HomeMy WebLinkAbout06-03-2020 Operations Committee Meeting Complete Agenda Packet N`4 ANli�l
y
� 9
� c+
o �
Fir/Ms THE ENv\Po�
ORANGE COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT
SPECIAL NOTICE REGARDING CORONAVIRUS (COVID-19�
AND ATTENDANCE AT PUBLIC MEETINGS
On March 4, 2020, Governor Newsom proclaimed a State of Emergency in California as
a result of the threat of COVID-19. On March 12, 2020 and March 18, 2020, Governor
Newsom issued Executive Order N-25-20 and Executive Order N-29-20, which
temporarily suspend portions of the Brown Act which addresses the conduct of public
meetings.
The General Manager and the Chairman of the Board of Directors have determined that
due to the size of the Orange County Sanitation District's Board of Directors (25), and the
health and safety of the members, the Board of Directors will be participating in meetings
of the Board telephonically and Internet accessibility.
PUBLIC PARTICIPATION
Your participation is always welcome. The Operations Committee meeting will be
available to the public online at:
https://ocsd.legistar.com/Calendar.aspx
You may submit your comments and questions in writing for the Operations
Committee's consideration in advance of the meeting only by sending them to
OCSDClerkaaocsd.com with the subject line "PUBLIC COMMENT ITEM # (insert the
item number relevant to your comment)" or "PUBLIC COMMENT NON-AGENDA
ITEM". Submit your written comments by 5:00 p.m. on Tuesday, June 2, 2020. All
public comments will be provided to the Operations Committee and may be read into
the record or compiled as part of the record.
Thank you.
Serving: Orange County Sanitation District
Anaheim 10844 Ellis Avenue, Fountain Valley,CA 92708
714.962.2411 • www.ocsd.com
Brea
Buena Park
Cypress May 27, 2020
Fountain Valley
Fullerton
Garden Grove
NOTICE OF MEETING
Huntington Beach
Irvine
La Habra
La Palma OPERATIONS COMMITTEE
Los Alamitos ORANGE COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT
Newport Beach
Orange
Placentia
Wednesday, June 3, 2020 — 5:00 P.M.
Santa Ana
Seal Beach
Stanton ACCESSIBILITY FOR THE GENERAL PUBLIC
Tustin Due to the spread of COVID-19, the Orange County Sanitation District
Villa Park will be holding all upcoming Board and Committee meetings by
teleconferencing and Internet accessibility. This meeting will be
County of Orange available to the public online at:
Costa Mesa
Sanitary District https://ocsd.legistar.com/Calendar.aspx
Midway City
Sanitary District
Irvine Ranch
Water District
Yorba Linda
Water District A regular meeting of the Operations Committee of the Orange County
Sanitation District will be held in the manner indicated herein on
oJN SANIt, oy Wednesday, June 3, 2020 at 5:00 p.m.
G � �
2 9
1
1
1"E ENv\P Our Mission: To protect public health and the environment by
providing effective wastewater collection, treatment, and recycling.
OPERATIONS COMMITTEE BOARD MEETING DATE
MEETING DATE
06/03/20 06/24/20
07/01/20 07/22/20
AUGUST DARK 08/26/20
09/02/20 09/23/20
10/07/20 10/28/20
11/04/20 11118120 *
12/02/20 12116120 *
JAN UARY DARK 01/27/21
02/03/21 02/24/21
03/03/21 03/24/21
04/07/21 04/28/21
05/05/21 05/26/21
*Meeting will be held on the third Wednesday of the month
ROLL CALL
OPERATIONS COMMITTEE
Engineering and Operations & Maintenance
Meeting Date: June 3, 2020 Time: 5:00 p.m.
Adjourn:
COMMITTEE MEMBERS (14)
Robert Collacott (Chair)
Mariellen Yarc Vice-Chair
Brad Avery
Allan Bernstein
Doug Chaffee
Brooke Jones
Steve Jones
Lucille Kring
Sandra Massa-Lavitt
Tim Shaw
Jesus J. Silva
Fred Smith
David Shawver (Board Chair)
John Withers Board Vice-Chair
OTHERS
Brad Hogin, General Counsel
STAFF
Jim Herber , General Manager
Rob Thompson, Assistant General Manager
Lorenzo Tyner, Assistant General Manager
Celia Chandler, Director of Human Resources
KathyMillea, Director of Engineering
Lan Wiborg, Director of Environmental Services
Kelly Lore, Clerk of the Board
ORANGE COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT Effective 02/19/2020
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
Complete Roster
ALTERNATE
AGENCY/CITIES ACTIVE DIRECTOR DIRECTOR
Anaheim Lucille Kring Denise Barnes
Brea Glenn Parker Cecilia Hupp
Buena Park Fred Smith Connor Traut
Cypress Mariellen Yarc Stacy Berry
Fountain Valley Steve Nagel Patrick Harper
Fullerton Jesus J. Silva Jan Flory
Garden Grove Steve Jones John O'Neill
Huntington Beach Erik Peterson Lyn Semeta
Irvine Christina Shea Anthony Kuo
La Habra Tim Shaw Rose Espinoza
La Palma Peter Kim Nitesh Patel
Los Alamitos Richard Murphy Dean Grose
Newport Beach Brad Avery Joy Brenner
Orange Mark Murphy Kim Nichols
Placentia Chad Wanke Ward Smith
Santa Ana Cecilia Iglesias David Penaloza
Seal Beach Sandra Massa-Lavitt Schelly Sustarsic
Stanton David Shawver Carol Warren
Tustin Allan Bernstein Chuck Puckett
Villa Park Robert Collacott Chad Zimmerman
Sanitary/Water Districts
Costa Mesa Sanitary District James M. Ferryman Bob Ooten
Midway City Sanitary District Andrew Nguyen Margie L. Rice
Irvine Ranch Water District John Withers Douglas Reinhart
Yorba Linda Water District Brooke Jones Phil Hawkins
County Areas
Board of Supervisors Doug Chaffee Donald P. Wagner
GoJN SANITgT,/0
Q ?
r c�
o i
H� THE ENS
Orange County Sanitation District
OPERATIONS COMMITTEE
Regular Meeting Agenda
Wednesday, June 3, 2020 - 5:00 PM
Board Room
Administration Building
10844 Ellis Avenue
Fountain Valley, CA 92708
(714) 593-7433
AGENDA POSTING: In accordance with the requirements of California Government Code Section 54954.2, this
agenda has been posted outside the main gate of the Sanitation District's Administration Building located
at 10844 Ellis Avenue, Fountain Valley, California, and on the Sanitation District's website at www.ocsd.com
not less than 72 hours prior to the meeting date and time above. All public records relating to each agenda
item, including any public records distributed less than 72 hours prior to the meeting to all, or a majority
of the Board of Directors, are available for public inspection in the office of the Clerk of the Board.
AGENDA DESCRIPTION: The agenda provides a brief general description of each item of business to
be considered or discussed. The recommended action does not indicate what action will be taken. The Board
of Directors may take any action which is deemed appropriate.
MEETING AUDIO: An audio recording of this meeting is available within 24 hours after adjournment of
the meeting. Please contact the Clerk of the Board's office at(714) 593-7433 to request the audio file.
NOTICE TO DIRECTORS: To place items on the agenda for a Committee or Board Meeting, the item must
be submitted in writing to the Clerk of the Board: Kelly A. Lore, MMC, (714) 593-7433/klore@ocsd.com at least
14 days before the meeting.
FOR ANY QUESTIONS ON THE AGENDA, BOARD MEMBERS MAY CONTACT STAFF AT:
General Manager: Jim Herberg,jherberg@ocsd.com/(714) 593-7300
Asst. General Manager: Lorenzo Tyner, Ityner@ocsd.com/(714)593-7550
Asst. General Manager: Rob Thompson, rthompson@ocsd.com/(714) 593-7310
Director of Human Resources: Celia Chandler, cchandler@ocsd.com/(714)593-7202
Director of Engineering: Kathy Millea, kmillea@ocsd.com/(714) 593-7365
Director of Environmental Services: Lan Wiborg, Iwiborg@ocsd.com/(714) 593-7450
OPERATIONS COMMITTEE Regular Meeting Agenda Wednesday, June 3, 2020
CALL TO ORDER
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
ROLL CALL AND DECLARATION OF QUORUM:
Clerk of the Board
PUBLIC COMMENTS:
You may submit your comments and questions in writing for the Committee's consideration by sending them to
the Clerk of the Board at OCSDClerk@ocsd.com with the subject line "PUBLIC COMMENT ITEM #" (insert the
item number relevant to your comment) or "PUBLIC COMMENT NON-AGENDA ITEM". Submit your written
comments by 5:00 p.m. on June 2, 2020. All public comments will be provided to the Committee and may be read
into the record or compiles as part of the record.
REPORTS:
The Committee Chairperson and the General Manager may present verbal reports on miscellaneous matters of
general interest to the Directors. These reports are for information only and require no action by the Directors.
CONSENT CALENDAR:
Consent Calendar Items are considered to be routine and will be enacted, by the Committee, after one motion,
without discussion. Any items withdrawn from the Consent Calendar for separate discussion will be considered in
the regular order of business.
1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 2020-1086
RECOMMENDATION:
Approve Minutes of the Regular Meeting of the Operations Committee held on May 6,
2020.
Originator: Kelly Lore
Attachments: Agenda Report
05-06-2020 Operations Committee Minutes
2. CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM CONTRACT PERFORMANCE 2020-1008
REPORT
RECOMMENDATION: Recommend to the Board of Directors to:
Receive and file the Capital Improvement Program Contract Performance Report for
the period ending March 31, 2020.
Originator: Kathy Millea
Attachments: Agenda Report
CIP Contract Performance Report 2020-03-31
Page 1 of 4
OPERATIONS COMMITTEE Regular Meeting Agenda Wednesday, June 3, 2020
3. TOSHIBA 12KV CIRCUIT BREAKER PURCHASE 2020-1044
RECOMMENDATION: Recommend to the Board of Directors to:
A. Award a Purchase Order Contract to Superior Electric Motor Services for the
purchase of eight Toshiba HVK 12kV circuit breakers for Plant No. 1 Electrical
Distribution System, per Specification No. E-2020-116213D, for a total amount
not to exceed $195,072, including sales tax and freight; and
B. Approve a contingency of $9,754 (5%).
Originator: Rob Thompson
Attachments: Agenda Report
4. 12KV DISTRIBUTION CENTER B AND EAST RAS PUMP STATION 2020-1077
ROOFING REPLACEMENT, PROJECT NO. FE18-19R
RECOMMENDATION: Recommend to the Board of Directors to:
A. Receive and file Bid Tabulations and Recommendation for O'Connell
Engineering & Construction, Inc. for 12kV Distribution Center B and East RAS
Pump Station Roofing Replacement, Project No. FE18-19R;
B. Award a Construction Contract to O'Connell Engineering & Construction, Inc. for
12kV Distribution Center B and East RAS Pump Station Roofing Replacement,
Project No. FE18-19R, for a total amount not to exceed $674,800; and
C. Approve a contingency of $67,480 (10%).
Originator: Kathy Millea
Attachments: Agenda Report
Draft FE18-19R Contract
NON-CONSENT:
5. HEADQUARTERS COMPLEX SITE PREPARATION, PROJECT NO. 2020-1032
P1-128C
RECOMMENDATION: Recommend to the Board of Directors to:
A. Consider the Fountain Valley Crossings Specific Plan Program Environmental
Impact Report (State Clearinghouse No. 2015101042) that evaluated the total
buildout of the Specific Plan area with a goal of revitalizing the existing light
industrial use;
B. Consider, receive, and file the Initial Study/Addendum for the Administrative
Headquarters Building, Project for P1-128, dated December 2019 to the City of
Page 2 of 4
OPERATIONS COMMITTEE Regular Meeting Agenda Wednesday, June 3, 2020
Fountain Valley's Program Environmental Impact Report for the Fountain Valley
Crossings Specific Plan to demolish five warehouse buildings, construct and
operate an administrative headquarters building, pedestrian bridge, signage,
landscaping, lighting, and surface parking lot in the City of Fountain Valley;
C. Receive and file Bid Tabulation and Recommendation for Headquarters
Complex Site Preparation, Project No. P1-128C;
D. Accept the formal bid withdrawal request received on March 13, 2020 from the
initial lowest bidder, Interior Demolition, Inc.;
E. Reject the bid from the second apparent low bidder AMPCO North, Inc. as
non-responsive;
F. Award a Demolition Contract to Resource Environmental, Inc. for Headquarters
Complex Site Preparation, Project No. P1-128C, for a total amount not to
exceed $1,555,000; and
G. Approve a contingency of $155,500 (10%).
Originator: Kathy Millea
Attachments: Agenda Report
P1-128 Headquarters Initial Study Addendum 12202019
Hyperlink to Fountain Valley PEIR for Fountain Valley
Crossings Specific Plan
P1-128C Construction Contract
6. HEADQUARTERS COMPLEX SITE PREPARATION, PROJECT NO. 2020-1033
P1-128C
RECOMMENDATION: Recommend to the Board of Directors to:
A. Approve a Professional Construction Services Agreement with HDR, Inc. to
provide construction support services for Headquarters Complex Site
Preparation, Project No. P1-128C, for a total amount not to exceed $178,000;
and
B. Approve a contingency of $17,800 (10%).
Originator: Kathy Millea
Attachments: Agenda Report
P1-128C Professional Construction Services Agreement
Page 3 of 4
OPERATIONS COMMITTEE Regular Meeting Agenda Wednesday, June 3, 2020
INFORMATION ITEMS:
7. FY 2020-21 & FY 2021-22 BUDGET PRESENTATION 2020-1067
RECOMMENDATION:
Information Item.
Originator: Lorenzo Tyner
Attachments: Agenda Report
FY20-21 & 21-22 Budget Presentation
DEPARTMENT HEAD REPORTS:
CLOSED SESSION:
None.
OTHER BUSINESS AND COMMUNICATIONS OR SUPPLEMENTAL AGENDA ITEMS, IF
ANY:
BOARD OF DIRECTORS INITIATED ITEMS FOR A FUTURE MEETING:
At this time Directors may request staff to place an item on a future agenda.
ADJOURNMENT:
The next Operations Committee meeting is scheduled for Wednesday, July 1, 2020 at 5:00
p.m.
Page 4 of 4
oJ�jV SAN17gTO9 Orange Count Sanitation District Administration Building
5� o, g � 10844 Ellis Avenue
2 9 Fountain Valley, CA 92708
OPERATIONS COMMITTEE (714)593 7433
9oTFCTN0 THE ENVQ����2
Agenda Report
File #: 2020-1086 Agenda Date: 6/3/2020 Agenda Item No: 1.
FROM: James D. Herberg, General Manager
Originator: Kelly A. Lore, Clerk of the Board
SUBJECT:
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
GENERAL MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION
RECOMMENDATION:
Approve Minutes of the Regular Meeting of the Operations Committee held on May 6, 2020.
BACKGROUND
In accordance with the Board of Directors Rules of Procedure, an accurate record of each meeting
will be provided to the Directors for subsequent approval at the following meeting.
RELEVANT STANDARDS
• Resolution No. OCSD 19-19
ATTACHMENT
The following attachment(s) may be viewed on-line at the OCSD website (www.ocsd.com) with the complete agenda
package:
• Minutes of the Operations Committee meeting held May 6, 2020
Orange County Sanitation District Page 1 of 1 Printed on 5/26/2020
powered by LegistarTM
Orange County Sanitation District NIN SAN/T,4;/O Wednesday, May 6, 2020
Minutes for the = °°°� "o� 5:00 PM
OPERATIONS COMMITTEE Board Room
Administration Building
10844 Ellis Avenue
9 Fountain Valley, CA 92708
oT�°T'"� THE ENv\P (714) 593-7433
CALL TO ORDER
A regular meeting of the Operations Committee was called to order by Committee Chair Bob
Collacott on Wednesday, May 6, 2020 at 5:01 p.m. in the Administration Building of the
Orange County Sanitation District. Chair Collacott stated that the meeting was being held
telephonically and via audio/video teleconferencing in accordance with the Governor's
Executive Order No. N-29-20, due to the Coronavirus Pandemic (COVID-19). Chair Collacott
led the Flag Salute.
The Clerk of the Board announced the teleconference meeting guidelines and stated that
votes will be taken by roll call.
DECLARATION OF QUORUM:
Roll call was taken and a quorum was declared present, as follows:
PRESENT: Robert Collacott, Mariellen Yarc, Allan Bernstein, Doug Chaffee,
Brooke Jones, Steve Jones, Lucille Kring, Sandra Massa-Lavitt, Tim
Shaw, Jesus Silva, Fred Smith, David Shawver and John Withers
ABSENT: Brad Avery
STAFF PRESENT: Jim Herberg, General Manager; Kelly Lore, Clerk of the Board; Al Garcia;
and Josh Martinez were present in the Board Room. Rob Thompson, Assistant General
Manager; Lorenzo Tyner, Assistant General Manager; Kathy Millea, Director of Engineering;
Lan Wiborg, Director of Environmental Services; and Tina Knapp were in attendance
telephonically.
OTHERS PRESENT: Brad Hogin, General Counsel was present in the Board Room.
PUBLIC COMMENTS:
None.
REPORTS:
General Manager Jim Herberg provided a brief COVID-19 update stating that all services are
being maintained with no issues, with approximately half the employees telecommuting and
the remaining half working onsite.
Mr. Herberg also announced that the OCSD Administrative offices will be closed on May 25th
in observance of the Memorial Day holiday.
Page 1 of 6
OPERATIONS COMMITTEE Minutes May 6, 2020
CONSENT CALENDAR:
1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 2020-967
Originator: Kelly Lore
MOVED, SECONDED, AND DULY CARRIED TO:
Approve Minutes of the Regular Meeting of the Operations Committee held on March
4, 2020.
AYES: Robert Collacott, Mariellen Yarc, Allan Bernstein, Doug Chaffee,
Brooke Jones, Steve Jones, Lucille Kring, Sandra Massa-Lavitt, Tim
Shaw, Jesus Silva, Fred Smith, David Shawver and John Withers
NOES: None
ABSENT: Brad Avery
ABSTENTIONS: None
2. QUARTERLY ODOR COMPLAINT REPORT 2020-1023
Originator: Rob Thompson
MOVED, SECONDED, AND DULY CARRIED TO:
Receive and file the Fiscal Year 2019/20 Third Quarter Odor Complaint Report.
AYES: Robert Collacott, Mariellen Yarc, Allan Bernstein, Doug Chaffee,
Brooke Jones, Steve Jones, Lucille Kring, Sandra Massa-Lavitt, Tim
Shaw, Jesus Silva, Fred Smith, David Shawver and John Withers
NOES: None
ABSENT: Brad Avery
ABSTENTIONS: None
3. MAINTENANCE COATING OF EFFLUENT JUNCTION BOX PIPING 2020-1045
Originator: Rob Thompson
MOVED, SECONDED, AND DULY CARRIED TO: Recommend to the Board of
Directors to:
A. Approve a Purchase Order Contract with Abhe & Svoboda, Inc. for the
maintenance coating of the pipes and associated support structure at the
Effluent Junction Box, per specification S-2020-114613D, for a total amount not
to exceed $135,732; and
B. Approve a contingency of $27,146 (20%).
Page 2 of 6
OPERATIONS COMMITTEE Minutes May 6, 2020
AYES: Robert Collacott, Mariellen Yarc, Allan Bernstein, Doug Chaffee,
Brooke Jones, Steve Jones, Lucille Kring, Sandra Massa-Lavitt, Tim
Shaw, Jesus Silva, Fred Smith, David Shawver and John Withers
NOES: None
ABSENT: Brad Avery
ABSTENTIONS: None
4. NEWPORT BEACH PUMP STATION PRESSURIZATION 2020-1031
IMPROVEMENTS, PROJECT NO. 5-68
Originator: Kathy Millea
MOVED, SECONDED, AND DULY CARRIED TO: Recommend to the Board of
Directors to:
A. Approve a Professional Design Services Agreement with Dudek to provide
Engineering Services for Newport Beach Pump Station Pressurization
Improvements, Project No. 5-68, for an amount not to exceed $542,988; and
B. Approve a contingency of $54,299 (10%).
AYES: Robert Collacott, Mariellen Yarc, Allan Bernstein, Doug Chaffee,
Brooke Jones, Steve Jones, Lucille Kring, Sandra Massa-Lavitt, Tim
Shaw, Jesus Silva, Fred Smith, David Shawver and John Withers
NOES: None
ABSENT: Brad Avery
ABSTENTIONS: None
5. SERVICE CONTRACT FOR PLANT NOS. 1 AND 2 CENTRAL 2020-1024
GENERATION CARBON CHANGE-OUT, SPECIFICATION NO.
S-2020-113OBD
Originator: Rob Thompson
MOVED, SECONDED, AND DULY CARRIED TO: Recommend to the Board of
Directors to:
A. Award a Service Contract to EnviroSupply & Service Inc. for Plant Nos. 1 and 2,
Central Generation Facility Fuel Gas Cleaning System, Carbon Change-Out
[replacement]; Specification No. S-2020-113013D, for a total amount not to
exceed $240,702 for the period July 1, 2020 through June 30, 2021 , with four (4)
one-year renewal options; and
B. Approve a contingency of $24,071 (10%).
AYES: Robert Collacott, Mariellen Yarc, Allan Bernstein, Doug Chaffee,
Brooke Jones, Steve Jones, Lucille Kring, Sandra Massa-Lavitt, Tim
Shaw, Jesus Silva, Fred Smith, David Shawver and John Withers
Page 3 of 6
OPERATIONS COMMITTEE Minutes May 6, 2020
NOES: None
ABSENT: Brad Avery
ABSTENTIONS: None
6. GRIT AND SCREENINGS REMOVAL, SPECIFICATION NO. 2020-991
S-2020-1121 BD
Originator: Lan Wiborg
MOVED, SECONDED, AND DULY CARRIED TO: Recommend to the Board of
Directors to:
A. Approve a Service Contract to Denali Water Solutions for Grit and Screenings
Removal, Specification No. S-2020-1121 BD, for a total amount not to exceed
$551,482 for the period July 1, 2020 through June 30, 2021, with four one-year
renewal options; and
B. Approve a contingency of $55,148 (10%).
AYES: Robert Collacott, Mariellen Yarc, Allan Bernstein, Doug Chaffee,
Brooke Jones, Steve Jones, Lucille Kring, Sandra Massa-Lavitt, Tim
Shaw, Jesus Silva, Fred Smith, David Shawver and John Withers
NOES: None
ABSENT: Brad Avery
ABSTENTIONS: None
NON-CONSENT:
7. BUSHARD DIVERSION STRUCTURE REPAIR, PROJECT NO. MP-307 2019-628
Originator: Kathy Millea
Director of Engineering Kathy Millea provided a brief description of/need for this item.
