Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Reconsider Reconstruction Options for Brush Drive Street Rep
RECEIVED 2006 MAY -8 AM 9: 41 C:17 N' C:LCPeiKk Gi' Council/Agency Meeting Held: D H'JF?7t ;GT0i3 E E A C H Deferred/Continued to: Ap rov d Conditionally Approved ❑ Denied Ci ler ' Sign e Council eeting Date: . 5/ 5/2006 Department ID Number: PW 06-030 CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION SUBMITTED TO: HONORABLE MAYOR CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS SUBMITTED BY: P 6�LE CU�H-G AFT, DPA, CITY ADMI I TRATOR PREPARED BY: ROBERT F. BEARDSLEY, PE, �IRrEZ OR OF PUBLIC WRKS SUBJECT: RECONSIDER RECONSTRUCTION OPTIONS FOR BRUSH DRIVE Statement of Issue,Funding Source,Recommended Action,Alternative Action(s),Analysis,Environmental Status,Attachments) Statement of Issue: Subsequent to comments from Brush Drive residents Ms. Teresa Chaque and Mr. Chris Varga, under Public Communications on May 1, 2006, the City Council voted 6-1 (Councilman Hansen opposed) to reconsider the street reconstruction project awarded for Brush Drive, between Waite Lane and Newland Street, at the May 15, 2006 City Council meeting. Funding Source: Funding already has been appropriated to allow for any selected alternative. Recommended Action: Motion to: Proceed with the contract awarded by Council on February 6, 2006, to Nobest , Inc., to construct infrastructure repairs on Brush Drive (Public Works Project MSC-430), specifically redirecting, pursuant to the Council action of April 17, 2006, that the entire street's curbs and gutters shall be subject to replacement and residents will be allowed to give input on selection of trees (not shrubs) to be planted as replacements for trees removed. Alternative Action(s): Provide alternative direction to staff which could include (1) negotiating a contract change order to delete Brush Drive in its entirety from the contract awarded on February 6, 2006; or (2), pursuant to the Council's action of February 6, 2006, negotiating a contract change order to substitute the Brush Drive project area with the next most feasible, highest priority street on the petition list after reserving sufficient project funds for Brush Drive, between Waite Lane and Newland Street, to (a) effect satisfactory repairs to the sidewalks to mitigate immediate safety issues, (b) perform spot repairs to curbs and gutters where necessary for safety concerns, and (c) protect trees as much as feasible, to accomplish the necessary safety repairs without leaving any tree in an unsafe condition. As a result of this process, Brush Drive residents must re-initiate the petition process for future requested repairs, losing their current standing on the petition list. 1 REQUEST FOR Error! Reference source not found. ACTION MEETING DATE: 6/5/2006 DEPARTMENT ID NUMBER: PW 06-030 Analysis: Council Action Chronology: This item first came to Council on February 6, 2006, at which time the Director of Public Works recommended that a residential street reconstruction project be awarded to Nobest, Inc. for the low bid amount of$3,600,058.45, for 25 residential streets on the Residential Street Petition List. In an effort to work with the residents who had raised objections to the project subsequent to the bid opening, the Director of Public Works offered an alternative recommendation in a January 30, 2006 memorandum, that Brush Drive, between Waite Lane and Newland Street, be removed from the project list but that project funds be set aside for satisfactory repairs to the sidewalks along the Brush Drive project area, thus mitigating any immediate safety issues. In this approach, spot repairs to curbs and gutters would be included where necessary for safety concerns and trees would be protected as much as feasible, to accomplish the necessary safety repairs without leaving any tree in an unsafe condition. After extensive discussion, Council concurred unanimously with the alternative recommendation for Brush Drive and directed staff accordingly, with the caveat added that Brush Drive residents would understand that they must re-initiate the petition process for any future requests for repairs, losing their current standing on the petition list. On April 17, 2006, Councilman Hansen presented an H-Item to reconsider the Brush Drive reconstruction issue. On that date, again after extensive discussion, Council voted 6-1 (Councilman Bohr opposed), redirecting staff to have the contractor Nobest, Inc. perform full repairs to Brush Drive's curbs and gutters and allowing residents to give input on selection of trees (not shrubs) to be planted as replacements for trees removed. On May 1, 2006, subsequent to Public Communications from Brush Drive residents Ms. Teresa Chaque and Mr. Chris Varga, and after a brief discussion, the City Council voted 6-1 (Councilman Hansen opposed) to reconsider the street reconstruction project awarded for Brush Drive at the May 15, 2006 City Council meeting. For the May 15, 2006 discussion, the staff recommended action will be to proceed with the originally-scoped, full project as stated in the "Recommended Action" above. The "Alternative Action(s)" above include less suitable alternatives that would not completely address the project. Staff still asserts that the reduced scope project described in the Director of Public Works' January 30, 2006 memorandum can be accomplished; however, as discussed extensively on February 6, 2006, areas of substandard drainage will persist where curbs and gutters are not reconstructed. Specific Resident Issues: Petitions. Ms. Chaque's and Mr. Varga's May 1, 2006 Public Communication remarks were primarily challenges to the validity, both in format and qualified signatures, of the original 1995 petition circulated by Mr. Robert Valesky. Staff continues to emphasize that, whatever the circumstances of the original petition, the process which was established in 1988 was intended to be an informal means for staff to (1) gauge the substantial interest of a neighborhood, some of whose residents had expressed a desire for their parkway trees to DADocuments and Settings\Greene)\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLKAD\060515-RCA-Brush Drive.doc -2- 5/4/2006 1:08 PM REQUEST FOR Error! Reference source not found. ACTION MEETING DATE: 6/5/2006 DEPARTMENT ID NUMBER: PW 06-030 be removed and streets repaired and (2) establish a priority list for appropriating limited funds. Once the list was created, the City had been served with written notice of conditions which may be potentially hazardous to pedestrians or motorists and became bound to a process for which there is no prudent way to remove itself except by completing the improvements. _Scope of Improvements. The residents speaking on May 1 asserted that staff charged with carrying out the project offered only an "all-or-nothing" approach to the project. If the street is to be reconstructed to accommodate proper drainage, our experience has been that, invariably, the entire street needs to be reconstructed. Certainly, where trees can be saved that will not cause problems later, that will be done. The newer Crape myrtle trees are in that category; however, after previous discussions, there may be a preference by the neighborhood to remove those trees and plant more substantial species selected from the City's Tree Management Plan list. Unique Solutions. The residents stated that staff has not pursued innovative solutions to similar problems experienced in other cities. Rubber sidewalk panels were offered as an example where some cities had used them for reconstructing raised sidewalks caused by tree roots and, thus, avoided tree removals. The Public Works staff is well aware of innovations in the industry and, in fact, has evaluated rubber sidewalks. Unfortunately, this experimental product has serious defects in practical application, which was fully explained in a July 22, 2002 memorandum to the City Council. Staff has decided against installing this product for those reasons. Environmental Status: Not Applicable. Public Works Commission Action: Not required. Attachment(s): NumberCity Clerk's Page Description 1. 2/6/2006 RCA and attachments: "Award MSC-430, Reconstruction of Various Residential Streets" 2. 1/30/2006 Memorandum and attachments: "Public Improvements — Brush Drive" 3. 4/17/2006 RCA and attachment: °H-Item for April 17, City Council C Meeting — Reconsideration of Brush Drive Street Repairs" 4. 7/22/2002 Memorandum and attachments: "Rubber Sidewalk Pavers" D:\Documents and Settings\Greene)\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\0LKAD\060515-RCA-Brush Drive.doc -3- 5/4/2006 1:08 PM (5) May 15, 2006 - Council/Agency Agenda - Page 5 Pursuant to the,Brown (Open Meeting)`Act,,.the City-Council ,may not discussitems unless they are on our agenda. So if you are speaking on an item not on the agenda, we cannot discuss:the issue,with you at this meeting. However, if you wish to meet with any of us please call the C.ouncil's Secretary at 714-536-5553. Thank you for taking the time'to come to the council meeting, to address,:the Council. Councilmembers strive to treat members.of the public with respect, and_we°ask-.that you,also express your concerns and ppinions in a:civil and respectful manner. Each speaker is allowed 3 minutes and time may not be donated to others. No action can be taken by Council/Agency on this date unless the item is agendized. ,Complete the attached pink form and give to the Sergeant=At-Arms.(the Police Officeg located near the speaker's podium) Forty Speakers. C-1. Council Committee/Appointments/Liaison Reports ( ) (This is the opportunity for Councilmembers to make announcements regarding Council committees, appointments or liaison reports.) C-2. City Administrator's Report C-2a. (City Council) Reconsider Options for the Street Reconstruction Project Awarded on February 6, 2006 for Brush Drive Between Waite Lane and Newland Street (800.20) Communication submitted by the Public Works Director transmitting the following Statement of Issue: Subsequent to comments from Brush Drive residents Ms. Teresa Chaque and Mr. Chris Varga, under Public Communications on May 1, 2006, the City Council voted 6-1 (Councilman Hansen opposed) to reconsider the street reconstruction project awarded for Brush Drive, between Waite Lane and Newland Street, at the May 15, 2006 City Council meeting. Recommended Action: Motion to: Proceed with the contract awarded by Council on February 6, 2006, to Nobest, Inc., to construct infrastructure repairs on Brush Drive (Public Works Project MSC-430), specifically redirecting, pursuant to the Council action of April 17, 2006, that the entire street's curbs and gutters shall be subject to replacement and residents will be allowed to give input on selection of trees (not shrubs) to be planted as replacements for trees removed. Motion to approve Recommended Action, subsequently replaced by a Substitute Motion. Substitute Motion to direct staff to verify that the signatures listed on the petition presented to Council at this meeting by Bob Va/eski are those of homeowners and proceed with repairs to the entire street if the percentage of homeowners is 75% or greater. In the event the percentage is less than 75, staff to poll homeowners via certified mail and report back to Council in 30-45 days. Approved 4-3 (Green, Hardy, Hansen— No) ATTACHMENT # 1 l.L. 2006 JAN 31 AM 9: t � Y ! ir;r, :. ui ., { Iei CITY OF HUNITIt�GTOH SEAC Council/Agency Meeting Held: Deferred/Continued to: 12(Apgroved 0 onditionally Approved C Denied � � ty C rk's 5 nature Council Meeting Date: 2/6/2006 Department ID Number: PW 06-003 CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION SUBMITTED TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY C UNCIL MEMBERS SUBMITTED BY: PENE �CUBRadH-GRA , Cl ADMINIXB TOR 57 PREPARED BY: ROBERT F. BEARDSLEY, PE, DIRECT�ROFC WORKS SUBJECT: Award MSC-430, Reconstruction of Various Residential Streets Statement of Issue,Funding Source,Recommended Action,Alternative Action(s),Analysis,Environmental Status,Attachment(s) Statement. of Issue: Bids have been received for the Reconstruction of Various Residential Streets, MSC-430. Nobest, Inc. submitted the lowest responsible bid. Staff is requesting authorization to award the construction contract to Nobest, Inc., and proceed with the project. Funding Source: Funds in the total amount of $4,250,000 have been designated for this purpose utilizing Measure M funds, Account No. 21390004.82300 ($1,000,000) and Capital Improvement Reserve funds, Account No. 10040314.82300 ($3,250,000). Recommended Action: Motion to: 1. Approve the project specifications; . 2. Accept the lowest responsive, responsible bid submitted by Nobest, Inc. in the amount of$3,600,058.45 for MSC-430; and. 3. Authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute a construction contract in substantially the same form as the attached sample contract. Alternative Action(s): Do not authorize award of this contract and direct staff on how to proceed. REQUEST FOR ACTION ' MEETING DATE: 2/6/2006 DEPARTMENT ID NUMBER:PW 06-003 Analysis: The project will consist of the construction of street improvements on 25 residential streets from the Tree Petition List as shown on Attachment #1, List of Streets. Construction will include removal and replacement of the parkway trees, reconstruction of the sidewalk, curb, and gutter, and a new asphalt-wearing surface. The scope of work includes streets in order of receipt of the petition beginning with Brush Drive (#1). Two streets, Myrtle Drive (#3) and Normandy Lane (#21), required engineering design prior to soliciting bids and have been held back from the sequence until the design phase is completed. The engineer's estimate for this project was $3,730,000. Bids were opened publicly on December 8, 2005, and are listed in ascending order: Bidding 1. Nobest, Inc. $ 3,600,058.45 2. All American Asphalt $ 4,171,825.00 3. Palp, Inc. $ 4,201,687.66 4. Shawnan $ 4,797,858.14 5. EBS, Inc. $ 4,997,253.92 The award process was delayed temporarily while staff consulted with some residents and the City Attorney 'regarding work proposed on one of the streets in the contemplated contract (Brush Drive). Some of the residents on this street are objecting to the extent of the improvements staff determined necessary to complete the permanent repairs. In particular, they have objected to removing 29 mature street trees from the parkways along the street fronting the 50 homes in the project area. Staff prepared a January 30, 2006 memorandum to the Mayor and Council, summarizing the situation, outlining possible options to resolve the situation and presenting a recommendation that addresses the residents' concerns. If, upon Council's determination to accept the recommendation in the Staffs separate January 30, 2006 memorandum, a motion should be made to approve the Recommended Action above, as stated, with the additional direction to remove Brush Drive from the project list and direct staff to negotiate a change order with the contractor using project funds redirected to effect satisfactory repairs to the public property in the Brush Drive project area. The work shall be limited to (1) mitigating immediate sidewalk and parkway safety issues, (2) spot repairs to curbs and gutters where necessary for safety concerns and (3) protecting existing trees in place while accomplishing these repairs without leaving any tree in an unsafe condition. Staff recommends that the contract be awarded to Nobest, Inc., the lowest responsible bidder, for the scope of work detailed above. The City has had positive experience with this contractor's past performance on several projects of this type. G:\R C A\2006\06-003 Feb 6 Churchill (Award MSC-430).doc-2- 1/31/2006 7:38 AM REQUEST FOR ACTION MEETING DATE: 2/6/2006 DEPARTMENT ID NUMBER:PW 06-003 Public Works Commission Action: The Public Works Commission reviewed and unanimously approved this project on October 19, 2005. Environmental Status: This project is categorically exempt pursuant to Class 1, Section 15301 of CEQA. Attachment(s): City Clerk's • - Number No. Description 1. List of Streets 2. Location Map 3. Sample City Funded Construction Contract G:\R C A\2006\06-003 Feb 6 Churchill (Award MSC-430).doc-3- 1/31/2006 7:38 AM TA RECEIVED CITY , OF HUNTINGTON 146"U p� ,, to IOU INTERDEPARTMENTAL COMMUNICCY,1,1, I,CT � CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH TO: Joan Flynn, City Clerk FROM: Robert F. Beardsley, P.E., Directo of Public Works DATE: February 6, 2006 SUBJECT: Late Communication City Council Agenda February 6, 2006—Agenda Item E-I I The staff recommendation for Agenda Item E-I I is amended as follows: Motion to: 1) Approve the project specifications; 2) Accept the lowest responsive, responsible bid submitted by Nobest, Inc. in the amount of$3,600,058.45 for MSC-430; 3) Authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute a construction contract in substantially the same form as the attached sample contract; and 4) Direct staff to negotiate a contract change order with Nobest, Inc., to substitute the Brush Drive project area with the next most feasible, highest priority street on the petition list after reserving sufficient project funds for Brush Drive, between Waite Lane and Newland Street to (a) effect satisfactory repairs to the sidewalks to mitigate immediate safety issues, (b) perform spot repairs to curbs and gutters where necessary for safety concerns, and(c) protect trees as much as feasible, to accomplish the necessary safety repairs without leaving any tree in an unsafe condition. RFBJg d �b /06 A40tvaa ATTACHMENT # 1 r - � 1 LIST OF STREETS FOR MSC-430 DISTRICT STREET NAME PETITION LIST # LOCATION Brush Drive 1 263 Softwind Drive 2 158 Rhapsody Drive 4 155 Elmhurst Circle 5 118 & 128 Morse Circle 6 164 Swan Lane 7 146 Dovewood Drive 8 146 Lotus Lane 9 435 Chesapeake Lane 10 435 Seabird Circle 11 453 Sha ne Drive 12 158 Ojai Lane/Napa Circle 14 178 Standish Lane 15 148 Trophy Drive 16 167 Trenton Lane 17 437 Doriane Circle 18 159 La Mesa Lane 19 178 Coral Circle 20 434 Montecito Drive 22 158 Robinwood Drive 23 146 Lee Circle 24 271 Par Circle 25 157 Patricia Lane 26 169 Puritan Circle 27 148 ol�b /ob 4-6r, tn ATTACHMENT #2 N V C� • a. C � W ,. ° ENN �- w w — — J 18 �d— S 128 Bolsa a V o iv Me Fadden 146 148 3 er 155 157 158 159 164 167 169 263 arner pc 17$ 1271 later - wy albert �. O 0 118 & aEllis ,o 128 —Elmhurst Cr. lea oa 3 146— Dovewood Dr., Robinwood Dr. and Swan Ln. aQ field 148—Standish Ln. and Puritan Cr. 166— Rhapsody Dr. 434 435 437 orktown 167— Par Cr. 168—Softwind Dr., Montecito Dr. and Shayne Dr. kdarns 169— Doriane Cr. 164—Morse Cr. L 453 ndianapolis 167—Trophy Dr. 169— Patricia Ln. tlanta 178—Ojai Ln., Napa Cr. And La Mesa Ln. 263— Brush Dr. Hamilton 271 — Lee Cr. 434—Coral Cr. Banning 436—Lotus Ln. and Chesapeake Ln. 437—Trenton Ln. 463—Seabird Cr. d�b ATTACHMENT #3 CITY FUNDED CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT BETWEEN THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH AND FOR THIS AGREEMENT ("Agreement") made and entered into this day of 20 by and between the City of Huntington Beach, a municipal corporation of the State of California, hereinafter referred to as "CITY," and a California , hereinafter referred to as "CONTRACTOR." WHEREAS, CITY has solicited bids for a public works project, hereinafter referred to as "PROJECT," more fully described as in the City of Huntington Beach; and CONTRACTOR has been selected to perform said services, NOW; THEREFORE, in consideration of the promises and agreements hereinafter made and exchanged, the parties covenant and agree as follows: 1. STATEMENT OF WORK; ACCEPTANCE OF RISK CONTRACTOR shall complete and construct the PROJECT pursuant to this Agreement and the Contract Documents (as hereinafter defined) and furnish, at its own cost and expense, all labor, plans, tools, equipment, supplies, transportation, utilities and all other items, services and facilities necessary to complete and construct the PROJECT in a good and workmanlike manner. CONTRACTOR agrees to fully assume the risk of all loss or damage arising out of the nature of the PROJECT, during its progress or prior to acceptance by CITY, from agree/forms/city consd4-03 1 the action of the elements, from any unforeseen difficulties which may arise or be encountered in the prosecution of work, and for all other risks of any description in connection with the work, including, but not limited to, all expenses incurred by or in consequence of the suspension or discontinuance of work, except such as are herein expressly stipulated to be borne by CITY, and for well and faithfully completing the work within the stipulated time and in the manner shown and described in this Agreement, and in accordance with the requirements of CITY for the compensation set forth in the accepted bid proposal. 2. ACCEPTANCE OF CONDITIONS OF WORK; PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS CONTRACTOR acknowledges that it is fully familiar with all the terms, conditions and obligations of this Agreement and the Contract Documents (as defined below in this Section), the location of the job site, and the conditions under which the work is to be performed, and that it enters into this Agreement based upon its thorough investigation of all such matters and is relying in no way upon any opinions or representations of CITY. It is agreed that the Contract Documents are incorporated into this Agreement by this reference, with the same force and effect as if the same were set forth at length herein, and that CONTRACTOR and its subcontractors, if any, shall be bound by the Contract Documents insofar as they relate in part or in any way, directly or indirectly, to the work covered by this Agreement. "Contract Documents" as defined herein mean and include: A. This Agreement; B. Bonds covering the work herein agreed upon; agree/forms/city const/4-03 2 C. The CITY's standard Plans and Specifications and special contractual provisions, including those on file in the office of the Director of Public Works of CITY and adopted by the City Council, and any revisions, amendments or addenda thereto; D. The current edition of Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction, published by Builders' News, Inc., 10801 , National Boulevard, Los Angeles, CA 90064, and all amendments thereto, written and promulgated -by the Southern California chapter of the American Public Works Association and the Southern California District Associated General Contractors of the California Joint Cooperative Committee; E. Bid documents including the Notice Inviting Bids, the Special Instructions to Bidders and the CONTRACTOR's proposal, (which is attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and incorporated herein by this reference); F. The particular Plans, Specifications, Special Provisions and Addenda applicable to the PROJECT. Anything mentioned in the Specifications and not indicated in the Plans or indicated in the Plans and not mentioned in the Specifications, shall be of like effect as if indicated and mentioned in both. In case of a discrepancy between any Plans, Specifications, Special provisions, or Addenda, the matter shall be immediately submitted by CONTRACTOR to the Department of Public Works of CITY (hereinafter referred to as "DPW"), and agree/forms/city const/4-03 3 1\ I CONTRACTOR shall not attempt to resolve or adjust the discrepancy without the decision of DPW, save only at its own risk and expense. Should there be any conflict between the terms of this Agreement and the bid or proposal of CONTRACTOR, then this Agreement shall control and nothing herein shall be considered as an acceptance of the terms of the bid or proposal which is in conflict herewith. 3. COMPENSATION CITY agrees to pay and CONTRACTOR agrees to accept as full compensation for the faithful performance of this Agreement, subject to any additions or deductions made under the provisions of this Agreement or the Contract Documents, a sum not to exceed Dollars ($ ), as set forth in the Contract Documents, to be paid as provided in this Agreement. 