chita Mesa and Huntington Beach Mesa. It is our understanding that wetland development is part of mitigating effects from the development of residential housing and parks on the upland mesa(s) . A new plan for this development was agreed upon in May 1909 through negotiations with the California Environmental Trust • Successful Communities? California SENT BY:Oept ParKs & Recreatio; 8-10-88 :11 :09AM 9156539824- 310 859 2325 414 Charles M. Holt June 11, 1991 Page two partner. The new plan eliminated all commercial development, a marina, and a navigable channel. ' We assume that the 404 Permit is part of implementing the new plan. In our opinion, therefore, the project APE consists , o! the entire development project, both lowlands and uplands. AU historic properties within this APE should be taken into account. As part of the Corps responsibilities in defining the APE, we would appreciate clarification on the following questions. What is the connection between the proposed development on Bolsa Chica Mesa and buntingtcn Mesa? Is, for example, the regional , park planned for Huntington Mesa part of a mitigation agreement to allow residential development on Solna Chica? What is the city and county involvement in the development of the project? Is Huntington Mesa part of the development project negotiated with the California Environmental Trust? PMM RMRWZRS, PCAS, ISM Z aMn AKWCAX CONSQI.TATION As part of its responsibilities under 36 CFR 800.4(a) (iii) , the Corps should actively gqather information from and involve interested parties, including appropriate Native Americans, and address their concerns RLS part of the planning process. The Corps should make at good faith effort to attempt to resolve any conflicting concerns by taking the perspectives of all parties into account, if a consensus on outstanding issues cannot be achieved within approppri.ate time frames, the Corps should make and implement the decis'.on it feels is most reasonable and equitable. ORA-83: Closing of Rmivation Units, Analysis, and Reporting We agree with signUl Landmark that the excavations in progress at ORA-83 in November 1990 and halted by the California Coastal Commission following receipt of comments from PCAS, should be completed. Diavinq the excavation units open and exposed for this length of time may be haaardous and destructive to the exposed cultural deposits. Excavation in the open units ' needs to be completed and the units backfilled. Scientific Resource Survey, Inc. (SRS) is contracted by Signal Landmark to complete the work. We suggest that SRS be given a deadline of six months to complete the cataloguing and basic analysis of artifacts. This time frame should commence when the proposed work at ORA-83 to excavate and backfill the open units is completed. The Corps should review a copy of the catalog and analysis of artifacts/scofaets upon completion. I SENT BY:Dept ParKs & Recreatio; 8-10-88 ;11 :10AM 9166539824-4 310 859 2325 415 Charles M. Holt June 11, 1991 Page three The Corps should review the contractorts staff qualifications to ensure they most Secretary of Interior ' standards for the level of work specified. Additionally, the Corps should provide documentation to OHP concerning the curation of the materials collected by contractor during their excavations. Which institution will be responsible for the long term curation of the collection? Please include a copy of the letter from that institution which documents their ' agreement to house the collection. The OHP is not prepared to comment on the proposed final mitigation work at ORA-83. We would like to have more information on the proposed project, as we requested in the discussion of the APB. At ORA-83 we are specifically concerned with how the proposed development might affect the historic structures/features on the property? Could portions of the site be set aside? HMINUMN BE&= EWA: Evaluation of Site Extent Signal Landmark requested a Coastal Development Permit to conduct an archaeological site survey and boundary study on seven of the nine archaeological sites located on Huntington Mesa. Huntington Mesa is zoned to become a regional park. ' According to Susan Hori (1991 Memorandum) Signal Landmark is "planning for the park in conjunction with the County of orange and the City of Huntington Beach". The proposed study would be conducted on portions of sites within Signal Landmark's property boundaries. We understand the need to define site boundaries depth of deposits, site integrity, and the range of cultural resources situated in this area. We would like to urge the Corps and Signal Landmark to identify and