MOVED, SECONDED, AND DULY CARRIED TO: Recommend to the Board of
Directors to:
A. Receive and file Bid Tabulation and Recommendation for Bushard Diversion
Structure Repair, Project No. MP-307; and
B. Reject the bid from Mehta Mechanical Company, Inc. and direct staff to reissue
the contract for bids with changes made to prolong the life of the repairs.
AYES: Robert Collacott, Mariellen Yarc, Allan Bernstein, Doug Chaffee,
Brooke Jones, Steve Jones, Lucille Kring, Sandra Massa-Lavitt, Tim
Shaw, Jesus Silva, Fred Smith, David Shawver and John Withers
NOES: None
ABSENT: Brad Avery
ABSTENTIONS: None
Page 4 of 6
OPERATIONS COMMITTEE Minutes May 6, 2020
8. SEISMIC EVALUATION OF STRUCTURES AT PLANT NOS. 1 AND 2, 2020-1029
PROJECT NO. PS15-06
Originator: Kathy Millea
Ms. Millea provided a PowerPoint presentation for this item that addressed resiliency at
OCSD, the history of OCSD seismic evaluations, seismic risks and hazards, mitigation
measures, and recommendations for long-term risk reduction.
WITHOUT OBJECTION ACTION TAKEN TO:
Receive and file the Seismic Evaluation of Structures at Plant Nos. 1 and 2, Project No.
PS15-06.
INFORMATION ITEMS:
9. CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM PROPOSED BUDGET FOR 2020-982
FY2020-21
Originator: Kathy Millea
Ms Millea provided a PowerPoint presentation on this item that reviewed the FY
2019-2020 Capital Improvement Program and performance; completed planning
studies; design and construction accomplishments; information as to the timing of
when budget information, including CIP, is presented to the Board; CIP net 10-year and
20-year outlay; total CIP budget authority; new projects; top budget increases and
decreases; project cancellations/closures; and projected FY 2020-2021 net CIP outlays
by project phase.
ITEM RECEIVED AS:
Information Item.
10. INTERIM FOOD WASTE RECEIVING FACILITY, PROJECT NO. 2020-1022
P2-124, AND PRICING POLICY DISCUSSION
Originator: Lorenzo Tyner and Kathy Millea
Mr. Herberg provided a Power Point presentation that reviewed the objectives and
history of the project, location, facility highlights, facility process and layout, project
budget and schedule, the policy discussion had regarding tipping fee in 2019, tipping
fee basis, an overview of cost recovery, comparable agencies, summary tipping fee for
preprocessed food waste for co-digestion, service area and solid waste haulers and
potential food waste slurry providers, tipping fee deal points, next steps, and the
outcome of tipping fee analysis.
ITEM RECEIVED AS AN:
Information Item.
Page 5 of 6
OPERATIONS COMMITTEE Minutes May 6, 2020
DEPARTMENT HEAD REPORTS:
None.
CLOSED SESSION:
None.
OTHER BUSINESS AND COMMUNICATIONS OR SUPPLEMENTAL AGENDA ITEMS, IF
ANY:
None.
BOARD OF DIRECTORS INITIATED ITEMS FOR A FUTURE MEETING:
Director Massa-Lavitt requested that an update on the Headquarters Complex project be
placed on a future meeting agenda.
ADJOURNMENT:
Chair Collacott declared the meeting adjourned at 6:20 p.m. to the meeting to be held on
Wednesday, June 3. 2020 at 5:00 p.m.
Submitted by:
Kelly A. Lore, MMC
Clerk of the Board
Page 6 of 6
oJ�V SAN17gTO9 Orange Count Sanitation District Administration Building
5� o, g � 10844 Ellis Avenue
2 9 Fountain Valley, CA 92708
OPERATIONS COMMITTEE (714)593 7433
9oTFCTN0 THE ENVQ����2
Agenda Report
File #: 2020-1008 Agenda Date: 6/3/2020 Agenda Item No: 2.
FROM: James D. Herberg, General Manager
Originator: Kathy Millea, Director of Engineering
SUBJECT:
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM CONTRACT PERFORMANCE REPORT
GENERAL MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION
RECOMMENDATION: Recommend to the Board of Directors to:
Receive and file the Capital Improvement Program Contract Performance Report for the period
ending March 31, 2020.
BACKGROUND
The Capital Improvement Program involves awarding and managing many construction and
consulting contracts. In 2008, the Orange County Sanitation District Board of Directors began
awarding contingencies along with construction and consulting contracts and amendments for
consulting contracts up to the amount of the approved contingency. This practice reduces
administrative costs, expedites resolution of project issues that arise, helps avoid Contractor delay
claims, and facilitates efficient management of many contracts.
The Capital Improvement Program Contract Performance Report summarizes construction and
consulting contract performance and activities for the quarter ending March 31, 2020. This report is
updated quarterly.
RELEVANT STANDARDS
• Ensure the public's money is wisely spent
ATTACHMENT
The following attachment(s) may be viewed on-line at the OCSD website (www.ocsd.com) with the complete agenda
package:
• Capital Improvement Program Contract Performance Report for the period ending March 31,
2020
Orange County Sanitation District Page 1 of 1 Printed on 5/26/2020
powered by LegistarTM
ORANGE COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT
Capital Improvement Program
Contract Performance Report
9ojEcrTN6 THE EN�\Ppa��� For the period ending March 31, 2020
DATE: May 6, 2020
TO: Orange County Sanitation District
Board of Directors
FROM: James D. Herberg, General Manager
Through: Kathy Millea, Director of Engineering
This report summarizes the status, activities, and performance of public works
construction contracts and consultant agreements. This report also identifies the names
and status of projects being performed under master budgets for planning studies,
research, small construction projects, O&M capital projects, and information technology
projects.
Table of Contents
Part 1 — Construction Contracts page 2
Active Construction Contracts
Construction Contracts Closed in Last Quarter
Cumulative Change Order Rates — Closed Construction Contracts
Part 2 — Engineering Services Agreements page 6
Active Engineering Services Agreements
Active Task Orders by Master Agreement
Part 3 - Master Budget Projects page 10
Planning Studies Status Report
Research Program Status Report
Small Construction Projects Program Status Report
Information Technology Capital Program Status Report
Operations and Maintenance Capital Program Status Report
Part 4 - Supplemental Engineering Services Contract page 16
Supplemental Engineering Services Contract Status
Supplemental Engineering Services Contract Labor Summary
Page 1 of 16
ORANGE COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT
Capital Improvement Program
Contract Performance Report
9ojEcrTN6 THE EN\Ppa��� For the period ending March 31, 2020
PART 1 - CONSTRUCTION CONTRACTS
Table 1 lists the construction contracts active as of March 31, 2020. The graph below
shows the number and total value of projects broken down plant and collections.
Active Construction Contracts
-00114%0
Plant Proiects Collections Projects
18 Contracts 6 Contracts
$349 million $90 million
One construction contract was closed in this quarter, as listed in Table 2.
Page 2 of 16
Capital Improvement Program Contract Performance Report
for Quarter Ending 03/31/2020
Table 1-Active Construction Contracts
Current
Award Board Award Contract Original Current Contingency Contingency
Project Contract Contractor Date Amount Change Orders Amount Contingency Contingency Used Remaining
2-41-8 SARI Rock Stabilizers Removal
2-41-8 SARI Rock Stabilizers Removal Griffith Company 09/26/2018 $2,809,082 $0 $2,809,082 10.0% 10.0% 0.0% 10.0%
2.72 Newhope-Placentia Trunk Replacement
2-72B Newhope-Placentia Trunk Replacement,Segment B OHL USA,INC. 06/15/2018 $58,242,000 $533,357 $58,775,357 6.5% 6.5% 0.9% 5.6%
3-62 Westminster Blvd Force Main Replacement
3-62 $27,743,000 $0 $27,743,000 10.0% 10.0% 0.0% 10.0%
1-117 Ocean Outfall System Rehabilitation
J-117B Outfall Low Flow Pump Station Shimmick Construction Co.,Inc. 12/19/2018 $90,200,000 $105,983 $90,305,983 8.0% 8.0% 0.1% 7.9%
1-126 Safety Improvements Program
J-126C NFPA 820 HVAC and Electrical Improvements MMC,Inc. 03/05/2019 $469,000 $0 $469,000 10.0% 10.0% 0.0% 10.0%
J-126JK Stairs,Hatches,Walkway Hazards,Ladders,Guardrails, Olsson Construction,Inc. 10/24/2018 $3,637,601 $917 $3,638,518 10.0% 10.0% 0.0% 10.0%
Roof Fall Protection
J-126PQ Ladders,Hatches,Roof Fall Protection Tharsos Construction 11/28/2018 $786,000 $0 $786,000 10.0% 10.0% 0.0% 10.0%
M-FE Small Construction Projects Program
FE16-06 Fuel Cell Facilities Demolition MMC,Inc. 07/24/2019 $474,000 $0 $474,000 10.0% 10.0% 0.0% 10.0%
FE17-01 Carbon Canyon Pipeline Sag Repairs Mike Prlich and Sons,Inc. 10/02/2019 $510,000 $0 $510,000 10.0% 10.0% 0.0% 10.0%
FE17-05 Plant 1 ICS Network Extension RP Controls 06/26/2019 $321,889 $0 $321,889 10.0% 10.0% 0.0% 10.0%
FE18-18 Portable Generator Connector at Lido Pump Station M.Brey Electric,Inc. 09/17/2019 $42,285 $0 $42,285 20.0% 20.0% 0.0% 20.0%
M-FIR Operationally-Funded Projects
FE17-06 Tustin Ave Manhole and Pipe Repair Nuline Technologies,LLC 10/24/20191 $350,000 $0 $350,000 10.0% 10.0% 0.0% 10.0%
0) MP-248 P2 Secondary Clarifier Repairs(AS Plant) W.M.Lyles Company 06/26/2019 $3,048,000 $0 $3,048,000 1 10.0% 10.0% 0.0% 10.0%
tQ MP-105 P2 CENGEN Steam Turbine Rehabilitation Dresser-Rand 03/25/2018 $245,424 $0 $245,424 20.0% 20.0% 0.0% 20.0%
tP
W MP-509 P2 Headworks Low Voltage Cable Assessment Mass Electric Construction Co. 12/18/2019 $434,327 $0 $434,327 20.0% 20.0% 0.0% 20.0%
O MP-638 Activated Sludge Plant Clarifier Inlet Gate Replacement Innovative Construction Solutions 12/18/2019 $658,300 $0 $658,300 10.0% 10.0% 0.0% 10.0%
at Plant No.2
P1-101 Sludge Dewatering and Odor Control at Plant 1
P1-101 Sludge Dewatering and Odor Control at Plant 1 WM Lyles Company 11/28/2012 $126,908,300 $12,785,479 $139,693,779 3.0% 11.5% 10.1% 1.4%
P1-115 Title 24 Access Compliance and Building Rehabilitation Project
PI-115B Rehabilitation of Fleet Services Building,Building 8 and CDC Engineering&Technology 09/11/2017 $2,235,563 $61,194 $2,296,757 10.0% 10.0% 2.7% 7.3%
Paving Area
P1-129 Return Activated Sludge Piping Replacement at Activated Sludge Plant No.1
P1-129 Return Activated Sludge Piping Replacement at Abhe&Svoboda,Inc. 07/24/2019 $6,863,092 $0 $6,863,092 10.0% 10.0% 0.0% 10.0%
Activated Sludge Plant No.1
P2-110 Consolidated Demolition and Utility Improvements at Plant 2
P2-110 Consolidated Demolition and Utility Improvements at Flatiron West Inc 02/09/2017 $16,730,000 $1,446,982 $18,176,982 8.0% 13.0% 8.6% 4.4%
Plant 2
P2-122 Headworks Modifications at Plant No.2 for GWRS Final Expansion
P2-122 Headworks Modifications at Plant No.2 for GWRS Final Shimmick Construction Co.,Inc. 01/22/2020 $14,487,735 $0 $14,487,735 10.0% 10.0% 0.0% 10.0%
Expansion
P2-123 Return Activated Sludge Piping Replacement at Plant 2
P2-123 Return Activated Sludge Piping Replacement at Plant 2 Shimmick Construction Co.,Inc. 09/25/2019 $6,042,110 $0 $6,042,110 10.0% 10.0% 0.0% 10.0%
P2-92 Sludge Dewatering and Odor Control at Plant 2
P2-92 Sludge Dewatering and Odor Control at Plant 2 Shimmick Construction Co.,Inc. 01/12/2015 $49,850,000 $2,030,417 $51,880,417 5.0% 6.0% 4.1% 1.9%
P2-88 Primary Treatment Rehabilitation at Plant No.2
P2-988 B/C-Side Primary Clarifiers Interim Repair at Plant 2 Myers&Sons Construction,LLC 01/23/2019 $8,665,000 $30,920 $8,695,920 10.0% 10.0% 0.4% 9.6%
Total $421,752,708 $16,995,249 $438,747,957
Capital Improvement Program Contract Performance Report
for Quarter Ending 03/31/2020
Table 2-Construction Contracts Closed in Last Quarter
Date Board Award Final Contract Original Current Contingency Unused
Project/Contract Contractor Closed Award Date Amount Change Orders Amount Contingency Contingency Used Contingency
J-117 Ocean Outfall System Rehabilitation
1-117A Interplant Effluent Pipeline Rehabilitation Shimmick Construction Co., O1/07/2020 08/07/2017 $12,609,012 $980,224 $13,244,050 8.0% 8.0% 7.8% 0.2%
Inc.
J-126 Safety Improvements Program
J-126L Various IQA Construction 02/18/2020 06/06/2018 $212,700 $19,933 $232,000 10.0% 10.0% 9.4% 0.6%
M-FE Small Construction Projects Program
FE14-05 Plant No.1 Fleet Services UST Leak Engineering/Remediation 03/31/2020 01/23/2019 $648,675 $26,085 $674,760 20.0% 20.0% 4.0% 16.0%
Remediation Resources Group,Inc.
FE15-07 Secondary Treatment and Plant Water VFD Helix Electric 03/17/2020 03/28/2018 $1,797,000 $90,543 $1,879,440 10.0% 10.0% 5.0% 5.0%
Replacement at Plant 1
Total $15,267,387 $1,116,785 $16,030,250
m
m
O
ORANGE COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT
Capital Improvement Program
Contract Performance Report
9ojEcrTN6 THE EN�\Ppa��� For the period ending March 31, 2020
When the Sanitation District Board awards a construction contract, they also approve a
contingency which allows the General Manager to approve contract change orders up to
the amount of the contingency. One purpose of this report is to document how much of
the contingency is utilized. A contract's change order rate is only meaningful when the
work is completed. As such, the change order performance charts in this report are based
only on contracts closed since the Board began approving contingencies in 2008. The
following chart shows how cumulative change order rates have changed for plant,
collections, and all contracts since the contingency system was implemented.
Cumulative Change Order Rates - Closed Construction Contracts
14% All
12% Collections
Plant
10%
8%
1 � J
6%
2%
0%
f, °o Ql O —4 N M IT LA tD I� co 61
O p —4 —4 1-4 —4 —4 ri r-4 .--� r-4 r-4
O O O O O O O O O O O O
N N N N N N N N N N rq N N
Page 5 of 16
ORANGE COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT
Capital Improvement Program
Contract Performance Report
9ojEcrTN6 THE EN�\Ppa��� For the period ending March 31, 2020
PART 2 — ENGINEERING SERVICES AGREEMENTS
The Sanitation District engages engineering consultants through Professional Service
Agreements (PSAs), Professional Design Services Agreements (PDSAs), Professional
Construction Services Agreements (PCSAs), and Master Professional Services
Agreements (Master Agreements). PDSAs are used to obtain design engineering
services, and PCSAs are a subsequent agreement with the design consultant to provide
support services during construction. PSAs are used for planning studies and other
consultant assignments.
Master Agreements are issued to a pool of pre-qualified consultants for smaller projects.
On those smaller projects, the Sanitation District solicits task order proposals from three
or four of the firms and awards a task order to the most qualified consultant. There are
currently six sets of Master Agreements.
• 2012 Master Design Agreements (expired)
• 2015 Master Design Agreements (expired)
• 2018 Master Design Agreements
• 2017 Master Agreements for CEQA Studies
• 2017 Master Agreements for Collection Planning Studies
• 2017 Master Agreements for Wastewater Treatment Planning Studies
The two Master Design Agreements from 2012, and 2015 have expired, meaning no new
task orders can be issued under them, but previously-issued task orders remain active
until completed. Task Orders are limited by Sanitation District Ordinance No. OCSD-52
$300,000 per task order.
A status table for all Active Engineering Services Agreements (PDSAs and PCSAs) is
attached under Table 3, and a status table for all Active Task Orders by Master
Agreement is attached under Table 4 (Master Agreements).