4. COMMENCEMENT OF PROJECT CONTRACTOR agrees to commence the PROJECT within ten (10) working days after the Notice To Proceed is issued and diligently prosecute the PROJECT to completion within ( ) consecutive from the day the Notice to Proceed is issued by DPW, excluding delays provided for in this Agreement. 5. TIME OF THE ESSENCE The parties hereto recognize and agree that time is of the essence in the performance of this Agreement and each and every provision of the Contract Documents. CONTRACTOR shall prepare and obtain approval as required by the Contract Documents for all shop drawings, details and samples, and do all other things necessary and incidental to the prosecution of its work in conformance with the progress schedule set forth in the"Contract Documents. CONTRACTOR shall coordinate its work with the work of all agree/forms/city const/4-03 4 other contractors, subcontractors, and CITY forces working on the PROJECT in a manner that will facilitate the efficient completion of the PROJECT and in accordance with the terms and provisions of this Agreement. CITY shall have complete control of the premises on which the work is to be performed and shall have the right to decide the time and order in which the various portions of the work shall be performed and the priority of the work of other contractors, subcontractors and CITY forces and, in general, all matters concerning the timely and orderly conduct of the work of CONTRACTOR on the premises. 6 CHANGES CONTRACTOR shall adhere strictly to the plans and specifications set forth in the Contract Documents unless a change therefrom is authorized in writing by DPW. CONTRACTOR agrees to make any and all changes, furnish materials and perform all work necessary within the scope of the PROJECT as DPW may require in writing. Under no condition shall CONTRACTOR make any changes without the prior written order or acceptance of DPW, and CITY shall not pay any extra charges made by CONTRACTOR that have not been agreed upon in writing by DPW. When directed to change the work, CONTRACTOR shall submit immediately to DPW a written cost proposal reflecting the effect of the change. Should DPW not agree to such cost proposal, the work shall be performed according to the changes ordered in writing by DPW and the proper cost thereof shall be negotiated by the parties upon cost and pricing data submitted by CONTRACTOR; thereupon, CITY will promptly issue an adjusted change order to CONTRACTOR and the contract price will be adjusted upward or downward accordingly. agree/fonns/city const/4-03 5 7. NOTICE TO PROCEED No work, services, material, or equipment shall be performed or furnished under this Agreement unless and until a Notice to Proceed has been given to CONTRACTOR by CITY. CITY does not warrant that the work will be available on the date the Notice to Proceed is issued. In the event of a delay in commencement of the work due to unavailability of the job site, for any reason, relief to CONTRACTOR shall be limited to a time extension equal to the delay due to such unavailability. 8. BONDS Only bonds issued by California admitted sureties will be accepted. CONTRACTOR shall, prior to its performance of this Agreement, furnish the following two (2) bonds approved by the City Attorney: One in the amount of one hundred percent (100%) of the contract price to guarantee the CONTRACTOR's faithful performance of the work, and one in the amount of one hundred percent of the contract price to guarantee payment of all claims for labor and materials furnished. In addition, CONTRACTOR shall submit to CITY a bond in the amount of one hundred percent(100%) of the final contract price, including all change orders, to warrant such performance for a period of one (1) year after CITY's acceptance thereof within ten (10) days of filing of the Notice of Completion. 9. WARRANTIES CONTRACTOR unconditionally guarantees all work done under this Agreement including, but not limited to, any workmanship, installation, fabrication, material or structural facilities constructed. CONTRACTOR, within ten (10) days after notice by CITY of any defect in the work, shall have the option to make appropriate repairs or replace agree/forms/city const/4-03 6 the defective item or items. Upon expiration of such ten (10) day period, CITY may then make appropriate repair or replacement at CONTRACTOR's risk and own cost and expense. 10. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR It is understood and agreed that CONTRACTOR is,'and shall be, acting at all times hereunder as an independent contractor and not an employee of CITY. CONTRACTOR shall secure at its own cost and expense, and be responsible for any and all payment of all taxes, social security, state disability insurance compensation, unemployment compensation and other payroll deductions for CONTRACTOR and its officers, agents and employees and all business licenses, if any, in connection with the PROJECT and/or the services performed hereunder. 11. LIQUIDATED DAMAGES/DELAYS It is agreed by the parties hereto that in case the total work called for hereunder is not in all parts and requirements finished or completed within the number of calendar days as set forth herein, damage will. be sustained by, CITY; and that it is, and would be, impractical and extremely difficult to ascertain and determine the actual damage which CITY would sustain in the event of and by reason of such delay. It is, therefore, agreed that CONTRACTOR will pay to CITY, as liquidated damages and not as a penalty, the sum of Dollars ($ ) per day for each and every working day's delay in completing the work in excess of the number of working/calendar days set forth herein, which represents a reasonable endeavor by the parties hereto to estimate a fair compensation for the foreseeable damages CITY would sustain in the event of and by reason of such delay; and CONTRACTOR agrees to pay these damages herein provided, and agree/forms/city const/4-03 7 further agrees that CITY may deduct the amount thereof from any monies due or that may become due to CONTRACTOR hereunder. CONTRACTOR will be granted an extension of time and will not be assessed damages for any portion of the delay in the completion of the work due to unforeseeable causes beyond the control and without the fault or negligence of CONTRACTOR, including, but not limited to, acts of God or of the public. enemy, fire, floods, epidemics, quarantine restrictions, strikes,unsuitable weather, or delays of subcontractors due to such causes. CONTRACTOR shall, within fifteen (15) days from the beginning of any such delay (unless DPW shall grant a further period of time), notify DPW in writing of the cause of the delay and CITY shall extend the time for completing the work if; in its judgment, the findings of fact thereon justify the delay; and the decision of DPW shall be conclusive on the parties hereto. Should CONTRACTOR be delayed in the prosecution or completion of the work by the act, neglect or default of CITY, or should CONTRACTOR be delayed by waiting for materials required by this Agreement to be furnished by CITY, or by damage caused by fire or other casualty at the job site for which CONTRACTOR is not responsible, or by the combined action of the workers, in no way caused by or resulting from default or collusion on the part of CONTRACTOR, or in the event of a lockout by CITY, then the time herein fixed for the completion of the work shall be extended by the number of days CONTRACTOR has thus been delayed, but no allowance or extension shall be made unless a claim therefor is presented in writing to CITY within fifteen(15) days of the commencement of such delay. No claims for additional compensation or damages for delays, irrespective of the cause thereof, and including without limitation the furnishing of materials by CITY or agree/forms/city const/4-03 8 } delays by other contractors or subcontractors, will be allowed and an extension of time for completion shall be the sole remedy of CONTRACTOR. 12. DIFFERING SITE CONDITIONS A. Notice: CONTRACTOR shall promptly, and before such conditions are disturbed, notify DPW in writing of: (1) Subsurface or latent physical conditions at the job site differing materially from those indicated in this Agreement or the Contract Documents; or (2) Unknown physical conditions at the job site, of an unusual nature, differing materially from those .ordinarily encountered and generally recognized as inherent to work of the character to be performed under this Agreement. DPW shall promptly investigate the conditions and if it finds that such conditions do materially so differ and cause an increase or decrease in the time required for performance of any part of the work under this Agreement, whether or not changed as a result of such conditions, an equitable adjustment shall be made and the agreement modified in writing accordingly. B. Time Extension: No claim of CONTRACTOR under this Section shall be allowed unless CONTRACTOR has given the notice required hereunder provided, however, the time prescribed therefor may be extended by CITY. agree/forms/city const/4-03 9 1 t f 13. VARIATIONS IN ESTIMATED QUANTITIES The quantities listed in the bid schedule will not govern final payment. Payment to CONTRACTOR will be made only for the actual quantities of contract items used in construction of the PROJECT, in accordance with the plans and specifications. Upon completion of the PROJECT, if the actual quantities used are either more than or less than the quantities listed in the bid schedule, the bid price shall prevail subject to the provisions of this Section. DPW may, at its sole discretion, when warranted by the facts and circumstances, order an equitable adjustment, upwards or downwards, in payment to CONTRACTOR where the actual quantities used in'construction of the PROJECT are in variation to the quantities listed in the bid schedule. No claim by CONTRACTOR for an equitable adjustment in price or time for completion shall be allowed if asserted after final payment under this Agreement. If the quantity variation is such as to cause an increase in the time necessary for completion, DPW shall ascertain the facts and circumstances and make such adjustment for extending the completion date as in its sole judgment the findings warrant. 14. PROGRESS PAYMENTS Each month DPW will make an estimate in writing of the work performed by CONTRACTOR and the value thereof. From each progress estimate, ten percent (10%) will be deducted and retained by CITY and the remainder of the progress estimate, less the amount of all previous payments since commencement of the work, will be paid to CONTRACTOR. When CONTRACTOR has, in the judgment of DPW, faithfully executed fifty percent (50%) or more of the value of the work as determined from the bid schedule, and if DPW finds that satisfactory progress has been and is being made, CONTRACTOR may be paid such sum as will bring the payments of each month up to one hundred percent(100%) of agree/forms/city const/4-03 10 the value of the work completed since the commencement of the PROJECT, as determined in its sole discretion by DPW, less all previous payments and less all previous retained amounts. CITY's final payment to CONTRACTOR, if unencumbered, or any part thereof unencumbered, shall be made thirty-five (35) days after the acceptance of the work and the filing of a Notice of Completion by CITY. Payments shall be made on demands drawn in the manner required by law, each payment to be accompanied by a certificate signed by DPW, affirming that the work for which payment is demanded has been performed in accordance with the terms of the Agreement and that the amount stated in the certificate is due under the terms of the Agreement. Partial payments on the contract price shall not be considered as a acceptance of any part of the work. 15. WITHHELD CONTRACT FUNDS, SUBSTITUTION OF SECURITIES At the request and at the sole cost and expense of CONTRACTOR, who shall retain beneficial ownership and receive interest, if any thereon, CITY shall permit the substitution and deposit therewith of securities equivalent to the amount of any monies withheld by CITY to ensure performance under the terms of this Agreement. . 16. AFFIDAVITS OF SATISFACTION OF CLAIMS After- the completion of the work contemplated by this Agreement, CONTRACTOR shall file with DPW its affidavit stating that all workers and persons employed, all firms supplying materials and all subcontractors working upon the PROJECT have been paid in full and that there are no claims outstanding against the PROJECT for either labor or material, except certain items, if any, to be set forth in CONTRACTOR's affidavit covering disputed claims, or items-in connection with Notices to Withhold, which have been filed under the provisions of the statutes of the State of California. agree/forms/city const/4-03 1 1 17. WAIVER OF CLAIMS The acceptance by CONTRACTOR of the payment of the final certificate shall constitute a waiver of all claims against CITY under or arising out of this Agreement. 18. INDEMNIFICATION, DEFENSE, HOLD HARMLESS CONTRACTOR hereby agrees to protect, defend, indemnify and hold harmless CITY, its officers, elected or appointed officials, employees, agents, and volunteers from and against any and all, claims, damages, losses, expenses,judgments, demands defense costs, and consequential damage or liability of any kind or nature, however caused, including those resulting from death or injury to CONTRACTOR's employees and damage to CONTRACTOR's property, arising directly or indirectly out of the obligations or operations herein undertaken by CONTRACTOR, caused in whole or in part by any negligent act or omission of the CONTRACTOR, any subcontractors, anyone directly or indirectly employed by any of them or anyone for whose acts any of them may be liable, including but not limited to concurrent active or passive negligence, except where caused by the active negligence, sole negligence, or willful misconduct of the CITY. CONTRACTOR will conduct all defense at its sole cost and expense and CITY shall approve selection of CONTRACTOR's counsel. This indemnity shall apply to all claims and liability regardless of whether any insurance policies are applicable. The policy limits do not act as a limitation upon the amount of indemnification to be provided by CONTRACTOR. 19. WORKERS' COMPENSATION AND EMPLOYER'S LIABILITY INSURANCE Pursuant to California Labor Code Section 1861, CONTRACTOR acknowledges awareness of Section 3700 et seq. of this Code, which requires every employer agree/forms/city const/4-03 12 to be insured against liability for workers' compensation; CONTRACTOR covenants that it will comply with such provisions prior to commencing performance of the work hereunder. CONTRACTOR shall obtain and furnish to City workers' compensation and employer's liability insurance in an amouni-of not less than the State statutory limits. CONTRACTOR shall require all subcontractors to provide such workers' compensation and employer's liability insurance for all of the subcontractors' employees. CONTRACTOR shall furnish to CITY a certificate of waiver of subrogation under the terms of the workers' compensation and employer's liability insurance and,CONTRACTOR shall similarly require all subcontractors to waive subrogation. 20. INSURANCE In addition to the workers' compensation and employer's liability insurance and CONTRACTOR's covenant to defend, hold harmless and indemnify CITY, CONTRACTOR shall obtain and furnish to CITY, a policy of general public liability insurance, including motor vehicle coverage covering the PROJECT. This policy shall indemnify CONTRACTOR, its officers, employees and agents while acting within the scope of their duties, against any and all claims arising out or in connection with the PROJECT, and shall provide coverage in not less than the following amount: combined single limit bodily injury and property damage, including products/completed operations liability and blanket contractual liability, of One Million Dollars ($1,000,000) per occurrence. If coverage is provided under a form which includes a designated general aggregate limit, the aggregate limit must be no less than One Million Dollars ($1,000,000) for this PROJECT. This policy shall name CITY, its officers, elected or appointed officials, employees, agents, and volunteers as Additional Insureds, and shall specifically provide that any other insurance agree/forms/city const/4-03 13 coverage which may be applicable to the PROJECT shall be deemed excess coverage and that CONTRACTOR's insurance shall be primary. Under no circumstances shall said above-mentioned insurance contain a self-insured retention, or a"deductible" or any other similar form of limitation on the required coverage. 21. CERTIFICATES OF INSURANCE: ADDITIONAL INSURED ENDORSEMENTS Prior to commencing performance of the work hereunder, CONTRACTOR shall furnish to CITY certificates of insurance subject to approval of the City Attorney evidencing the foregoing insurance coverages as required by this Agreement; the certificates shall: 1. provide the name and policy number of each carrier and policy; 2. state that the policy is currently in force; and 3. promise to provide that such policies will not be canceled or modified without thirty (30) days' prior written notice of CITY. CONTRACTOR shall maintain the foregoing insurance coverages in force until the work under this Agreement is fully completed and accepted by CITY. The requirement for carrying the foregoing insurance coverages shall not derogate from the CONTRACTOR's defense, hold harmless and indemnification obligations as set forth under this Agreement. CITY or its representative shall at all times have the right to demand the original or a copy of all the policies of insurance. CONTRACTOR shall pay, in a prompt and timely manner, the premiums on all insurance hereinabove required. CONTRACTOR shall provide a separate copy of the additional insured endorsement to each of CONTRACTOR's insurance policies, naming CITY, its officers, agree/forms/city const/4-03 14 elected and appointed officials, employees, agents and volunteers as Additional Insureds, to the City Attorney for approval prior to any payment hereunder. 22. NOTICE OF THIRD PARTY CLAIM Pursuant to Public Contracts Code §9202, CITY shall provide notice to CONTRACTOR of receipt of any claim filed with CITY or a court of competent jurisdiction which arises out of performance of this agreement within ten(10) days of receipt of such claim or claims. 23. DEFAULT AND TERMINATION If CONTRACTOR fails or refuses to prosecute the work hereunder with diligence, or fails to complete the work within the time specified, or is adjudged bankrupt or makes an assignment for the benefit of creditors or becomes insolvent, or violates any provision of this Agreement or the Contract Documents, CITY may give CONTRACTOR notice in writing of its intention to terminate this Agreement. Unless the violation is cured within ten (10) days after such Notice of Intention has been served on CONTRACTOR, CITY may, without prejudice to any other remedy it may have, terminate this Agreement upon the expiration of that time. Upon such default by CONTRACTOR, CITY may elect not to terminate this Agreement; in such event CITY may make good the deficiency in which the default consists and deduct the resulting costs from the progress payments then or to become due to CONTRACTOR. If it is subsequently determined by a court of competent jurisdiction that CITY's termination of this Agreement, under this Section was wrongful, such termination shall be converted to a termination for convenience under Section 23 and any damages shall be assessed as set forth in Section 23. agree/forms/city const/4-03 15 24. TERMINATION FOR CONVENIENCE CITY may terminate this Agreement. for convenience at any time with or without cause, and whether or not PROJECT is fully complete upon seven (7) calendar days written notice to CONTRACTOR. In the event of termination, under this Section CITY shall pay CONTRACTOR for value of work in place on the PROJECT through the termination period plus seven and one-half percent(7 '/2 %) for overhead and profit less all such payments already made. Such payment by CITY shall be CONTRACTOR's sole and exclusive remedy for termination by CITY for its convenience and CITY shall have not further obligation to CONTRACTOR. 25. DISPOSITION OF PLANS, ESTIMATES AND OTHER DOCUMENTS CONTRACTOR agrees that upon: completion of the work to be performed hereunder, or upon expiration or earlier termination of this Agreement, all original plans, specifications, drawings, reports, calculations, maps and other documents pertaining to this Agreement shall be delivered to CITY and become its sole property at no further cost. 26. NONASSIGNABILITY CONTRACTOR shall not sell, assign, transfer, convey or encumber this Agreement, or any part hereof, or any right or duty created herein, without the prior written consent of CITY and the surety. 27. CITY EMPLOYEES AND OFFICIALS CONTRACTOR shall employ no CITY official nor any regular CITY employee in the work performed pursuant to this Agreement. No officer or employee of CITY shall have any financial interest in this Agreement in violation of the California Government Code. agree/forms/city const/4-03 16 JJ 28. STOP NOTICES; RECOVERY OF ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS CITY shall be entitled to all reasonable administrative costs and necessary disbursements arising out of the processing of Stop Notices, Notices to Withhold, or any similar legal document. This obligation shall be provided for in the labor and materials payment bond required of CONTRACTOR. CITY may charge an administrative fee of One Hundred Dollars ($100) for every Stop Notice filed in excess of two (2), regardless of whether or not CITY is named in an action to enforce such stop notices. CITY may set off any unreimbursed cost or expense so incurred against any sum or sums owed by CITY to CONTRACTOR under this Agreement. 29. NOTICES Any notices, certificates, or other communications hereunder shall be given either by personal delivery to CONTRACTOWs agent (as designated in Section 1 hereinabove) or to CITY as the situation shall warrant, or by enclosing the same in a sealed envelope, postage prepaid, and depositing the same in the United States Postal Service, to the addresses specified below; provided that CITY and CONTRACTOR may designate different addresses to which subsequent notices, certificates or other communications will be sent by notifying the other party via personal delivery, reputable overnight carrier or U. S. certified mail-return receipt requested: TO CITY: TO CONTRACTOR: City of Huntington Beach ATTN: 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, CA 92648 agree/forms/city const/4-03 17 30. SECTION HEADINGS The titles, captions, section, paragraph and subject headings, and descriptive phrases at the beginning of the various sections in this Agreement are merely descriptive and are included solely for convenience of reference only and are not representative of maters included or excluded from such provisions, and do not interpret, define, limit or describe, or construe the intent of the parties or affect the construction or interpretation of any provision of this Agreement. 31. IMMIGRATION CONTRACTOR shall be responsible for full compliance with the immigration and naturalization laws of the United States and shall, in particular, comply with the provisions of United States Code Section 1324a regarding employment verification. 32. LEGAL SERVICES SUBCONTRACTING PROHIBITED CONTRACTOR and CITY agree that CITY is not liable for payment of any subcontractor work involving legal services, and that such legal services are expressly outside the scope of services contemplated hereunder. CONTRACTOR understands that pursuant to Huntington Beach City Charter Section 309, the City Attorney is the exclusive legal counsel for CITY; and CITY shall not be liable for payment of any legal services expenses incurred by CONTRACTOR. 33. ATTORNEY'S FEES In the event suit is brought by either party to construe, interpret and/or enforce the terms and/or provisions of this Agreement or to secure the performance hereof, each party agree/forms/city consd4-03 18 f-tea shall bear its own attorney's fees, such that the prevailing parry shall not be entitled to recover its attorney's fees from the non-prevailing parry. 