evaluate in a more complete and comprehensive fashion all historic properties within the proposed parkland. We suggest that every effort be made to gain the access needed to do this. Segmenting archaeological properties on the basis of property boundaries presents major obstacles for ' understanding the nature, extent, and significance of these properties and for their subsequent management. The proposal by MM to use a mixed strategy of augerinq to test for subsurface deposits coupled with hand excavated units seems appropriate. The number of hand excavated units may need to be expanded on larger, more complex sites, particularly those whose boundaries are difficult to define between sites with two different trinomials. Infotec's report, for example, combines r SENT BY:Dept Parks & Recreatio; 8-10-E8 +11 :10AM 9166539824-4 310 859 2325 416 Charles M. Holt ' June 11, 1991 Page four ORA-293 and GRA-294 (1991:67) . Additionally, the historic ' And prehistoric component at OPA-365 will need to be defined. We hope these comments will serve to not a positive direction and move this undertaking forward in a manner that complies reasonably with the requirements of Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act. Your prompt response to our questions would be appreciated. If you have any questions, please contact Leslie Hartzell at (916) 322-9602. , I Sincerely, Kathryn Gualtieri i State Historic Preservation Officer cc: Meg Vaughn Susan Hori SENT BY;Dept Parks & Recreatio; 8-10-88 :11 :11AM 9166539824-4 310 859 2325417 STATE OF OAUPORNIA—THt PBSOURCE6 ACRNCY PON MLSON,C•"M ' ' OFFICE OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION P.O.BOX"2899 BACRAMENTO 94MW000I (016)"6-8008 FAX:(016)M-6371 August 16, 1991 MREPLY Tot C08910124A ' Susan K. Hari Panne, Callahan, McHolm 6 Winton 19100 Von Karman P.O. Box 19613 IRVINE CA 92713-9613 RE: Balsa Chic& Wetlands Developsent Secttion 404 Permit Application and Bolsa Chica and Huntington Yesa Proposed Dmmlopawnts, orange County, California i Dear Ms. Hori: Thank you for informally providing additional information and clarification on the proposed wetland restoration of Bolsa Chica lowlands and the proposed Huntington and Balsa_ Chica Mesa developments. Until we are informed by the Corps of Engineers (COE) that the 404 permit application for the proposed wetlands restoration at Bolsa Chica has been withdrawn, the COE Continues to be the ' lead federal agency in consultation with our office under Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act. 36 CPR 800.3(c) states that, "Section 106 requires the Agency Official [i.e. COE] to complete the Section 106 process prior to the approval of the expenditure of any Federal funds an the undertaking or prior to the issuance of any license or permit" (emphasis added) . Furthermore, under 36 CPR 800.4(a) (1) the Agency Official, not the applicant, establishes the M undertaking's Area of Potential Effects (APE) in consultation with the State Historic preservation Officer. The Office of Historic Preservation (OHP) requested information about the project APE from the COE in .& letter dated June 11, 1991.. OHP is awaiting a formal response from the COE with regard to the questions raised in this letter. Regardless of the CO24s decision regarding the APE, 0HP1s review of the ' proposed projects) follows 36 CPR Part 800 regulations. Your letter of July 24, 1991 states that some of the sites at Huntington Mesa have been adversely affected by development or that portions of the sites have been mitigated prior to development by adjacent property owners. We recommend that, summary information be compiled on each site on Huntington Mesa stating the'presently known condition of each site and the findings from previous survey, testing, and mitigation efforts. i SENT BY:Dept Parks & Recreatio: 8-10-88 :11 :11AM 9166539824-4 310 859 2325418 ' Susan K. Hori ! ' August 16, 1991 Page Two I This information should be used in the development of research questions and appropriate methodology to evaluate site ' significance. The documentation provided by tha Koll Company from their archaeological contractor was merely an outline of the proposed methods for testing sites and did not place the sites in a broader context of previous knowledge about the sites. Please note, we are very much interested in assisting the Coastal Commission in review of the proposed developments at ' Boisa Chica and Huntington Mesas. As you are no doubt aware, the State Historic Preservation officer is written into the Coastal Act with certain responsibilities. We have chosen to participate in the review of those