The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutRECREATIONAL TRAILS - 1970 - 1982 - Bikeway - Equestrian - .. . ........... VY N V. A% dim • N11 11j, Z.4 r. 41� 41 moo I ADDENDUM Pen and Ink Changes 1. Change Figure 2-7, Route Number: 51, Route Name:Gothard Street, Street Segment; Garfield Avenue to Yorktown Avenue to read Route Number 57 . 2 . Add to Figure 2-8 : Route Number : 57 Phase: I III Route Name: Gothard Street Street Segment: Garfield Avenue to Yorktown Avenue Mileage of .bikeways: . 50 Trail Construction: 9, 000 3. Incorporate the attached maintenance impact statements for. bikeways and equestrian trails as part of the Trails Implementation Plan. Portion of 2. 5. 6, page 27 (insert as first paragraph) Adoption of the Trails Implementation Plan will have a direct effect upon the personnel, material .and equipment needs of the Public Works Department. The effect will be related primarily to maintenance cost that the City would incur under each phase of the Bikeway Section of the Trails Implementation Plan. Maintenance cost shown in Figure 2-12 would be divided between labor, -material and equipment cost. Labor would take an estimated 43 percent of the projected maintenance cost while material and equipment would take 38 percent and 19 percent respectively. The following represents a breakdown of projected public works maintenance cost incurred under each phase of the bikeway plan. Phase I Labor Cost (increase in Public Works Department $ 36 ,174 personnel of 2 employees) Material Cost 31,968 Equipment Cost 15, 983 Total Maintenance Cost Phase I $ 84,125 Phase II Labor Cost (increase in Public Works Department $ 13 ,541 personnel of . 68 employees) Material Cost 11,967 Equipment Cost 5 ,988 Total Maintenance- Cost Phase II $ 31,496 Phase III Labor Cost (increase in Public Works Department $ 10,833 personnel of . 58 employees) Material Cost 9 , 573 Equipment Cost 4 ,786 Total Maintenance Cost Phase III $ 25,192 Replace existing 3.4 , page 35, with this page. 3.4 Cost Analysis A cost analysis of the Equestrian Trails Plan is provided in Figure 3-3. The total project development cost is estimated to be $223, 692 . Approximately two-thirds of this cost could be shared be- tween City, County, and State. The implementation of the proposed Equestrian Trails will affect Public Works Department personnel, material funding and equipment or rentals. The Public Works Department estimates that it will cost fifty percent of construction cost per year to regrade, dress trails and remove debris dumpings . Fence replacement and repairs are estimated to cost ten percent of construction cost per year, while replacement of signs that are knocked down, stolen or deteriorated are estimated to cost twenty-five percent of the construction cost. per year. Phase I of the Equestrian Trails Plan will cost an estimated $60, 623 to develop. Public Works Department estimates that maintenance of the Phase I equestrian trail will cost an estimated $7 ,161. This amount includes an increase of .17 Public Works employees. Phase II of the Equestrian Trails Plan will cost an estimated $163 , 069 to develop. Public Works Department estimates that maintenace of the Phase II equestrial trails will cost an estimated $20 , 657 . The cost may be shared between City, County, and State. This amount includes andincrease of one Public Works employee. Several sources of funding for equestrian trails in the City are possible. 1. Land and Water Conservation Funds ($7 ,000 from these funds is already reserved for equestrian trails) 2. Horse licensing 3. Revenue- Sharing monies 4. Recreation and Parks budget L fees tax funds from the State Beach, Park Recreation and Historical lities Bond Act of 1974 . ty of Orange and State funding sources • I SUMMARY The Trails Implementation Plan is divided into two Sections : Bikeway and Equestrain Trails. The Plan sets forth specific recom- mendations and provides cost estimates for each trails plan. The Trails Implementation Plan is consistent with the recreational goals of the California Coastal Act and will be reflected in the Local Coastal Program which will culminate in the adoption of the Coastal Element of the General Plan. Also , the Plan is consistent f with the County of Orange Environmental Management Agency' s concept plans for providing Bicycle and Equestrian recreational trails within a proposed linear park connecting Huntington Central Park with the Bolsa Chica marshland. • Bikeways The Trails Implementation Plan proposes to update the existing 68 mile Master Plan of Bikeways to approximately 134 miles. The primary reasons for the expansion of the City' s bikeway system is to improve access to various school sites , especially the intermediate and high school levels, improve east/west bikeway flow, improve access to Huntington Central Park, improve beach access, and generally provide improved access to commercial activity centers throughout the City. The Plan proposes a number of recommendations to improve the present bikeway program. The recommendations are: • 1. Adopt the Revised Master Plan of Bikeways as shown in Figure 2-7. 2. Provide for an annual maintenance budget for the upkeep of the bikeway system. 3. Continue support of the Community Bicycle Safety Program. • 4. Direct Public Work' s staff to evaluate and report to the Planning Commission those streets along the existing bikeway system that have a conflict between cyclist and parked automobiles. 5. Direct Public Work' s staff to provide procedures for protecting bikeways that lie adjacent to construction sites. 6. Direct that a more limited Bike Crossing Sign program be insti- tuted throughout the City. • i • Equestrians The equestrian plan reduces the number of miles of Trail under Phase I of the existing trails plan that was developed by the Equestrain Use Committee and adopted by the City Council in August 1975. The equestrian trails that are being proposed for elimination from the • Plan lie east of Goldenwest Street, between Garfield Street and Slater Avenue and extend adjacent to Gothard Street and around the perimeter of Huntington Central Park south of Talbert Avenue. The Implementation Plan recognizes the importance of providing equestrian use as a recreational alternative for the residents of the • community. The Plan focuses equestrian use west of Goldenwest Street within Phase III of Huntington Central Park and immediately south between Ellis Avenue and Garfield Avenue. The Plan also focuses on connecting the City' s equestrian trails system with equestrian trails along the Edwards Street/38th Street bluffs (proposed County of .Orange lineal park) and eventually extending into the Bolsa Chica area. The equestrian plan provides for the following recommendation. Adopt a policy of preserving equestrian use in and around Huntington Central Park (Phase III) by: • 1. Adoption of the Conceptual Equestrain Trails Plan (Figure 3 . 2) that provides for the establishment of a permanent trails system that links Huntington Central Park, Phase III with the Estate Development Land Uses south of Phase III , the Edwards Street/ • 38th Street bluffs, and the Bolsa Chica marshlands . 2. Reiterate the City' s intent to include an Equestrian Center as an . integral part of the Huntington Central Park, Phase III master planning effort. Jogging Trails The section on Jogging Trails that is currently part of the Recreational Trails Element and was included in the first draft of the Trails Implementation Plan has been deleted from this revised Draft Plan. It is generally felt that the jogging trails would be incorporated into park sites as they are developed and adequate review and recommendation are the responsibility of the Recreation and Parks Commission. • • ii G ... . ...... I s ......�.w,r.e-...,w.,e�-c.,.u..<.,,,::...m+....:.,.,.....,...,,::,,.�:...................:..._.............t.............,. ..,. ..,,....s......... ......,..,...... ... EpNGER ,fib,,,• � g � 5 .............. q ........... ...........5.................:......-......-. -...... ........... ..-.-. ................ ........... HELL kE ...:. .-. 4 : , S `t; ..vw.nNw..r•.<+r<........,.i..voh..°+.:°r.,aai.'u^ra»r..m u.,.w i+"„�.... »w.nv,�..x<an:fxirs«<.i. <x,...:oio.�i WARNER SLATER TALBERT :: .. 9115 • LEGEND s.,.uo:. ..:..o..,..n GAR FIELD "'a s .,.f.' NELD Y i i 2 �r FIRST PHASEYORKTOWN ............ _ ... . �.�• SECOND PHASE \'\ ' fi i z • :::::::: CENTRAL PARK , • i BOLSA CHICA ECOLOGICAL ♦y \i; ��:`;.., "�:� .......:........�...........-.....�........... .. .....-.. ............ INDIANAPOLIS E PRESERVE PROPOSED TRAIL DELETION s, s ' .`''...., -�.......... ............ ..,.,......,...£ HAMLTON S s BANNING MW • EQUESTRIAN TRAILS PLAN `'. APPROVED AUGUST , 1975 • huntington beach planning department • } COST SUMMARY FOR TRAILS IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 1977 DOLLARS BIKEWAYS Phase I (Improvements) (within one year) $ 66, 725 Phase I (New Construction (within one year) 214, 212 TOTAL COST PHASE I $280, 937 Phase II (One to Five Years) . $ 63 ,780 Phase III (Five Years or Greater) 248 , 679 GRAND TOTAL COST $5 9 3,3 9 6 . EQUESTRIAN TRAILS Phase I (1. 81 miles) Grading 1. 81 miles @ $1, 454/mile $ 2, 632 Fencing 1. 81 miles @ $31, 869/mile 57 , 683 (wooden .rail fencing) Signing 7 signs @ $44/ea (4 signs/mile) 308 Total Cost $ 60, 623 Phase II Grading 7 miles @ $1, 452/mile $ 10,164 Fencing 2� miles @ $31, 869/mile 79, 673 (wooden rail fencing) 4� miles @ $16, 000/mile 72 , 000 (chain link fencing) Signing 28 signs @ $44/ea (4 signs/mile) 1, 232 Total Cost $163, 069 GRAND TOTAL COST $223, 692 Annual Maintenance Cost Bikeway Program $ 70, 084 Equestrian Program 2 ,420 Total Cost $ 72 , 504 • iv TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. 0 Introduction 1 1. 1 Intent 1 1. 2 Goals and Objectives 2 • 1. 3 Relation to .Other County and State Plans 3 2. 0 Bikeways 4 2. 1 Definitions 4 2. 2 Existing Bikeway Program 5 2. 3 Existing Deficiencies 11 2. 4 Bikeway Implementation Plan 15 2. 5 Implementing Funding Sources 20 2.. 6 Recommendations 27 3. 0 Equestrian Trails 28 3. 1 Existing Equestrian Studies 28 3. 2 Temporary Equestrian Trails 32 3. 3 Implementation 32 3. 4 Cost Analysis 34 3. 5 Recommendation 36 AM& • • • • TABLE OF FIGURES 2. 1 Existing Master Plan of Bikeways 2 . 2 Activity Centers • 2. 2A Support Facilities for Bikeways 2 . 3 Orange County Arterial Bikeway System 2. 4 Bike Route Signs 2. 5 Bicycle Accident Statistics • 2. 6 Streets not Suitable for Bikeway Lanes 2. 7 Revised Master Plan of Bikeways 2. 8 Bikeway Implementation Plan 2. 9 Bikeway Funds Received to Date • 2. 10 Bikeways Implementation Plan Cost Analysis 2 . 11 Bikeways Implementation Plan Funding Source Estimates 2. 12 Bikeways Implementation Plan Maintenance Cost • 3. 1 Equestrian Trails Plan 3. 2 Equestrian Trails Conceptual Plan 3. 3 Cost Analysis Equestrian Trails Plan AIRk • • 1. 0 INTRODUCTION The Trails Implementation Plan provides the residents of the com- munity with a recreational and a transportation trails system. The trails that are identified in this study are categorized into two areas: bikeways (bicycle lanes and trails) and equestrian trails. In the past, a number of studies have been carried out for these types of trails, providing the impetus for their development. This trails study will consolidate into one document a recommended plan • for the implementation expansion, and maintenance of a Citywide trails system. 1. 1 Intent The City ' s Trails are presently incorporated into the General Plan • under the Recreational Trails Element. The intent of the Trails Implementation Plan is to remove the Recreational Trails Element from the General Plan document, and to redirect and give recognition to bicycle trails as a viable mode of transportation for the move- ment of people in and through the community. At& � 1 i The General Plan Document, under the Circulation Element and Open Space and Conservation Element, presently includes adopted policies • with regard to City Trails. The Trails Implementation Study is viewed as an implementing tool of these trails policies. The removal of the Recreational Trails Element from the General Plan will provide the City with an increased range of flexibility for the planning and development of the City' s trails. system. Also, the separation will enable the City to be more responsive to new sources of funds as they become available for development and main- tenance of community trails. 1. 2 Goals and Objectives • The following goals and objectives are identified to provide a broad statement of purpose and provide the necessary direction for the achievement of a Citywide trails system. 1. 2 . 1 Bikeways Goal Provide bikeways that are safe and accessible to all residents of the community. Policies 1. Provide bicycle lanes along arterial streets for transportation and recreational purposes that provide direct access to activity centers. • 2 . Provide bicycle trails that are separated from road- ways where possible. 3. Provide an effective maintenance program for bicycle lanes and trails. • 4 . Provide bicycle lanes that are constructed to state design standards that maximize the safety of the cyclist. 5 . Continue to emphasize bicycle safety under the auspices of the City' s bicycle education program. • 1. 2. 2 Equestrial Trails Goal Accommodate horses in Huntington Beach. • 2 • Policies • 1. Develop a comprehensive trails system that serves designated equestrian areas. 2 . Connect the trails system with other open space areas. • 1. 3 Relationship to Other Planning Efforts 1. 3. 1 Local Coastal Program The Trails Implementation Plan is consistent with the California Coastal Actos concept of increasing non-motor- ized access to public beaches and providing recreational uses within the Coastal Zone. The preparation of the City' s Coastal Element of the General Plan will provide policies for development of non-motorized access to the public beach facilities. The adoption of the Coastal • Element is not expected to occur until sometime in mid 1979. 1. 3. 2 Bolsa Chica Regional Park Linking The County of Orange Environmental Management Agency (EMA) prepared a feasibility study for the development of a linear park along the Edwards Street/38th Street bluff connecting Huntington Central Park with the proposed purchase of land by the State within the Bolsa Chica Marshland. The feasibility study points out that the proposed park would offer excellent opportunities for equestrian trails and bicycle trails. Under the Trails Implementation Plan both proposed bicycle trails and equestrian trails are supportive of the County' s feasi- bility study. AM& • • • 3 i 2. 0 BIKEWAYS 2. 1 Definitions The following definitions are presented to provide continuity of terms throughout this section of the study with regard to bikeways: Bicycle - A device upon which any person may ride. Propelled exclusively by human power through a belt, chain or gears and having either two or three wheels in tandem or tricycle position. Class I Bikeways - Bikeways which provide a completely separated right-of-way designated for the exclusive use of bicycle and pedestrians with crossflows by motorists minimized. Class II Bikeways - Bikeways which provide a restricted right-of- way designated for the exclusive or semi-exclusive use of bicycles with through travel by motor vehicles or pedestrians prohibited, but with vehicle parking and crossflows by pedestrians and motorists permitted. Class III Bikeways - Bikeways which provide a right-of-way designation by signs or permanent markings and shared with pedestrians or motorists. � - 4 Activity Centers - Includes Commercial, Recreational, and Educational facilities that generate trip ends from residential land use. • 2. 2 Existing Bikeway Program The City of Huntington Beach has been actively pursuing a bikeway program since mid-1972 . Initially the City provided approximately 8-1/2 miles of Class I and II bikeways. This included the Class I bikeway extending along the Santa Ana River. Since this initial • program, the City has increased its bikeway program to include approximately 68 miles of Class I and Class II Bikeways (Figure 2-1) . The City' s bikeway program is one of the most extensive programs in Orange County. 2 . 2. 1 Route Selection Criteria • Past route selection has been based on (1) an analysis of the directness of proposed bike routes to community activity centers, (2) an evaluation of the relationship a proposed bikeway has with traffic volumes, traffic speed and roadway widths, and (3) the interfacing characteristics of the proposed bikeway to that of the County' s Arterial Bikeway System and the Bikeway Master Plans of adjacent cities. 2. 2. 2 Activity Centers • Activity centers that serve to attract the cycling public' have been identified in Figure 2-2. When the community bikeway system was initially planned, emphasis was placed on providing bikeways that served the educational activity centers - elementary schools, intermediate schools, high schools and Goldenwest College. Also, recreational areas, • such as the city and state beaches, community parks and Central Park were identified as high-use activity centers needing bikeways. In recent years, the bicycle has become increasingly popular as a means of transportation to schools, commercial and recreational activity centers and for home-to-work commuter trips. • The increasedinterest in cycling requires that bikeway planning continues to take into account the relationship of bikeways to the activity centers - Continued_ emphasis must be placed on providing safe bikeways that allows direct access to these activity centers. • 2. 2. 3 Bike Facilities When initially planning the bikeway system, consideration was given to providing routes to activity centers that had available along them rest areas, drinking fountains, • rest rooms, bicycle repair shops and air pump facilities. (Figure 2. 2A) 5 • • h 940 NEWBp(EWAYS� �OF c ♦1. ei lot t Q" ot • 'Lc6 ,® a `♦ ` �Pa ap`S4 ■ e®`e EQ� BG `I` '� °y _■ a �e .ry �♦ P� _8 a �♦ �,e' Lei'E� iy 1`♦ O\PrP e, e, r1P eje' P`�P e,® 5 lCO� ♦�♦ � 1`♦ ',oP ♦•� _� � of `. PALM f ■ t■t.as* z - ORANGE -....._ ■ -- • EXISTING MASTER PLAN OF CITY BIKEWAYS Figure 2-1 (-pM-pG8 • eF 4 \ FC E�LG �♦p° lq�O �° 20`f �\ ¢fit 4 � : j4q ®\ ♦A ®♦O a�c� ®i®♦® 40♦� s •, �/ ® ��°` � �� / Ste? 'f,5, ♦♦ p'k" O 0i \? G4 ♦♦ VO � �L µ,me\�s s` +ga'`��` ♦♦�eF� ®/®i®/ �4� \♦♦♦\® ��..y 8 \k<� ¢f,� �Q3'_ �C.a°� O \5 of ♦♦ ¢° • 7�C� ,? a E �c ¢ P ^Ple • c ` cP(� Q Z °�3J` q�t� cF v ; SPALM .... _ ORANGE '.. jjp� r�� >�- PACIfiC OAST. NLYY ...__ _ .......__. - �- ` r �E 3 ate,` as` ACTIVITY CENTERS • Figure 2-2 • LEGEND ♦� i, BIKEWAYS ♦ r. 3s: '<. : . ' .� '♦ E° ®BIKE REPAIR O � o ♦ 4: ♦ REST AREA ♦♦,, j♦� ♦• r� A AIR PUMP i • ® s'�• vl^ D DRINKING WATER O ♦P 1 a R REST ROOM ? 1 gO+ Pp �♦ ' tad 41 T PUBLIC TELEPHONE Off' `QED b:y �• P .` .` r 4F.�• Via O ' O O♦��' PTV P� � O ► ® P "e 4 4 r► P P ay ,i 'r g 1` v_ 6 . OR T • ,s®�•:f® DR ♦ ♦ DR D DR D T ® DR ♦ ♦T DRT DRY DR DR DR DR R . DR D DRT DR DR ® SUPPORT FACILITIES lopHUPTINGTON BEACH, 01LIFORNIA FOR BIKEWAYS PLANNING DEPARTMEPT Figure 2-2A <-RM-70A • Bicycle parking facilities have been provided at public • facilities, such as the community parks, city beach facil- ities , public library and the civic center. There is no requirement for private developers to provide bicycle parking facilities at new developments, however, many developers or store owners realize the need for bicycle parking facilities and provide them to the public. When planning new bicycle routes, the availability of the ancillary bike facilities are considered. 2. 2. 4 The Orange County Arterial Bikeway System (ABS) The Orange County Arterial Bikeway System (Figure 2-3) • identifies a network of bikeway routes that have county- wide significance. The system is perceived as forming the backbone bikeway system for Orange County. The Arterial Bikeway System is financed by the County from the following revenue sources with no matching funds required by participating cities. • • Highway User Tax Fund S.B. R21 Funds • Dana Point Tidelands Funds • Harbors, Beaches, and Revenue Sharing Funds Park District Funds • The following citywide bikeway routes are currently in- cluded on the Orange County Bikeway System Implementation Plan. Project Number Street Name Bikeway Limits • 3E Newland Street North City limits to Warner Avenue 16A Slater Avenue Wintersberg Channel to Edwards Street * Wintersberg Pacific Coast Highway to • Channel Slater Avenue 16B Slater Avenue Edwards Street to Newland Street 17A Pacific Coast Anderson Street to Warner Highway Avenue *17B Pacific Coast Warner Avenue to Beach Highway Boulevard *17C Pacific Coast beach Boulevard to Santa Highway Ana River • * Off-road trails (Class 1 Bikewav) • 6 6C••`� SOB _:; 1OC 3A 4 �' SC =:; 7 8A; 9A 4-; r 8B 11 76 ; 15A .: :12A j+N ✓ 3C % :3 , . 12C �; 15B D\� 14C 15C = ` 17A �,� 9FD w7E 16� -- al ; 17B 17C ,. -171 Legend a �� 17F 1 17H 7G Existing ...:.................. 77-78 --------- 75-76 78-79 Each project identified by a number which represents an overall route •..... 76-77 and a letter which reflects a specific project link. Figure 2-3 AfWXHUNTINGTON BUCH G4LIFORNIA'1: A rr"11 I ER IA L BIKEWAY SYSTEM PLANNING DEPARTMENT IMPLEMENTATION ' P L A N OQLJ04 r�7-77 BIKE RD.,U'TE • O BAKE Q XING Q BIKE ROUTE SIGNS FIGURE 2-4 111 � 8 2. 2. 5 Adjacent Cities Bicycle Plans Initially when planning the City' s Bikeway system the importance of connecting City bikeway routes with existing and proposed routes of adjacent cities was recognized. The following arterial streets indicate existing and proposed bikeways of adjacent cities that presently connect or are planned to connect with Huntington Beach. *Garfield Avenue Ellis Avenue Newland Street *Bushard Street *Ward Street *Pacific Coast Highway *Edwards Street Slater Avenue Bolsa Chica Street *Heil Avenue 2. 2. 6 Traffic Considerations A major concern when planning bikeway routes that share the same right-of-way as motor vehicles has been the existing and proposed traffic characteristics of the roadways. Traffic volumes, traffic speed and sufficient shoulder along the roadway are criteria that must be considered when selecting bikeways routes. The streets that are included on the City' s Master Plan of Bikeways were selected because of low traffic speeds and volumes and adequate right-of-way widths to provide the cyclist with a higher degree of safety than if bikeways were not provided. 2.2 . 7 Existing Bikeway Design Standards One of the unfortunate outgrowths of the bicycle boom of the late 60' s and early 70' s had been the lack of uniform design standards for bikeway development. The lack of uniformity had resulted in a proliferation of various bike- way design standards throughout the state. Like many cities, Huntington Beach had been caught up in this diver- sity of bikeway design standards. Over the years, the State came to recognize the problem associated with the diversification of bikeway design standards and under the California Bikeway Act: (S. B. 244) , di.rected th(- Department of Transportation (Calltrans) to establish minimum general design criteria for the development, planning and construction of bikeways, including the design speed of the facility, the space requirements of the bicycle and bicyclist, minimum widths, clearances, grade, and bikeway surface. In response to SB 244, Caltrans adopted, in August, 1976, minimum general design criteria and mandatory minimum safety design criteria to be applied to all bikeways throughout the State of California. All bikeways within the City are presently -_.J being upgraded to comply with these state guidelines. *Existing bikeways that connect with adjacent cities. 9 2. 2. 8 Community Bicycle Safety Program • In July, 1972, the City Council established the Community Bicycle Safety Program. The program was conceived to combat the mounting bicycle safety problem that the City had begun to experience with the increased popularity of the bicycle. The program is administered by the Police • Department under the auspices of the Bicycle Safety Unit. The primary goals of the program are to: (1) reduce the number of bicycle accidents, deaths and injuries occuring in the City, (2) educate the public - particularly local school children - with respect to bicycle safety and state • and local laws pertaining to the safe operation of bikes and (3) attempt to aid in the prevention of bicycle thefts by promoting bicycle licensing and registration within the City. The Community Bicycle Program has touched approximately • 129, 000 elementary, intermediate, high school and college students during the first four years of its existence. The instruction these students have received from the personnel of the Bicycle Safety Unit has heightened the students awareness of the state and local laws governing bicyclist. While it is difficult to • corrolate the bicycle educational program to reduced number of bicycle related accidents, it is believed that the education has at least provided the student with a higher level of knowledge and respect for bicycle safety. As more data becomes available concerning the cycling public, the Bicycle Safety Unit will be better able to measure the effectiveness of the Community Bicycle Program. Figure 2-5 shows the number of accidents the City has experienced during the last four years. The majority of these accidents occurred at intersections or along streets not provided with bicycle lanes. • Figure 2-5 - bicycle accident statistics for the period from January 1973 through December 1976. Total Bicycle Year City Population Accidents Biycle Fatalities • 1973 143 , 000 110 0 1974 143, 636 147 0 1975 146 ,400 106 0 • 1976 151, 000 126 2 1977 157 ,80.0 1 • 10 • I 2 . 3 Existing Deficiencies The establishment of a bikeway program that uses designated areas within the street right-of-way is a relatively new concept. The program has been underway within the City since early 1973 . Since that time, a number of deficiencies have been identified that need to be addressed and corrected to assure the continuance of an ef- fective citywide bikeway program. 2 . 3 . 1 Master Plan of Bicycle Trails The City 's existing Master Plan of Bicycle Trails consists of approximately 68 miles of Class I and Class II bikeways . All bikeways shown on the Master Plan have been built, with the exception of the Pacific Coast Highway Trail between the City Pier and Bolsa Chica State Beach, the Garfield Avenue trails between Ward Street and the Santa Ana River. There is a present need to evaluate the City' s Master Plan of Bicycle Trails adding new bikeways that improve residents access to the community activity centers . 2 . 3 . 2 Bikeway Maintenance Program A problem presently facing the City bikeway program is the lack of defined maintenance program While funds have been acquired through the S .B. 821 Bicycle and Pedestrian Fund for refurbishment of the City Bikeways, no City monies have been set aside for annual bikeway maintenance. To date, state and federal funds made available for bikeways have been limited to initial development. Once the bikeways are constructed, . . it is the responsibility of the City to maintain them, using general fund revenues . Financial restraints have placed the bikeway maintenance program low on the Public Works Department priority list of services that need to be provided to the residents of Huntington Beach. 11 • 2. 3. 3 Bikeway Path Maintenance Unimproved streets having a temporary Class I bikeway adjacent to them present a special maintenance problem. In situations of this nature, there is placed along the unimproved portion of roadway a five foot wide, 2 inch • asphalt/concrete (A/C) path. The path is temporary being replaced by a fully improved street section (in- cluding a Class II bikeway) when property is developed or when motor vehicle traffic volumes indicate a need for more improved right-of-way. The cost to the City for maintaining these temporary paths is considerably • higher than those along fully improved streets, primarily because Public Works Department Crews are used to maintain them instead of the City' s street sweepers. If a main- tenance program was initiated by the Public Works Department the annual maintenance cost of the existing paths would be approximately $28, 000 for the first year and approximately $19, 700 per year thereafter. The initial cost includes the purchase of a small vacuum sweeper and the hiring of an equipment operator. When planning bikeways, efforts should be made to place bikeways along arterial streets that are fully improved and not along arterial streets that would have large areas of unimproved right-of-way which would require the temporary paths and the high maintenance cost associated with them. However, the plan should be flexible enough to permit the 5 foot paths if there exists a high demand for cyclists along unimproved arterials. 2 . 3. 4 Bike Crossing Signs The placement of bike crossing signs at every street that intersects bikeway routes has been expensive to implement and will be costly to maintain. While placement of these signs allows a high degree of awareness on the part of the motorist of the possible presence of cyclists, it appears that the need for such an extravagant program may be over- stated. Stop signs located at local streets that cross or intersect the City' s arterial streets allows the motorist sufficient time to look for approaching cyclist as well as motorists. A more limited bike _crossing - _ signing program would be less expensive to implement while ample__protec-tion would be provided to the cc list and motorist through the present stop signing program. For 12 instance, a limited signing program can be instituted in cases where two arterial streets intersect or yield signs exist. Placement of such bike crossing signa would be appropriate in these cases to alert motorist to be on the lookout for cyclist. Also, another problem has been identified with regard to the placement of bike crossing signs. These signs have been placed at various distances from the intersection. Signs are found placed at the immediate intersection on stop 'signs poles while others are set back so far from the intersection that their effectiveness is questionable. Such inconsistencies call attention to the need for development of. more uniform City standards with regard to the placement of bike crossing signs. 2. 3. 5. Automobile and Truck Parking Another problem that has been identified while making field surveys of the existing bikeways is the conflict between cyclist and parked automobiles and trucks. Parked vehicles in the bikeway force the cyclist to enter into the traffic lane, thus setting into motion a potentially dangerous situation between the cyclist and the moving traffic. It appears that some of the Class II bikeways that presently exist have this parking conflict. Also, it has been found during field checks that an enforcement problem exists along bikeways that are pre- sently posted No Parking. On a number of occasions it has been observed that cars and trucks are parked within existing bikeways which are clearly marked' No Parking. 2. 3. 6 Arterial Streets The Recreational Trails Phase I Study recommended placing bikeway lanes on secondary arterial streets because they are characterized as having lower speek limits and lower traffic volumes. In reviewing the existing arterial streets in the City, the following observations were made: 1. The majority of accidents occurred on arterial streets that do not provide for bikeway lanes. 2 . Secondary arterial streets are ideal for bike lanes as long as on-street parking is prohibited and center medians and left turn pockets are not painted. 3. Major and primary arterial streets that are limited to four traffic lanes and left turn pockets and are otherwise fully improved are adequate for bikeway lanes provided traffic volumes are not so 13 1 H I i i concentrated as to cause conflicts between motorist and cyclist. 4 . Arterial streets that are provided with bikeway lanes experienced fewer bicycle/automobile accidents than streets not provided with bikeway lanes. Careful review of the City' s existing arterial street • system is needed to assure that bikeway routes are constructed that provide safety as well as direct access to activity centers throughout the community. In the past safety considerations have been an important concern when planning bikeway lanes. While safety is • important, it must be recognized that if bikeway lanes are not provided along arterial streets which bring individuals to and from activity centers in a direct manner, that these streets will be used by the cyclist whether a bikeway lane is provided or not. • As stated above, most bicycle accidents occurred along arterial streets not having bicycle lanes. The need to provide direct routes to activity centers, even if it involves using primary and major arterial streets, is considered in this study. The placement of bikeway lanes along arterial streets heightens the cyclist and motorist conscious awareness of one another, thus placing both in a defensive posture. When reviewing the arterial streets for inclusion of bikeway lanes, equal weight has been given to providing safe bikeway lanes and bikeway lanes that provide direct access to City activity centers. 2. 3. 7 New Development New developments within the community have caused a problem with regard to City bikeway lanes. During the construction phase of new developments , portions of the bikeway lanes that extend adjacent to the project are continually obstructed with dirt and debris. Also, when street sections are dug-up to lay water, sewer, electrical or telephone lines, the bikeway lanes are destroyed and are not replaced. These occurrences place an additional expense upon the City. Procedures need to be established and enforced that will assure that during the construction phase of new development that the developer maintain the adjacent bikeways, keeping them free of dirt and debris. Also, it the bikeway is destroyed by the developer, he should be required to replace the bikeway at his expense in accordance with appropriate design standards . AIR& 14 2. 4 Bikeway Implementation Plan The following section presents an implementation plan for existing and proposed bikeways throughout the City. The proposed routes provide for a continuous circulation plan using those streets that provide safe bikeway lanes that directly connect residential areas with activity centers. Route selection has been expanded to cover an analysis of all the arterial streets instead of the incremental approach that has prevailed during past planning efforts. Such an analysis is reflected in the recommended phasing plan for implementing the bikeway program. The proposed plan provides a three-part phasing program that can be interpreted as: immediate needs, short-range needs (1 to 5 years) , and. long-range needs (5 years or longer) . Besides identifying these arterial streets that should be designated as bikeway routes, the study makes specific recommendations for those arterial streets that are not suited for bikeway routes_ (Figure 2. 6) and provides the justification for the recommendation for not including them on the bikeway plan. Lastly, the report provides possible sources of funds for implementing the recommenced plan and the estimated cost for each phase of the program. 2. 4. 1 Bikeway Route Selection The City' s arterial streets were reviewed to determine which streets could accommodate bikeway lanes. In the review process the following questions were considered: 1. Is there a direct route or connection with designated activity centers? 2. Is there sufficient right-of-way within the street section to accommodate bicycle and automobile traffic? 3. Would there be conflicts between cyclist and street parking? 4. Are there future plans for widening the street? 5. Does the proposed bikeway provide a cross-town route or a linkage with a cross-town route? 6. What are the traffic volumes and speed limit on the street? 7. Is the proposed bikeway compatible with existing or proposed bicycle routes of other adjacent cities? 15 • Figure 2-6 Arterial Streets Not Suitable for Bikewav Lanps 0 Street Reasons I' Bolsa Avenue 3/4 lanes of traffic to serve McDonnell! Douglas & Westminster Mall does not • provide sufficient street width for bike lanes. High traffic volumes during peak hours. McFadden (Gothard - Beach) narrow bridge over freeway • Edinger (Bolsa Chica - narrow roadway - flood control channel Springdale) fence on north, residential parking on south side of street. Edinger (Goldenwest - 3 lane traffic to serve Goldenwest Newland) College and Huntington Center - narrow • bridge over freeway and on/off ramps - high traffic volumes at peak hours. f Indianapolis (Lake - Beach) narrow road, on-street residential parking, high incidence of bike accidents. • Goldenwest Street on-street parking for college and (Bolsa - Edinger) apartments, high traffic volume. Goldenwest Street narrow road, high speeds. • (Talbert - Garfield) Beach Blvd. (north of 3 lanes traffic, freeway on/off Adams) ramps high traffic volume & speeds Brookhurst (north of 3 lanes traffic high volume. . Atlanta) Pacific Coast Highway on street parking, high traffic speeds. • • • 16 8. Would the inclusion of . a bike lane in the street require major and expensive modifications to street facilities? 