34. INTERPRETATION OF THIS AGREEMENT The language of all parts of this Agreement shall in all cases be construed as a whole, according to its fair meaning, and not strictly for or against any of the parties. If any provision of this Agreement is held by an arbitrator or court of competent jurisdiction to be unenforceable, void, illegal or invalid, such holding shall not invalidate or affect the remaining covenants and provisions of this Agreement. No covenant or provision shall be deemed dependent upon any .other unless so expressly provided here. As used in this Agreement, the masculine or neuter gender and singular or plural number shall be deemed to include the other whenever the context so indicates or requires. Nothing contained herein shall be construed so as to require the commission of any act contrary to law, and wherever there is any conflict between any provision contained herein and any present or future statute, law, ordinance or regulation contrary to which the parties have no right to contract, then the latter shall prevail, and the provision of this Agreement which is hereby affected shall be curtailed and limited only to the extent necessary to bring it within the requirements of the law. 35. GOVERNING LAW This Agreement shall be governed and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of California. 36. DUPLICATE ORIGINAL The original of this Agreement and one or more copies hereto have been prepared and signed in counterparts as duplicate originals, each of which so executed shall, agree/forms/city const/4-03 19 irrespective of the date of its execution and delivery, be deemed an original. Each duplicate original shall be deemed an original instrument as against any party who has signed it. 37. CONSENT Where CITY's consent/approval is required under this Agreement, its consent/approval for one transaction or event shall not be deemed to be consent/approval to any subsequent occurrence of the same or any other transaction or event. 38. SURVIVAL Terms and conditions of this Agreement, which by their sense and context survive the expiration or termination of this Agreement shall so survive. 39. MODIFICATION No waiver or modification of any language in this Agreement shall be valid unless in writing and duly executed by both parties. 40. ENTIRETY The parties acknowledge and agree that they are entering into this Agreement freely and voluntarily following extensive arms length negotiation, and that each has had the opportunity to consult with legal counsel prior to executing this Agreement. The parties also acknowledge and agree that no representations, inducements, promises, agreements or warranties, oral or otherwise, have been made by that party or anyone acting on that parry's behalf, which are not embodied in this Agreement, and that that party has not executed this Agreement in reliance on any representation, inducement, promise, agreement, warranty, fact or circumstance not expressly set forth in this Agreement. This Agreement, and the attached Exhibit "A", contain the entire agreement between the parties respecting the subject matter agree/forms/city const/4-03 20 of this Agreement, and supersede all prior understandings and agreements whether oral or in writing between the parties respecting the subject matter hereof. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed by and through their authorized offices the day, month and year first above written. CONTRACTOR CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH, a municipal corporation of the State of California Mayor By: ATTEST: print name ITS: (circle one)Chairrnan/President/Vice President City Clerk AND By: APPROVED AS TO FORM: print name ITS: (circle one)Secretary/Chief Financial Officer/Asst. City Attorney Secretary-Treasurer INITIATED AND APPROVED: REVIEWED AND APPROVED: Director of Public Works City Administrator agree/forms/cRy const/4-03 21 CITY FUNDED CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT BETWEEN THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH AND FOR TABLE OF CONTENTS Page No. 1. STATE OF WORK;ACCEPTANCE OF RISK 1 2. ACCEPTANCE OF CONDITIONS OF WORK;PLANS 2 3. COMPENSATION 4 4. COMMENCEMENT OF PROJECT 4 5. TIME OF THE ESSENCE 4 6. CHANGES 5 7. NOTICE TO PROCEED 6 8. BONDS 6 9. WARRANTIES 6 10. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR 7 11. LIQUIDATED DAMAGES/DELAYS 7 12. DIFFERING SITE CONDITIONS 9 13. VARIATIONS IN ESTIMATED QUANTITIES 10 14. PROGRESS PAYMENTS 10 15. WITHHELD CONTRACT FUNDS,SUBSTITUTION OF SECURITIES 11 16. AFFIDAVITS OF SATISFACTION OF CLAIMS 11 17. WAIVER OF CLAIMS 12 18. INDEMNIFICATION,DEFENSE,HOLD HARMLESS 12 . 19. WORKERS' COMPENSATION INSURANCE 13 20. INSURANCE 13 21. CERTIFICATES OF INSURANCE;ADDITIONAL INSURED 14 22. NOTICE OF THIRD PARTY CLAIM 15 23. DEFAULT&TERMINATION 15 24. TERMINATION FOR CONVENIENCE 16 25. DISPOSITION OF PLANS,ESTIMATES AND OTHER 16 26. NON-ASSIGNABILITY 16 27. CITY EMPLOYEES AND OFFICIALS 16 28. STOP NOTICES 17 29. NOTICES 17 30. SECTION HEADINGS 18 31. IMMIGRATION 18 32. LEGAL SERVICES SUBCONTRACTING PROHIBITED 18 33. ATTORNEY'S FEES 18 34 INTERPRETATION OF THIS AGREEMENT 19 35. GOVERNING LAW 19 36. DUPLICATE ORIGINAL 19 37. CONSENT 20 38. SURVIVAL 20 39. MODIFICATION 20 40. ENTIRETY 20 ATTACHMENT #2 ' 'j: CLTY OF HUNTIN"GTON B. E"AGH INT.E, RD TARTMEN'TAL : C.O:MMLI.NIC'AT.:ION 'TO: Honorable";Mayor Dave Sullivan and--City,Council: Members,. City Ad,rninistrato,;.,Penelop (breth Graft, oPa::,: ..: o, ert,. ,., eardsley; hector of,�Public Works';. . DATE: Janua ` 30..:2bb6 SUBJECT Public arnprovernents =.Brush Drive Recently; several residents of Brush'Drive haye contacted City Council Members; concerning a capital improvement project budgeted this year to reconstruct their street The residents are questioning the need for the,improvements atihe expense of their mature street trees They also have questioned the extent 6 ,the planned work:as well as the validity of the.petition process that the City:has;used for.'many years to`help prioritize Ahe,jbudgeting of;funds,forthis,purpose.,.This memorandum provides'some` background.' alternatives to resolvingahe:matter and a staff recommendation. Petition:Process;Background s:a:mean wh 98 a sb ch aimi ted:fund :co f s u d be..alt ocatedao_re a'ir�r.y esidenti`al'> ` . ..... . . .. streets:darna� e'd>b ::Cit arkwa trees :the City,develo ed:an inf� rm .' ' �, 9: ...,. Y Y,p. Y. _ Y . P o, al process wherein residents were invited'to submit:petitions to:establish their position,on a waiting list for project funding 'A,75 percent property:owner support was established as.the miriim.iam threshold fo'r.the list to be:accepted This list soon became quite extensive;with ,most petitions facing:a;"1:0;:year, or longer; backlog: There was:no,specific".format.estabhshed for.the petition as it.,i'- intended-to,serve:.as: uideline;for,`staff not:a'Le� al,docdhiL-nt:;:The:advanta a of a.- etition:.list is that'once staff verifies the infrastructure defects as being sufficiently extensive.to"warrant.repair; it provides a semblance of order: .Ifiallows�staff to:prioritize the need.;based,on a;verifed' , community.interest.in proceeding with.what hevitably`will have a.significant aesthetid impact on'their:neighbochood `Convefsely; however, the petition process;arguably PI the,City;on notice of conditions existing on the' street;"some of which may be potentially,hazardous to pedestrians or motorists ;;)a 6 resulting from City trees presents a liability exposure to tfie City regardless.of whether a petition exists .S6,,Ohd' a street is placed on a priority list, the City must reasonably address any hazardous conditions To place.a street with acknowledged'defects,on apriority list;.,budget funds for.the.necessary repairs and, s 1.ubsequently,elect to:take no action; may compromise the City's potential liability,for any subsequent accident that may be attributable to the Mayor Dave Sullivan and:Clty Council January 30, 2006` Page 2 unrepaired defects. There is�no•effective way to remove a street from the priority list except by completing;"the improvements: "°•B` rush'Drive,Hi'storV:' x. Brushx Dnye:between:lNaite:Lane and`Newland'":Street fronts..50"homes;and has.:been on. he:�petition�lisfi since,l 995.- it reached the Number T,positi.on and became a budgeted protect' FY 20.05L06 ,The'.street'has 29 mature:frees that, due to their. invasive root:structures, have damaged the adjacent:sidewalks:`an- or curbs:and gutfers and mush•be removed to permanently eliminate"furthe'r;d"amage. .Over.the•years, '13 younger crape myrtle (Lagerstroemia`indica)arees:have been plan ed and.wo.uld':be. : protected.with:'this project.'.Forty (40),0dditional crape:myrtles;would be:added::upon: completion of the street work. .... .... ... <; :On Se tember 27;:2005 after:staff circulated notices:of the im `endin ro eet; Ms':,: p. ._.. p 9 p., 1: Teresa Chaque, a,resident of 8392 Brush Drive„appeared before the City Councilis Beautification, Landscape & Tcee subcommittee;:expressing:her:"oppositron:to fhe .project acid asking the Cityao-invalidateahe.1995 petition, citing::various„imperfections in the,process,, ,She.represented�•that there was a large'—,rp eritage•other neighbors who simil8idy'opposed"the;project, stating that she had her own petition underway, in opposition to:the project;;claiming that;at that:tirime, she.had.obtained 2$:sign,atur.,es. After discussion; the:City:Council subcommittee referred:"the matterao staff to e..'valuate th e.situation after a meeting with fhe residents, scheduled for October 27; 2005 This irvas;the.meetin rautinel ,held:fo descn6e the ;,ro'e( f defiails to the`• 9,. ;.:y P., 1. the"construction schedule;and" respond to.questions Unfortunately; this.,meeting-': received.,sparse attendance, with"approximately.6 properties"represented: . Subsequent to,ahe neighborhood meeting, M,s. `Cfiaque;appeared before the City Council on November 21,20'05, reiterating,her concerns and stating that'she was speaking for numeroius propertyowriers on BrushDnve.' "Council members asked"•.that staff provide atlditional.information to,them before any..coristructio.n work proceeded: =;. On Janua _ :1:3,;;2006;;with no substantial o osition:aside:frorh"that_oU s ;Chaque;; ry, pp wrote her a letter (copy attached) responding to all her concerns acid indicated that I ., mtende&to peoceoO with the project. On January. 23, 2006, Ms Chaque responded to rny.letter and,,Jbr the:first time;submitted several:petitions In opposition to the protect;: dated Sepfember.200'S: Subsequently;staff and Council Members`.have received e mail mesa es;and hone calls from a number of residents, su ortiri Ms Cha ue's g p pp 9 q osition :: A.copy.of Ms Chaque's January 23, 2006.letterand her petitions are attached: ..Staff examined these and:confirmed,that approximately 64 p:ercent,of the property owners 4. Mayor Dave S'UIIivan;,and city.council,: January,30, 2006. Page 3 appearto be'supportive of.removing the project-from the contract to be:submitted;to.the Council,;. or:action on,Fekiruary 6; 2Q06 Biddin- f rocess Bidsawere`op'ened om- ecember& 20.0&_ The:.contractspecifications require that le` islative act ion:on`.the.contract be:com "I eted;:within;60-_calendar:da saterefore 9 p Y.. , February 6, 2GO6'1s:the:deadline;for.City`Council:action:"'Because of�the current Instability in cohstruction materials prices, the successful low bid contractor is.not, amenableto,ex 9 tendin .th'e:contr-actaward date: There:are 24.oth"er streets:included. in , this'contract; totaling:$36 millronT so,:aosrngthis .id would;:be"very unfavorabl"e:: Bids prices for this contract:are.based on a.:per lot"quantity, so, opportunities are favorable:for.negotlating:with:tlie:contractor:on:a change order:basis't0 alter the work locations=depending.on the site:conditions and vicinity of the`replac"ement locations. ••Alternatives Available for. Resolution Several alternativesare available.for.,conside'ration in resolJ. ving:this:matter 1 Award the contract on: Fe 'ruary.6, 20.06,:as.originally proposed; essentially remoying•alf curbs and,gutters Wong;Brush Drive;, rerrioving.,"and replacing;most ofahe,sidewalks; a'nd removing:adl the mature trees.,re p a* in them withcrape my ides", O.utcocn,e:,This would be.consistent with the established process and.budget,kiut would>be objected;to by a rriajoriy.of the.affected neighborhood 2. Awardth'e contract on February'6, 2006,,with a".Council minute action to:remove Brush Drive from,the project list and:direct,staff to negotiate a change order with the contractor toI.'iincorporate into the project the. ne. most.feasi - e. highest priority.•atreet:on the petition list Outcome:. To'do`nothing on Brush Drive,.at this point, would leave an unacce ,able liability:.ex :osure to the>ci :: ;. . :. p p, `Award<the`con tract on Februa 6 200,6 as:bid includin .:Brush.Drive"`with Council minute actionto d"efer the work,on Brush Drive subject to.resolving the concerns with the!::residenfs;::which ma` result::in a:modified' ro ect...,., Outcome: This robably.would .be p received unfavorably by the residents and , would:leave:too many unresolved issues'than would be advisable during:the canstru.ction.phase: Mayorbave Sullivan,and City Council January 30; 2006 Page 4 4 Award a-contract : s:in Alternative No: 2, above, remo:ving.Brush:.Drive from the. project list-and order that;project funds,be redirectedfor staff,to efFect.satisfactory repairs to the sidewalks along`the Brush Drive project area";,to":mitigate:.any. immediate safety issues. " Spot.r6pairs Ito curbs.and;"gutters.would:be. included: where necessary fOr safe::ty concerns:and rees would:be protected as much as feasible; to accomplish the necessary""safety repairs,without:leaving any tree in. an unsafe;tondition. Qutcome This would allow the City.,to protect;its: adequately.:from liability exposure,while minimizing the undesirable impacts on the neighborhood as . expressed"by:many:prope'rty owners: This:alternative should be:acceptable to everyone e.street W6uld then have to be periodically monitored for. reoccurring,defectS.. Recommend6d'Adtibris'l. :The idealaituation is one in;which the;needs:and desires of a`neighborhood's residents are,consistent with the Citys responsibilities to protect'",the public safety and welfare Staff recommends tnat:this:can:be accomplished with Alternative No 4; :above:and will be,prepared"t' i nake:.that recommendation"on Februa ry 6; 2006`. ;:Attachments January I , 2006 letter- Robert"F. Beardsley to Teresa Chaque, January 23, 2006 letter and attachments - Teresa.Chaque.to Robert F :Beardsley , D'avid:Webb>De u Dire&br.:bf Public.Works : . Jim Jones, Maintenance Ope.ratigns Manager JasonChurchill, Streets & 1=acilities Supennsor Randy Menzel,:::Tree Supervisor CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH 2000 Main Street P . O . Box 190 California 92648 Robert F. Beardsley, P.E. Department of Public Works Director (714) 536-5431 January 13, 2006 Ms. Theresa Chaque 8392 Brush Drive Huntington Beach, California 92647 Subject: Public Improvements - Brush Drive Dear Ms. Chaque: This letter is to conclude our determination, after several prior discussions with you, concerning the pending street improvements and city street tree replacement project on your street. This work has been budgeted, designed, and bid for construction and I am preparing to bring this matter to the City Council for contract award in February. You expressed a number of concerns about the validity of the 1995 Brush Drive petition process; whether the process was handled appropriately; whether the current residents are supportive of the project; and whether the project needs to be accomplished in the manner we have proposed. It is important to recognize that the petition process, in fact, is only a means by which the City is placed on notice by residents of,possible defects that need to be corrected and we have used this process to help us prioritize our limited funds available for this work. Regardless of the petition process, proper maintenance of the public right-of-way is our obligation and, therefore, it is our responsibility to proceed with corrective work, both as a responsibility to maintain the city infrastructure and to protect the city from liability exposure. We have provided notices to the residents regarding this project and, I understand, that you have also made direct contact with your neighbors. Clearly, there have been very few concerns expressed about this project and I have to conclude that the level of support of the neighborhood is at least equivalent to that of the original petition. Licensed civil engineers, licensed land surveyors and certified arborists all have examined the condition of the street and the street trees on Brush Drive and have determined that this project cannot be accomplished by selective replacement of damaged concrete and a limited number of trees. As my staff discussed with you and your neighbors at the pre-construction meeting on Theresa Chaque 1-23-06 8392 Brush Drive Huntington Beach CA 92647 Robert Beardsley Department of Public Works City of Huntington Beach ` 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Dear Mr. Beardsley, Attached is a copy of your letter I am responding to. The first point I would like to make is about the statement in the letter: "Clearly, there have been very few concerns expressed about the project and I have to conclude that the level of support of the neighborhood is at least equivalent to that of the original petition."This statement is false and the level of support against having the trees cut down is very substantial. Enclosed please find copies of all the signatures I have obtained for the "Tree Saving Petition". One signature counted from each residence totals 38 out of 50 lots, or 64%. Also enclosed is a copy of the 1995 "Tree Removal Petition" which has been highlighted to get some points across. Note that the last 2 pages on this petition, containing most of the signa- tures, have no petition statements at the top of the pages, as the first page does. This Fall I spoke with Robert Valeski, the person who circulated this 1995 petition, after he had returned from 4-5 months in Wisconsin. I found true what I had suspected all Summer from talking with the long time residents. Mr. Valeski stated to me during a phone conversation on 10-27-05 that he was unaware that ALL the trees would be taken out when he circulated the 1995 petition. He had circulated the petition under the guise of having sidewalks and gutters re-done only and did not inform the residents about every tree being taken out. Since the petition statement was not on the paper they were signing, the residents were unaware of what they were actual- ly signing. Of course they had no objections to getting new sidewalks and gutters, as was told to them verbally, by a trusted neighbor. But they did not know all the parameters involved. Many of the residents who signed the 1995 petition and now have signed the new Tree Saving Petition have substantiated this fact and are not happy about it. Some were at the community meeting on 10-27-05. From the 1995 petition I have found and have highlighted in the colors listed: 2 signers were renters (pink). 14 owners have reversed their decision by signing the new petition (green). 21 lots have changed owners (yellow). 2 remain to be contacted (orange): 6 valid signatures are left (unmarked). There are 50 lots affected by the project. 45 people signed the original petition. 2 of the (known) renters have to be disqualified leaving 43 signatures. To come up with what the level of support could have been in 1995, if the residents had known the facts, I've subtracted the 14 owners from the petition that have reversed their decision because they were mislead. That leaves 29 signatures, or 58%, at best. It would most likely be even less than 58% because so many owners from 1995 are gone and we don't know what their opinion would have been should they had known the truth about the trees. The 32, or 64%signatures on the Tree Saving Petition is substantial and definitely beats 58%. Anything over a majority usually rules in a democratic society. Furthermore, because 21 of the 1995 signees have sold their houses and are gone, their sig- natures now are no longer valid. By omitting the signatures of the 2 renters and the 14 who have signed the Tree Saving Petition, only 6 to 8 valid signatures are left on the old petition. On to my second point from the letter which reads in this sentence: "it is important to recog- nize that the petition process, in fact, is only a means by which the City is placed on notice by residents of possible defects that need to be corrected and we have used this process to help prioritize our limited funds available for work." Since the city was falsely placed on notice of possible defects on Brush Drive, then the notice needs to be dropped. The majority of the residents on Brush Drive feel that the small amount of defects that the street may have does not warrant cutting down all our trees. This street's sidewalks and gutters are in far better condition than most in the entire neighborhood. It is quite obvious. There isn't much here to trip on and sidewalk liability cases are far easier to be gotten on Bryant St., Lambert St. or many other streets in our tract. So if limited funds are to be prioritized, they would be best placed on another street that desperately needs it. Although it is conscientious of the city to honor petitions submitted by citizens, it is probably wise for someone to go out and visit the streets affected by the petitions and make an evaluation as to which streets actually are in better or worse shape, prior to taking action. We feel that the value of our trees far outweighs the value of perfect sidewalks and gutters. The citizens know that it is technically possible to repair the sidewalks and gutters without destroying the trees. We are extremely disappointed by the unwillingness to consider any alternatives or to work with the citizens by the city Public Works Department. I would like to submit the new Tree Saving Petitions to-the proper office. I was, and still am, unsure about when to submit them since the City Council had put the project on hold with the City Attorney, per the Nov. 21, 2005 City Council meeting, which I spoke at. Thank you for your time. Sincerely, Theresa Chaque c: Mayor and City Council Penelope Culbreth-Graft, DPA, City Administrator David Webb, Deputy Director of Public Works Jim Jones, Maintenance Operations Manager TREE REMOVAL PETITION DATE: Tvt We, the homeowners on �•ea.SfAl would like to have the trees removed from the parkway. The trees are cracking the sidewalks, curbs and gutters, and roots are clogging sewer lines. Also,the trees have raised the sidewalks,curbs and gutters,causing a tripping hazard and water to stand in streets. We would like to have trees removed, repairs made to sidewalks, curbs and gutters, and frees replaced with ones that do not cause these problems. NAME ADDRESS 71 S 3 7 V ADDRESS i • • 13iqv:S (Y DR , 1 .. 1 - T � 6 9 .31N 9 b Atoll I / -� I)�� _ -IRI c4e L UASH Dt! ■ Pit.. A�" Pe AZ�4 `. NAME ADDRESS ��ft�'Ci 3 of3 Q� 8coa. fit. SOS Z �iCt�a H -9e oe, OF Mv r /(o F72 algl*tv &511 s4mr cad 16 5 7 t dlo4teop Lo+ 8352 13 (DV . I Brush rive Tree Saving Pe..Aion Date: SE& 17�5 We, the homeowners on Brush Drive, Huntington Beach, CA are opposed to the Tree Removal Petition dated July 1, 1995. We do not want our trees removed from our parkway in order to refurbish the gutters and sidewalks. The majority of these imperfections on the sidewalks and gutters are minimal and don't affect walking or drainage when raining. Alternative methods other than removing the trees are to be used to repair any cracks or raised concrete. Name Address Signature Thece-sc4 ChCLgv Print name Signature \IIFIq 07 Print naqle t S. aSh lie �rYe�c� �AUn-�Ir)ti -fibt� 6�._-g y � � C-A 1126il-l Print name S' ature _ 2,2 Print name rl�� ell Wrint name Print name _21 CA- Print name S tur Print ARMe Brush Drive Tree Saving Petition Date: 61 -7 d We, the homeowners on Brush Drive, Huntington Beach, CA are opposed to the Tree Removal Petition'dated July 1, 1995. We do not want our trees removed from our parkway in order to refurbish the gutters and sidewalks. The majority of these imperfections on the sidewalks and gutters are minimal and don't affect walking or drainage when raining. Alternative methods other than removing the trees are to be used to repair any cracks or raised concrete. Nam Address Signa _Y1r1I z �W l CK-- Print name .