Page 6 of 16
Capital Improvement Program Contract Performance Report
for Quarter Ending 03/31/2020
Table 3-Active Engineering Services Agreements
Award Board Award Current Contract Original Current Contingency Contingency
Project Contract Type Consultant Date Amount Amendments Amount Contingency Contingency Used Remaining
2-41-8 SARI Rock Stabilizers Removal
2-41-8 SARI Rock Stabilizers Removal PCSA Michael Baker International,Inc. 09/26/2018 $215,129 $0 $215,129 10.0% 10.0% 0.0% 10.0%
2-72 Newhope-Placentia Trunk Replacement
2-72 Newhope-Placentia Trunk Replacement PCSA Lee&Ro 03/23/2016 $3,253,946 $0 $3,253,946 10.0% 10.0% 0.0% 10.0%
2-72 Newhope-Placentia Trunk Replacement PDSA Lee&Ro 10/22/20141 $8,468,232 $434,974 $8,903,206 10.0% 10.0% 5.1% 4.9%
3-62 Westminster Blvd Force Main Replacement
3-62 Westminster Blvd Force Main Replacement PCSA Stantec Consulting Services,Inc. 12/18/2019 $1,183,000 $0 $1,183,000 10.0% 10.0% 0.0% 10.0%
3-62 Westminster Blvd Force Main Replacement PCSA Stantec Consulting Services,Inc. 07/22/2015 $6,917,175 -$1,339,457 $5,577,718 10.0% 10.0% 0.0% 10.0%
3-64 Rehabilitation of Western Regional Sewers
3-64 Rehabilitation of Western Regional Sewers PDSA AECOM Technical Services,Inc. 01/27/2016 $17,639,250 $1,088,654 $18,727,904 10.0% 10.0% 6.2% 3.8%
3-67 Seal Beach Pump Station Replacement
3-67 Seal Beach Pump Station Replacement PDSA Lee&Ro 11/20/2019 $5,947,850 $0 $5,947,850 10.0% 10.0% 0.0% 10.0%
5-60 Newport Force Main Rehabilitation
5-60 Newport Force Main Rehabilitation PCSA Brown and Caldwell 04/29/2014 $2,231,925 $839,714 $3,071,639 9.0% 38.7% 37.6% 1.0%
5-67 Bay Bridge Pump Station Replacement
5-67 Bay Bridge Pump Station Replacement PDSA Arcadis US Inc. 10/25/2017 $7,137,000 $368,955 $7,505,955 10.0% 10.0% 5.2% 4.8%
6-17 District 6 Trunk Sewer Relief
6-17 District 6 Trunk Sewer Relief PCSA RMC Water&Environment 10/10/2016 $290,000 $0 $290,000 15.0% 15.0% 0.0% 15.0%
7-66 Sunflower and Red Hill Interceptor Repairs
7-66 Sunflower and Red Hill Interceptor Repairs PDSA GHD 09/25/2019 $308,712 $0 $308,712 10.0% 10.0% 0.0% 10.0%
1-117 Ocean Outfall System Rehabilitation
m J-117A Interplant Effluent Pipeline Rehabilitation PCSA Brown and Caldwell 05/24/2018 $1,121,666 $112,167 $1,233,833 10.0% 10.0% 10.0% 0.0%
m J-117B Outfall Low Flow Pump Station PCSA Brown and Caldwell 12/19/2018 $8,563,913 $0 $8,563,913 10.0% 10.0% 0.0% 10.0%
v J-124 Digester Gas Facilities Rehabilitation
J-124 Digester Gas Facilities Rehabilitation PDSA Brown and Caldwell 11/15/2017 $11,770,000 $50,000 $11,820,000 10.0% 10.0% 0.4% 9.6%
rn J-126 Safety Improvements Program
J-126 Safety Improvements Program PDSA Arcadis 08/29/2016 $3,040,000** $0 $3,040,000 10.0% 5.1% 0.0% 5.1%
J-128 Project Management Information System
J-128 Project Management Information System Other PMWeb,Inc. 05/24/2017 $1,022,500 $79,525 $1,102,025 20.0% 20.0% 7.8% 12.2%
J-98 Electrical Power Distribution System Improvements
J-98 Electrical Power Distribution System Improvements PDSA Brown and Caldwell 01/29/2020 $2,240,000 $0 $2,240,000 10.0% 10.0% 0.0% 10.0%
M-FE Small Construction Projects Program
FE16-11 Lane Channel Crossing PSA HDR Engineering,Inc. 06/28/2017 $131,939 $0 $131,939 10.0% 10.0% 0.0% 10.0%
M-RESEAR Research Program
RE17-02 Biogas Scrubber Evaluation PSA Carollo Engineers,Inc. 04/21/2017 $656,783 $63,097 $719,880 15.0% 15.0% 9.6% 5.4%
M-STUDIE!Planning Studies Program
P515-02 Edinger Pump Station Rehabilitation Study PSA Lockwood,Andrews&Newman,Inc. 12/20/2017 $505,042 $0 $505,042 10.0% 10.0% 0.0% 10.0%
P515-06 Seismic Evaluation of Structures at Plant Nos.1 and PSA Geosyntec Consultants,Inc. 06/28/2017 $2,578,028 $132,425 $2,710,453 10.0% 10.0% 5.1% 4.9%
2
P515-08 Collections Capacity Evaluation Study PSA RMC Water&Environment 08/24/2016 $2,802,675 $19,372 $2,822,047 10.0% 10.0% 0.7% 9.3%
P516-01 Stormwater Master Plan PSA Michael Baker International,Inc. 07/26/2017 $715,300 $54,839 $770,139 10.0% 10.0% 7.7% 2.3%
P517-03 Active Fault Location Study at Plant No.2 PSA Lettis Consultants International,Inc. 03/06/2019 $868,286 $0 $868,286 10.0% 10.0% 0.0% 10.0%
PS17-08 CECiA-Facilities Master Plan PSA Dudek 02/27/2019 $812,709 $0 $812,709 10.0% 10.0% 0.0% 10.0%
PS18-09 Ocean Outfall Condition Assessment and Scoping PSA Carollo Engineers,Inc. 03/25/2020 $2,744,000 $0 $2,744,000 10.0% 10.0% 0.0% 10.0%
Study
P1-101 Sludge Dewatering and Odor Control at Plant 1
P1-101 Sludge Dewatering and Odor Control at Plant 1 PCSA HDR Engineering,Inc. 06/28/2012 $7,140,000 $2,453,653 $9,593,653 8.0% 35.0% 34.4% 0.6%
P1-105 Headworks Rehabilitation at Plant 1
P1-105 Headworks Rehabilitation at Plant 1 PDSA Carollo Engineers,Inc. 05/27/2015 $17,528,957 $7,710,955 $25,239,912 10.0% 51.0% 44.0% 7.0%
P1-128 Headquarters Complex
P1-128 Headquarters Complex PDSA HDR Engineering,Inc. 06/22/2016 $11,785,709 -$752,553 $11,033,156 10.0% 10.0% 0.0% 10.0%
P1-128 Headquarters Complex PSA LSA Associates,Inc. 08/11/2016 $420,927 $0 $420,927 10.0% 10.0% 0.0% 10.0%
P3-129 Return Activated Sludge Piping Replacement at Activated Sludge Plant No.1
Capital Improvement Program Contract Performance Report
for Quarter Ending 03/31/2020
Table 3-Active Engineering Services Agreements
Award Board Award Current Contract Original Current Contingency Contingency
Project Contract Type Consultant Date Amount Amendments Amount Contingency Contingency Used Remaining
P1-129 Return Activated Sludge Piping Replacement at PCSA AECOM Technical Services,Inc. 07/24/2019 $140,000 $0 $140,000 10.0% 10.0% 0.0% 10.0%
Activated Sludge Plant No.1
P1-129 Return Activated Sludge Piping Replacement at PDSA AECOM Technical Services,Inc. 06/20/2017 $523,039 $27,015 $550,054 10.0% 10.0% 5.2% 4.8%
Activated Sludge Plant No.1
P3-232 Uninterruptable Power Supply Improvements at Plant 1
P1-132 Uninterruptable Power Supply Improvements at PDSA Tetra Tech,Inc. 10/23/2019 $784,680 $0 $784,680 10.0% 10.0% 0.0% 10.0%
Plant 1
P3-133 Primary Sedimentation Basins No.6-31 Reliability Improvements at Plant No.1
P1-133 Primary Sedimentation Basins No.6-31 Reliability PDSA Carollo Engineers,Inc. 09/25/2019 $1,219,667 $0 $1,219,667 10.0% 10.0% 0.0% 10.0%
Improvements at Plant No.1
P2-130 Consolidated Demolition and Utility Improvements at Plant 2
P2-110 Consolidated Demolition and Utility Improvements PCSA Stantec Consulting Services,Inc. 01/25/2017 $1,499,839 $0 $1,499,839 10.0% 10.0% 0.0% 10.0%
at Plant 2
P2-122 Headworks Modifications at Plant No.2 for GWRS Final Expansion
P2-122 Headworks Modifications at Plant No.2 for GWRS PCSA CDM Smith Inc. 01/15/2020 $2,200,000 $0 $2,200,000 10.0% 10.0% 0.0% 10.0%
Final Expansion
P2-122 Headworks Modifications at Plant No.2 for GWRS PDSA CDM Smith Inc. 05/24/2017 $5,319,930 $0 $5,319,930 10.0% 10.0% 0.0% 10.0%
Final Expansion
P2-123 Return Activated Sludge Piping Replacement at Plant 2
P2-123 Return Activated Sludge Piping Replacement at Plant PCSA SPEC Services,Inc. 09/25/2019 $252,329 $0 $252,329 10.0% 10.0% 0.0% 10.0%
2
P2-123 Return Activated Sludge Piping Replacement at Plant PDSA SPEC Services,Inc. 02/15/2018 $668,217 $0 $668,217 10.0% 10.0% 0.0% 10.0%
V]
2
O P2-124 Interim Food Waste Receiving Facility
OD P2-124 Interim Food Waste Receiving Facility PDSA Kennedy/Jenks Consultants 09/05/2018 $695,000 $20,717 $715,717 10.0% 10.0% 3.0% 7.0%
O
P2-92 Sludge Dewatering and Odor Control at Plant 2
6) P2-92 Sludge Dewatering and Odor Control at Plant 2 PCSA Brown and Caldwell 12/17/2014 $4,798,328 $0 $4,798,328 10.0% 10.0% 0.0% 10.0%
P2-98 Primary Treatment Rehabilitation at Plant No.2
P2-98 Primary Treatment Rehabilitation at Plant No.2 PDSA Black&Veatch 07/27/2016 $18,141,423 $1,279,488 $19,420,911 10.0% 10.0% 7.1% 2.9%
P2-986 B/C-Side Primary Clarifiers Interim Repair at Plant 2 PCSA Black&Veatch 01/23/2019 $549,534 $0 $549,534 10.0% 10.0% 0.0% 10.0%
SP-152 Climate Resiliency Study
SP-152 Climate Resiliency Study PSA Hazen and Sawyer 11/28/2018 $697,952 $64,199 $762,151 10.0% 10.0% 9.2% 0.8%
SP-196 Process Control Systems Upgrades Study
SP-196 Process Control Systems Upgrades Study PSA Stantec Consulting Services,Inc. 03/01/2018 $1,389,866 $9,000 $1,398,866 10.0% 10.0% 0.6% 9.4%
Total $168,920,457 $12,716,739 $181,637,196
**Original Award was$1,540,000,and later amended to$3,040,000 by Board Action
Capital Improvement Program Contract Performance Report
for Quarter Ending 03/31/2020
Table 4-Active Task Orders by Master Agreement
Master Agreement/Project Consultant Award Date Original Task Amendments Current Task
Order Value Order Value
2012 Master Professional Design Service Agreements(Expired)
FE30-21 Area 02 Craig Regional Park Manhole Improvements GHD 10/8/2012 $58,440 $41,560 $100,000
2015 Master Professional Design Service Agreements(Expired)
FE14-05 Plant No.1 Fleet Services UST Leak Remediation Dudek 9/1/2015 $86,116 $73,137 $159,253
PS17-02 Guidelines for Development in the Area of OCSD Facilities AECOM 8/21/2017 $93,187 $0 $93,187
2017 Master Agreements for Wastewater Treatment Planning Studies
P3-101 Spill Prevention,Control,and Countermeasure Plan for Sludge Dewatering and Odor AECOM 06/27/2018 $28,216 $10,935 $39,151
Control at Plant No.1
PS18-10 Root Cause Analysis of Malfunctioning Process Units at TFSC Facility at Plant No.2 Brown and Caldwell 2/6/2019 $24,783 $0 $24,783
PS18-01 Asset Management Plan Development HDR Engineering,Inc. 04/03/2019 $274,777 $0 $274,777
PS17-10 Emergency Overflow Weirs,Wing Wall Structural and Geotechnical Investigations HDR Engineering,Inc. 05/21/2019 $260,415 $0 $260,415
PS18-05 Plant No.2 Future Site Plan Development Brown and Caldwell 05/22/2019 $122,389 $0 $122,389
PS18-11 ETAP Model Updates for Plant Nos 1 and 2 Brown and Caldwell 3/17/2020 $227,412 $0 $227,412
u]
c 2017 Master Agreements for Collection Planning Studies
O
No Task Orders Issued to Date -- -- -- -- --
2017 Master Agreements for CEQA Studies
No Task Orders Issued to Date -- -- -- -- --
2018 Master Professional Design Service Agreements
J-127 Natural Gas Pipelines Replacement at Plant Nos.1 and 2 Black&Veatch 1/21/2019 $271,964 $0 $271,964
FE18-19 12KV Distribution Center B and East RAS Pump Station Roof Replacement HDR Engineering,Inc. 09/16/2019 $74,771 $0 $74,771
FE18-15 Plant Boiler System Relief at Plant No.2 IDS Group,Inc. 10/22/2019 $23,299 $0 $23,299
FR2-0013 Trickling Filter Sludge Pump Room Exhaust Fan Relocation at Plant No.2 AECOM 11/6/2019 $75,120 $0 $75,120
FE18-14 Plant Water Pipeline Replacement in Kinnison,Lindstrom,and Scott Tunnels at Plant Dudek 11/6/2019 $108,308 $0 $108,308
No.2
FE18-16 Truck Loading Basement Drain Modifications at Plant No.1 GHD,Inc. 12/4/2019 $70,130 $0 $70,130
P1-135 Digester Ferric Chloride Piping Replacement at Plant No.1 Dudek 2/19/2020 $127,174 $0 $127,174
FE18-13 Redhill Relief Sewer Relocation at State Route 55 GHD,Inc. 3/27/2020 $168,612 $0 $168,612
Total $2,095,113 $125,632 $2,220,745
"`" SA"" /°a ORANGE COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT
Capital Improvement Program
Contract Performance Report
For the period ending March 31, 2020
TM1,s THE E
PART 3 — MASTER BUDGET PROJECTS
The Board-adopted budget for Fiscal Years 2018-19 and 2019-20 includes master
program budgets that allow staff to more quickly initiate, execute, and manage smaller
projects that fit within the scope of a particular program. The projects chartered under
these program budgets are referred to as sub-projects and are managed to the same
standards as projects specifically listed in the adopted budget. A status table for each of
these programs listing the sub-projects is attached.
Master Program Title Status Table
Planning Studies Program Table 5
Research Program Table 6
Small Construction Projects Program Table 7
Information Technology Capital Program Table 8
Operations & Maintenance Capital Program Table 9
Page 10 of 16
Capital Improvement Program Contract Performance Report
for Quarter Ending 03/31/2020
Table 5-Planning Studies Status Report
Project Number Project Name Status Allocated Budget
PS15-02 Edinger Pump Station Rehabilitation Study Active $ 971,000
PS15-06 Seismic Evaluation of Structures at Plant Nos.1 and 2 Active $ 3,860,000
PS15-08 Collections Capacity Evaluation Study Active $ 3,682,000
PS15-10 2017 Facilities Master Plan Active $ 3,850,000
PS16-01 Stormwater Master Plan Active $ 1,415,700
PS16-02 SCE Feed Reliability Improvements Study Active $ 293,000
PS17-03 Active Fault Location Study at Plant No.2 Active $ 1,300,000
PS17-08 CEQA-Facilities Master Plan Active $ 1,170,000
PS17-10 Emergency Overflow Weirs,Wing Wall Structural and Geotechnical Investigations Active $ 465,000
PS18-01 Asset Management Plan Development Active $ 420,000
PS18-05 Plant No.2 Future Site Plan Development Active $ 217,000
PS18-06 Go/No-Go Lights and Signage Active $ 495,000
PS18-09 Ocean Outfall Condition Assessment and Scoping Study Active $ 3,340,000
PS18-11 ETAP Model Updates for Plant Nos 1 and 2 Active $ 553,000
PS19-01 Digester 6 Pipe Stress Analysis at Plant No.1 Active $ 45,000
PS19-02 Circular Primary Clarifier Replacement Phasing Study at Plant No 1 Active $ 53,000
Grand Total $ 22,129,700
Number of Chartered Projects 16
Board Approved Program Budget $ 28,652,000
Remaining Unallocated Budget $ 6,522,300
Page 11 of 16
Capital Improvement Program Contract Performance Report
for Quarter Ending 03/31/2020
Table 6- Research Program Status Report
Project Number Project Name Status Allocated Budget
RE17-01 Operational Research Technical Support FY18-19 Active $ 650,000
RE17-02 Biogas Scrubber Evaluation Active $ 865,000
RE17-03 Reliant Wet Well Wizard Test Closed $ 45,013
RE17-04 AquaNereda Aerobic Granular Sludge Process Active $ 242,000
RE17-05 Organica FCR Process Active $ 242,000
RE17-06 TWAS Pump Reliability Improvement Trials at Plant No.2 Closed $ 10,159
RE17-07 Super Oxygenation System Research at Seal Beach Pump Station Closed $ 80,000
RE18-01 Trickling Filter Bleach Test at Plant No.1 Active $ 140,000
RE18-02 Protein Matrix Demonstration Study at Plant No 1 Active $ 310,000
Grand Total $ 2,584,172
Number of Chartered Projects 9
Board Approved Program Budget $ 8,500,000
Remaining Unallocated Budget $ 5,915,828
Page 12 of 16
Capital Improvement Program Contract Performance Report
for Quarter Ending 03/31/2020
Table 7-Small Construction Projects Program Status Report
Project Number Project Name Status Allocated Budget
FE10-21 Area 02 Craig Regional Park Manhole Improvements Active $ 1,358,999
FE14-05 Plant No.1 Fleet Services UST Leak Remediation Active $ 1,487,311
FE15-07 Secondary Treatment and Plant Water VFD Replacement at Plant 1 Active $ 3,319,600
FE15-10 East Lido Force Main Rehabilitation Active $ 2,228,000
FE16-06 Fuel Cell Facilities Demolition Active $ 900,000
FE16-10 East Basin Distribution Box Repair Active $ 1,021,960
FE16-11 Lane Channel Crossing Active $ 500,000
FE16-14 Slater Pump Station Valve Replacements Active $ 1,050,000
FE17-01 Carbon Canyon Pipeline Sag Repairs Active $ 783,000
FE17-03 Battery Storage System at Plant No.1 Active $ 571,000
FE17-05 Plant 1 ICS Network Extension Active $ 950,000
FE18-06 CenGen Instrument Air Compressors Replacement at Plant No.1 and No.2 Active $ 1,450,000
FE18-08 West Trunk Bypass Sewer Realignment Active $ 98,000
FE18-11 Headworks Explosive Gas Monitoring Systems at Plant No.1 and No.2 Active $ 335,000
FE18-12 Erosion Control at Santa Ana River and Hamilton Ave Active $ 245,000
FE18-13 Redhill Relief Sewer Relocation at State Route 55 Active $ 1,540,000
FE18-14 Plant Water Pipeline Replacement in Kinnison,Lindstrom,and Scott Tunnels at Active $ 1,425,000
Plant No.2
FE18-15 Plant Boiler System Relief at Plant No.2 Active $ 180,000
FE18-16 Truck Loading Basement Drain Modifications at Plant No.1 Active $ 440,000
FE18-17 Trunkline Sampler Power Feed at Plant No 2 Active $ 160,000
FE18-18 Portable Generator Connector at Lido Pump Station Active $ 106,000
FE18-19 12KV Distribution B and East RAS Pump Station Roofing Replacement Active $ 988,000
FE18-20 Blower Building No.1 Air Compressors at Plant No.1 Active $ 1,200,000
FE19-01 Pump Station Portable Generator Connectors Active $ 1,990,000
FE19-02 Cengen Plant Water Pipe Replacement at Plant No.1 Active $ 825,000
FE19-04 Sunflower Pump Replacement at Plant No.1 Active $ 6,300,000
FE19-03 Trickling Filter Sludge and Scum Pumps Replacement at Plant No.1 Active $ 700,000
FE19-05 Engineering Trailer B Car Chargers at Plant No.1 Active $ 12,000
FE19-06 EPSA Motor Cooling Improvements at Plant No.2 Active $ 403,000
Grand Total $ 32,566,870
Total Chartered Projects 29
Board Approved Program Budget $ 53,250,000
Remaining Unallocated Budget $ 20,683,130
Page 13 of 16
Capital Improvement Program Contract Performance Report
for Quarter Ending 03/31/2020
Table 8- Information Technology Capital Program Status Report
Project Number Project Name Status Allocated Budget
IT16-03 Plant 2 Internet Connection Active $ 50,000
IT16-05 Plant 2 Radio Repeater Upgrade Closed $ 35,000
IT16-06 Network Equipment 2016-17 Closed $ 44,302
IT16-07 Server Replacement and Obsolescence Closed $ 337,332
IT16-08 IT Security 2016-17 Active $ 162,000
IT16-09 iPACS Enhancements Active $ 85,000
IT16-10 LIMS Compliance Improv Project Active $ 754,800
IT16-11 Business Continuity Plan Active $ 140,000
IT17-01 VMWare Active $ 800,000
IT17-02 Upgrade Active Directory Directory to 2016 Active $ 56,000
IT17-03 Upgrade ShoreTel System Server Active $ 190,000
IT17-04 PCllmprovements Closed $ 131,093
IT17-05 Conference Room Monitor Upgrade Active $ 75,686
IT17-06 Printer Obsolescence Active $ 350,000
IT17-07 Safety Management Suite Active $ 106,000
IT17-08 Perimeter Physical Security Im Closed $ 170,077
IT17-09 MYOCSD Redesign Closed $ 170,077
IT17-10 Electronic Operator Round Form Active $ 45,000
IT17-11 P2 Radio Repeater Closed $ 170,077
IT17-12 Sever/Network Power Improvements Active $ 90,000
IT17-13 Graphric Workstations for PAO Closed $ 15,000
IT17-14 Specialized Application Programing&Support Active $ 600,000
IT17-15 Data Storage Replac/Obsolescens Active $ 600,000
IT18-02 Fleet Management Information System Active $ 250,000
IT18-03 Timecard Systems Upgrade Active $ 150,000
IT18-04 Conference Rooms Audio System Replacement Active $ 90,000
IT18-05 Trusted System Document Management Active $ 100,000
IT18-06 Server Replacement and Obsolescence FY18/19-19/20 Active $ 900,000
IT18-07 Network Equipment FY18/19-19/20 Active $ 850,000
IT18-09 Records Management Information System Active $ 100,000
IT18-10 Board Services Management System Active $ 60,000
IT18-11 IT Security Budget 2018-2019 Active $ 150,000
Grand Total $ 7,827,444
Total Chartered Project 32
Board Approved Program Budget $ 10,000,000
Remaining Unallocated Budget $ 2,172,556
Page 14 of 16
Capital Improvement Program Contract Performance Report
for Quarter Ending 03/31/2020
Table 9-Operations& Maintenance Capital Program Status Report
Project Number Project Name Status Allocated Budget
FR00001 SALS Hidrostal Pump Active $ 212,268
FR00002 Chopper Pump at Dig P P2 Active $ 212,268
FR00008 Rag Bin Ramp Retrofit Active $ 33,038
FR00011 Westside Impeller/Line Replacement Active $ 108,368
SC16-01 Maint.Storage Area Tool Cage Active $ 12,000
SC17-01 CENGEN#1 Elevator Rehab Active $ 12,000
SC17-02 P1 CenGen Plant Water Piping Rehabilitation Active $ 250,000
SC17-03 CenGen Oil Filter Platform Active $ 260,000
SC17-04 P1 CenGen 12KV Circuit Breaker Replacement Active $ 220,000
SC17-05 Hidrostal Pump-TEFC Close Coupled Motor#2(Pump for SALS) Active $ 261,260
SC17-06 P1 Lab UPS System Replacement Active $ 290,294
SC18-01 P1 Primary Clarifier Fall Protection Improvements Active $ 50,000
SC18-02 Joint Cen Gen Oil Centrifuge Heater&Controls Rehabilitation(MP-18) Active $ 120,000
SC18-03 P1 SALS Main Duty Pump&Motor and Installation-Remaining 2(MP-524) Active $ 500,000
SC18-04 Edinger UPS Replacement(MP-444) Active $ 15,000
SC18-05 P1 Laboratory HVAC Boiler Burner Replacement At Plant No.1 Active $ 400,461
SC18-06 Pump Station Bypass Parts-Procurement(MP-426) Active $ 500,000
SC18-08 MacArthur Pump Station-FM Valve Replacement Active $ 55,109
SC18-09 Admin Bldg UPS System Replacement Active $ 185,000
SC18-10 P2 South Scrubber Complex Bleach Pump Turndown(MP-420) Active $ 44,900
Grand Total $ 3,697,066
Total Chartered Projects 20
Board Approved Program Budget $ 15,622,000
Remaining Unallocated Budget $ 11,880,034
Page 15 of 16
ORANGE COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT
Capital Improvement Program
Contract Performance Report
9ojEcrTN6 THE EN�\Ppa��� For the period ending March 31, 2020
PART 4 — SUPPLEMENTAL ENGINEERING SERVICES CONTRACT
In May 2016, the Sanitation District Board of Directors approved a $41 million
professional services agreement with Jacobs Project Management Co. to provide
supplemental engineering and support staff services for a four-year term with the option
of three one-year renewals. The benefits of using a supplemental engineering services
contract, as opposed to hiring full-time staff or limited-term employees, include rapid
mobilization of highly skilled/technical staff, flexibility to change the mix of staff positions
on an immediate and as-needed basis, the ability to reduce staff as workloads decrease,
access to technical experts to support special tasks, and access to staff with wastewater
project experience.
A status table for the supplemental engineering services contract summary is attached
under Table 10, and the supplemental engineering services labor summary can be
found under Table 11 .
Table 10—Supplemental Engineering Services Contract Status
Total Fees Time
Contract $41,000,000 86 months 111
Actuals to Date $19,987,641 49% 47 months 48%
Remaining $21,012,359 51% 39 months 52%
111 Assuming three 1-year extensions
Table 11 -Supplemental Engineering Services Labor Summary
This Quarter Inception to Date
Labor Hours 8,519 149,061
Full Time Equivalents 18.9 21.1
Labor Costs (no expenses) $1,133,618 $19,568,496
Average Hourly Rate $133 $131
Page 16 of 16
oJ�jV SAN17gTO9 Orange Count Sanitation District Administration Building
5� o, g � 10844 Ellis Avenue
2 9 Fountain Valley, CA 92708
OPERATIONS COMMITTEE (714)593 7433
9oTFCTN0 THE ENVQ����2
Agenda Report
File #: 2020-1044 Agenda Date: 6/3/2020 Agenda Item No: 3.
FROM: James D. Herberg, General Manager
Originator: Rob Thompson, Assistant General Manager
SUBJECT:
TOSHIBA 12KV CIRCUIT BREAKER PURCHASE
GENERAL MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION
RECOMMENDATION: Recommend to the Board of Directors to:
A. Award a Purchase Order Contract to Superior Electric Motor Services for the purchase of eight
Toshiba HVK 12kV circuit breakers for Plant No. 1 Electrical Distribution System, per
Specification No. E-2020-116213D, for a total amount not to exceed $195,072, including sales
tax and freight; and
B. Approve a contingency of $9,754 (5%).
BACKGROUND
The Orange County Sanitation District (Sanitation District) Plant No. 1 Power Building 5 12 kV circuit
breakers are over 20 years old and have reached the end of their useful life. The Toshiba VK type 1
circuit breakers currently in service are obsolete and no longer supported nor repairable by Toshiba's
field service repair shop. Replacement parts are also not available. Toshiba redesigned the circuit
breakers and changed their designation to HVK. The Toshiba HVK circuit breakers are the only
circuit breakers compatible with 12 kV switchgear in Power Building 5.