projects, particularly in light of the federal involvement of the COT. Again, thank you for clarifying the relations between the city, county, and Balsa Chica Planning coalition involvement in , the pproposed undertakings. We hope there was no difficulty in closing the excavation units at Solsa Chica site ORA-83. If you have any questions, please contact Leslie Hartzell at (216) 321- 9602. After September 13, 1991 Leslie can be reached at (916) 653-5099. sincerely, ' Kathryn oualtieri ' State Historic Preservation Officer cc: Meg Vaughn, Coastal Commission ' Charles M. Holt, Chief, Regulatory Branch, Los Angeles COE ' 1 SENT BY:Dept Parks & Recreatio; 6-10-88 ;11 :12AM 9166539824-+ 310 859 2325419 $TAT[OF CALIFOAMIA—THE 10011" E$AOENOY ME VOLOON,0owmwr OFFICE OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION ' P.Q.00" "no SACRAMEWO 04200.OWI (41e)445-SON PAX:(916)S -OM August 30, 1991 ' REPLY TO) CON910124L ' Meg Vaughn, staff Analyst California Coastal Commission South Coast Area P.O. Box 1450 LONG BEACH CA 90801-4416 RE: Coastal Dowslopmsarit Permits Ron. 5-89-772A and 8-90-909 for Archaeological (fork at R mtington and Holsa Chica > amm, Orange ' County, California Dear Ms. Vaughn: The Coastal Commission in a letter dated August 16, 1991 has asked the State Office of Historic Preservation (OHP) for comments on the Roll Companyls proposed amendments to the , Coastal Development Permits referenced above. The amendments would give final review and approval of all phases of archaeological investigation to the Poor Review Team and exclude the OHP from involvement in the review process. ' The California Coastal Act of 1976i Public Resources Code, See. 30244 states that the State Historic Preservation Officer has responsibilities in reviewing and commenting on archaeological studies to mitigate impact of coastal development ' on archaeological sites. The statewide Interpretive Guidelines further clarify the role of the state Historic Preservation Officer. In particular, page 95 of the Guidelines specifies the role of the OHP (Standard Conditions:items Ed] and [a]) in the review of draft summary and final reports. As stated in our letter to Ids. Susan X. Mori on August 16, 1991, we are Interested in continuing to assist the Coastal Commission in review of the proposed developments at Balsa Chica and ' Huntington Kaman. We would like to take this opportunity to comment on the ' proposed archaeological investigations at Bolsa Chica and Huntington Kesas as specified in the Coastal Development permit applications. ' Application No. 5-90-090 for archaeological testing at Huntington Beach Mesa specifies that the "proposed project will be used to formulate a research design appropriate for the sites and mitigation as necessary" (pp. 3) . Wo would suggest that any ' 'scope of work' for a testing project must necessarily be incorporated into a research design at the outset of the SENT BY:Dept Parks & Recreatio; 8-10-I18 ;11 :12AM 9166539824- 310 659 2325420 r Meg Vaughn, Staff Analyst August 30, 1991 Page Two 1 project. The research design provides the guidelines and jug ification for how mausy auger tests, shovel tests, excavation ' units, or other samplirnJ strategies will be necessary to adequately determine site boundaries, depth of deposit, spatial patterning, and range o[ artifacts present. The contractor for Signal/Koll Co. has submitted to GHP a ' copy of their "scope of Work" for testing seven sites which includes a mixed strategy of surface collection, auger testing, and one 1xi meter test unit excavated in each site. The ' Guidelines require a research design on any "archaeological work involving excavation of more than two meters of surface area" (pp. 92) . we would suq-gqest, however, that the proposed testing strategy has not been adequately justified in the submitted ' outline "$cops of Work" and that a research design would be appropriate for determining information needs. For example, the research design should specify the types of artifacts that will , be surface collected, Me procedures for systematioally mapping and collecting those artifacts, and what research questions the data will help answer. Additionally, the research design should Instance,, the proposed subsurface testing of the sites. For iinstance, will the augmr samples be used primarily to document the depth of cultural :leposits at each site and/or the horizontal continuity �- f deposits from adjacent site locations? What justification is 'there for placing one lxl motor unit in ' each site? Perhaps mare units are needed to adequately toot the larger, more complex sites? Additional comments