✓":1 SI afure ifoe Prin4r, /0-6�-+�-- Print name Sigr ChcrffreH „ a SV R6-4 ��C 6� �y t Print name (/{�y �V)Ia,K41 C �� r SignatureQOJ Print name nj Signature ` Print name 41 ZP f ature —�u Print name Signature Print name Brush Drive Tree Saving Petition Date: 0 We, the homeowners on Brush Drive, Huntington Beach, CA are opposed to the Tree Removal Petition dated July 1, 1995. We do not want our trees removed from our parkway in order to refurbish the gutters and sidewalks. The majority of these imperfections on the sidewalks and gutters are minimal and don't affect walking or drainage when raining. Alternative methods other than removing the trees are to be used to repair any cracks or raised concrete. Address Signature Print name 6y 72- U Signature Le ZirA Le*(� P�am� IF ft JG N N ]Fur` MFl phi 1�� Print name 2'-4 Ak--�� { -2- Signature Print name Signal Print name c S I B gush C. Signature Pe-feu Inc Ze //a t) C6 C -� -Re-,OCA A � Print name a l 12_ x-us h 'Dr+v e. Signature I5, -±f.,JJN Re-6Eco Print name C 7Z��l ,1 S' ure n Print name Brush Drive Tree Saving Petition Date: 9 - l 1 0 We, the homeowners on Brush Drive, Huntington Beach, CA are opposed to the Tree Removal Petition dated July 1, 1995. We do not want our trees removed from our parkway in order to refurbish the gutters and sidewalks. The majority of these imperfections on the sidewalks and gutters are minimal and don't affect walking or drainage when raining. Alternative,methods other than removing the trees are to be used to repair any cracks or raised concrete. Name , Address Sign�ture t a< J�' cz)ke—f A Print n i Signa > Print name J _ Signa a _T -1),510 Res Print name 7) _ Signature Print name Si eture 67 Print name lo",-,— &X, S 1�z Signa ,� CA 2DW2 Print name Si amen S lure Print name ��'�' Brush. Drive Tree Saving Petition Date: We, the homeowners on Brush Drive, Huntington Beach, CA are opposed to the Tree Removal Petition dated July 1, 1995. We do not want our trees removed from our parkway in order to refurbish the gutters and sidewalks. The majority of these imperfections on the sidewalks and gutters are minimal and don't affect walking or drainage when raining. Alternative methods other than removing the trees are to be used to repair any cracks or raised concrete. Name Address Wv- A k I mature Print name ow S' azure _ Print name T - - 165 S" reG L/ Pr�n nke Signature I 11 \ Pru nt ame f Signahre Print name Signature Print name Signature Print name Signature Print name aenx VY; 1'MmvutjJj ' 111, Brush Drive Tree Saving Petition Dater We, the homeowners on Brush Drive, Huntington Beach, CA are opposed to the Tree Removal Petition dated July 1, 1995. We do not want our trees removed from our parkway in order to refurbish the gutters and sidewalks. The majority of these imperfections on the sidewalks and gutters are minimal and don't affect walking or drainagc when raining. Alternative methods other than removing the trees are to be used to repair any cracks or raised concrete. Name �� •� -.,r,,, Address 1&(2,.02._,.�Zr� r-rear` Stgfi-NK PM%name sin Print name .Sig"-rum vtint namc Print name &Vmirure t name y�nuturo Heim ua"oe .4puture Print Dine Print name ATTAC H M E N T #3 CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH o .. City Council Interoffice Communication G CX%, To: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members o-� "— L From:. Don Hansen, City Council Member s Date: April 10, 2006 n a Subject: H-ITEM FOR APRIL 17, CITY COUNCIL MEETING - _ N RECONSIDERATION OF BRUSH DRIVE STREET REPAIRS STATEMENT OF ISSUE: On February 6, 2006, staff presented a contract award recommendation for repairs to numerous streets on the residential street repair petition list. One of these streets, Brush Drive, between Waite Lane and Newland Street, has been on the list since 1995, finally receiving budget funding for repairs this fiscal year. Once preliminary planning for the construction documents commenced and the property owners on Brush Drive were notified of the impending work, some of them became concerned over the anticipated removal of numerous city-owned parkway trees adjacent to their homes. These residents challenged the validity of the petition because it was over 10-years old; alleged that many of the original petitioners had moved; and claimed that most owners signing the petition did not understand the extent to which the damaged curb and sidewalk replacement would necessitate removal of the adjacent parkway trees. When the contract bids were presented on February 6, and after extensive discussion, Council directed staff to "...(a) effect satisfactory repairs to the sidewalks to mitigate immediate safety issues, (b) perform spot repairs to curbs and gutters where necessary for safety concerns, and (c) protect trees as much as feasible to accomplish the necessary safety repairs without leaving any tree in an unsafe condition." Subsequent to the Council's action, the property owner who circulated the original petition requested that the City Council reconsider its action and proceed with the full repairs. This owner asserted that the adopted alternative direction, which he felt was recommended merely to satisfy a vocal minority of objecting residents, will lead to an inadequate result- is not responsive to the majority of the Brush Drive homeowners; and is unfair to the original petitioners. Referring to the attached map, there are 50 properties along Brush Drive in the improvement area. Twenty-nine (29) of these properties have mature trees whose root systems are causing damage and are susceptible to removal. The remaining 21 properties either have no parkway trees or have recently planted parkway trees that are not at risk. Staff would expect to plant some 40 new replacement trees (with some corner lots receiving two trees) if the entire project were to be reconstructed as originally planned. H-ITEM FOR APRIL 17, CITY COUNCIL MEETING-RECONSIDERATION OF BRUSH DRIVE STREET REPAIRS 4/10/2006 Page 2 CITY OBLIGATION: The City Attorney has provided an opinion that there is no process in place by which the city or the adjacent property owners along Brush Drive may revoke a petition process. In fact, regardless of the existence of any petition, the city remains primarily responsible for public safety issues in the public rights of way. RECOMMENDED ACTION: The City Council should reopen discussion on its prior action relative to its direction to staff concerning Brush Drive. The project should be reconsidered in light of reconstructing the entire street's curbs and gutters as (1) the only permanent solution to the street's drainage problems; (2) the only way to eliminate the liability exposure to the City from tree damage; and (3) the means to uphold fair and equitable treatment of the adjacent property owners who took the initiative to improve their street and have been waiting nearly 11 years for this project. Attachment xc: Penny Culbreth-Graft, City Administrator Paul Emery, Deputy City Administrator Bob Hall, Deputy City Administrator Joan Flynn, City Clerk Robert Beardsley, Director of Public Works f 1 i Heil Ave. f S Mw 16M , t ISM 1QSVl 7eaCt 1 "M 1ad4 , Iwo , teat eee2 ta61 � IOU "M to" te621 1dS72 1632, low tart taSg 1ae3e 1012 e6e21 1e672 16e11 16St2 1g11 tdffit - to ,aea2 taee, 115p Sail 1a n 1ediI IsSu ,am Ism tW1 ; + ` ism "at s`4 "m ,ea11 Ism 1031 3 red t 1e6t2 Ka„ D tired IeaN 8 16Sa tYM, 5 t�S ,tSt, r 1 ,6�N 6 Ma 10" teed IWAV leas' +e842 teed+ ,aa6t teed+ m tam, MR tars, 4 M83 less, am 41 14 "m aril lap Ism teen ` ' 3 rase+ ides+ a idea: reds+ tme2 +oe+ ism ,ease +eaea t6de2 rasa, teem twat tatRt ,asat ,air ,ea7: =% Ion fan$ ,aan "M "M ,ear, tears tasr, usrt ,aeat ,eau Y IT IT IT 17 IT I$ O� gg _ �_t x_ _ g Q_ _p pe(1 _■e g § tall teats 1 1d - Bryant Dr. 1°a't gg yy y�rr gg gg p § g Q .y 9 g q 16a12 taeal ,a n 0134 Lambert Of. ego- h S & 91 IS B a 'aa°' low saral ,crn y s ,arzs }; ,a73: 1e7s1 Ca IcaTe�rfry Dyer. �{ gyp y1 ; U 1574 1a7e, 16742 ,aJN t67i2 9 S g id N �6 it ,a n 16741 tam ma, � 15741 ma C i iWsmim 1t4o70w1 sm ZQ 1951 tern am . � � � ,p32 fatal ,eret twat 1ms a '°� g �' rent Jc ,am ,a77+ .fie ,ass ' 1an2 Taal ,erm ,oar tans Z3 tam ten, larn ` c , ci +eeas farad, lare2 ta701 nt7at tare G ttaa2 t,�101 -2 twat ea>� g '"A taut 1 ,soot team tae,n ,taet 1a7e, � _ _ � taee, � ,dar2 Ise,it � 1ew 4 s ,aem seed+ co fae2t 1ae22 tell ' +Gal g $ 16a a0t, Jaen , 60 'sm 8 taa12 taatl _ Lancaster Dr. g-T-F Arnett Dr. M a , A S ,� " ' tax+ ,®eL ism GOLDEN WEST 7°°e1 ' +dada 1ar1 lessCHURCH OF CHRIST idea, Ism 16"1 teems 100, ["I (RANCHO VIEW SCHOOL) 'd°°' , $ pelts 65 ton rn „1w, +eo, t®1 >oa ,am m ism tarn Tggamar�Dr. ,deli+ ism 1031 16°" (16940 B ST.j $ ,des+ ^ tor, Wamer Ave. 4 i Y Existing tree to remain(14) o Existing tree to be evaluated(29) X No existing tree in parkway(7) Y 263 ATTAC H M E N T #4 '�� CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH INTERDEPARTMENTAL COMMUNICATION TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members VIA: Ray Silver, City Administrator FROM: Robert F. Beardsley, Director of Public Works . DATE: July 22, 2002 SUBJECT: Rubber Sidewalk Pavers One year ago (7/14/01), the L.A. Times published an article about a sidewalk replacement product developed by a city of Santa Monica employee using recycled rubber instead of concrete. The intent of this product is to provide increased flexibility and, thereby, allow tree roots to encroach under the walkway without creating the safety problems often encountered in raised concrete sidewalk sections.. Mayor Pro tem Boardman provided copies of this article to all Council Members and asked that my.staff. investigate the feasibility of installations in Huntington Beach. We researched the manufacturer of.this product and obtained a sample section for testing;. The product .;. was found to be very dense and substantial; however, it proved to have very low durability.against surface wear. So, before we purchased and installed this product.in the field,:we found that,the city"of Long Beach had already done so: I asked my staff to visit Long Beach bast month; to observe:fihe: product in an actual field application. The notes and a photo from the field visit are attached,:giving`.. some pros and cons and comments from staffs observations. The rubber sidewalk modules, alone; cost$6.95/square foot plus tax ($0.52). Another$0.58/sq. ft. is needed for restraints to hold the panels in place and, then, $0.10/sq. ft. is required for glue. This totals $8.15/sq. ft. To compare with concrete, the cost to remove the old sidewalk must be factored in at $1.50/sq. ft., which brings the total cost to $9.65/sq. ft. Compared to the total cost for concrete sidewalk at$3.50/sq. ft. (including removals), the rubber product is nearly three times more expensive. The rubber sidewalk is available for a limited time under a"pilot project discount" at substantial savings; however,with the disadvantages we found in this product, my recommendation is to not pursue an installation in Huntington Beach at this time. RFB:cf, Attachments: Field Notes(undated)from Long Beach site investigation Photograph from Long Beach installation c: William P.Workman,Assistant City Administrator Paul Emery,Deputy Director of Public Works James Jones,Maintenance Operations Manager Charles Davis,Landscape Architect David Webb,City Engineer t� Just a few words in regards to the field trip we went on. Here are a few pros and cons of rubber sidewalks that we looked at in Long Beach: Pros 1. The recycling benefit, it would assist us in meeting our current requirements. 2. The flexibility of the product. 3. The ease of handling the product. 4. The product would be adequate for pedestrian traffic. Cons 1. Transitions A. We witnessed a razor scooter that had difficulty with the transitions. B. Roller Blades may also have problem with the transition. 2. Compaction in some areas would be hard to accomplish. 3. Consolidation of concrete appears easier than the use of this product. 4. Water appeared to cause adverse conditions with the product ( edges were starting to curl after just two months ). 5. Residents in the apartment complex where rubber sidewalks were instated are not pleased with the sidewalk. 6. The cost of rubber product and instalation was about twice the cost concrete sidewalks. A few things that are uncertain: 1. Longevity of the product. 2. Where would be an appropriate location for the product. 3. Would soil test have to be completed for compatibility with this product. 4. Stain resistance such as surf wax, paint, gum, tree dropings. PF7 7 6 �� ;�' � � � � , of_eir .��• ,-. by _ � � ,. ... • 1, US b Ai r.. r;4 Mm z r ,� r `y `• Mg ED 4y c t Sz e 1;.3t' X„rt'�, " �, r 1 r t s ,j7 s`4 s. ass •> _ �"'' �a` xr� ��'�.7 �r-�,�+ '� s,� bayr r,'�.'h�'�r t'- ,�� *r,�f! � ,�""�zm� , e• �y �4 R �4, .�-.1 l .;�.,9 4✓Swwsi.u.YnY-+b%b.+xrw...FtuW:G.wii♦tank�w.....-na�•' r :. wm, Y-t.y i m. s x i•`"yia° � - �rT �} ,�4.! � S ji hism v� ^s1kk '' d nk`Y Ta't 9Y p�:h € e b�A;lyi,+✓b F"X s^�E.f Yfn Sf V s�- w e s,a� bl 3 a $s �� �r fiyT`4�' 1,�1�'7�,t ry`y ,3 ;•� .. a s«rk t +. �. }v ' r - x���1`. s .. � ��..'.: ,��y ft.�+�t�'.y�'t-F'-a.�,�zY� )r'�a"23 ��,� {�>`°v�y:'r. �r ��'� � f4 „� •,tl`�'t�` v� -""'F hT e..-rK�. '� '�...#, :.a .. ,c e. _.<+� � t � ..t; 3 of 3, ^rr yr� a-• a�4 f<4 k a -e �'- w��ky`r�r 3't -� 4� I�.v x���,�;.�• 4`t�.. t�� ��"str F '�'�`•:r�sir��;��:>+�! y"(�?,�{i'�.� s s, �.t o-xr�r�;���rt>�..§'§�'�E °��-r��'�`�.+��,. � ,•!. rY� �u�w3; •.eta�3 .pa aK y"" �, f .�, B",rN�.�,.i''r��T+�� � a.y�"�`���'�4�:�`��a�`fi)��se�"`��.y��3�f,) ,� $...FGic �)k�'�`a '� t•�,.t �- r,.�r ti�,� .. � � � �t� .�-' �xa�r l�, -�-^x�•� �zi:�8t^9i�Y%'�: �f'.''$J'a-,�' .. i!'�. '" r kz,.,s-sr"s kk `tea`rt}x'c :.. N,r�n Y €e-¢�' {"t ,�3.. t p Yts t".�k�L '�F z<•n �"^. 'e;.t,f..a" ,L"fir.,"* :"•r; :.'£ ♦.. -. >� 3' �. �_. �' ,.L,;i„ '..,." .�a t ,s _.4 `�` i ,twx"� :: �" � �. ' ma's �i* v"; fie«"ate, ^vt. '1, ,p,, a s r :',F;se ,1N s 3 -7 - �'� :� �:,+Lj•`;{ s ,:i:• i r sau.xa'''' an.'` `t a,t v;' fi At nrk.''""r- y !�') °a ?',: a9" +a .T z, ..y F s. .5... 7 3` :�aiass,..r1k'ga .}S,"-' )'sr $;,"�n I )�+ r s a...: `� ,A f" ' -w r v t.� >tE:'�.�:. � a' t�s !i"'.�r;;#s�tm,�*c.E�.'P�,s L.�r�,��'��+._:��•9� �» n s"� x � 9�yt� - 3 f k �a C: t :<���4� .�r�t5`+r Apr . ..hs�"z•F3� :zn +z�";#�'e�� ^5� , r�ti�� '�'L 4 r �t i � r'r'�-�"',y�"'�`����y�� h �j"a£h X` g^"rr�+'t'�`�gk�r�;��t�;kt ��',�y+c� ��.�•, , _tick '�"�'�=ns���,i'�A ,*�.z��� ;r�sst��. sS�''S�#a.g.F's'... +S� e�.�x5�,2>r:-�r,r,� .:s� i... ,� )'�E ✓ra �`.s"`� y-k �`*gg` � .� .i„-`� r. !. . t` v Y t.4 "t,3u trt..�` �� S ust a ;,�Wit'.s ` s �i' , a a+ik, ., °,r4'- irx s.r.,-�3' ... z S ''" ; - 5+�ax#_ "1' s ,tt 5 c ? ` � r` rz�•T:C � a3 �.,�y, �3 �, � .,,s ��`ez"��sy-EN Al •-�a .�F+- r.; ) mm at ,y5 E ,�,. "°,i) 'r 't a1 a� t Y,) frlyy,` .'A�. r +i'rt4.{ .` j•'�' rk' 'iti Y: ~zr�.$Y'` k„¢�� x r.:r R `"#I 'at` .ria"� .�" �v : i' S,q,.$>• :`:; uS , x. ? y *a ,q is n,r '' 8 ,y'.e r:b 5 �`v'c t iX '� TF 4 t'�r♦ "t K 14 zr )i�K,e1 �" b 4t sf A $R'-3x }M^T $1 nr{•e " >rctyt yY 5 W. ,�. 1� a ME, ! + r -t } .,' w n bb .c: }+%a? to t" 8" iq k rY+a�t.M. r fi } {y Si ✓ { �4 f r ' ,44 ) ,r d":',4 S -� � _.r q. -y. t k d. �2 � •. �+ y# � 7� } :fi r br�.. r'r t n fit- 'Y A`vrx;4 14 g:� RCA ROUTING SHEET INITIATING DEPARTMENT: Public Works SUBJECT: Reconsider Reconstruction Options for Brush Drive COUNCIL MEETING DATE: May 15, 2006 RCAI ATTAC H M E NTS 'STATUS Ordinance (w/exhibits & legislative draft if applicable) Attached ❑ Not Applicable ❑ Resolution (w/exhibits & legislative draft if applicable) Attached ❑ Not Applicable ❑ Tract Map, Location Map and/or other Exhibits Attached ❑ Not Applicable ❑ Contract/Agreement (w/exhibits if applicable) Attached ❑ (Signed in full by the City Attorney) Not Applicable ❑ Subleases, Third Party Agreements, etc. Attached ❑ (Approved as to form by City Attorney) Not Applicable ❑ Certificates of Insurance (Approved by the City Attorney) Attached ❑ Not Applicable ❑ Fiscal Impact Statement (Unbudgeted, over $5,000) Attached ❑ Not Applicable ❑ Bonds (If applicable) Attached ch l No icable ❑❑ Staff Report (If applicable) AttachNot Applicable ❑❑ Commission, Board or Committee Report (If applicable) Attached ❑ Not Appiicable ❑ Findings/Conditions for Approval and/or Denial Attached ❑ Not Applicable ❑ EXPLANATION FOR MISSING ATTACHMENTS REVIEWED RETURNED FORWARDED Administrative Staff Assistant City Administrator Initial City Administrator Initial City Clerk ( ) EXPLANATION FOR RETURN OF ITEM: Only)(Below Space For City Cierk's Use RCA Author: REQUEST FOR LATE SUBMITTAL (To accompany RCA's submitted after Deadline Department: Public Works Subject Reconsider Reconstruction Option for Brush Dr. Council Meeting Date: Date of This Request: 5/4/06 REASON (Why is this RCA being submitted late?): Special request of the City Council made at the May 1, 2006 meeting to be on the May 15, 2006 meeting agenda EXPLANATION (Why is this RCA necessary to this agenda?): CONSEQUENCES (How shall delay of this RCA adversely impact the City?): Will not be under consideration at the May 15, 2006 meeting as requested b City Council. Signature: Approved Cl Denied Department Head Penelope Culbreth-Graft City Administrator Late Suhmittal.dot 07/14/94 Page 1 of 1 Esparza, Patty From: Dan Joyce [danjoyce@rubbersidewalks.com] Sent: Monday, May 15, 2006 12:07 PM To: Pesparza@surfcity-hb.org Subject: Rubbersidewalks for Item C2A Dear City Official, It has come to our attention that our product, Rubbersidewalks, was recommended for the Brush Street project, however your public works staff stated our product was experimental based on their evaluation and memo on July 22, 2002. Yes, four years ago our product was experimental because it was new to the market. However that is not the case today. We are a proven solution. Since 2002, over 80 cities have installed the product with over 130 installations and over 100,000 sf. For example, the city of Santa Monica uses our product for 10% of their sidewalk maintenance program. The City of Santa Monica is also a "Tree City" similar to Huntington Beach. In addition, the City of Santa Monica just completed a 5 year study of our product in the spring of 2005, proofing that our product was a solution near tree roots. In addition, larger cities such as Seattle, San Francisco, and Washington, DC are using our product. State agencies such as the California State Parks and the California EPA are also using our product. Designed primarily for use in place of concrete where sidewalks are adjacent to trees, Rubbersidewalks can save your urban trees, eliminate trip and fall lawsuits, and reduce costs of chronic concrete break out SAVING cities, thousands of dollars. Our company is the leading supplier of non-concrete sidewalks in the United States. The revolutionary product was introduced in 1998 as a fundamentally new system: modular sidewalk paving. Rubbersidewalks offers an alternative to concrete: heavy-duty, sidewalk-worthy rubber paving tiles (pavers) made of 100% recycled tire rubber. In addition, we can train your contractor or your city crew to install our product. Attached please find our flyer, press releases and marketing materials. In addition, I've included a link to a special news story about our installation in the City of Santa Monica, CA. Just click onto the link below. http:Hkcbs.dayport.com/viewer/viewerpage.php? Art ID=5860&tf=KCALvideo player.tpl&PreloadContract DefID=6&Contract DefID=5&Category ID=85 will be unable to attend the meeting this evening but would like to educate the city council, the public works department, the city arborist and your citizens that there are solutions to your problems besides cutting down your trees. I'm willing to make myself available for a future city council meeting, if needed. In the meantime, lease visit our website for more information at www.rubbersidewalks.com. Thank you for your time and consideration. Dan Joyce Vice President Rubbersidewalks, Inc. Please visit us on our website: www.Rubbersidewalks.com Ph/Fx 949-362-5200 5/15/2006 Rubbersidewalks Competitive Points List Rubbersidewalks Concrete Asphalt 20+ years 5 years 2 years B0DOC-1Za00oc7 $15.00/sf $12.00-$15.00/sf $5.00/sf - 2 man crew 4 Man Crew 4 man crew 100 Percent 0 percent 0 percent ' �Q�.J000pOUC_JW�� Low vibration High vibration High vibration 2'x2.5' x 1.875", Fit to Form Fit to Form 2' x 2' x 1.875" 7cjG 10.8 Ibs per sq ft @ 46.87 Ibs per sq ft @ 24.4 Ibs per sq ft @ 1 7/8" 2" 2" Safety-All: No change Cracking, staining, Uncoated: Moderate discoloration Chipping and holes fading, discoloration Possible settling �nli]-fnY�C3 requiring sub-base Lifting, breaking Lifting, deterioration adjustment gnl@93&M9@U@R Under 200 g @ 5 ft Over 200 g Over 200 g causes less injuries r�al�a�,r�oo 100 percent 0 Percent 0 percent Mo)Dm m @wDOW Best Worst Better pwq@wBest Worst Better (.54" per hour) (.00" per hour) (.20" per hour) .90 Dry/.65 wet .60 Dry/.50 Wet .50 Dry/.25 Wet None Lime, Heat Island Effect Resin, Heat Island Effect 2622 West 157'Street Gardena, CA 90249 310 515 5814(Phone)310-515-5314(Fax) www.rubbersidewalks.com The resources of the earth are limited. Recycling is limited only by our imagination and effort. I "f n '4 :.+ r y ��l 'dl, s4 s �,� FPS-•k"'," ' ^ia .mom .5>x ``�^'�;;i I s,,, " a ' � a +r r',r'•4 �a� a ti.say. ' �k r,o�,• r-, 4__• •a �. � _� �. �',{_ ' or Rubbersidewalks.com I for information: " _ •� ' '`= ; , : Lindsay Smith = - � Ph3105155814 n _ r Fax 310 515 5314 2622 West 151th Street Gardena,California 90249 E-mad: ° _ Rubbersidewalks@aol.com ��r[Y'� `- '�� �_- `•tom II>�l°JI.U' ,17�S�a' .�'P+' � "' - ;4 Easy and economical to install, tree roots grow less invasively beneath Rubbersidewalks offering a new strategy for sidewalk maintenance. Ak �.