RELEVANT STANDARDS
• Protect Orange County Sanitation District assets
• Maintain a proactive asset management program
• Sustain 1, 5, 20-year planning horizons
• 24/7/365 treatment plant reliability
PROBLEM
Toshiba model VK circuit breakers have reached the end of their useful life. Preventive maintenance
performed identified contact wear at their maximum allowable limit. Toshiba no longer supports
repair services because parts are unavailable for these circuit breakers.
Orange County Sanitation District Page 1 of 3 Printed on 5/26/2020
powered by LegistarTM
File #: 2020-1044 Agenda Date: 6/3/2020 Agenda Item No: 3.
PROPOSED SOLUTION
Competitively bid and subsequently approve a purchase order to the lowest responsive and
responsible bidder, for the purchase of eight new Toshiba HVK 12 kV circuit breakers for Plant No. 1
Power Building 5.
TIMING CONCERNS
The replacement of 12 kV circuit breakers are required for reliably switching power to the Plant No. 1
Digester Facilities. A delay in procurement may impact the ability to switch power from multiple
sources due to risk of a circuit breaker failure which impacts reliability for processing solids.
RAMIFICATIONS OF NOT TAKING ACTION
Failure to act increases the risk of circuit breaker failure resulting in a disruption of power distribution
throughout Plant No. 1, impacting process and our ability to treat wastewater.
PRIOR COMMITTEE/BOARD ACTIONS
N/A
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
Six bids were received. Below are the responsive bidders and their corresponding bids plus
additional sales tax. The lowest responsive and responsible bidder is Superior Electric Motor
Services.
Bidder Amount of Bid Plus Sales Tax
Superior Electric Motor Services $195,071.40
Turtle & Hughes $200,535.00
Romac Supply $201,405.00
Sulzer EMS $212,527.95
CHW Enterprises, Inc. $227,191.80
B&H International $247,478.68
CEQA
N/A
FINANCIAL CONSIDERATIONS
This request complies with authority levels of the Sanitation District's Purchasing Ordinance. This
recommendation will be funded under the Repair and Maintenance line item for the Operations and
Maintenance Department (Budget Update Fiscal Year 2019-20, Page 47). The available funding is
sufficient for this action.
Orange County Sanitation District Page 2 of 3 Printed on 5/26/2020
powered by LegistarTM
File #: 2020-1044 Agenda Date: 6/3/2020 Agenda Item No: 3.
Date of Approval Contract Amount Contingency
06/24/2020 $195,072 $9,754 (5%)
ATTACHMENT
The following attachment(s) may be viewed on-line at the OCSD website (www.ocsd.com) with the complete agenda
package:
N/A
RM:iq:ab:gc
Orange County Sanitation District Page 3 of 3 Printed on 5/26/2020
powered by LegistarTM
oJ�V SAN17gTO9 Orange Count Sanitation District Administration Building
5� o, g � 10844 Ellis Avenue
2 9 Fountain Valley, CA 92708
OPERATIONS COMMITTEE (714)593 7433
9oTFCTN0 THE ENVQ����2
Agenda Report
File #: 2020-1077 Agenda Date: 6/3/2020 Agenda Item No: 4.
FROM: James D. Herberg, General Manager
Originator: Kathy Millea, Director of Engineering
SUBJECT:
12KV DISTRIBUTION CENTER B AND EAST RAS PUMP STATION ROOFING REPLACEMENT,
PROJECT NO. FE18-19R
GENERAL MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION
RECOMMENDATION: Recommend to the Board of Directors to:
A. Receive and file Bid Tabulations and Recommendation for O'Connell Engineering &
Construction, Inc. for 12kV Distribution Center B and East RAS Pump Station Roofing
Replacement, Project No. FE18-19R;
B. Award a Construction Contract to O'Connell Engineering & Construction, Inc. for 12kV
Distribution Center B and East RAS Pump Station Roofing Replacement, Project No. FE18-
19R, for a total amount not to exceed $674,800; and
C. Approve a contingency of $67,480 (10%).
BACKGROUND
The 12kV Distribution Center B and East RAS Pump Station buildings provide electrical power to
critical operating facilities at the Orange County Sanitation District (Sanitation District) Plant No. 2.
RELEVANT STANDARDS
• Comply with California Public Contract Code Section 20103.8, award construction contract to
lowest responsive, responsible bidder
• Maintain a proactive asset management program
• Protect Orange County Sanitation District assets
PROBLEM
The 12kV Distribution Center B and East RAS Pump Station buildings were built in 1977 and are
currently experiencing roof leaks. Staff has been protecting electrical equipment using temporary
measures.
Orange County Sanitation District Page 1 of 3 Printed on 5/26/2020
powered by LegistarTM
File #: 2020-1077 Agenda Date: 6/3/2020 Agenda Item No: 4.
PROPOSED SOLUTION
Award 12kV Distribution Center B and East RAS Pump Station Roofing Replacement, Project No.
FE18-19R. This project will replace the roofing on two buildings, repair cracks on the concrete roof
structure, and other related improvements.
TIMING CONCERNS
Delaying the construction contract will directly lengthen the time that a leaking roof could cause
damage to electrical equipment.
RAMIFICATIONS OF NOT TAKING ACTION
Electrical equipment will continue to be at risk of damage.
PRIOR COMMITTEE/BOARD ACTIONS
April 2020 - The Board of Directors rejected the single low bid received as non-responsive and
authorized the Purchasing Manager to conduct a Negotiated Procurement for a construction contract
for 12kV Distribution B and East RAS Pump Station Roofing Replacement, Project No. FE 18-19, in
accordance with Purchasing Ordinance No. OCSD-52.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
The Sanitation District advertised 12kV Distribution Center B and East RAS Pump Station Roofing
Replacement, Project No. FE18-19, for bids on January 10, 2020. A single, sealed bid was received
on February 13, 2020. After evaluation, the bid was found to be non-responsive. In April 2020, the
Board of Directors rejected the bid as non-responsive and authorized the Purchasing Manager to
conduct a Negotiated Procurement.
On April 24, 2020, the Sanitation District requested bids from four contractors and two sealed bids
were received on May 7, 2020. A summary of the bid opening follows:
Engineer's Estimate $662,100
Bidder Amount of Bid
O'Connell Engineering & Construction, Inc. $674,800
W.M. Lyles Co. $711,000
CEQA
The project is exempt from CEQA under the Class 1 categorical exemptions set forth in California
Code of Regulations Section 15301 because the project involves repairs, replacement, and or minor
alteration of existing facilities involving no expansion of use or capacity. A Notice of Exemption will
be filed with the OC Clerk-Recorder after the Sanitation District's Board of Directors approves the
construction contract.
Orange County Sanitation District Page 2 of 3 Printed on 5/26/2020
powered by LegistarTM
File #: 2020-1077 Agenda Date: 6/3/2020 Agenda Item No: 4.
FINANCIAL CONSIDERATIONS
This request complies with authority levels of the Sanitation District's Purchasing Ordinance. This
item has been budgeted (Budget Update, FY 2019-20, Appendix , Page A-8, Small Construction
Projects Program, Project M-FE) and the budget is sufficient for the recommended action.
ATTACHMENT
The following attachment(s) may be viewed on-line at the OCSD website (www.ocsd.com) with the complete agenda
package:
• Construction Contract
Orange County Sanitation District Page 3 of 3 Printed on 5/26/2020
powered by LegistarT"
P T
CO C REEMENT
C-CA-033020
TABLE OF CONTENTS
CONTRACT AGREEMENT
SECTION - 1 GENERAL CONDITIONS.................................................................1
SECTION -2 MATERIALS AND LABOR................................................................4
SECTION - 3 PROJECT ........................................................................................4
SECTION -4 PLANS AND SPECIFICATONS........................................................5
SECTION - 5 TIME OF COMMENCEMENT AND COMPLETION..........................5
SECTION - 6 TIME IS OF THE ESSENCE ............................................................5
SECTION - 7 EXCUSABLE DELAYS.....................................................................6
SECTION - 8 EXTRA WORK.................................................................................6
SECTION - 9 CHANGES IN PROJECT..................................................................7
SECTION - 10 LIQUIDATED DAMAGES FOR DELAY............................................7
SECTION - 11 CONTRACT PRICE AND METHOD OF PAYMENT.........................7
SECTION - 12 SUBSTITUTION OF SECURITIES IN LIEU OF RETENTION OF
FUNDS.............................................................................................9
SECTION - 13 COMPLETION..................................................................................9
SECTION - 14 CONTRACTOR'S EMPLOYEES COMPENSATION.......................10
SECTION - 15 SURETY BONDS...........................................................................12
SECTION - 16 INSURANCE ..................................................................................13
SECTION - 17 RISK AND INDEMNIFICATION......................................................22
SECTION - 18 TERMINATION...............................................................................22
SECTION - 19 WARRANTY...................................................................................22
SECTION -20 ASSIGNMENT................................................................................23
SECTION -21 RESOLUTION OF DISPUTES........................................................23
SECTION -22 SAFETY & HEALTH.......................................................................24
SECTION -23 NOTICES .......................................................................................24
C-CA-033020
CONTRACT AGREEMENT
ORANGE COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT
PROJECT NO. FE18-19R
12KV DISTRIBUTION CENTER B AND EAST RAS PUMP STATION ROOF REPLACEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into, to be effective, this , by and between ,
hereinafter referred to as "CONTRACTOR" and the Orange County Sanitation District,
hereinafter referred to as "OCSD".
WITNESSETH
That for and in consideration of the promises and agreements hereinafter made and exchanged,
OCSD and CONTRACTOR agree as follows:
SECTION — 1 GENERAL CONDITIONS
CONTRACTOR certifies and agrees that all the terms, conditions and obligations of the
Contract Documents as hereinafter defined, the location of the job site, and the conditions under
which the Work is to be performed have been thoroughly reviewed, and enters into this Contract
based upon CONTRACTOR's investigation of all such matters and is in no way relying upon
any opinions or representations of OCSD. It is agreed that this Contract represents the entire
agreement. It is further agreed that the Contract Documents are each incorporated into this
Contract by reference, with the same force and effect as if the same were set forth at length
herein, and that CONTRACTOR and its Subcontractors, if any, will be and are bound by any
and all of said Contract Documents insofar as they relate in any part or in any way, directly or
indirectly, to the Work covered by this Contract.
A. Contract Documents Order of Precedence
"Contract Documents" refers to those documents identified in the definition of"Contract
Documents" in the General Conditions — Definitions.
C-CA-033020
PROJECT NO. FE18-19R
12KV DISTRIBUTION CENTER B AND EAST RAS PUMP STATION ROOF REPLACEMENT
Page 1 of 25
1. In the event of a conflict between one Contract Document and any of the other
Contract Documents, the provisions in the document highest in precedence shall be
controlling. The order of precedence of the Contract Documents is as follows:
a. Supplemental Agreements—the last in time being the first in precedence
b. Addenda issued prior to the date for submittal of Bids—the last in time being the
first in precedence
c. Contract Agreement
d. Permits and other regulatory requirements
e. Special Provisions
f. General Conditions (GC)
g. Notice Inviting Bids and Instruction to Bidders
h. Geotechnical Baseline Report (GBR), if attached as a Contract Document
i. Plans and Specifications— in these documents the order of precedence shall be:
i. Specifications (Divisions 01-17)
ii. Plans
iii. General Requirements (GR)
iv. Standard Drawings and Typical Details
j. CONTRACTOR's Bid
2. In the event of a conflict between terms within an individual Contract Document, the
conflict shall be resolved by applying the following principles as appears applicable:
a. Figured dimensions on the Contract Documents shall govern. Dimensions not
specified shall be as directed by the ENGINEER. Details not shown or
specified shall be the same as similar parts that are shown or specified, or as
directed. Full-size details shall take precedence over scale Drawings as to
C-CA-033020
PROJECT NO. FE18-19R
12KV DISTRIBUTION CENTER B AND EAST RAS PUMP STATION ROOF REPLACEMENT
Page 2 of 25
shape and details of construction. Specifications shall govern as to material
and workmanship.
b. The Contract Documents calling for the higher quality material or workmanship
shall prevail. Materials or Work described in words, which so applied, have a
well known technical or trade meaning shall be deemed to refer to such
recognized standards. In the event of any discrepancy between any Drawings
and the figures thereon, the figures shall be taken as correct.
C. Scale Drawings, full-size details, and Specifications are intended to be fully
complementary and to agree. Should any discrepancy between Contract
Documents come to the CONTRACTOR's attention, or should an error occur in
the efforts of others, which affect the Work, the CONTRACTOR shall notify the
ENGINEER, in writing, at once. In the event any doubts or questions arise with
respect to the true meaning of the Contract Documents, reference shall be
made to the ENGINEER whose written decision shall be final. If the
CONTRACTOR proceeds with the Work affected without written instructions
from the ENGINEER, the CONTRACTOR shall be fully responsible for any
resultant damage or defect.
d. Anything mentioned in the Specifications and not indicated in the Plans, or
indicated in the Plans and not mentioned in the Specifications, shall be of like
effect as if indicated and mentioned in both. In case of discrepancy in the
Plans or Specifications, the matter shall be immediately submitted to OCSD's
ENGINEER, without whose decision CONTRACTOR shall not adjust said
discrepancy save only at CONTRACTOR's own risk and expense. The
decision of the ENGINEER shall be final.
C-CA-033020
PROJECT NO. FE18-19R
12KV DISTRIBUTION CENTER B AND EAST RAS PUMP STATION ROOF REPLACEMENT
Page 3 of 25
In all matters relating to the acceptability of material, machinery or plant equipment;
classifications of material or Work; the proper execution, progress or sequence of the
Work; and quantities interpretation of the Contract Documents, the decision of the
ENGINEER shall be final and binding, and shall be a condition precedent to any payment
under the Contract, unless otherwise ordered by the Board of Directors.
B. Definitions
Capitalized terms used in this Contract are defined in the General Conditions, Definitions.
Additional terms may be defined in the Special Provisions.
SECTION —2 MATERIALS AND LABOR
CONTRACTOR shall furnish, under the conditions expressed in the Plans and Specifications, at
CONTRACTOR'S own expense, all labor and materials necessary, except such as are
mentioned in the Specifications to be furnished by OCSD, to construct and complete the
Project, in good workmanlike and substantial order. If CONTRACTOR fails to pay for labor or
materials when due, OCSD may settle such claims by making demand upon the Surety to this
Contract. In the event of the failure or refusal of the Surety to satisfy said claims, OCSD may
settle them directly and deduct the amount of payments from the Contract Price and any
amounts due to CONTRACTOR. In the event OCSD receives a stop payment notice from any
laborer or material supplier alleging non-payment by CONTRACTOR, OCSD shall be entitled to
deduct all of its costs and expenses incurred relating thereto, including but not limited to
administrative and legal fees.
SECTION — 3 PROJECT
The Project is described as:
PROJECT NO. FE18-19R
12KV DISTRIBUTION CENTER B AND EAST RAS PUMP STATION ROOF REPLACEMENT
C-CA-033020
PROJECT NO. FE18-19R
12KV DISTRIBUTION CENTER B AND EAST RAS PUMP STATION ROOF REPLACEMENT
Page 4 of 25
SECTION —4 PLANS AND SPECIFICATONS
The Work to be done is shown in a set of Plans and Specifications entitled:
PROJECT NO. FE18-19R
12KV DISTRIBUTION CENTER B AND EAST RAS PUMP STATION ROOF REPLACEMENT
Said Plans and Specifications and any revision, amendments and addenda thereto are attached
hereto and incorporated herein as part of this Contract and referred to by reference.
SECTION — 5 TIME OF COMMENCEMENT AND COMPLETION
CONTRACTOR agrees to commence the Project within 15 calendar days from the date set forth
in the "Notice to Proceed" sent by OCSD, unless otherwise specified therein and shall diligently
prosecute the Work to completion within three hundred forty (340) calendar days from the date
of the "Notice to Proceed" issued by OCSD, excluding delays caused or authorized by OCSD as
set forth in Sections 7, 8, and 9 hereof, and applicable provisions in the General Conditions.
The time for completion includes seven (7) calendar days determined by OCSD likely to be
inclement weather when CONTRACTOR will be unable to work.
SECTION — 6 TIME IS OF THE ESSENCE I
Time is of the essence of this Contract. As required by the Contract Documents,
CONTRACTOR shall prepare and obtain approval of all shop drawings, details and samples,
and do all other things necessary and incidental to the prosecution of CONTRACTOR's Work in
conformance with an approved construction progress schedule. CONTRACTOR shall
coordinate the Work covered by this Contract with that of all other contractors, subcontractors
and of OCSD, in a manner that will facilitate the efficient completion of the entire Work and
accomplish the required milestone(s), if any, by the applicable deadline(s) in accordance with
Section 5 herein. OCSD shall have the right to assert complete control of the premises on
which the Work is to be performed and shall have the right to decide the time or order in which
the various portions of the Work shall be installed or the priority of the work of subcontractors,
C-CA-033020
PROJECT NO. FE18-19R
12KV DISTRIBUTION CENTER B AND EAST RAS PUMP STATION ROOF REPLACEMENT
Page 5 of 25
and, in general, all matters representing the timely and orderly conduct of the Work of
CONTRACTOR on the premises.
SECTION — 7 EXCUSABLE DELAYS
CONTRACTOR shall only be excused for any delay in the prosecution or completion of the
Project as specifically provided in General Conditions, "Extensions for Delay", and the General
Requirements, "By CONTRACTOR or Others— Unknown Utilities during Contract Work".
Extensions of time and extra compensation arising from such excusable delays will be
determined in accordance with the General Conditions, "Extension of Time for Delay" and
"Contract Price Adjustments and Payments", and extensions of time and extra compensation as
a result of incurring undisclosed utilities will be determined in accordance with General
Requirements, "By CONTRACTOR or Others— Unknown Utilities during Contract Work".
OCSD's decision will be conclusive on all parties to this Contract.
SECTION — 8 EXTRA WORK
The Contract Price as set forth in Section 11, includes compensation for all Work performed by
CONTRACTOR, unless CONTRACTOR obtains a Change Order signed by a designated
representative of OCSD specifying the exact nature of the Extra Work and the amount of extra
compensation to be paid all as more particularly set forth in Section 9 hereof and the General
Conditions, "Request for Change (Changes at CONTRACTOR's Request)", "OWNER Initiated
Changes", and "Contract Price Adjustments and Payments".
In the event a Change Order is issued by OCSD pursuant to the Contract Documents, OCSD
shall extend the time fixed in Section 5 for completion of the Project by the number of days, if
any, reasonably required for CONTRACTOR to perform the Extra Work, as determined by
OCSD's ENGINEER. The decision of the ENGINEER shall be final.
C-CA-033020
PROJECT NO. FE18-19R
12KV DISTRIBUTION CENTER B AND EAST RAS PUMP STATION ROOF REPLACEMENT
Page 6 of 25
SECTION —9 CHANGES IN PROJECT
OCSD may at any time, without notice to any Surety, by Change Order, make any changes in
the Work within the general scope of the Contract Document, including but not limited to
changes:
1. In the Specifications (including Drawings and designs);
2. In the time, method or manner of performance of the Work;
3. In OCSD-furnished facilities, equipment, materials, services or site; or
4. Directing acceleration in the performance of the Work.
No change of period of performance or Contract Price, or any other change in the Contract
Documents, shall be binding until the Contract is modified by a fully executed Change Order.
All Change Orders shall be issued in accordance with the requirements set forth in the General
Conditions, "Request for Change (Changes at CONTRACTOR's Request)" and "OWNER
Initiated Changes".
SECTION — 10 LIQUIDATED DAMAGES FOR DELAY
Liquidated Damages shall be payable in the amounts and upon the occurrence of such events
or failure to meet such requirements or deadlines as provided in the Special Provisions,
"Liquidated Damages and Incentives."
SECTION — 11 CONTRACT PRICE AND METHOD OF PAYMENT
A. OCSD agrees to pay and the CONTRACTOR agrees to accept as full consideration for the
faithful performance of this Contract, subject to any additions or deductions as provided in
approved Change Orders, the sum of as itemized on the Attached Exhibit"A".
Upon satisfaction of the conditions precedent to payment set forth in the General
Requirements, Additional General Requirements and General Conditions (including but
not limited to Sections entitled "Mobilization Payment Requirements" and "Payment
C-CA-033020
PROJECT NO. FE18-19R
12KV DISTRIBUTION CENTER B AND EAST RAS PUMP STATION ROOF REPLACEMENT
Page 7 of 25
Itemized Breakdown of Contract Lump Sum Prices"), there shall be paid to the
CONTRACTOR an initial Net Progress Payment for mobilization. OCSD shall issue at the
commencement of the job a schedule which shows:
1. A minimum of one payment to be made to the CONTRACTOR for each successive
four (4) week period as the Work progresses, and
2. The due dates for the CONTRACTOR to submit requests for payment to meet the
payment schedule.
After the initial Net Progress Payment, and provided the CONTRACTOR submits the
request for payment prior to the end of the day required to meet the payment schedule,
the CONTRACTOR shall be paid a Net Progress Payment on the corresponding monthly
payment date set forth in the schedule.
Payments shall be made on demands drawn in the manner required by law, accompanied
by a certificate signed by the ENGINEER, stating that the Work for which payment is
demanded has been performed in accordance with the terms of the Contract Documents,
and that the amount stated in the certificate is due under the terms of the Contract.
Payment applications shall also be accompanied with all documentation, records, and
releases as required by the Contract, Exhibit A, Schedule of Prices, and General
Conditions, "Payment for Work— General". The Total amount of Progress Payments shall
not exceed the actual value of the Work completed as certified by OCSD's ENGINEER.
The processing of payments shall not be considered as an acceptance of any part of the
Work.
B. As used in this Section, the following defined terms shall have the following meanings:
C-CA-033020
PROJECT NO. FE18-19R
12KV DISTRIBUTION CENTER B AND EAST RAS PUMP STATION ROOF REPLACEMENT
Page 8 of 25
1. "Net Progress Payment" means a sum equal to the Progress Payment less the
Retention Amount and other qualified deductions (Liquidated Damages, stop
payment notices, etc.).
2. "Progress Payment" means a sum equal to:
a. the value of the actual Work completed since the commencement of the Work
as determined by OCSD;
b. plus the value of material suitably stored at the worksite, treatment plant or
approved storage yards subject to or under the control of OCSD since the
commencement of the Work as determined by OCSD;
C. less all previous Net Progress Payments;
d. less all amounts of previously qualified deductions;
e. less all amounts previously retained as Retention Amounts.
3. "Retention Amount" for each Progress Payment means the percentage of each
Progress Payment to be retained by OCSD to assure satisfactory completion of the
Contract. The amount to be retained from each Progress Payment shall be
determined as provided in the General Conditions—"Retained Funds; Substitution of
Securities."