9. If a bike route is possible, is there a parallel street which offers a better route? The proposed revisions to the City' s Master Plan of Bike- ways (Figure 2-7) and the Summary of the Bikeway Imple- mentation Plan (Figure 2-8) reflects those routes along the arterial street system that would best conform to the above considerations_ . The City' s arterial street system is used for bikeway routes because it provides the most direct access to the City ' s activity centers and allows bikeway construction to take place in an economical manner. 2. 4. 2 Phase I - Improvement Program As pointed out under the deficiency section of this study, an annual improvement program for the City' s existing bikeways is the most immediate need confronting the City's • bikeway program. Phase I of the Trails Implementation Plan recommendsthe establishment of an improvement program for the' City' s existing bikeways. Such an improvement program would consist of the repainting and resigning of bikeways in accordance with state bikeway design standards . Also, such an improvement program would be implemented prior to the construction of any new bikeways beyond those recommended for construction under Phase I . The City has available $65, 000 for the Phase I Improvement .Program. The monies for the improvement program have been made available through the 1976-77 and 1977-78 S .B. 821 Funding Program for bicycle and pedestrian way development that is administered by the Southern California Associa- tion of Governments (SCAG) . 2. 4. 2 . 1 Phase I New Bikeway Construction In addition to the establishment of an effective annual improvement program, Phase I recommends limited develop- ment of new bikeways to service the areas around Marina High School and Edison High School. Both high schools draw from wide areas of the community, and experience high bicycle usage to and from the high schools. It is believed that providing Class I and Class II bikeways on and next to the arterial streets that provide access to the high schools, will aid in heightening the motorist awareness of the cycling student and provide the cyclist with a higher degree of safety than is presently provided. The Phase I new bikeway construction will consist of approximately 12 miles of new bikeways. 17 �Fq�y o�? yFk \�0�o- 1rq�Po - c0 LEGEND �g4ca `O�yk c0ly ♦�♦♦�♦i tot t IMMMMME PHASE 1 (IMPROVEMENTS) a psi `SP qp, `♦� ♦� ♦ ♦. .♦�♦ A ♦�1` ♦� ��`�� ■MNE■ PHASE 1 (NEW CONSTRUCTION) �Pil �0 ♦�♦� �lottt►` ♦,` ,♦` ♦� �P �� ■mmmm■ PHASE 2 �011 `�. ♦ ♦.♦ ♦. ® dla •• • • PHASE 3 `♦`® '♦,`®` `�`♦ ��♦ ♦�♦ A, ®�® Note: The mute numbers correspond to Figure 2-e C ®`® �® ® .�♦ ♦� ♦` q'Q6®� in the Tmils Implementation Plan Document 4gyq'ti ®�®` tiA ♦ ♦i IPA0 ♦�®` Owe, ♦ ? 0 . t ♦, 5 sue® It.0(11 1� y� lb _R Ary ♦ `® 0114 ♦'®/ tit ♦ ♦♦'♦♦`.\ ,� b ,, P. i 0-a 0 Ci �..� ♦� Z ok el- p®`ram®` � ♦ � `� ^�� pb ®` •' A h �5 0 F� ® • •• 12 _ `^• • 18 Ir p • • C• 41 PALM ` •._ •• •• • • •• ORANGE SI • /• 17 •Ab • ``• pgClHC COASF HWY 31 S31 v re 2- ® HWINGTON BEACH, auFORNIA MASTER PLAN PLANNING DEPARTMEW OF BIKEWAYS • • REQUIRED CHANGES COST (Dollars) w M > ca c w H Z m 3 � +j c rn c C Y z w H w w W Y a, O c p o w w m Y m -C t m y rn rn a� Q ~ _ Cr z ~ 0 O rn m 1 c LO Q 'c cv L � 0 d N N C H = C a)co a� U N cn ~ c LU m e OC — 0 O X z i O L M - U U cr w M ++ to a Q - 1 I McFadden Avenue Graham to Gothard 3.90 4449 Sunset FY 2 I Edinger Avenue Montery to Aquatic Park 1.75 1978 1728 FY • 3 I Heil Avenue Saybrook to Gothard 6.50 O 1977 6389 4 I Garfield Avenue Edwards to Ward 8.00 7759 5 I Yorktown Avenue Goldenwest to Delaware 1.33 1978 1586 6 I Yorktown Avenue Magnolia to Bushard 1.00 • 1048 • 7 I Atlanta Avenue Bushard to Santa Ana 1605 River 1.50 8 I Hamilton Avenue Magnolia to Bushard 1.00 • 1238 • 9 I Banning Avenue Magnolia to Bushard 1.00 • 1096 10 I Warner Avenue PCH to Algonquin 2.00 0 1838 11 I Bushard Street Garfield to Brookhurst 6.50 • • 7054 • 12 I Brookhurst Street Bushard to Santa Ana 50 FY 396 River Trail • 1978 13 I Magnolia Street Garfield to Yorktown 1.00 979 14 I Magnolia Street Hamilton to PCH 1.75 1414 • 15 I Magnolia Street Atlanta To Edison H.S. .75 • 1000 16 I Newland Street Yorktown to PCH 6.00 • • 6071 17 I Lake Street Yorktown to PCH 3.50 3538 • 18 I 17th Street Yorktown to PCH 2.70 • 3082 19 I Edwards Street Bolsa to Garfield 8.00 a 8419 20 I Graham Street McFadden to Heil 2.00 • 2065 • 21 I Goldenwest Street Heil to Norma Drive .50 • 509 22 I Monterey Street Edinger to Saybrook 1.20 • 1251 23 I Algonquin Street Heil to Warner 1.00 • FY 1978 1175 24 I Gothard Street McFadden to Edinger 1.00 . 1036 STTMMARV nP RTKRWAV TMPT.RMRNTATTON PLAN "7V'T'e ��b REQUIRED cr CHANGES COST (Dollars) W m T cc W WW Y m ° � — °z Z C: °a -Ac CD HWQ : Q a °� m O M cr z ~ P -a CC m CL E .7!) W O ca W0 En c � 1 C N75- 0 CD Oo En X Z O +, m U U W M }, ( H a a Q North City limits to • FY A portion of this 25 I Springdale Street Royalist Dr. 3.35 1978 3,486 hikeway is built 26 I Hamilton Avenue Magnolia to Newland 1.00 • 1,238 27 I McFadden Avenue Graham to Bolsa Chica 1.00 S 1,200 28 I Bolsa Chica Street McFadden to Edinger 1.00 1,027 29 I Edinger Avenue Bolsa Chica FY 1,161 to Monterey 1.20 � 1978 30 I Newland Street Yorktown to Garfield 1.00 • 1,062 31 I Pacific Coast Highway Bolsa Chica State Beach 3.50 S 150000 Yunds to City Pier F u76-79 32 I Indianapolis Avenue Newland to Santa Ana • 4,316 SB 821 Funds River 3.62 • 32A I Marina Park Trail Graham to Marina High FY School .25 1977 • 3,038 33 II Warner Avenue Goldenwest to Gothard .38 , • 1979 641 34 II City Park Drive Edwards to Central Park . 25 597 FY 35 II Yorktown Avenue Delaware to Beach .50 1978 603 36 II Garfield Avenue Ward to Santa Ana River .50 606 37 II Slater Avenue Graham to Newland 6.00 • FY 6,552 1978 38 II Atlanta Avenue Beach to Bushard 3.00 3,194 39 II Bolsa Chica Street North City limits to 2.85 • 2,760 McFadden 40 II Goldenwest Street Norma Dr. to Rio Vista D -2.00 2,132 41 II Goldenwest Street Garfield to PCH 3.00 e 3,131 42 II Gothard Street Heil to Warner 1.00 1,036 43 II Newland Street Garfield to Edinger 6.00 6,276 44 II Talbert Avenue Goldenwest to Newland 3.00 FY1978 4,752 Yorktown to Pacific Railroad 45 II Lake Street Coast Highway 1.75 31,500 right-of-way 46 III Hamilton Avenue Bushard to Santa Ana FY River 1.25 1977 1,325 � 47 III Heil Avenue Gothard to San Diego y From railroad to FrePwav 3.0097ft 3,220 Beach Blvd.- built SUMMARY OF BIKEWAY IMPLEMENTATION PLAN Cont . Figure 2-8 • REQUIRED CHANGES COST (Dollars) w caEn CU m C:w H m rn O cn Z w F- w w Z Y `° o E c a o Cr w c w Q owC m '� a> c t °' H c Q' +' M Q • O Q 4— m 4 O a) � H p - O = m z ~ � p Q1 m L C L 'CL - '— (p i L L O a (/� N a O 0 U +, S." m C Cr ccH a) C W — N O O a� X z -id i � U U w co ++ (n L Ir 4_ F Q 48 III Atlanta Avenue Lake to Beach 1.00 • 1,062 49 III Gothard Street Edinger to Heil 1.00 1,027 50 III Gothard Street Warner to Ellis 3.00 . 3,545 • 51 III Palm Avenue Goldenwest to 38th St. 1.25 22,500 52 III Wintersburg Channel Slater to Pacific 1. 25 22,500 Coast Highway 53 III Edwards Street Talbert to Pacific Coast Highway 4.25 • 76,500 54 III Bolsa Chica Street Warner to Paci is 4.00 Coast Highway 72,000 55 III Ellis Avenue Edwards to Gothard 2.00 36,000 • 56 III Abandon portion of Ellis to Garfield .50 • Gothard 91000 • • • • • SUMMARY OF BIKEWAY IMPLEMENTATION PLAN Cont. Figure 2-8 The Phase I new construction also includes a half mile section of Newland Street and the Pacific Coast Highway Bikeway that will be financed with county and state funds. Construction cost for Phase I New Construction is esti- mated to be $211,174 . New construction under Phase I consists of the following bikeways: Route Number 25 Springdale Street North City limits to Royalist Drive 26 Hamilton Avenue Magnolia to Newland 27 McFadden Avenue Graham to Bolsa Chica 28 Bolsa Chica McFadden to Edinger 29 Edinger Avenue Bolsa Chica to Monterey 30 Newland Street Yorktown to Garfield 31 Pacific Coast City Pier to Bolsa Chica Highway State Beach 2. 4. 3 Phase II (1 to 5 years) Phase II of the bikeway implementation plan is directed_ toward improving the bikeway circulation pattern by: (1) increasing east-west bikeway circulation flow, (2) • including bikeways on the City' s bikeway plan that are presently on the Orange County Bikeway Master Plan, (3) providing a Class I bikeway parallel to Pacific Coast Highway that will extend from Warner Avenue to the Santa Ana River, (4). improving access to activity centers throughout the City, and (3) providing bikeways to service Oceanview High School. Phase II recommends the construction of the following new bikeways. These bikeways are recommended for development concurrently with planned street improvements over the next five years. The total estimated cost to construct Phase II, excluding purchase of right-of-way is $63,780 . The purchase of right-of-way is looked upon as a function of street improvements and not as part of bikeway improvements. New construction under Phase II consists of an_ proximately 30 miles of bikeway and are as follows : � 18 • I I • East West Bikeways Route Number 33 Warner Avenue Goldenwest to Gothard 34 City Park Drive Edwards to Central Park 35 Yorktown Avenue Delaware to Beach 36 Garfield Avenue Ward to Santa Ana River • 37 Slater Avenue Graham to Newland 38 Atlanta Avenue Beach to Bushard 44 Talbert P venue noldenwest to Newland 46 Hamilton Avenue Bushard to Santa Ana River North South Bikeways • Route Number 39. Bolsa Chica Street North City limits to McFadden 40 Goldenwest Street Norma. Drive to Rio Vista Drive • 41 Goldenwest Street Garfield to Pacific Coast Highway 42 Gothard Street Heil to [Varner 43 Newland . Garfield to Edinger 45 Lake Street Yorktown to Pacific Coast .Highway 2 . 4. 4 Phase III (5 years or more) Phase III of the Bikeway Implementation Plan proposes • bikeways along City streets that need to be built to their ultimate right-of-way widths, but are not scheduled for construction for a period greater than five years. The primary purpose of Phase III is to identify long range bikeway needs. It also provides improved circulation pattern and ties fragmented • bikeways together. Phase III recommends the construction of the following new bikeways. These bikeways are recommended for development concurrently with planned street improvements. The total estimated cost to construct Phase _III , excluding purchase of right-of-way is $248 , 679. Such cost does not include right-of-way • cost which are looked upon as a function of the roadway cost and not the bikeway. New construction under Phase II would consist of ap- proximately 23 miles and includes the following bikeways . • • 19 Route Route Number Name Street Segments • 47 Heil-Avenue Gothard to San Diego Freeway • 48 Atlanta Avenue Lake to Beach Boulevard 49 Gothard Street Edinger to Heil 50 Gothard Street Warner to Ellis • 51 Palm Street Goldenwest to 38th Street 52 Wintersburg Slater to Pacific. Coast Hwy. Channel 53 Edwards Street Talbert to Pacific Coast Hwy. 54 Bolsa Chica Warner to Pacific Coast Hwy. Street 55 Ellis Avenue Edwards to Gothard 56 Abandon portion Ellis to Garfield of Gothard • 2. 5 Implementing Funding Sources As bicycle programs have gained in popularity with the citizens throughout the nation, state and federal funding sources have 0 become available for the initial construction of bikeways. The following discussion will briefly address those funding sources that the City of Huntington Beach has used in the past to develop its present program. Also discussed are the funding sources that are expected to be available to implement the recommendations in- cluded in this study. • 2 . 5. 1 Land and Water Conservation Grant The Land and Water Conservation Fund Act of 1965 provides a 50-50 federal matching grant program. The City of • Huntington Beach applied for a grant for Development of trails that included bicycle trails, equestrian-trails _ and jogging trails. The City received approximately.. $66, 600 from the grant program, the bulk of which was spent to develop a portion of the existing City bike ways. 20 2. 5. 2 Revenue Sharing The State and Local Fiscal Assistance Act of 1972 (commonly called revenue sharing) provides funds based on a formula allocation, from the federal government to local governmental jurisdictions. Subject to broad guidelines, including use for parks and recreation pur- poses, the Orange County Board of Supervisors , as governing body, may allocate county revenue sharing funds at its discretio-i, based on analysis of competing demands for the limited funds. By Resolution No. 73-272 , and a Minute order of December 17, 1974, the Board approved revenue sharing funds for bikeway development. (Revenue sharing has not been allocated as a funding source for bikeways since 1974-75) . The City of Huntington Beach had received from the County approximately $17, 000 from the Revenue Sharing Program for the development of bikeways. 2. 5. 3 State Bicycle Lane Account • Money available to cities and counties throughout the State, under the bicycle lane account is derrived from a portion of the State Gas Tax. Approximately $30,000 is diverted monthly from the gas tax into the bicycle lane account. The City has received to date approximately • $6, 500 from 'the bicycle lane account. 2. 5. 4 *Orange County Arterial Bikeway System (ABS) The Orange County Arterial Bikeway System (ABS) is a network of bikeway routes of countywide significance. The program derives its .funds from a number- of sources. • * Prior to the est:abl ishment of tho AW.', t.hf-4 (._'()ilrjty mpdnmorod a 50-50 matching program under the auspices of the Countywide Cooperative Bikeway Program. Huntington Beach received 30, 000 under this program. • 21 LUCA VIU The following is a summary of ABS funding sources for fiscal year 1976-77. • FUNDING SOURCES FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 1976-77 ABS PROGRAM Funding Source Amount Highway User Tax Fund $ 384 , 500 Dana Point Tidelands Fund 131, 800 Revenue Sharing Funds 275, 600 SB 821 - County Transportation Funds 10 , 000 Harbors, Beaches and Parks District funds 1, 615, 460 • Total estimated program cost $2, 416, 860 The City of Huntington Beach has received to date approximately $30, 000 from the *ABS program. The fiscal year 1976-77 ABS program designates approximately $ 192,000 from the program for the development of the connecting link of the Pacific Coast Highway bike trail between • the City Pier and the Bolsa Chica State. Once completed the off-street Pacific Coast Highway Bike Trail will extend from Warner Avenue to the Santa Ana River. 2. 5. 5 SB 821 Funds • State Senate Bill 821 was adopted in 1973. The bill amended the Transportation Development Act (Senate Bill 325) to allow for one quarter of one percent of the sales tax on gasoline be made available to the cities and counties annually for the exclusive use of bicycle , and pedestrians facilities. • The City has received SB 821 allocations for the following projects: Fiscal Year 1974-75 - $25, 362 . 00 - PCH Bike Trail - Brookhurst to Beach *This figure includes funds received under the countywide cooperative bikeway programs . Atftk J 22 • 1 Fiscal Year 1975-76 - $23, 516. 00 - Springdale and Indianapolis Bikeways Fiscal Year 1976-77 - $35, 800. 00 Improvement of Existing Bikeways Total SB 821 funds received by the City to date has been approximately $84 ,778. 00. Annual allocations • are expected to continue for the foreseeable future and will allow the City to implement many of the recommended bikeways within this study. 2. 5. 6 Funding Implications Review of the funding sources (Figure 2-9) indicates the • City has been successful to date. in _capturing a significant amount of Bikeway funds from the County and State, while having to spend only a minimal amount of city revenues. Of the $536, 516 received by the City for bikeway construction, $235, 100 has been spent to date with the remaining $301, 416 designated for development of various bikeways during Fiscal Years 1976-77 and 1977-78 . $202 , 000 of the remaining $301, 416 is designated for the final connecting link of the Pacific Coast Highway bikeway between Beach Boulevard and Bolsa Chica State Beach. The funds that are received from the County and State Agencies are primarily for the develop- ment of new bikeways in accordance with State mandated guidelines . The responsibility for insuring maintenance of existing and future bikeways lies with the City. For the first three . years of the City' s bikeway program little if any mainten- • ance took place. In August 1976 the State of California adopted uniform design standards for bikeways. The City applied to SCAG for SB 821 funds to refurbish the City' s bikeways to meet the State mandated guidelines. The refurbishment program began during the summer of 1977. Once the refurbishment program is completed the City will be responsible for future maintenance. In order to protect the initial investment in the City ' s bikeway program, there is a need to establish an annual maintenance program for the bikeways. It should also be pointed out that under the Land and Water Conservation Grant, that the City received for bikeway development, it was a condition of the grant that the City provide adequate maintenance of those bikeways that were constructed with the grant money. Figure 2-12 shows maintenance cost for the proposed bikeway implementa- , tion plan. The Public Works Department has estimated that an annual amount required to insure adequate maintenance of the City' s existing bikeways would be approximately • $1, 027 per mile for bikeways located on improved roadways • 23 Figure 2-9 FUNDS RECEIVED TO DATE FOR DEVELOPMENT OF BIKEWAY PROGRAM Bikeway Sources of Funding FY 1973-74 FY 1974-75 FY 1975-76 FY 1976-77 Land & Water Conser- $ 64, 500** vation .l Revenue Sharing NA $ 17, 000** NA - Bicycle Lane 6, 500**. - - - Account Arterial Bikeway - 33, 000** $192 , 000 System* AM SB 821 Funds NA 25, 362** $ 23, 616 35 ,800 Park & Recreation 64 , 500** 17, 000** - - Account SB 283 Funds - - - 50, 000 Gas Tax Funds 2,738** 4, 500** - TOTAL COST $135, 500 $ 95,100 $ 28 ,116 $277 ,800 Total Spent to Date $235,100 Total Presently Available 301,416 . TOTAL $536,516 * Includes Funds under the Countywide Cooperative Bikeway Financing Program ** Money Spent to Date N1010 P - • Figure 2-10 BIKEWAYS IMPLEMENTATION PLAN COST ANALYSIS 1977 DOLLARS Phase I (Improvements) 66, 725 • p (within one year) $ Phase I (New Construction) (within one year) 214 ,212 TOTAL- COST PHASE I $ 280, 937 Phase II (One to Five Years) $ 63',780 Phase III (Five Years or Greater) $ 248, 679 TOTAL IMPLEMENTATION COST $ 593,396 • Figure 2-11 BIKEWAYS IMPLEMENTATION PLAN FUNDING SOURCE ESTIMATES • FY 1977-78 FY 1978-79 FY 1979 -80 FY 1980-81 County Arterial - _ _ Bikeway System State Bicycle Lane 10 , 000 10 , 000 10, 000 10, 000 Account SB 821 35,800 35, 800 35, 800 35, 800 TOTAL 45 , 800 45, 800 45,800 45,800 * $152 , 000 is from the County Arteria'_ Bi:ceway Fund for construction of the Pacific Coast Highway Clasp 1 Bikeway. • 25 • • • Figure 2-12. BIKEWAY IMPLEMENTATION PLAN MAINTENANCE COST BIKEWAYS ON IMPROVED ROADWAYS Miles Cost Per Mile Cost Phase I 76 . 30 $1, 027 $ 78 , 360 Phase II 28 . 48 1, 027 29 ,249 Phase III 9 .25 1, 027 9 , 500 Total Cost $117 , 109 OFF-ROAD BIKEWAYS • Miles Cost Per Mile Cost Phase I 4 .50 $1, 281 $ 5, 765 Phase II 1. 75 1,281 2 , 242 • Phase III 13 . 25 1, 281 15, 692 Total Cost $ 23 ,699 • Total Miles 133 .53 * Total Maintenance Cost 140 , 808 • * $140 , 808 would represent two year maintenance cost. Bikeways would be repainted a minimum of every other year. Atltk • 26 and $1, 281 per mile for bikeways that are located off the • roadways. Total cost if bikeways were reconstructed each year would be $140, 168 . However, this cost would be spread over at least a two year period (possibly a three year period) since not all bikeways need repainting and resigning annually. Future funding sources for initial development of bikeways • are shown in Figure 2-11. The bulk of the funds will come from SB 821 funds. All City bikeways under the County Arterial Bikeway Program will be funded during 1976-1977 and built except for the Wintersberg bikeway , located between Graham Street and Pacific Coast Highway. Funding for this bikeway is not shown because of the uncertainty of Bolsa Chica Preserve. When the Wintersberg bikeway is funded, the City will receive approximately $40, 000 for construction. 2 . 6 Recommendations The 68 miles of existing bikeways in Huntington Beach is one of the most extensive systems in Orange County. Implementation of the revised Master Plan of Bikeways as proposed in this study would increase the bikeway system to 133.53 miles. The establishment of the bikeway program throughout the City has increased the motorist awareness of the cyclist and has established boundaries • in which the cyclist, especially the young cyclist, can maneuver with a reasonable degree of confidence that he will not have a conflict with an automobile. The following recommendations will enable the City to continue to carry out an effective bikeway program that will provide the • residents of Huntington Beach with an adequate bikeway system. i 1. Adopt the Revised Master Plan of Bikeways as shown in Figure 2-7 2. Provide for an annual maintenance budget for the upkeep of the bikeway system. • 3. Continue support of the Community Bicycle Safety Program. 4. Direct Public Work' s staff to evaluate and report to the Plan- ning Commission those streets along the existing bikeway system that have a conflict between cyclist and parked automobiles. • 5. Direct Public Work' s staff to .provide procedures for protecting bikeways that lie adjacent to construction sites. 6. Direct that a more limited Bike Crossing Sign program be insti- tuted throughout the City. • 27 • • • • 3. 0 EQUESTRIAN TRAILS • 3. 1 Existing Equestrian Studies 3 . 1. 1 Recreational Trails Element, Phase I The Recreational Trails Element, Phase I , as adopted by • the Huntington Beach City Council in October, 1973, did not set forth a specific plan for equestrian trails to be im- plemented over time. It was determined that additional direction on equestrian uses in the City was needed before any specific planning could occur; and it was recommended that actual expenditure of funds be delayed until further • study could be conducted. Specifically, the Trails Element recommended that: 1. A study be done to present specific alternatives for the accommodation of equestrian uses in the City, both on an interim and long-range basis. From this study the City Council could formulate a definitive policy for Staff to use in providing equestrian trails in the City. 2. Set aside $7, 000 from the Phase I Land and Water Con- servation for equestrian trails. The output of the study would include a recommendation on how this money • should be spent. Adftk 28 Based on the recommendations of the Recreational Trails Element, Phase I , the Equestrian Use Study was prepared in May, 1974. 3. 1. 2 Equestrian Use Study The purpose of the Equestrian Use Study was to identify viable equestrian use alternatives in an effort to generate discussion and to facilitate development of a comprehensive statement of City policy regarding equestrian use. In this pursuit, the study identified the assets and liabilities of equestrian use, presented and evaluated five alternative equestrian use concepts, discussed factors involved in designing and developing a trails system, and presented Planning Department recommendations. Ranging from complete exclusion of all equestrian uses to large-scale expansion of existing horse areas, the long- range equestrian use concepts outlined by the study cover a variety of possible policy choices available to City decision makers: Alternative A: Exclusion - Phase out existing equestrian uses; provide no trails other than regional river path; enforce restrictions against horses on public rights-of-way. • Alternative B: Confinement Confine equestrian uses to City-owned stables at Central Park and suitable trails in park; encourage development of river equestrian center to serve river trail system. Alternative C: Tolerance - Permit existing uses to continue; establish temporary trails; (assume that equestrian uses will eventually be replaced by market demand) . Alternative D: Consolidation - Designate "equestrian areas" where commercial stables will be 'permitted; prohibit horses on residential lots; develop a trails system to serve equestrian areas and connect with regional systems. Alternative E: Expansion - Designate areas where commercial and private stables are permissible; develop a comprehensive trails system that serves such areas, connects them with other open spaces, and links them with regional systems. The Equestrian Use Study also sets forth three short-range trail proposals which addressed current needs and maintained flexibility for future actions. 29 1) Alternative Trail 1 - A 3-mile trail through the Bolsa Chica and along the Wintersburg Channel. 2) Alternative Trail 2 - A 1. 5-mile trail through Huntington? Central Park and City-owned acreage adjacent to it. 3) Alternative Trail 3 - A trail linking the major com- mercial stables in the central section of the City, ranging in length from 1. 75 to 2. 5 miles depending on the location of the crossing on-Goldenwest Street. Recommendations by the Planning Department Staff set forth in the Equestrian Use Study were as follows: • 1) . A signalized horse crossing should be installed as soon as possible at Ernest and Goldenwest to alleviate a safety hazard due to horses crossing in this location instead .of at Garfield, the designated horse crossing. • 2) Immediate consideration should be given to establishing a Central Park trail and an equestrian facility in Phase III of Central Park. 3) The specific path and the desirable nature and location of an equestrian center should be determined by a • special committee appointed by the City Council. This committee should include a member of the Council, a Planning Commissioner, a Recreation and Parks Com- missioner, and a representative of equestrian interests in the community. Its proposals -- to be reported back to the City Council -- should include an acceptable • route for the Central Park trail, a recommendation on the equestrian facility, and a suggested long-range use concept to direct future land use planning in the City. The City Council reviewed the Equestrian Use Study and accompanying Planning Department recommendations in June, • 1974, and took the following actions: 1) Directed the Staff to pursue a combination of the long- range equestrian use concepts D and E, and as a short- range objective, Alternative Trail 2. 2) Approved the location of a signalized horse crossing at Ernest and Goldenwest Streets. 3) Directed that a special study committee be formed. The make-up of the committee was authorized as outlined previously. '000/ � 30 • 3. 1. 3 Equestrian Use Committee The Equestrian Use Committee, appointed by the City Council in June, 1974, was made up of four members : Henry Duke (City Council) , Robert Bazil (Planning Commission) , Lee Mosteller (Recreation and Parks Commission) , and • Bill Williams (local stable owner) . Upon its formation, the Committee was directed by the Council to prepare recommend- ations regarding: 1) an acceptable route for a Central Park riding trail; 2) appropriate action on an equestrian center, and 3) a long range equestrian use concept to guide future land use and trails planning. • After considerable study and deliberation, the committee prepared a set of recommendations and accompanying trails plan which were adopted by the City Council in August, 1975. The actions recommended by the Equestrian Use Committee are as follows: • 1. A signalized horse crossing at Ernest and Goldenwest. 2 . A preliminary trails plan (Figure 3-1) , adopted by the Council as an amendment to the City's Trails Element. This trails plan is divided into two phases. Phase I • would be implemented to serve the need of today ' s riders. It would utilize the railroad right-of-way, publicly owned property and/or designated open space areas. Phase II represents a longer range program which would be implemented as development occurs in the Bolsa Chica, the State Wildlife Refuge, the proposed Edwards realign- • ment, and the Estate Development area. 3. Roughly graded equestrian trails constructed at minimal cost. Fences or other amenities would not be added until financing permits. • 4. Privately owned equestrian stables to be encouraged by the City in designated open space or estate development areas. The City need not become financially involved in an Equestrian Center. 5. Continued effort to seek potential equestrian trail routes to link with the Santa Ana River trail and/or a beach-related trail system. • • 31 The functions of the Equestrian Use Committee (disbaned in November, 1975) are being carried out by the Planning Commission (with staff support from the Planning Depart- ment) . 3 . 2 Temporary Equestrain Trails • The State Department of Parks and Recreation had indicated to the City staff that the City would loose the remaining portion of the Land and Water Conservation Grant ($7 ,500) it received a few years ago unless equestrian or pedestrian trails were constructed. The funding under the Land and Water Conservation Grant is a 50/50 • matching arrangement. The Public Works Department with the con- currence of the Parks and Recreation Commission and City Council has designed a temporary equestrian trail in the Phase III area of Central Park. The design and eventual construction of the temporary trails will be funded with the $7 ,500 from the Land and Water . Conservation Grant and a matching amount from the parks acquisition and development fund. The trail will be approximately 1. 8 miles in length and will cost an estimated $15, 000 to develop. This temporary trail system is seen as the forerunner of a permanent equestrian trail system which is envisioned as being • master planned in conjunction with the other recreational uses to be located in Central Park. 3 . 3 Implementation 3. 3 . 1 Trails System • The Equestrian trails system that is recommended in this report (Figure 3-2) provides a more limited trails system than the plan adopted by the City Council in August 1975 (Figure 3-1) . The revised plan eliminates all equestrian trails on the east side of Golenwest Street. • The plan emphasizes trail development within Huntington Central Park Phase III and the estate development properties west of Goldenwest Street and north of Garfield Avenue with connectinq trails to the Edward Street/ 38th Street bluffs (Orange County lineal park ConCtpt) t.hjt+- will tie into the Bolsa Chica marshlands. The primary reasons for eliminating the equestrian trails on the east side of Goldenwest Street are to: 1 . Reduce the possible traffic conflicts between equestrians and motor vehicles moving along Goldenwest . Street and Gothard Street. 2 . Eliminate the possible noise conflicts between the public shooting range, police helicopter, and rail- road with equestrian riders. A 32 .............. w �M ......... . .__� f .. EDRJ= HER ! 3 SLATIR .\ .,w.,uw,o,£iow,o.�.m....,y,.,„.,.•, d a.x�� WARNBI .� s.. - .. - ._. _.._...... .. ..v� .r.. .............. / ........ TALear w. .. amV LEGENDGARFIELD �.� FIRST PHASE '.^ .................:.............._..._._.............................. ................. YORKTOWN \ ��• SECOND PHASEADAMS \� `• CENTRAL PARK easA CHICA ECOLOGICAL , ., "A. �•. �.., \� Wit, ....�....... ............................. . ._......-. ........... INDIANAPOLIS PRESERVE \. ...........i.................�.. .......... NAMLTON :................ ..... BANNING Figure 3-1 EQUESTRIAN TRAILS PLAN APPROVED AUGUST , 1975 huntington beach planning department 33 • • �y ..00n I.ppX 9{9S .ow0t. • IL ♦y4` • HUNTINGTON CENTRAL PARK EM PROPOSED LINEAR PARK BOLSA CHICA MARSH /i •«•�� PHASE I TRAIL SYSTEM • --- PHASE II TRAIL SYSTEM Figure 3-2 • Aft EQUESTRIAN TRAILS CONCEPTUAL PLAN • huntington beach planning department 34 .LQCVV 3. Reduce the cost of trail development. 4 . Eliminate conflicts between equestrians and existing land uses along Gothard Street between Ellis Avenue and Slater Avenue. The equestrian trails plan is presented as a conceptual plan. Once spcific land use plans are developed for Huntington Central Park, Phase III , the County lineal park and the Bolsa Chica marshlands precise trail align- ments can be prepared. The importance of adopting the conceptual trails plan is that it reflects the City' s intent to have equestrian trails developed within and around Huntington Central Park, Phase III as a permanent recreational use. 3 . 3. 2 Equestrian Center The Trails Implementation Plan recommends the development of an Equestrian Center located on publicly owned property within Huntington Central Park, Phase III . The center is envisioned as containing boarding stables for privately owned horses, a riding arena with setting and lighting. Also the center would include other supporting facilities such as wash. racks, paddocks, tack sheds and exercise rings. The Equestrian Center would also include adequate equestrian trailer parking facilities for residents and visitors who want to use the permanent trail system. . It is not the purpose of this report to specify the exact location, size, and type of facilities to be included in the Equestrian Center. The primary purpose of this Section of the Trails Implementation Plan is to recommend that an equestrian center be designated as a permanent recreational use within Huntington Central Park, Phase III . The Equestrian Center and trails system would be supportive of each other. 3. 4 Cost Analysis A cost analysis of the Equestrian Trails Plan is provided in Figure 3-3. The total project will cost approximately $223, 692 initially and about $2, 420 per year in maintenance. Approximately 2/3 of this cost will be shared between City, County, and State. Several sources of funding for equestrial trails in the City are possible: 35 Figure 3-3 COST ANALYSIS EQUESTRIAN TRAILS PLAN • 1977 DOLLARS PHASE I (1. 81 miles) Grading 1. 81 miles @ $1, 454/mile $ 2 , 632 Fencing 1. 81 miles @ $31, 869/mile 57 , 683 (wooden rail fencing) Signing 7 signs @ $44/ea (4 signs/mile) 308 Total Cost $ 60, 623 PHASE II Grading 7 miles @ $1, 452/mile $ 10,164 Fencing 22 miles @ $31, 869/mile 79, 673 (wooden rail fencing) 42 miles @ $16, 000/mile 72, 000 (chain link fencing) Signing 28 signs @ $44/ea (4 signs/mile) 1,232 Total Cost $163 , 069* • GRAND TOTAL COST $223, 692 *Phase II cost would be shared by the County, State, and City. • 36 • I l� 1. Land and Water Conservation Funds ($7 , 000 from these funds is already reserved for equestrian trails) 2. Horse licensing 3. Revenue Sharing monies 4 . Recreation and Parks budget 5. Park fees 6. Park tax 7. Bond funds from the State Beach, Park Recreation and Historical • Facilities Bond Act of 1974. 8 . County of Orange and State funding sources. 3. 5 Recommendation Adoption of the following recommendations will provide for develop- ment of an Equestrian Center and Trails System that will be an integral part of the master planning effort for establishment of recreational type uses within Huntington Central Park. 1. Adopt the Conceptual Equestrian Trails Plan (Figure 3-2) that provides for the establishment of a permanent trails system that links Huntington Central Park, Phase III, with the Estate Development Land Uses south of Phase III , the Edwards Street/ 38th Street bluffs and the Bolsa Chica -marshlands. 2 . Reiterate the City ' s intent to include an Equestrian Center as an integral part of the Huntington Central Park, Phase IIT master planning effort. 37 CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH CITY COUNCIL Ronald R.Pattinson,Mayor Ron Shenkman,Mayor Pro Tom Ted W.Bartlett Norma Brandel Gibbs Alvin M.Coen Richard W.Siebert . Harriett M.Wieder Floyd G.Belsito,City Administrator PLANNING COMMISSION Roger D.Slates,Chairman Prim Shea,Vice-Chairman Ruth Finley Frank V. Hoffman Charles T.Gibson Susan D.Newman John Stern Edward D.Selich,Secretary PLANNING DEPARTMENT PARTICIPATING STAFF Edward D.Selich . . . . Planning Director Monica Florian . . Assistant Planning Director Richard Barnard . . . . . . Assistant Planner Emilie Johnson . . . . . . Associate Planner Bill Holman . . . . . . . Planning Aide George Ermin • • • • • • Planning Draftsman 'Bob Sigmon • • • • . . Planning Draftsman June Allen . . . . Administrative Secretary Gisela Campagne • . . . . . . . Secretary Susan Pierce • • • • . . . Secretary-Typist • `Prepared Cover I 1J/ �A City of Huntington Beach • P.O. BOX 190 CALIFORNIA 92648 ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT June 11, 19 7 3 CO V ti��•q /w'!