- . Rubbersidewalks are " ,•'y s made of 100%recycled _ California tire rubber. Each square foot uses the rubber from one I passenger tire. i r a tea"-� P If Af Rubbersidewalks modularity allow roots to be periodically inspected and trimmed. These materials made possible through the support of the California Integrated Waste Management Board RUBBERSIDEWALKS-MUNICIPAL Modular recycled-California-fire-rubber sidewalk paving system ` PRODUCT DESCRIPTION Rubbersidewalks are high-density paving files made with recycled California tire crumbed rubber combined with poyurefiwne binder and colorant,then molded with heat under compression. This produces a strong and durable part that meets all requirements of sidewalk-worthiness,includes stable grade,non-vibration in compliance with ADA requirements,and high coefficient of friction for non-skid both dry and wet.Rubbersidewalks are hard enouigh for skateboarders,rolerblades and spikes,yet resilient enough to provide safe passage for all pedestrian and wheeled traffic.Pavers are available in various sizes arid colors,and are reversible.Expected fie per face is minimum seven years. RUBBERSIDEWALKS'INSTALLATION&MAINTENANCE SERVICES Rubbersidewalks are quoted as installed product in most mgkms.Services Include:•Site registration and tracking in Rubbersidewalks'database•Maintenance schedule¬ification of maintenance due•Photo documentation of site,before and after•Site Banner•Educational materials for local school district Available upon request:•Consulting arbodst services•Long tern Maintenance Service•Press Wit materials Material: 100%recycled California crumb rubber,Urethane resin binder&coloraid Sue: 2'x 2.5'x 1.875"S sq it(for 4 or 5 foot wide sidewalks),2.5'x S'x 1.875"12.5 sq ft,2'x 2'x 1.875 4 sq it Weight; 10.8 lbs per square foot(54 His;135 His;44 His) Surface: Crumb rubber molded texture,all edges V8"radius(both sides identical) Colors: Gray,terra cotta,green,blue,black,black with white chip(additional colors available upon request).Paver expected to darken slightly in the first two months then remain stable.UV lab tests show no change after two years.Surface appearance may vary due to inconsistence in granulated waste tire rubber. .0. Maintenance: Sweep,hose down or mop Weight load: 3,000 pounds per square inch Shock Attenuation: Under 200 g at 5'.Fall significantly less to cause injury or broken bones than on concrete. } x g p Coefficient of friction: ASTM C 1028: 0.90 dry;0.65 wet(OSHA guidelines require that all walking surfaces satisfy a 0.5 Static Coefficient of Friction rating.In new a construction and alterations,ADA specifies that a 0.6 Coefficient of Friction is recommended on all path of travel surfaces.) Taber-Abrasion: ASTM C 501:270(indicates high resistance to wear) �k # Salt/Chloride: ASTM B117:No change in surface;no stain or residue Magnesium Chloride Soak: No change in surface;no stain or residue Hum, Xenon Arc Weathering No change after exposure to sunlight two-year equivalent Flame Spread ASTM E162: Index 131.18 at average temperature of 157.7 C(Surface flammability ANSI Z124.1 and Z124.1allows Index of 450 or ess)If exposed to open, constant fire,pavers are likely to smolder.Lit cigarettes,cigars or matches can burn on paver until they sell-extinguish. t Porosity: Permeable at module seams;immediate drainage of water into ground;minimal run off into storm drain x`== Freeze-Thaw: ASTM C 1026:Product exposed to 15 cycles of freeze-thaw at 0 Degrees for 90 days.No change.No facial defects.No signs of crazing,chipping, spailing or cracking.Product frozen at 0 degrees was subjected to impact with no change. ADA Compliance: Low vibration;concrete-to-Rubbersidewalks transition imperceptible;high coefficient of friction both dry and wet;surface hardness supports all pedestrian and wheeled traffic. Modularity: Rubbersidewalks is a modular sidewalk system.Pavers are interconnected and can be periodically opened for tree root maintenance. Other. •100%California recycled tire rubber,with polyurethane binder•Non-toxic.All components inert solids.No volatile organic compounds •Rubbersidewalks reduces sound of all pedestrian or wheeled traffic SOLE SOURCE Rubbersidewalks is a sole source product,developed exclusively by Rubbersidewalks,Inc.for the public right of way and other landscaping applications,marketed and manufactured by Rubbersidewalks,Inc.Rubbersidewalks modular sidewalk system has been tested and proven effective for use on public right of way applications(sidewalks,walkways,tree weld,and proven beneficial to the health and maintenance of urban trees. Rubbersidewalks,Inc.is a small,woman-owned California business. n, -ri TELEVISION NEWSPAPER ARTICLES Huell Howser "California's Green",2004 Los Angeles Times July 14, 2001 KTLA Morning News (Los Angeles), 2004 With Rubbersidewalks, Trees on the Rebound by Bob Pool a>i9th with Gayle Anderson Daily Breeze May 30,2001 KFI AM 640 Radio (Los Angeles), 2004 Cities go to the Mat for Old Trees by Traci Jai Isaacs with Gary Hoffmann Contra Costa Times May 26, 2002 'T`k New Sidewalks Bend Conventional Wisdom by Denis Cuff MAGAZINES Tree Care Industry October 2001 Rubber Sidewalks Saves Trees The Daily Telegraph July 16, 2001 by Dan Dale Rubber Paving gets to Root of Street Safety by Ben Fenton Natural Home Magazine Dec 2001 The Right Path Ventura Star Star November 2001 by Marsha Scarbrough Thousand Oaks Might Save with Sidewalks of Rubber by Julia Rogers LD. June 2002 Savvy Sidewalks-Where the Sidewalks Ends .Department of Public Works NEWS,City of Los Angeles February 13, 2002 by Michelle Taute DPW Experimenting with Rubbersidewalks by Marshall Lowe f . , 3 The resources of the earth are Ph 310 515 5814•Fax 310 515 5314. 2622 West 157th Street,Gardena,CA 90249 limited.Recycling is limited only E-mail:rubbersidewalks@aol.com•Web:www.rubbeFsidewalks com by our imagination and efforL.. .,.; i RUBBERfIDEU)ALRf, inc FACT SHEET: Rubbersidewalks are a cost-effective and environmentally sound solution to the chronic problems caused by tree-lined sidewalks. Cities across the country struggle with the public safety concerns and financial burdens posed by tree roots lifting concrete sidewalks. Rubbersidewalks' modular sidewalk system allows air and water to easily reach soil below, so trees develop less aggressive roots which can be easily maintained during periodic inspection. Rubbersidewalks currently installed nationwide: Over 50,000 square feet in over 60 cities. Average cost per square foot, including break out and installation: $15.00 Standard size: 2' x 2.5' x 1.8767 5 square feet, universal-use size Installation method: Interconnected, modular system Cost savings: • Rubbersidewalks eliminate injury and costly claims for trip and fall accidents • Concrete sidewalks cannot be "maintained". They must be completely demolished, off hauled, and replaced. • Rubbersidewalks maintenance is economical • Rubbersidewalks, Inc. tracks all installation sites for maintenance review, alleviating burden on city Benefits of Rubbersidewalks: • Saves the urban forest by eliminating need for tree removal • Modular system allows pavers to be periodically opened for inspection and easily reinstalled • Available in assorted shades and textures to resemble concrete, granite or adobe- colored pavements • Reversible pavers, last for at least 12 years of typical usage • Provides safe passage for all pedestrian and wheeled traffic • Directs water into soil thus reducing water run-off into storm drain • Resilient though firm, more comfortable and healthy to walk or jog on • Absorbs sound, reduces decibel level of foot and wheeled traffic • Safe, non-toxic and flame resistant • Can be used in tree wells as well as sidewalks • Excellent for use in temporary sidewalk situations, such as special events or construction sites Serves the environment: • One-square-foot of Rubbersidewalks recycles waste rubber from one passenger tire • In California alone more than 34 million passenger tires are disposed of each year creating 408 million pounds of waste rubber. • Each 20 square foot installation saves one tree from removal • Rubbersidewalks' pavers are recollected and recycled at the end of their life cycle Company: Headquartered in Gardena, California, Rubbersidewalks, Inc. was founded in 2001 by company president/CEO, Lindsay Smith. The product was invented by Richard Valeriano, public works inspector for the City of Santa Monica, where it was tested for more than three years before being offered to other municipalities. Today, Rubbersidewalks are being installed regularly in cities throughout the United States and Canada including California Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Oregon, New York, New Jersey, Vermont and Washington. Additional information is available at www.Rubbersidewalks.com. jr °'�, � 1. j I i F +.iGEf.QVVi1 ..1 f McKinney, TX San Francisco, CA Hawthorne,NY Wal-Mart New Rochelle,NY w Inglewood, CA Santa Monica, CA 2622 West 157u'Street Gardena, CA 90249 310-515-5814 PHONE/FAX310-515-5314 Email:rubbersidewalks(WaoLcom Web site:www.rubbersidewalks.com The resources of the earth are limited.Recycling is limited only by our imagination and effort. Cities Using Rubbersidewalks Olympia,WA Alameda,CA Seattle,WA Albany,CA Tacoma,WA Garden City,ID Burbank,CA Agora,CO Berkeley,CA Wal-Mart Cornwall,VT Camarillo,CA Cerritos,CA ~ ^�`1 --— Chicago,IL Hawthorne,NY Concord,CA •J ilr-�New Rochelle,NY Dublin,CA Newark,NJ Fillmore,CA Fremont,CA � Washington,DC Glendale,CA Inglewood,CA Savannah,GA Irvine,CA Lemon Grove,CA Lompoc,CA Long Beach,CA Los Angeles,CA p• Tallahassee,FL LA Unified School District S Hollywood,FL Manteca,CA McKir ey,TX Menlo Park,CA Wal-Mart Morro Bay,CA Motion Pictures Fund Novato,CA Oakland,CA Redwood City,CA Riverside,CA Sacn Over 100)000 sf in 130 Installations San Fernaernanddo,,CA San Francisco,CA San Leandro,CA San Marino,CA Santa Barbara,CA Santa Fe Springs,CA Santa Monica,CA Thousand Oaks,CA Ventura,CA Page 1 of 1 Esparza, Patty From: Bazant, Denise Sent: Monday, May 15, 2006 1:35 PM To: Esparza, Patty; Lugar, Robin Subject: FW: Trees Late Communication -----Original Message----- From: Dapkus, Pat Sent: Monday, May 15, 2006 1:04 PM To: Bazant, Denise Subject: FW: Trees -----Original Message----- From: Ray Dieckman [mailto:corsairl@adelphia.net] Sent: Monday, May 15, 2006 8:00 AM To: city.counciI@surfcity-hb.org Cc: Pat Dapkus; Cathy Fikes Subject: Trees Please remove the trees on Brush Drive. I've owned my house since 1972 and have hated the tree from the start. On 9-12-01 1 fell because of the tree lifting and destroying my driveway. The city didn't help me at all,you could clearly see the tree roots were at fault. We have replaced the driveway and had the roots cut back but was told it would continue to happen. PLEASE REMOVE MY TREE Thank you, Sherri (Lombardo) Dieckman 8092 Brush Drive HB My Mother leaves their now Naoma Schmicker and too wants the tree remove. 714 375 8931 I can be reached at 949-300-9273 5/15/2006 r EPA:Global Warming:Heat Island Effect 05/15/2006 04:30 PM o' Recent Additions I Contact Us I Print Version Search: ' EPA Home > Global Warming >Actions > Local > Heat Island Effect Heat Island Effect HmL Print Screen What is the Heat Island Effect? On hot summer days, urban air can be up to 10`F hotter than the surrounding countryside. Not to be confused with global climate change, scientists call this phenomenon the "heat island effect." Heat islands form as cities replace natural land cover with pavement, buildings, and other infrastructure. Increased urban temperatures can affect public health, the environment, and the amount of energy that consumers use for summertime cooling. • Public Health: Heat islands can amplify extreme hot weather events, which can cause heat stroke and lead to physiological disruption, organ damage, and even death — especially in vulnerable populations such as the elderly. • The Environment: Summertime heat islands increase energy demand for air conditioning, raising power plant emissions of harmful pollutants. Higher temperatures also accelerate the chemical reaction that produces ground-level ozone, or smog. This threatens public health, the environment, and for some communities may make it harder to meet federal air quality goals. • Energy Use: Because homes and buildings absorb the sun's energy, heat islands can increase the demand for summertime cooling and raise energy expenditures. For every 1° F (0.6° C) increase in summertime temperature, peak utility loads in medium and large cities increase by an estimated 1.5-2.0 percent. Cities in cold climates may actually benefit from the wintertime warming effect of heat islands. Warmer temperatures can reduce heating energy needs and may help melt ice and snow on roads. In the summertime, however, the same city may experience the negative effects of heat islands. Fortunately, there are a number of steps that communities can take to lessen the impacts of heat islands. These "heat island reduction strategies" include: • Installing cool or vegetated green roofs • Planting trees and vegetation • Switching to cool paving materials Visit EPA's Heat Island Site for more information on what local governments and citizens can do to address the problem of rising urban temperatures. Climate I Emissions I Impacts I Actions I News and Events I Resource Center I Where You Live I Visitor Center About the Site I Site Map I Glossary EPA Home I Privacy and Security Notice I Contact Us Last Modified on Thursday,July 22nd, 2004 URL: yosemde.epa.gov/oar/globalwarming.nsf /content/ActionsLocalHeatlsland Effect.html http://yosemite.epa.gov/oar/globalwarming.nsf/webprintview/ActionsLocalHeatislandEffect.htmI Page 1 of 2 Nate Sumner's Real Estate Update 05/15/2006 02:18 PM Tim Your REALTOR: June 2005 Copynght@ 2005 Realty All Rights Reserved. es TM Nate Sumner Smart, Experienced Real Estate Guidance Think Green: Trees a Big Plus For Your Home As you embark on your house-hunting ventures, chances are the contenders canopied by mature trees will make the top of your list. Or, if you're buying a new home, you're probably anxious to get those trees planted to reap the awards in the years ahead. The benefits of trees are numerous. They increase property values, sometimes as much as 20 percent, according to the National Arbor Day Foundation. On average, trees add between 5 to 7 percent to the value of the property- the U.S. Forest Service says the added value results in an extra $5,000 per lot. Trees also help cool your home. The USFS says trees that are placed strategically around buildings can reduce air conditioning needs by 30 percent and can save 20 to 50 percent in energy used to heat a home. Growing Greener Cities, A Tree Planting Handbook (Global Releaf, Living Plant Press, Los Angeles, 1992), says the average base value for a tree with a 10-inch diameter (measured 4.5 feet from the ground) is $1,729. A tree with a 30-inch diameter has an average base value of$15,554. The values are adjusted based on species, location in relation to the house, and condition. As you set out to plant a tree, the International Society of Arboriculture recommends you consider: • The reason the tree is being planted. Will it be for shade, fruit, or seasonal color? • How much space you have. Determine whether a small-, medium- or large-sized tree would fit best. Be sure to consider overhead, underground wires and utilities. • Clearance for sidewalks, patios and driveways. • Soil conditions. Is the soil deep, fertile and well drained, or is it shallow, compact, and infertile? Many nurseries and garden centers will provide - for a minor fee - an evaluation of your soil's fertility and pH. The test is typically returned with recommendations for improving your soil with fertilizers or soil amendments. e Exposure. How much sunlight will the tree have? Most woody plants need full sunlight; some do well in light shade. Few perform well under heavy shade http://realtytimes.com/ni/nipages79/2trees.htm?opendocument&[D=natesumner Page 1 of 2 REGavtiu FROM 4;'�= v "-•Yrc� AS PUBLIC RECORD FOR COUNCIL MEETING OF 22IA49 / '""a CITY CL K OFFICE JOAN L.FLYNN,CITY CLERK BRUSH DRIVE STREET IMPROVEMENT PETITION Date: S O We, the homeowners on Brush Drive, want the city to go ahead.with.the proposal'to fix our street as originally approved by the City Council in October of 2005. We realize this will mean removing the trees. We do not want spot repairs, as this will only temporarily solve some T problems and will create others. Name: Address: 4. 53 3 z Ig"", s L ep 5. 6. 7. ( 9. V pra4-01 10. ( � 11. i 12. v S 131 ZII 2 s 14. � ( 15. �bL�7 09 C,�Q� ( ( 16. ��Sal' ��`�YT b(/Z, C 18. y Q BRUSH DRIVE STREET IMPROVEMENT PETITION Date: We, the homeowners on Brush Drive, want the city to go ahead with the proposal to fix our street as originally approved by the City Council in October of 2005. We realize this will mean removing the trees. We do not want spot repairs, as this will only temporarily solve some problems and will create others. Name: Address: s 1. 2. d 1 I rrC��✓ �'� 2 !/C.0 S�il !�� l� '�j �we( 1 4. 5. S6-u5 zZ ���17 6. 7. 6�Z �Dom- ffi� cam.. Y7 -Pt- -"�j l l 10. Cr9A6rl 12. Zo PLlei �► 13. J 14. Ab-ioll G7�/l f Z 3 16. r 17. ..E BRUSH DRIVE STREET IMPROVEMENT PETITION We,the homeowners on Brush Drive,want the city to go ahead with the proposal to fix our street as originally approved by the City Council in October of 2005. We realize this will mean removing the trees. We do not want spot repairs, as this will only temporarily solve some problems and will ate others. Date: Name: Address: A��K 2. 4 A .� 03. 4i�-Oz' 4. IV 5. S' 8. � tv ���JZ- Rt5 fe 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 5/15/2006 Current Homeowners Signing to Fix Brush Dr. Completely O y c^, Yes No Reason n 1 8402 Brush 2 8392 3 8382 4 8372 a 5 8362 7D 6 8352 7 8342 split 8 8332 9 8322 m 10 8312 11 8302 12 8282 . 13 8272 14 8262 15 8252 16 8242 17 8232 18 8212 19 8202 20 8192 21 8182 22 8162 23 8152 24 8142 Not home 25 8132 26 8122 Not home 27 8112 28 8102 Rental 29 8092 30 8082 31 166rTrippi 32 165 33 165 34 165 35 165 36 165 37 16571 Wheeler 41 38 16572 Wheeler 39 16572 Monroe 40 16571 Monroe 41 16571 Hart 42 16572 Hart 43 16571 Potter 44 16572 Potter 45 16572 Waite 46 16601 Waite 47 16591 Waite 48 16572 Irby 49 16571 Irby 50 16602 Irby 80% of homeowners want this -("'r . I sty p _ .,'?•i�l�'.,�q dant� � =� - p7 011 � � T f sue, I "r R/r f ' jI — 5� W7 ^� _ • �`&� tit a �� f • ti r1 ft - Y. t J I C • .'r 1 \ I }f F RECEIVED FR AS PU9LIC ROF ECORD FOR C�OU z�FFICi A�EETN�p • t JOAN L CL CITY CLERK( c rz�s r" r X ,°yta•�td �'S�a}�,i raj�- �Y�"n�Fr��.� �""� t i � - �' tL ti+'�'{ a ��� {�'�C �'S�<< '4i '_'" � i•.r y'�`.b"nc %y, );�i '•.1. k-`�'}.i ro• ;.,,�.>,.14,^. h ky�k�� ,;,�{;' . a�a'F�;`.;':4 .a4'r�-r'�e�ti.•,}�q.�,�w7, �^'S 4, � Run "' �4�b�'Pti�'kx "�yki�1.'�`+�y^ � nY✓�,' .�M�t�i+k^V Y, `y�w, 'k��'0rv,i's i�. L i `7i' �'��7 �,, rbw 4F�i" � ',Y�M� i�•,`^ 'J.6' '��1� �.��1. "r, v� e� d Yr. _ arY. g� F A t - r r (( P �c IV r tir ri �� 4 ,,tiu 9 � :_'_ - •mow`' fe,x '. V D P,��t„i f �3"'` x T'= R ,� ,.. - -^ �• "�j.l� 146114.4 t• t to 3, s€fir � a� ��4�.} ���>�� y,♦ ��->��� . �r v� � n /�1 �_ q �j"'' � Qom`• � • r • V1� RECEIVED FROM AS PUBLIC RECORD/FOR CouN iL ME � Brush Drive Petition Name Remo v: 112 CITY ERK OFFICE JOAN L.FLYNN,CITY CLERK A '-7 1 , , homeowner of the residency at Name t- 1(�05-7 vv" \ ,\ �Huntington Beach California, 92647 Address want my name removed from the July 1, 1995 Brush Drive "Tree Removal Petition" on file with the City of Huntington Beach, California. Signed Date 1( 3 6 tC/ .Print name -ro . � My name is Mini e,O/q Ct . I live at the corner of Brush Dr. and Newland St. I would like to ask you to fix our street completely. • The big tree in front of my house is causing sewer problems. I have to call a plumber several times per year to clear out the tree roots. • One tree root is going under my block wall fence and causing damage. • I have lots of standing water which smells bad and is unhealthy for US. • My sidewalk needs repair so I don't fall • It is OK with me to take out my big tree, because it is the cause of the problems. Thank you very much. I hope you will do this for our street. C- I R UCH G- 0 7 RECEIVED FROM, AS LIC RECORD FOR-COUNCIL COUNCIL M OF / �o0 C41YCLEW OFFICE BAN L FLYNN,CITY CLERK RECEIVED FROM AS PUBLIC RECOM FOR COUNCIL MEETI1` OF CITY CLW OFFICE JOM L.FLYNAI.CITY CLERK Brush Drive Petition Name Removal I , ti �- , homeowner of the residency at Name Huntington Beach, California, 92647 Address want my name removed from the July 1, 1995 Brush Drive "Tree Removal Petition" on file with the City of Huntington Beach, California. Signed Date Print name Brush Drive Petition Name Removal I Stel A e-n';-0 , homeowner of the residency at Name I Z ruS h Ve- , Huntington Beach, California, 92647 Address want my name removed from the July 1, 1995 Brush Drive "Tree Removal Petition" on file with the City of Huntington Beach, California. Signed Date auZ (p Print name Brush Drive Petition Name Removal I , cm 'Q �Q,r1�ir ® , homeowner of the residency at Name 2- �'c'uS �1 �r ��- , Huntington Beach, California, 92647 Address want my name removed from the July 1, 1995 Brush Drive "Tree Removal Petition" on file with the City of Huntington Beach, California. Signed Date I (p Print name ECE I FED Brush Drive Petition Name Reffftff 11 PM 2; 06 C!T Y G'l L E,Fli IT,° 0 I , B ea� rl r , homeowner of�`the Tresidency at Name 2. 1—IA SIB D Huntington Beach, California, 92647 Address want my name removed from the 2006 "Brush Drive Street Improvement Petition" on file with the City of Huntington Beach, California. Signed Date 5 — � i Print Ck R e V)Vf-0 name KODCO -4\ 0-t � P rl atU-f e e S W o L-k-kJ Oly "IV Brush Drive Petition Name ReTSVO Is w 11- 09 I , fW07 KLI'LAA9 , homeowner of the residency at Name �� ► , Huntington Beach, California, 92647 Address want m name removed from the 2006 "Brush Drive Street Improvement Petition" on fil with the Ci f HunlingjO Bea h, California. Signed Date_ I 0r 0 Print AV ri L IiAZM name ��i�bnl O I/V/ 1APro IZ- Cam' i`c5r1h 1�eatcL E Brush Drive Petition Name Removal° �.VIIV, or I , rd, h uJ r, i n , homeowner of the residency at Name 1 SIT 1'�0��-� , Huntington Beach, California, 92647 Address want my name removed from the 2006 "Brush Drive Street Improvement Petition" on file with the City of Huntington Beach, California. Sign ate- l Date Print �-J► C� name � C 1� ED pal 11� 09 Brush Drive Petition Name tt v L t�i 3ITy OF to G homeowner of the residency at Name Huntington Beach, California, 92647 Address want my name removed from the 2006 "Brush Drive Street Improvement Petition" on file with the City of Huntington Beach, California. Signed Da 9te - PrintL��-- name RECEVED FRC,'M U v B AS PUB-1 IC RECORD fO5 COUNCIL UdC OF , ! o to Brush Drive Petition Name Removal �I� A Y CLERK OFFICITCE CLERK VA-R6 , homeowner of the residency at Name R US14 DK Huntington Beach, California, 92647 Address want my name removed from the July 1, 1995 Brush Drive "Tree Removal Petition" on file with the City of Huntington Beach, California. Signed Date ©� Print C 0 tST50tQZ T. VA R64 name Brush Drive Petition Name Removal 1 R dulWs homeowner of the residency at Name U52- bzjs 4 -2 AIL , Huntington Beach, California, 92647 Mdress want my name removed from the July 1, 1995 Brush Drive "Tree Removal Petition" on file with the City.of Huntington Beach, California. f c,� Z p D Signed Date ( 4 Print name Brush Drive Petition Name Removal I , F)E'iI4 Mc-c- L C' CL;(1 , homeowner of the residency at Name 2. 2 FjrtrlS` 1 f i y , Huntington Beach, California, 92647 Addrew want my name removed from the July 1, 1995 Brush Drive "Tree Removal Petition" on file with the City of Hunting on Beach, California. 0 3 wl) SignA�"d' Date MOV 02 Print C ��� name 3 ¢Z RECEIVED FROM JLun�- AS PUBLIC RE O 0 FFOR COU C1L EWE G EM OFFICE JDM L FLYK Cr Y G.ERK TREE REMOVAL PETITION DATE: , We, the homeowners on ,$.fUSf,/ would like to have the trees removed from the parkway. The trees are cracking the sidewalks, curbs and guiters, and roots are c;ogging sewer lines. Also,the trees have raised the sidewalks,curbs and gutters,causing a tripping hazard and water to stand in streets. We would like to have trees removed, repairs made to sidewalks, curbs and gutters, and trees replaced with ones that do not cause these problems. NAME ADDRESS ❑ Renters or non homeowners signed. ❑ 1 is unavailable. O 3 Have had their names removed. ❑ 8 signatures are left. ❑ 13 Homowners have sold the homes. "There is no record with the City Clerk for name removals from this petition, so I have Q 14 signed the Tree Saving Petition.* highlighted them all for reference. � 11• i • e e 1 �I► TTMillpp O � 1 os o VO a I W�A&W..Al I- P�a- . - ��� /_ AIM 97.01 � 111 WF 1� • _ ORPM&N, A �`. � 1 NAME E ADDRESS 7A, • S� z. � . • Cosa 47 ll-SH jj�f 6 r AU72. -A&� 16571 Iftoy oe L-e 8352 11 �� . APR-27-06 14:07 FROM—Southland Title & Escrow g g� + T-202 P.008/022 F-910 riECOtIOIN:QEDIIEST[D Hr 88-522 1 q A�Y0111I RtF.OWNP WA+L 141S GEED AND_JNLESS w �IW OII►EPWt9E S040"fiELOW.UAli TAX SIATEYENTS TO ROOM I k11R0f%klA w, R. Pvzot ros r '8$CAM 1111-IOLT 13'88 ell• Fel1 /sti r rt..G.r J alar �j'9 >'JG Y7 $5. . c � is TnaOto"No.._ _E{cto.kb __ - —SPACE ABOVE THIS LINE FOR RECGACEWS USE No C4-11,0 c4A nooj DOCUMENTARY TRiANS:ER TAX S -'70 ._.:_ Z . '• U f TC 1./��iVl DE E® I ) Computed on Tull value of properly Conveyed, ar compuTed on lul: value ss ♦•aloe of .8ns and enncum s r ma}�31t o Pit site 00 �jse�CJtLvr F�.r..�,c. 7- fry unaerslpnso Beantortsj. for a vatuaule conslttoralton.rocoipl or wnich Is nereDy acknowledgeo.co,__hetAty,j remise. release anD forever ouit lattTl to 'Jz-I'- "f;;. the following desenlxd mal properly in the City of County of ;,1ale of California. oT 38 of 7'/cec T s'/2 9 / A:'✓2 �i+/a ;'i c u�o..r ,.. :;3.,n.r' ,2./� /•.Ic E. j r-.�.�.. i I i.+ CeO-Sf-C e7r ..iis.a at.:n,CL•,j ,&JAD5� i+r rr.E .N--X-,'C RI rnE CR...r�/ iet�•..c�c•r7 'r'c Assessor s parcel No. lr, 7 Eaecule0 ors Ci . STATE OF CALIiORN1A COLIIIrTY�O-F�' a��' on Ihle(-, — pay Oti�.r,'�lF.S$�M Iho vm Iej _,betas me. Iee vn00.e [.� f1rMe h and to,aAlo Slafey?OrSWta4T IOOeueO �U OG;;T" pF7 (:[At- SEAL pet eorlouT r eown f e n�lot perm ro CAE GG S r.RA W FO R O nee w 1•le Dili of at19t]EtOty e..oetwrl b IM pr wewse.►r'fp__ JEW NO1Aw P_.UC C4LIiDQIJA j ORANGt GOJ:lIe !;u d.bed re who within tnshi men M acenowree-jed 10 me that rdr otrern. mite FED 23. 