SECTION — 12 SUBSTITUTION OF SECURITIES IN LIEU OF RETENTION OF FUNDS
Pursuant to Public Contract Code Section 22300 et seq., the CONTRACTOR may, at its sole
expense, substitute securities as provided in General Conditions—"Retained Funds;
Substitution of Securities."
SECTION — 13 COMPLETION
Final Completion and Final Acceptance shall occur at the time and in the manner specified in the
General Conditions, "Final Acceptance and Final Completion", "Final Payment" and Exhibit A-
Schedule of Prices.
C-CA-033020
PROJECT NO. FE18-19R
12KV DISTRIBUTION CENTER B AND EAST RAS PUMP STATION ROOF REPLACEMENT
Page 9 of 25
Upon receipt of all documentation, records, and releases as required by the Contract from the
CONTRACTOR, OCSD shall proceed with the Final Acceptance as specified in General
Conditions.
SECTION — 14 CONTRACTOR'S EMPLOYEES COMPENSATION
A. Davis-Bacon Act:
CONTRACTOR will pay and will require all Subcontractors to pay all employees on said
Project a salary or wage at least equal to the prevailing rate of per diem wages as
determined by the Secretary of Labor in accordance with the Davis-Bacon Act for each
craft or type of worker needed to perform the Contract. The provisions of the Davis-Bacon
Act shall apply only if the Contract is in excess of Two Thousand Dollars ($2,000.00) and
when twenty-five percent (25%) or more of the Contract is funded by federal assistance. If
the aforesaid conditions are met, a copy of the provisions of the Davis-Bacon Act to be
complied with are incorporated herein as a part of this Contract and referred to by
reference.
B. General Prevailing Rate:
OCSD has been advised by the State of California Director of Industrial Relations of its
determination of the general prevailing rate of per diem wages and the general prevailing
rate for legal holiday and overtime Work in the locality in which the Work is to be
performed for each craft or type of Work needed to execute this Contract, and copies of
the same are on file in the Office of the ENGINEER of OCSD. The CONTRACTOR
agrees that not less than said prevailing rates shall be paid to workers employed on this
public works Contract as required by Labor Code Section 1774 of the State of California.
Per California Labor Code 1773.2, OCSD will have on file copies of the prevailing rate of
per diem wages at its principal office and at each job site, which shall be made available to
any interested party upon request.
C-CA-033020
PROJECT NO. FE18-19R
12KV DISTRIBUTION CENTER B AND EAST RAS PUMP STATION ROOF REPLACEMENT
Page 10 of 25
C. Forfeiture for Violation:
CONTRACTOR shall, as a penalty to OCSD, forfeit Two Hundred Dollars ($200.00) for
each calendar day or portion thereof for each worker paid (either by the CONTRACTOR or
any Subcontractor under it) less than the prevailing rate of per diem wages as set by the
Director of Industrial Relations, in accordance with Sections 1770-1780 of the California
Labor Code for the Work provided for in this Contract, all in accordance with Section 1775
of the Labor Code of the State of California.
D. Apprentices:
Sections 1777.5, 1777.6, 1777.7 of the Labor Code of the State of California, regarding
the employment of apprentices are applicable to this Contract and the CONTRACTOR
shall comply therewith if the prime contract involves Thirty Thousand Dollars ($30,000.00)
or more.
E. Workday:
In the performance of this Contract, not more than eight (8) hours shall constitute a day's
work, and the CONTRACTOR shall not require more than eight (8) hours of labor in a day
from any person employed by him hereunder except as provided in paragraph (B) above.
CONTRACTOR shall conform to Article 3, Chapter 1, Part 7 (Section 1810 et seq.) of the
Labor Code of the State of California and shall forfeit to OCSD as a penalty, the sum of
Twenty-five Dollars ($25.00) for each worker employed in the execution of this Contract by
CONTRACTOR or any Subcontractor for each calendar day during which any worker is
required or permitted to labor more than eight (8) hours in any one calendar day and forty
(40) hours in any one week in violation of said Article. CONTRACTOR shall keep an
accurate record showing the name and actual hours worked each calendar day and each
calendar week by each worker employed by CONTRACTOR in connection with the
Project.
C-CA-033020
PROJECT NO. FE18-19R
12KV DISTRIBUTION CENTER B AND EAST RAS PUMP STATION ROOF REPLACEMENT
Page 11 of 25
F. Registration; Record of Wages; Inspection:
CONTRACTOR shall comply with the registration requirements of Labor Code Section 1725.5.
Pursuant to Labor Code Section 1771.4, the Work is subject to compliance monitoring by the
California Department of Industrial Relations. CONTRACTOR shall maintain accurate payroll
records and shall submit payroll records to the Labor Commissioner pursuant to Labor Code
Section 1771.4(a)(3). Penalties for non-compliance with the requirements of Section 1776 may
be deducted from progress payments per Section 1776.
CONTRACTOR shall comply with the job site notices posting requirements established by
the Labor Commissioner per Title 8, California Code of Regulations Section 16461(e).
SECTION — 15 SURETY BONDS
CONTRACTOR shall, before entering upon the performance of this Contract, furnish Bonds
approved by OCSD's General Counsel —one in the amount of one hundred percent (100%) of
the Contract amount, to guarantee the faithful performance of the Work, and the other in the
amount of one hundred percent (100%) of the Contract amount to guarantee payment of all
claims for labor and materials furnished. As changes to the Contract occur via approved
Change Orders, the CONTRACTOR shall assure that the amounts of the Bonds are adjusted to
maintain 100% of the Contract Price. This Contract shall not become effective until such Bonds
are supplied to and approved by OCSD. Bonds must be issued by a Surety authorized by the
State Insurance Commissioner to do business in California. The Performance Bond shall
remain in full force and effect through the warranty period, as specified in Section 19 below. All
Bonds required to be submitted relating to this Contract must comply with California Code of
Civil Procedure Section 995.630. Each Bond shall be executed in the name of the Surety
insurer under penalty of perjury, or the fact of execution of each Bond shall be duly
acknowledged before an officer authorized to take and certify acknowledgments, and either one
of the following conditions shall be satisfied:
C-CA-033020
PROJECT NO. FE18-19R
12KV DISTRIBUTION CENTER B AND EAST RAS PUMP STATION ROOF REPLACEMENT
Page 12 of 25
A. A copy of the transcript or record of the unrevoked appointment, power of attorney, by-
laws, or other instrument, duly certified by the proper authority and attested by the seal of
the insurer entitling or authorizing the person who executed the Bond to do so for and on
behalf of the insurer, is on file in the Office of the County Clerk of the County of Orange; or
B. A copy of a valid power of attorney is attached to the Bond.
SECTION — 16 INSURANCE
CONTRACTOR shall purchase and maintain, for the duration of the Contract, insurance against
claims for injuries to persons, or damages to property which may arise from or in connection
with the performance of the Work hereunder, and the results of that Work by CONTRACTOR,
its agents, representatives, employees, or Subcontractors, in amounts equal to the
requirements set forth below. CONTRACTOR shall not commence Work under this Contract
until all insurance required under this Section is obtained in a form acceptable to OCSD, nor
shall CONTRACTOR allow any Subcontractor to commence Work on a subcontract until all
insurance required of the Subcontractor has been obtained. CONTRACTOR shall maintain all
of the foregoing insurance coverages in force through the point at which the Work under this
Contract is fully completed and accepted by OCSD pursuant to the provisions of the General
Conditions, "Final Acceptance and Final Completion". Furthermore, CONTRACTOR shall
maintain all of the foregoing insurance coverages in full force and effect throughout the warranty
period, commencing on the date of Final Acceptance. The requirement for carrying the
foregoing insurance shall not derogate from the provisions for indemnification of OCSD by
CONTRACTOR under Section 17 of this Contract. Notwithstanding nor diminishing the
obligations of CONTRACTOR with respect to the foregoing, CONTRACTOR shall subscribe for
and maintain in full force and effect during the life of this Contract, inclusive of all changes to the
Contract Documents made in accordance with the provisions of the General Conditions,
"Request for Change (Changes at CONTRACTOR's Request)" and/or"OWNER Initiated
C-CA-033020
PROJECT NO. FE18-19R
12KV DISTRIBUTION CENTER B AND EAST RAS PUMP STATION ROOF REPLACEMENT
Page 13 of 25
Changes", the following insurance in amounts not less than the amounts specified. OCSD
reserves the right to amend the required limits of insurance commensurate with the
CONTRACTOR's risk at any time during the course of the Project. No vehicles may enter
OCSD premises/worksite without possessing the required insurance coverage.
CONTRACTOR's insurance shall also comply with all insurance requirements prescribed by
agencies from whom permits shall be obtained for the Work and any other third parties from
whom third party agreements are necessary to perform the Work (collectively, the "Third
Parties"), The Special Provisions may list such requirements and sample forms and
requirements from such Third Parties may be included in an attachment to the General
Requirements. CONTRACTOR bears the responsibility to discover and comply with all
requirements of Third Parties, including meeting specific insurance requirements, that are
necessary for the complete performance of the Work. To the extent there is a conflict between
the Third Parties' insurance requirements and those set forth by OCSD herein, the
requirement(s) providing the more protective coverage for both OSCD and the Third Parties
shall control and be purchased and maintained by CONTRACTOR.
A. Limits of Insurance
1. General Liability: Two Million Dollars ($2,000,000) per occurrence and a general
aggregate limit of Four Million Dollars ($4,000,000)for bodily injury, personal injury
and property damage. Coverage shall include each of the following:
a. Premises-Operations.
b. Products and Completed Operations, with limits of at least Two Million Dollars
($2,000,000) per occurrence and a general aggregate limit of Four Million
Dollars ($4,000,000)which shall be in effect at all times during the warranty
period set forth in the Warranty section herein, and as set forth in the General
Conditions, "Warranty (CONTRACTOR's Guarantee)", plus any additional
C-CA-033020
PROJECT NO. FE18-19R
12KV DISTRIBUTION CENTER B AND EAST RAS PUMP STATION ROOF REPLACEMENT
Page 14 of 25
extension or continuation of time to said warranty period that may be required
or authorized by said provisions.
C. Broad Form Property Damage, expressly including damage arising out of
explosion, collapse, or underground damage.
d. Contractual Liability, expressly including the indemnity provisions assumed
under this Contract.
e. Separation of Insured Clause, providing that coverage applies separately to
each insured, except with respect to the limits of liability.
f. Independent CONTRACTOR's Liability.
To the extent first dollar coverage, including defense of any claim, is not
available to OCSD or any other additional insured because of any SIR,
deductible, or any other form of self insurance, CONTRACTOR is obligated to
assume responsibility of insurer until the deductible, SIR or other condition of
insurer assuming its defense and/or indemnity has been satisfied.
CONTRACTOR shall be responsible to pay any deductible or SIR.
g. If a crane will be used, the General Liability insurance will be endorsed to add
Riggers Liability coverage or its equivalent to cover the usage of the crane and
exposures with regard to the crane operators, riggers and others involved in
using the crane.
h. If divers will be used, the General Liability insurance will be endorsed to cover
marine liability or its equivalent to cover the usage of divers.
2. Automobile Liability: The CONTRACTOR shall maintain a policy of Automobile
Liability Insurance on a comprehensive form covering all owned, non-owned, and
hired automobiles, trucks, and other vehicles providing the following minimum limits
of liability coverage:
C-CA-033020
PROJECT NO. FE18-19R
12KV DISTRIBUTION CENTER B AND EAST RAS PUMP STATION ROOF REPLACEMENT
Page 15 of 25
Either (1) a combined single limit of One Million Dollars ($1,000,000) and a general
aggregate limit of One Million Dollars ($1,000,000) for bodily injury, personal injury
and property damage;
Or alternatively, (2) One Million Dollars ($1,000,000) per person for bodily injury and
One Million Dollars ($1,000,000) per accident for property damage.
3. Umbrella Excess Liability: The minimum limits of general liability and automobile
liability insurance required, as set forth above, shall be provided for either in a single
policy of primary insurance or a combination of policies of primary and umbrella
excess coverage. Excess liability coverage shall be issued with limits of liability
which, when combined with the primary insurance, will equal the minimum limits for
general liability and automobile liability.
4. Drone Liability Insurance: If a drone will be used, drone liability insurance must be
maintained by CONTRACTOR in the amount of One Million Dollars ($1,000,000) in a
form acceptable by OCSD.
5. Worker's Compensation/Employer's Liability: CONTRACTOR shall provide such
Worker's Compensation Insurance as required by the Labor Code of the State of
California, including employer's liability with a minimum limit of One Million Dollars
($1,000,000) per accident for bodily injury or disease. If an exposure to Jones Act
liability may exist, the insurance required herein shall include coverage with regard to
Jones Act claims.
Where permitted by law, CONTRACTOR hereby waives all rights of recovery by
subrogation because of deductible clauses, inadequacy of limits of any insurance
policy, limitations or exclusions of coverage, or any other reason against OCSD, its
or their officers, agents, or employees, and any other contractor or subcontractor
C-CA-033020
PROJECT NO. FE18-19R
12KV DISTRIBUTION CENTER B AND EAST RAS PUMP STATION ROOF REPLACEMENT
Page 16 of 25
performing Work or rendering services on behalf of OCSD in connection with the
planning, development and construction of the Project. In all its insurance coverages
related to the Work, CONTRACTOR shall include clauses providing that each insurer
shall waive all of its rights of recovery by subrogation against OCSD, its or their
officers, agents, or employees, or any other contractor or subcontractor performing
Work or rendering services at the Project. Where permitted by law, CONTRACTOR
shall require similar written express waivers and insurance clauses from each of its
Subcontractors of every tier. A waiver of subrogation shall be effective as to any
individual or entity, even if such individual or entity (a) would otherwise have a duty
of indemnification, contractual or otherwise, (b) did not pay the insurance premium,
directly or indirectly, and (c) whether or not such individual or entity has an insurable
interest in the property damaged.
6. Pollution Liability Insurance: CONTRACTOR shall purchase and maintain insurance
for pollution liability covering bodily injury, property damage (including loss of use of
damaged property or property that has not been physically injured or destroyed),
cleanup costs, and defense costs (including costs and expenses for investigation,
defense, or settlement of claims). Coverage shall carry limits of at least One Million
Dollars ($1,000000) and shall apply to sudden and non-sudden pollution conditions
(including sewage spills), both at the site or needed due to migration of pollutants
from the site, resulting from the escape or release of smoke, vapors, fumes, acids,
alkalis, toxic chemicals, liquids or gases, waste materials, or other irritants,
contaminants or pollutants.
If CONTRACTOR provides coverage written on a claims-made basis, OCSD has the
right to approve or reject such coverage in its own discretion. If written on a claims-
C-CA-033020
PROJECT NO. FE18-19R
12KV DISTRIBUTION CENTER B AND EAST RAS PUMP STATION ROOF REPLACEMENT
Page 17 of 25
made basis, the CONTRACTOR warrants that any retroactive date applicable to
coverage under the policy precedes the effective date of this Contract, and that
continuous coverage will be maintained, or an extended discovery period will be
exercised, for a period of two years beginning from the time that the Project under
this Contract is completed.
7. Limits are Minimums: If CONTRACTOR maintains higher limits than the minimums
shown in this Section, OCSD requires and shall be entitled to coverage for the higher
limits maintained by the CONTRACTOR.
B. Deductibles and Self-Insured Retentions
Any deductibles or self-insured retentions must be declared to and approved by OCSD. At
the option of OCSD, either: the Insurer shall reduce or eliminate such deductibles or self-
insured retentions as respects OCSD, its Directors, officers, agents, CONSULTANTS, and
employees; or CONTRACTOR shall provide a financial guarantee satisfactory to OCSD
guaranteeing payment of losses and related investigations, claim administration, and
defense expenses.
C. Other Insurance Provisions
1. Each such policy of General Liability Insurance and Automobile Liability Insurance
shall be endorsed to contain, the following provisions:
a. OCSD, its Directors, officers, agents, CONSULTANTS, and employees, and all
public agencies from whom permits will be obtained, and their Directors,
officers, agents, and employees are hereby declared to be additional insureds
under the terms of this policy, but only with respect to the operations of
CONTRACTOR at or from any of the sites of OCSD in connection with this
Contract, or acts and omissions of the additional insured in connection with its
general supervision or inspection of said operations related to this Contract.
C-CA-033020
PROJECT NO. FE18-19R
12KV DISTRIBUTION CENTER B AND EAST RAS PUMP STATION ROOF REPLACEMENT
Page 18 of 25
b. Insurance afforded by the additional insured endorsement shall apply as
primary insurance, and other insurance maintained by OCSD shall be excess
only and not contributing with insurance provided under this policy.
2. Each insurance policy required herein shall be endorsed to state that coverage shall
not be cancelled by either party, except after thirty (30) days prior written notice by
certified mail, return receipt requested, and that coverage shall not be cancelled for
non-payment of premium except after ten (10) days prior written notice by certified
mail, return receipt requested. Should there be changes in coverage or an increase
in deductible or SIR amounts, CONTRACTOR undertakes to procure a manuscript
endorsement from its insurer giving 30 days prior notice of such an event to OCSD,
or to have its insurance broker/agent send to OCSD a certified letter describing the
changes in coverage and any increase in deductible or SIR amounts. The certified
letter must be sent Attention: Risk Management and shall be received not less than
twenty (20) days prior to the effective date of the change(s). The letter must be
signed by a Director or Officer of the broker/agent and must be on company
letterhead, and may be sent via e-mail in pdf format.
3. Coverage shall not extend to any indemnity coverage for the active negligence of
any additional insured in any case where an agreement to indemnify the additional
insured would be invalid under California Civil Code Section 2782(b).
4. If required by a public agency from whom permit(s) will be obtained, each policy of
General Liability Insurance and Automobile Liability Insurance shall be endorsed to
specify by name the public agency and its legislative members, officers, agents,
CONSULTANTS, and employees, to be additional insureds.
C-CA-033020
PROJECT NO. FE18-19R
12KV DISTRIBUTION CENTER B AND EAST RAS PUMP STATION ROOF REPLACEMENT
Page 19 of 25
D. Acceptability of Insurers
Insurers must have an "A2, or better, Policyholder's Rating, and a Financial Rating of at
least Class Vill, or better, in accordance with the most current A.M. Best Rating Guide.
OCSD recognizes that State Compensation Insurance Fund has withdrawn from
participation in the A.M. Best Rating Guide process. Nevertheless, OCSD will accept
State Compensation Insurance Fund for the required policy of worker's compensation
insurance, subject to OCSD's option, at any time during the term of this Contract, to
require a change in insurer upon twenty (20) days written notice. Further, OCSD will
require CONTRACTOR to substitute any insurer whose rating drops below the levels
herein specified. Said substitution shall occur within twenty (20) days of written notice to
CONTRACTOR by OCSD or its agent.
E. Verification of Coverage
CONTRACTOR shall furnish OCSD with original certificates and mandatory endorsements
affecting coverage. Said policies and endorsements shall conform to the requirements
herein stated. All certificates and endorsements are to be received and approved by
OCSD before Work commences. OCSD reserves the right to require complete, certified
copies of all required insurance policies, including endorsements, affecting the coverage
required by these Specifications at any time.
F. Subcontractors
CONTRACTOR shall be responsible to establish insurance requirements for any
Subcontractors hired by CONTRACTOR. The insurance shall be in amounts and types
reasonably sufficient to deal with the risk of loss involving the Subcontractor's operations
and work. OCSD and any public agency issuing permits for the Project must be named as
"Additional Insured" on any General Liability or Automobile Liability policy obtained by a
Subcontractor. The CONTRACTOR must obtain copies and maintain current versions of
C-CA-033020
PROJECT NO. FE18-19R
12KV DISTRIBUTION CENTER B AND EAST RAS PUMP STATION ROOF REPLACEMENT
Page 20 of 25
all Subcontractors' policies, Certificate of Liability and mandatory endorsements effecting
coverage. Upon request, CONTRACTOR must furnish OCSD with the above referenced
required documents.
G. Required Forms and Endorsements
1. Required ACORD Form
a. Certificate of Liability Form 25
2. Required Insurance Services Office, Inc. Endorsements (when alternative forms are
shown, they are listed in order of preference)
In the event any of the following forms are cancelled by Insurance Services Office,
Inc. (ISO), or are updated, the ISO replacement form or equivalent must be supplied.
a. Commercial General Liability Form CG-0001 10 01
b. Additional Insured Including Form CG-2010 10 01 and
Products-Completed Operations Form CG-2037 10 01
C. Waiver of Transfer of Rights of Form CG-2404 11 85; or
Recovery Against Others to Us/ Form CG-2404 10 93
Waiver of Subrogation
3. Required State Compensation Insurance Fund Endorsements
a. Waiver of Subrogation Endorsement No. 2570
b. Cancellation Notice Endorsement No. 2065
4. Additional Required Endorsements
a. Notice of Policy Termination Manuscript Endorsement
5. Pollution Liability Endorsements
There shall be a Separation of Insured Clause or endorsement, providing that
coverage applies separately to each insured, except with respect to the limits of
liability. There shall also be an endorsement or policy language containing a waiver
of subrogation rights on the part of the insurer.
C-CA-033020
PROJECT NO. FE18-19R
12KV DISTRIBUTION CENTER B AND EAST RAS PUMP STATION ROOF REPLACEMENT
Page 21 of 25
OCSD, its directors, officers, agents, CONSULTANTS and employees and all public
agencies from whom permits will be obtained as well as their directors, officers,
agents, and employees shall be included as insureds under the policy. Any
additional insured endorsement shall contain language at least as broad as the
coverage language contained in ISO form CG 20 10 11 85 or alternatively in both
CG 20 10 10 01 and CG 20 37 10 01 together.
SECTION — 17 RISK AND INDEMNIFICATION
All Work covered by this Contract done at the site of construction or in preparing or delivering
materials to the site shall be at the risk of CONTRACTOR alone. CONTRACTOR shall save,
indemnify, defend, and keep OCSD and others harmless as more specifically set forth in
General Conditions, "General Indemnification".
SECTION — 18 TERMINATION
This Contract may be terminated in whole or in part in writing by OCSD in the event of
substantial failure by the CONTRACTOR to fulfill its obligations under this Agreement, or it may
be terminated by OCSD for its convenience provided that such termination is effectuated in a
manner and upon such conditions set forth more particularly in General Conditions,
"Termination for Default" and/or"Termination for Convenience", provided that no termination
may be effected unless proper notice is provided to CONTRACTOR at the time and in the
manner provided in said General Conditions. If termination for default or convenience is
effected by OCSD, an equitable adjustment in the price provided for in this Contract shall be
made at the time and in the manner provided in the General Conditions, "Termination for
Default" and "Termination for Convenience".