� 19 'i;. Gist"Gti Honorable Mayor and City Council City of Huntington Beach Attention: David D. Rowlands City Administrator Subject: Santa Ana River Bicycle Trail Gentlemen: Transmitted herewith is a set of plans and specifications for the construction by Orange County Flood Control District of the Santa Ana River Bicycle Trail between Pacific Coast Highway and Atlanta Avenue and between Edinger Avenue and Ratella Avenue. The District requests that the City Council approve the plans and specifications prior to the award .of the contract. Two certified copies of the Council' s action should be sent this office for transmittal. The. District has processed an Environmental Impact Report for that portion in County territory- and an Exemption Declaration for that portion in the city of Huntington Beach is presently before the Environ mental Review Board. Very truly yours, e�L FJ�_a�mesR. eeler Director of Public Works JRW:HEH:ae Trans. l Sri'r'� .h• 4,5 PLANS AND SPECIAL PROVISIONS FOR THE A - CONSTRUCTION OF THOSE PORTIONS OF THE rW SANTA ANA RIVER BICYCLE TRAIL K "xY FROM GCS 3;;r PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY TO ATLANTA AVENUE AND FROM �, . ,' ,x`'•.+f'f(`/�'`"` EDINGER AVENUE TO KATELLA AVENUE MAY 1973 A COOPERATIVE PROJECT FINANCED BY THE Y� r, COUNTY OF ORANGE x: AND THE ,�...=" FEDERAL LAND AND WATER CONSERVATION FUND aE , !_�;, .•: ; ADMINISTERED BY r't`4`'`°� ORANGE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT SANTA ANA,CALIFORNIA ;N" N, 'h';� �j'Y�. H. G. OSBORNE, CHIEF ENGINEER ORANGE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT SANTA ANA, CALIFORNIA SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE v CONSTRUCTION OF THOSE PORTIONS OF THE SANTA AND RIVER BICYCLE TRAIL FROM PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY TO ATLANTA AVENUE AND FROM EDINGER -AVENUE TO KATELLA AVENUE COUNTY OF ORANGE AND FEDERAL LAND AND WATER CONSERVATION FUND IMPROVEMENT PROJECT ADMINISTERED BY ORANGE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT H. G. OSBORNE, CHIEF ENGINEER MAY 1973 T A B L E O F C O N T E N T S SECTION 1 NOTICE TO CONTRACTORS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A INFORMATION FOR BIDDERS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B PROPOSAL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C AGREEMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D SECTION 2 ITEMS OF WORK .� Page 2-01 Intent . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-1 2-02 Location and Description of Work . . . . . . . . 2-1 2-03 Drawings . . . . . . . . . . . 2-1 2-04 Progress of Work and Time for Completion . . . . . . 2-2 2-05 Flow and Acceptance of Water . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-2 2-06 Cooperation with Others 2-2 2-07 Utilities 2-3 2-08 Specialty Items 2-4 2-09 Nature of Material . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-4 2-10 Disposal of Surplus Material . . . . . . . . . 2-4 2-11 Construction Area . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-5 2-12 Clearing, Grading and Compaction . . . . . . . . . . 2-5 2-13 Alignment and District Surveying . . . . . . 2-5 2-14 Asphalt Concrete Bicycle Trail, Maintenance Vehicle Crossings , Ramps and Drive Pads . . . . . . . . . . 2-6 2-15 Soil Sterilization . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-7 2-16 Portland Cement Concrete Sewer Crossing . . . . . . . 2-8 2-17 Seventeenth Street River Crossing . . . . . . . . . . 2-8 2-18 Measurement and Compensation . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-8 Bid Item 1 - Mobilization . . . . . 2-9 Bid Item 2 - 2-Inch Thick Asphalt Concrete Bicycle Trail, 10-Feet Wide . . . . . . 2-9 Bid Item 3 - 4-Inch Thick Asphalt Concrete Bicycle Trail, 12-Feet Wide . . . . . . . . . . . 2-9 Bid Item 4 - 4-Inch Thick Asphalt Concrete Maintenance Vehicle Crossings, Drive Pads and Ramps . . . . . . 2-9 Bid Item 5 - Portland Cement Concrete Sewer Crossing 2-10 Bid Item 6 - Seventeenth Street River Crossing . . . 2-10 i TABLE OF CONTENTS - (continued) STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS (in a separate volume) SECTION 3 GENERAL PROVISIONS Page 3-01 Intent - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3-1 3-02 Definition of Terms - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3-1 •: 3-03 Scope of the Work - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3-3 3-04 Control of the Work - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3-10 3-05 Control of the Material - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3-15 3-06 Legal Relations and Responsibility - - - - - - - - - 3-18 3-07 Prosecution and Progress - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3-26 3-08 Payment - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3-32 3-09 Repair of Equipment - - - - - - - - - - - - - Z - - 3-35 DETAIL SPECIFICATIONS Section Pali 4 Earthwork - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 4-1 5 Portland Cement Concrete - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 5-1 6 Reinforcement - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 6-1 7 Gravel Base - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 7-1 8 Riprap - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 8-1 9 Aggregate Base - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 9-1 10 Asphalt Concrete - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 10-1 11 Precast Prestressed Concrete Bridge Members - - - 11-1 12 Reinforced Concrete Pipe - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 12-1 13 Reinforced Concrete Pipe Conduit - - - - - - - - - - 13-1 14 Corrugated Metal Pipe - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 14-1 15 Fencing - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - . 15-1 16 Irrigation Crossings - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 16-1 17 - - - Deleted - - - 18 Maintain Traffic and Detours - - - - - - - - - - - - 18-1 19 Stonework - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 19-1 20 Filter Blanket - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 20-1 21 Cast-in-place Nonreinforced Concrete Pipe - - - - - 21-1 ii N O T I C E T O C O N T R A C T O R S - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Santa Ana, California Date May 22, 1973 In pursuance of a resolution of the Board of Supervisors of the Orange County Flood Control District adopted May 22, 1973 , directing this notice, NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the MeT7 of said Board will receive in Room 501 in the County Administration Building, 515 North Sycamore Street , Santa Ana on or before the hour of 2:00 PM of June 18 1973 , sealed bids or proposals for the construc- t on o ose por ions of the Santa Ana River Bicycle Trail from Pacific Coast Highway to Atlanta Avenue and Edinger venue to Kate a venue . SCHEDULE OF WORK ITEMS Item 1 1 Mobilization of Contractor 's equipment and administration, on a lump sum basis. Item 2 25 ,000 Lineal feet of 2-inch thick asphalt concrete, bicycle trail, 10-foot wide, on a lineal foot basis. Item 3 11,000 Lineal feet of 4-inch thick asphalt concrete, bicycle trail, 12-feet wide, on a lineal foot basis . Item 4 42 ,000 Square feet of 4-inch thick asphalt concrete, maintenance vehicle crossing, drive pads, ramps and miscellaneous work on a square foot basis. Item 5 1 Sewer crossing, on a lump sum basis . Item 6 1 Seventeenth Street river crossing on a lump sum basis . SPECIAL NOTICE 1. Federal funds are being used to assist in the construction of this project and the Contractor shall be aware of Federal Civil Rights regulations and page D-3 of the Agreement . 2 . An accelerated schedule is necessary to award a contract before the end of the fiscal year . The contractor is therefore required to sub- mit the documents as specified in Section B, Information For Bidders , by 4 P .M. June 22 , 1973 . Award of Contract will be made by District ' s Board of Supervisors on June 26,. 1973 . (Nov.1969) Al Pursuant to the provisions of Section 1773 of the Labor Code of the State of California , the Board of Supervisors has ascertained the general prevailing rate of wages and employer payments for health and welfare , vacation , pension , and similar purposes applicable to the work to be done . These rates shall be the minimum wage rates for this project . These rates are on file with the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors and copies will be made available to any interested party on request . Plans and special provisions which include contract documents will be available for examination without charge at the office of the District or may be secured upon payment, including State Sales Tax, o f: 1. $4 .20, if requested by mail i 2 . 3 . 15 , if picked up at the District 'office made payable to : Orange County Flood Control District Post Office Box 1078 (Mailing; address ) 400 Civic Center Drive West (Street address) Santa Ana, California There will be no refund for return of plans and special provisions and return is not required. The standard specifications and plans (adopted March 7 , 1972) are also part of this contract . Copies of the standard specifica- tions and plans are also available at the office of the District for an additional charge , including State Sales Tax, of: 1. �3.47 , if picked up at the District office 2 . 4 .52 , if requested by mail' By order of the Board of Supervisors of the Orange County Flood Control District , Orange County , California. W. E. ST JOHN County Clerk and ex-o£ficio Clerk of the Board of Supervisors of the Orange County Flood Control District By Deputy A2 I N F O R M A T I O N F O R B I D D E R S 1. AUTHORITY FOR THE WORK The said work must be done in strict conformity with the Standard Specifications and Plans adopted March 7 , 1972 and Plans and Special Provisions adopted by the Board of Supervisors of the Orange County Flood Control District on May 22 , 1973 The Board of Supervisors of the County of Orange by Resolution No. 73-210 dated February 27, 1973 has authorized the Orange County Flood Control District to prepare plans and specifications and to administer the contract for construction of the work proposed herein. ` 2 . CONTRACT DOCUMENTS The contract documents shall consist of Standard Specifica- tions , Plans , and Special Provisions which includes Information for Bidders , Form of Agreement , Form of Proposal and Notice to Contractors , all of which are on file in the office of the Orange County Flood Control District and are hereby referred to and made a part hereof.. 3 . PROPOSALS Bids shall be for furnishing all labor, equipment and ma- terials in accordance with the Plans and Special Provisions for the work in the schedule of work items of the Proposal. The quantities in the schedule of work items are approxi- mate only , being given as a basis for the comparison of bids , and the District reserves the right to increase or decrease the amount of any class or portion of the work, as may be deemed necessary or expedient by the said District. All bids will be compared on the basis of the schedule of work items in the Proposal. Bids to receive consideration shall be made in accordance with the following instructions : (a) Bids must be made on the blank form provided for the purpose. All items of the bid schedule shall be properly filled out , and numbers shall be stated both in words and figures . In case words and figures do not agree the words shall govern and the figures shall be disregarded . If any unit price and the total amount named by the, bidder for any item are not in agreement , the unit price alone will be considered as repre- senting the bidder 's intention, and the totals will be corrected to conform thereot . Any error in the addition of the amount constituting the items of the bid schedule will be corrected and such corrected total shall be used to determine the success- ful bidder. All prices or sums shall include all sales and other taxes which may be payable. B1 The signature of all persons signing the proposal shall be in longhand . The completed form should be without inter- lineations or alterations . (b) Bids shall not contain any recapitulation of the work to be done . Alternative proposals will not be considered unless called for . No oral , telegraphic or telephonic proposals or modifications will be considered . �c) Bids must be accompanied by a certified check or bidder s bond for an amount not less than 10 percent of the aggregate sum of the bid, made payable to the order of the Orange County Flood Control District. Said check or bidder 's 4 bond shall be given as a guarantee that the bidder will enter into a contract if awarded the work. The successful bidder shall sign ' and return the contract , together with the contract bonds , within 10 calendar days after award of contract by the District . In case of failure to execute the contract and file acceptable bonds within said 10 calendar days , the certified check or bidder 's bond shall be forfeited to the District and the District may award the contract to one of the other bidders . (d) Before submitting a bid , bidders shall carefully examine the Plans , read the Special Provisions which include the forms of contract documents , shall visit the site of the work, and shall fully inform themselves as to all existing conditions and limitations , and shall include in the bid a sum to cover the cost of all items included in the contract . (e) Bids shall be sealed in the envelope provided and marked "Bid for Construction of Santa Ana River Bicycle -Trail" and addressed to "Clerk or the Boara of Supervisors of the Orange County Flood Control District , Room 501 , 515 North Sycamore Street, Santa Ana, California" and be delivered thereto on or before the day and hour set for the opening of bids , in the Notice to Contractors as published , and bearing the name of the bidder. It is the SOLE responsibility of the bidder to see that his bid is received in proper time. Any bid received after that scheduled closing time for receipt of bids shall be returned to the bidder unopened. 4 . WAGES AND BENEFITS _ Bidders attention is directed to the statement regarding prevailing wage rates in the Notice to Contractors . B2 Travel and subsistence payments to each workman needed to execute the work shall be made as such travel and subsistence payments are defined in the applicable collective barganing agreements filed in accordance with Section 1773 . 8 of the Labor Code. Attention is directed to the provisions of Labor Code Sec- tion 1777 . 5 concerning employment of apprentices . It requires contractors or subcontractors employing tradesmen in any ap- prenticeable occupation to apply to the applicable joint ap- prenticeship committee for a certificate of approval and fixing the ratio of apprentices to journeymen used on the contract . Contractor may be required to make contributions to appren- ticeship programs . Contractor and subcontractors shall also comply with Sec- tion 1777 . 6 in the employment of apprentices . For information relative to apprenticeship standards , con- tact Director of Industrial Relations , San Francisco , California or Division of Apprenticeship Standards branch offices . Bidders ' attention is called to the above mentioned Statutes which will require them, if awarded the contract , to pay not less than said general per diem rate of wages set forth, to all laborers , workmen and mechanics employed in the execution of the proposed contract . 5 . AGREEMENT AND BONDS The form of Contract , which the successful bidder , as Con- tractor , will be required to execute is included in the contract documents and should be carefully examined by the bidder. The Agreement and the bonds will be executed in original, duplicates stamped according to law , one of which original-duplicates shall be filed with the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors and the other with the County Recorder of the County of orange . 6. INTERPRETATION OF PLANS AND DOCUMENTS If any person contemplating submitting a bid for the pro- posed contract is in doubt as to the true meaning of any part of Plans , Special Provisions , or proposed contract documents , or finds discrepancies in , or omissions from the Plans or Special Provisions , he may submit to the Engineer a written re- quest for an interpretation or correction. The person sub- B3 mitting the request will be responsible for its prompt delivery. Any interpretation or correction of the proposed documents will be made only be addendum or bulletin duly issued and a copy of such addendum or bulletin will be mailed or delivered to each person receiving a set of such documents. - The Engineer will not be responsible for any other explanation or interpretation of the proposed documents. 7 . ADDENDA OR BULLETINS Any addenda or bulletins issued during the time of bidding, or forming a part of the documents sold to the bidder, for the preparation of his bid, shall be covered in the bid and shall be made a part of the contract. Addenda will be issued by the Board of Supervisors to effect major changes in the work to be done and/or to effect changes in the quantities shown in the Notice to Contractors and Proposal. Bulletins will be issued by the Chief Engineer to effect minor changes in the work to be done and to amend and clarify the plans and specifications . 8. STATE AND DISTRICT LABOR AND MATERIAL REQUIRET`ENTS Attention is called to the State and District Labor and Materials Requirements, which form a part of the contract and/or Specifications . 9. OPENING OF BIDS Bids will be opened and publicly read aloud at the time set in the Notice to Contractors . 10. AWARD OR REJECTION OF BIDS The award of the contract, if it be awarded, will be to the lowest responsible bidder complying with these instructions and with the Notice Inviting Bids . The Board of Supervisors, however, reserves the right to reject any or all bids, and to waive any informality in bids received. No bidder may withdraw his bid for a period of 45 days after the time set for opening thereof. However, proposal guarantees will be returned within 10 days after the award of the contract or rejection of the bids , as the case may be, to the respective bidders whose proposals they accompany. The Contract , if it be awarded, will be awarded to the lowest responsible bidder on the basis of unit prices submitted by the Contractor for all work shown on the plans and in these Special Provisions . However , if at the time this contract is to be awarded the lowest bid submitted by a responsible bidder exceeds the amount of funds then estimated by the District as available to finance the contract, the District may delete a portion of the work . B4 11. BIDDERS INTERESTED IN MORE THAN ONE BID No" person, firm or corporation shall be allowed to make or file, or be interested in more than one bid for the same work, unless alternate bids are called for. A person, firm or corporation , who has submitted a sub-proposal to a bidder, or who has quoted prices on materials to a bidder, is not thereby disqualified from submitting a sub-proposal or quoting prices to other bidders . 12. BONDS The successful bidder, simultaneously with the execution of the Agreement, will be required to furnish a faithful per- formance bond equal to 50 percent of the contract amount and an additional labor and materials bond equal to 50 percent of the contract amount, which bond shall provide that if the per- son or his subcontractors fail to pay for any materials , pro- visions or other, o supplies used in, upon, for, r about the performance of the work contracted to be done, or for any work or labor thereon of any kind, or for amounts due under the Un- employrient Insurance Act with respect to such work or labor, that the surety or sureties will pay for the same, and also in case suit is brought upon the bond, a reasonable attorney ' s fee to be fixed by the court. Bonds shall be secured from a surety .company satisfactory to the Orange County Flood Control District and shall be in the form and be based upon the conditions specified in Section 3248 (and as amended) of the Civil Code of the State of California. 13. ASSIGNMENT OF CONTRACT No assignment by the Contractor of any contract to be entered into hereunder or of any part thereof, or of funds to be received thereunder by the Contractor, shall be recog- nized by the awarding authority unless such assignment has had the prior approval of the awarding authority and the Surety has been given due notice of such assignment in writing and has consented thereto in writing. Attention is directed to Section 3-07.02 "Subcontracting" of the Standard Specifications. If the Contractor intends to subcontract any portion of the work bid upon, the bid 'or offer must set forth the name and the location of the mill, shop or office of each sub- contractor who will perform work or labor or render service to the Contractor in or about the construction of the work or improvement, and the portion of the work which will be done by each subcontractor. B5 14 . OTHER REQUIREMENTS In performance of the terms of this Contract , the Con- tractor shall not engage in nor permit such subcontractors as he may employ from engaging in discrimination in employment of persons because of the race , color , national origin or ancestry , or religion of such persons . Violation of this provision may result in the imposition of penalties referred to in Labor Code Section 1735 . _ The Contractor is required to secure the payment of com- pensation to his employees in accordance with the provisions of Section 3700 of the Labor Code and before entering into a contract , the bidder to whom contract has been awarded shall ' furnish satisfactory evidence that he has secured , for the period of the contract , full workman's compensation insurance and Public Liability and Property Damage insurance in accordance with the Standard Specifications , from any responsible insurance company , a-uthorized to do business in this State and such in- surance shall be maintained in full force and effect at his own expense during the life of the contract. Before entering into a contract , the successful bidder shall furnish a statement of his financial condition and previous construction experience or such other evidence of his qualifications as may be required by the Board of Super- visors . No bid will be accepted from a Contractor who is not licensed in accordance with the law under the provisions of Division III , Chapter 9 of the Business and Professions Code of the State of California. B6 TEAR OUT SECTION P R O P O S A L T O ORANGE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT SANTA ANA, CALIFORNIA FOR CONSTRUCTION OF THOSE PORTIONS OF SANTA ANA RIVER BICYCLE TRAIL FROM PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY TO ATLANTA AVENUE AND FROM EDINGER AVENUE TO KATELLA AVENUE Name of Bidder Business Address Phone No. Place of Residence TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ORANGE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT: The undersigned, as bidder , declares that the only persons or parties interested in this proposal as principals are those named herein; that this proposal is made without collusion with any other person, firm, or corporation; that the Contractor has not accepted any bid from any subcontractor or materialman through any bid depository, the By-laws , Rules or Regulations of which prohibit or prevent the Contractor from considering any bid from any subcontractor or materialman, which is not processed through said bid depository , or which prevent any subcontractor or materialman from bidding to any contractor who does not use • the facilities of or accept bids from or through such bid - depositor; that he has carefully examined the location of the proposed work, the proposed form of contract , and the plans therein referred to ; and he proposes and agrees , if this proposal is accepted, that he will contract with the Orange County Flood Control District in the form of the copy of the contract , as set forth in said special provision of the Orange County Flood Control District to provide all the necessary labor, machinery , tools , apparatus and other means for construction , and to do all the work and furnish all the materials specified in the contract , in the manner and time therein prescribed, and according to the requirements of the Engineer as therein set forth, and that he will accept in full payment therefor the following lump sum and unit prices , to wit: Cl SCHEDULE OF WORK ITEMS ITEM APPROX . Items with Lump Sum or Unit Prices NO. QUAN. Unit Prices Written in in Figures Amounts Words Cts Cts 0o 1 1 Mobilization, for the lump sum price of ---------------------- --------------------- Dollars 2 25,000 Lineal feet of 2-inch thick asphalt concrete, bicycle trail, 10-feet wide, for ------------------------------- ----------------- Per Lineal Foot 3 11,000 Lineal feet of 4-inch thick asphalt concrete, bicycle trail, .12-feet wide, for ------------------------------- -----------------Per Lineal Foot 4 42,000 Square feet of 4-inch thick asphalt concrete, maintenance vehicle crossings,drive pads, ramps and miscellaneous work for ------------------------------- --------------- Per Square Foot •® C2 i SCHEDULE OF WORK ITEMS ITEM APPROX. Items with Lump Sum or Unit Prices NO. QUAN. Unit Prices Written in in Figures Amounts Words Cts Cts $ 1 Portland Cement Concrete sewer crossing for the lump sum price i of ---------------------------- ---------------------- Dollars 6 1 Seventeenth Street river cross- ing for the lump sum price of -------------------------------- ----------------------- Dollars .X. Total or Gross Sum Bid Written in Figures Total or Gross Sum Bid Written in Words - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - In case of a discrepancy between words and figures, the words shall prevail. C3 It is understood that the approximate quantities shown in the foregoing schedule are solely for the purpose of facilitating the comparison of bids , and that the Contractor 's compensation will be computed upon the basis .pf the actual quantities in the completed work , whether they be more or less than those shown herein. As required by the California State Law, the General Contractor bidding will hereinafter state the subcontractor who will be the subcontractor on the job for each particular trade or subdivision of the work and will state the firm name and principal location of the mill, shop or office of each: DIVISION OF WORK NAME OF FIRM OR CONTRACTOR LOCATION OF MILL, OR TRADE SHOP OR OFFICE Accompanying this proposal is NOTICE : Insert the words "cash" i er s Eon , or "certified check" , as the case may e in amount equal to at least ten per cent of the total of the bid, -payable to the Orange County Flood Control District . • The undersigned deposits the above named security as a proposal guaranty, and agrees that it shall be forfeited to the Orange County Flood Control District as liquidated damages in case this proposal is accepted by the 'said District and the undersigned shall fail to contract as aforesaid and to give the two bonds in the form set forth in the special provisions of the District in the sums to be determined as aforesaid with surety satisfactory to the District , within six (6) days (not) including Sundays) after the bidder has received notice from the District that the contract is ready for signature otherwise said security shall be returned to the undersigned. The names of all persons interested in the foregoing proposal as princiapls are as follows : C4 1 (IMPORTANT NOTICE - - - If bidder or other interested person is a corporation, state legal name of corporation, also names of the president, secretary, treasurer, and manager, thereof; if a co-partnership, state true name of firm, also names of all individual co-partners composing firm; if bidder or other interested person is an individual, state first and last names in full) . r Licensed in accordance with an act providing for the registration of Contractors, License No. Signature of bidder . NOTE: If .bidder is a corporation, the legal name of the corporation shall ba set forth above together with the sig- nature of the officer or officers authorized to sign contracts on behalf of the corporation; if bidder is a co-partnership, the true name of the firm shall be set forth above together with the signature of the partner or partners authorized to sign contracts in behalf of the co-partnership, and if bidder is an individual, his signature shall be placed above. Business address Place of residence Dated C5 TEAR OUT SECTION P R O P O S A L T O ORANGE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT SANTA ANA, CALIFORNIA FOR CONSTRUCTION OF THOSE PORTIONS OF SANTA ANA RIVER BICYCLE TRAIL ' FROM PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY TO ATLANTA AVENUE AND FROM EDINGER AVENUE TO KATELLA AVENUE Name of Bidder Business Address Phone No. Place of Residence TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ORANGE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT: The undersigned, as bidder , declares that the only persons or parties interested in this proposal as principals are those named herein; that this proposal is made without collusion with any other person, firm, or corporation; that the Contractor has not accepted any bid from any subcontractor or materialman through any bid depository, the By-laws , Rules or Regulations of which prohibit or prevent the Contractor from considering any bid from any subcontractor or materialman, which is not processed through said bid depository , or which prevent any subcontractor or materialman from bidding to any contractor who does not use the facilities of or accept bids from or through such bid depositor; that he has carefully examined the location of the proposed work, the proposed . form of contract , and the plans therein referred to ; and he proposes and agrees , if this proposal is accepted, that he will contract with the Orange County Flood Control District in the form of the copy of the contract , as set forth in said special provision of the Orange County Flood Control District to provide all the necessary labor, machinery, tools , apparatus and other means for construction , and to do all the work and furnish all the materials specified in the contract , in the manner and time therein prescribed , and according to the requirements of the Engineer as therein set forth, and that he will accept in full payment therefor the following lump sum and unit prices , to wit: C1 SCHEDULE OF WORK ITEMS ITEM APPROX. Items with Lump Sum or Unit Prices NO. QUAN. Unit Prices Written in in Figures Amounts Words Cts Cts 1 1 Mobilization, for the lump sum priceof ---------------------- --------------------- Dollars 2 25,000 Lineal feet of 2-inch thick asphalt concrete, bicycle trail, 10-feet wide, for ------------------------------- ----------------- Per Lineal Foot • 3 11,000 Lineal feet of 4-inch thick asphalt concrete, bicycle trail, 12-feet wide, for ------------------------------- -----------------Per Lineal Foot 4 42,000 Square feet of 4-inch thick asphalt concrete, maintenance vehicle crossings,drive pads, ramps and miscellaneous work for ------------------------------- --------------- Per Square Foot •® C2 SCHEDULE OF WORK ITEMS ITEM APPROX. Items with Lump Sum or Unit Prices NO. QUAN. Unit Prices Written in in Figures Amounts Words Cts Cts 5 1 Portland Cement Concrete sewer crossing for the lump sum price of ---------------------------- ---------------------- Dollars 6 1 Seventeenth Street river cross- ing for the lump sum price of -------------------------------- ----------------------- Dollars Total or Gross Sum Bid Written in Figures Total or Gross Sum Bid Written in Words In case of a discrepancy between words and figures, the words shall prevail. C3 It is. understood . that the approximate quantities shown in the foregoing schedule are solely for the. purpose of facilitating the comparison of bids , and that the Contractor 's compensation will be computed upon the basis .of the actual quantities' in the completed work , whether they be more or less than those shown herein. As required by the. California State Law, the General Contractor bidding will hereinafter state the subcontractor who will be the subcontractor on the job for each particular trade or subdivision of the work and will state the firm name and principal location of the mill, shop or office of each: DIVISION OF WORK NAME OF FIRM OR CONTRACTOR LOCATION OF MILL, OR TRADE SHOP OR OFFICE Accompanying this proposal is NOTICE : Insert the words "cash" "bidder 's bond" , or "certified check" , as the case may e in amount equal to at least ten per cent of the total of the bid, .payable to the. Orange County Flood Control District . _ The undersigned deposits the above named security as a proposal guaranty , and agrees that it shall be forfeited to the Orange County Flood Control District as liquidated damages in case this proposal is accepted by the 'said District and the undersigned shall fail to contract as aforesaid and to give the two bonds in the form set forth in the special provisions of the District in the sums to be determined as aforesaid with surety satisfactory to the District , within six (6) days (not) including Sundays) after the bidder has received notice. from the District that the contract is ready for signature otherwise said security shall be returned to the undersigned. The names of all persons interested in the foregoing proposal as princiapls are as follows : C4 (IMPORTANT NOTICE - - - If bidder or other interested person is a corporation, state legal name of corporation, also names of the president, secretary, treasurer, and manager, thereof; if a co-partnership, state true name of firm, also names of all individual co-partners composing firm; if bidder or other interested person is an individual, state first and last names in full) . Licensed in accordance with an act providing for the registration of Contractors, License No. Signature of bidder NOTE: If .bidder is a corporation, the legal name of the corporation shall ba set forth above together with the sig- nature of the officer or officers authorized to sign contracts on behalf of the corporation; if bidder is a co-partnership, the true name of the firm shall be set forth above together with the signature of the partner or partners authorized to sign contracts in behalf of the co-partnership, and if bidder is an individual, his signature shall be placed above. Business address Place of residence Dated C5 P R O P O S A L T O ORANGE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT SANTA ANA, CALIFORNIA FOR CONSTRUCTION OF THOSE PORTIONS OF SANTA ANA RIVER BICYCLE TRAIL FROM PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY TO ATLANTA AVENUE AND FROM EDINGER AVENUE TO KATELLA AVENUE Name of Bidder Business Address Phone No. Place of Residence TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ORANGE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT: The undersigned, as bidder , declares that the only persons or parties interested in this proposal as principals are those named herein; that this proposal is made without collusion with any other person, firm, or corporation; that the Contractor has not accepted any bid from any subcontractor or materialman through any bid depository , the By-laws , Rules or Regulations of F which prohibit or prevent the Contractor from considering any bid from any subcontractor or materialman, which is not processed through said bid depository , or which prevent any subcontractor or materialman from bidding to any contractor who does not use the facilities of or accept bids from or through such bid depositor; that he has carefully examined the location of the proposed work, the proposed form of contract , and the plans therein referred to; and he proposes and agrees , if this proposal is accepted, that he will contract with the Orange County Flood Control District in the form of the copy of the contract , as set forth in said special provision of the Orange County Flood Control District to provide all the necessary labor, machinery, tools , apparatus and other means for construction, and to do all the work and furnish all the materials specified in the contract , in the manner and time therein prescribed, and according to the requirements of the Engineer as therein set forth, and that he will accept in full payment therefor the following lump sum and unit prices , to wit: C1 SCHEDULE OF WORK ITEMS ITEM APPROX. Items with Lump Sum or Unit Prices NO. QUAN . Unit Prices Written in in Figures Amounts Words Cts CtS A nr� 1 1 Mobilization, for the lump sum price of ---------------------- --------------------- Dollars 2 25,000 Lineal feet of 2-inch thick asphalt concrete, bicycle trail, 10-feet wide, for ------------------------------- ------ Per Lineal Foot 3 11,000 Lineal feet of 4-inch thick asphalt concrete, bicycle trail, 12-feet wide, for ------------------------------- -----------------Per Lineal Foot 4 42,000 Square feet of 4-inch thick asphalt concrete, maintenance vehicle crossings,drive pads, ramps and miscellaneous work for ------------------------------- --------------- Per Square Foot •® C2 SCHEDULE OF WORK ITEMS ITEM APPROX. Items with Lump Sum or Unit Prices NO. QUAN. Unit Prices Written in in Figures Amounts Words Cts Cts 5 1 Portland Cement Concrete sewer crossing for the lump sum price of ---------------------------- ---------------------- Dollars 6 1 Seventeenth Street river cross- ing for the lump sum price of -------------------------------- ----------------------- Dollars Total or Gross Sum Bid Written in Figures Total or Gross Sum Bid Written in Words • - - — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — In case of a discrepancy between words and figures, the words shall prevail. C3 It is understood that the approximate quantities shown. in the foregoing schedule are solely for the purpose of facilitating the comparison of bids , and that the Contractor 's compensation will be computed upon the basis of the actual quantities in the completed work , whether they be more or less than those shown herein. As required by the California State Law, the General Contractor bidding will hereinafter state the subcontractor who will be the subcontractor on the job for each particular trade or subdivision of the work and will state the firm name and principal location of the mill , shop or office of each: DIVISION OF WORK NAME OF FIRM OR CONTRACTOR LOCATION OF MILL, OR TRADE SHOP OR OFFICE Accompanying this proposal is NOTICE : Insert the words "cash" "bidder 's bond" , or "certified check'' , as the case may e in amount equal to at least ten per cent of the total of the bid, -payable to the Orange County Flood Control District . The undersigned deposits the above named security as a proposal guaranty, and agrees that it shall be forfeited to the Orange County Flood Control District as liquidated damages in case this proposal is accepted by the "said District and the undersigned shall fail to contract as aforesaid and to give the two bonds in the form set forth in the special provisions of the District in the sums to be determined as aforesaid with surety satisfactory to the District , within six (6) days (not) including Sundays) after the bidder has received notice from the District that the contract is ready for signature otherwise said security shall be returned to the undersigned. The names of all persons interested in the foregoing proposal as princiapls are as follows : C4 (IMPORTANT NOTICE - - - If bidder or other interested person is a corporation, state legal name of corporation, also names of the president, secretary, treasurer, and manager, thereof; if a co-partnership, state true name of firm, also names of all individual co-partners composing firm; if bidder or other interested person is an individual, state first and last names in full) . Licensed in accordance with an act providing for the registration of Contractors, License No. Signature of bidder, NOTE: If bidder is a corporation, the legal name of the corporation shall be set forth above together with the sig- nature of the officer or officers authorized to sign contracts on behalf of the corporation; if bidder is a co-partnership, the true name of the firm shall be set forth above together with the signature of the partner or partners authorized to sign contracts in behalf of the co-partnership, and if bidder - is an individual, his signature shall be placed above. Business address Place of residence Dated C5 A G R E E M E N T THIS AGREEMENT , made and entered into this day of 19 by and between the OF ORANGE , a political subdivision of the State of California , hereinafter referred to as COUNTY , and hereinafter referred to as CONTRACTOR, W I T N E S S E T H: 1 . CONTRACTOR, under the direction and to the satisfaction of COUNTY , will furnish all labor , materials , transportation and services for the construction of The Santa Ana River Bicycle Trail in accordance with the plans an Special Provisions , Stand—a—rU Specifications , advertisement for bids , notice inviting bids , information for bidders , bid, general, special and supplementary provisions , drawings , plans , specifi- cations and all modifications and amendments thereto all of which are incorporated herein and made a part hereof as though fully set forth . 