19" S Ae_ n - VAINESS and f !II 4L Nota AuWle In and MAIL 7A to SVb `- (710{arA{IOr Or11CD1 nOlatlY seat• STATEME TO —7� F.�,�orJ F^ S 3R� RP��.1 7�ra...t i1✓i.rn...G>a.,.i .�csr.r Gl' NAME Af i ESS zip COI/D telly l90 tY. eA. r...,,.e...t_n....•.s'-rr.w.a...ww...a•'towe-.n awn.vaa� ..e...w•'o'e.r.q. . pal CA'Y O(IC n.0 tti). ..�i -. ao:a�l�w'•. .^'�'.•.`irnrn�..wo.+ �...w ._..w...._....���.-..sw.. M1M A[OII{ 71C ' APR-27-06 14:06 FROM-Southland Title & Escrow ��dZ + �(1,�5 � T-202 P.002/022 F-910 t -,7�li - deli 0QC # 94-0483310 02—AUS--1994 11:46 AM ® When recorded return to: Recorded in official Records WANETA S. OFFERMAN Of orange Cant,. California l 181 Equestrian Way lce A. Branch, Caurb Recorder Prescott,AZ 86303 Pace t of 2 Fees: f 8.00 Tax: s 0.00 :6 DEED For the consideration of Ten Dollars ($10.00) and other valuable —2. consideration, 1, WANETA S_ OFFERMAN hereby deed and assign to WANETA S. -0 OFFER"as Trustee of THE WANETA S_ OFFERMAN REVOCABLE TRUST dated I c 44 ry -;3 /" 1994, all right, title and interest.in the following real property situated in the County of Orange, State of California SEE ATTACHED SCHEDULE A" s - Exempt transfer of property. � The names and addresses of the Trustors, Trustees and Beneficiaries of this Trust are: WANETA S. OFFERMAN 181 Equestrian Way Prescott,AZ 86303 DATED this l day of % ���L�t . 1994. A i 1 WANETA S.OVPERMAN STATE OF ARIZONA ) )ss. County of Yavapai ) _ Y ` iytnstrument was acknowledged before me this day of '/� . 1994, by WANETA S.OFFERMAN. Z Notary Public My Commission Expires: i • A tiardom�J�t0.ttRr. .� � Pint TAX STATLMrtjjs He o V er APR-27-06 14:06 FROM-Southland Title & Escrow J33()Z- + E3 Qt�h T-202 P.003/022 F-910 r SCHEDULE "A" 8302 Brush Delve, Huntington Beach,Orange County,California 92647. r c APR-27-06 14:10 FROM-Southland Title & Escrow 1615 7 Z.+ Tcl T-20- P.021/022 F-910 nECONDINO neouFf760 or ORANGE DING Ct ATEQUE37ED BY. TITLE COMPIWY AND W4ENRED%VXe/ Yo CCO MM LIKE4901101WI39W;01M BELOW.MAIL A DOG # 93-04538096 r- 00—JUL--1993 03348 PM xr. and Mrs. PatrimMIX Recorded in Official Records 1 16572 Tripp Circle of Orange County, California rg u HontingtM B-wh• Ca: tee A. Brard, uaty Recorder �- L 209163-1 53293 J Pass l of 1 Ftax$ f 0.00 Title Order No. Escrow No. SPAC13 ABOVE THI3 LINE FOR RECORDERS USE GRANT DEED - N/A�ttet ao i� of Vesting Only m v The underTigned declares that the documentary transfer tax is S �tL p ��-- - and Is ' computed on the full value of the Interest of property conveyed,or is computed on the full value less the value of liens or encumbrances remaining thereon at the time of sole.The land, - tenements or realty is located in I� unincorporated Brea —City of and FOR A VALUABLE CONSIDERATION,icalpt of which is hereby acknowledged, xavin J. patrilroulst and Arlene petriffeulx, huebend wO wifo • D _ hereby ORAM(S)to Ice Vin J. fttrjrrOUlx and Arle /Altritwulx, htwbdn l and wife 81s joint terartks - M city of thultiTx,)tort Beach the following described Feat property in the county of Otarl9e .state or California: Lot 116 of Tract no. 3429, In the City of HuntiTgton Beach, as per map recordod in kook 124, pages 1 to 4 incluniva, of Hi 11arm z Maps, in the Office of the QD=ty Etecorder of Said Cau>tty. - APNs 107-304-07 July 7, 1991 Dated ` >Affekm Eetrimou3.X rr{,tle n� ..........._.STATE OF CALIFORNIA. _ 1 _�.... •---., ...- General Acknawledgemenl SQLITHIANID T1ttE �• STATE OF CAt1M,JA S&ITH frA D ' COUNTY OP ss. m July 7, 1993 Sharon L. MA NOTARY SELL OR STAMP blue me. . a notary .rN ells retr tlx - epenon+Hy �nlametQprmtd long on"bull elwllritlotyt.idenct)bbe — llcpcnan(a ►e.tw.c(.IIJ.rtw dbwc�iNnhW YrafldK4.o.kdpJ SZ JC L duL �omt dusk h►rre�m.uJJe wrc I41,104#Ahc4 wJ,onrNupseig(kr�ud r„o dd/��� F 11..1 p7 NaJlr1 h"v Jenalw.lUon LAe trMrvmml Ox�rwnfll v Jie t1�i1T won rAge eN,'�VA _ u eelull o/.NcE Ae pn+agU.W.t.awn10e 1n+41nrt �'���i�••"r"" Wff FSS m) anJ olfrial vJ. O S:yurrT �GG�7!„t�'��/ l[�►K�A.� i A�YIlO!1\OIA�'tl AN.y11 dr 1n►re.aLa THei1cJ k1++h ot'm%kil,t ca.Y tww"& .\J.a1 napalm of cos ttl�halr b tn'G�et J�vntq - T1H1 10.aT111CATE MUST BE ATT ) Grant DDod APR-27-06 14:0e FROM-Southland Title & Escrow L ( L + Cli('C 1S T-202 P-012/022 F-910 R6C0MNGRECRrES'�. D6y �1461 '0ROM#_ 746346-70 107-401-24 v{0lm �r,�rr,asooaa ..r�,eM OCT SOS kn otvrsirrp Off1CtN UAA"�duii><Y' � 1A n�. CAROLYN FAITH ROSB � a192 BWSH DRIVE � ROTRIIdG7M BEACS, CA 92647 eta L � �10 SPAM ASCUE THIS UW FOR A@COFMOM USE --; 99 Giant Dftd x 0. is�F419>�Pigaedgt�snor(r d Il/�)s - c D owtrp�a am atu.r'tta vPProDe�K���7�"-� e )c�pemd aA[nll,ratnele�vshm of Zeus eae ermalaing ac time d sale. ( )v ,00epotes«tares:(�)Cipr of WMW3W TON IMACH ( )Rralty clot sold POR A vet•itstrt rx GOI =ERATIMI.>rmt<a9-hick is b-ft ac1atow19dVd. WAt.M A. ROSE, 9PO111SE OF VBSTP.E I h_*IW GR ANt3YS7 to CM LYN FAITH ROSE, A MARRIED WOMAN AS WM SOLE AM SEPARATE PROPERTY that}avpe w ro ORANGE 00 Y.Soft of CWHomitL deswBod as: LOT 20, TRACT 3429, XR THE CITY OF HMtMXNGTON BEACH, COMM OF ORANGE, STATE OF CAL3I2ZIIA, AS PER MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 124, PAGES 1 -- 4 INCLUSIVE OP MSCELLA'NEO'DS MAPS, RaCIDRDS OF OBARG$ COUNTY. CAI.IFOMMA. XXCBPT THEREMM ALL. laNERUZ, OIL, GAS AND OTFMR HYDSOCAXZON SUBSTA OSS LYING BELOV A 71H872 OF 500 FEET BELOW THE StWMACE OF SAID LAND, WIMODT TER RXGAT OF SURFACE 1+1P= ABOVE THE mma OF 500 FEET FROM XIM St1RFACL. AS RSSE&VED IN DEEDS OF IMCOHD. _ EXCEPT 2"90MWEM ALL H42' AND IWATEX RIG$TS ZWEATH THE SVRVACE OF SAID LAND IMTHODT THE SIGRT OP SURFACM 12MY. Mail tnx tttanrme to S AS ABOVE i D. �' - CSTA7H OF MA � t � �1TAT.LY A p f C►n Oefm no the ttaderaigeed. a la tot•eald Smle.p_eoaaft eppeaard. Pemar�y-�eara to-ax for pruwa to me en the eaata of y�teoom)meeQtepa�aan�ornas�naate . baarl and to the widdn insuwacm and nckaawfadV4 that omamodtheewum V4r20=3maV handand i3McWseal. C vmu� DEANNE M."IG4�1Vg ow: war�a.vud.�e•e.uearru�. ►omit t OFnm is Omura ootavr� NaJpp 1'f�UR�) Wd,.wwewEWAwUi3m u�ao MAIL TAX 3STATEMEN7S A5 DIFMGI ABCJYI^ APR-27-06 14:09 FROM-Southland Title & Escrow 010 2 + Lj Y (.t S h T-202 P.015/022 F-910 -Iiecommem RNIQUES tM UT M Weinstein b Weinstein 92`25r670 w TI,InF i j� ew rnrEa OWCOAMD a to 7 (^ WEINMIN S yyEINSTEIN Add. s AMfnsys at Law rrt Wishlre 9I11e. Lion NI b Sba Ficer ABCOMW fit OFFIC W.RECCN)9 s C 6W.Mfly Hlg&CA 90212 OF OMN6E COl1NfY.CAUFCCOM APR pp�� •� cu�or S tMa.TAX OTArnwas TO � f M ArIt 21�92 ,..,.rSidney G Edith D. Sternberg ` "oo 2049 S. Beverly Dr. Q'S'•�* R�p _� Airs I;r,E-t5 e Los. ?mgeleer CA 90034 SPACE A8M TIA9 Unr fop aFcn *Wq Trust Transfer Deed TID Yrfa N lsus t+Artss fusem t:tl sT Town""URCURW tto"= IBM* Grant Deed (Eadadad from Reapprabw under PropwaUo.13.La.Cy= Cont.AA 13AI[el.me*) The undetsigned Grantat(s)dedaft(s)under penally of perjury that the(ollotving is rave and toirtm THERE IS NO CONSIDERATION FOR THIS TRANSFER. Documentary transfer tar is S far G1 Computed onful(valueo(popenyoonveyed.ot U computed onfull value krsva(ueatrwes and e0 uAgunces emainingattime of sale of trawsfet. J ®There cf o PR T� transfer tar doe.(not ewon od give Coda¢or Oad:tuea uumher) IM T a Q Llnitnoorpmatrd area: 21 City of a".,tint�rtnn aP�t-2t �d � , I This K r Trust Transfer under er the aievenne and Tamtioa Codeand Gramor(s)suss(have)ehecited the opplirabice=rJusiau; X 8 Transfer to a revocable tsU= q Tranzfer to a short-e m envt not exccediog 12 years with trwtor home the reversion; --j p Transfer to a bust where the traLuar or the 4uriprlf 6pOLUC is the lOte b=crlLlW 1 .•t O Change of trustee holding title_ In Transfer from truer to trustor or uustoes spouse where prior transfer to trust was excloacd from seuppmisat and for a valuable j W ranfldCrati fl.receipt of which is Actcaatvledged. a 13 Other. a. GRANTGR(S)c SIDNEY STERNBERG and EDITS STERWBERG, 'husband and wife, '• benby GRANT(S)to Q SIDNXY STERNBERG AND EDITH D. STERNBERG, Trustees of the STERNBERG d' LIVING TRUST DATED APRIL; 14, 1992, o (AO[alltridat deuxa ted teal property in me County of Orange .Stale of courarniv. c Lot 12 of Tract No. 3429 in the City of Huntington Beach, as shown on .t a map thereof recorded in Book 124, Pages 1 to 4 inclusive, mi.scellaneou Maps, records of said Orange County. EXCEPTING therefrom all oil, gas, minerals and hydrocarbon substances below a depth of 500 feet, ineasured from the surface of said land, z without the right- of entxy upon the surface thereof, as reserved by various deeds or record. EXCEPTING therefrom all underground water lying beneath said land, but 3 without the right of entzY to the BuSfaeC thereof for the purpose of procuring water, as reserved in deed recorded in Boole 5024, Page 147 Official Records of said Orange County. (comtlton_ known as 8102 Brush Dr., Hunt.ingto acn, )• Date,l , iof Sfue p(Callamta EDI H STERNHERG f t =W.4 Los Angeles bo(aternq pprsprpllru pawaA SID STERNBERG and EDITH STERNBERG (s p vod to me an Um basis of zidwartry avido+tco)m bo the poman(s)whore nttmo(a)is/aro aubnactibad to the ttdtatyt Wavanwrn land■daerhdW to me Ih=+a0 wAkW the In®tturnanL - —� aiFJ1L WITNESS my hull and official oat -=• C�— (Tb6 aria for -theta "I""" wq TMit (Jsdsr No. $snow.I omn or Alto. Fate No. MAfI TAX STATEAGEM As OIREGTED ABOVE �. APR-27-06 14:09 FROM-Southland Title & Escrow 60 9 2+ 5rZ1,5� T-202 P.017/022 F-910 )! /`�11\1\\r/!i '�1\\\\\`ill/!�/'/, 3\\1l\ � 8T=352%%5 ' J% Scott C- -ruthere me EN oORCED�MLSEEaOINEnwU a w eac TAX STATEMENTS t : WW"OWNTY,�C .112 PM ,Il3N 2 2*87 � D. Scott Cd�r#chaaa � P.O. Roz 228 n A" Stanton, CA 90680 100 amk9lip i 7atl.ora.r�lo ExJorh SPLICE ADCVE THIS LINE FOA RECOAOER'S USE � QOCIIFAENTAAV TAA�t]rEi1 TtUf fi'e'6►UO - •---- « . �^ Q U ITC LA I M DEED C comp►tm an frill value of pm,."comm,or '- 0 computed on lull muc less value of Moo&W e br rt1t10 K Ime of . i S el DjCrrt a a,rm;Ieaaw+i To. �►.ra Ir+r I THE UNDERSIGNED GRANTORM DECLARE(s)FOR A VALUABLE CONSIDERATION,rftdpi of which IS hereby acknowledged, PAUL DAVFD LOMBARDO PAID hereby remise, release and Ior1rm quitclaim io DW IRAISFM r,#X SHERRI NAOMA LOMBARDO �•opmal trio following described real prcpeliy In the Clty of Huntington Beach. OTC u W. County of Orange , Slate of Callfomla:IB092 Brush Drive Huntington Beach, CA LOT I OF TRACK 3429 AS PER MAP RECORDED IN 1300K 124 PAGES 1 through 9 OF MISCELLANEOUS MAPS AND RECORDS IN THE ORANGE COUNTY RECORI]ER'S OFFICE I IAssessor's parcel No- 107-401-I S Executedon IdnIv 22 19AZ,at Staneen, Cellrornigil _ wn Me:wu PAUL DAVID LON[ErARDO STATE OF CALIFORWA COUNTY OF Orange J I on ►h1, 27 :s--y o1 MU, 1, Ine yoY 1987 bdtore roe, the undmitymnd,i Notary punhe In and tar solo slate,personalty apwrno Paul David Lombardo I I �. prwee le I i m1SOn IM W,NI of aaltruetory evWencello DO the per3on_wtwsa nuy_ 1_a0WIDW to the within Insitwapt.110d2WON:ttd20 tom3I1131 r ,re••n.A rr .�� 11tyA/r lJ►r.RRAL WITNESS my hind and YAUnA I GIWER ° MO Durtl weuC-GUvoRrlur IV1 eorrra �iree OWAIIIE am 1. IN* ochry ot,one In endnx Sava St■t*.:/lime L Groor (TMc area(ef OhIeW rraUrgl soot) MAIL TAX - STATEMENTS TO MAIL TAX STAVEMEIPITS AS DIRECTED ABOVE ; NAMC nDDP.tE$S Z:p ��,,qp� •r�rr lit.q.r e d nw m~0 WA q-.0-Oq IP a%.rxa$*Aft"Mf Vw.w-Ow 4t✓erJ1w OVr p!D D'ft~ll I.tl d.I -M P--.W A .Y>!•I(Jrr"./ :=M-m-"% MM.I t•sr�. fMu I Y� Pw I.e./o-""W-R.. .ft. am.M pm'0 r ram 4 Hiss 1giwr".IC APR-27-06 14:09 FROM—Southland Title & Escrow g� � + ru 5 h T-202 P.016/022 F-910 I:• Order No- Escrow No- REC016INc iEquP-717n BY Loan No. WESTMN ATTORNEY SERVICE pOC # 94-0327866 WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO: 11—MAY-•1994 03:59 F-M Recorded in Official Records C. WILLIAN CARLSON, JR., INC. of Orange fauntr, l, A Professional corporation California P Lee A. Branch, County ReCOrder 2130 Main Street, Suite 140 Pa9B I of 1 Fees-. f 5.00 —. Huntington Beach, CA 92648 1aX7 t 0.00 SPACE ABOVE TH19 UW-FOR RECOADEWS USE L MAIL TAX STATEMENTS TO: F.Nn"A NO CONSIp8RATION DOGUMRV TRAhLSFER TAX i--.-...,...-._............�.................�,. MR. AND MRS. WALTER R. JEPPESEN -_CornpUled on the mnzlderauon or raele or propeny conveya4 OR 7132 BluAeailts Drive oorrrpuloo on'ho eorvearatlon or value rose nave or entunntrance- Muntington Beach, CA 92647 meson tpattbnoof&We. ` Iprriwe ofDQCj&sal or Agelti dolmmillftto.--FYm Narno C. WELIStAn A.P.#107--402-14 GRANT DEED ;. Ll FOR A VALUABLE CONSIDERATION,recelpe of which is hereby acknowledged, "4 WALTER ROBERT JEPPESEN and ELEANOR R. JEPPESEN, Husband and wife, t �_ i hereby GRANT(S)to WALTER R. JEPPESEN and ELEANOR E. JEPPESEN, as Trustees of the "WALTER R. JEPPESM4 AND ELEANOR E. JEPPESEN 1990 TRUST" dated DECEMBER 7, 1990 the real propeny In trio City of Huntington bleach County of OFange State of California,deacobed as I } Lot 10 of Tract No. 3429, as shown on a map recorded in 1 Book 124, pages 1 4 inclualve of Miscellaneous Maps, records of Oran,e County, California ( l I Dated �Q\ t � Q� hx4- CALIFORNIA ALT ROS$R EP STATE OF CA ORANGE �' r COUNTY OF ) re.i,`� '•:Fry, -7l 1Ct before me. 'a•'' jeg 7: ' ELEANO &PfESEN peraanally appeaten and ELEANOR E. JEPPESEN :r+' p oesonany known to mo 1 .'1 Qwhiel aa)10 be the poreon(a)*Mae norm(a)War*llubarAbod lo1hu wllnln ''�'`• tnelrumarl(and acrno"iDalaaa to rrre Thal blMAn .l •1J aY ereelAed the eaTe W IiF 7 ar N6ZWlthelr alnhpriNd Cbpecl poo arid that by 146AaAheb al ne- J,.N i t:t,lN.:(c� •l ' S A 1,rgr u.-,y lure(e)On Ilse InaWMenl Ihr Pa,aonlel e,lM enNy uvon txhoM or Mich - '��� / C:—!-!••'•• �, r� . 1 tn8pe►bon(s)gtlEd,elretuled►na4161HrmonL QJJ n1cnm.nracl 'U7C..,F/ %MTNESS my nand and rL ~�"'.�`�'""d'`F"'••�• �- - 1 .ealist Pagel of 7 REAL-ISTCQM A SERVICE FROM REAL ESTATE SOLUTIONS" Property List Property 1 of 30 Address 8082 Brush Dr Zip Code 92647 Owner Name Jeppesen Walter R Recording Date 02/22/1985 Sale Price $82,500 Total Assessment $174,132 Annual Tax $2,002 Bedrooms 3 Total Baths 2 Universal Land Use SFR Lot Acres .19 Stories 1 Building Sq Ft 1,207 Year Built 1960 Tax ID 107-401-14 Lot Sq Ft 8085 TGNO 828-A7 Property 2 of 30 Address 8092 Brush Dr Zip Code 92647 Owner Name Dieckman Trust Recording Date 06/22/1987 Settle Date 05/00/1987 Sale Price $50,000 Total Assessment $51,221 Annual Tax $708 Bedrooms 3 Total Baths 2 Universal Land Use SFR Lot Acres .14 Stories 1 Building Sq Ft 1,123 Year Built 1959 Tax ID 107-401-15 Lot Sq Ft 6018 TGNO 828-A7 Property 3 of 30 Address 8102 Brush Dr Zip Code 92647 Owner Name Sternberg Sidney Recording Date 12/21/1976 Sale Price $56,000 Total Assessment $73,097 Annual Tax $938 Bedrooms 3 Total Baths 2 Universal Land Use SFR Lot Acres .14 Stories 1 Building Sq Ft 1,112 Year Built 1959 Tax ID 107-401-16 Lot Sq Ft 6249 TGNO 828-A7 Property 4 of 30 Address 8112 Brush Dr Zip Code 92647 Owner Name Renfro Harold Eldon Recording Date 02/05/1964 Total Assessment $47,487 Annual Tax $595 Bedrooms 3 Total Baths 2 Universal Land Use SFR Lot Acres .14 Stories 1 Building Sq Ft 1,112 Year Built 1959 Tax ID 107-401-17 Subdivision 3429 Lot Sq Ft 6249 TGNO 828-A7 Property 5 of 30 Address 8122 Brush Dr Zip Code 92647 Owner Name Mc Lellan Betty May Total Assessment $47,751 Annual Tax $597 Bedrooms 3 Total Baths 2 Universal Land Use SFR Lot Acres .14 Stories 1 Building Sq Ft 1,123 Year Built 1959 Tax lD 107-401-18 Subdivision 3429 Lot Sq Ft 6249 TGNO 828-A7 http://realist2.firstamres.com/propertylist_print.jsp 4/22/2006 APR-27-06 14:10 FROM-Southland Title & Escrow / & 7/ + Pp T-102 P.019/022 F-910 WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO: Reaoraea in the counzy of orange, cattfornsa MARGARET GUILLEN PEREZ 611111111111 L. Granville, Clark/Recorder 16571 POTTER CIRCLE 6,�8 HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92647-4822 19980438697 07/09/98 Parcel# 107-402.08 D04284 0.08 600 4 ? 8 0 1 0.99 0.00 0.80 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Trust Transfer Deed Grath Deed ( Excluded from reappraisal under proposition 13, Calif.Const. Art 13 A§1 et seq.) The undersigned Grantor(s) declare(s) under penalty of perjury that the following is true and correct: THERE IS NO CONSIDERATION FOR THIS TRANSFER. (IJ XThls transfer Is exempt from the documentary transfer tax. ❑ The documentary transfer tax is$ and is computed on I o the full value of the interest or property conveyed. D the full value less the value of liens or encumbrances remaining thereon at the time of sale. The property is located in❑an unincorporated area, ❑the city of Huntington teach This is a Trust Transfer under §62 of the Revenue and Taxation Code and Grantor(s) has (have) checked the applicable exclusion: o Transfer to revocable trust; ❑ Transfer to a short-term trust not exceeding 12 years with trustor holding the reversion; ❑ Transfer to a trust where the trustor or the trustor's spouse is the sole beneficiary; ❑ Change of trustee holding title: 0 Transfer from trust to trustor or trustor's spouse where prior transfer was excluded from reappraisal and for a valuable consideration,recut of which is acknowledged. a Other: GRANTOR(S): MARGARET GUILLEN PEREZ hereby grant(s) to MARGARET GUILLEN PEREZ as Trustee of THE MARGARET GUILLEN PEREZ REVOCABLE LIVING TRUST UTD 1095 the following real property in the City of Huntington Beach, County of Orange, California: LOT 173 OF TRACT 3429,AS SHOWN ON A MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 124, PAGES 1,2,3 AND 4 OF MISCELLANEOUS MAPS, RECORDS OF ORANGE COUNTY,CALIFORNIA State of California ) Dated:_ )ss County of Orange ) On 0;A&T before me, Mary E. Perex, personally appeared MARGARET GUILLEN PF.AEZ, proved to me on the basis of satWectory MA GA _ UILLEN PEREZ evidence to be the persons whose name is subscribed to the within Instrument and acknowledged to me that she executed the same in her authorized capacity, and that by her signature on the instrument the person, or the entity upon behalf of which the person acted, executed the inatru$nent, WIT SS end �781's_e NO emu* «rc�.esr..osc e.goes . PER APR-27-06 14:10 FROM-Southland Title & Escrow !� 7� + !'pe- T-202 P-019/022 F-910 I Order NO. D69 -Eecrou,No. RECOf�1Ep IN OFFiCUL fiECQRpq Loan ftem tom PEQQufSTED BY OF CMNOE caumft.CAIJFCANfA - WESTERN ATZOSEV SERV= --- WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO- `9E2 1M AUG 14 89 C. WILLIA64 CARI.som, J$. , 1.NC- -- A Proiewsional Corpor8tion Q• � 2130 Main Straot, Suite 140 G Huntington Beach, CA 92648 !a [PAGE? A&POV6 Tw19 LINQ POP MaCOAOa P'B V=t1 _ - MA1L TAX STA:mmFJVTS TO: 'Pida>3s�ar l7ta '1�9t No fJIgt9S�Bia�'�1 Victor tad Aram RotoOro 0�AMARV 7RANSIRM TAX a -�0- - — 0231 Lancaatar DrIve ---.Cmmtaen.el.aemar.Aa►ma.G.mpw�.�mn.w.s oA —Conlputt0m t11�0eN1NJtllbeofl�ll.IstlNwm�ImbN�7tl Huntington Reach, CA 92647 �lfe>ye�,A,1 �./"%� i- r d' �--- n. . so va—�(�'�t►a• _ C. WILLrhm CaRLSON, JR. AP 9x07-391-08 GRANT DEED --- FOR A VALUA13LE CONSIDERA7iON, nteelpit of wk%h is hwabV ache Iedq&L VICTOR P. ROMERO and ANNE W. ROHURO, haroby GIRANY(S) m VTCTOA P. IRO RO and AMM W. ROM IRO. TYustteen under Chat o@rtain Declaration of TzuBt dated AaguBt 9 , 2989, kzk*wn As the ---- VICTOR F. ROM33M AND AN= W. ROMERO 1909 e1TE1JST, ow Nutt P.opwty In the Cary of UUntjmgton Beach Count' 01 Orange State of em"fom{o, dew"bad as Lot 145, Wraat 3429, as shown on a asap recovdad in took 124, pagan 1 to 4, ittrlueive, or Miscellaneous spa, raaovda of Orange County. California. p�.we Augt]Bt 9_ 7 SI89 VISTOR P., 1 UM M��IMANu► os sU,,e Tea I9A4.. ------- - belam mS opm •N fiata(b In.f W fd mom AMR ammWamm— °` o�vM HE I, .. w060na+r km n I.me of Pore a eo nw an Oka male o9.ffin.mmfiawyaw whose _ srlsea)to b.L%Oetomw ,amemAt o eubmated to am wftlln he.umel.•n0 owloslOQgea�o nle/M11�i�a1�u10/arocaewo J wtawi►mP Fd q taco —�mlow m.earns. YYIT�teSB eltl► .�of11c1e1 aw. N1pn•7>sM �w _ --_ - --- ITW ,r. nor 0"wo1 +0N11.1 t"I Y� 1007 (�) MAIL TA�c aTATKe�NTG Ai OInCGTCD AOOYC APR-27-06 14:09 FROM-Southland Title & Escrow 01 3 Z- + T-202 P.014/022 . F-910 - a�wrflo. W--S I 53 - Et�etvwr ii4. ��,••••��C;w wer�jp -- L+ar�No. GF ORANGE CiMWW. - FtWOMING RUCUEMED By 11'30 OCT 2 6 19$9 AND WHEN RECORDED WUL TM A.M. David All" 8"%M 23861 xl Toro Road, 4th rloor -,-- E1 Tpro, CA 92630 �4 • MACi &aW81 111fa LN111<l9R JMW" A>: MAB. TALC STATMEM M TO: ttranarer to a revoaasbla 1 ivinq Zt aist tbp the M/]! Jack H31Ds►rt wx n ar THE UNDERSIGNED GRANIOR(S)DWJ4 E(S: 0232 ovush Dr&vle OOCUA4EirYMW TRANSFER TAX 6—_.__..... KUntlttgton 8e40h, CA 92647 --Cpr a an Ira or vskr - OainmY�le+p�t tMnr d•atu ._ - ,91W1?+ELJAiM pip 1►Px_ -------------------�.. . FOR VALVA9LE CONSIDERATWN. =Wpt of a kkh is f...rp w*nrawt&do dL .TACK X. HILBBAT AMD BxLLIS C. KXXJ ". kkusband and vita do tM1bW RFMSS. RELEA56 AND FOREVER QI/TC%,WW to JACK LAVSit 8 HIL9ERT AND BXLLIS CO=XXU H2L BFZV, Truateea or the 2113be.vt Faat2y Trust Bated state 8, 1909 ME WWI p4wmty In Ow City of Huntistgtost Heads County of Qrangs . Sam of "Iforwaa, ZOO! 28 of Traat No. 3429r in tho Cityt or Huntington Beach, as Per MAP racardad In Doolt 124, Pa906 1, 2, 3 and. 4 Ot Miaewallaneoua� MPU in 17-ba ofi'i� o� Sae Co nIty Recorder of Sala OoWnZy. Commonly ]down- as= S23a SkUnh flriva, Rat-ntington Bench, Ch Subdect to: A11 Covenants. CondItiona, R®Btrd(ttions, Ra6mtrvaliorna, Ix1ghts, Rights of Way and Sas ants oY record. i XODAVL atr►m 4s a jM JACK L. =LBEUT �otsatyOUR _,__-• 11913 A o.•ma. o.am.4-WW-04,•froa•+r PAN.0,..e ear.. 06%,P . SILI+I$ C. HIL$QRT W4 Co o+•+cewr w40190 66.um(o►aoroO to we w we a lft rf 809010vasr OFf)CRAL SEAL wwwio+t.o t411w wrronUl W.�+(.ra1.1 yr��e.oi4re b er. I RWnN MAC DONAI D .s~n wn�.we.p�nwrrppra to eb AII.MdryAlwYwwro OOtMTY t+fr Oor���RQ►7� vwrNtea wy w+0 �( WAIL TAIL STAT1FMlK= A8 DIREF.TE4 ANOWS Brush Drive Petition Name Removal if AR6-A , homeowner of the residency at Name c�a ya B R U S-)14 D K , Huntington Beach, California, 92647 Address want my name removed from the July 1, 1995 Brush Drive "Tree Removal Petition" on file with the City of Huntington Beach, California. Signed Date Print C' (�R�S Cat'ft�tZ �• �/� R64 name Brush Drive Petition Name Removal 1 3WV�j homeowner of the resid ency at Name -Nwle. Huntington Beach, California, 92647 Address want my name removed from the July 1, 1995 Brush Drive "Tree Removal Petition" on file with the City of Huntington Beach, California. Signed Date (29 0 Print name Brush Drive Petition Name Removal MC- e t a.n , homeowner of the residency at Name 8 12 2- Fj r LA s h 'D , Huntington Beach, California, 92647 Address want my name removed from the July 1, 1995 Brush Drive "Tree Removal Petition" on file with the City of Hunting on Beach, California. ?c jzo � Sign Date ma Print name 9_ F• rt FE',;xat%�'k"�''SttS-r;�+"�'_ ,�i,; .�.�:.. ,:j,r '"x't`..:;�• <.d.. T:•r+" 1 1 1 1 1 Rubbers ilewalks UB! y �fo"r mFormation 3. ...r._-, _ „'X''' ;,a�a�• ,ar .t` 3b"r m�,�?"'.��' ,r,.'`„�.`,�.�rza. .ram ^. .ra'' i%� 14 ,.{�� � • -� ,��� z �� Ph 310 515 5814,„;�, ° :: ► � �fi mil ' �.° ;�'`�� _'.� ���,,� s n x�„ ��.�� - .•3.• Fax 310�515 5314 : '� ���'>Riititiersidewalks�aola 1 1 1 1 -c'; =c.•zr'.�!;.'r�x-+'.�, 1�....�uy�.:�:i-,.g.,_ ���,..�•:<>''.c..:;="�, 3�;� ins" �� ,�` tea-•:. Jie,rs`'.<"::: 17 and_economical to•mstalf tree roots,_gip less invasive►beneathf Rubbersidewalks offering a new .=: - y 4 ,,ti' - �" „i_t�"�� .� fk,� .b"l, ' .e � ♦� `L.7 ,� .v .i f '',t-`Ji t �7 � tS ?�d�[r�iJ�F.�a j'.:�y��k, w F '3 �y ;�' �S'. ,.• � w,.s y "'��'. x.�b s�`st:'.. + n �..,r},�"^�`{.�y°r��+°r; , k ' q�'x. Rubbeisidewalks are made of 100%recycled California fire rubber. ° "`�`'"'":v:" ,• •` ^� ati y�.,:,-�',. _;t>,.., ,a w�""�`NM�yy Y.^PaXixt:r'.._ -`� ,s i square uare a1 , '. foot uses ���'tr;ri' '" the rubber from one ' < �� PEP Passenger tire. _:�`"' 4 �. �. ..�, .� € - ..,,,,ram� �• Id �.�;x ,x f ') c�;P"'a�.r•• x's".,<��'>� `f c�``- a .r.,�`'t�n,fir"•.•x.•r.. �:'<�. �" �,�„�+`,t" .^s, a���t'i " .,,.f._K'�.c.""-d,aF'`m�= 3� ,,af, ��,a••`_T-. %.% ,�s, ''s, C'�n-� "'u`Y^-+� ._.,a a� �# ^y a Fit` �a'-x ..�;.. r'•.s.Xc"'".��'} `"_ ��z3:':r._,.. i�„-- �' #s.. � "t ,.c"1` 4.. �y •sue. i}' WHIMS � .•, 9 'Y}. -. � x h y �,�t a C:`t y�,����- �-• ..:.* h�'�lF-�..t, �e a � �'3�,,... �-• �p a f � .r r -"> awa,Fa•*fw� k . <<_ z �'`�"'"y�ds:,,,o, �d�;�' k�4 s• '�' 'As�, �'•'a' � ,ate �' ��r� ,t� �' S' .,t3 �`�'- - -,�•'•m.�k�`+.'