SECTION — 19 WARRANTY
The CONTRACTOR agrees to perform all Work under this Contract in accordance with the
Contract Documents, including OCSD's designs, Drawings and Specifications.
C-CA-033020
PROJECT NO. FE18-19R
12KV DISTRIBUTION CENTER B AND EAST RAS PUMP STATION ROOF REPLACEMENT
Page 22 of 25
The CONTRACTOR guarantees for a period of at least one (1) year from the date of Final
Acceptance of the Work, pursuant to the General Conditions, "Final Acceptance and Final
Completion" that the completed Work is free from all defects due to faulty materials, equipment
or workmanship and that it shall promptly make whatever adjustments or corrections which may
be necessary to cure any defects, including repairs of any damage to other parts of the system
resulting from such defects. OCSD shall promptly give notice to the CONTRACTOR of
observed defects. In the event that the CONTRACTOR fails to make adjustments, repairs,
corrections or other work made necessary by such defects, OCSD may do so and charge the
CONTRACTOR the cost incurred. The CONTRACTOR's warranty shall continue as to any
corrected deficiency until the later of(1) the remainder of the original one-year warranty period;
or (2) one year after acceptance by OCSD of the corrected Work. The Performance Bond and
the Payment Bond shall remain in full force and effect through the guarantee period.
The CONTRACTOR's obligations under this clause are in addition to the CONTRACTOR's
other express or implied assurances under this Contract, including but not limited to specific
manufacturer or other extended warranties specified in the Plans and Specifications, or state
law and in no way diminish any other rights that OCSD may have against the CONTRACTOR
for faulty materials, equipment or Work.
SECTION —20 ASSIGNMENT
No assignment by the CONTRACTOR of this Contract or any part hereof, or of funds to be
received hereunder, will be recognized by OCSD unless such assignment has had prior written
approval and consent of OCSD and the Surety.
SECTION —21 RESOLUTION OF DISPUTES
OCSD and the CONTRACTOR shall comply with the provisions of California Public Contract
Code Section 20104 et. seq., regarding resolution of construction claims for any Claims which
C-CA-033020
PROJECT NO. FE18-19R
12KV DISTRIBUTION CENTER B AND EAST RAS PUMP STATION ROOF REPLACEMENT
Page 23 of 25
arise between the CONTRACTOR and OCSD, as well as all applicable dispute and Claims
provisions as set forth in the General Conditions and as otherwise required by law.
SECTION —22 SAFETY & HEALTH
CONTRACTOR shall comply with all applicable safety and health requirements mandated by
federal, state, city and/or public agency codes, permits, ordinances, regulations, and laws, as
well as these Contract Documents, including but not limited to the General Requirements,
Section entitled "Safety" and Exhibit B OCSD Safety Standards.
SECTION —23 NOTICES
Any notice required or permitted under this Contract shall be sent by certified mail, return receipt
requested, at the address set forth below. Any party whose address changes shall notify the
other party in writing.
TO OCSD: Orange County Sanitation District
10844 Ellis Avenue
Fountain Valley, California 92708-7018
Attn: Clerk of the Board
Copy to: Orange County Sanitation District
10844 Ellis Avenue
Fountain Valley, California 92708-7018
Attn: Construction Manager
Bradley R. Hogin, Esquire
Woodruff, Spradlin & Smart
555 Anton Boulevard
Suite 1200
Costa Mesa, California 92626
TO CONTRACTOR: [Contractor's Name]
[Contractor's Address]
Copy to: [Contractor's Representative's Name and Title]
[Contractor's Address]
C-CA-033020
PROJECT NO. FE18-19R
12KV DISTRIBUTION CENTER B AND EAST RAS PUMP STATION ROOF REPLACEMENT
Page 24 of 25
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Contract Agreement as the
date first hereinabove written.
CONTRACTOR:
By
Printed Name
Its
CONTRACTOR's State License No. (Expiration Date— )
OCSD: Orange County Sanitation District
By
David John Shawver
Board Chairman
By
Kelly A. Lore
Clerk of the Board
By
Ruth Zintzun
Purchasing & Contracts Manager
C-CA-033020
PROJECT NO. FE18-19R
12KV DISTRIBUTION CENTER B AND EAST RAS PUMP STATION ROOF REPLACEMENT
Page 25 of 25
EXHIBIT A
SCHEDULE OF PRICES
C-EXA-080414
TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXHIBIT A
SCHEDULE OF PRICES
EXA-1 BASIS OF COMPENSATION ...........................................................................1
EXA-2 PROGRESS PAYMENTS.................................................................................1
EXA-3 RETENTION AND ESCROW ACCOUNTS.......................................................1
EXA-4 STOP PAYMENT NOTICE ...............................................................................3
EXA-5 PAYMENT TO SUBCONTRACTORS...............................................................3
EXA-6 PAYMENT OF TAXES......................................................................................3
EXA-7 FINAL PAYMENT .............................................................................................4
EXA-8 DISCOVERY OF DEFICIENCIES BEFORE AND AFTER FINAL PAYMENT....5
ATTACHMENT 1 - CERTIFICATION FOR REQUEST FOR PAYMENT.........................7
ATTACHMENT 2 - SCHEDULE OF PRICES..................................................................8
C-EXA-080414
EXHIBIT A
SCHEDULE OF PRICES
EXA-1 BASIS OF COMPENSATION
CONTRACTOR will be paid the Contract Price according to the Schedule of
Prices, and all other applicable terms and conditions of the Contract
Documents.
EXA-2 PROGRESS PAYMENTS
Progress payments will be made in accordance with all applicable terms and
conditions of the Contract Documents, including, but not limited to:
1. Contract Agreement— Section 11 —"Contract Price and Method of
Payment;"
2. General Conditions— "Payment— General";
3. General Conditions— "Payment—Applications for Payment";
4. General Conditions— "Payment— Mobilization Payment Requirements;"
5. General Conditions— "Payment— Itemized Breakdown of Contract Lump
Sum Prices";
6. General Conditions— "Contract Price Adjustments and Payments";
7. General Conditions— "Suspension of Payments";
8. General Conditions— "OCSD's Right to Withhold Certain Amounts and
Make Application Thereof'; and
9. General Conditions— "Final Payment."
EXA-3 RETENTION AND ESCROW ACCOUNTS
A. Retention:
OCSD shall retain a percentage of each progress payment to assure
satisfactory completion of the Work. The amount to be retained from each
progress payment shall be determined as provided in General Conditions—
"Retained Funds; Substitution of Securities". In all contracts between
CONTRACTOR and its Subcontractors and/or Suppliers, the retention may not
exceed the percentage specified in the Contract Documents. Ex
C-EXA-080414
PROJECT NO. FE18-19R
12KV DISTRIBUTION CENTER B AND EAST RAS PUMP STATION ROOF REPLACEMENT
Page 1 of 8
B. Substitution of Securities:
CONTRACTOR may, at its sole expense, substitute securities as provided in
General Conditions—"Retained Funds; Substitution of Securities." Payment of
Escrow Agent:
In lieu of substitution of securities as provided above, the CONTRACTOR may
request and OCSD shall make payment of retention earned directly to the
escrow agent at the expense of the CONTRACTOR. At the expense of the
CONTRACTOR, the CONTRACTOR may direct the investment of the
payments into securities consistent with Government Code §16430 and the
CONTRACTOR shall receive the interest earned on the investments upon the
same terms provided for in this article for securities deposited by the
CONTRACTOR. Upon satisfactory completion of the Contract, the
CONTRACTOR shall receive from the escrow agent all securities, interest and
payments received by the escrow agent from OCSD, pursuant to the terms of
this article. The CONTRACTOR shall pay to each Subcontractor, not later than
twenty (20) calendar days after receipt of the payment, the respective amount
of interest earned, net of costs attributed to retention withheld from each
Subcontractor, on the amount of retention withheld to ensure the performance
of the Subcontractor. The escrow agreement used by the escrow agent
pursuant to this article shall be substantially similar to the form set forth in
§22300 of the California Public Contract Code.
C. Release of Retention:
Upon Final Acceptance of the Work, the CONTRACTOR shall submit an
invoice for release of retention in accordance with the terms of the Contract.
D. Additional Deductibles:
In addition to the retentions described above, OCSD may deduct from each
progress payment any or all of the following:
1. Liquidated Damages that have occurred as of the date of the application for
progress payment;
2. Deductions from previous progress payments already paid, due to OCSD's
discovery of deficiencies in the Work or non-compliance with the
Specifications or any other requirement of the Contract;
3. Sums expended by OCSD in performing any of the CONTRACTOR'S
obligations under the Contract that the CONTRACTOR has failed to
perform, and;
4. Other sums that OCSD is entitled to recover from the CONTRACTOR
under the terms of the Contract, including without limitation insurance
deductibles and assessments.
C-EXA-080414
PROJECT NO. FE18-19R
12KV DISTRIBUTION CENTER B AND EAST RAS PUMP STATION ROOF REPLACEMENT
Page 2 of 8
The failure of OCSD to deduct any of the above-identified sums from a
progress payment shall not constitute a waiver of OCSD's right to such sums or
to deduct them from a later progress payment.
EXA-4 STOP PAYMENT NOTICE
In addition to other amounts properly withheld under this article or under other
provisions of the Contract, OCSD shall retain from progress payments
otherwise due the CONTRACTOR an amount equal to one hundred twenty-five
percent (125%) of the amount claimed under any stop payment notice under
Civil Code §9350 et. seq. or other lien filed against the CONTRACTOR for
labor, materials, supplies, equipment, and any other thing of value claimed to
have been furnished to and/or incorporated into the Work; or for any other
alleged contribution thereto. In addition to the foregoing and in accordance with
Civil Code §9358 OCSD may also satisfy its duty to withhold funds for stop
payment notices by refusing to release funds held in escrow pursuant to public
receipt of a release of stop payment notice executed by a stop payment notice
claimant, a stop payment notice release bond, an order of a court of competent
jurisdiction, or other evidence satisfactory to OCSD that the CONTRACTOR
has resolved such claim by settlement.
EXA-5 PAYMENT TO SUBCONTRACTORS
Requirements
1. The CONTRACTOR shall pay all Subcontractors for and on account of
Work performed by such Subcontractors, not later than seven (7) days after
receipt of each progress payment as required by the California Business
and Professions Code §7108.5. Such payments to Subcontractors shall be
based on the measurements and estimates made pursuant to article
progress payments provided herein.
2. Except as specifically provided by law, the CONTRACTOR shall pay all
Subcontractors any and all retention due and owing for and on account of
Work performed by such Subcontractors not later than seven (7) days after
CONTRACTOR'S receipt of said retention proceeds from OCSD as
required by the California Public Contract Code §7107.
EXA-6 PAYMENT OF TAXES
Unless otherwise specifically provided in this Contract, the Contract Price
includes full compensation to the CONTRACTOR for all taxes. The
CONTRACTOR shall pay all federal, state, and local taxes, and duties
applicable to and assessable against any Work, including but not limited to
retail sales and use, transportation, export, import, business, and special taxes.
The CONTRACTOR shall ascertain and pay the taxes when due. The
CONTRACTOR will maintain auditable records, subject to OCSD reviews,
confirming that tax payments are current at all times.
C-EXA-080414
PROJECT NO. FE18-19R
12KV DISTRIBUTION CENTER B AND EAST RAS PUMP STATION ROOF REPLACEMENT
Page 3 of 8
EXA-7 FINAL PAYMENT
After Final Acceptance of the Work, as more particularly set forth in the
General Conditions, "Final Acceptance and Final Completion", and after
Resolution of the Board authorizing final payment and satisfaction of the
requirements as more particularly set forth in General Conditions — "Final
Payment", a final payment will be made as follows:
1. Prior to Final Acceptance, the CONTRACTOR shall prepare and submit an
application for Final Payment to OCSD, including:
a. The proposed total amount due the CONTRACTOR, segregated by
items on the payment schedule, amendments, Change Orders, and
other bases for payment;
b. Deductions for prior progress payments;
c. Amounts retained;
d. A conditional waiver and release on final payment for each
Subcontractor (per Civil Code Section 8136);
e. A conditional waiver and release on final payment on behalf of the
CONTRACTOR (per Civil Code Section 8136);
f. List of Claims the CONTRACTOR intends to file at that time or a
statement that no Claims will be filed,
g. List of pending unsettled claims, stating claimed amounts, and copies of
any and all complaints and/or demands for arbitration received by the
CONTRACTOR; and
h. For each and every claim that resulted in litigation or arbitration which
the CONTRACTOR has settled, a conformed copy of the Request for
Dismissal with prejudice or other satisfactory evidence the arbitration is
resolved.
2. The application for Final Payment shall include complete and legally
effective releases or waivers of liens and stop payment notices satisfactory
to OCSD, arising out of or filed in connection with the Work. Prior progress
payments shall be subject to correction in OCSD's review of the application
for Final Payment. Claims filed with the application for Final Payment must
be otherwise timely under the Contract and applicable law.
3. Within a reasonable time, OCSD will review the CONTRACTOR'S
application for Final Payment. Any recommended changes or corrections
will then be forwarded to the CONTRACTOR. Within ten (10) calendar days
after receipt of recommended changes from OCSD, the CONTRACTOR will
make the changes, or list Claims that will be filed as a result of the
changes, and shall submit the revised application for Final Payment. Upon
C-EXA-080414
PROJECT NO. FE18-19R
12KV DISTRIBUTION CENTER B AND EAST RAS PUMP STATION ROOF REPLACEMENT
Page 4 of 8
acceptance by OCSD, the revised application for Final Payment will
become the approved application for Final Payment.
4. If no Claims have been filed with the initial or any revised application for
Final Payment, and no Claims remain unsettled within thirty-five (35)
calendar days after Final Acceptance of the Work by OCSD, and
agreements are reached on all issues regarding the application for Final
Payment, OCSD, in exchange for an executed release, satisfactory in form
and substance to OCSD, will pay the entire sum found due on the approved
application for Final Payment, including the amount, if any, allowed on
settled Claims.
5. The release from the CONTRACTOR shall be from any and all Claims
arising under the Contract, except for Claims that with the concurrence of
OCSD are specifically reserved, and shall release and waive all unreserved
Claims against OCSD and its officers, directors, employees and authorized
representatives. The release shall be accompanied by a certification by the
CONTRACTOR that:
a. It has resolved all Subcontractors, Suppliers and other Claims that are
related to the settled Claims included in the Final Payment;
b. It has no reason to believe that any party has a valid claim against the
CONTRACTOR or OCSD which has not been communicated in writing
by the CONTRACTOR to OCSD as of the date of the certificate;
c. All warranties are in full force and effect, and;
d. The releases and the warranties shall survive Final Payment.
6. If any claims remain open, OCSD may make Final Payment subject to
resolution of those claims. OCSD may withhold from the Final Payment an
amount not to exceed one hundred fifty percent (150%) of the sum of the
amounts of the open claims, and one hundred twenty-five percent (125%)
of the amounts of open stop payment notices referred to in article entitled
stop payment notices herein.
7. The CONTRACTOR shall provide an unconditional waiver and release on
final payment from each Subcontractor and Supplier providing Work under
the Contract (per Civil Code Section 8138) and an unconditional waiver and
release on final payment on behalf of the CONTRACTOR (per Civil Code
Section 8138)within thirty (30) days of receipt of Final Payment.
EXA-8 DISCOVERY OF DEFICIENCIES BEFORE AND AFTER FINAL PAYMENT
Notwithstanding OCSD's acceptance of the application for Final Payment and
irrespective of whether it is before or after Final Payment has been made,
OCSD shall not be precluded from subsequently showing that:
1. The true and correct amount payable for the Work is different from that
previously accepted;
C-EXA-080414
PROJECT NO. FE18-19R
12KV DISTRIBUTION CENTER B AND EAST RAS PUMP STATION ROOF REPLACEMENT
Page 5 of 8
2. The previously-accepted Work did not in fact conform to the Contract
requirements, or;
3. A previous payment or portion thereof for Work was improperly made.
OCSD also shall not be stopped from demanding and recovering damages
from the CONTRACTOR, as appropriate, under any of the foregoing
circumstances as permitted under the Contract or applicable law.
4/
C-EXA-080414
PROJECT NO. FE18-19R
12KV DISTRIBUTION CENTER B AND EAST RAS PUMP STATION ROOF REPLACEMENT
Page 6 of 8
ATTACHMENT 1 — CERTIFICATION FOR REQUEST FOR PAYMENT
I hereby certify under penalty of perjury as follows:
That the claim for payment is in all respects true, correct; that the services mentioned
herein were actually rendered and/or supplies delivered to OCSD in accordance with the
Contract.
I understand that it is a violation of both the federal and California False Claims Acts to
knowingly present or cause to be presented to OCSD a false claim for payment or
approval.
A claim includes a demand or request for money. It is also a violation of the False
Claims Acts to knowingly make use of a false record or statement to get a false claim
paid. The term "knowingly" includes either actual knowledge of the information,
deliberate ignorance of the truth or falsity of the information, or reckless disregard for the
truth or falsity of the information. Proof of specific intent to defraud is not necessary
under the False Claims Acts. I understand that the penalties under the Federal False
Claims Act and State of California False Claims Act are non-exclusive, and are in
addition to any other remedies which OCSD may have either under contract or law.
I hereby further certify, to the best of my knowledge and belief, that:
1. The amounts requested are only for performance in accordance with the
Specifications, terms, and conditions of the Contract;
2. Payments to Subcontractors and Suppliers have been made from previous payments
received under the Contract, and timely payments will be made from the proceeds of
the payment covered by this certification;
3. This request for progress payments does not include any amounts which the prime
CONTRACTOR intends to withhold or retain from a Subcontractor or Supplier in
accordance with the terms and conditions of the subcontract; and
4. This certification is not to be construed as Final Acceptance of a Subcontractor's
performance.
Name
Title
Date
C-EXA-080414
PROJECT NO. FE18-19R
12KV DISTRIBUTION CENTER B AND EAST RAS PUMP STATION ROOF REPLACEMENT
Page 7 of 8
ATTACHMENT 2 — SCHEDULE OF PRICES
To be inserted at the time of contract award
C-EXA-080414
PROJECT NO. FE18-19R
12KV DISTRIBUTION CENTER B AND EAST RAS PUMP STATION ROOF REPLACEMENT
Page 8 of 8
oJ�1V SAN17gTO9 Orange Count Sanitation District Administration Building
5� o, g � 10844 Ellis Avenue
2 9 Fountain Valley, CA 92708
OPERATIONS COMMITTEE (714)593 7433
9oTFCTN0 THE ENVQ����2
Agenda Report
File #: 2020-1032 Agenda Date: 6/3/2020 Agenda Item No: 5.
FROM: James D. Herberg, General Manager
Originator: Kathy Millea, Director of Engineering
SUBJECT:
HEADQUARTERS COMPLEX SITE PREPARATION, PROJECT NO. P1-128C
GENERAL MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION
RECOMMENDATION: Recommend to the Board of Directors to:
A. Consider the Fountain Valley Crossings Specific Plan Program Environmental Impact Report
(State Clearinghouse No. 2015101042) that evaluated the total buildout of the Specific Plan
area with a goal of revitalizing the existing light industrial use;
B. Consider, receive, and file the Initial Study/Addendum for the Administrative Headquarters
Building, Project for P1-128, dated December 2019 to the City of Fountain Valley's Program
Environmental Impact Report for the Fountain Valley Crossings Specific Plan to demolish five
warehouse buildings, construct and operate an administrative headquarters building,
pedestrian bridge, signage, landscaping, lighting, and surface parking lot in the City of
Fountain Valley;
C. Receive and file Bid Tabulation and Recommendation for Headquarters Complex Site
Preparation, Project No. P1-128C;
D. Accept the formal bid withdrawal request received on March 13, 2020 from the initial lowest
bidder, Interior Demolition, Inc.;
E. Reject the bid from the second apparent low bidder AMPCO North, Inc. as non-responsive;
F. Award a Demolition Contract to Resource Environmental, Inc. for Headquarters Complex Site
Preparation, Project No. P1-128C, for a total amount not to exceed $1,555,000; and
G. Approve a contingency of$155,500 (10%).
BACKGROUND
The Orange County Sanitation District (Sanitation District) is replacing the existing Administration
Building and other buildings at Plant No. 1 with a new Headquarters complex north of Ellis Avenue
across from Plant No. 1.
Orange County Sanitation District Page 1 of 4 Printed on 5/27/2020
powered by LegistarTM
File #: 2020-1032 Agenda Date: 6/3/2020 Agenda Item No: 5.
RELEVANT STANDARDS
• Comply with California Public Contract Code Section 20103.8, award a construction contract
to lowest responsive, responsible bidder.
PROBLEM
Existing buildings on the site north of Ellis Avenue need to be demolished for construction of the
Headquarters Complex. The main construction project will take longer to complete if these buildings
are not demolished in advance.
PROPOSED SOLUTION
Award a separate demolition contract in advance of the main construction contract for the
Headquarters Complex. This contract will demolish four of the five buildings on the site. The fifth
building is currently occupied by a tenant and does not need to be demolished until near the end of
the main construction project.
TIMING CONCERNS
Delaying the demolition of these buildings might delay construction of the Headquarters Complex.
RAMIFICATIONS OF NOT TAKING ACTION
If the demolition is not completed in advance under a separate contract, the overall completion of
the Headquarters Complex will be delayed by requiring the future Headquarters Complex
construction contractor to perform the demolition.
PRIOR COMMITTEE/BOARD ACTIONS
N/A
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
The Sanitation District advertised Project No. P1-128C for bids on January 30, 2020 and six sealed
bids were received on March 10, 2020. A summary of the bid opening follows:
Engineer's Estimate $ 2,475,000
Bidder Amount of Bid
Interior Demolition, Inc. $ 800,000
AMPCO North, Inc. $ 1,094,000
Resource Environmental, Inc. $ 1,555,000
GGG Demolition, Inc. $ 1,725,000
American Wrecking, Inc. $ 1,727,000
Nationwide Contracting Services, Inc., dba $ 3,119,306
Nationwide General Construction Services
Orange County Sanitation District Page 2 of 4 Printed on 5/27/2020
powered by LegistarTM
File #: 2020-1032 Agenda Date: 6/3/2020 Agenda Item No: 5.
Consistent with the requirements of Public Contract Code Section 5100 et seq., the apparent low
Bidder, Interior Demolition, Inc. (Interior Demolition), informed Sanitation District staff that it had
discovered a mathematical clerical error in its bid, that the error affected its final bid price, that it
could not absorb the cost of the error, and that it wished to withdraw its bid. Staff recommends
accepting Interior Demolition's bid withdrawal request.
Sanitation District staff evaluated the second low Bidder, AMPCO North, Inc. (AMPCO), and
determined that its accident frequency factor was above the Sanitation District's required limit of
1.25 or below. Sanitation District staff informed AMPCO of its findings through the clarification
process and set the deadline for its response. AMPCO did not respond by the deadline. Therefore,
staff recommends rejecting AMPCO's bid as non-responsive.