2 . CONTRACTOR agrees to pay to any laborer or mechanic employed by him, the prevailing rate of per diem wages and rates for legal holidays and overtime work , all as shown and set *forth in the Notice to Contractors or as on file with the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors . The CONTRACTOR shall as a penalty forfeit to the COUNTY $25 . 00 -for each calendar day or portion thereof for each workman paid less than the prevailing wage under this contract , by CONTRACTOR or any Subcontractor under him. _ 3. Eight- hours constitutes a legal day 's work. CONTRACTOR shall forfeit , as a penalty to COUNTY , $25 . 00 for each workman employed in the execution of the contract by CONTRACTOR or any Subcontractor under him for each calendar day during which such workman is required or permitted to work more than eight hours in any one calendar day and 40 hours in any one calendar week in violation of the .provisions of California Labor Code , and in particular, Sections 1810 to 1815 thereof, inclusive , except that work performed by employees of Contractors in excess of eight -hours per day, and forty hours during any one week, shall be (March 1972) • • D1 permitted upon compensation for all hours worked in excess of eight hours per day at not less than one and one-half times the basic rate of pay , as provided in Section 1815 . The CONTRACTOR and all Subcontractors shall keep accurate records showing the name and hours worked each calendar day and calendar week by each workman in accordance with Section 1812 4 . CONTRACTOR agrees to commence construction of the work provided for herein within 10 days after execution of this Agreement and to continue in a due and diligent workmanlike manner Without interruption, and to complete construction thereof within 4.5 consecutive calendar days from the date o (:Xecution o this greement . In addition CONTRACTOR agrees to complete construction of the portions of the -bicycle trail asphalt concrete paving and crossings between Brookhurst Street and Atlanta Avenue and between Edinger Avenue and Chapman Avenue within 30 consecutive calendar days from the date of execution of this Agreement . 5 . COUNTY agrees to pay CONTRACTOR in accordance with the prices set forth in the b.id submitted by CONTRACTOR on the items of bid accepted by the COUNTY . Work progress payments , in accordance with the general provisions of this contract , shall be made by the COUNTY computed from prices set forth in the bid submitted by CONTRACTOR. 6. CONTRACTOR certifies the following: "I am aware of the provisions of Section 3700 of the Labor Code which require every employer to be insured against liability for workmen's compensation or to undertake self-insurance in accordance with the provisions of that code , and I will comply with such provisions before commencing the performance of the work of this contract . " 7. Time is of the essence and. as it is extremely dif- ficult and impracticable to determine and fix the actual dam- ages which COUNTY will sustain should CONTRACTOR fail to complete the work called for in this Contract within the time allowed herein, CONTRACTOR agrees that one Hundred Dollars per day for each day beyond the Contract term require to complete the work is a fair and reasonable estimate of the damages which COUNTY would suffer because of CONTRACTOR's delay , and said amount shall be presumed to be the amount of damage sustained by COUNTY as a result of a delay on the part of CONTRACTOR, and therefore it is agreed by both parties hereto that said amount per day for each day beyond the Contract term shall be a charge against CONTRACTOR and shall be deducted as liquidated damages from amounts due him under this Contract. D2 8. During the performance of this contract, the CONTRACTOR agrees as follows: "(1) The contractor will not discriminate aga`nst any employee or applicant for employment because of race, creed, color, religion, sex, or national origin. The contractor will take affirmative action to ensure that applicants are employed, and that employees are treated during employement, without regard to their race, creed, color, religion, sex, or national origin. Such action shall include, but not be limited to, the following: employment, upgrading, demotion or transfer; re- cruitment or recruitment advertising; layoff or termination; rates of y pay or other forms of compensation; and selection for training, includ- ing apprenticeship. The contractor agrees to post in conspicious places, available to employees and applicants for employment, notices to be provided by the contracting officer setting forth the provisions of this nondiscrimination clause. "(2) The contractor will, in all solicitations or advertisements for employees placed by or on behalf of the contractor, state that all qualified applicants will receive consideration for employment with- out regard to race, creed, color, religion, sex, _or national origin. "(3) The contractor will send to each labor union or repre- sentativc of workers with which he has a -ollective bargaining agreement or other contract or understanding, a notice, to be provided by the agency contracting officer, advising the labor union or workers' representative of the contractor's commit- ments under Section 202 of Executive Order No. 11246 of September 24, 1965, and shall post copies of the notice in con- spicuous .places available to employees and applicants for employment. "(4) The contractor will comply with all provisions of Execu- tive Order No. 11246 of September 24, 1965, and of the rules, regulations, and relevant orders of the Secretary of Labor. "(5) The contractor will furnish all information and reports required by Executive Order No. 11246 of September 24, 1965, and by the rules, regulations, and orders of the Secretary of Labor, or pursuant thereto, and will permit access to his books, records, and accounts by the contracting agency and the Secretary of Labor for purposes of investigation to ascertain compliance with such rules, regulations, and orders. IL "(6) In the event of the contractor's noncompliance with the nondiscrimination clauses of this contract or with any of such rules, regulations, or orders, this contract may be canceled, terminated, or suspended in whole or in part and the con- tractor may be declared ineligible for further Government contracts in accordance with procedures authorized in Execu- tive Order No. 11246 of September 24, 1965, and such other sanctions may be imposed and remedies invoked as provided in Executive Order No. 11246 of September 24, 1965, or by vale, regulation, or order of the Secretary of Labor, or as other- wise provided by lay. D3 "(7) The contractor will include the provisions of Paragraphs (1) through (7) in every subcontract or purchase order unless exempted by rules, regulations, or orders of the Secretary of Labor issued pursuant to Section 204 of Executive Order No. 11246 of Septemner 24, 1965, so that such provisions will be-binding upon each subcontractor or vendor. The contractor will take such action with respect to any subcontract or pur- chase order as the contracting agency may direct as a means of enforcing such provisions, -including sanctions for noncom- pliance: Provided, ho:tever, That in the event the contractor becomes involved in, or is threatened with, litigation with a subcontractor or vendor as .a result of such direction by the contracting agency, the contractor may request the United States to enter into such litigation to protect the interests of the United States." D4 I IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have hereunto set their hands and seals the day and year first hereinabove written. COUNTY OF ORANGE a political subdivision of the State of California By Chairman ot its Board of Supervisors COUNTY ATTEST: W. E. ST JOHN, County Clerk and ex-officio Clerk of the Board of Supervisors of Orange County, California By Deputy By APPROVED AS TO FORM CONTRACTOR ADRIAN KUYPER, COUNTY COUNSEL, ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA By Deputy D5 2-1 SANTA ANA RIVER BICYCLE TRAIL SECTION 2 SPECIAL PROV IS IONS ITEMS OF WORK 2-0.1 INTENT The trail work is to be done in accordance with the Orange County Flood Control District Standard Specifications and Plans (herein- after called Standard Specifications) , and these Special Provisions. The Standard Specifications were adopted by the Board of Supervisors on _ March 7, 1972 and are available for purchase in the district's main office at 400 Civic Center Drive West, Santa Ana. In case of conflict between the plans and Standard Specifica- tions, the plans shall prevail. In case of conflict between the Special Provisions and either the Standard Specifications or plans, the Special Provisions shall prevail. 2-02 LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION OF WORK Part I of the portion of the Santa Ana River Bicycle Trail to be constructed begins at Pacific Coast Highway in the City of Huntington Beach and continues along Brookhurst Street and the southerly levee of Talbert Channel to a sewer crossing, thence along the northerly levee of Talbert Channel and the westerly levee of the Santa Ana River to join the existing trail at Atlanta Avenue. Part II begins at the end of the exist- ing trail at Edinger Avenue in Santa Ana and continues along. the easterly levee of the Santa Ana River to a river crossing at Seventeenth Street, thence along the westerly river levee to Katella Avenue. _ The work consists essentially of the construction of 25 ,000 lineal feet of 2-inch thick, 10-foot wide asphalt concrete bicycle trail; 11,000 lineal feet of 4-inch thick, 12-foot wide asphalt concrete bicycle trail; 42,000 square feet of maintenance vehicle crossings, drive pads, maintenance ramps; P.C.C. sewer crossing; Seventeenth St. river crossing; and appurtenant work. 2-03 DRAWINGS Sheets 1 through 5 of Drawing No. E01-112-2 "Plans for the Construction of that Portion of the Santa Ana River Bicycle Trail from Pacific Coast Highway to Atlanta Avenue and from Edinger Avenue to Katella Avenue" are a part of these specifications. The drawings show location, character of work, and details of construction. 2-2 2-04 PROGRESS OF WORK AND TIME FOR COMPLETION The Contractor's attention is directed to the Agreement and to Paragraph 3-07.05 of the General Provisions. The Contractor shall complete Part I and the portion of Part II to the Chapman Avenue temporary ending so that portions of the trail may be opened to bicycle traffic within 30 working days after award of contract. The Contractor shall complete the work from Chapman Avenue to Katella Avenue as soon as possible following the work of the District's permittee constructing the interceptor sewer, and no later than ten working days after the District's permittee has com- pleted backfilling the underground portion of his work on the westerly river levee, such time to be determined by the Engineer. An extension of contract time for the work between Chapman Avenue and Katella Avenue without assessment of liquidated damages will be granted in the event that in the Engineer's judgment the District's permittee has not completed the work sufficiently so the bicycle trail may be constructed. In the event the work is not completed within the time specified, liquidated damages will be de- ducted from the amounts otherwise due the Contractor. 2-05 FLOW AND ACCEPTANCE OF WATER It is anticipated that storm, surface and ground or other waters will be encountered at various times and locations during the work herein contemplated. The Contractor, by submitting a bid acknowledges that he has investigated the risk arising from such waters and has prepared his bid accordingly, and Contractor by submitting a bid assumes all of said risk. The Contractor shall conduct his operation in such a manner that storm or other waters may proceed uninterrupted along their existing street or drainage courses. Diversion of water for short reaches to protect construction in progress will be permitted if public or private properties, in the opinion of the Engineer, are not subjected to the probability of damage. The Contractor shall obtain written permission from the applicable public _ agency or property owner before any diversion of water outside District rights-of-way will be permitted by the Engineer. 2-06 COOPERATION WITH OTHERS The District permittee is constructing the Santa Ana River Inter- ceptor Sewer in the westerly levee from Seventeenth Street to immediately upstream of the drop structure, 1700+ feet southerly of Katella Avenue. The interceptor sewer construction work consists of the construction of underground sewer pipe and landscaping work. It is anticipated the sewer Contractor shall have the underground construction portion of his interferring work completed prior to award of the contract for the construction of the bicycle trail proposed herein. However, in the event the sewer Contractor 2-3 has not completed this work, the Contractor to whom this bicycle trail contract is awarded shall schedule his work in such a manner as to follow the underground portion of the work and cooperate with the forces performing the landscaping portion of the sewer contract work. In addition, the District's Maintenance Division may be con- structing signs or other work and other construction or relocation work may be in progress within or adjacent to the work herein contemplated. The Contractor shall cooperate with the forces performing the work and provide such working space as may be required. No additional compensation shall become due the Contractor by virtue of compliance with this paragraph, nor shall there be additional compensation, except as otherwise noted in Section 3-08, for delays or inconvenience to the Contractor.due to delays by others in finishing their work. The stables and riding and hiking permit holders have been notified of the proposed construction and have been instructed to use the levee op- posite the construction. Some permit holders may attempt to utilize the levees where construction is occurring, and the Contractor shall exercise caution. 2-07 UTILITIES The District has endeavored to locate and show on the plans the approximate locations of all private and public utilities and facilities to be encountered during construction. However, it is possible that during the work unknown substructures requiring relocation or protection may be encountered. Such unknown substructures will generally fall into two classes, namely, those requiring relocation or protection at the ex- pense of the owner, and those requiring relocation or protection at the expense of the District. In the case of the former, the Contractor shall provide time and working space for protection or relocation activities and may be entitled to an extension of time for completion and/or extra compensation under the provisions of Section 3-03.05 "Extra Work" of the general provisions. In the case of unknown substructures encountered, the pro- tection or relocation of which is to be at the expense of the District, the District will make arrangements for the protection or relocation by the owner or by the Contractor, or by others. In the event either the protection or the relocation is to be accomplished by the Contractor, the procedures of said Section 3-03.05 shall be used. In the event pro- tection or relocation is accomplished by the owner or by others, the Contractor shall provide time and working space and may be entitled to an extension of time for completion and/or extra compensation under the provisions of said Section 3-03.05. 2-4 Protection of facilities noted on the plans "protect" shall be carried out in a manner which will prevent disturbing or damaging such facilities. The Contractor shall notify the facility owner at least 72 hours prior to beginning work in close proximity to the facility. In the event any such facilities should be disturbed or damaged the Con- tractor shall at once make repairs to the satisfaction of the owner and at no cost to the District. 2-08 SPECIALTY ITEMS The Contractor is referred to Section 3-07.02 of these specifi- cations. For the purpose of these specifications, "Specialty Items" are limited to and defined as the following items of work: 1. Furnishing and installing chain link fence. 2-09 NATURE OF MATERIAL The Santa Ana River levees are generally composed of granular material. The above information is of a general nature and shall not be construed to be a waiver of the Contractor's obligation to inspect the soil conditions himself before submitting a bid. By submitting a bid, the Contractor acknowledges that he has satisfied himself as to the nature of the work including but not restricted to the conditions affecting handling and storage of materials, disposal of excess material, and the necessary work required to obtain the compaction as shown on the plans and specified on these specifications. 2-10 DISPOSAL OF SURPLUS MATERIAL The Contractor is referred to Section 4-03C of these specifications. The Contractor shall dispose of excess material by compacting to a relative compaction of 90 percent at locations on the levee as required by the Engineer or, if directed by Engineer, placing it loose in the river invert in layers not to exceed 6 inches in locations directed by the Engineer. No excavated material shall be deposited on private property, either permanently or temporarily, unless written permission from the owner thereof is secured by the Contractor. 2-5 2-11 CONSTRUCTION AREA The Contractor's construction operations shall be confined to the District's right-of-way within the construction areas shown on the plans. Within these rights-of-way and construction areas certain improvements shall be protected in place as shown on the plans. No trees in the right-of-way and construction area shall be removed or damaged. • After completion of the project, the Contractor shall restore the ground to its original condition except where otherwise required by the plans. In this respect, the Contractor shall leave the construction area in a clean : and presentable condition. 2-12 CLEARING, GRADING AND COMPACTION The Contractor shall clear only the area which is to be paved of foreign material and rocks with the largest dimension exceeding 4 inches. All existing facilities and improvements shall be protected except as shown on the plans. The rocks shall be removed to a minimum distance of 6 inches below paving subgrade, except at rock lined ramps where paving is to cover rock lining, and at the sewer crossing where a portion of the sewer crossing shall be founded on a portion of the rock lining and rock shall be replaced to existing grade. The Contractor shall grade to obtain the cross slopes as shown on the plans. Pockets or humps which deviate from the required slopes shall be regraded as required by the Engineer. Grading shall include all work necessary to assure adequate pavement and levee berm drainage. The Contractor shall compact the subgrade to a relative compaction of 95% for a minimum distance of 6 inches below paving subgrade. In areas which the Contractor cannot obtain or maintain 95% relative compaction due to the nature of the material or construction methods, the Contractor shall place a stabilizer or base material to obtain the same subgrade strength. Compacted fill shall be placed at 90% for the Brookhurst Street paving and at 85% for the S.P.R,R, crossing. Material may be obtained at a location specified by the Engineer. The location will be within one mile of each site. 2-13 ALIGNMENT AND DISTRICT SURVEYING Prior to beginning grading work for any reach the Contractor shall establish a line to be used for his work in accordance with the cross sections on the plans. The alignment shall be pleasing in appearance with no sharp curves and shall be approved by the Engineer prior to commencement of grading and paving work. The District will provide the following surveying services for the construction of this project at no cost to the Contractor: 2-6 In the reach between 1000 feet + north of Seventeenth Street and 900 feet + south of Garden Grove Boulevard, 100 feet + north of Chapman Avenue to Katella Avenue, and the Santa Ana and Garden Grove Freeway undercrossings, the District will set stakes at offset distances as determined by the Engineer after consultation with the Contractor at 500-foot intervals on tangents and on the large radius levee curves and at 25-foot or 1/4 delta intervals on short radius curves. Alignment in these reaches will vary from the top of levee to follow contours in the golf course and other areas. The Contractor may obtain additional surveying from either the District or licensed land surveyors or registered civil engineers in private practice. Subject to the availability of District crews and approval by the Engineer, the Contractor may obtain additional surveying from the District by submitting a "Request for Survey" on a form provided by the Engineer, three working days (exclusive of Saturdays, Sundays and holidays) in advance of the date the surveying is required. A "Request for Survey" form shall be submitted for each additional surveying operation. The Contractor shall be charged at the rate of forty-five dollars ($45) per hour for the time the District spends in additional surveying at the job site and at the rate of twenty-two dollars ($22) per hour for the time District survey personnel spend traveling to and from the project to perform the additional surveying. These charges shall be deducted from any moneys due or to become due the Contractor. Stakes set by the District and destroyed or disturbed by children, storm water or other natural causes will be replaced at the Engineer's earliest convenience and at no cost to the Contractor. Stakes set by the District and destroyed or disturbed by the Contractor will be replaced by the District at no cost to the Contractor provided the Engineer determines that the restaking is not the result of carelessness or negligence by the Contractor. 2-14 ASPHALT CONCRETE BICYCLE TRAIL, MAINTENANCE VEHCICLE CROSSINGS, RAMPS AND DRIVE PADS The Contractor shall furnish and construct 2-inch thick, 10-foot wide asphalt concrete bicycle trail paving, 4-inch thick, 12-foot wide asphalt concrete bicycle trail paving, and 4-inch thick asphalt concrete maintenance vehicle crossings, ramps, drive pad paving as shown on the plans. _ In lieu of the grading specified in Section 10-01 of the Standard Specifica- tions the grading shall be as specified for 1/2 inch maximum, medium grading, and in lieu of the grade specified in the Standard Specifications the bituminous binder shall be of grade 60.-70 penetration. The asphalt content of the mix shall be between 6% and 7% as determined after tests by the Engineer. 2-7 2-15 STERILIZATION 1. General The Contractor shall apply a soil sterilant to the subgrade before placing portland cement or asphalt concrete paving and rip- rap. The Contractor shall exercise caution•to avoid sterilizing areas adjacent to the paving which are to be planted. 2. Method The Contractor shall apply Fenamine or Hyvar "X" as specified below. The product shall be applied at a minimum of 200 gallons of water per acre. Higher rates shall be used as required by the Engineer where hard to kill perennial weeds are known to be present in the area. Spray equipment which provides good mechanical agitation and even coverage of spray over the area to be treated shall be used. Spray equipment shall be calibrated before material is applied. Rip-rap, asphalt, or concrete paving may be applied immediately after the product has dried on the soil. 3. Material Specifications of Chemicals Fenamine shall contain a minimum of the following ingredients per gallon as a liquid and shall be applied at 7 to 9 gallons per acre. Amitrol (3-Amino-1,2,4-Triazole) 3.5% Ammonium salt of Fenac (2,3,6-trichlorophenylacetic acid) 6.3% Atrazine (2-chlor, 4-ethylamino, 6-isopropylamino, 5-triazine) 10.8% Inert ingredients 79.4% Hyvar "X" shall contain a minimum of the following ingredients per pound as a wettable powder and shall be applied at the rate of 20 to 30 lbs, per acre. Bromacil (5-bromo, 3-sec-butyl, 6-methyluracil) 80.0% Inert ingredients 20.0% 2-8 2-16 . PORTLAND CEMENT CONCRETE SEWER CROSSING _The Contractor shall construct a portland cement concrete sewer crossing over the existing 78-inch I.D. sewer crossing Talbert Channel at the location shown on the plans. The Contractor shall exercise caution in protection of the sewer line and the parapet walls to be doweled. The Orange County Sanitation District shall be contacted at (714) 540-2910 at least 72 hours prior to beginning work on the sewer crossing. The 4-inch water line shall be relocated in accordance with the re- quirements of the Orange County Sanitation District and the City of Newport Beach. 2-17 SEVENTEENTH STREET RIVER CROSSING The Contractor shall construct an asphalt concrete river crossing and drive pads on the berm at Seventeenth Street to connect to the ramps as shown on the plans. The crossing shall be constructed to obtain smooth horizontal and vertical curves for bicycle traffic and to obtain adequate drainage for low flows from the river and from the side drain. Aggregate base shall be used as necessary to obtain the subgrade shown on the plans. 2-18 MEASUREMENT AND COMPENSATION Compensation for the bid items shall include all labor, materials, tools, equipment, safety measures, and supervision required to complete the work to the grades and dimensions shown on the plans or staked in the field. There shall be no compensation except for the bid items herein. The cost of all work in the plans and specifications not specifically identified as a bid item or described within a bid item shall be included in related bid items, and no additional compensation shall become due the Contractor by nature of compliance with the plans and specifications except as provided in Sections 3-08 and 3-03.05. • In lieu of the method of measurement for payment and payment specified in Sections 10-03 and 10-04 of the Standard Specifications, measurement for payment for the 2-inch thick, 10-foot wide and 4-inch thick, 12-foot wide bicycle trail shall be made by the Engineer along the centerline of the completed paving, and payment shall be made on a lineal foot basis. In lieu of the method of measurement and payment speci- fied in Sections 10-03 and 10-04 of the Standard Specifications, measurement for calculation of area and payment for the 4-inch thick maintenance vehicle crossings maintenance ramps and drive pads shall be by the Engineer, and payment shall be made on a square foot basis. All measurements shall be made by the Engineer using a measuring wheel. 2-9 Bid Item 1 - Mobilization The Contractor shall be paid a fixed lump sum price for his cost of providing bonds, insurance, financing, and moving equipment to the job site, and obtaining permits as required by the City of Huntington Beach. This item will be paid with the first monthly progress payment to the Contractor after award of the contract and shall include the cost of such mobilization and administration for the entire contract period. Bid Item 2 - 2-Inch Thick Asphalt Concrete Bicycle Trail, 10 Feet Wide The cost of constructing 2-inch thick asphalt concrete bicycle trail, 10 feet wide, including clearing, grading, compaction or aggregate base, prime coat, sterilization, joining other structures and appurtenant work to the lines and grades shown on the plans and specified in these specifica- tions and as directed by the Engineer shall be included in the contract price per lineal foot for Bid Item 2. Bid Item 3 - 4-Inch Thick Asphalt Concrete Bicycle Trail, 12 Feet Wide The cost of constructing 4-inch thick asphalt concrete bicycle trail 12 feet wide, including clearing, grading, compaction, aggregate base, prime coat, sterilization, transitions and appurtenant work to the lines and grades shown on the plans and specified in these specifications and as directed by the .Engineer shall be included in the contract price per lineal foot for Bid Item 3. Bid Item 4 - 4-Inch Thick Asphalt Concrete Maintenance Vehicle Crossings, Ramps and Drive Pads The cost of constructing 4-inch thick asphalt concrete maintenance • vehicle crossings, ramps and drive pads of variable width at the sewer crossing, Victoria Street, Atlanta Avenue Connection, Edinger Avenue, Mc Fadden Avenue, Bolsa Avenue, Fifth Street, S.P. Railroad, Fairview Road, Santa Ana Freeway underpass, Garden Grove Freeway underpass, Orangewood Avenue, and other locations as directed by theEngineer, including clearing, grading, compaction, prime coat, steriliation, joining other structures, filling low spots in rock and furnishing and placing base material as required, yellow striping and appurten- ant work to the lines and grades shown on the plans and specified in these specifications or as directed by the Engineer shall be included in the con- tract price per square foot for Bid Item 4. The Atlantic Avenue Connection will be measured on a square foot basis between top of levee match with 2-inch by 10-foot trail to edges of feather on existing trail overlay and shall be compensated for under Bid Item 4. 2-10 Bid Item 5 - PORTLAND CEMENT CONCRETE SEWER CROSSING The cost of constructing a portland cement concrete sewer crossing including clearing old fences and rock, grading, portland cement concrete, reinforcing steel, 4-inch pipe barricades, water line relocation and other work required, Type CL-6 chain link fence and all appurtenant work shown on the plans, including the 4-inch pipe barricades at Pacific Coast Highway and at Brookhurst Street, shall be included in the contract lump sum price for Bid Item 5. Bid Item 6 - Seventeenth Street River Crossing f 0 The cost of constructing the Seventeenth Street asphalt concrete paving for the drive pads and river crossing including corrugated metal pipe arched, aggregate base, yellow striping, grading and compaction and the concrete pedestal and setting of the plaque and all appurtenant work as shown on the plans shall be included in the contract lump sum price for Bid Item 6. L HA BRA BREA 16 �w F 1=0 FULLER ONJ I PL4C1A RIVE Av PM FREE-A` LinWa of 4NAHUM 4r 6 \ I 3 JA CYP SS K. Rd 54 O Los AL WO I, G PM', ,I a FRw AR TMW TER 54N;A SEAL BEACH lu SSET BEUNAZ. MODJESKA RV.K INDEX OF DRAWINGS HUN BEACH ONtoTRAB SAN OAKS 1—T SHEET NO TITLE r EL TORO NEWPORT CORONA DEL MAR END CONST BEACH V 1. LOCATION MAP CORONA PART H DEL MR 2. PLAN, PART I AND PART 1[ C, sr F LAGUNA 3. LEVEE SECTIONS & SEWER CROSSING BEACH ye INDICATES AREA 0". 4. LEVEE SECTIONS & RAMP SCHEDULE SHOWN ON SAN JUAN CAPISTRANO Pe` ® LOCATION MAP yt z". peNA 5. SEVENTEENTH STREET CROSSING AND ONT FREEWAY UNDER PASSES C. BEGIN CONST. SAN CLEMENTE PART It v, 41, ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA VICINITY MAP > END CONST. 4 3 2 PART 1 4 8 12 SCALE IN MILES > APPROVED, CHIEF ENGINEER PLANS FOR BEGIN CONST. THE CONSTRUCTION OF PART I THAT PORTION OF LOCATION MAP SANTA ANA RIVER BICYCLE TRAIL SCALE I" = 10000' FROM PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY TO ATLANTA AVENUE AND FROM EDINGER AVENUE TO KATELLA AVENUE MAY 19T3 APPROVED: -r-�Z-XZZY APPEtdVeDlama APPR ED 23 �3 APPROVED: t;rli� COUNTY OFORANGE __!t -ENGINEER OV 5 PORTIONS DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS AS TO PORTIONS CITY AS TO PORTIONS DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS AS To PORTIONS AS TO POnT WITHIN PC CITY' WITHIN THE CITY T.H.THE CITY C ENGINEER WITHIN THE CITY AND OF HUMI NSTON OF SANTA ANA OF ORANGE OF ANAHEIM OUCH FEDERAL LAND AND WATER CONSERVATION FUND IMPROVEMENT PROJECT ADMINISTERED BY ORANGE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT SANTA ANA CALIFORNIA DWG- NO. EOI-112-2 SHEET I OF 5 SHEETS GENERAL NOTES �14 8Z-GIAI COIVSr ;/7 1 PARrr Q, coast. area. /O;f? ezisth7y poisingzahaal-e ar"loeX117 51' hered� 4 ,P _ - --- -- V .411 czr i rq' PCFC Wes)Levee AII South Le 3R04U'S a shall bass, lmw"y77onshaldYo,v-ea easecA,07 e 2 minimum radius ol A00, neceat 44eh _-a pp I j > ENO CoNsr ybew� coast CrO5517y PART 0 Sewer ootfall 071 N _ZX15� -- ----- N j -,rA7 -- -74 ------ C"ANN A Comit Atlanta Ave. co o uo per shit.5 0 CEA/V C015- 97027- C 4 - COWSMUCRON NME5 C L A F- 80 ZAk 125",4 4--,014ocXe PLAN —/Cill 311/ PART_T BROOK,W1 RSTSr rO ,A?: A AVE. 17 LAMT e 1 0 - -- s -,7mO ",70'ev refit! ,1 scale /"=/O, 17. slope eExist.f✓. lg.� levee schedule vh?4 4. L OA C97nJIL.ArI71731tlOn toOBTY-PICAL SECT/ON 7 Sr. 2XlcA.c.BlcrczE rP,41L BZI_GIOV co/KST West Levee No PART IL \L .9 100 11�__, --- I-P cooll,_c It 0 0001� G, mlc1q ff} io �A kw, - '- 1-1 "'s .\- . A 01A Moll-left • Q A vDaC0"As; 11157 T, loft ft 17- 94AXT-.2T VW - 61 , V R —I� \ �'\�`� \� ,'I _Y: 'I`C ••�4' - \` ,/ - \ 1 P -1 -Q q._ NA B � \ 2 '�- \ _ :� �. �-_ �\� � T. •\ '\ _ `.J` � tip. u V Xv�_ �, _:r -.' rn:{., \ ENG I \ \ `,�\ \✓?