on the work at Huntington mesa and ' Bolsa chic& mesa are included in a letter from our office to Charles M. Solt, Chief Regulatory Branch, Los Angeles Corps of Engineers, dated June 11, 1991. Please refer to your copy of this letter for comments specific to sole& Chica and the closure of units. We are awaiting a formal response from the Corps on t the questions raised In this letter. We hops these cosmments will assist the Coastal commission ' in making a decision cin the proposed amendments to the Coastal Development Permits. if you have any questions, please contact Leslie Hartsell at (93.6) 322-9602. After September 13, 1991, Lesiis•s new phone number will be (916) 653-5099. , Sincerely, Kathryn Gualtiori Bate Historic preservation Officer cos Charles M. Holt, Chief Regulatory Branch, L.A. Corps SENT BY:Dept Parks & Recreatio; 8-10-88 :11 :13AM 91665398244 310 859 2325421 SYATE OF CALIFORNIA—THE RESOURCES AGMY PETE WILSON,00ranor OFFICE OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION P.O.BOX 942808 ' SACRAMENTO 94296-Mi (018)446-SM FAX:(918)372.8377 October 1, 1991 REPLY TO: 002910114A Meg Vaughn California Coastal Commission South Coast District 245 West Broadway, Suite 380 ' P.O. Sox 2450 LONG BEACH CA 90801-1450 I RE: Proposed Testing of seven Archaeological Sites on signal Landmark Inc. Property on euntington Beach Yeses, Grange County, California ' Dear Ms. Vaughn: The State Office of Historic Preservation (OHP) has recently received additional information regarding the proposed testing of seven archaeological sites at Nuntington Beach Mesa as part of Coastal Development Permit 05-90-909. The archaeological consultant submitted the following information to OHP in a letter dated August 33, 19911 a cover letter, an executive summary research design, and a copy of the Research Design for Evaluation of Coastal ArchboolZaal Sites is Northern Oran" County, California prepared by Roger Mason (1987) . The information submitted answers a number of the questions raised in our letters: of June 11, 1992 and August 30, 1991. Most useful for our evaluation of the proposed scope of ' work at Huntington Beach Mama was Mason's 1987 research design which summarised the previous research conducted at Bolma Chica and Huntington Beach Mesas. The research questions and data requirements chapter was adequate for addressing a broad range of questions from basic issues such as presence or absence of certain resources to broader issues such as local populations exploitation of resources within microhabits associated with the coastal zone and interior terrestrial habitats. The research design also included a chapter on the proposed methodology for tasting sites. ' A number of questions posed in our letter of August 30, 1991 dealt specifically with the consultant's justification for the proposed scope of work. Using the 1987 research design as a guideline for assessing the proposed scope of work, we would ' like to offer the following suggestions for the proposed testing program. SENT BY:Dept Parks & Recreatio: 8-10-83 :11 :14AM 9166539824-1 310 859 2325422 Meg Vaughn ' October 1, 1991 Page Two The scope of work iaubmitted with the permit application states that a surface collection will be made at each site and ' subsurface tasting will involve augering and hand-excavating a unit at each site. A report will be prepared describing the results. Specifics for now the work is to be carried out, justification of particular methods and a timetable for completion of report is not included. We suggest you follow the methodology detailed in the 1987 research design which provides more specific treatment and justification for the proposed testing program. In particular, the 1987 proposal uses a site datum tied to a permanent feature to plot a 20 x 20 meter grid across each site. Surface ' artifacts are to be syyistematieally mapped and collected. Samples of shell are to be collected from a portion of each quad. i 1 Auger testing is quided by an off-site backhoe trench, where feasible. Auger testing involves screening soils removed within 13 am levels and reeordin of stratigraphy within each hole. We suggest that the materials be screened through 1/8" mash rather than the 3/4" mesh recommended in the research ' design This method will inform researchers as to whether the particular site being tested contains useful information about fish remains, shellfiefh species, and seeds which can be used to ' address questions about the exploitation of floral and faunal remains within the off'-shore, lagoon, and inland habitats. The surface mapping, collection and auger testing should be