�� �.t"� �tt' ,ate`_. ' ;s, .,-'fi�* ,3� �-"'`�` ...";'a<;�� r.3 ' ` Rebbersidewallcs'modularity=`allow Odical ins ed r44 q lk _.pp/�I�1y pin,w aye+„ fnWYYI-fDtt Rub _ t a are hglF�paring files made with .awnbed rubber COmbnled M.,pOfymetllafle busies and wilb heat dmw This produces 8 anti datable part that nieet5 811 retpllleRtS, afa6le grade;nOiFrtbrati0ll® wtitll ADA regf8nd lisgh oeCOicieat e; _ of bictiai for non-skid both dry-and wet Imbhersi lki are hard ewa�gh hur skatetioa rs,ie5eibledes and'sp&es,y resrTieitt enoi�i to 00"sale passage ter a9 ii rimed tral6c Powers areavailable in- Sores and colas,and aR rerers�le:Expec6ed�e perce s mmhmno sewer yrs ° ' = ttU DEYViW ii6m xnow&INNN rENANCE SERVICES Y `` a tblbbersidew are, uoted'as instated m"frost Services budale !Sae and 4acl HI database•Maputeoaooe sdce�de.¬ficatiai of Q I � re6�"�s �- in*Wiance dine•Photo d6mneu bit of ft before and alt r:!,Sr�e Bamcer•.Educational materials for Bork Sclgd w _. Avanable upm •'L'a aitarst SeMCeS•long lean Maiu> SeiYICe�Press IQ lateft 100%recycled California crumb rubber,Urethane resin binder&colorant t t 2'z 2.5'x 1875";5 sq It(for 4 or 5 foot wide sidewalks),25'x 5'x 1.875°12S sq ft,°2'z 2'x 1875 4:s9 ft' Weight 10.8 ibs per square foot(54. 135165;4416s) .Surface Crumb rubber mohled tabu",all edges 1/8"radius(both sides identical) . z "Coleus:`.'::. Gray,Berra rwtta,green,blue,Bloch,black with white chip(additional coleus arable neon requrest).Paver expected to:darken eighty ii fasE=} ...,.-.two months then remain stable.UV-lab tests show no change after two years.Surface appearance may wary due to inconsishmce m granulated- .,r ' .... _ _ waste ire robber. - M i r a idenaiice hose doww o mop':"Sweep, . W ads,aught load.•:--,-. - '3,000 you perariwve: Shock`Attenuatioo:°:.,`;__':,Order 200 g at:5'.'Fan sigruificardy less to cause.iniury or broken lanes than on concrete. Coefficient of friction:,' —'-ASTM C 1028:.0.90 d 0.65 wet(OSHA guidelines ire that all walking _ ry; gu• require surfaces satisiya OS Stator Coetfiaem of Frietiai'atiag,:in�r�i='�= - 6msbuction and.aiteratioi ADfhspecifies that a 0.6 Coefficient of Friction le recommended an a0,path of travel surfaces _ _=j TabiAbrasioni` ARM C 501:2701indleates"blgh resistance to wear) 3att/Chlorida'. ASTM 11117i No change m sarface;'no stain or residue Mignesfnm..ChImfde Seal No change in surface;no stain or residue Xenon'A a Weatlrering No change after e0mane 1to-ser�rt two-year equivalent Flame Spi6d ASTM E162:.Andex-131.18 at average temperature of 157.7 C(Surface fiammab�ANSI Z124.1;and Z124.labws Index of 450 or essl if exposed f oven,= constant fire,paters are,l r to smolder.Ld cigarettes,agars or matches can burn on parer.mutil they sdfcxtinguish. c, Porosdy •Permeable at module seams immediate drabuage of water into ground;minimal nor off into storm dram � � �-.4 Frio" parr As C 1026:Product 6*sed to 15'eyc�of free"m at 0 Degrees for 90 days.No change.No facial defects.No signs of daring,d►uppwg, spaifmg or,c,"li Product frozen at 0 degrees as subjected to impact,witli rro chaage." o • ADA C_ompnance: ;, Lot vibuatitiui;.�iicrete-to-Rubberside�rana transition Imperceptible:high coefficient of fritdioiu both dry and wet;surface hardness'supports aA R pedestrian and wheeled Traffic: ` "u'larl. ,, �tiesidewaBa is a modular sidewak item.Paves are interconnected and can be pe lock*opened for tree root maintenance." •100%California recycled tire rubber,with p*urethane binder•Non-toxic.An components inert solid&No volatile organic coiigimniids Rnbbersidmum reduces sound of all pedestrian or wheeled traffic' IAubb lervaDis is a sale soiree product,developed exidusir*by Rubbersider�ns,Bic for the pi&6C rigid of way and athsu applicatiais,marlreTed and ivied f>y.- �ibbera de9ra9a,lac: dewam modular si WA*system has been tested and proven effective for use in Public rigid of way ap&eons Isvdewe�,wa1kRvn w'weN,_and prom ban al b isle healtli and it urban trees Rgb6ersideiranes,Inc?is a small;wotan�owned lanfomia busbass :. TELEVI$ION:rv=" NEWSPAPER aanclEs Huep H6wser,.v4tifomia's Green';2004'_ Los Angeles Tuires July 14;,2001 1MA M6hdng.News (Cos Angeles),2004 With Rubbersidewalks, Trees on the Rebound by Bob Pool. with Gayle Anderson Daly Breeze'May 30,2001 :_. . . Cities go to the Mat f6r0ld Trees by Traci Jai Isaacs KF'I'AM 640-Radio(Los.Angetes);2004:. vAwdai Hoffmann, Cortra Costa Times May;26,2002 - MAGAZINES New,Sidewalks Bend Conventional Wisdom by._Denis Cuff ,Tree Care Industry;'October 2001 Rubber Sidewalks"Saves Trees The Daiy Tdlegraph July_.16r.2001. by Dan,Dale; '_:;:.: " Paving gets,to-' of.Sireet Safety by Ben Fenton-Rubber Natural Horne,Magazine Dec 2061.The Right Path Ventura Star Star November-2001- ` by`Marsha"Scarbrough ;.Thousand Oaks Might,Saye"wftti Sidewalks`of Rubber by Julia Rogers LD.'June;2002 ;Savvy Sidewalks Where.the•Sidewalks•Ends:- Departnernt of Pubic Woriis NEWS,City of Los AngelesFeiiruary 13 2002 by Michelle;Taute DPW Experimenting'with-Rtibbersidewalks by Marshall Lowe _ -._ .._ '1 5 - _ The resources of the earth are Ph 310:515,5814•Faz 310 515 5314 e-2622 Vliest 1570 Street,'faandenai,.CA:90249 ' r - With Rubber Sidewalks,Trees Are on the Rebound Bob Pool / LA Times 14jul01 04/30/2006 11:03 AM With Rubber Sidewalks, Trees Are on the Rebound Bob Pool / LA Times 14ju101 1Vatkways: Panels pop out, giving access to roots, so removing ficus isn't only option. The popularity of Southern California's most destructive curbside shade tree is starting to bounce back--thanks to rubber sidewalks. Leafy ficus trees have helped cool neighborhood roadsides for decades. As they have grown, though, their stubborn roots have created safety hazards by pushing concrete sidewalk slabs out of the ground. That has prompted repair crews throughout the region to chop down rows of the dense, green- canopied trees. Replacement trees have generally been slower-growing and scrawnier-looking. But street maintenance workers in Southern California will soon be stretching the life expectancy of the ficus by using flexible sidewalks made from recycled automobile tires. The rubber sidewalk gently bends when pushed from below by tree roots. It's also soft enough to cushion the landing of anyone unlucky enough to trip and fall on it. When the roots need trimming, the rubber panels can be popped out and then reused. The panels are made from high-density, non-mushy rubber that is tough enough to handle skateboards and women's high heels. Around trees, they replace about a 10-foot length of conventional concrete sidewalk surface. The rubber sidewalk has been a dream of Santa Monica street inspector Richard Valeriano for seven years. It came to him, in fact, while he was asleep. "In my dream, sidewalks were all bending and twisting, but there was no cracking," Valeriano said. "I woke up and said, 'Wow! Elastic sidewalks! I wonder how we can make them?' " Valeriano answered his own question a short time later when the West Los Angeles health club where he works out was remodeled. New flooring made of rubberized tile squares was installed. "That's it!" he exclaimed. After some research, Valeriano linked up with a Rancho Cucamonga rubber mat manufacturing firm, U.S. Rubber Recycling Inc. With his help, the company produced a 30-by-12-inch tile from ground-up tires. When baked under pressure in a mold and dyed a red-brick color, the finished rubber tile has the look of five bricks arranged in a pattern. http://www.mindfully.org/Plastic/Rubber-Sidewalks.htm Page 1 of 4 With Rubber Sidewalks,Trees Are on the Rebound Bob Pool/ LA Times 14jul01 04/30/2006 11:03 AM New Pavers First Used Near Library Branch Valeriano got the backing of his Santa Monica bosses to purchase a pallet load of the 2-inch-thick molded pavers and began experimenting with ways to glue them down. In 1999, he wrapped up two years of tests at the city street maintenance yard by replacing a badly cracked section of public sidewalk with rubber. That walkway--beneath a ficus tree next to the city's library branch at Ocean Park Boulevard and 21st Street--was a success. Soon Santa Monica crews were installing the rubber pavers under ficus trees at half a dozen other places in town. Santa Monica's rubber sidewalks got some unexpected bounce in April because of ficus tree-cutters near Torrance. Lindsay Smith, a Gardena screenwriter and producer, spied a Los Angeles County work crew starting to cut down 26 ficus trees along Redondo Beach Boulevard near the Alondra Park Golf Course. Smith persuaded the workers to hold up until alternatives to the cutting could be discussed. Then she got on the telephone and started calling arborists in hopes of finding a way to save the trees. One expert mentioned Santa Monica's rubber sidewalk experiment. Smith managed to save 12 of the ficus trees after arranging a demonstration of Santa Monica's rubber walkways. Public works officials from the county and from adjoining South Bay cities showed up. A second demonstration drew officials from cities in Orange County as well. Public works leaders from Hermosa Beach, Los Angeles, Long Beach, Glendale, Cerritos and the city of Orange were among those from 15 cities who pledged their own rubber sidewalk tests. Officials from a dozen other cities expressed interest. The cities' walkway evaluations will cost about $1,000 per tree. But since recycled tires are used for the rubber, the tests could end up being underwritten by state grants financed by a $1 per tire recycling fee motorists pay when they replace their cars' tires. At current prices, rubber walkways are about twice as expensive as concrete. But the cost evens out when sidewalks next to trees have to be repaired every five or six years, Valeriano said. He speculated that rubber sidewalks are tough enough to last for decades. U.S. Rubber Recycling President Rick Snyder said the $6-a-square-foot cost of each rubber panel is likely to fall dramatically if they come into wide use. http://www.mindfully.org/Plastic/Rubber-Sidewalks'.htm Page 2 of 4 With Rubber Sidewalks,Trees Are on the Rebound Bob Pool/ LA Times 14jul01 04/30/2006 11:03 AM "People call Lindsay a tree-hugger. . . . She's doing this from her heart. We're not paying her," he said. Municipal officials are cautiously optimistic about taking rubber from the road and putting it on the sidewalk. Unlike Santa Monica--which has a no-cutting policy toward street trees--most cities routinely remove trees when their roots buckle sidewalks or threaten to do so. "It's a new idea, and we're looking for new ideas," Jeff Porch, a Long Beach street maintenance supervisor, said of.the rubber walkways. Said Ray Torres, a Glendale public works official: "From what I've seen, it looks good. It might be something that can help us." L.A. Considering Test of Rubber Sidewalks In the city of Orange, officials planning to test about 100 square feet of rubber sidewalks are hoping the material will put an end to jackhammering and conventional concrete replacement, said Tara Finnigan, the city's business and public affairs manager. Rubber sidewalk experiments are also being considered in each.of Los Angeles' 15 council districts. "We like the project. We like the possibilities. We want to see what happens," said Cora Fossett, a spokeswoman for the Department of Public Works. "We'll hopefully put them in places where property owners really want to save the trees." Some arborists contend the ficus is the wrong tree for urban curbsides. But they say they are interested in how the rubber sidewalks handle its tough roots. "I need to see it before I can imagine it," said Jim Summers, forestry director for TreePeople, a Los Angeles arbor group. "We want to preserve as many ficuses as we can, but there comes a time when resources can be better spent finding a different tree." In Santa Monica, meantime, officials have invested about $40,000 in molds for the rubber pavers and in various types of adhesives for tests in gluing them down. Although other cities have asked for gray, concrete-colored rubber, Santa Monica favors red because it seems to fade less in sunlight, Valeriano said. A recent survey of Santa Monica's 235 miles of sidewalks shows that even with rubber repairs, city resources could be thinly stretched. There are 664 places were roots have raised sidewalks 3 inches or more, and 1,800 other spots where the displacement is slightly less, Valeriano said. http://www.mindfully.org/Plastic/Rubber-Sidewalks.htm Page 3 of 4 With Rubber Sidewalks,Trees Are on the Rebound Bob Pool/ LA Times 14jul01 04/30/2006 11:03 AM Those who walk on the flexible sidewalks seem to like them. Outside the library on 21st Street, 10- year-old Isabel Spiegel had an unusual spring in her step as she skipped over the walkway. "It feels better than regular brick," she said. Her father, Venice advertising copywriter Jeff Spiegel, said he's not surprised that cities are jumping on the rubber walkways. "Big camphor trees tear up the sidewalk where we live," Spiegel said. "This seems like it would be worth a try in Venice." If you have come to this page from an outside location click here to get back to mindfully.org http://www.mindfully.org/Plastic/Rubber-Sidewalks.htm Page 4 of 4 •Loading"Rubber sidewalks add bounce to city foot traffic" 04/30/2006 11:12 AM SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/243444_ncenterO5.html Rubber sidewalks add bounce to city foot traffic Wednesday, October 5, 2005 By KERY MURAKAMI SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER REPORTER There are rubber balls to bounce, rubber galoshes to keep your feet dry and rubber gloves for the nasty cleaning chores. Now, in Seattle's South Park neighborhood and in a growing number of cities around the country, there are rubber sidewalks. The other day, Eric Sweet, who lives in the neighborhood, was doing ate �' test walk of the roughly 60-foot stretch of bluish-gray rubber panels ,. that city transportation department crews finished installing last Friday. ` "Wow," he said takingtentative steps on the surface that was firm but P had a little give. It was sort of like walking on used tires, from which the rubber panels are made. "They do feel different. It's kind of cool." Liz Ellis, an arborist with the city's transportation department, championed bringing rubber sidewalks to Seattle after she read they were being tested in Santa Monica, Calif., and other cities. Q4zaom Karen Ducey/P-1 She was intrigued not by the novelty of it. Nor did she want to give Crews from Rubbersidewalks Inc. install rubberized panels at Eighth Avenue South Seattleites a little extra bounce in their step as the winter gloom sets in. and South Rose Street in South Park. Five recycled tires are used in each panel,57 of Shepointed to a mound in the rubber sidewalk, raised b the roots which make up this test walkway.The P Y sidewalks are more elastic than concrete growing from one of the red maple trees on the shady, lush street of ones, stretching to accommodate growing small houses on Eighth Avenue South between South Rose and South tree roots, and don't have to be replaced as often, saving costs. Thistle streets. Across the street, where the sidewalk is concrete, the growing roots of another tree had already cracked it. "That (sidewalk) was just put in about a year ago," Ellis said. The rubberized sidewalks are more elastic, so instead of cracking, they stretch, and have to be replaced less often and are cheaper to fix, Ellis said. She doesn't know whether the sidewalks of Seattle will someday be paved in rubber. They are being tested only in the small stretch on the one street because it is still relatively new. Santa Monica was the first city to install them in 1998. At $8.70 a square foot, the rubber plates cost about $2 more a square foot to install than a regular concrete or asphalt sidewalk, Ellis acknowledged. http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/printer2/index.asp?ploc=b&refer=http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/243444-ncenterO5.html Page 1 of 2 Loading"Rubber sidewalks add bounce to city foot traffic" 04/30/2006 11:12 AM The test patch in South Park cost the city $8,000. Over time, she said, the extra cost might be offset by the fact that cracked sidewalks won't have to be replaced as often. Richard Valeriano, Santa Monica's senior street maintenance inspector, said it's still too early to know the long-term cost of the rubberized sidewalks. But, he said, the labor costs of replacing them runs about $1.50 square foot instead of the $8 to $12 it costs to break up and replace concrete. Santa Monica has installed them at about 50 sites, Valeriano said. Dan Joyce, a principal at the Gardena, Calif.-based rubber sidewalk manufacturer Rubbersidewalks Inc., said 80 cities in eight states are trying rubberized sidewalks. Tacoma and Olympia are among them. Butting up against concrete sidewalks can damage tree roots, and Seattle occasionally has to remove the trees, Ellis said. She came across the rubberized sidewalks after grappling with the same issue that inspired the company to develop the technology -- to get trees and sidewalks to coexist. "if you care about sustainability, you have to try to get the most life out of what you have," she said. Each of the 57 rubber panels installed, she said, is made of five recycled tires. "That's a big mountain of tires that won't be going into a landfill," she said. Joyce said the company's founder, Lindsay Smith, a screenwriter, got the idea when she was upset that Los Angeles County crews were going to rip out trees in her neighborhood and discovered that Santa Monica County was experimenting with rubberized sidewalks. Sweet, the man who was walking down the street, had one worry. He slid his sneakered foot across the rubberized sidewalk and wondered if it would become as slick as a Wham-0 Slip 'N Slide when it rains.' Valeriano, though, said Santa Monica tested the sidewalk with skateboarders, rollerbladers and women in high heels and found the rubber has more traction than concrete. Said Debbie McNeil, who is active with the South Park Neighborhood Association, "We want to keep as many street trees here. as possible. But we also want sidewalks that don't trip us." P-I reporter Kery Murakami can be reached at 206-448-8131 or kerymurakami(—&seattlepi.com. ©1998-2006 Seattle Post-Intelligencer ittp://seattlepi.nwsource.com/printer2/index.asp?ploc=b&refer=http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/243444_ncenteri)S.htmI Page 2 of 2 C A L I F o R N I A e A _ A statewide campaign to expand, enhance, and preserve urban and community forests in 1 California in order to make our cities and communities more livable, improve our global environment, and connect people to the land and to each other. Our programs and services THE include: Providing information,advice,and referrals to individuals,organizations,and agencies interested BENEFITS in starting or improving urban forestry efforts in their communities. Publishing a quarterly newsletter exploring current OF TREES issues in urban forestry. Working with the nursery and landscaping indus- tries to promote the growing of quality tree stock, and proper planting and care practices. It's not hard to see that trees are one of the Supporting a growing network of community tree most important components of attractive groups that promote citizen action and environmen- residential and commercial streets. tal stewardship through planting and caring for trees. The colors,forms, and textures they add Administering a grant program that provides help to soften and bring natural character funding to citizen-based groups involved in urban to cityscapes. forestry. California ReLeaf offices: But the beauty of trees is more than skin 116 New Montgomery 3001 Redhill Avenue deep. Beyond aesthetics, the benefits trees Suite 300 Building 4,Suite 224 San Francisco, CA 94105 Costa Mesa, CA 92626 provide are many and varied. (415)495-5660 (714)557-2575 Let's take a closer look at the important r H e California ReLeaf is a project of The Trust for role trees play in our lives. -------- -- -- —— ——— — — a TRUSTPublic Land,a national land-conservation F ��{� on o organization that has protected to date over PUBLIC 650,000 acres of urban,rural,and wildland open LAND spaces for public enjoyment. d14 5193 While we work and play, the trees Trees provide cool places for kids to play in our backyards, on our streets, and in our on schoolgrounds, in parks, and in back- parks are busy providing us with a cleaner, yards. cooler environment. Ab%It's plain and simple. Healthy trees Trees remove carbon dioxide from the air make dollars and sense. and produce life-supporting oxygen. Trees planted strategically around homes By providing shade, moisture, and wind- can reduce energy consumption by 15 to 35 breaks, trees decrease the amount of energy percent, saving consumers up to $240 a needed to cool and heat our homes and year. offices. Homeowners can increase the value of Trees help clean the air by trapping dust their property as much as 20 percent by and pollen. planting trees and enhancing the landscape. Trees help.reduce stormwater run-off and Trees need less water than lawns, and their help prevent soil erosion. shade can significantly reduce the water Trees help reduce urban noise pollution by requirements of other landscape plants. acting as sound barriers. In commercial areas, trees can boost business and tourism by providing shadier, Trees provide homes for birds and other more inviting sidewalks and parking lots. wildlife. Tree planting, care, and management )*k Trees also help to improve the generate jobs in both the public and private health and welfare of our communities. sectors. Trees beautify our surroundings, enhance Trees are a wise investment—they increase our sense of well-being, and alleviate in dollar value and provide greater environ- stress. mental benefits as they mature. Tree canopies help protect us from expo- sure to the sun's rays. When properly planted and cared for, trees can improve the quality of our lives in a Tree planting and care provide one of the myriad of ways. Contact California ReLeaf few opportunities to experience and nurture or your local tree group to find out how you nature in urban areas. can help keep your community's trees happy and growing. Tree planting and care projects bring neighbors together, and foster community pride and a sense of ownership. I i I �! a `t j A , `« a - r , r I� 1 � •,� '.J��-ate`=��t..�i1r- � .�,:J' l°q �I� ! '�,• .��� wt _ ti, i� ..`_ ��pl\1\ ��� h.; - r r - � rnk '•r r / �/ J - I 111yy�,,��wyYY T i e T. �.�, „ ..,-"�---->�~ti��--� Ili►• I;,� I�� ` � � _ �- � fir 4Yi �JJk - mm_ Ir.T� {' ;- F1 ,} ��� {r '' F• ' y 1•`. IFFF 0 vMw- 1'All a r �`4r�?:' .t�#��3�j`ia d'wJ'4 :" ...fue`.�IF:�." h•i .Y�a �,.Y. Lam" } �r;r.=., - I` I _ •�(. - ���,-# _ � � It .L � ' i• — s aa::. .'xA •tea w y f j j- ITS l '3S u}J ! �'�.. ,•'a'{.. •, — ^� "�"`�.,_, 1tiJ y t � Y rat-I,+--v."'� I--. /` _. `'•.�``. .'•R;�i ._.. - , I I r i _:_._-.�, Ir ��� :1 ����j,��� •1 �' �: ''Wa_•i „� � �G ;.�,T�-_' a-`z;-"'' ��"•K. ���C� �t�`�';i ---� . �lV" 1. - r�; - r Piz-, ,, f � - �''514� .��1�'tiII�T - •�•>A�H, '1 "'�I� � A L,•,iyj �! !'ILir,�' .,�:-'w . _ l � �,�` f i�(lam .:,�'1CI ',, I I �� : I _L`-c-.,.-...._s I I gfys��. ��.. �F7�A. _�', �^`---_•----� •, ., '�.e; '.��,..-V->_ _ - _'vim` �F k 1CLL-•,w�C �,x� ,tee. �r<,t�-"'" y ''.., �t �° .,,...�,-���� _ _ " • • • •TMI , taw • ., �.., .. > •: 4 � car- _ w � -*�aaM,,. _ "•lice � 1 i_,.. •, _. .- s_ Amok _ - 4 "' `�`.+:n- lJ--•--`--�'r ~ - _ �j�-.';' .. Tj ` .....' •�� fH 1�k.� �UI ("'� '� 1 ,� 4t,.� I� ��IPr•nll�� �""�, - -- -- • _ ml .x._ i Brush Drive gutters the next day after it rained on 4/14/06. -.ae -fir:r, T.q�t ta. - �_• l-_ 77 .. I Oih _ 'rots - _ `�. 1 "\_ ,-...:..-..,, ,.,.e•-e4.'., .