�•Ui'v 1 3i'\�� c 0 A.. ; �-� � �. ;\`•. .,,,, \\ k/ O "\9\ A r•,.y' `��. � i� 11 / \ ^' Sr �r�- ` \. a � A \� �o '°�`,. SANTA ANA RIVER Np A Ef,A OL BICYCLE TRAIL -OSS117 East Levee See/r 5t Cl --j// 5:1 detail sht S OF ORANGE trail 2so each 5/de ois COUNTY AND rompCA4,0,wdlo Ave.rlw-- FEDERAL LAND AND WATER see Gt�tvyT 2% 51aae Ibred aort by a.,h CONSERVATION FUND See S.A Pv IMPROVEMENT PROJECT EXiJt PLAN romp e e,0 levee shts ADMINISTERED BY ,PAI?7-_Y PRELIMINARY REVS ION CODIL D.,,,-g.,d V,- Cd EDINGER AVE. 7-0 I(A ZKY L A AVE. �omFbctewjsx, ma2o to 95% icale /00,9 REVISIONS ORANGE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT ..R� DATE I�M TION --- C4 17_99 Bose 0IM-1017.01) PLAN Q_f7_A1L z 3 PART I a PART II TYPICAL 3"0/7 ED 4kld'A.C RICYCZ 7RA11- ..A..1 ED j,cR:m:.� ,vo icale CALL I QATL I VV6'40 AS ..� MAY 1973; E01-112I-2 SHEET 2 OF 5 / rr,��}} P/ace� exP•✓f mof/.L /Smooth feo then Existiis9 8' AlWil A �/ /_\! G"cam acted><i// lyl, 20"/0p oneo Qn l Cons,+. e",-ef& // a✓ems pipe Cmsf.10-4"�Conc.filled 2"5 Copt.) :/w/-0`4�,2"W>~h ways \ �-q"Ac. P�;oes- See note on / - �__ 5'awer C,-os-s;„g. GENE.PAL NOTES \ / �f I r .i �- O1 Profecf a// existii�g gates, fences, int r 5f a//p¢c� //s� shrubs,ground coveriiiq and other between �'i � l,/ foc,/ifies i� consfiucfion o'rt o. culverts ' �Bac,Fw/sand or ex-crossvo/.E—� � �� Bioo.fhuist Secfian �4p/2'7p ✓ ► I '�weepha/es J rare/C� 907. herein Ia I 9 Protect pea. - O2 �/oii/ erlsfing loavii,q uihere s/,ourn signal-- - urifh o smooffi feoffieredo,i�. Coast ¢"thicF(voryiny thF over/oy) J 44" 80afr s -'l q Remove /ocEYa �� •� J 2 /\ aL7/2"into / �p. I firm Subgrade e. PoCifb T+ `�`l i �oF o romp. Mo r geode /07,min. radius _ P' S to o//ocu ✓chic% turn. \�, I�� ura//<ryp.)% �— Exist Poroaef,vo// CoasfHwy_ -s/ yf O3 A//curves ,is a/iynmerf f9rade - �R/W of /00' except Poii7t so/id ye/%�u /tee /,\ Defoi/"F` '' urbere shouin. 01-i —e-- /O'* post rop o{-s/apes ELE!AT/ON �I�� hereon--- 40'pas7' /outer hi17ye po of Seurer CroSsin l rO Pe9rode os req o ID%� Z /�� Fb tch detenioroted , 9 G 0 dy En %Weer to � 'End 2=x/O Fbvii�� pavement u{/over/oy Sco% /q=!'-O" G orov,de smooth ie 4"=/O ioav nq CONST,PUCT/ON NOTES L��i \ TyPico/ 9oth Sides -G� ram See Tionsition A Consf 25,OOD L.F 2,r/O"19. C /-Type GL-6 fleaduro//Pence- � � P` hereon. �� adjust aLeciny ro center �i ,� bicycle frai/,oer defaiY ® s//f. 2 •J c —.ram 'pay- !I /2'-0" on Supporfs «yP) / _ sercier cuith 2� cross 6=0" I- G'-O" ,Pau h broom finish oEter Stec/Txocue/ �e+ - 9 '�� /, © Consf 11,L1010 L.F4)rl2AC r slope and 2",ni17. 8_L il�I.I;z' / i-Ij 1is;0-.:\',.Q_•�___• I I/ I I 8—�2Z`°O5 lSouppppeodn t250 C"yr yaP ve.)r Pe/ocoteod 4"u,tr. �� bicnq Conc. over bells Omit '� \I/", ver be//5. GOnc. 2"c/n pipes./oP 49s Oon Sewer cro5sN 9 P2move }19% info Brisfiny cuo/L / e�/ - - 'agate. a sETiON e-B C - L h I PL AN 49 / No Sco% t j I Af/onto Ave. Cornectibn' ,r I % I No SCALE / { E',o 2.. �`i al_ :•� Ll o io v'r'9 t0' � 20'* � 20'. ` B tp I — J PQr"�y y4e/2'Bolh ways Comp.6aclf,Y/ End 4"-12'Povin I Consf Area '�I /n reto%n;n we// i I 9 Begin 4"th.cd' ji f0:_ -Z' L�eP• I ��` Er strubb/e Corit J4@i2" #47,e ba fff Povii T / Protect 4 Gos.� i Re%cofo 4"JYoter21 Top of 2 1 TI y`I Consf Cl-<o Fence sb clear �wst. F{aci{c Seeslope- ," !I: ' Coast. CL-6Fpnce Coosf ground - ��- / , - _- Cj�, / / DETAIL PF"" /liyhuoy sht2. 0 t -�___ �—Remove east.fence �F,Y/ 90"{ re/otiye.Mat'% oro/rob/e `D� 4 I 1 9% -� ,I ConSt. _ =1=` S Q (Tyo Pemove and salvage-a' ap ! location spvci{edby Engr(uiifhin -;,,� 6 - _�..,•" -- Sewer Ciossin9 i widen oPenin9 far /O'/rot/. BROO/<HU,PST SECT/O/V t mile o�s�re /79 � le �' ! a`th:ek ft.,00✓. I'k See e/ev,hereon 4' Wee Pacific Coast Hiyhuroy Yo Tolbert Chonne/ (Ty,0 J P _: I i y - Zo" Na scale o SECTION A-A �Carsef 2-a"d Conc. f.%led /-0" p,�oes wifh 4'max. spacing Coast Areo Typ. both sides) p � to,oreyent vehicle refry fo Consf. Areo _ Crossin 11 ee 7'-0"/on varies / ( ernbed,oer Std- Gofe fbst p 1a_ p / / Consf CL-�Fence embedment(TyP E'tich side) 2_ _j See defoi/ � sst2 ' S%y and/V ley LE!/EE SECT/ON WEST LEI/EE SECT/O/V / 8roo,fharst to /20' Docuasfream 1500"' o/s l%icforia St to At/o-fo Ave. frOn1 Se,VO sC0/lLE o// PrR� \NO SCALE I SANTA ANA RIVER of I o BICYCLE TRAIL OI, V COUNTY OF ORANGE Cons/ Area _I Note:Center 12' p a y a 1 AND - frail between Berns �' } ti p leg / p 3 FEDERAL LAND AND WATER on edge of levee. CONSERVATION FUND 3"on or.9ino/ diowin9 IMPROVEMENT PROJECT Ye/low sfiipe I ADMINISTERED BY PRELIMINARY REVISION CODE Disregard Prints Burring EaAier Cad" _�— R \ See defoi/©ShtZ \� j -_ ZS-O- I IREVISIONS ORANGE COUNTYFIAODCONTROLDISTRICT MARK DATE DESCRIPr1ON 0' i onfa Ana ,elver_ I _ LEVEE SECTIONS AND WEST L E!/EE SECT/ON f20"'3� Sewer Outfo//fo PLA/� SEWER CROSSING 1.500,t o/s !Y/ctorio St TRANS/T/O/V PL AN NO SCALE /O tYide to /2 GYio'e SPCf/On DRAWN A Arr RECOMMENDED &Bearer Crossin4 �,s_ EacED F-..m M_ ./ DESIGN DIVISIDN ENGINEER NO SCALE SCALE 1"=50' weMMEC SCALE 11 D DWG.NO. DESIGN ENGINEER AS SNOWNI 1973 EO I-I i 2-2 ""' SHEET 3 OF 5 Begin z xio' Arv;„¢ GENMAL NOTES Endo"Yh.k sQuore Foot paving as LO Protect o// existing gofer, Fences, Shrubs, ground Ica N covering and other Focilitres :n the Consf. area. Protect frees O o smoo t /et;ng u Poviny rhere shoran w/tf! h Point ya/%w ;17A0 a 2 ✓o/n ex yedw7werea, /� Ra./rovd �4ShrUbS joir.f on rorrrP¢`/O"into + I coast area �P/ore fill A// curves in alignment and grade rho// be ar io'o" � varies elative compa a rct/oo to\ I�— ___ �I smooth and rho// hove o m.nimum radius h I restore ramp�fi//mat% I �I /70min.'— o{ /00' except uihere shoran otherwise. ovaliable of/ocaticv1 2 /7' To 65 '�yl specified byEa9r .�2 _ _ �ex/Sf A.C. 9 2fo5 I rurthrn!mi at srt�f� � / ¢AC. w River invert i/ o I —exist ground �I —see detail CONSTrP(JCT/ON NOTES o TYPICAL .SECT/Q/i/ �Y� O shl2 Construct2S,LixJ LF 2'x/O'A.C. B.cycle Trot/ per detail AO sht 2. SP.RR RAMP V I / no Scale EA ST L EVfE SECT/ON ® Canstruc4 Jf,OL}7 Lf 4':r/2'A.C. Bicycle Trot/ Per• C ryp\ o ED/NGERAZE TO 17th ST. defo:/ (� sht 2. vo scale © Construct romp underpass per Schedule ocrd_ 'jOrie sht 4 ,loin edge oFe,x's ' G/ Q ip AG or Pier - doss s/ooes rho//vary O I oioe (2%mn�cross h by I / coast. area (Coast area PIOteCt Post Va var/es ries l LAN OI el 0 Lawton of I TYPICAL RAMP See decal 0 / y Fars vorie5. See'decor/ B P \ See Schedule below Shf.2 — I I vo scale \ WEST LEl/EE SECT/OrV `VEST LEVEE SECT/O/V o y O OT0ORH O /7T H OFlG LVD/7 STO 00` ST900ST ,vo scale AND Coast area / Existingy mo 1'. m away ay be 100'fUPSTRE G.G.AM 451VQ TO G.G.FWY. 1 2% subyrode iC 0 6"min. c/r No Sco/e I ConsT.' 4"A.G. Po✓ing ,C to tap of rock /5 rao:n to/ned on ex/stin roodua� and if is compacted Ira o relative 9 S CO1"Re7Ct;o17 of 96 . Locu.saots, over rock lined romp_ , soffit spots or Jyo/ds rho// be Typ. both sides I braughf uP fa subgrode uiith I !/ictorio, 5.p Ro.%rood. \ i 4°0 ( ogg bole os req o' by Engineer: rongcwood L7Vo. TSyP/CAL SECT/QN section hereon) I 1 I ,POCK .PAMP ' Y;ctor/o 5t e 0rew7q wood Ave. coas4 urea w_ I No Sco% vorics a 13 Begin 4"tfhf. square {oaf paving / \ h I \ End 2.r/0'povii7y / J Higher berm�Yy/ovl� see detail AO Sht 2 WEST L E!/EE SECT/ON III SANTA ANA RIVER UPSTREA.G/GGFWY TO 250-�',OOWNSTREAM CNAPIdANA16C RAMP SCHEDULE# No BICYCLE TRAIL L6 S.A.R. Ramp Drive Pod COUNTY OF ORANGE it Sfieey- 5tq o,, 161, c, C. Id, da Remarks AND consl.�orea O fi2 l Z 3 FEDERAL LAND AND WATER varies vrctorio sr: 82too 340' /2' 26" 26' 4eo' 46' no 7cces5(lV1evee) l CONSERVATION FUND IMPROVEMENT PROJECT -— 3"on original drawing Edinger Ave. 385t00 /55" /O' - 28"I - 48" access(-'levee) I et _ ADMINISTERED BY AlcFadden Ave. 42/too /90' /0" 26' ?6' 60' 35' " " e PRELIMINARY REVISION CODE � Disregard Prints Bearing Eedier Coda REVISIONS ORANGE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT Bo/sa Ave. 4Slt0o /80' /0' 26' 26'4G' 46' yI WVLK GATE pESCRIPf ON .TYh 3f 466t00 /e5' /O 24' 241 06' 40' " See detorlosht2-� (center fra// a- levee) �Lowerberm(tyP LEVEE SECTIONS a, Roil Road 48/f00 235, /O' 24' 24' 46' 46' no access AND Fairview fd. 3,o/foo 2/5' /2' 26' 26 5Io 56' access WEST LEVEE .SECT/ON RAMP SCHEDUE Oron9ewoodAve. 660f6S 585' /2' 40' 26" 4O- 20 " (ov/e✓eeJ 250'L/P.5ToFeA)W Ch'APMAN AYE TD. DESIGN RECOMMENDED o PAn/GEbr/Oo0 AYE. R41W,0 DRAYYIL--ICHEqKEn DESIGN DIVISION ENGINEER Oimene;ons ore approximate orAd s✓io// be vor;ed to suit lel cond:/';orns o5 directed b En :rieer A6 Sco% SUBMITTED SCALE ?>A DWG.No. y 9 ENGINEER AS SHOWN MA� '973 EOI-I12-2 �`"n` SHEET 4 OF 5 I ©ahynmenr set ?� GENERAL NOTES by En9meer D /Coast.pedesta/�irista// ) P/a ue to be See 9ht 3.' / shrubs, 5rroundtco e�i�g and other / p/ogee(furnished by Engineer 4 d by fa&lit49 /n the Coat ar ea. 1 —Go/f i furnishe course Engineer/ qq O wJth a ssmoo�hpfeafhewed jo.nfwn I Fb'hw, ye//ow c s ost O3 q//curves in o/%gnmer,tyrade s10/1 I tionsitionP �� be smooth andsho//hove 011"h7i- / o \ mum radius of 100"except where � I PLAIN � � shown otherwise. j Coast.trht 3Jansifica / 10 P, (s Grade river invert " Sec detail O ® z I \\ lyef `owoid CMP I � a P dioin e c this ShG � and cant o 2'± bem I os d�recfedbyEn9inee W a �j 5°rt CONSERUM061 NOTES OConel'2S,00O L.F of 2"x 10'.4 C. Bicycle • Be9in2X/o;gc1 M729- \ \ 7rai1/oerdefai/ :1-sht End 4'AC 0-31Cyc/e detail Bsht ?. . i caret. d+wepod � � golf course 30's,YSd_ os detarmind _ \ O Coast ?amp UnderPass�oer schedule by Engineer I p {I I dayG9ht CM.-A!, grade � —Class B PGC. 2'beim ro keeyo water Point ye//ow / I \ off paving � stripe to/O'* I / beyond edye of I ' 2� Be in4 4.C./7f�St. ring FRONT SIDE � br,d9epie /Y L,4NDi0W.4TER CONSERVATION FUND PEDEST�JL fryv.J 1�Cons7'.drivepod Scale : 1%p 1'-O` I 1 do'sx 50''airPLAN !�/, determindbyEn9inccr GARDEN GROVE FMI U/VDERPASS /5 / 1 f I No 8co% v � I7-y. bridge O II I 1 brid y h I �� 1I. 9epier� I I �E.rist. 9i; Exist.9ravnd� ' west levee-I I �1— r• - •' kv// 40 P 1 I I Cr SECT/O.V E-E�. 99 n I V A Base I \ Instal//4go. CMPA r25x/6"/W0i17 channel C I maint.rood�uay LA /8:Y/�"side drain) I °� o' /T Y5 ST R k1,- ROSS/NG No scale o, —4 W..[/ehicle I 2 Point ye//ow I eDdl� Road Crossing l I O s/ripe /0 t past i f tian9ition ma��i' 'ZI Az o-I I AA.C.!/epic%Road // O SANTA ANA RIVER BICYCLE TRAIL z� COUNTY OF ORANGE AND 0 IF p 3 FEDERAL LAND AND WATER CONSERVATION FUND 3"on on ina/drowin 499re9ate base compacted I 6"Vaturo/mormYa1 O i 9 9 IMPROVEMENTADMINISTERED PROJECT BY TO 95 Pe%t�ve ccmpgcYia7� J�compacted to 90so PLAN I PRELIMINARY REVISION CODE Relative eom.....; n I Disregard Prints Rearing Earlier Codes DETA/L ORANGE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT SECT/ON C C II! REVISIONS N ELEVATE M D I I /T thST TYP. RIVER TRAIL TRAIL DRA/ —1MARKo,A,E DESCRIPf10N No scale No sca/e j I� SEVENTEENTH STREET PLAN CROSSING AND FREEWAY UNDERPASSES SAWA ANA FIVJ!UA/DERPA S S NO SGa/e DESIGN rO E_O RECOMMENDED I ORA II IC CRE DESIGN DIVISION ENGINEER SUBMITTED SCALE (,SATE OWG.NO. ESIGN ENGINEER AS SHOWN MAY 1973 EOI- 2-2 2 I SHEET 5 OF 5 MASTER PLAN OF RIDING AND. HIKING TRAILS 1 REcaennoN a�rrr OFIANGE . COUNTY GENERAL PLAN MASTER PLAN OF RIDING AND HIKING TRAILS A Component of the Recreation Element of the Orange County General Plan ORANGE COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT AGENCY July 1982 ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Bruce Nestande, Chairman Third District Roger R. Stanton First District Harriett M. Wieder Second District Ralph B. Clark Fourth District Thomas F. Riley Fifth District' ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION A. Earl Wooden, Chairman First District Alvin M. Coen Second District Charlotte Mousel Third District C. Douglas Leavenworth Fourth District William R. MacDougall Fifth District ORANGE COUNTY HARBORS, BEACHES AND PARKS COMMISSION J. Don Hartfelder, Chairman Second District Larry Luera First District Leonard MacKain Third 'District Sally White Fourth District Sandy Boostrom Fifth District Donald L. Fox League of Cities Frank J. Laszlo League of Cities ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT AGENCY Murray Storm, Director Robert G. Fisher, Director of Planning Robert L. Rende, Manager, Project Planning Division Ronald L. Tippets, Project Manager MASTER PLAN OF RIDING AND HIKING TRAILS ADVISORY COMMITTEE Bill Kapela First District Roy Russell, Jr. Pat Pleshe " Connie Mandic Second District Phyllis B. Traylor of of . Bob Mattox John Cronin Third District Bob Pekarek Dr. Gerald Podolak Linda Bedford Fourth District Dione Hesketh Gene St. Amand Gale Harmon Fifth District Ilsa Byrnes Pam Davis " CONTENTS Page I. INTRODUCTION . . .. . .. . .. . .. . . . . .. . .. . .. ... . .. . . . . .. . . . . . . . . 1 A. Authority . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . .. . . . . .. . . . . . . . ... 1 B. Purpose . . . . .. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 C. Relationship to other General Plan Elements . . . . . . . . . . 1 II. CURRENT CONDITIONS AND CONSIDERATIONS FOR THE FUTURE . . . .. 1 III. PLANNING PROCESS . . . .. . . . . .. . . . . .. . . . . .. . . . . .. . . . . .. . . . . .. 2 IV. FUTURE OBJECTIVES . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . .. . . . . .. . . . . .. . . . . .. . . . . . 4 A. Goal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . .. . . .. .. . . . . .. 4 B. Riding and Hiking Trail Plan . . . . . . . . .. . .. . .. . . . . .. . . . 4 1. Trails . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . .. . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . .. 4 2. Staging Areas . . .. . . . . .. . . . . .. . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . .. . . 8 V. IMPLEMENTATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . .. . . .. .. . . . . . . . . . . .. . . 10 A. Trail Policies . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . .. . . . . .. . . . . .. . . . . . . . . 10 B. Trail Criteria . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . .. . . . . . . . . 12 VI. APPENDIX A. Trail Descriptions VII. EXHIBITS A. Trail Map B. Trail Dimension Criteria I. INTRODUCTION A. Authority On February 11, 1981 by Resolution No. 81-206, the Board of Supervisors authorized preparation of an amendment to the Recreation. Element of the General Plan to update the Master Plan of Riding and Hiking Trails. To facilitate the effort, on March 10, 1981 by Resolution No. 81-333, the Board also directed that: "1. A Riding and Hiking Trails Master Plan Advisory Committee be established. 2. Said committee be composed of three numbers from each Supervisorial District to be appointed by the Supervisor from each District. 3. Said committee be fully involved by Environmental Management Agency in the preparation of the update of the Master Plan of Riding and Hiking Trails." B. Purpose The purpose of this component of the Recreation Element is to provide a comprehensive Master Plan of Riding and Hiking Trails to guide the development of a high quality trail system meeting the hiking and equestrian needs and desires of the citizens of Orange County consistent with the current state of planning and development and the County and City General Plans. C. Relationship to other General Plan Elements The Orange County General Plan is developed and maintained pursuant to Government Code Section 65300 which requires that each planning agency have a General Plan which shall contain "mandatory" elements for land use, circulation, housing, conservation, open space, safety, seismic safety, noise and scenic highways and "permitted" elements for other important community features. One of the permitted elements is the Recreation Element which in Orange County consists of the following three components: Master Plan of Regional Parks, Master Plan of Local Parks, and Master Plan of Riding and Hiking Trails. Each of these components is countywide in scope except that for local parks. II. CURRENT CONDITIONS AND CONSIDERATIONS FOR THE FUTURE The existing Master Plan of Riding and Hiking Trails was approved by the Board of Supervisors on January 20, 1965. That plan included 224 miles of existing and proposed trails. One objective of the plan was to establish riding and hiking trails in those areas where trails would pass over public land or areas where coordination with property owners might reasonably be expected to be accomplished. I of 14 Accordingly, a substantial portion of the system was located within the Cleveland National Forest or along existing or proposed channels of the Orange County Flood Control District. There has been one amendment to the Master Plan of Riding and Hiking Trails since 1965. This amendment was approved in August 1979. It deleted the portion of the Santiago Creek Trail between the Santa Ana River Trail and the Garden Grove Freeway and added trail links between the Santiago Creek Trail and the Santa Ana River Trail in the Weir Canyon area and in the vicinity of the Southern Pacific Railroad through the cities of Villa Park and Orange. The Orange County Horsemens Association estimates that there are 20,000 to 25,000 recreational horses stabled in Orange County. These are located in either equestrian residential areas and communities or in commercial stables. Significant existing and planned residential areas are located in Fullerton, Brea, Yorba Linda, Eucalyptus Drive area, Anaheim Hills, Villa Park, Orange Park Acres, Panarama Heights, Cowan Heights, Lemon Heights, Silverado, Modjeska, Trabuco Oaks, Coto de Caza, San Juan Capistrano, Nellie Gail Ranch, Laguna Canyon, Santa Ana Heights and Huntington Beach. In addition, there are scattered residences which maintain horses in most areas of the county including the mature residential areas in the northwest portion of the County. Many of the future residential communities are expected to include opportunities for equestrian residential uses. Stabling areas are located in many parts of the County including Carbon Canyon, Anaheim Hills, several locations along the Santa Ana River, .Lake Forest, Trabuco Oaks, Coto de Caza, San Juan Capistrano, Nellie Gail Ranch, Leisure World, Laguna Canyon, Irvine Coast, Santa Ana Heights and Huntington Beach. The significant growth and changing conditions in Orange County suggested the need for this comprehensive update of the Master Plan of Riding and Hiking Trails. With the ongoing comprehensive planning for recreation facilities and protection of environmental resources within the County, this new plan should provide a major contribution to trail recreation opportunities for the citizens of Orange County. III. PLANNING PROCESS The task of preparing this Master Plan of Riding and Hiking Trails was accomplished by the Project Planning Division of the Orange County Environmental Management Agency with the assistance of the Master Plan of Riding and Hiking Trails Advisory Committee. The members of the Advisory Committee are listed in the front of this document. The Advisory Committee and the Project Planning Division staff held 11 meetings to develop the proposed plan. 2 of 14 Additionally, field investigations were carried out by staff and and advisory committee members to investigate trail needs, opportunities, constraints and feasibility. A review of the existing Master Plan of Riding and Hiking Trails revealed that most of the trails are appropriate for retention on the master plan except for the portion of the Oso Creek Trail northerly of the Nellie Gail Ranch and some clearly local trails within the Cleveland National Forest. It was also found that the trail locations within the Cleveland National Forest need to be updated to conform with the most current plans of the U. S. Forest Service. The addition of a number of trails to the master plan was found appropriate to complete trail loops, to serve significant equestrian residential or stable areas, to reflect the current status of existing and planned develop- ment, and to reflect current County and City trail planning. Current County regional park and State park planning and County specific plans also indicated the need to modify, extend or reroute some existing master plan trails. Based on the above, trail needs,- constraints and opportunities were identified and evaluated. From this a working draft trail map was prepared for initial review which included both trails and potential staging areas. This draft trail map was circulated to all cities in Orange County, adjoining county planning depart- ments, major landowners, community associations and the Orange County Horsemens Association. Based on comments received, the proposed trail map was refined by the staff and advisory committee. An important aim while developing the trail plan was to include trails which would serve a regional purpose and which are feasible to implement at a reasonable cost. Names were developed. for trails for ease of trail identification and use. . For utility, the selection of names was based on trail location or destination. Where, appropriate, existing established trail names were retained. Policies of the existing Master Plan of Riding and Hiking Trails and Master Plan of Regional Parks were reviewed and proposed policies were formulated to support and guide implementation of the trail master plan. Finally, trail criteria of the County and selected cities and other agencies was reviewed and proposed trail criteria for implementation of the trail master plan were developed. The above process has resulted in this comprehensive Master Plan of .Riding and Hiking Trails. 3 of 14 route planning, these are also noted following the trail route descriptions included in Appendix A. 1. Fullerton Trail: Through Fullerton and Brea from Los Coyotes Regional Park to Carbon Canyon Regional Park at the junction of the Chino Hills Trail and the E1 Cajon Trail. Approx. 10.2 miles. 2. Chino Hills Trail: Through the Chino Hills from the Junction of the Fullerton Trail and El Cajon Trail at Carbon Canyon Regional Park to the Santa Ana River Trail at Featherly Regional Park. Approx. 10.6 miles. 3. Diamond Bar Trail: Through the north Chino-Hills from the Chino Hills Trail just east of Carbon Canyon Regional Park to the Los Angeles County line. Approx. 2. 1 miles. 4. Telegraph Canyon Trail: Along Telegraph Canyon in future Chino Hills State Park from the Chino Hills Trail to the San Bernardino County line. Approx. 3.2 miles. .5. El Cajon Trail: Through Yorba Linda from the junction of the Fullerton Trail and Chino Hills Trail at Carbon Canyon Regional Park to the Santa Ana River Trail near Yorba Regional Park. Approx. 6.8 miles. 6. Santa Ana River Trail: Along the Santa Ana River from the Huntington Beach Trail near Pacific Coast Highway to the Riverside County line. Approx. 28. 1 miles. 7. Huntington Beach Trail: Through southerly Huntington Beach from the Santa Ana River Trail near Pacific Coast Highway to the future Bolsa Chica Linear Regional Park near Bolsa Chica Beach State Park and Huntington Central Park.. Approx. 7.9 miles. 8. Anaheim Hills Trail: Through Anaheim Hills from the Santa Ana River Trail near Yorba Regional Park to and along the Southern California Edison Company easement to Nohl Ranch Road near the Anaheim Hills Saddle Club. Approx. 8.6 miles. 9. Santiago Oaks Trail: Through planned open space from the Anaheim Hills Trail to the Santiago Creek Trail in Santiago Oaks Regional Park. Approx. 0.6 miles. 10. Four Corners Trail: Along or near the Four Corners Pipe- line from the Anaheim Hills Trail to the Weir Canyon Trail near Weir Canyon Road. Approx. 1. 1 miles. 11. Weir Canyon Trail: To and along Weir Canyon from the Santa Ana River Trail at Featherly Regional Park to the Santiago Creek Trail at Irvine Regional Park. Approx. 7.6 miles. 5 of 14 12. Coal Canyon Trail: Along existing truck roads near Coal and Gypsum Canyons from the Santa Ana River Trail near Featherly Regional Park to the Weir Canyon Trail. Approx. 6.6 miles. 13. Main Divide Trail: Along the Main Divide Truck Road through the Cleveland National Forest from the Coal Canyon Trail to the junction of the Riverside County line near Ortega Highway. Approx. 27.6 miles. 14. Santiago Creek Trail: Along Santiago Creek, Limestone Canyon and Santiago Canyon Road from Villa Park Road to the Aliso Creek Trail at Cook's Corner. Approx. 16.6 miles. 15. Ladd Canyon Trail: Along Silverado and Ladd Canyons from the Santiago Creek Trail to the Main Divide Trail. Approx. 6.6 miles. 16. Santiago Truck Trail: Along the Santiago Truck Trail from the Santiago Creek Trail at Modjeska Grade Road to Old Camp near the Cleveland National Forest boundary and Joplin Ranch. Approx. .6.2 miles. 17. Joplin Trail: Along upper Santiago Canyon from the Santiago Truck Trail at Old Camp to the Main Divide Trail. Approx. 1.8 miles. 18. Serrano Creek Trail: Along Serrano Creek from the Santiago Creek Trail near Modjeska Grade Road to Serrano Community Park at Trabuco Road. Approx. 5.2 miles. 19. Aliso Creek Trail: Along Aliso Creek from the Santiago Creek Trail at Cook's Corner to Horseshoe Bend in Lower Aliso Canyon near South Laguna. Approx. 14.5 miles. 20. Aliso - Serrano Trail: From the Serrano Creek Trail to the Aliso Creek Trail about 2 miles northeast of Trabuco Road. Approx. 0.8 miles. 21. Live Oak Canyon Trail: To and through O'Neill Regional Park from the Aliso Creek Trail southwest of Cook's Corner to the Arroyo Trabuco Trail in O'Neill Regional Park. Approx. 2.6 miles. 22. Arroyo Trabuco Trail: Along the Arroyo Trabuco from the Cleveland National Forest boundary to Pacific Coast high- way near Doheny Beach State Park. Approx. 15.5 miles. 23. Trabuco Canyon Trail: Along Trabuco Canyon from the Cleveland National Forest boundary to the Main Divide Trail. Approx. 5.9 miles. 6 of 14 I I 24. Holy Jim Trail: In Holy Jim Canyon from the Trabuco Canyon Trail to the Main -Divide Trail near Bear Springs. Approx. 3.4 miles. 25. West Horse Thief Trail: Along Upper Trabuco Canyon from the Trabuco Canyon Trail to the Main Divide Trail. Approx. 1.3 miles. 26. Bell Canyon Trail: Through the Robinson Ranch open space and along the westerly ridge of Bell Canyon from the Arroyo Trabuco Trail east of O'Neill Regional Park to the San Juan Creek Trail in Ronald W. Caspers Regional Park. Approx. 10.1 miles. i 27. Bell Ridge Trail: Along Bell Ridge from the Bell Canyon Trail in the Robinson Ranch open space to the Los Pinos Trail in the Cleveland National Forest. Approx. 6.1 miles. 28. Tijeras Canyon Trail: Along Tijeras Canyon from the Bell Canyon Trail to the Arroyo Trabuco Trail. Approx. 5.4 miles. 29. San Juan Creek Trail: Along San Juan Creek from San Juan Hot Springs to Pacific Coast Highway near Doheny State Beach. Approx. 15.2 miles. 30. Los Pinos Trail: . Northerly and easterly from San Juan Hot Springs to the Main Divide Trail within the Cleveland National Forest. Approx. 10.2 miles. 31. San Juan Trail: Northeasterly from San Juan Hot Springs to the Main Divide Trail. Approx. 7.2 miles. 32. Chiquita Trail: Through the Cleveland National Forest from the San Juan Trail to the Riverside County line. Approx. 2.5 miles. 33. Sitton Peak Trail: Easterly from San Juan Hot Springs to the San Diego County line within the Cleveland National Forest. Approx. 3:0 miles. 34. Lucas Canyon Trail: Along Lucas Canyon from the San Juan Creek Trail in Ronald W. Caspers Regional Park to the San Diego County line within the Cleveland National Forest: Approx. 4.5 miles. 35. Cristianitos Trail: Along. Cristianitos Canyon from the San Juan Creek Trail to the .San Diego County line at San Onofre State Park. Approx. 4.8 miles. 36. Prima Deshecha Trail: Along or near a Southern California Edison Company easement from the San Juan Creek Trail to the Cristianitos Trail at the San Diego County line. Approx. 6.3 miles. 7 of 14 37. Salt Creek Trail: Through the Bear Brand Ranch and Laguna Niguel areas from the Arroyo Trabuco Trail to the Aliso Creek Trail near Laguna Niguel Regional Park. Approx. 7.3 miles. 38. Oso Creek Trail: Along Oso Creek from the Santiago Creek Trail to the Nellie Gail Ranch community. Approx. 3.8 miles. 39. Niguel Trail: Along an unnamed canyon from the Nellie Gail Ranch community to Laguna Niguel Regional Park. Approx. 2.0 miles. 40. Nellie Gail Trail: Along La Paz Road and Moulton Parkway from the Nellie Gail Ranch community to the Aliso Creek Trail. Approx. 2.0 miles. 41. Wood Canyon Trail: Through Wood Canyon, Sycamore Hills and Laurel Canyon from the Aliso Creek Trail to a junction with the Emerald Canyon Trail and Irvine Coast Trail. Approx. 5.5 miles. 42. Emerald Canyon Trail: . Through Emerald Canyon from a junction with the Wood Canyon Trail and Irvine Coast Trail to Crystal Cove State Park near Pacific Coast Highway. Approx. 4.0 miles. 43. Irvine Coast Trail: Through Bommer Canyon and William R.. Mason Regional Park from a junction with the Wood Canyon Trail and Emerald Canyon Trail to a junction with the Santa Ana Heights Trail and Peters Canyon Trail near University Drive. Approx. 8.2 miles. 44. Santa Ana Heights Trail: Along the San Diego Creek Channel and through Santa Ana Heights from a junction with the Irvine Coast Trail and Peters Canyon Trail to the Orange County Fairgrounds. Approx. 5.0 miles. 45. Peters Canyon Trail: Along the San Diego Creek Channel, Peters Canyon Channel and Peters Canyon Wash from a junction with the Irvine Coast Trail and Santa Ana Heights Trail to Irvine Regional Park. Approx. 12.0 miles. Staging Areas: The following is a listing of 28 potential staging areas identi- fied for further study. They are also shown on Exhibit A. Several of these are located within regional parks or other parks and are either existing or identified in park general development plans. Others are identified as potential sites which need further study and identification as to feasibility, land acquisition and implementation requirements. They are all listed together here with the intent that each staging 8 of 14 area will be studied as trail route implementation planning is accomplished and as adjacent land is developed. 1. Within Los Coyotes Regional Park. 2. Within Carbon Canyon Regional Park. 3. Within Yorba Regional Park. 4. Within Featherly Regional Park. 5. At the mouth of Coal Canyon. 6. On the Anaheim Hills Trail at the mouth of Deer Canyon. 7. Along the Santa Ana River downstream of Garden Grove Boulevard near Forrest Paull Park. 8. Along the Huntington Beach Trail in the vicinity of Brookhurst Street. 9. Within future Bolsa Chica Linear Regional Park near Edwards Street. 10. Near the end of the Anaheim Hills Trail about 1/8th mile south of Nohl Ranch Road. 11. Near the end of the Santiago Creek Trail near Villa Park Road. 12. Within Irvine Regional Park. 13. Along the Santiago Creek Trail near the Ladd Canyon Trail. 14. Within future Whiting Regional Park near the junction of the Santiago Creek Trail and the Serrano Creek Trail. 15. At the end of the Serrano Creek Trail in Serrano Regional Park. 16. Along the Aliso Creek Trail near its junction with the Live Oak Canyon Trail within the Glenn Ranch open space. 17. Within O'Neill Regional Park. 18. Within the Robinson Ranch open space adjacent to the Bell Ridge Trail. 19. Within Caspers Regional Park. 20. . At or near San Juan Hot Springs adjacent to the San Juan Creek Trail and other trails leading into the Cleveland National Forest. 21. Along the Prima Deshecha Trail near Avenida Pico. 22. Near the San Juan Creek Trail junction with the Prima Deshecha Trail. 23. Along the Aliso Creek Trail opposite Laguna Niguel Regional Park near Alicia Parkway. 9 of 14 24. Along the Irvine Coast Trail near Sand Canyon Avenue. 25. At the end of the Emerald Canyon Trail within the Crystal Cove State Park. 26. Within Mason Regional Park. 27. Adjacent to the Santa Ana Heights Trail near the inter- section of Mesa Drive and Birch Street. 28. At the end of the Santa Ana Heights Trail within the Orange County Fairgrounds. The above listing may be added to or diminished depending on future studies of trail requirements, feasibility of staging area location and need for staging areas as the implementation and completion of the trail system is accomplished. V. IMPLEMENTATION A. Trail Policies Policies represent the intervening step between goals and imple- menting actions and provide important guidelines for decision makers in directing the future development and operation of the county-wide trail system. The Master Plan of Riding and Hiking Trails shall be developed in accordance with the following policies. 1. Acquisition and Development a. The dedication of right-of-way and construction of regional riding and hiking trails shall be pursued as a condition of approval of development projects within the unincorporated and incorporated areas of the County. b. The anticipated cost of regional riding and hiking trails, including acquisition, development and maintenance, shall be considered in the process of making acquisition decisions. c. Regional riding and hiking trails shall, to the extent possible, be located and signed to provide for acces- sibility by law enforcement and emergency vehicles. d. Regional riding and hiking trails along watercourses or channels shall be located outside of the 25 year flood plain where feasible. e. Development planning for regional riding and hiking trails shall identify fiscal constraints, meet regional needs, and consider the desires of, and the impacts upon, the local community. 10 of 14 f• "Land banking" of right of way for regional riding and hiking trail corridors by County, State and Federal agencies shall be encouraged. g. Expansion of existing regional trail facilities shall . be sought where attractive opportunities exist. h. Regional riding and hiking trail linkages with regional parks, state parks, national forest and city and local trail systems shall be sought. 2. Operation and Maintenance a. The regional riding and hiking trail system should be operated and maintained with a combination of. funding provided by the Orange County Harbors Beaches and parks District, local jurisdictions within incorporated areas and homeowner and community associations. b. The operation and maintenance function may be contracted to the private sector when analysis shows that a savings will be result for the service desired. c. The natural and man-made environment of the regional facilities should be protected from deterioration due to over-use. d. The County of Orange, in cooperation with other agencies and volunteers shall provide user education and exposure to the location and historical features of regional Tiding and hiking trails through interpretive programs, exhibits, publications and activities. 3. Intergovernmental Coordination a. The County of Orange should assist local agencies in the provision of trails which will meet identified regional recreation needs. b. The County of Orange .should request cities to partici- pate in the assessment of opportunities for consolida- tion, exchange of services and other approaches for reducing the cost of the delivery of recreation trail facilities and services. c. Cooperation and liaison shall be maintained to encourage consistency between city General Plan trail components and the County Master Plan of Riding and Hiking Trails. 11 of 14 B. Trail Criteria Trails included in the Master Plan of Riding and Hiking Trails shall be developed in accordance with the following criteria. 1. Trail Tread Width: o 10 ft. minimum - urban and rural standard. (See Exhibit B) o 4 ft. minimum - mountain standard. 2. Shy Distance*: o 2 ft. minimum - flat ground, upslope (See Exhibit B) and downslope flatter than 4: 1 slope. o 4 ft. minimum - downslope steeper than 4:1 slope. 3. Right-of-way: o Minimum - Trail tread width plus (See Exhibit B) appropriate shy distances. 4. Setbacks o 5 ft. minimum setback from existing or (See Exhibit B) future curb face, edge of sidewalk or edge of paved or unpaved shoulder. o 5 ft. minimum buffer separation from bikeway, sidewalk or other trails. o 2 ft. minimum setback from retaining walls or fences. 5. Vertical Clearance: 12 ft. minimum vertical clearance beneath (See Exhibit B) structures or tree limbs. 6. Trail Fencing: should be provided where horses need to be firmly confined within the trail width for safety such as in community and regional parks, steep slope areas, bridges, golf courses and other potential hazard or high traffic and general public use areas. 7. Proximity to In combined trail systems, the bicycle Roadway: trail should be located closest to a roadway. 8. Trail Signs: a. Trail name signs should be placed at entry points and other points where trail identification is needed. b. Directional signs should be placed as appropriate to clarify trail distination and direction to trail users. c. Signs should be offset from the trail edge a minimum of 2 ft. * Horizontal clearance 12 of 14 I d. Signs should be identify hazard points, clearance requirements or safety precautions as warranted. e. Mileage signs may be located at trail heads. 9. Roadway Treatments: a. Street signage to warn motorists of impending trail crossings should be located in advance of. trail crossings. Signs should meet County and State standards. . b. Markings for trail crossings should consist of striping on the roadway surface and, where feasible, texturing (sandblasting) of the roadway surface. 10. Staging Areas: a. Staging areas may vary in size depend- ing on location,- physical constraints and need. b. Where feasible; staging areas should be located within regional or state parks or be adjacent to arterial highways. c. Surfacing with well-drained, non- cohesive .soils is desirable, where feasible. d. Staging areas should have the following provided: 1) Identification signs. 