Staff evaluated the third low bidder, Resource Environmental, Inc., and determined the bid to be
responsive and responsible. Staff reviewed the Engineer's Estimate to determine the discrepancy
with the low bid. It was determined that the Engineer's Estimate included conservative assumptions
regarding the removal of waste materials. As the contract requires a 75% recycling of waste
generated, this cost can vary greatly depending on the current market and the capability of the
Contractor to resell their waste materials. Considering that there are several bids within the same
range of the lowest responsive, responsible bidder, staff believes that the bid is valid.
The bids were evaluated in accordance with the Sanitation District's policies and procedures. A
notice was sent to all bidders on May 5, 2020 informing them of the intent of Sanitation District staff
to recommend award of the Demolition Contract to Resource Environmental, Inc.
Staff recommends awarding a Demolition Contract to the lowest responsive, responsible bidder,
Resource Environmental, Inc., for a total amount not to exceed $1,555,000.
CEQA
On January 23, 2018, the City of Fountain Valley certified the Program Environmental Impact Report
for the Fountain Valley Crossings Specific Plan (State Clearinghouse No. 2015101042) that
evaluated the total buildout of the Specific Plan area with a goal of revitalizing the existing light
industrial use.
Following that, the Sanitation District prepared an Initial Study/Addendum for the Administrative
Headquarters Building, Project No. P1-128, dated December 2019, to the City's Program
Environmental Impact Report. The addendum concluded that no further environmental review was
required. (Public Resources Code Section 21166; CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162 and 15164.)
A Notice of Determination will be filed with the Orange County Clerk-Recorder after the Sanitation
District Board approval of the construction contract for the Headquarters Complex Site Preparation,
Project No. P1-128C.
FINANCIAL CONSIDERATIONS
This request complies with authority levels of the Sanitation District's Purchasing Ordinance. This
item has been budgeted (FY 2019-20 Budget Update, Appendix A, Page A-8, Headquarters
Orange County Sanitation District Page 3 of 4 Printed on 5/27/2020
powered by LegistarTM
File #: 2020-1032 Agenda Date: 6/3/2020 Agenda Item No: 5.
Complex, Project No. P1-128) and the budget is sufficient for this action.
ATTACHMENT
The following attachment(s) may be viewed on-line at the OCSD website (www.ocsd.com) with the complete agenda
package:
• Initial Study/Addendum to the Program Environmental Impact Report for the Fountain Valley
Crossings Specific Plan, dated December 2019
• City of Fountain Valley's Program Environmental Impact Report for the Fountain Valley
Crossings Specific Plan. Document may be found at the following link:
<https://www.fountainvalley.org/l 278/Fountain-Valley-Crossings>
• P1-128C Construction Contract
TG:dm:gc
Orange County Sanitation District Page 4 of 4 Printed on 5/27/2020
powered by LegistarT"
INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM
ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT
PROJECT NO. P1-128
Prepared for:
hSV AN gTi
4 i
Q ('f
O �
f f
THE Epv�Q,
Orange County Sanitation District
Sanitation District Plant No. 1
10844 Ellis Avenue
Fountain Valley, CA 92708
Prepared by:
LSA
20 Executive Park, Suite 200
Irvine, CA 92614
(949) 553-0666
This page intentionally left blank
INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT
DEC EMBER 2019 PROJECT No. P1-128 100
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 INTRODUCTION................................................................................................ 1-1
1.1 Background .......................................................................................................................1-1
1.2 Previous Environmental Documentation..........................................................................1-2
1.3 Purpose of the Addendum to the Specific Plan EIR..........................................................1-2
1.4 Environmental Procedures................................................................................................1-3
1.5 Conclusions .......................................................................................................................1-5
2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ..................................................................................... 2-1
2.1 Project Overview...............................................................................................................2-1
2.2 Project Location ................................................................................................................2-1
2.3 Proposed Project...............................................................................................................2-7
2.4 Permits and Approvals....................................................................................................2-12
2.5 Agency Consultation and Coordination ..........................................................................2-13
3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST ........................................................................... 3-1
3.1 Project Description and Background.................................................................................3-1
3.2 Environmental Factors Potentially Affected .....................................................................3-3
3.3 Determination...................................................................................................................3-3
4.0 ANALYSIS OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS......................................................... 4-1
4.1 Aesthetics..........................................................................................................................4-2
4.2 Agriculture and Forestry ...................................................................................................4-7
4.3 Air Quality .......................................................................................................................4-11
4.4 Biological Resources........................................................................................................4-20
4.5 Cultural Resources ..........................................................................................................4-25
4.6 Energy Conservation .......................................................................................................4-30
4.7 Geology and Soils............................................................................................................4-35
4.8 Greenhouse Gas Emissions.............................................................................................4-42
4.9 Hazards and Hazardous Materials ..................................................................................4-48
4.10 Hydrology and Water Quality .........................................................................................4-58
4.11 Land Use and Planning....................................................................................................4-68
4.12 Mineral Resources...........................................................................................................4-74
4.13 Noise................................................................................................................................4-77
4.14 Population and Housing..................................................................................................4-8S
4.15 Public Services.................................................................................................................4-89
4.16 Recreation.......................................................................................................................4-95
4.17 Transportation/Traffic.....................................................................................................4-98
4.18 Tribal Cultural Resources ..............................................................................................4-108
4.19 Utilities and Service Systems.........................................................................................4-115
4.20 Mandatory Findings of Significance..............................................................................4-126
5.0 REFERENCES..................................................................................................... 5-1
i
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx a12/20/19»
ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM
PROJECT No. P1-128 DECEMBER 2019
FIGURES AND/ TABLES
FIGURES
Figure1: Project Location ................................................................................................................... 2-3
Figure2: Project Site........................................................................................................................... 2-5
Figure 3: Conceptual Site Plan ............................................................................................................ 2-9
TABLES
TableA: Proposed Parking................................................................................................................ 2-11
Table B: Permits and Approvals Needed .......................................................................................... 2-12
Table C: SCAQMD Construction and Operation Thresholds of Significance (Ibs/day)..................... 4-12
Table D: Peak Daily Construction Emissions (Ibs/day)...................................................................... 4-15
Table E: Operational Emissions (Ibs/day).......................................................................................... 4-15
Table F: Electricity Demand from Proposed Project......................................................................... 4-31
Table G: Natural Gas Demand from Proposed Project..................................................................... 4-31
Table H: Operational Greenhouse Gas Emissions (MT/yr) ............................................................... 4-45
APPENDICES
A: CalEEMod Output Sheets
B: Summary of Mitigation Measures
ii
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx(12/20/19)
INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT
DECEMBER 2019 PROJECT No. P1-128
LIST OF ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS
AASHTO American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials
AAQS ambient air quality standard
AB Assembly Bill
acre-ft/yr acre-feet per year
ACM asbestos-containing material
AELUP Airport Environs Land Use Plan
AFIP Administrative Facilities Implementation Plan
APN Assessor's Parcel Number
AQMP air quality management plan
BMPs Best Management Practices
Cal/OSHA California Occupational Safety and Health Administration
CaIEEMod California Emission Estimator Model
CalGreen California Green Building Standards Code
California Register California Register of Historical Resources
CalRecycle California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery
Caltrans California Department of Transportation
CARB California Air Resources Board
CBC California Building Code
CCR California Code of Regulations
CDFW California Department of Fish and Wildlife
CEQA California Environmental Quality Act
CHa methane
Channel Fountain Valley Channel
CHRIS California Historical Resources Information System
City City of Fountain Valley
CMA Congestion Management Agency
CMP Congestion Management Program
CO carbon monoxide
CO2 carbon dioxide
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx a12/20/19»
ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM
PROJECT No. P1-128 DECEMBER 2019
CO2e carbon dioxide equivalent
County County of Orange
CREC controlled recognized environmental condition
dB decibel
dBA A-weighted decibel
DOC Department of Conservation
EIR Environmental Impact Report
EPA United States Environmental Protection Agency
ESA Environmental Site Assessment
FIRM Flood Insurance Rate Map
ft foot/feet
FVCSP Fountain Valley Crossings Specific Plan, or Specific Plan
FVFD Fountain Valley Fire Department
FVPD Fountain Valley Police Department
FVSD Fountain Valley School District
GAP Green Acres Project
GHG greenhouse gas
gpd gallons per day
GWh gigawatt hour
HBM hazardous building materials
HBUHSD Huntington Beach Union High School District
HCP Habitat Conservation Plan
HCP Habitat Conservation Plan
HFCs hydrofluorocarbons
HREC historical recognized environmental condition
HRI Historical Resources Inventory
HVAC heating,ventilation, and air conditioning
1-405 Interstate 405
LBP lead-based paint
Ibs pounds
LEED (United States Green Building Council) Leadership in Energy and
iv
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx(12/20/19)
INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT
DECEMBER 2019 PROJECT No. P1-128
Environmental Design
Leq equivalent continuous sound level
LID Low Impact Development
LOS level-of-service
MBTA Migratory Bird Treaty Act
MM Mitigation Measure
MRF Materials Recovery Facility
MRZ Mineral Resource Zones
MWD Metropolitan Water District of Southern California
MWDOC Municipal Water District of Orange County
NAHC Native American Heritage Commission
National Register National Register of Historic Places
NCCP Natural Community Conservation Plan
NOx nitrogen oxides
NPDES National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
Oa ozone
OCPL Orange County Public Libraries
OCSD Orange County Sanitation District
OCTA Orange County Transportation Authority
OCWD Orange County Water District
OHP Office of Historic Preservation
Pb lead
PCBs polychlorinated biphenyls
PFCs perfluorocarbons
Phase I ESA Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Phase I Environmental Site
Assessment Phase I Environmental Site Assessment
Plant No. 1 OCSD's Reclamation Plant No. 1
PM10 particulate matter
PM2.5 fine particulate matter
PRC Public Resources Code
Project Administrative Headquarters Building Project, Project No. P1-128
v
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx a12/20/19»
ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM
PROJECT No. P1-128 DECEMBER 2019
REC recognized environmental condition
ROG reactive organic gases
RTP/SCS Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy
RWQCB Regional Water Quality Control Board
SB Senate Bill
SC Standard Condition
SCAG Southern California Association of Governments
SCAQMD South Coast Air Quality Management District
SCCIC South Central Coastal Information Center
SCE Southern California Edison
SCG Southern California Gas Company
sf square foot/square feet
SF6 sulfur hexafluoride
SH Seismic Hazard
S02 sulfur dioxide
SP Specific Plan
Specific Plan Fountain Valley Crossings Specific Plan, or FVCSP
Specific Plan EIR Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report
SWP Colorado River and State Water Project
SWPPP Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan
TAC toxic air contaminant
TDM Transportation Demand Management
thm therms
TIA Transportation Impact Analysis
tpd tons per day
USFWS United States Fish and Wildlife Service
VMT vehicle miles traveled
VOC volatile organic compounds
Working Group GHG CEQA Significance Threshold Stakeholder Working Group
WQMP Water Quality Management Plan
vi
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx(12/20/19)
INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT
DECEMBER 2019 PROJECT No. P1-128
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 BACKGROUND
The Orange County Sanitation District (OCSD) provides wastewater collection and treatment for
2.5 million residents in Orange County, California.The administrative, engineering, and laboratory
functions for OCSD are located at OCSD's Reclamation Plant No. 1 (Plant No. 1) in the City of
Fountain Valley(City). In addition,there is staff housed in aging office trailers throughout Plant
No. 1.
In 2013, OCSD commissioned an Administrative Facilities Master Plan to provide management and
the OCSD Board of Directors with the necessary information to make policy decisions regarding the
administrative infrastructure facilities at Plant No. 1. OCSD later prepared an Administrative
Facilities Implementation Plan (AFIP) to describe an organized program to replace the aging on-site
buildings. Following preparation of the AFIP, OCSD prepared an Alternate Site Evaluation and
developed four alternate site plan options showing building footprints, parking, and access, etc.,for
the administration building and laboratory. Based on the evaluation, OCSD selected the Southwest
Plant Alternative as the preferred alternative for evaluation under the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA).
Around the time the CEQA evaluation was to begin, OCSD also began to evaluate the possibility of
locating the administrative and laboratory facilities at an off-site location. Several locations were
evaluated but were found to be infeasible, or OCSD was unable to acquire the property in question.
From 2017 to 2018, OCSD acquired approximately 5.2 acres north of Plant No. 1 on Ellis Avenue
between Pacific Street and Bandilier Circle and re-initiated the CEQA process to evaluate the
potential effects of the Administrative Headquarters Building Project, known as Project No. P1-128
(Project).The approximately 5.2-acre site north of Plant No. 1 on Ellis Avenue is herein referred to as
the Project site. Due to the size of the Project site, the proposed Project only includes construction
and operation of an administration building and surface parking lot. No laboratory building is
proposed.
On January 23, 2018,the City of Fountain Valley adopted a Specific Plan for the Fountain Valley
Crossings, a 162-acre office and industrial center located within the City.The purpose of the Specific
Plan is to provide a policy and zoning framework to allow for additional land uses in the Specific Plan
area.The Project site is located within the Fountain Valley Crossings Specific Plan (Specific Plan)
area.This Initial Study/Addendum has been prepared to analyze the environmental effects, if any, of
implementing the proposed Project within the Specific Plan area.
In accordance with State CEQA Guidelines Section 15051(a), OCSD is the appropriate Lead Agency
for this Project as it is the public agency that will be directly implementing the Project (developing
plans, paying construction, and acquiring property, etc.), even though the Project will be located
within the jurisdiction of another agency(the City of Fountain Valley).
1-1
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx a12/20/19»
ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM
PROJECT No. P1-128 DECEMBER 2019
1.2 PREVIOUS ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTATION
The City circulated an Initial Study/Notice of Preparation for preparation of a Program
Environmental Impact Report (EIR)for the Specific Plan on October 15, 2015,for a 30-day public
comment period.The City held a public Scoping Hearing on October 28, 2015, and public comments
were received until November 16, 2015.
The Draft EIR for the Fountain Valley Crossings Specific Plan (State Clearinghouse No. 2015101042)
was circulated for an extended 47-day public review period from January 6, 2017,to February 22,
2017.The City held a Public Hearing for the Draft EIR on January 25, 2017,to provide the public with
an opportunity to provide comments on the Specific Plan and the Draft EIR.
Following release of the Draft EIR and closure of the public review period in February 2017,the City
prepared and released for public review the pre-recirculation Final EIR on April 27, 2017.The City
Planning Commission held a public hearing on May 10, 2017,to provide Specific Plan adoption
recommendations to the City Council. The City scheduled a City Council public hearing for the
Specific Plan and the Draft EIR on June 20, 2017; however,following receipt of public comments and
staff's recommendations,the City directed staff to recirculate the Draft EIR to address public
comments and make other clarifying revisions.The Partial Recirculated Draft EIR consisted of only
the portions of the EIR that were modified. Specifically, Partial Recirculated Draft EIR sections that
were revised include the cumulative impact analysis, the revised Transportation Impact Analysis,
and a new section to address Tribal Cultural Resources, as well as sections that were revised to
provide clarity.
The Partial Recirculated Draft EIR was circulated to the public for a 45-day public review and
comment period pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines Section 15088.5(c)from October 6, 2017,to
November 20, 2017.The Specific Plan and Revised Final EIR were adopted by the City Council on
January 23, 2018.
For purposes of this Initial Study/Addendum, the Initial Study, Draft EIR, Final EIR, Recirculated Draft
EIR, and Revised Final EIR for the Specific Plan are referred to as the Specific Plan EIR.The Final
Specific Plan EIR (January 2018) is herein incorporated by reference.
1.3 PURPOSE OF THE ADDENDUM TO THE SPECIFIC PLAN EIR
This Initial Study/Addendum provides the basis for preparing an Addendum to the Specific Plan EIR
for the Fountain Valley Crossings Final EIR and serves as the CEQA documentation for the following:
• Demolition of the five existing industrial warehouse buildings;
• Construction and operation of an approximately 109,914 square-foot(sf)three-story
administration building;
• Construction and operation of a surface parking lot with 262 spaces;
1-2
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx(12/20/19)
INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT
DECEMBER 2019 PROJECT No. P1-128
• Construction and operation of an approximately 128-foot (ft) -long pedestrian bridge connecting
the Project site to the existing Plant No. 1 site; and
• Installation of landscaping, signage, and security lighting.
This Initial Study/Addendum has been prepared pursuant to the provisions of CEQA (Public
Resources Code Sections 21000 et seq.) and the State CEQA Guidelines.
1.4 ENVIRONMENTAL PROCEDURES
A Program EIR is prepared for a project consisting of a series of actions that can be characterized as
one large project and that are related either geographically; as logical parts in the chain of
contemplated actions; in connection with the general criteria to govern the conduct of a continuing
program; or as individual activities carried out under the same authorizing statutory or regulatory
authority and having generally similar environmental effects which can be mitigated in similar ways
(State CEQA Guidelines Section 15168). Once a Program EIR has been prepared, subsequent
activities within the program are evaluated to determine whether additional CEQA analysis is
needed.These subsequent activities could be found to be within the Program EIR scope, and
additional environmental documents may not be required if the Program EIR adequately addressed
impacts of the subsequent activity(State CEQA Guidelines Section 15168[c]). When a Program EIR is
relied upon for a subsequent activity, the Lead Agency incorporates applicable mitigation measures
and alternatives developed in the Program EIR into the subsequent activities (State CEQA Guidelines
Section 15168 [c] [3]). If a subsequent activity would have effects that are not identified in the
Program EIR, the Lead Agency would prepare additional environmental review documentation, as
applicable.
The Specific Plan EIR is a Program EIR that addresses the total build out of the Specific Plan area with
a goal of revitalizing the existing light industrial uses.The environmental analysis provided in the
Specific Plan EIR provides sufficient analysis in compliance with the requirements of CEQA to enable
decision-makers to approve subsequent projects proposed in the Specific Plan area,that are
consistent with the Specific Plan,without subsequent environmental review. However, if any
substantial changes to the development parameters (e.g., building envelope, height, or use, etc.)
analyzed in the Specific Plan EIR are later revised, subsequent environmental review would be
required prior to approval.
Pursuant to CEQA, the State CEQA Guidelines, and the local CEQA guidelines,this Initial Study/
Addendum focuses on demolition of the five existing industrial warehouse buildings and the
construction and operation of the new Administration Headquarters building on the Project site,
and whether the proposed Project would result in new significant impacts or a substantial increase
in previously identified significant impacts.
Pursuant to Sections 15162 and 15168(c) of the State CEQA Guidelines, when an EIR has been
certified for a project, no subsequent EIR shall be prepared for the Project unless the lead agency
determines, on the basis of substantial evidence, that one or more of the following conditions are
met:
1-3
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx a12/20/19»
ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM
PROJECT No. P1-128 DECEMBER 2019
(1) Substantial changes are proposed in the Project that will require major revisions of the previous
EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in
the severity of previously identified significant effects;
(2) Substantial changes occur with respect to the circumstances under which the Project is
undertaken that will require major revisions of the previous EIR due to the involvement of new
significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified
significant effects; or
(3) New information of substantial importance,which was not known and could not have been
known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the previous EIR was certified as
complete, suggests any of the following:
a) The Project would have one or more significant effects not discussed in the previous EIR.
b) Significant effects previously examined would be substantially more severe than identified
in the previous EIR.
c) Mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would in fact be
feasible, and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the Project, but
the Project proponent declines to adopt the mitigation measures or alternatives.
d) Mitigation measures or alternatives that are considerably different from those analyzed in
the previous EIR would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the
environment, but the Project proponent declines to adopt the mitigation measures or
alternatives.
Section 15164(a) of the State CEQA Guidelines provides that an Addendum to an EIR shall be
prepared "if some changes or additions are necessary, but none of the conditions described in
Section 15162 calling for preparation of a subsequent EIR have occurred."This Initial Study/
Addendum reviews the proposed Project and any changes to the existing conditions that have
occurred since the Specific Plan EIR was certified by the City of Fountain Valley. It also reviews any
new information of substantial importance that was not known and could not have been known
with exercise of reasonable diligence at the time that the Specific Plan EIR was certified. It further
examines whether, as a result of any changes or any new information, a subsequent or
supplemental EIR may be required.This examination includes an analysis of the provisions of Section
21166 of the Public Resources Code and Section 15162 of the State CEQA Guidelines and their
applicability to the proposed Project.This Initial Study/Addendum relies on the Analysis of
Environmental Impacts (Section 4), which addresses environmental checklist issues on a section-by-
section basis.
The Environmental Checklist Form has been prepared pursuant to Section 15168(c)(4) of CEQA,
which states that"where the subsequent activities involve site specific operations,the agency
should use a written checklist or similar device to document the evaluation of the site and the
1-4
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx(12/20/19)
INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT 61- i2 ItA
DECEMBER 2019 PROJECT No. P1-128
activity to determine whether the environmental effects of the operation were covered in the
program EIR."
The proposed Project is within the scope of the Specific Plan EIR. The Project site is designated
Industrial (Commercial Manufacturing) in the City's General Plan and is zoned as Specific Plan (SP)—
Fountain Valley Crossings Specific Plan (FVCSP) Mixed Industry District.The proposed administrative
uses are consistent with the commercial manufacturing designation, which allows for office
(administrative, business, and professional) uses. (State CEQA Guidelines Sections 15168(c)(2).) The
Specific Plan anticipated, and the Specific Plan EIR evaluated, the potential net increase of 811,408
sf for the office uses within the Specific Plan area.The proposed Project, at 109,914 sf, is thus
consistent with the build out of new office uses projected in the Specific Plan. Build out of the
Specific Plan would result in an increase in population associated with approximately 2,063 new
employees, 1,444 new residents, and customers of commercial and retail businesses. Build out of
the Specific Plan would increase the density of commercial uses and introduce new residential uses,
thereby increasing the total population of the Specific Plan area. Implementation of the proposed
Project would not result in an increase in OCSD employees because the Project is characterized as a
relocation, rather than an expansion, of existing operations.Thus, the Project would be consistent
with population growth projected in the Specific Plan. (Id.) In addition,the proposed Project site is
within the geographic area analyzed in the Specific Plan EIR. (Id.)As a result,the proposed Project is
within the scope of the Specific Plan EIR. As evidenced in this document,the Orange County
Sanitation District (OCSD), the Lead Agency, determined that an Addendum to the previously
approved Specific Plan EIR is appropriate.
1.5 CONCLUSIONS
This Initial Study/Addendum addresses the environmental effects associated with the demolition of
the existing industrial warehouse buildings and construction and operation of the new
Administration Headquarters building that has been proposed within the Specific Plan area.The
proposed Project would not create new significant impacts related to any of the environmental
topics discussed below or a substantial increase in the severity of significant effects previously
studied and disclosed in the Specific Plan EIR.The conclusions of the analysis in this Initial Study/
Addendum are not substantially different from those identified in the Specific Plan EIR. In addition,
no new mitigation measures that would reduce impacts have been found to be feasible, and
mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would remain infeasible.