•!'s"'' ...fie Above: Walking from Newland towards Waite on the left side, Above: This is the worst spot, at the corner of Newland and last photo. Brush. The water from Newland street apparently drains here. Would a Brush Street project even address this? Or is this for a u` "$ Newland Streetproject? Several relatives of the owner who lives here have answered the door at this house, but not the owner, so I do not have a vote from the owner himself. He never has bothered to contact me. The others have said they love the trees and want to keep their trees. _ Left: This is the Crepe Myrtle replacement tree. These "trees" have �.. been leafless for quite some time now and still show no signs of any buds at this date, 4/17/06 when this photo was taken. pg. 6 C11V P �,�p , J CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH o C City Council Interoffice Communication - z� To: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members 0_<C37Y.1 — From: Don Hansen, City Council Member Pd Date: April 10, 2006 c C, Subject: H-ITEM FOR APRIL 17, CITY COUNCIL MEETING - _ N RECONSIDERATION OF BRUSH DRIVE STREET REPAIRS STATEMENT OF ISSUE: On February 6, 2006, staff presented a contract award recommendation for repairs to numerous streets on the residential street repair petition list. One of these streets, Brush Drive, between Waite Lane and Newland Street, has been on the list since 1995, finally receiving budget funding for repairs this fiscal year. Once preliminary planning for the construction documents commenced and the property owners on Brush Drive were notified of the impending work, some of them became concerned over the anticipated removal of numerous city-owned parkway trees adjacent to their homes. These residents challenged the validity of the petition because it was over 10-years old, alleged that many of the original petitioners had moved; and claimed that most owners signing the petition did not understand the extent to which the damaged curb and sidewalk replacement would necessitate removal of the adjacent parkway trees. When the contract bids were presented on February 6, and after extensive discussion, Council directed staff to "...(a) effect satisfactory repairs to the sidewalks to mitigate immediate safety issues, (b) perform spot repairs to curbs and gutters where necessary for safety concerns, and (c) protect trees as much as feasible to accomplish the necessary safety repairs without leaving any tree in an unsafe condition." Subsequent to the Council's action, the property owner who circulated the original petition requested that the City Council reconsider its action and proceed with the full repairs. This owner asserted that the adopted alternative direction, which he felt was recommended merely to satisfy a vocal minority of objecting residents, will lead to an inadequate result; is not responsive to the majority of the Brush Drive homeowners; and is unfair to the original petitioners. Referring to the attached map, there are 50 properties along Brush Drive in the improvement area. Twenty-nine (29) of these properties have mature trees whose root systems are causing damage and are susceptible to removal. The remaining 21 properties either have no parkway trees or have recently planted parkway trees that are not at risk. Staff would expect to plant some 40 new replacement trees (with some corner lots receiving two trees) if the entire project were to be reconstructed as originally planned �� �!/ 7 _p � �5r H-ITEM FOR APRIL 17, CITY COUNCIL MEETING -RECONSIDERATION OF BRUSH DRIVE STREET REPAIRS 4/10/2006 Page 2 CITY OBLIGATION: The City Attorney has provided an opinion that there is no process in place by which the city or the adjacent property owners along Brush Drive may revoke a petition process. In fact, regardless of the existence of any petition, the city remains primarily responsible for public safety issues in the public rights of way. RECOMMENDED ACTION: The City Council should reopen discussion on its prior action relative to its direction to staff concerning Brush Drive. The project should be reconsidered in light of reconstructing the entire street's curbs and gutters as (1) the only permanent solution to the street's drainage problems; (2) the only way to eliminate the liability exposure to the City from tree damage; and (3) the means to uphold fair and equitable treatment of the adjacent property owners who took the initiative to improve their street and have been waiting nearly 11 years for this project. Attachment xc: Penny Culbreth-Graft, City Administrator Paul Emery, Deputy City Administrator Bob Hall, Deputy City Administrator Joan Flynn, City Clerk Robert Beardsley, Director of Public Works (8) April 17, 2006 - Council/Agency Agenda - Page 8 G-1d. (City Council) Adopt Ordinance No. 3734 Amending Chapter 3.03 of the Huntington Beach Municipal Code Relating to Contract Procedures by Amending Monetary Limits and Authority (600.05) —Ordinance No. 3734— "An Ordinance of the City of Huntington Beach Amending Chapter 3.03 of the Huntington Beach Municipal Code Relating to Contract Procedures."Approved for Introduction 4/3/06. Recommended Action: Motion to: 1. After City Clerk reads by title, Adopt Ordinance No.3734 by roll call vote; and 2. Direct the Central Services Manger to develop and/or implement a "centralized contract management program" to oversee and ensure compliance with all codes while still maintaining the safeguards to ensure budget control. Approved 7-0 G-2. Ordinances for Introduction G-2a. (City Council) Approve for Introduction Ordinance No. 3735 Amending Chapter 10.44 of the Huntington Beach Municipal Code Relating to Recreational Vehicle Parking Time Limits (560.20) —Ordinance No. 3735— "An Ordinance of the City of Huntington Beach Amending Chapter 10.44 of the Huntington Beach Municipal Code Relating to Parking Time Limits." Recommended Action: After City Clerk reads by title, Approve Introduction of Ordinance No. 3735, by roll call vote. Motion to deny approval of the Recommended Action (subsequently replaced by a substitute motion). Police Chief Ken Small reported on the effectiveness of the RV ordinance and reasons for amending. Extensive Council discuss ensued. Substitute motion to approve the amendments on page G-2a.5 of the agenda packet as follows: Section 1, 10.44.065 Exceptions, (a) 1. change the word "twelve"to "sixteen",(a) 2. change the word "three"to "eight";and add(a) 3. no more than 100 days in any twelve month period. Approved 6-1 (Hansen— No) The Chief further clarified that parking enforcement will not ticket Rvs that have a permit and are moved to a different street on street sweeping days. H. City=Cbuncil/Redevelopment Agency Items H-1a. (City Council) Submitted By Councilmember Hansen Reconsideration of Brush Drive Street Repairs (120.90) Communication from Councilmember Hansen transmitting the following Statement of Issue: On February 6, 2006, staff presented a contract award recommendation for repairs to numerous streets on the residential street repair petition list. One of these streets, Brush Drive, between Waite Lane and Newland Street, has been on the list since 1995, finally receiving budget funding for repairs this fiscal year. (9) April 17, 2006 - Council/Agency Agenda - Page 9 Once preliminary planning for the construction documents commenced and the property owners on Brush Drive were notified of the impending work, some of them became concerned over the anticipated removal of numerous city-owned parkway trees adjacent to their homes. These residents challenged the validity of the petition because it was over 10-years old; alleged that many of the original petitioners had moved; and claimed that most owners signing the petition did not understand the extent to which the damaged curb and sidewalk replacement would necessitate removal of the adjacent parkway trees. When the contract bids were presented on February 6, and after extensive discussion, Council directed staff to "...(a) effect satisfactory repairs to the sidewalks to mitigate immediate safety issues, (b) perform spot repairs to curbs and gutters where necessary for safety concerns, and (c) protect trees as much as feasible to accomplish the necessary safety repairs without leaving any tree in an unsafe condition." Subsequent to the Council's action, the property owner who circulated the original petition requested that the City Council reconsider its action and proceed with the full repairs. This owner asserted that the adopted alternative direction, which he felt was recommended merely to satisfy a vocal minority of objecting residents, will lead to an inadequate result; is not responsive to the majority of the Brush Drive homeowners; and is unfair to the original petitioners. Referring to the attached map, there are 50 properties along Brush Drive in the improvement area. Twenty-nine (29) of these properties have mature trees whose root systems are causing damage and are susceptible to removal. The remaining 21 properties either have no parkway trees or have recently planted parkway trees that are not at risk. Staff would expect to plant some 40 new replacement trees (with some corner lots receiving two trees) if the entire project were to be reconstructed as originally planned. CITY OBLIGATION: The City Attorney has provided an opinion that there is no process in place by which the city or the adjacent property owners along Brush Drive may revoke a petition process. In fact, regardless of the existence of any petition, the city remains primarily responsible for public safety issues in the public rights of way. Recornknended Action: Motion to: The City Council should reopen discussion on its prior action relative to its direction to staff concerning Brush Drive. The project should be reconsidered in light of reconstructing the entire street's curbs and gutters as (1) the only permanent solution to the street's drainage problems; (2) the only way to eliminate the liability exposure to the City from tree damage; and (3) the means to uphold fair and equitable treatment of the adjacent property owners who took the initiative to improve their street and have been waiting nearly 11 years for this project. Discussion held amongst Council and staff. Substitute motion to poll residents via certified mail, subsequently withdrawn. Recommended Action approved as amended to reconstruct the entire street's curbs and gutters and to allow residents to give input on selection of trees (not shrubs) to be planted as replacements for trees removed. Approved 6-1 (Bohr— No) Heil Ave. ,6501 16502 '650 ,6502 +6s0 MM 1650, 16502 16501 16502 16501 16502 16s0, 16502 ' 1651 8462 16s1 16321 16522 '6521 16522 16521 16522 16521 16572 16521 16522 ,6S21 16s22 16S21 16522 16S21 16522 16521 16S31 16532 16531 16532 16S31 16s32 16531 15532 1653, 16532 16531 16SM 16531 16532 16S31 16s32 16531 165>Z t654t J 16542 16541 V t6S42 16541 ` 16w 16541 .5 1;Z 16541 U 16W 16541 ` U m V m m V 16542 16541 m 115542 16541 16542 1654t 16551 16552 ,65s, 5 ,6552 1655+ V- 16552 +65s1 Q t6552 1655, m ,sss ,6$s1 n c •l>a ° 10 C m G 16552 i65si 01 16SS2 16S5, t6sm 16551 16561 > d = ° L H 07 ,gym 16562 16561 18562 16561 16562 16561 16562 16S61 3 165R 16561 16562 t6561 = 16562 16$61 16562 ,6561 16571 16572 16571 ,6572 16571 16572 16571 16572 16571 ,6572 165 11 1 1 1 i 16571 I I I I 16591 8 I I �1 yI1 7� ❑I g- Bnah Dr. I I I c I 1661I g y g 'a' O O I$ g i1 g y1 N y1 16 111 g 16602 16601 gd p 16 g 5� 26 26 26 •b 16612 16611 e o Id g 2d id it 16 8 $ 16622 t6621 OM Bryant Dr. '&M 1%31 N 16642 16641 16662 16661 16672 16671 16672 s o o — 6+31 Q {� ❑ g g LasmbertD9y�r. 72 y S� g g '�- '�' c,6M1 o id g 'id g � � it 16 Iii ib 8 i5 iS i6 ld � 36 i6 16692 18691 g g g Q 1yy gg 542 16702 1901 16732 g Id tl b 16722 ,672, 16132 16731 U) m Terry Dr. V 16741 19742 16747 16742 g 16742 16741 ` 16742 16741 C ,6742 16741 16742 16741 C ,6742 L) 16752 ,6751 16761 16752 16751 ^ 167S2 16751 >. 16751 J 16752 6 �� �' 16761 C C 16752 16752 t6/62 16761 w3� 16171 (� 16772 16771 m c J 16772 16771 J + t67 16781 W C 16TR 16771 Z 1676, 16782 1676, ' .0 16762 1678+ m ,�� /6771 D 16782 16781 A 16782 ,6771 16800 16791 10 16722 16791 2 +�� 167E 0 16792 16791 16791 C 16792 16791 0 6 16791 18792 16791 J 1679i 16791 16792 16601 222X t17. ,660Q 16801 16801 16602 16601 8 16602 16801 2 C 4 $ 16602 16801 >8 ,669z ,6821 16602 i6 1d 26 ,68,2 ,66„ 16821 16622 1f 121 16822 1502 Lancaster Dr. Amett Dr. 1683 16832 g �yy 1� pp 1 1041 16842 Robidoux Dr. 16561 Clr. ^� 1666 g ,666e 16668 16871 16668 Mal CHURCH OF CHRIST 16881 8 1688 89 161 1669T 16897 16901 16M (RANCHO VIEW SCHOOL) 16891 J � E � � '10` 1691t Co 1112 Co 1691, ,691 �, 2 16922 16912 0] 16940 16921 0 Tamaru Dr. ,6944 16932 16931 $ E 6472 16M (16940 B ST.) S _ ,69s+ e9s 6471 16971 $ a 3 Warner Ave. T Existing tree to remain (14) o Existing tree to be evaluated (29) n No existing tree in parkway (7) 263 c / r } F 1 "� a ) r 1 s J i �'��� rye; / � ' ` y• o II 7 h " z P it �f t • ',—,ate T�_ �► '�� ��•��,,� � � � . �s .��" ��� m ♦\�,�©�° DOO�OOOOOObO ��V1111...I .'* 0;OOOOOO C, r i ' Dm .Q��4$`I\ 7f i anOp 3: P�k d8OOO ✓ Q n09 O 04.. f SA 'ov c�ao�i y t'OnN5 �vjf �O I.� A k�y,1�. - RECEIVED FROM AS PUBLIC RECOR F R C UNCIL MEETING OF - CITY CLER ICE JOAN L.FLYW,GfTY CLERK This is a List of 16 Homeowners or 32% who want to Save the Trees on Brush Drive and are against any project which will require them to be removed. Owner(s) Address Recorded Documents & Efforts Theresa & Xili Chaque 8392 Brush Signed the Tree Saving Petition, have sent. letters & e-mails and have spoken at several city council & public works meetings. Chris Varga 8242 Brush Signed Tree Saving Petition, sent letters & emails, had name removed from 1995 petition, has spoken at several council meetings and the 10/27/05 public works meeting. Steven & Kerry Leth 8212 Brush Signed Tree Saving petition, spoke at the 10/27/05 public works meeting and spoke at the 2/06/06 city council meeting. Brian Hughes 8252 Brush Signed Tree Saving petition, had his name removed from 1995 petition and spoke at the 10/27/05 public works meeting. John & Lillian Tepel 16572 Wheeler Signed Tree Saving petition, had name removed from 1995 petition, spoke at the May 15th, 2006 city council meeting and has submitted a letter. Betty McLellan 8122 Brush Signed the Tree Saving petition, had name removed from the 1995 petition and has submitted a letter. Her voice was played from a tape recorder at the council meeting on 5/15/06 asking not to take her tree out. Stella Renfro 8112 Brush Signed the Tree Saving petition, had name removed from the 1995 petition, had her name removed from the'Herrema 2006 petition after being mislead into signing it and has submitted a letter. Bonnie & Ross Erick 8342 Brush Signed the Tree Saving petition, sent an e-mail, spoke at 2 meetings with individual council members and spoke at 2/06106 city council meeting. Sidney & Edith 8102 Brush Signed the Tree Saving_petition and have sent Sternberg an e-mail and a letter. Susan Somes 16572 Waite Signed Tree Saving Petition, has sent an e-mail and along with her children posed for a photo where they held signs for saving the trees. Richard Sorrano 16571 Wheeler Signed the Tree Saving petition, had name removed from the Herrema 2006 petition. Christopher & Sarah 16572 Monroe Signed the Tree Saving Petition, had name Twining removed from the Herrema 2006 petition and posed for a photo with a sign supporting saving the trees. Sarah Twining wrote a letter to Mr. Beardsley and the City Council asking them to please honor their request to have their name removed from the Herrema petition. Donna Wittebom 16601 Waite Signed the Tree Saving petition, had name removed from the Herrema 2006 petition and has sent an e-mail. Garth & Sheri Casteel 16571 Tripp Signed the Tree Saving petition, had name removed from the Herrema 2006 petition. Mr. & Mrs. Alfonso 8232 Brush Removed their name from the Herrema Aguilar petition. They are new owners who have not moved in yet, signed the Herrema petition by mistake, because they did not know enough information about the project and are against the street project. Collen VonFlowtow 8272 Brush Removed their name from the Herrema petition and is against the project. David Kellams" 8182 Brush Signed the Tree Saving Petition and had his (wants project) name removed from the Herrema 2006 petition because he thought a poll by mail needed to be done so that the decision could be made fairly even though he wants the project. Kenneth Parks 8302 Brush Signed the Tree Saving petition. Signed Doug Herrema's petition, but asked Mr. Herrema to remove his name from it. Mr. Herrema did not cross off his name, but had him sign a second document which was supposed to facilitate having his name taken off and never submitted it. Sarah Twining June 29, 2006 16572 Monroe Street Huntington Beach CA 92647 Huntington Beach City Council Robert Beardsley, Public Works 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach CA 92648 Dear City Council and Mr. Beardsley, My husband and I do not feel that a large project to redo the street is neces- sary for Brush Drive and wish to preserve our tree lined street. The mature trees look much better, make the street cooler and provide shade. We are concerned that the real estate values on our street will decline from their loss. This street does not need a major street project. We have been away in Europe and have been unable to attend any City Council meetings. Before we left, my husband felt pressured into signing the petition by Mr. Herrema, but I signed a paper to take his name off of it, because it is not really what we want. I understand that this document was not acknowledged at the council meeting on 6-19-06. Please allow us the right to change our mind and remove our name from the latest petition. S cerely, Sarah Twining Brush Drive Petition Name Removal I , Sra ra_ h i r� ► homeowner of the residency at Name 7_ I`�o�^-� , Huntington Beach, California, 92647 Address want my name removed from the 2006 "Brush Drive Street Improvement Petition" on file with the City of Huntington Beach, California. Sign a' Date 5 Print name i Brush Drive Petition Name Removal homeowner of the residency at Name Huntington Beach, California, 92647 Address want my name removed from the 2006 "Brush Drive Street Improvement Petition' on file with the City of Huntington Beach, California. Signed`—� a Date � -O Print A-) T name Brush Drive Petition Name Removal homeowner f h•me• • the residency at Name ✓� , Huntington Beach, California, 92647 Address want my name removed from the 2006 "Brush Drive Street Improvement Petition on file with the City of Huntington Beach, California. Sign (i�7�Ji' 'lL� Date Print yrx) '-t'o 0 name Brush Drive Petition Name Removal homeowner of the residency at Name �0 Z 46WJ 7 k 1)111/ e , Huntington Beach, California, 92647 Address want my name removed from the 2006 "Brush Drive Street Improvement Petition" on file with the City of Huntington Beach, California. Signed Date Print 7,"z- name Save the Urban Forest Petition "We the citizens of Huntington Beach object to the treatment of the citizens and urban forest on Brush Drive and want them to be treated fairly. The destruction of 42 mature trees on almost a mile long street is devastating to the urban environment of the street, neighborhood and to the native birds which are currently nesting. We support the efforts of the residents who want to keep their mature trees and support a poll by registered mail to determine if 75%, which is the city policy, want to have them removed for a street improvement project." Name Address Contact Information 5'qZ lam- c1.15�� % 1q-ssU3 --1`122- a 5 ��G �L t G `0 M t ai d iA Rz 1 A lrC 11. P 41r ) L 17� C 4 / OS © rZ,ti7/,.= y C) a �� uk ICVTA i �. of 10 4t� Mrv- VA�Ac _ t Save the Urban Forest Petition "We the citizens of Huntington Beach object to the treatment of the citizens and urban forest on Brush Drive and want them to be treated fairly. The destruction of 42 mature trees on almost a mile long street is devastating to the urban environment of the street, neighborhood and to the native birds which are currently nesting. We support the efforts of the residents who want to keep their mature trees and support a poll by registered mail to determine if 75%, which is the city policy, want to have them removed for a street improvement project." Name Address Contact Information } 71 .CLJ 71Y) /0 Al �-+��C vt C r. kA 6A cl'L 1 Save the Urban Forest Petition "We the citizens of Huntington Beach object to the treatment of the citizens and urban forest on Brush Drive and want them to be treated fairly. The destruction of 42 mature trees on almost a mile long street is devastating to the urban environment of the street, neighborhood and to the native birds which are currently nesting. We support the efforts of the residents who want to keep their mature trees and support a poll by registered mail to determine if 75%, which is the city policy, want to have them removed for a street improvement project." Name Address Contact Information ��AA ILIA C 01 S:3 Oso IT r4. 1 rj) rvulzJt c S'cl 3-7v2 y ✓7 91 MAC � r r1✓YI " /&,/ II r14,6o2 L �_�L �� 475 - / 776 Y�f;Q DA11M iJ-5 `=112 CO F---L C ti LI I s� 1�• w v �� I�\�—s✓`�Lti•C I1: � I �;��� tj -�1y_may c;.. �� 0 Save the Urban Forest Petition "We the citizens of Orange County object to the treatment of the citizens and urban forest on Brush Drive, Huntington Beach and want them to be treated fairly. The destruction of 42 mature trees on almost a mile long street is devastating to the urban environment of the street, neighborhood and to the native birds which are currently nesting. We support the efforts of the residents who want to keep their mature trees and support a poll by registered mail to determine if 75%, which is the city policy, want to have them removed for a street improvement project." Name Address Contact Information "JP/ i�I Z� --f VIVT IM 22C) y �WQ (rio 12Nir9 Sots � a (2 b - 1313 KJ C3,(-, - 1r' Ocf If :�-� t ci��-�L��t,,►�.;1 G�r�� c��n P� �L C-►,— � 2��� �3 2 CC, fit✓; /U r3 e�7_3/ti W i Save the Urban Forest Petition "We the citizens of Orange County object to the treatment of the citizens and urban forest on Brush Drive, Huntington Beach and want them to be treated fairly. The destruction of 42 mature trees on almost a mile long street is devastating to the urban environment of the street, neighborhood and to the native birds which are currently nesting. We support the efforts of the residents who want to keep their mature trees and support a poll by registered mail to determine if 75%, which is the city policy, want to have them removed for a street improvement project." Name Address Contact Information 1 Z 3 562 427 Koo RECEIVED I:RONi � - c AS PUBLIC RECOf3D aNCII MEET 7F �'! CITY CLERK FFICE JOAN L.FLYNN,CITY CLERK Brush Drive Petition Name Removal , homeowner of the residency at Name Huntington Beach, California, 92647 Address want my name removed from the 2006 "Brush Drive Street Improvement Petition" on file with the City of Huntington Beach, California. Sign Date Print LJ �'�i1�1 i/p rl!5-4 name Brush Drive Petition Name Removal i PAZ,e� homeowner of the residency at Name t> j , Huntington Beach, California, 92647 Address want my name removed from the 2006 "Brush Drive Street Improvement Petition" on file with the City of Huntington Beach, Calffornia. Signed Date -7' 2 � PrinttiPAR,�'S name Brush Drive Petition Name Removal I l v �' , homeowner of the residency at Name So�3Z �J J7 Ai I"'-e , Huntington Beach, California, 92647 Address want my name removed from the 2006 "Brush Drive Street Improvement Petition' on file with the City of Huntington Beach, California. Signed Date z/(;, ' Print Gi✓`6 v�` �O� name Sarah Twining June 29, 2006 16572 Monroe Street Huntington Beach CA 92647 Huntington Beach City Council Robert Beardsley, Public Works 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach CA 92648 Dear City Council and Mr. Beardsley, My husband and I do not feel that a large project to redo the street is neces- sary for Brush Drive and wish to preserve our tree lined street. The mature trees look much better, make the street cooler and provide shade. We are concerned that the real estate values on our street will decline from their loss. This street does not need a major street project. We have been away in Europe and have been unable to attend any City Council meetings. Before we left, my husband felt pressured into signing the petition by Mr. Herrema, but I signed a paper to take his name off of it, because it is not really what we want. I understand that this document was not acknowledged at the council meeting on 6-19-06. Please allow us the right to change our mind and remove our name from the latest petition. S cerely, Sarah Twiniffing