2) Marked parking stalls long enough for a car and horse trailer and layed out so that straight ahead entrance and exit is possible. 3) Water for horses, where feasible. 4) Water for riders and hikers, where feasible. 5) Hitching posts. 6) Picnic tables. 7) Rest rooms, where feasible. 8) Shade 13 of 14 11. Rest Areas: Rest areas for trail users should be located within regional or local parks, State parks, and staging areas as first priority and at other feasible locations to seek a desirable minimum spacing of 3 to 5 miles. Rest areas should provide the following: a. Hitching Posts. b. Water for Horses c. Water for hikers and riders. d. Identification signs. e. Picnic tables. f. Rest rooms, where feasible. g. Shade. 14 of 14 APPENDIX A TRAIL DESCRIPTIONS The following are concise descriptions of each trail location and route as best known at this conceptual level of planning. Where there are any particular conditions which need to be considered during trail implementation or further trail route planning, these are noted following the trail route description. 1. Fullerton Trail The Fullerton Trail commences within Los Coyotes Regional Park and extends easterly along the northerly side of Rosecrans Avenue on an existing trail to just westerly of Camino Centro Loma where it extends northerly and easterly along an existing trail through and around Coyote Hills development to Euclid Street. It then extends northerly along the easterly side of Euclid Street and through Laguna Lake Park to an abandoned railroad right of way along which it extends south to the existing Union Pacific Railroad. The trail then extends easterly along the southerly side. of the Union Pacific Railroad and under Harbor Boulevard to the Fullerton Golf Course where it extends south along an existing trail and under Bastanchury Road. It then extends easterly along the southerly side of Bastanchury Road and northerly along the easterly side of State College Boulevard to Craig Regional Park. From Craig Regional Park the trail follows the westerly side of Associated Road north across Imperial Highway to the Loftus Channel right of way (flood control). It then follows the maintenace road of the flood control channel northerly and easterly to the end of the channel westerly of the Valencia Avenue in a commercial area. It then extends north along the westerly side of Voyager Avenue to the northerly side of Birch Street, then easterly along the northerly side of Birch Street across Valencia Avenue and the northeasterly side of Rose Drive to the junction of the Chino Hills Trail (2)* and E1 Cajon Trail (5) near Carbon Canyon Regional Park. Special study should be made of the Harbor Boulevard crossing along the Union Pacific Railroad and the approaches on the east and west ends. Structural solutions will be necessary here to provide a trail which meets safe trail standards. The route for the trail easterly of Craig Regional Park through the cities of Fullerton and Brea should also be investigated further. * Trail number in text and on Exhibit A. 1 of 15 APPENDIX A TRAIL DESCRIPTIONS A possible alternative includes a route extending easterly along Rolling Hills Drive to Tri-City Park, then northerly along Kraemer Boulevard across Imperial Highway to the Loftus Channel, then easterly along the channel. Another alternative would extend the trail northerly along Kraemer Boulevard, then easterly through a commercial center south of Imperial Highway and along the abandoned Pacific Eletric Railroad right of way to join the E1 Cajon Trail (5) near the outlet channel from Carbon Canyon Dam, westerly of Rose Drive. 2. Chino Hills Trail The Chino Hills Trail commences at the terminus of the Fullerton Trail (1) near Carbon Canyon Dam (flood control) and extends through Carbon Canyon Regional Park easterly along Telegraph Canyon through future Chino Hills State Park to a point about 2 miles easterly of the regional park. It then climbs to the south along existing trails and roads to the Metropolitan Water District Lower Feeder right of way along which it extends easterly to Blue Mud Canyon. The trail extends easterly in Blue Mud Canyon and along the southerly ridge of Wire Springs Canyon to the San Bernardino County boundary where it follows ridges southeasterly and southerly to the Santa Ana River Trail (6) within .Featherly Regional Park. As the trail passes along the County boundary it provides opportunities for connection to trails within the County of San Bernardino and the easterly portion of future Chino Hills State Park. A special condition which should be investigated is the route from Telegraph Canyon southerly and easterly along the Metropolitan Water District right of way. In this particular area the trail may need to depart from the water line right of way to meet minimum trail grade requirements in the hilly terrain. Also, an alternate route for the trail or an additional trail branch should be investigated through Brush Canyon between the Riverside County line and the Santa Ana River Trail (6) . 3. Diamond Bar Trail The Diamond Bar Trail extends northerly from the Chino Hills Trail (2) across Carbon Canyon Road along a canyon through Brea Wilder- ness Park and over a ridge to the County boundary in the north. Chino Hills. From here it can be connected to the Los Angeles County's proposed .Skyline Trail and trails leading to. the Diamond Bar area to the north. .Special study of the route of this trail will be necessary in . cooperation with the City of Brea, landowners and Los Angeles County. 2 of 15 4. Telegraph Canyon Trail The Telegraph Canyon Trail extends from the Chino Hills Trail (2) easterly along Telegraph Canyon within future Chino Hills State Park to the San Bernardino County boundary where it has opportuni- ties for extension into the easterly portion of Chino Hills State Park and to connect with trails within San Bernardino County. Special coordination will be appropriate with the State Department of Parks and Recreation. 5. El Cajon Trail The El Cajon Trail commences at the junction of Fullerton Trail (1) with the Chino Hills Trail (2) and extends southerly in the vicinity of Rose Drive or the outlet channel for Carbon Canyon Dam across Imperial Highway and southerly along an existing trail along the channel. In the vicinity of Bastanchury Road it Joins the old E1 Cajon canal right of way within which it extends easterly along an existing equestrian trail to Imperial Highway. It then crosses Imperial Highway and extends south- easterly along the old canal right of way to Grandview Avenue.. From Grandview Avenue it extends through a low density residential area to Kellogg Drive. After following Kellogg Drive southerly a short distance, it extends easterly through low density residential areas around the Yorba Linda Country Club to Esperanza Road. The trail then extends easterly along Esperanza Road to Fairmont Avenue which it then follows southeasterly across the AT&SF Railway to join the Santa Ana River Trail (6) . Special study will be required of the route north and south. of Imperial Highway and how the crossing of the highway should be made. The route in the vicinity of Kellogg Drive will also need special study. Special consideration will be required to provide the trail connection from elevated Fairmont Avenue to the Santa Ana River Trail (6) and space for the trail on the Fairmont Avenue bridge. 6. Santa Ana River Trail The Santa Ana River Trail commences. at Pacific Coast Highway at the Huntington Beach Trail (7) and extends northeasterly along the westerly side of the Santa Ana River Channel to a point near Anaheim Stadium where it crosses to the easterly bank. and extends northerly to Imperial Highway. After crossing to the northerly bank at Imperial highway, the trail extends easterly past Yorba Regional Park and Featherly Regional Park to the County boundary where it will connect with trails along the river in Riverside County. 3 of 15 Special investigation of the route for the trail between Weir Canyon Road and the Riverside County boundary should be carried out in conjunction with flood control, highway and development planning. Also, investigation of a permanent alternate route or an interim trail along the southerly side of the river from Imperial Highway to Weir Canyon Road should be made. The potential interim .trail would connect with the interim trail connection at Weir Canyon Road between the Weir Canyon Trail (11) and Santa Ana River Trail (6) . See discussion below. A trail route on the south side of the river in Santa Ana Canyon should also be investigated. 7. Huntington Beach Trail The Huntington Beach Trail commences at the southerly end of the Santa Ana River Trail (6) and extends northwesterly along the bank of the Talbert Channel to Brookhurst Street. From Brookhurst Street the trail extends along the southerly and westerly side of the channel to Atlanta Avenue where it extends west on the southerly side of Atlanta Avenue across Beach Boulevard to the abandoned Southern Pacific Railroad right of way. The trail then extends northerly through the existing developed area along the railroad right of way to Garfield Avenue. After crossing Garfield Avenue and Main Street, the trail extends along the westerly side of Gothard Street to Ellis Avenue and then westerly along southerly side of Ellis Avenue to the proposed Bolsa Chica Linear Regional Park. Within the linear regional park the. trail extends along the bluff to a point near Pacific Coast Highway and may include an extended trail loop within the park to enhance trail use. Special study of which side of the channel bank the trail should be located between the Santa Ana River Trail (6) and Brookhurst Street needs to be made. Also, dust problems which may be created by the trail activity along the earth levee, the difficult crossing of Beach Boulevard, provision for the trail along the southerly side of Atlanta Avenue, and the need to acquire right to place the trail in the abandoned Southern Pacific Railroad right of way all need special attention. 8. Anaheim Hills Trail The Anaheim Hills Trail commences where the E1 Cajon Trail (5) joins the Santa Ana River Trail (6) at Fairmont Avenue and extends southerly along Fairmont Avenue across the Santa Ana 4 of 15 River and the Riverside Freeway to Santa Ana Canyon Road. It then extends easterly along Santa Ana Canyon Road to Deer Canyon in. the Eucalyptus Drive Area. The trail then turns southerly along Deer Canyon or Eucalyptus Drive Drive to the Metropolitan Water District (MWD) Santiago Lateral pipe- line easement in Anaheim Hills. Once on the MWD easement, the trail extends southerly across Canyon Rim Road and Serrano Avenue and through Hidden Canyon to join the Weir Canyon Trail (11) . Here it turns westerly and extends along an existing trail in an Edison easement for approximately 211 miles where. it turns sharply northeasterly along another trail in an Edison easement to a terminus at Nohl Ranch Road. Special considerations are provisions for the separation of hiking and equestrian traffic from vehicular traffic on the Fairmont Avenue bridge across the Santa Ana River and Riverside Freeway and the trail route in the Deer Canyon area southerly of Santa Ana Canyon Road. The crossings of Canyon Rim Road and Serrano Avenue will need special attention also. 9. Santiago Oaks Trail The Santiago Oaks Trail extends from the east-west leg of the Anaheim Hills Trail (8) southwesterly through an unnamed canyon in the Anaheim Hills open space to join the Santiago Creek Trail (14) within Santiago .Oaks Regional Park. Steep canyon terrain is a consideration here. 10. Four Corners Trail The Four Corners Trail extends from the Anaheim Hills Trail (8) in Deer Canyon easterly along the Four Corners Pipeline easement or the southerly boundary of the Bauer Ranch development to join the Weir Canyon Trail (11) south of Santiago Canyon Road. Special attention will need to be given to terrain along the linear easement in hilly terrain and to the method of crossings Weir Canyon Road. The route alternatives along the Four Corners Pipeline easement and the edge of the Baur Ranch development need to be studied and compared in cooperation with the City of Anaheim. 11. Weir Canyon Trail The Weir Canyon Trail commences at the Santa Ana River Trail (6) within Featherly Regional Park and extends southerly under the Riverside Freeway along Gypsum Canyon Road. It then turns westerly along the southerly side of Santa Ana Canyon Road to 5 of 15 an unnamed creek just easterly of Weir Canyon Road. The trail then extends southerly along or parallel to ranch roads along the creek to the head waters of the creek where it traverses the ridge line southerly into Weir Canyon. From this point it extends down Weir Canyon and/or along an existing Edison easement, then in Weir Canyon southerly to join the Santiago Creek Trail (14) in Irvine Regional Park. A link from the Weir Canyon Trail to the Santa Ana River Trail (6) along Weir Canyon Road under the Riverside Freeway is a potential interim trail to connect the two trails during the period before heavy development and high traffic volumes occur on Weir Canyon Road. The purpose of this link is to achieve a more direct route from Anaheim Hills to the river trail until the Fairmont Avenue crossing for the Anaheim Hills Trail (8) is complete. Special consideration should be given to the trail facility under the Riverside Freeway along Gypsum Canyon Road, and to the steepness of the grade climbing from the unnamed water course southerly to the ridge into Weir Canyon. The feasi- bility of continuing the interim trail link at Weir Canyon Road as a permanent trail should be considered in cooperation with the cities having jurisdiction. 12. Coal Canyon Trail The Coal Canyon Trail commences at the Santa Ana River Trail (6) opposite Coal Canyon Road and extends southerly across the Santa Ana. River and under the Riverside Freeway along Coal Canyon Road, then climbs up to the westerly ridge line along an existing ranch road. It then follows southerly along the existing ranch road to a point where the Main Divide Trail (13) extends easterly and southerly into the Cleveland National Forest. From this point the Coal Canyon Trail extends southerly and westerly along existing ranch roads to connect with the Weir Canyon Trail (11) in the head waters of Weir Canyon. Special consideration needs to be given to a suitable crossing of the Santa Ana River, to the crossing along Coal Canyon Road under the Riverside-Freeway, and to the location of the trail through the westerly portion of the proposed Sports Shooting Center in Coal Canyon. 13. Main Divide Trail The Main Divide Trail commences at the ridge line location of the Coal Canyon Trail (12) and extends easterly into the Cleveland National Forest, then southeasterly along the 6 of 15 Main Divide Truck Road, generally along the ridge of the Santa Ana mountains past Santiago Peak to the Riverside County line northwesterly of Ortega Highway where. other trails extend easterly into Riverside County and southerly into San Diego County. 14. Santiago Creek Trail The Santiago Creek Trail commences within the future westerly portion of Santiago Oaks Regional Park near Villa Park Road and extends .easterly along Santiago Creek to. Villa Park Dam. The trail then extends around Villa Park Dam and through Irvine .Regional Park along Santiago Creek to .Irvine Lake. Passing Irvine Lake on the southwesterly side, the trail extends along Limestone Canyon and Santiago Canyon Road to again join Santiago Creek near Silverado Canyon Road. It then extends southerly along Santiago Creek to Modjeska grade, where the trail extends over the ridge along Santiago Canyon Road into the Aliso. Creek watershed where it joins the Aliso Creek Trail (19) at Cook's Corner. The routes by which the trail is extended around Villa Park Dam and Santiago Dam (Irvine Lake) will need special consideration. 15. Ladd Canyon Trail The Ladd Canyon Trail commences at the Santiago Creek Trail (14) near Silverado Canyon Road and extends easterly along Silverado Canyon Road, then northeasterly along Ladd Canyon to join the Main Divide Trail (13) at the head waters of Ladd Canyon. 16. Santiago Truck Trail The Santiago Truck Trail commences at the Santiago Creek Trail (14) near the intersection of Santiago Canyon Road and Modjeska Grade Road. The trail extends along Modjeska Grade Road and the existing Santiago Truck Trail along a ridge line and upper Santiago Canyon in an easterly and northerly direction to Old Camp within the Cleveland National Forest about 1 mile north of the national forest boundary and Joplin Ranch where it joins the Joplin Trail (17). 17. Joplin Trail The Joplin Trail commences from the Santiago Truck Trail (16) at Old Camp within the Cleveland National Forest and extends in a northerly direction along upper Santiago Canyon to the Main Divide Trail (13). 18. Serrano Creek Trail The Serrano Creek Trail commences at the Santiago Creek Trail (14) near Modjeska Grade Road and extends southerly over the ridge in future Whiting Regional Park to the head waters of Serrano 7 of 15 Creek, where it follows the creek southwesterly to terminate at Serrano Community Park at Trabuco Canyon Road. A special consideration is the provision of Grade separated crossings for future arterial highways and the Foothill Transportation Corridor. 19. Aliso Creek Trail The Aliso Creek Trail commences at the Santiago Creek Trail (14) at Cook's Corner and extends southwesterly along Aliso Creek to the Leisure World Community at Paseo de Valencia. It then extends along Paseo de Valencia and future Sheep Hills Road around the Leisure World Community to again join Aliso Creek. It then follows the creek southwesterly to a point approximately 2 miles from the coast at Horseshoe Bend where the trail terminates. A special consideration is the provision of grade separated crossings at future arterial highways and the San Joaquin Hills Transportation Corridor. 20. Aliso - Serrano Trail The Aliso - Serrano Trail connects the Serrano Creek Trail (18) and Aliso Creek Trail (19) at a point approximately midway between Trabuco Canyon Road and Cook's Corner by traversing the low, hilly ridge in the northeasterly portion of the Rancho de Los Alisos Planned Community. 21. Live Oak Canyon Trail The Live Oak Canyon Trail commences at the Aliso Creek Trail (19) about 31 mile downstream from Cook's Corner at abridge for E1 Toro Road near the proposed Saddleback Meadows development and extends along the southerly edge of the Saddleback Meadows development into the Ramakrishna portion of O'Neill Regional Park to Live Oak Canyon Road. From this point it follows the westerly side of Live Oak Canyon within O'Neill Regional Park to join the Arroyo Trabuco Trail (22) within the park. 22. Arroyo Trabuco Trail The Arroyo Trabuco trail commences in Trabuco Canyon at the Cleveland National Forest boundary and extends southwesterly and southerly along Arroyo Trabuco through O'Neill Regional Park past the Plano Trabuco, under the San Diego Freeway and through the City of San Juan Capistrano to join the San Juan Creek Trail (29) . 8 of 15 Special consideration will be required to provide safe trail space under the Camino Capistrano bridge just southwesterly of the San Diego Freeway. 23. Trabuco Canyon Trail The Trabuco. Canyon Trail commences at the Arroyo Trabuco Trail (22) at the Cleveland National Forest boundary and extends easterly in Trabuco Canyon past its junction with the Holy Jim Trail (24) and West Horse Thief Trail (25) to the ridge line at the T4ain Divide Trail (13) . 24. Holy Jim Trail The Holy Jim Trail commences at the mid-point of the Trabuco Canyon Trail (23) and extends upstream in Holy Jim Canyon and up and along the west and north face of the canyon to join the Main Divide Trail (13) near Bear Springs. 25. . West Horse Thief Trail The West Horse Thief Trail commences at the Trabuco Canyon Trail (23) and extends northeasterly in upper Trabuco Canyon to its upper watershed where it joins the Main Divide Trail (13) . 26. Bell Canyon Trail The Bell Canyon Trail commences at the Arroyo Trabuco Trail (22) about 1 mile east of O'Neill Regional Park and extends southerly through the Robinson Ranch development open space and Dove Canyon to the ridge line between Bell Canyon and Canada Gobernadora. The trail then extends southerly on an existing ranch road along the ridge line and along the westerly boundary of the Audubon Society Sanctuary to Ronald W. Caspers Regional Park where it descends easterly into the park to join the San Juan Creek Trail (29) near the entrance to the park. 27. Bell Ridge Trail The Bell Ridge Trail commences at the Bell Canyon Trail (26) in the Robinson Ranch development open space and extends easterly along the ridge line within the Cleveland National Forest to join the Los Pinos Trail (30) on the ridge westerly of the Main Divide Trail (13). 28. Tijeras Canyon Trail The Tijeras Canyon Trail commences at the Bell Canyon Trail (27) near the southerly end of the Robinson Ranch development open space and extends southwesterly along Tijeras Canyon to join the Arroyo Trabuco Trail (22) at the extreme southerly end of the Plano Trabuco. 9 of 15 29. San Juan Creek Trail The San Juan Creek Trail commences at the Los Pinos Trail (30) , San Juan Trail (31) and Sitton Peak Trail (33) at San Juan Hot Springs and extends southerly and westerly along San Juan Creek through Ronald W. Caspers Regional Park and through San Juan Capistrano to Pacific Coast Highway near Doheny State Beach. 30. Los Pinos Trail The Los Pinos Trail commences at the San Juan Creek Trail (29) at San Juan Hot Springs and extends northerly along a ridge on an existing trail to join the Main Divide Trail (13) within the Cleveland National Forest. 31. San Juan Trail The San Juan Trail commences at the San Juan Creek Trail (29) at San Juan Hot Springs and extends northeasterly along a ridge line on an existing trail to join the Main Divide Trail (13) . 32. Chiquita Trail The Chiquita Trail extends from the San Juan Trail (31) southeasterly along Lion Canyon to the Riverside County line northwest of Ortega Highway where it extends southerly to join trails within the Cleveland National Forest. 33. Sitton Peak Trail The Sitton Peak Trail commences at the San Juan Creek Trail (29) at San Juan Jot Springs and extends easterly along a ridge line into the Cleveland National Forest to the Riverside County line where it extends easterly to join trails within the Cleveland National Forest in Riverside and San Diego Counties. 34. Lucas Canyon Trail The Lucas Canyon Trail commences at the San Juan Creek Trail (29) in Ronald W. Caspers Regional Park and extends easterly along Lucas Canyon to the Riverside County line where it connects with trails within the Cleveland National Forest in Riverside County and San Diego County to the east and south. The Lucas Canyon Trail currently in use commences at San Juan Hot Springs and shares the same route with the Sitton Peak Trail (3.3) for the first 2 miles. Then it descends into Lucas Canyon and follows the canyon easterly into Riverside County. When the trail connection along the canyon directly from the mouth is implemented, the current trail connection from San Juan Hot Springs via the Sitton Peak Trail (33) will be an alternative trail connection. 10 of 15 35. Cristianitos Trail The Cristianitos Trail commences at the San Juan Creek Trail (29) approximately a mile below the Caspers Regional- Park entrance and extends southerly along ranch roads in a unnamed canyon, then into Cristianitos Canyon where it extends southerly to the County boundary and San Onofre State Beach. The route for this trail will need to be coordinated with development in the O'Neill Ranch area when development proposals are presented. -Possible alternative routes to fit with environmental provisions in the development plans will need to be considered. Also, coordination with the route for the Foothill Transportation Corridor will be necessary. 36. Prima Deshecha Trail The Prima Deshecha Trail extends southerly from the San Juan Creek Trail (29) near La Pats, Avenue along La Pata Avenue or the existing Edison powerline easement through future Prima Deshecha Regional Park to the vicinity of Avenida Pico where it extends easterly along the Edison easement to join the Cristianitos Trail (35) at the County boundary. Routes for this trail will need to be coordinated with develop- ment proposals and highway planning in the area. 37. Salt Creek Trail The Salt Creek Trail commences at the Arroyo Trabuco Trail (22) in San Juan Capistrano south of Oso Road and extends westerly into the Bear Brand Ranch across future Street of the Golden Lantern to San Juan Canyon. The trail continues westerly down San Juan Canyon to Salt Creek at Niguel Road, then northerly along Salt Creek to the vicinity of future Trabuco Creek Road, where it will extend northerly through developing areas and over the hills to Crown Valley Parkway. The trail then crosses Crown Valley Parkway and passes through Laguna Niguel Community Park, then northerly along the Sulpher Creek Channel past the regional sewage treatment plant and into. Laguna Niguel Regional Park. The trail continues through Laguna Niguel Regional Park and across Alicia Parkway to join the Aliso Creek Trail (19) . Careful consideration needs to be given to the crossings of Alicia and Crown Valley Parkways and additional study is needed of the easterly connection to the Arroyo Trabuco Trail (22) in San Juan Capistrano. 11 of 15 38. Oso Creek Trail The Oso Creek Trail commences at the Arroyo Trabuco Trail (22) at the confluence of Arroyo Trabuco and Oso Creek just downstream from Camino Capistrano and extends northerly along Oso Creek to a point northerly of Crown Valley Parkway where it crosses Cabot Road and extends into the Nellie Gail Ranch community where it joins the junction of the Niguel Trail (39) and Nellie Gail Trail (40). Special consideration will need to be given to the crossing of Cabot Road and to the location of the trail within Nellie Gail Ranch for compatibility with the trail system within that area. 39. Niguel Trail The Niguel Trail commences at the junction of the Oso Creek Trail (38) and Nellie Gail Trail (40) in the Nellie Gail Ranch community and extends southwesterly along an unnamed water course and swale to La Paz Road. It then passes under La Paz Road in an existing equestrian undercrossing to join the Salt Creek Trail (37) within Laguna Niguel Regional Park. Special provisions need to be made when Street of the Golden Lantern and the San Joaquin Hills Transportation Corridor are implemented to provide for safe trail crossings. 40. Nellie Gail Trail The Nellie Gail Trail commences at a junction with the Oso Creek Trail (38) and Niguel Trail (39) and extends northwesterly through the Nellie Gail Ranch community to La Paz Road. After crossing La Paz Road through an existing equestrian undercrossing, the trail extends southwesterly in existing open space on the northerly side of La Paz Road to Moulton Parkway where it passes under an existing undercrossing. The trail then extends northwesterly along the southwesterly side of Moulton Parkway to Alicia Parkway. There it will cross Alicia Parkway and extend southwesterly adjacent to Alicia Parkway to join the Aliso Creek Trail (19) . An alternate route would continue the trail from the Moulton Parkway undercrossing at La Paz Road in a southwesterly direction to the boundary between the Aliso Viejo and Alicia Creek developments. It would then extend northwesterly between the two developments to Alicia Parkway where it will cross at a special equestrian crossing or extend along the easterly side of Alicia Parkway to its intersection with Moulton Parkway. There it will cross Alicia Parkway and extend southwesterly adjacent to Alicia Parkway to join the Aliso Creek Trail (19). 12 of 15 I Special. consideration will need to be given to selecting the acceptable route for the trail through the Nellie Gail Ranch community and the route between the Moulton Parkway crossing at La Paz Road and the Aliso Creek ,Trail (19) . Also, provision of a safe crossing of Alicia Parkway will need special attention. 41. Wood Canyon Trail The Wood Canyon Trail commences at 'the Aliso Creek Trail (19) at the mouth of Wood Canyon and extends northerly along the bottom of Wood Canyon to its head waters easterly of. E1 Toro Road. It then crosses over the ridge and descends through a planned open space area to the vicinity of the E1 Toro Road/ Laguna Canyon Road intersection. Following a crossing of both roads, the trail extends up Laurel Canyon to a point on the ridge near the head waters of Emerald Canyon where it will join the Emerald Canyon Trail (42) and Irvine Coast Trail (43) . Special consideration will need to be given to the location of the crossing of E1 Toro Road and Laguna Canyon Road and how the trail will descend the steep slope to E1 Toro Road from the south. 42. Emerald Canyon Trail The Emerald Canyon Trail commences at the junction of the Wood Canyon Trail (41) and Irvine Coast Trail (43) on the ridge line and extends southwesterly down into Emerald Canyon following the bottom of Canyon to a point near the boundary of the City of Laguna Beach where it turns northwesterly and climbs over the hills into Crystal Cove State Park, where it terminates in a staging area proposed in the State Park plan. Special coordination with the State Department of Parks and Recreation will be needed. 43. Irvine Coast Trail The Irvine Coast Trail commences at the junction of the Wood Canyon Trail (41) and Emerald Canyon Trail (42) and extends northwesterly generally along the coastal side of the ridge to a point near future Sand Canyon Avenue at the northerly end of Crystal Cove State Park. At this point the trail drops down the face of Bommer Canyon and extends northerly past Sand Canyon Reservoir to William R. Mason Regional Park. The trail extends westerly through the regional park and across and 13 of 15 parallel to University Drive to the San Diego Creek Channel to a junction with the Santa Ana Heights Trail (44) and Peters Canyon Trail (45) . Special consideration is appropriate for the section of the trail _along the ridge near the State park, San Joaquin Hills Transportation Corridor and Sand Canyon Avenue to provide for a suitable trail location and highway crossings. The crossing of University Drive near William R. Mason Regional Park will also need special attention. 44. Santa Ana Heights Trail The Santa Ana Heights Trail begins at the junction of the Irvine Coast Trail (43). and Peters Canyon Trail (45) and extends westerly along and across the San Diego Creek Channel and under MacArthur Boulevard, the future Corona del Mar Freeway and Jamboree Road to the Upper Newport Bay area. The trail then continues northwesterly outside the edge of the Upper Newport Bay Ecological Reserve to join the Santa Ana Delhi Channel. It continues north along the flood control channel maintenance road past the Newport Beach Golf Course across Mesa Drive and Irvine Avenue to Santa Ana Avenue. The trail then extends southwesterly along the northwesterly side of Santa Ana Avenue and then northwesterly along Mesa Drive to cross Newport Boulevard and the future Costa Mesa Freeway to.the Orange County Fairgrounds stable facility. Special consideration will need to be given to the crossing of the San Diego Creek Channel, possibly with a removable bridge or dip crossing. Trail routing studies should be under- taken for the trail as it skirts the Upper Newport Bay Ecological Reserve. Special attention will need to be given the trail as it crosses Mesa Drive, Irvine Boulevard and Santa Ana Avenue. Coordination with the Santa Ana Country Club will be required along Santa Ana Avenue and Mesa Drive. The crossing of the two frontage roads at Newport Boulevard and the bridge crossing of the Costa Mesa Freeway will need special attention and coordination with Caltrans and the City of Costa Mesa. Alternate routes may be considered for this trail, and it should have close study before a final route is established between Upper Newport Bay and the County Fair- grounds. 45. Peters Canyon Trail The Peters Canyon Trail extends northeasterly from the junction of the Santa Ana Heights Trail (44) and the Irvine Coast Trail (43) along the San Diego Creek and Peters Canyon Channels and 14 of 15 Peters Canyon Wash to the Peters Canyon- Reservoir area, where it crosses over the hill across Santiago Canyon Road to join the Santiago Creek Trail (14) within Irvine Regional Park. Special consideration will need to be given to the crossing of the San Diego Creek Channel near Barranca .Road, where the San Diego Creek Channel turns southeasterly and the Peters Canyon Channel continues to the northeast. Crossings of Main Street, Barranca Road, Warner Avenue and Walnut Avenue will need special consideration. The Santa Ana Freeway crossing will .need to be considered along with the ultimate flood control plan for the area, with provisions being made at that time for space for the equestrian trail to cross under the freeway, even though .it may be flooded from time to time during storms. Also, the crossings of Irvine Boulevard, Bryan Avenue and Santiago Canyon Road will need special attention. 15 of 15 { 173 NYONW. Ic TWt(IL+.r to j NiR.I,JIir r `•2. 111 ✓• � DE 71tj ?1 r IV ia 'bf r•JI^ . W --1.• ,� �" '61 �F I�' ICI l\ • ,1 (IJ ,\ —_ I I _/'; 1-t+-r f •I - f��3;'.•r��-I. 'f�' .i. :x �� r.� .Q�r +.. ,r ''' "P-_• 11�-.II l�1�N1'y'S.I ,y r .6 • jrtM W ... ,4� _�. I• `. .Ni �Ft,_ Irl "' �r ��;�� •h�"'a ':, �j"•�' �,.'� . ` •.-ram t.. }y _ I . P - \ x Cyr SpT � nttF r. r �� k% ,� ^I. J A T r \\ yBUN Mn.r-SW I I l If �y • ` r .SR ' pATIC I •,.' I•t• NV�PIrJ A(I� _ t - p(N` �..yC�TpP A C C iiPnRK i \ - I- -.�rIVl ., _. S16AIkl;* r ti,�i•,yu�'N91 in ,*.. '. r'• UJ' n 1 -AGH'7"RPIL f :ua� nfT g�d(Na i �»• ,oi a � LIsG= Zvo u L r - ' �.\ �1.11 Nl.. "d�i Q/ �tM ,�.o k•- $TRi+L :\ - - ....... ( �� Y f �'�� '1� E <+WSER�IAN(2•LREEK TRA{�----�%'^.✓,, ..�M1/ -.1.-�. J 11�To r ��,�� - �'S''•� r.. CLIVE a '+ •\ _ •1 f ANYON • '•"� �`� �I MASON '� J.. •�`_� ....,..,(.",r �. 'FflAIL •� o rn n I Irr f .,(WALISO EEK TRAIL ARROYO ! f• J A• { !%IY r+ IRA eUCO is iR9N7 - ;�ti:-r. + ^, TRAIL. IING$.••1 (a71- _ 1. RA"" A X,�4�� ... J E-� vi 4COA3T i A, _ fn: Yoe 43)0 t -�l � ►DEL 1L I�.l i NYDNf•ti,9� I LA LEGEND - PAG'I(IG OCEAN H5T).A- {-- '�_•w ,� ......• REGIONAL RIDING AND HIKING TRAIL I�"'• ► ,' �l� ' , �• I - ti � yB).SAN,,1J�JJAA�� 9 (IrU III(:IIINAI IHAII N11M111H - - • l r GREEKjAI I:II VIIANII NnIIl 1NA1 I(nn::I i1+nn '- EL ., _ C _ \Y�� 1.01I NIIAI ':IA(:INI:AI+t-A *-ar. • (7R7 '• ` -0 .: • - -- I'(111NIIAI INII HIM IHAII IINK `:• l .t `'- ••�_'� �, f� I XI;:IINI:NI.(:IONN TAMS - ALISO- '\-i� 'a - l I.XISIINGIAI1.I'AHKSOHIA.NiHr.S _ BEACH +•'•••'..• ' 'lam S/' 1 . r .. A f• 1:..ICRI 'f( NI` - SALT CREEK ...: BEACH (eapq(MA -- 0 SHE TRAIL DANA STAI PARKYY � POINI '''Y• Y/ - IIAl1DOR 4 •^b. rah.:.t HrA - TANK 1 aA1gP•+Tla,t �ww � atuJi�ttJM 'fR�It,. � OPItF�?Ta�J � �„ya,,,,tn�,{�►nlc� IMAY1' �� - N IMP�%i' Z01JE 2� lo'' TI�a1L �iM�►J —�VAN Wks nA`rvw-yT" 4I#wKwp TIPAL- oA�1Q�Tw►� � �M+ M��M T�aL lzca°v IMPIiCr ZoW� RIb4(T-�-1N�Y _ Y.fflT-oF-ICY__- WaAsrJ.e � i GtJRD!'f�GE q� � SIDC�Vi►d,�� 6AEaE Tg,& L Noxr rep fv^-;wA%r 2� ' �AIt, 5� 1rtu.1, � Y..._ . 