designed to more accurately ident'ify site boundaries, particularly those si.:es most recently noted by van Hueren at al. (1989)) as representing one site rather than two separate ' sites. game areas "'between" sites should be examined for both surface and subsurface constituents. The selection of hand excavation units is based upon information gathered from the auger tests. The units should be excavated within 10 cm levels fallowing stratigraphic levels, where identifiable, rather than strictly arbitrary levels. Again, the screen sine should be 1/8" for the initial. testing ' phase. Finer screen sire or column samples should be used if organic features are identified. We noted previously that ORA-363 has both a prehistoric and ' historic component. Historic artifacts or features should be collected, recorded, analysed and reported on within an appropriate historic context. The project staff should include personnel qualified in historic archaeology that meet the ' Becretary of the Interior's standards. i r � r __ r 1 SENT BY:Dept Parks & Recreatio; 8-10-88 ;11 :14AM ; 9166539824y 310 859 2325423 Meg Vaughn October 1, 1991 Page Three 1 The 1987 research design notes the historic use of the ' study area. Any structures or features 45 years or older must be inventoried prior to ground disturbing activites associated with the linear park development. Effects to historic as wall as rehistoric resources must be taken into account as part of ' pro act planning for the proposed park. The permit only Addressas the prehistoric sites. questions outstanding includes what inventory has been done of historic resources and how will these resources be taken into account during project planning? Artifacts should be catalogued, analysed and reported on in a timely fashion. we recommend that the draft report be ' submitted to our office for review within six months of the completion of the fieldwork. The final report should be completed within one year. r Additionally, we would like the contractor to provide documentation from an approved institution that has agreed to permanently house the collections from the testing program. Documentation of staff qualifications indicating project ' personnel meet the secreatary of Interior's Standards should also be forwarded to our office. ' The 1987 research design includes a program for remote sensing and analysis of soil phosphates. Theme studies may be mar* appropriate for an enhanced tasting program or as part of a j more extensive data recovery program for assessing the site's ' eligibility to the National Register. The contractor may wish to use their discretion on the proposal for these two testing options. The report on the testing phase should include a description and analysis of all artifacts and ecofaats recovered, discussion of each site's boundary indicators and factors affecting site integrity, and a preliminary assessment of the National Register eligibility for each site in light of previous research on the site. The most important contribution this report should make is to integrate information gained from ' previous investigations with the current study. This is particularly crucial for those sites that cross property boundary lines. It is our understanding from conversations with Susan Mori that portions of some sites adjacent to Signal Landmark property have or are being mitigated, we would like to see every effort made to incorrpporate the information from these studies with the proposed testing program. Depending on the status of the 404 Permit Application ' submitted by Signal Landmark to the Corps, the information gained from the survey at Huntington Beach Mesa can be used to SENT BY:Dept ParK9 & Recreatio; 8-10-e8 ;11 :15AM 9166539824-, 310 859 2325424 ' i Meg Vaughn October 1, 1991 Page Four 1 address potential effects of the proposed development on listed or potentially eligible National Register sites. We are venting , for comments from the Corps on a number of questions posed by the 404 Permit Application. Please send the documentation on an approved duration ' facility and the staff qualifications prior to the commencement of fieldwork. Once this information is received we do not object to the testing 1i oqr proceeding according to the above- stipulations. We will be pleased to review the draft report on ' the testing. If you halve any questions, please contact Ms. Lselie Hartzell of my otaff at (916) 633-5099. Sincerely, ' Kathryn Gualtieri t State Historic Preservation Officer cc: Darlene Shelley, roll Co. , Susan Hori, Pae, Callahan, McHoln 6 Winton Charles M. Holt, Chief Regulatory Branch, L.A. Corps ' 1 1 i 1