6' M►►J.,_..._ VF- 1 wPu op. I R�Nce �1 V t�l�•lSIoN G�rt'� e EQUEST IAN , T DY HUNTINGMN BEACH PLANNING DEPARTMENT Aft- Ak • _ . N-F " f Equestrian Use May,1974 Study • ABSTRACT • It is the purpose of this study to identify viable equestrian use alternatives in an effort to generate discussion and to facilitate development of a comprehensive statement of City policy regarding equestrian use. In this pursuit, it identifies particular assets and liabilities of equestrian use, presents and evaluates five alternative equestrian use concepts, discusses some factors • involved in designing and developing a trails system, and presents Planning Department recommendations. Ranging from complete exclusion of all equestrian uses to large- scale expansion of existing areas, the long-range equestrian use concepts outlined by the study cover a variety of possible policy • choices available to City decision makers: Alternative A: Exclusion - Phase out existing equestrian uses, provide no trails other than regional river path; enforce restrictions against horses on public rights-of-way. • Alternative B: Confinement - Confine equestrian uses to City- owned stables at Central Park and suitable grails in park; encourage development of river equestrian center to serve river trail system. Alternative C: Tolerance - Permit existing uses to continue; • establish temporary trails; (assume that equestrian uses will eventually be replaced by market demand) . Alternative D: Consolidation —Designate "equestrian areas" where commercial stables will be permitted; prohibit horses on residential lots; develop a trails system to serve equestrian • areas and connect with regional systems. Alternative E: Expansion - Designate areas where commercial and private stables are permissible; develop a comprehensive trails system that serves such areas, connects them with other open spaces, and links them with regional systems. • Each of these concepts represents a viable solution to the "problem" of what to do with horses in a metropolitan area. The alternative selected will depend on the City' s goals for tomorrow and will reflect a balance of individual good and public interest to determine what is best for the whole community. • Though each equestrian use alternative would provide a different type of future for horses and horse enthusiasts in the ,City, one factor is common to all except "A" ; that is, the potential of Huntington Central Park to serve as a central equestrian facility. • •-2 1 . • Therefore, the report suggests several possible approaches to establishing an equestrian center there. All these concepts represent long-range programs which will affect • future equestrian use. To meet the immediate needs of horsemen in the community requires a plan that could be implemented over a short-term basis and so the report sets forth three short-range trail proposals which both address current needs and maintain a considerable degree of flexibility for future actions . • Alternative Trail 1 involves a 3-mile trail through the Bolsa Chica and along the Wintersburg Channel. This route would be free of traffic and man-made barriers; it would provide diverse and inter- esting scenery; it would link two equestrian areas of the City; and it would involve few property owners . Development cost of the project would be $23 ,640 with $3 ,600 for leased right-of-way and • $675 for yearly maintenance. Alternative Trail 2 utilizes the land and scenic resources provided by Huntington Central Park and City-owned acreage adjacent to it. This proposal offers immediate availability of right-of-way; it is the most scenic and presents the greatest variety of terrain; and • it would be an excellent core system should the City decide on a more extensive trail in the future. A 1. 5 mile Central Park trail would cost $33 ,480 to develop and $300 a year to maintain. Alternative 3 is designed to link the major commercial stables in the central portion of the City. This concept explores three • alternative horse crossings on Goldenwest -- Garfield, Ernest, and Ellis -- and relies heavily on City-owned land and acreage that is currently in equestrian use. Each approach necessarily includes some private, non-equestrian parcels, however. A Garfield crossing (existing) would involve 2.5 miles of trails and cost $3 , 300 to develop; right-of-way leases would be approximately $1 ,980 and • yearly maintenance would be $750. A crossing at Ernest would include 1.75 miles of bridlepath at a development cost of $12 ,310 , right-of-way leases totaling $900 , and maintenance of $350 a year. Two miles of trails would accompany an Ellis crossing. Development would require $17 ,640 , leases would involve $1, 350 , and maintenance would be $400 yearly. • It is the recommendation of the Planning staff that a signalized horse crossing be installed immediately at Ernest and Goldenwest to alleviate a serious safety hazard for both riders and drivers. The staff also recommends that immediate consideration be given to establishing a Central Park trail and that an equestrian facility • be established in Phase III plans for Central Park. Excluding the equestrian facility which is a long-range proposal , implementation of this plan would cost about $53 ,000 . • Z I 6 The staff further recommends that the specific path and the desirable nature and location of the equestrian center should be determined by a special committee appointed by the City Council. This • committee should include a member of the Council, a Planning Commissioner, a Recreation and Parks Commissioner, and a representa- tive of equestrian interests in the-- community. Its proposals -- to be returned to the City Council in 30 days -- should include an acceptable route for the Central Park trail, a recommendation on the equestrian facility, and a suggested long-range use concept to • direct future land use planning in the City. • • • • l • • TABLE OF CONTENTS • 1. 0 INTRODUCTION 1 1. 1 Intent 1 1. 2 Equestrian Issues 2 1. 2. 1 Benefits 2 1. 2. 2 Liabilities 2 1. 2. 3 Types of Use 3 1. 3 Existing Status of Equestrian Use 3 2. 0 CONCEPTS 7 2. 1 Alternative A: Exclusion 8 2. 2 Alternative B: Confinement 8 2. 3 Alternative C: Tolerance 8 • 2. 4 Alternative D: Consolidation 9 2. 5 Alternative E: Expansion 9 2. 6 Summary 9 2. 7 An Equestrian Center 10 3. 0 TRAILS SYSTEM 13 • 3. 1 General Considerations 13 3. 1. 1 Corridors 13 3. 1. 2 Barriers 15 3. 1. 3 Criteria for Trail Selection 15 3. 2 Short-Range Trail Alternatives 15 3. 2. 1 Alternative Trail 1 : Bolsa Chica 16 • 3 . 2. 2 Alternative Trail 2: Central Park 18 3. 2. 3 Alternative Trail 3 : "Feeder System" 21 4 .0 CONCLUSION 27 4 .1 Summary 27 4.2 Recommendation' 28 ACE&. • • • introduction • • • • • 1. 0 Introduction Not too long ago Huntington Beach was a small seaside community surrounded by vast agricultural areas and the accouterments of pastoral life. As population grew and urban development expanded, however, this bucolic nature was transformed until only a few • vestiges of provincial lifestyle remained. One of these last remnants of -the City' s rural past is the horse whose present status is tenuous at best and whose tomorrows are uncertain. The role of the horse in a metropolitan environment and the future of equestrian use in Iuntington Beach is the subject of this report. • 1. 1 Intent It is the purpose of this study to investigate potentials for equestrian use within the City, to question the role the horse now plays in the community and what role, if any, it should play in the future. The objective of this investigation is to develop viable alternative concepts in an effort to generate public and political discussion and to facilitate development of a comprehen- sive statement of City policy regarding equestrian use. Toward this end, the report identifies particular assets and liabilities of equestrian use, presents and evaluates five alternative equestrian a use concepts, discusses some factors involved in designing and developing a trails system, and finally, presents Planning Department recommendations. • 1 • • 1. 2 Equestrian Issues Before determining the fate of equestrian use within the City, it is desirable to examine some pertinent equestrian issues facing the community. Specifically, these include the benefits to be received from horses in a metropolitan area, the liabilities to be suffered, and the differences between commercial and private equestrian use. • 1. 2. 1 Benefits The most immediate benefit of permitting horses in the City is convenience to residents who own them. Having their horses nearby means less time must be spent traveling, more time can be spent enjoying the animals. As well, horseback riding is an important recreational alternative that appeals to many. However, it is an opportunity not readily available in many neighboring communities and rapidly disappearing from metropolitan Southern California. In addition to personal convenience • and recreation, equestrian use may also provide a valuable open space resource as stables, corrals, and pastures contribute open areas and visual relief from the surround- ing landscape. In a less tangible way, equestrian use may preserve rural or agrarian values -- values which are very much a part of the American Ethic. And not the • least advantage to be derived from equestrian use is the psychological benefit accrued from companionship between man and animal. 1. 2. 2 Liabilities on the other hand, maintaining horses can create problems unacceptable in an urban area. Whenever horses are confined, for example, there is a potential health hazard generated by flies, rodents, and the possibility of water pollution. Horses can also be a safety hazard both to individuals and motor vehicles. Finally, equestrian uses may be a nuisance to the community in terms of dust, odor, and visual blight. It is obvious that all these liabilities can be mitigated with careful and conscientious action by horse and stable owners. Nevertheless, these potential threats to public health, safety, and convenience must be recognized in any decision made regarding the future of equestrian use in the City. . h 2 • 1. 2. 3 Types of Use The question facing the City is not only whether eques- trian uses should be permitted for if equestrian uses are allowed, then the City must decide what type of use is acceptable. Keeping horses might involve, for example, one or two animals on individual lots for personal enjoy- ment. This is private equestrian use. Commercially, keeping of horses might involve a stable where individuals • board their horses, a stable where horses can be rented by the hour, or a combination of both. Each use presents its own advantages either to individuals or to the community, and each use is accompanied by • special problems. Private use, for instance, represents the maximum of personal convenience to horse owners; and consequent low-density development perhaps best preserves a rural atmosphere. However, control of private stables is difficult; and, therefore, health, safety, and nuisance problems are more likely to occur. Commercial stables represent a concentrated horse population, so problems can be more acute. Because regulation and inspection is easier, though, these problems are more readily controlled. Also, because commercial stables generally have greater financial resources, good manage- ment and modern facilities are more likely, thus, • mitigating risk to the community. 1. 3 Existing Status of Equestrian Use Articles 963 and 949 of the City Code (included in the Appendix) • provide for both private and commercial equestrian uses; and according to figures presented by interested horsemen in 1972, the City had 35 stables (private and boarding) with a total of 625 horses. Latest estimates indicate there are now 700 to 800 horses but that private stables are declining . Currently, eques- trian uses are concentrated in four major areas of the community -- three of which are in proximity to Huntington Central Park. These areas, indicated on ;Figure 1-1, include: 1. Western Huntington Beach, around Warner and Bolsa Chica. 2. Directly south of Huntington Central Park. 40 3. Northeast of Huntington Central Park. 4. Scattered locations southeast of Huntington Central Park. • � 3 • I..... ....... . '° BOISA X w� �e .......................................................... ......_._ ........... SLAnR mow.. weelT ♦` ;�� :i .... RLIS i 4 .. GARFIELD ........... ............ ._........ ............ ............... !� PORK i TOWN • \ \ ADMME �'i'• fy J, INDIANAPOLIS 4. �� %�: • i NAMLTON .................. ...�.:.. BANNING Figure 1-1 AML EXISTING EQUESTRIAN AREAS huntington beach planning department 4 a With the exception of the Santa Ana River Trail, there are no designated equestrian trails in Huntington Beach. However, a horse crossing exists at Garfield and Goldenwest Street to serve r the areas of stable concentration where there are informal eques- trian paths (heavily traveled routes by horse enthusiasts, either with or without the property owners permission) . The Trails Element Preliminary Plan of June, 1972, though, set forth the criteria for developing a 13-mile official trails network which includes: • 1. Trails off-road wherever possible. 2 . Eight to ten foot rail-fenced pathways. 3. Loose dirt bed with eucalyptus and/or bean pod mulch to • minimize dust. 4 . Graphics denoting use and direction. D . Graphics warning motorists of equestrian crossing. 6. Policing generated voluntarily by equestrian clubs. The Phase I Recreational Trails Element of October, 1973, however, recognized that this preliminary study did not address itself sufficiently to the question of how and to what extent the City should accommodate equestrian uses on both an interim and long- range basis. As that document concludes: There is no doubt a present demand and need for equestrian trails. Stables are operating under City Ordinance, and residents are using the facilities. It is the staff' s feeling that before any money be committed to equestrian trails a further definition of City policy • on accommodating horses must be determined. It is recommended that: 1. A study, to be completed in 90 days, be done to present specific alternatives for the accommodation of equestrian uses in the City both on an interim and long-range basis. From this study, the City Council could formulate a definitive • policy for staff to use in providing equestrian trails. It is suggested that the Planning Department coordinate this study with assistance from the Recreation and Parks and Public Works Departments. 2 . $7 ,000 be set aside from the Phase I grant money for equestrian • trails. The output of the 90-day study would include a recommendation of how to spend this money. The remaining pages of this report constitute the results of this proposed study. • 5 • secfl«, z • alternative use concepts • • • • 2. 0 Alternative Use Concepts • It appears that the keeping of horses within the City is at a point of transition. That is, while equestrian activities are permitted, they are by ordinance considered temporary. As a result, stables represent a form of underdevelopment on lands awaiting urbanization. It is to be expected that as development pressures increase, equestrian areas will be converted to uses • of greater intensity until eventually they are completely replaced by urban development. Now is an excellent time for the City to make a conscious decision about the future of equestrian use. Such activities currently exist, vacant- land is available for expansion or alteration of existing uses if such is deemed desirable, and development of a trails network is possible. The result of no City action, continued application of existing ordinances, and market forces will ultimately be the complete disappearance of the horse and its related uses from the community. If equestrian uses are to be permitted and encouraged, • therefore, such decision must be made before natural economic forces restrict alternatives available to the City. To promote discussion and crystallize thinking about the future of equestrian activities, five alternative use concepts are presented on the following pages. ganging from complete exclusion of all ' equestrian uses to large-scale expansion of existing areas, these alternatives cover a variety of possible policy choices available to City decision-makers. Selection of one such alternative (or amended alternative) is essential before a realistic trails system can be developed because the intent of the City regarding the future of horses in the community will regulate the nature of the trails system (if any) needed. AMk 7 • 1 2. 1 Alternative A: Exclusion Phase out existing equestrian uses; provide no trails other than regional river path; enforce restrictions against horses on public rights-of-way. Alternative A represents the most severe option available to the City: exclude equestrian use. Selecting this alternative would entail a policy of active removal of non-conforming equestrian uses and refusal to renew or grant equestrian use permits. To discourage existing use, the City could prohibit horses on public rights-of-way and prosecute trespassers on private property. If the City prefers this alternative, no equestrian trails would be necessary, of course. Only the County regional trail along the Santa Ana River would serve riders in this area. Selecting this alternative, the City would join its neighbors Westminster, Costa Mesa, and Newport Beach in making no provision for horses. 2 . 2 Alternative B: Confinement Confine equestrian uses to City-owned stables at Central Park and suitable trails in park; encourage development of river equestrian center to serve river trail system. Alternative B would restrict equestrian uses to two defined areas of the City. This concept would prohibit private stables but permit commercial ones (either boarding or rental) in Central Park and near the Santa Ana River. A City stable managed by concessionaire (or the City, itself) could provide revenues for trail maintenance as well as stable operation; and an equestrian center near the Santa Ana River would take advantage of the regional trail system. This center could either be managed by the City or the private sector. Alternative B would provide the City maximum control of equestrian use and necessitate only a limited trails system. However, this alternative would obviously limit the number of horses and stables that could be accommodated within the City. 2. 3 Alternative C: Tolerance Permit existing uses to continue; establish temporary trails; (assume that equestrian uses will eventually be replaced by market demand) . The consequences of Alternative C, as defined above, would vary little from the results of natural market forces. In other words, the City would continue to tolerate existing equestrian uses, perhaps renew or grant new permits, until growth pressures brought about conversion of these temporary uses and open space areas. Non-conforming private equestrian uses would be allowed to continue until they became a health or safety hazard. Assuming that some equestrian activity would continue for several years, temporary 8 ft I I trails which require minimum commitment of City funds would be provided for the convenience of riders and the safety of the general public. • 2. 4 Alternative D: Consolidation Designate "equestrian areas" where commercial stables will be permitted; prohibit horses on residential lots; develop a trails system to serve equestrian areas and connect with regional systems. Accepting Alternative D would require defining a specific area or areas of the City where commercial equestrian uses would be welcomed. Such areas would best be primarily vacant or underdeveloped, current- ly employed for equestrian uses, and not in proximity to residential • or dense development. Within and between these areas, the City could develop and maintain a comprehensive trails system designed as a. permanent recreational facility and regional trail link. To minimize instruction and enforcement difficulties, keeping horses on individual lots would be prohibited. • 2. 5 Alternative E: Expansion Designate areas where commercial and private stables are permissible; develop a comprehensive trails system that serves such areas, connects them with other open spaces, and links .them with regional • systems. Alternative E would represent a wholehearted commitment by the City to encourage and foster a viable equestrian subculture. Under this concept, portions of the community would be set aside for commercial stables and low-density residential areas would be designated for • "horse estates" . Selecting this alternative could mandate develop- ment of a Citywide equestrian trails network which would link estate areas with stables, stables with each other, and both with other open space nodes (i.e. , Central Park, beaches, Bolsa Chica, Santa Ana River) . The City system should also be designed to connect with regional bridle paths. This alternative would perhaps best preserve a rural atmosphere and maximize recreation and open space values of equestrian use. It would also require the greatest commitment of resources to a trails system and would probably encourage more horses. 2 . 6 Summary Each of these alternatives represents a viable solution to the "problem" of what to do with horses in a metropolitan area. Each requires different policies and actions to implement its proposals; 9 • and each provides its own advantages and disadvantages to the community and to individual horsemen. The alternative selected will depend on the City' s goals for tomorrow and will reflect the judgment of the City Council as it balances individual good and public interest to determine what is best for the whole community. 2. 7 An. Equestrian Center Though each equestrian use alternative presented above would provide a different type of future for horses and horse enthusiasts in the City, one factor is common to them all (except Alternative A - Exclusion) ; that is, the potential of Huntington Central Park to serve as a central equestrian facility. Whether it is the ultimate decision of the City Council that equine uses be severely restricted or that they be greatly expanded, Central Park -- particularly its proposed expansion -- could play an important role in equestrian recreation planning. An equestrian center at Central Park could provide boarding to supplement or replace existing stables; it could offer rental horses for general public recreation; it could provide a central location for horse shows; and it could preserve considerable open space acres as pasture and grazing land. Such a center would be feasible if it were built by the City and leased to a manager or if city land were leased to concessionnaires to construct and operate stables. In either case, the center could accomodate as many or as few stables as desired. The following cost breakdown represents expenditures required to construct an average-size commercial stable. This facility would serve about 125 horses and would include stables, arenas, and riding area over 17 acres (5 acres developed stable facilities and 12 acres pasture and riding area) . Income from an equestrian center would vary depending upon the number of horses served, the facilities provided, the number of horses available for rent, and, of course, the user fees charged. However, local stable owners estimate gross income from an average commercial stable would be about $80, 000 a year with net income about 20 percent of that ($16, 000) . Direct income to the City would depend upon lease agreements. The City of Palos Verdes Estates netted $3, 600 in fiscal year 1973-74 from a 70-horse operation by charging the proprietor 6 percent of the gross receipts. (The percentage has now been raised to 8. ) In the City of Rolling Hills Estates, the present proprietor of the 88-horse stable guarantees the City $5,000 per year. Obviously, city-owned equestrian facilities are not high-income properties but neither are they a financial burden to the community. 10 a LOIN FIGURE 2-1 COST ANALYSIS: EQUESTRIAN FACILITY 40 box stalls @ $1000/stall installed $ 40, 000 85 paddock stalls @ $325/stall installed 27, 625 8 wash racks on septic system 4, 000 grading and site preparation 7, 000 a 3 arenas in galvanized pipe 6, 500 lights for 1 large arena 5,000 parking 6,864 S landscaping-springling @ $. 50/sq. ft. 4, 000 6 tack rooms 12, 000 rest rooms on septic system 6, 000 3 hot walkers @ $1250 each 3 ,750 Bull Pen 1, 500 TOTAL $124 ,239 a A } 11 Assuming a gross income of $80,000 for a 125-horse, 17-acre, city- owned stable and a lease agreement of 8 percent of gross receipts, City dividends would be $6,400 a year or $376 per acre of equestrian use. I 12 Alft section 3 trails system s t s 3. 0 Trails System While the character of the trails system will depend upon which Alternative Use Concept is selected, several factors will remain constant. Regardless of the scope of the trails plans, for example, its objective will be to serve both individual horsemen and the continunity by providing riding paths that link important equestrian areas, that are as interesting and scenic as possible, and that are safe for both riders and the general public. 3. 1 General Considerations To develop a trails system like the one defined above requires s analysis of the trails potentials offered by the urban form and topography of the community. The extremes to which the City is willing to go in securing right-of-way, preventing development, rerouting traffic, etc. , to secure a "desirable" systein will, of course, depend on how important equestrian uses are to be in community life. If Alternative B is selected, for instance, City s involvement in recreational equestrian trails would be moderate. If Alternative E is selected, on the other hand, the City would be justified in developing an extensive (and undoubtedly expensive) trails network. In both cases, however, some general considerations must be kept in mind. s 3.1. 1 Corridors Trails are linear systems which thereby lend themselves to existing corridors throughout the City. That is, flood control channels, utility easements, dykes, bluff s AM- k 13 lines, the river, and the railroad already form linear networks that crisscross the City and could conceivably be incorporated into an equestrian trails system. Because these corridors already provide open passageways generally unobstructed by development and because many are publicly owned already, their use where possible tends to minimize cost and inconvenience. More specifically, these potential equestrian corridors include: 1. Bolsa Chica Dyke - Built to protect recent housing tracts, this facility (although under County jurisdiction) would provide a non-automobile equestrian bridge across Bolsa Chica Gap. The dyke itself is a large earthen berm about 60 feet wide. 2. City Flood Control Channels - Especially the Slater Channel between Wintersburg Channel and Huntington Central Park and the Murdy Channel. 3. County Flood Control Channels - especially the Wintersburg and Sunset Channels. (All County flood channels within the City have been designated environmental corridors for potential trails and greenbelt usage. ) 4 . Bluff line 5. Railroad right-of-way - which parallels Gothard and Lake and may be abandoned by the railroad south of Garfield. 6. Edison Easement 7. Santa Ana River - where regional equestrian trails are planned. Existing corridors do not provide the whole answer, however; and a significant handicap is the fact that such systems do not always link desired areas or supply interesting or scenic surroundings. Additionally, they are sometimes obstructed by barriers which preclude trail development. 14 1 .S W 3. 1. 2 Barriers These barriers .include natural or man-made obstacles that prevent through access either physically or because of safety hazards. The most significant obstructions are heavily trafficked streets. To overcome these hazards would require special signalized crossings which might interrupt vehicular traffic or construction of overpasses or underpasses whose cost might be unacceptable except ' in conjunction with Alternative Use Concepts D or E. Some of the most serious trail interruptions would include Pacific Coast Highway, Goldenwest Street, Warner Avenue, and Beach Boulevard where high traffic volume is accompa- nied by high speeds. In some instances, flood control channels serve as barriers as well as corridors. Where channels intersect proposed trails, special bridges might be required or equestrian traffic would have to be routed over existing bridges thus promoting a dangerous combination of horses and cars. Again, the resource commitment to be made by the City in overcoming these obstacles would depend upon the Alternative Use Concept accepted. 3. 1. 3 Criteria for Trail Selection e If an equestrian trails system is to be developed, several general criteria should be adhered to regarding safety, cost, and routing. To protect horses, riders, and motorists, for instance, trails should be off road wherever possible, and road crossings should be minimal. Trails should be fenced, clearly marked, and voluntarily policed by equestrian groups. To minimize cost, existing corridors should be utilized as much as possible, use of private lands should be minimized, and low-maintenance materials should be used in trail construction. Finally, to afford greatest convenience to riders and to discourage "unofficial" paths, trails should join equestrian areas, connect with regional trail systems, and link with other open space areas. 3. 2 Short-Range Trail Alternatives The development of a comprehensive trails system must obviously await selection of a long-range equestrian use alternative. Because implementation of any such alternative would involve a significant length of time, however, three short-range trail proposals are presented on the following pages. Executing one of these suggestions would serve the immediate needs of equestrian 15 F+ enthusiasts in the City while maintaining a considerable degree of flexibility in regard to future actions. Depending upon the use alternative selected by the City Council, these short-range proposals might serve only until existing equestrian uses were replaced by development demand. On the other hand, if equestrian activity is to be incorporated securely among the City' s land . uses, the trails could be expanded. In this manner, the City could provide for existing needs without permanent commitments while keeping options open for an expanded trail system at some later time if desired. ` 3. 2. 1 Alternative Trail 1: Bolsa Chica Indicated on Figure 3-1, Alternative 1 involves a trail through the Bolsa Chica commencing approximately at the Talbert Street realignment and Edwards on the east, intersecting the Wintersburg flood control channel in the west, and continuing north along the channel to Warner Avenue and south to the terminus of the channel . Such a trail could parallel the existing dike across the Bolsa Chica from its origin at Edwards or follow an existing fence demarking the centerline of the proposed Talbert realignment extension along the border of Final Tract 7635. Paralleling this fence until it crosses the dike, the trail could then be coincident with the dike to the flood control channel . (Both possibilities are outlined in Figure 3-1. ) Using either route, the dike trail would be about 2 miles long. An additional 1 to 1� miles would be available along the Wintersburg channel. 3. 2. 1. 2 Evaluation This interim proposal offers several advantages. Because the area is primarily undeveloped, it is free of traffic and other manmade barriers thus providing a safe riding environment. The natural character of the Bolsa Chica also means minimum commitment of municipal resources would be required for construction and maintenance. The proposed trail traverses level terrain which minimizes necessary grading, and maintenance could be limited to repairs after heavy rains. Additionally, the route would provide diverse and interesting scenery for riders now restricted to corrals or roadsides. I 16 L...............r--------------------- I BOLSA —.......,.................................................... -.._. _,.._ .._..... . .............;................ —--.. .............. ...... ................ NER ........... ............ ........... — { .-.._v._ ................. uATBa • \ j................ GARFIFLD .................�...:.............--___--..-. .............. .................� TOR KTOWN • Government Owned _. Land w , ADAMT Lease Necessary E :• ......>....... ........... ................. .........._..._.. -.-........ INDIANANXIS • S� ,�, ` ATLANTA b� `-\`�,`�.\ ,........ .............y.._........ NAMLTON < is s ` ...i•'"� �, *`\ �............... ..�::.. BANNING o .Sio —o >KO fx�o x[. ��V•• Figure 3-1 _ _ I - ALTERNATIVE TRAIL 1 : BOLSA CHICA huntington beach planning department 17 The location is also ideal. Situated between two existing equestrian areas in the City, it could serve riders from both locations. And in a longer range perspective, the trail is conveniently near possible equestrian facilities in the Huntington Central Park vicinity and might eventually be linked with riding paths in the State Ecological Preserve. 3. 2. 1.b Cost Analysis Because the City has no existing trails, accurate cost figures on development and maintenance of bridle paths are unavailable. Based on information from other cities and counties, however, the cost of developing a Bolsa Chica trail could be estimated at $23, 640 . Maintenance would be about $675 a year and leased right-of-way would be approximately $3, 600 yearly. FIGURE 3-2 COST ANALYSIS: ALTERNATIVE 1 Right-of-way 2 mi. lease @ $1 ,800/mi./yr. $ 3 , 600 Development 2 mi. @ $1,320/mi. grading 2, 640 2 mi. @ $10, 500/mi. fencing 21 ,000 TOTAL $23,640 Maintenance 3. 5 mi. @ $200/mi./yr. 675 These figures assume use of the Wintersburg channel at minimal charge from the Orange County Flood Control District, and, as with all other alternatives presented in this document, cooperation from property-owners in accepting reasonable lease agreements for 10-foot wide trails. 3. 2. 2 Alternative Trail 2 : Central Park Alternative 2 utilizes the land and scenic resources provided by Huntington Central Park as well as City- owned acreage adjacent to its borders. Figure 3-3 outlines one such possible route which parallels an existing jogging trail in' the northeast section of 18 "' r ll :r..•r... 1 Jy s MpCI lM-7 .1pre Mlan n 1ALlIBTIMB) AVE. 07 ""1 ERf([II 7" • ' •�:�_ ___ _J �; �� ::_QED ��"� '------------ -- l ,; t" I I • I • Figure 3-3 ALTERNATIVE TRAIL 2 • UN I14GTON CENTRAL PARK huntington beach planning department • .19 MW i the park then meanders about a currently undeveloped portion to Goldenwest. Across Goldenwest, the trail continues on city-owned parcels bordering the park through a eucalyptus grove, beside Huntington Lake, and down the bluff to Edwards. Altogether, the bridle path would traverse approximately 1. 5 miles. 3. 2. 2.a Evaluation This alternative offers several distinct advantages not the least of which is the immediate availability of right-of-way: no section of the trail would be located on private property; and, therefore; development of the network could begin almost immediately. Of all the alternatives, this one is undoubtedly the most scenic and presents the greatest variety of terrain for riders , crossing, as it does, meadowlands, hillsides, groves, fields and lake shores. Because much of the area is already graded, minimum expenditures would be required for this necessary task. On the other hand, however, because the trail would often pass through high use and highly visible areas of the park, an attractive railing system would be required and thus added expense incurred. While this alternative would give the City' s horsemen a pleasant place to ride, it would not provide a "feeder system" of trails to bring riders from their stable areas to the park. The trail described above would be an excellent core system, though, should the City decide upon a more extensive trail in the future. It could easily be linked with the Bolsa Chica trail proposed in Section 3 . 2. 1 and/or with the "feeder system" outlined in the following section. iMost importantly, it would be a desirable adjunct if an equestrian facility was developed in Phase Three of Central Park as discussed in Section 2 .7 . 3. 2. 2.b Cost Analysis The following table represents an expenditure breakdown for 1. 5 miles of trail in Central Park. 20 FIGURE 3-4 COST ANALYSIS: ALTERNATIVE 2 • Right-of-way 1. 5 mi. (secured) $ 00 Development 1. 5 mi. @ $1, 320/mi. grading 1, 980 • 1. 5 mi. @ $21,000/mi. fencing 31,500 SUBTOTAL $33 ,480 Signalization (3-way) $10,000 • Maintenance 1. 5 mi. @ $200/mi./yr. $ 300 Total cost for development of the trail would be $33 ,480 plus a minimum of $10, 000 for a signalized crossing at Goldenwest. Yearly maintenance would be about $300 for • some regrading and repair. 3. 2. 3 Alternative 3 : "Feeder System" This alternative is actually three variations on the • same theme; namely, to link the major commercial stables in the central portions of the City. The prime obstacle to this objective is Goldenwest, a highly trafficked arterial. The three proposals set forth in this section attack the problem of Goldenwest with different horse crossings: Garfield, Ernest, and Ellis. The three routes are similar with the exception of the linkages necessary to complete their various crossings . They rely heavily on City-owned land and acreage that is. currently in equestrian use or that is covered by riding agreement between stable and property owners. Necessarily, however, each system includes some private, non- equestrian parcels. These alternatives -- 3a, 3b, and 3c -- are illustrated in Figures 3-5, 3-6, and 3-7 . 3. 2. 3.a Garfield Crossing • This trail utilizes the existing signalized horse crossing at Garfield and Goldenwest. It encompasses about 2. 5 miles of unfenced bridle paths on . 5 mile of City land, . 9 mile of equestrian-use lands and 1. 1 miles of private land. Securing this trail would require • A!' ,. 21 • 4W • TALBERT AVE. CF-R (HUNTIN3TUN CF.N"i R4.:.PAi{;Sl Government Owned Land Lease Necessary • ••e..• Equestrian Use Land- j Minimum Fee ME ELLIS • • • • • • 1: � :?fiO CCRP • (I • I: • F. N 1 JL-,11 -LLL j AVE. GARFIELD Figure 3-5 • ALTERNATIVE TRAIL 3a Adft GARFIELD CROSSING Ilip huntington beach planning department • 22 el • negotiating with numerous parcel owners, and some paths. would be adjacent to roadways. As detailed below, total development cost of the program would be about $3 , 300. • Maintenance would average approximately 0750 per year and right-of-way would run about $1, 980 yearly. FIGURE 3-8 COST ANALYSIS: ALTERNATIVE 3a • Right-of-way 1.1 mi. lease @ $1, 800/mi./yr. $1, 980 Development 2. 5 mi. @ $1, 320/mi. grading 3, 300 • Maintenance 2. 5 mi. @ $200/mi./yr. 750 3. 2. 3b Ernest Crossing Alternative 3b suggests utilizing a signalized crossing • at Ernest. While this necessitates additional expenditures for traffic control, it requires less right-of-way across private land. The trail includes 1. 75 miles of paths; . 5 mile on private lands, .75 mile of equestrian use land, and . 5 mile of City-owned property. • Cost for developing this trail system would be approx- imately $12, 310 as indicated in Figure 3-9. Annual maintenance would be about $350 and right-of-way $900 a year. FIGURE 3-9 • COST ANALYSIS: ALTERNATIVE 3b Right-of-way . 5 mi. lease @ $1, 800/mi./yr. $ 900 _• Development 1. 75 mi. @ $1, 320/mi. 2, 310 Sig nalization (3-way) 10, 000 Maintenance 1. 75 mi. @ $200/mi./yr. 350 • 3. 2. 3c Ellis Crossing This final variation includes a signalized crossing at Ellis to join its 2 miles of trails. The system would involve . 75 mile of private land, . 75 mile of equestrian • w. 23 • TALBERT AVE. -T 8 � 6 S ► *J C F-R (HUNTINVON CF.N'i RA:.PARK) �=I Government Owned Land Lease Necessary •••••• Equestrian Use Land- Minimum Fee ELLIS • • • • • l I • • • T-3 _jl • • • ��• I • u AVE. GARFIELD Rgure 3-6 ALTERNATIVE TRAIL 3b ERNEST CROSSING huntington beach planning department 24 I TALBERT AVE. .}" CF-R (HUNTINGTON CENTRAL FARM Government Owned Land i Lease Necessary 11-7 ••••.• Equestrian Use Land- , Minimum Fee • • ELLIS TIM • • • • i • • � =-RRc ceaP i U - 1 AVE. GARFIELD Figure 3-7 ALTERNATIVE TRAIL 3c AMI ELLIS CROSSING 1 fly huntington beach planning department 25 • • use acreage, . 5 mile of City-owned property, and a more expensive 4-way signal. A crossing at Ellis, however, would be useful to both automobile and horse traffic . Development costs for Alternative 3c would total $17 ,600 • with maintenance requiring about $400 yearly. Right-of- way would involve expenditure of $1 ;350 each year. FIGURE 3-10 • COST ANALYSIS: ALTERNATIVE 3c Right-of-way . 75 mi. lease @ $1 ,800/mi./yr. $ 1 ,350 Development 2 mi. @ $1, 320 grading 2, 640 • Signalization (4-way) 15, 000 Maintenance 2 mi. @ $200/mi./yr. 400 • • • • • 26 Adft • • Section 4 COf1CIUSIOf1S ti • • • • • • 4. 0 Conclusion It is apparent from the previous discussion that numerous equestrian use alternatives -- both long range and short range -- are available to the City. Which alternative is selected will have significant implications for the future of the equine-centered subculture in • Huntington Beach. 4. 1 Summary As explained in Section 2 , equestrian uses are at a point of transi- tion; and it is assumed that as development pressures increase, equestrian areas will be converted to uses .of greater intensity until they are eventually replaced completely by urban development. If equestrian activities are to be permitted and/or encouraged by the City, therefore, a conscious decision to do so must be made before natural economic forces restrict available alternatives. Existing long-range alternatives include: phasing out all existing uses (A) ; confining equestrian uses to City stables at Central Park (B) ; permitting existing uses to continue until they are replaced by market demand (C) ; designating general "equestrian areas" where commercial stables will be permitted (D) ; and encouraging ranch-like • .f: 27 • • developments and expanded equestrian use areas around the City (E) . Each of these alternatives represents a viable solution to the "problem" of what to do with horses in a metropolitan area. The alternative selected will depend on the City' s goals and policies . Assuming that exclusion of equestrian uses is an unacceptable alternative, it would obviously take a considerable amount of time to implement any of the long-range proposals . To deal with the immediate needs of the City's horsemen, then, the report presents three short-range trail alternatives. These plans include a trail through the Bolsa Chica (Alternative 1) , a Central Park trail (Alternative 2) , and a "feeder" trail linking existing commercial stables with a Goldenwest horse crossing at Garfield, Ernest , or Ellis (Alternative 3) . Executing any one of these proposals would serve the immediate needs of equestrian enthusiasts while maintain- ing a considerable degree of flexibility in regard to future actions. All of these trails could be phased out after a few years if necessary or expanded into a comprehensive trails system if desired. 4 .2 Recommendation • It is the recommendation of the Planning staff that a signalized horse crossing be installed immediately at Ernest and Goldenwest to alleviate a serious safety hazard for both riders and drivers . Furthermore, because it is apparent that Central Park will play a vital role if horses are to be maintained in the City under any alternative use concept, the staff also recommends that immediate • consideration be given to establishing a Central Park trail as indicated in Alternative 2 . Such a trail would serve the immediate needs of riders in the City while forming the basis of an expanded trail system if such was desired in the future. It is additionally recommended that an equestrian facility be established in Phase III plans for Central Park. Implementation of this proposal (excluding the equestrian facility which is a long-range plan) would cost about $53 ,500 -- $43,500 for the Park Trail and $10 ,000 for a signalized crossing at Ernest. These figures are flexible depending on the degree of trail develop- ment desired by the City Council. Seven thousand dollars is already reserved for equestrian trails from Land and Water Conservation funds . If the proposed horse licensing ordinance is adopted, another $7 ,000 would be generated. Remaining funds might be secured from Revenue Sharing inonies, Recreation and Park budget, the General Fund, or possible bond funds from the State Beach, Park Recreation and Historical Facilities Bond Act of 1974 . The exact route of the Central Park bridle path and the desirable nature and location of the equestrian center should be determined by a special committee appointed by the City Council. This committee should include a member of the Council, a Planning 28 • h{ I Fop • Commissioner, a Recreation and Parks Commissioner, and a representa- tive of equestrian interests in the community. The Planning staff would serve the committee in an advisory capacity.. • To facilitate implementation of these proposals , the committee should be directed to report back to the Council within 30 days. Its proposal should include an acceptable route for the Central Park trail, a recommendation on the equestrian facility, and a suggested long-range use concept to direct future land use planning in the • City. • • • • • • Al''' -ft- 29 • • • • • • • section 5 appendix i PLANNING COMMERCIAL DISTRICT S. 9490 r ARTICLE 949 1 EQUINE STANDARDS - COMMERCIAL (1769 - 8/72) S. 9490 Intent and Purpose. The board and care of equines is hereby declared to be a commercial enterprise of a recreational nature and a luxury in an urban environment . The intent of this article is to establish standards for the keeping of equines in a manner which will not endanger the health, peace, and safety of the community and which will- assure that equines are kept in a clean and sanitary condition and not subjected to suffering, cruelty, or abuse. It is further the intention of this article to provide for the regular inspection of equine stables to assure that good stable management is a continuing practice. Such inspection is for the purpose of minimizing fly production, reducing natural fly attractants, and to prevent the breeding of flies. S. 9491 Uses Subject to Conditional Use .Permit. The following uses may be permitted for a period of time to be determined by the Planning Commission, subject to issuance of a conditional use permit: (a) Uses adjacent to an established equestrian trail or where a minimum riding area of one (1) acre for every ten (10) equines is provided. Such uses may include the following: Animal and convalescent stables Commercial equine stables Livery and boarding stables Private club riding stables Public equine stables Rental stables Riding academy (b) Length of time and frequency shall be considered when application for a conditional use permit has been made to hold horse shows or rodeos. (1769 - 8/72, 1847' - 6/73) S. 9492 Yard Requirements. The yard requirements shall pertain to all structures including but not limited to stalls, corrals, arenas and fly-tight manure bins, except pastures, grazing areas, access roads, and watchman's quarters. All such structures shall maintain a minimum of three hundred (300) feet from any property that is used, zoned or master planned for residential use. All yard requirements shall be measured from the existing property line, the ultimate right of way line as adopted on the Master Plan of Arterial Streets and Highways and any amendments thereto, or any precise plan of a street or alley alignment, whichever may be greater. The following yard setback requirements shall apply: i (a) Front. The front yard setback shall be a minimum of fifty (50) feet. (b) Interior Side. The interior side yard setback shall be a minimum of twenty- 4 1 five (25) feet. (c) Exterior Side. The exterior side yard setback shall be a minimum of fifty '50) feet. 6/8/73 S. 9493 COMMERCIAL DISTRICT PLANNING (d) Rear. The rear yard setback shall be a minimum of twenty-five (25) feet. GENERAL DEVELOPMEW STANDARDS. The following general development Stan- � _ dards establish minimum and maximum requirements for maintaining equines: (a) 1-1nimum Building Site: two (2) acres. (b) Minimum Riding Area: shall be one (1) acre for every ten (10) horses where stable does not abut an established riding trail. (c) Minimum Frontage: one hundred (100) feet. (d) Maximum Building Height: twenty-five (25) feet. (e) Landscaping and Irrigation: landscaping and irrigation system shall be sub- � ject to approval of the Planning Department and provided in the following manner: (1) A five (5) foot planter shall be provided along the front property line. (2) A five (5) foot planter with perimeter trees and shrubs shall be pro- vided along the side and rear property lines. • (3) A permanent irrigation system shall be provided. (f) Si n: The minimum development standards for all signs shall conform to Article 976. (g) Parking: the minimum development standards for all vehicle parking shall conform to Article 979. S. 9493.2 Specific Development Standards. Corrals, Racks and Stalls. All corrals, racks and stalls shall conform to the following requirements: • (a) Equine Corral. There shall be one corral provided for each equine, except a mare and foal may be corralled together for a period not to exceed twelve (12) months and corrals may be designed for more than one equine provided that all standards shall be multiplied by the number of equines. Each equine corral shall meet the following requirements: • (1) The minimum size corral shall be 288 square feet with a minimum dimension of twelve (12) feet and shall have a minimum five (5) foot high fence. (2) Each corral shall be provided with .a combination manger and feeder and a permanently installed water system with automatic drinking controls. The ' watering cup or drinking device shall at all times be under a shaded area. (3) Each equine shalt ae provided with a minimum of ninety-six (96) square feet of shelter covering with a minimum dimension of eight (8) feet. Shelters shall be sloped away from corral center, or rain gutters which lead to the outside of the corral shall be installed. • (4) Corral floors shall be graded to :lope away from the center of the corral. (b) Box Stall. box sail is optional and may be provided in lieu of equine corrals. Box stalls shall be a minimum size of 144 square feet and shall maintain a minimum dimension of twelve (12) feet. • PLANNING COMRCIAL DISTRICT S. 9493.2 (c .(c) Wash Rack. There Shall be one wash rack provided for every thirty-five (35) equines but in no case shalt there be less than one (1) wash rack. Each wash rack shall meet the following requirements: (1) The minimum size wash rack area shall be six (6) feet wide and eight (8) feet long. • (2) Each wash rack shall be provided with a .permanent watering system. (3) Each wash rack shall be constructed with a concrete slab flooring. (4) Each wash rack shall be connected to an approved sewerage. . S. 9493.3 Additional Specific Developirent Standards. In addition to the specific development standards set out in Section 9493.2, the following specific requirements shall be met: (a) In all enclosures where equines are maintained, the land surface of such enclosures shall be graded above the remaining land surface. (b) Exercise rings shall maintain a minimum dimension of thirty (30) feet. (c) Arenas shall maintain a minimum of ten thousand (10,000) square feet with a minimum dimension of eighty (80) feet. (d) Stallions shall be maintained in a manner that will protect people and other animals. (e) Density of equines: the maximum number of equines shall be twenty-five (25) equines per acre. (f) Public Toilets: public toilets for each sex shall be provided. NOTE: Portable outdoor sanitation facilities shall not be permitted except they may be permit- ted for equitation events. (g) Storage and tack areas: storage and tack areas shall be provided and desig- nated on the plot plan. (h) Trash, solid waste disposal areas, and dumpsters to be designated and con- veniently located with an all-weather road access provided. (i) Access: all public rights of way shall be fenced and limited ingress and egress for vehicles and horses shall be provided. (j) Watchman quarters: one mobilehome unit or equivalent for the watchman quarters shall be provided and subject to Planning Department approval. (k) Lighting for rodeos, stables, and horse shows shall be such that itis directed onto the site. (1) Back-siphoning device shall be installed to protect the public water supply. An approved pressure vacuum breaker is recommended on the water line serving the corrals. The vacuum breaker should be at least twelve (12) inches above the highest point of water usage or an approved double-check valve may be acceptable. (m) Security lighting shall be provided and all utilities shall be underground. s S. 9494 C001ERCIAL DISTRICT PLANNING S. 9494 STANDARDS OF PERFORMANCE. It is the intent of these standards to attain free circulation of air and maximum exposure to sunlight for the purpose of improvi.ni; sanital- lon. Pipe fences are favored for maximum air cirettlation. S. 9494. 1 Fly and Insect Control. Fly and insect control shall be diligently prac- ticed and subject to Article 312. (a) Disposal of stable wastes shall follow one or more of the following suggestions: (1) All thin layer spreading shall be subject to the approval of the Orange County Health Officer. (2) Immediate off-ranch delivery to farmers for direct fertilizer use, or to a county landfill for destruction. (3) Temporary placement shall not exceed forty-eight (48) hours in an all- concrete, three-walled open storage bin with removal to on or off ranch use or destruction on a suitable schedule. Size of storage bin depends on projected daily volume of wastes. NOTE: the size and number could be predicated on the number of allowed horses. (b) Feed mangers or boxes shall not be placed near water sources since damp spilled feed attracts flies and makes a good breeding site for flies S. 9494.2 Rodent Control. Rodent control shall be diligently practiced and the entire premises shall be kept in an orderly and sanitary manner .to prevent possible rodent infestation. The following guidelines and criteria shall be considered in review- ! ing plans and in operation: (a) All dry grains shall be stored in rodent proof metal containers and hay shall be stored in a covered structure on a cement slab or on a raised wood platform that main- tains a minimum clearance of eighteen (18) inches above the ground. (b) Any tack equipment, device, substance, or material shall be stored on racks or shelves at least twelve (12) inches above the floor surface. Tack room floors shall maintain a minimum clearance of six (6) inches above the ground. S. 9494.3 Water Management. Special attention shall be given to water systems because accumulation of manure, bedding, and/or feed with water are ideal for fly production. For effective reduction of these fly-production sources, the following guidelines are provided: (a) A nonleak valve for all troughs, bowls, cups, and other water sources shall be provided. (b) Automatic valves, or sanitary drains if water flow is continuous, are needed equipment for large troughs or cups. (c) In paddock and corrals, the developer should properly grade the earth surface t:o ,suit the master drainage plan so that rain water or water trough overflow does not form ponds. PLANNING COMMERCIAL DISTRICT S. 9494.4 S. 9494.4 Stable Sanitation. Good sanitary methods around barns, stalls, paddocks, arenas, tack sheds, and the owner's or watchkeeper's quarters are as . important as manure management. A general cleanup program should accompany the manure management system. Weed control near stables, corrals, water troughs, and surrounding areas around paddocks helps the sun to penetrate and allows the movement of ai.r. This helps to dry the manure and reduce resting places for certain flies. - Controlling weed growth from open waste water drains reduces potential habitats for filth, flies, gnats and mosquitos. S. 9494.5 Dust Control. Continuous dust control of the entire premises shall be maintained and subject to Article 313. The following methods for dust control shall be followed: (a) A method for light water sprinkling of arenas and exercise pens shall be • provided. (b) Chemical control of dust may be permitted. (c) Perimeter trees and shrubs shall be required for dust control. S. 9494.6 Stable Management. The management of commercial horse stables shall meet the requirements of the Orange County Health Department to keep environ- mental problems at a minimum. S. 9495 ENFORCEMENT. The Orange County Health Officer, under Article 312, 313, and 902, is herein vested with the duty and authority to inspect regularly all commercial horse stables within the city. Report and recommendation by the Orange County Health Officer shall be forwarded to the Director: of Building and Safety. a S PLANING MISCELLANEOUS DISTRICTS S. 9630 ARTICLE 963 EQUINE STANDARDS, NONCOMMERCIAL .63 INTENT AND PURPOSE. The intent of this article !a to establish standards for the keeping of equines on a non-commercial basis and in a manner which will not endanger the health, peace, and safety of the community and which will assure that equines are kept in a clean and sanitary condition and not subjected to .suffering, cruelty, or abuse. It is further the intention of this article to provide for the regular inspection of non-commercial equine facilities to assure that good stable manage- ment is a continuing practice. Such inspection is for the purpose of minimizing fly . production, reducing natural fly attractants, and to prevent the breeding of flies. S. 9631 USES PERMITTED. Equines may be permitted in any zoning district subject ,.o an administrative review application before the Board of Zoning Adjustments and subject to the provisions delineated in this article. Equines maintained under this article are intended for private, noncommercial use. Equines shall be kept on any land within a reasonable distance of the owner's premises in order to assure that such ani- mals receive proper care. S. 9632 USES PROHIBITED. Commercial operations of any nature are prohibited under this article. S. 9633 YARD REQUIREMENTS. The yard requirements shall pertain to all structures that relate to equines including but not limited to stalls, corrals, arenas and fly-tight manure bins, except pastures or grazing Areas'. All such structures shall maintain a minimum distance of one hundred (100) feet from any dwelling unit other than a unit on subject property that is used for human habitation. L All yard requirements shall be measured from the existing property line, the ultimate right of way line as adopted on the Master Plan of Arterial Streets and Highways and any amendments thereto, or any precise plan of a street or alley alignment, whichever may be greater. The following setback requirements shall apply: (a) Front . The front yard setback shalt be a minimum of fifty (50) feet . (b) Interior Side . The interior side yard setback shalt be a minimum of twenty- five (25) feet, except that the interior side yard setback shall be a minimum of fifty - (50) feet for one equine and one hundred (100) feet for two or more equines from any property line that is coterminous with property that is residentially zoned, residentially used, or master planned for residential use. (c) Exterior Side. The exterior side yard setback shall be a minimum of fifty (50) feet . (d) Rear. The rear yard setback shall be a minimum of twenty-five (25) feet, except the rear yard setback shall be a minimum of fifty (50) feet for one equine, one hundred (100) feet for two or more equines from any property line that is coterminous with property that is residentially zoned, residentially used or master planned for residential use. S. 9634 GENERAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS. The following general development standards establish minimum and maximum requirements for maintaining equines. Minimum Building Site: ten thousand (10,000) square feet for two (2) or fewer equines . For each additional equine over two (2) there shall be an additional ten thousand (10,000) square feet provided. S. 9634.2 MISCEk ANEOUS DISTRICTS PLANNING S. 9634.2 Specific Development Standards. The following specific requirements shall be met: s' ::rrals. There shall be a minimum size corral of 288 square feet provided for eac:- equine except that a snare and foal may be corralled together for a period not. to exceed twelve (12) months . Each equine corral shall meet the following requirements: (1) The minimum size corral shall be 288 square feet with a minimum dimension of • twelve (12) feet and shall have a five (5) foot high fence. (2) Each corral shall be provided with a combination manger and feeder and a permanently installed water system with automatic drinking controls. The watering cup or drinking device shall at all times be under a shaded area. (3) Each equine shall be provided with a minimum of ninety-six (96) square feet of shelter covering with a minimum dimension of eight (8) feet. Shelters shall be sloped away from corrals, or rain gutters which lead to the outside of the corral shall be installed. (4) Corral floors shall be graded to slope away from the center of the corral. 1 (b) In all enclosures where equines are maintained, the land surface of such enclos- ures shall be graded above the remaining land surface so as to provide adequate drainage. (c) Stallions shall he maintained in a mariner that will protect people, and other animals. (d) Density of Equines. The maximum number of equines permitted on any one site shall be four (4) , except that more than four (4) equines may be kept on a site where such equines are owned by the person residing on such site. (e) Access. All public rights of way shall be fenced and limited ingress and egress *for vehicles and horses shall be provided. (f) Back-siphoning device shall be installed to protect the public water supply. An approved pressure vacuum breaker is recommended on the water line serving the corrals. The vacuum breaker should be at least twelve (12) inches above the highest point of water usage or an approved double-check valve may be acceptable. S. 9635 STANDARDS OF PERFORMANCE. It is the intent of these standards to attain free circulation of air and maximum exposure to sunlight for the purpose of improving; sanitation. Pipe fences are favored for maximum air circulation. R. 9615. 1 Fly and _Insect Control . Fly and Insect. control shall he diligently pract1c.4-d and r+uhject to Article '112. (a) Disposal c►f stable wastes shall follow one or more of the following suggestions: (1) All thin layer spreading shall be subject to the approval of the Orange County Health Officer. (?1 Immediate off-ranch delivery to farmers for direct fertilizer use, or to a county landfill for destruction. v PLANNING MISCELIANEOUS DISTRICTS _ S. 9b35(a) (3) (3) Temporary placement shall not exceed forty-eight (48) hours in an all- concrete, three-walled open storage bin with removal to on or off-ranch use or de- struction on a suitable schedule. Size of storage bin depends on projected daily volume of wastes. NOTE: The size and number could be predicated on the number of allowed horses. (b) Feed mangers or boxes shall not be placed near water sources since damp spilled feed attracts flies and makes a good breeding site for flies. S. 9635.2 Rodent Control. Rodent control shall be diligently practiced and the entire premises shall be kept in an orderly and sanitary manner to prevent possible rodent infestation. The following guidelines and criteria shall be be considered in reviewing plans and in operation. . (a) All dry grains shall be stored in rodent proof metal containers and hay shall be stored in a covered structure on a cement slab or on a raised wood platform that maintains a minimum clearance of eighteen (18)inches above the ground. (b) Any tack equipment , device, substance, or material shall be stored on racks or shelves at least twelve (12) inches above the floor surface. Tack room floors shall maintain a minimum clearance of six (6) inches above the ground. S . 9635.3 Water Management . Special attention shall be Riven to water sources because accumulation of manure, bedding, and/or feed with water are ideal for fly production. For effective reduction of these fly-production sources, the following guidelines are provided: (a) A nonleak valve for all troughs, bowls, cups and other water sources shall be provided. (b) Automatic valves, or sanitary drains if water flow is continuous, are needed equipment for large troughs or cups. (c) In paddock and corrals, the owner should properly grade the earth surface to suit the master drainage plan so that rain water or water trough overflow does not form ponds . (d) Frequently remove stall bedding from underneath water cups. S. 9635.4 Stable Sanitation. Good sanitary methods around barn, stalls, paddocks, arenas, tack sheds, and the owner' s quarters are as Important nA manure management. A general cleanup program should accompany the manure msnagr_mrnt nyntem. Wend control near corrals, water troughs, and surrounding areas around paddocks helps thi- nun to penetrate and allows the movement of air. This helps to dry the manure and reduce resting places for certain flies. Controlling weed growth from open waste water drains reduces potential habitats for filth, flies, gnats, and mosquitos. S. 9635.5 Dust Control. Continuous dust control of the entire premises shall be maintained and subject to applicable provisions of Article 949 and article 313. S . 9635 .6 Stable Management. The management of equine facilities shall meet the requirements of the Orange County Health Department to keep en- vironmental problems at a minimum. S. 9636 MISCELLANEOUS DISTRICTS PLANNING S. 9636 ENFORCEMENT. The Orange County Health Officer, under Articles 312, 313 and 902, is herein vested with the duty and authority to inspect regular- ! +ly all noncosaercial equine facilities within the City. Prior to occupancy, a report sz, ret:menC'ation of the Orange County Health Officer shall be forwarded to the Director of Building and Safety. Certificate of occupancy shall be subject to the approval of the Orange County Health Officer. a S f r • • • • HUNTINGTON BEACH PLANNING DEPARTMENT *RICHARD HARLOW Director *EDWARD SELICH Senior Planner *MONICA FLORIAN Associate Planner DAVE EADIE Associate Planner • AL MONTES Assistant Planner MAUREEN WILD Assistant Planner SAVOY BELLAVIA Assistant Planner FRED RITTER Assistant Planner JOHN COPE Assistant Planner "EMI LI E JOHNSON Planning Aide CHARLES LAUMANN Planning Aide BOB KIRBY Planning Aide SERGIO MARTINEZ Planning Aide THOM JACOBS Illustrator *GEORGE ERMIN Planning Draftsman BOB SIGMON Planning Draftsman ALAN LEE Planning Draftsman JUNE Al LEN Administrative Secretary JANA HARTGE Principal Clerk SUSAN PIERCE Secretary-Typist GISELA CAMPAGNE Secretary *MARY CARDINAL Clerk-Typist "Participating Staff REPORT BY: ADVANCE PLANNING STAFF .{, BIKE LANES efI+ bl of to W f° ° `� h."q4Oc�o��q �`�`` BIKE TRAILS �q"Os ��°ftiy 001, �1��♦'i, 1` IN, STATE OF CALIFORNIA BEACH ffl 4P q4O .1 ♦, ,♦ 1�1 1.� ♦ a��a c °` ♦'♦,♦ blot .♦�♦.1� 1��` '♦, z'p CITY BEACH °q, c4 1` .1 `I. ♦i♦ 'PO a �' ■, .1 'o q� 1` 1` pO°ryG� `I.1 �} 101, 4` 1 00 4b � 1 � 1b 1\0P? �1b soh Nlb SPALM .:::: .•:. N ................. ...•:.::•::.:•:...•:::. :::::::::::::::: ::::::•::::•:::::::::::::::::::::. :::::::•::::............. iY': ::::•::::::. :::::.:_:::::::•::::......:::::::::......:::•. :::... ::................. :::::•:. ::.......................... ...................:•:::::. :............................... ................... : :• .: ....:........,.....:...: :::::::•. ............................::::::::•:::. ............ f:..:::::••::•::::::::::::::•:....................................... 8f LSkH�CA'S F�4'1 'E#Ei�CCH........................................:.....:............tea- = - ... RECREATION, PARK AND SCHOOL FACILITIES RECREATION, PARK AND SCHOOL FACILITIES COMMUNITY SERVICES FACILITIES 1. Community Services Department, Civic Center, 2000 Main Street (714) 536-5486. <` _ _ - - P' a Hours: Monday - Friday, 8:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m. 2. Beach Headquarters, 103 Pacific Coast Highway, (714) 536-5281. - _ _ _ _ n° t _ - _ - t - Hours: Seven days a week, 8:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m. -E - - 16 - - _ - _ _ _ 3. Huntington Beach Central Library 'a - - - - i - a o `o 7111 Talbert Avenue (714) 842-4481. Hours: Monday, 1:00 p.m. - 9:00 p.m. 4. Arevalos School-Park 3.0 X I X % X X 11. City Gym and Pool <5 X F % Tuesday - Thursday, 9:00 a.m. - 9:00 P.M. 19692 Lexington Lane 16th and Palm (960-8884) Friday - Saturday, 9:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m. 5. Bolsa View Park 3.0 X X X X X X X 12. Clegg-Stacey School-Park 3.0 X X X X X 3a. Banning Annex 3b. Main Street Annex Crestmoor L Brighton Lane 6311 Larchwood Drive 9281 Banning Street 525 Main Street (714) 962-6664 (714) 960-3344 6. Booster Park 1.0 X x 13. College View School-Park 3.0 X x x x X X 3c. Graham Street Annex Baruna & Davenport 6582 Lennox Drive 15882 Graham Street 7. Burke School-Park 2.5 X X X X X X A. Conrad Park 3.0 X X (714) 894-1307 9700 Levee Drive Aquarius Dr. & Trinidad Ln. 15. Crest View School X X X X Annex Hours: Monday - Thursday, 12:00 - 9:00 p.m. 8. Bushard School-Park 2.5 X X X X X 18052 Lisa Street Saturday, 9:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m. 19699 Education Lane Closed Friday and Sunday 16. Drew Park 2.5 X X X X X x 9. Chris Carr Park 11.0 X % X X Cape Cottage & Cape Newbury Springdale & Heil 17. Dwyer School X X X % X 10. Circle View School-Park 2.0 X X X X % 1502 Palm Avenue 6261 Hooker Drive RECREATION, PARK AND SCHOOL FACILITIES RECREATION, PARK AND SCHOOL FACILITIES CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH > a o o w m %.,PUMMUNITY ` - - ? o n¢ ¢ > 18. Eader School-Park 2.5 X X X X LL % X 47• Marina High School-Park 11.0 X X X X X % X X X X X 9291 Banning 15871 Springdale _ 19. Edison High School % X X X*% X %* 48. Marine View School-Park 3.0 X X X % X ^Elm%'& FICES' 21400 Magnolia Street 5682 Tilburg Drive 20. Edison Community Park 40.0 X X X. X %* X* X* X X X X* 49• Meadow View School X X X X X 21377 Magnolia Street 5702 Clark Drive I I I 1 K M N Eff 960-8670 50. Mesa View School X % X x X X A' 21. Farquhar Park 3.0 X X X X 17601 Avilla Lane 12th b Main 51. Moffett School-Park 2.5 X X X X X X X 22. Franklin School-Park 2.0 X X X % X 8800 Burlcrest Drive (Springdale) 14422 Hammon Lane 52. Hurd Community Park 15.0 X % % X X X X % X 7000 Norma Drive(960-8895) 23• French Park .5 X Venture Dr. @ Harbor Channel 53• Newland School-Park 3.0 X X X X X 8787 Dolphin Drive 24. Gill School % X % X 15212 Victoria Lane 54. Oak Vlew School-Park 2.5 X X % X X X X Nichols and Bel sito • 25• Gisler School-Park 11.0 X X. X X X 55. Oak View Center Park 2.0 X X X % X X* X* 9700 Bluefield Drive 1ka Oak Lane(960-8858) 26. Glen View School-Park 3.0 X % X X % X 6621 Glen Drive 56. Oka School % X X X 9800 Yorktown Avenue 27. Golden View School-Park 2.5 X X X X X X X 57• Park View School X % X % X X 17251 Golden View Lane 16666 Tunstall Lane 28. Golden West College X*X* X X X III X 58. Perry School-Park 2.0 X X X X X • 15744 Goldenwest Street 19231 Harding Lane 29• Greer Park-Lake 11.0 % X X X X X 59• Person d den School X X X X Mc Fa and Go Peterson ldenwest 20661-Farnsworth Lane 30. Harbour View School-Park 3.5 X X X % X %* % 60. Pleasant View School-Park 2.0 X X X X X HUNTINGTON BEACH 4343 Pickwick Circle 16692 Landau Lane 31. Haven View School-Park 3.0 X %* X X X % 61. Prince Park .2 X 16081 Waikiki Lane Typhoon Ln b Venture Dr. 32. Hawes School-Park 2.5 X X X X X 62. Robinwood School-Park 2.0 X X X X % 9682 Yellowstone Drive 5172 McFadden Avenue 33• Helme Park 2.0 X X X X %* %* 63• Schroeder School-Park 2.5 X X X X X 18001 Chapel Lane 15151 Columbia Lane 34. Hope View School-Park 3.0 % %* % % X 64. Seabrldge Beach-Park 4,5 X X X % X Community Services Facilities 17622 Flintstone Lane 3222 Countess Drive 35• Huntington Beach Community 12.0 % %* X %* X X %* 65• Seeley Park 3.5 X % X X Park, 17th b Main Surfcrest b Vacation 36. Huntington Beach High School X X X %* X % X 66. Seniors' Recreation Center 2.0 X X X % 1905 Main Street 1736 Orange Avenue Bicycle Lanes & Trails 37. Huntington Central Park 270.0 % X X X X X X (536-9387) Goldenwest b Talbert 67. Smith School X X X X 770 17th Street 38. Irby Park 11.0 % % % Library & Annexes Patricia b Ruth 68. Sowers School-Park 2.5 X X X X X 39. Kettler School % X* X % 9300 Indianapolis 8750 Dorsett Drive 69. Spring View School X X X X 40. Lake Park 5.0 X X X % % 76662 Trudy Lane ' 11th b Lake Recreation, Park, Beach 70, Sun View School-Park 2.5 % % X X X 41. Lake View School-Park 3.0 % % X X X X 7721 Juliette Lowe Lane 17451 Zeider Lane 71. Talbert School-Park 5.5 X X % X X - - 42. Lamb School X X. % X 9101 Brabham Drive 10251 Yorktown 72. Tarboz Park •5 % % And School Facilities Wellington b Melville 43• Lambert Park 3.5 % NW Ellis b Newland 73. Terry Park 5.0 X X X X X X* 44. Langenbeck Park 18.0 X X X X X X. Huntington b Taylor Bay and Sun Coral 74. Trinidad Beach-Park 1.0 X % % 45. Lark View School-Park 3.0 X X X X X X Trinidad Ln @'Long Channel T H E MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL A R E PLEASED 17200 Pinehurst Lane 75. Village View School X X X X X 46. LeBard School-Park 5.0 X X X % X X* X 536_ Sisson Drive TO PRESENT THIS BROCHURE WHICH WILL 20451 Craimer 76. Wardlow School-Park 2.5 X % X % % 9191 Pioneer Drive ENABLE YOU TO LOCATE THE FINE FACILITIES PROVIDED FOR YOUR CONVENIENCE IV. FUTURE OBJECTIVES A. Goal The goal for the trail master plan constitutes a formal state- ment of the purpose, nature and quality of the recreational trails to serve the recreation needs and desires of the citizens of the County. Based on the need for recreation trail facili- ties, the opportunities for implementation, and the various physical constraints for such implementation, the goal of, the Master Plan of Riding and Hiking Trails is.: 'To provide .a useful and efficient regional riding and hiking trail system to meet the recreation needs and desires of the citizens of the entire County by: (1) empha- sizing trail linkage opportunities between open space and recreation facilities and equestrian communities throughout the County; (2) planning and designing trails for minimum maintenance; and (3) providing efficient operation and maintenance programs." B. Riding and Hiking Trail Plan The trail master plan consists of a trail map shown on Exhibit A and descriptions of each trail which follow below and in Appendix A. The base map for the trail map is a composite of the U. S. Geological Survey topographic maps with the existing County regional parks, State parks, State beaches and the Cleveland National Forest added. The trail map identifies master plan trails including their names and locates potential sites for staging areas. The names of trails are based on trail location or destination as an aid to trail users. The names for staging areas have not been identified at this time because the locations shown on the map are potential sites subject to further investiga- tion. At the time of implementation, names may be established which identify with the specific locations of the staging areas. Trails: The trail plan includes approximately 250 miles of regional trails in County area outside the Cleveland National Forest and shows approximately 80 miles of Federal trails within the national forest. The following are concise descriptions of the location, limits. and length of each trail. More detailed descriptions are contained in Appendix A based on the best information about each route as known at this conceptual level of planning. Where there are any particular conditions which need to be considered during trail implementation or further trail 4 of 14