Appendix B provides a summary of mitigation measures from the Specific Plan EIR that are
applicable and included in this Initial Study/Addendum.
1-5
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx a12/20/19»
ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM
PROJECT No. P1-128 DECEMBER 2019
This page intentionally left blank
1-6
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx(12/20/19)
INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT
DECEMBER 2019 PROJECT No. P1-128
2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
2.1 PROJECT OVERVIEW
Orange County Sanitation District (OCSD) Reclamation Plant No. 1 (Plant No. 1) is a 114-acre facility
that treats approximately 130 million gallons of wastewater per day. OCSD's administrative,
engineering, and laboratory facilities are located primarily at Plant No. 1. In addition,there is staff
housed in aging office trailers throughout Plant No. 1. OCSD has decided the most cost-effective
solution is to construct new buildings to serve administrative and engineering functions.As such,the
proposed Administrative Headquarters Building Project, Project No. P1-128 (Project) would
construct a new headquarters building on an approximately 5.2-acre site north of Ellis Avenue
(Project site).
2.2 PROJECT LOCATION
2.2.1 Regional Setting
The Project site is located in Fountain Valley in the northwestern portion of Orange County (refer to
Figure 1, Project Location). Fountain Valley encompasses approximately nine square miles and is
bounded by Westminster and Garden Grove to the north, Santa Ana to the northeast, Costa Mesa to
the southeast, and Huntington Beach to the southwest. As shown on Figure 1, Interstate 405 (1-405)
provides regional access to the Project site.
The approximately 5.2-acre Project site is located north of OCSD's Plant No. 1 on Assessor's Parcel
Numbers (APNs) 156-163-06, -08, -09, -10, and -11.
2.2.2 Surrounding Land Uses
The Project site is bordered by industrial uses to the north, Pacific Street to the east, industrial uses
and Bandilier Circle to the west, and Ellis Avenue and OCSD's Plant No. 1 to the south.
The Project site and the adjacent properties are characterized by 1970s concrete tilt-up buildings
that are occupied by a variety of light industrial (e.g., warehousing), retail, and office uses. Many of
these buildings were constructed pursuant to Fountain Valley's former Industrial Redevelopment
Plan Area. 1-405 is 414 ft north of the Project site.The Santa Ana River Trail and Channel are located
approximately 0.2 mile east of the Project site.
2.2.3 Existing Site Conditions and Land Use Designations
The Project site is flat and is currently developed with five industrial warehouse buildings (totaling
approximately 114,744 square feet [sf]) and associated surface parking lots (refer to Figure 2,
Project Site). Landscaping on the Project site is comprised of several mature trees, shrubs, and small
grassy areas around the perimeter of the site.
2-1
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx«12/20/19»
ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM
PROJECT No. P1-128 DECEMBER 2019
This page intentionally left blank
2-2
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx(12/20/19)
� Project Vicinity
1�
Los Orange
o
A County
C ngeles
■■ 1■■■s�ii �
Project Site �' ♦J
1
L SA LEGEND FIGURE 1
Project Site
Existing Orange County Sanitation District Plant No. 1
N
Orange County Sanitation District
o Aso 9 Headquarters Complex Project
FEET Project Location
SOURCE:Bing Maps(2015)
I:\ORC1601\GIS\MXD\ProjectLocation.mxd(5/11/2018)
ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM
PROJECT No. P1-128 DECEMBER 2019
This page intentionally left blank
2-4
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx(12/20/19)
11
1 /11 aM
• r
.i
�; J1
i x ! it
L S A LEGEND FIGURE 2
Project Site
N
Orange County Sanitation District
o ez.s tzs Headquarters Complex Project
FEET Project Site
SOURCE:Bing Maps(2015)
I:\ORC1601\GIS\MXD\Project5ite.mxd(5/11/2018)
ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM
PROJECT No. P1-128 DECEMBER 2019
This page intentionally left blank
2-6
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx(12/20/19)
INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT <
DECEMBER 2019 PROJECT No. P1-128
The Project site is in the Fountain Valley Crossings Specific Plan area, which the City of Fountain
Valley adopted on January 23, 2018.The Project site is designated Industrial (Commercial
Manufacturing) in the City's General Plan and is zoned as Specific Plan (SP)— FVCSP Mixed Industry
District.The proposed administrative uses are consistent with the commercial manufacturing
designation, which allows for office (administrative, business, and professional) uses. Additionally,
the Project would be consistent with the zoning because it would be consistent with development
standards required by the Specific Plan.
2.3 PROPOSED PROJECT
2.3.1 Project Characteristics
The proposed Project is a plan to construct a new administration building on the Project site north
of Ellis Avenue and to relocate the existing administrative uses from Plant No. 1 to the Project site.
The Project includes demolition of five industrial warehouse buildings on the Project site. As shown
on Figure 3, Conceptual Site Plan, the following facilities would be constructed on the Project site:
• An approximately 109,914 sf three-story administration building;
• A surface parking lot with 262 spaces;
• An approximately 128 ft long pedestrian bridge constructed across Ellis Avenue to connect Plant
No. 1 with the new Administration Headquarters complex on the Project site; and
• Landscaping, signage, and security lighting.
Implementation of the proposed Project would not result in an increase in OCSD employees because
the Project is characterized as a relocation, rather than an expansion, of existing operations. In
addition, other than the relocation of staff/uses from the existing administration building, no
changes to operations are proposed at Plant No. 1.
2.3.2 Administrative Building
The proposed three-story administration building would be approximately 109,914 sf and would
include a lobby, a boardroom/multipurpose room, a public exhibit displaying the history and values
of OCSD for use during public tours and events, and administrative offices for OCSD staff.The
administration building would operate during OCSD's normal business hours, which are Monday
through Friday from 8 a.m.to 6 p.m. Limited monthly events would occur on some evenings,
including meetings of OCSD's Board of Directors.
The new building would provide modern, state-of-the-art space that would consolidate OCSD
business operations, providing a collaborative, sustainable, and flexible work environment.The new
building would replace a combination of outdated, non-compliant buildings and trailers located at
Plant No. 1.The building will be designed to achieve United States Green Building Council
Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) Platinum Certification.
2-7
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx a12/20/19»
ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM
PROJECT No. P1-128 DECEMBER 2019
This page intentionally left blank
2-8
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx(12/20/19)
0
9" x �
&rxsimrtroe
II
If
'�", Ci/��off• / e4•
I I
I rlrl� of}�
l
1
I it
I_ oas�anxoixorxxwoxnxsu�rr. \ I� I
LJ_________L_\________
I
I __ raaxrwE sroov ffl p0B0GOPN6` — � uaeoixouararol wamcssmcs ___� §
I mrae sroareul�ows - I
i � awsr srtavKvux r
I _1____-_� i II vxrvarEraoxrwe.sraor
_ uux sxraa+ / I rvae�
a I � � � E�wrarEE�a�a,raAa
,EarEx.wxar
i
' � _ I = ran�rEwcxrwe.noor
Ir _J I
h I
r�}osucmE x snµh�m�
i
�
i sr
s I
� I I
r
_T -----W—_—_____---
--ENE
L SA FIGURE 3
N
0 60 120 Orange County Sanitation District
Headquarters Complex Project
FEET Conceptual Site Plan
SOURCE:EPT Design
I:\ORC1601\G\Site Plan.cdr(11/27/2019)
ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM
PROJECT No. P1-128 DECEMBER 2019
This page intentionally left blank
2-10
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx(12/20/19)
INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT
DECEMBER 2019 PROJECT No. P1-128
The Project would also include a public entrance plaza, an exhibit plaza, and a private landscaped
employee courtyard.
2.3.3 Pedestrian Bridge
An approximately 128 ft long pedestrian bridge would be constructed across Ellis Avenue to connect
Plant No. 1 with the new Administration Headquarters complex on the Project site.The pedestrian
bridge is designed to reflect the character of the new administration building.The bridge would
consist of two painted exposed Warren steel trusses spanning Ellis Avenue with a concrete metal
deck floor and a metal roof.The bridge would be unconditioned and open to the air, as well as
enclosed with stainless steel cable mesh for protection from any potential falls.
The tallest point of the bridge structure would be a maximum of 30 ft above grade.The lowest point
of the bridge structure would be a minimum of 19 ft above grade in accordance with the American
Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials' (AASHTO) standards requiring a minimum
of 18.5 ft between pedestrian bridges and the roadway.The bridge would be supported by
reinforced concrete columns located outside of the public right-of-way on each side of Ellis Avenue.
The bridge would connect to the second-floor level of the new administration building on the north
side of Ellis Avenue and then connect to an elevator tower inside the secure perimeter of Plant
No. 1. Security lighting would be included within the bridge enclosure.
2.3.4 Parking
The proposed Project would include 262 parking spaces within the surface parking lot. While a
majority of parking spaces would be uncovered, some would be covered with overhead canopies
featuring photovoltaic panels.Table A shows the type and number of parking spaces proposed by
the Project.
Table A: Proposed Parking
Type of Parking Space Number of Spaces
Uncovered Parking
Standard 186
ADA-Accessible 5
Van-Accessible ADA 1
Electric Charging 7
ADA-Accessible Charging 1
Van-Accessible Charging 1
Clean Air/Van Pool/Electric Vehicle 11
Covered Parking
Standard 27
ADA-Accessible 4
Van-Accessible ADA 1
Electric Charging 5
ADA-Accessible Charging 1
Van-Accessible Charging 1
Clean Air/Van Pool/Electric Vehicle 11
Total Parking 262
ADA=Americans with Disabilities Act
2-11
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx a12/20/19»
ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM
PROJECT No. P1-128 DECEMBER 2019
The development standards outlined in the Specific Plan require 3.5 parking spaces per 1,000 sf of
building area. As such, the proposed 262 parking spaces are non-compliant with the 365 parking
spaces required by the Specific Plan, and a variance will be requested to account for the reduction in
parking. The Project would also provide 3 motorcycle spaces (1 uncovered and 2 covered) and 13
bicycle parking spaces (all uncovered).
2.3.5 Landscaping
A total of 60,120 sf of landscaping is proposed throughout the Project site.Approximately 187 trees
would be planted as part of Project implementation.Trees would be comprised of a variety of 24-,
36-, 48-, and 72-inch box sizes and would include lemon scented gum (Eucalypts citriodora),African
sumac (Laurus nobilis and Rhus lancea), blue palo Verde (Parkinsonia x, Desert Museum),Torrey pine
(Pinus torreyona), and Southern live oak(Quercus virginiana). A variety of shrubs, vines, and
groundcover would also be planted throughout the Project site.
2.3.6 Construction Schedule
Construction is anticipated to begin in January 2021 and be completed in May 2023.
2.4 PERMITS AND APPROVALS
Public agencies may use this Initial Study/Addendum as the basis for their decisions to issue
discretionary approvals and/or permits for the proposed Project.Table B, Permits and Approvals
Needed, below, provides a list of entitlements and permits that could be required for the proposed
Project.
Table B: Permits and Approvals Needed
Agency Name Permit or Approval
Orange County Sanitation District(OCSD) Approval of the Initial Study/Addendum
Approval of the Site Plan
Issuance of Construction Bid Package
City of Fountain Valley Approval of Traffic Control Plan
Issuance of Demolition and Building Permits
Approval of Entitlement Applications,including Development Plan
Review No.1,Variance No.332,and Lot Line Adjustment No 19-01
Variance No.332 would include the following:
• Variance 1—Frontage Coverage(Pacific Street)
• Variance 2—Frontage Coverage(Bandilier Circle)
• Variance 3—Build-to-Corner(Ellis Avenue/Bandilier Circle)
• Variance 4—Parking Count
• Variance 5—Curb Cuts&Driveways(Pacific Street)
• Variance 6—Street Facade Composition deviation of 5.5 percent
(Bandilier Circle)
• Variance 7—Building Length deviation of 2.1 percent(Ellis
Avenue)
2-12
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx(12/20/19)
INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT
DECEMBER 2019 PROJECT No. P1-128
The following Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) permits would also be
required for approval of the Project; however, they are not considered discretionary approvals.
• National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Construction General Permit
• NPDES Dewatering Permit (if groundwater dewatering during construction is required)
2.5 AGENCY CONSULTATION AND COORDINATION
The City of Fountain Valley, listed in Table B, would require OCSD to obtain approvals for the
proposed Project and is considered a "Responsible Agency" under State CEQA Guidelines Section
15381. Only agencies with discretionary approval power over the project are considered responsible
agencies. Coordination with the City of Fountain Valley and other agencies may be required to
determine the specific nature of any future permits or approvals.
During the development of the Project plans, OCSD formally consulted with the City of Fountain
Valley to obtain its input as a responsible agency and to determine that an Addendum is the
appropriate documentation required for this Project (Public Resources Code Section 21080.3[a]). In
addition, this Initial Study/Addendum is intended to provide the City of Fountain Valley with
information to inform the discretionary approvals process.
2-13
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx a12/20/19»
ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM
PROJECT No. P1-128 DECEMBER 2019
This page intentionally left blank
2-14
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx(12/20/19)
INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT 1
DECEMBER 2019 PROJECT No. P1-128
lquvw
3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
3.1 PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND BACKGROUND
3.1.1 Project Title
Administrative Headquarters Building Project, Project No. P1-128
3.1.2 Lead Agency Name and Address
Orange County Sanitation District (OCSD)
Sanitation District Plant No. 1
10844 Ellis Avenue
Fountain Valley, CA 92708
3.1.3 Contact Person and Phone Number
Kevin Hadden, (714) 593-7462
3.1.4 Project Location
The Administrative Headquarters Building Project, Project No. P1-128 (Project) site is located at
Bandilier Court/Ellis Avenue/Pacific Street in Fountain Valley, Orange County, California.
3.1.5 Project Sponsor's Name and Address
Orange County Sanitation District
10844 Ellis Avenue
Fountain Valley, CA 92708
3.1.6 General Plan Designation
The Project site is designated "Industrial—Commercial Manufacturing."
3.1.7 Zoning
The Project site is zoned "Specific Plan (SP)—FVCSP Mixed Industry District."
3.1.8 Specific Plan District
The Project site is located within a mixed industry district within the Fountain Valley Crossings
Specific Plan area.
3.1.9 Description of Project
The proposed Project includes demolition of the five existing industrial warehouse buildings and
construction and operation of a new Administration Headquarters building on the Project site.
The proposed Project would include the construction and operation of a three-story, 109,914 sf
administration building, and a surface parking lot with 262 parking spaces on the Project site.
Landscaping and security lighting would be installed along the perimeter of the building.
3-1
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx«12/20/19»
ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM
PROJECT No. P1-128 DECEMBER 2019
An approximately 128 ft long pedestrian overcrossing would also be constructed across Ellis Avenue
to connect Plant No. 1 with the new Administration Headquarters building on the Project site.
3.1.10 Surrounding Land Uses and Setting
A mix of light industrial (e.g., warehousing), retail, and office uses make up the general character of
the area around the Project site.
3.1.11 Other Public Agencies Whose Approval is Required
OCSD may be required to obtain approval or permits from the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality
Control Board (RWQCB) and the City. Refer to Table B.
3.1.12 Have California Native American tribes traditionally and culturally affiliated with the
Project area requested consultation pursuant to Public Resources Code section
21080.3.1? If so, has consultation begun?
In accordance with Assembly Bill 52 (AB 52), letters were distributed on September 28, 2017,to the
Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians—Kizh Nation,the Juaneno Band of Mission Indians/Acjachemen
Nation, and the San Gabriel Band of Mission Indians notifying each tribe of the opportunity to
consult with OCSD regarding the proposed Project. No responses or requests for consultation have
been received from the Juaneno Band of Mission Indians/Acjachemen Nation or the San Gabriel
Band of Mission Indians. On October 5, 2017,Andrew Salas, Chairman of the Gabrieleno Band of
Mission Indians—Kizh Nation, requested to be consulted on the Project. OCSD responded to the
request via email on October 5, 2017, and October 24, 2017,to arrange a meeting with the tribe,to
which Mr. Salas has not responded. OCSD will continue the consultation process with the Gabrieleno
Band of Mission Indians— Kizh Nation during the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
process.
3-2
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx(12/20/19)
INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT
DECEMBER 2019 PROJECT No. P1-128
3.2 ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED
The environmental factors checked below would result in a substantial change from the previous
analysis in the Specific Plan EIR as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. Please see the
Analysis of Environmental Impacts in Section 4.0 for additional information. No environmental
factors listed below would result in a substantial change from the previous analysis contained in the
Specific Plan EIR.
❑ Aesthetics ❑ Agriculture and Forestry ❑ Air Quality
❑ Biological Resources ❑ Cultural Resources ❑ Energy
❑ Geology and Soils ❑ Greenhouse Gas ❑ Hazards and Hazardous
Emissions Materials
❑ Hydrology and Water ❑ Land Use/Planning ❑ Mineral Resources
Quality
❑ Noise ❑ Population/Housing ❑ Public Services
❑ Recreation ❑ Transportation/Traffic ❑ Tribal Cultural Resources
❑ Utilities and Service ❑ Findings of Mandatory
Systems Significance
3.3 DETERMINATION
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
❑ I find that the proposed Project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment,and a NEGATIVE
DECLARATION will be prepared.
I find that although the proposed Project could have a significant effect on the environment,there will not be a
❑ significant effect in this case because revisions in the Project have been made by or agreed to by the Project
proponent.A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
❑ I find that the proposed Project MAY have a significant effect on the environment,and an ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPACT REPORT is required.
I find that the proposed Project MAY have a"potentially significant impact"or"potentially significant unless
mitigated"impact on the environment,but at least one effect 1)has been adequately analyzed in an earlier
❑ document pursuant to applicable legal standards,and 2)has been addressed by mitigation measures based on
the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets.An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required,but it must
analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed.
I find that although the proposed Project could have a significant effect on the environment,because all
potentially significant effects(a)have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION
® pursuant to applicable standards,and(b)have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or
NEGATIVE DECLARATION,including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed Project,
nothing further is required.
Orange County Sanitation District
Signature Agency
Printed Name/Title Date
3-3
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx a12/20/19»
ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM
PROJECT No. P1-128 DECEMBER 2019
This page intentionally left blank
3-4
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx(12/20/19)
INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT
DECEMBER 2019 PROJECT No. P1-128
4.0 ANALYSIS OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
This following environmental analysis evaluates the proposed Administrative Headquarters Building
Project, Project No. P1-128 (Project) as compared to the analysis of environmental impacts in the
certified Fountain Valley Crossings Specific Plan EIR (Specific Plan EIR).The Checklist takes into
consideration the preparation of the previous environmental document and the changes in
circumstances that have occurred subsequent to adoption of the Specific Plan EIR, pursuant to
Public Resources Code Section 21166, and Sections 15162 and 15164 of the State CEQA Guidelines.
The comparative analysis for each of the environmental issues listed in the Checklist provides OCSD
decision-makers with a factual basis for determining whether the proposed Project, changes in
circumstances, or new information since the adoption of the Specific Plan EIR require the
preparation of a subsequent or supplemental EIR, or other additional environmental review.The
basis for each finding, and the supporting substantial evidence, is explained in the analysis in this
section.
4-1
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx a12/20/19»
ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM
PROJECT No. P1-128 DECEMBER 2019
4.1 AESTHETICS
New Significant More Severe No Substantial Change
Impact Impact from Previous Analysis
Would the Project:
a. Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? ❑ ❑ ❑
b. Substantially damage scenic resources,including,but not
limited to,trees,rock outcroppings,and historic buildings ❑ ❑
within a State Scenic highway?
c. Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality
of the site and its surroundings?(This may include loss of
major onsite landscape features,or degradation by change ❑ ❑
of character when placed in the context of the existing
surroundings.)
d. Create a new source of substantial light or glare which ❑ ❑
would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area?
4.1.1 Existing Setting
The City of Fountain Valley (City) is an urbanized community located within north-central Orange
County.There are no General Plan-designated scenic views or vistas within the City.According to
the Specific Plan EIR,there are no unique or unusual features in the Specific Plan area that comprise
a dominant portion of a viewshed.The Santa Ana and San Gabriel Mountains lie approximately
17 miles and 35 miles north of the Specific Plan area, respectively. However,views to these scenic
resources are substantially limited due to intervening structures and vegetation.
According to the Specific Plan EIR,the visual character of the Specific Plan area is dominated by light
industrial uses, with one-to two-story structures setback from wide surface streets and surface
parking lots.The Specific Plan area is relatively flat and gently slopes to the southwest. Individual
parcels typically support established landscaping including shade trees, hedges, grassy lawns, and
other small landscaped areas along the perimeter of properties and throughout surface parking lots.
Some public roadways in the Specific Plan area are developed with sidewalks and street trees.
Mature trees in the Specific Plan area are comprised of street trees in public rights-of-way and those
on private property. Shade and shadow effects are minimal due to the low profile of most
structures. However, even with larger structures, shade and shadow effects are negligible due to the
distance of separation between taller structures from adjacent buildings. Street lighting and
vehicular traffic lights are the predominant source of nighttime light and glare.
Public views within the Specific Plan area are characterized by existing structures, surface parking
lots, and street trees.There are no State-designated scenic highways or eligible scenic highways
within the City or in its immediate vicinity.'
' California Department of Transportation (Caltrans). California Scenic Highways Mapping System.Website:
https:Hdot.ca.gov/programs/design/lap-landscape-architecture-and-community-livability/lap-liv-i-scenic-
highways(accessed November 24, 2019).
4-2
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx(12/20/19)
INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT
DECEMBER 2019 PROJECT No. P1-128
4.1.2 Impacts Identified in the Specific Plan EIR
The Specific Plan EIR analyzed the Specific Plan's potential Aesthetics impacts on pages 3.1-1
through 3.1-22.
The Specific Plan EIR determined that there are no roadways or areas designated as scenic routes or
vistas within the Specific Plan area.Additionally,there are no designated historic structures within
the Specific Plan area.Views within the Specific Plan area are typical of urbanized light industrial
areas, and there are no unobstructed distant views of scenic natural features.The topography of the
area is relatively flat and does not contain any unique topographic features that would offer a scenic
view.Therefore, no impact would occur to the aesthetics associated with a scenic vista or scenic
highway.
The Specific Plan EIR concluded that development of the Specific Plan area could result in the
removal of mature trees due to redevelopment.Typically, redevelopment of parking lots and
buildings would primarily result in removal of trees within each property.As such, street trees are
expected to be minimally impacted.The Specific Plan encourages the preservation of mature trees
and encourages new development to incorporate trees within landscape areas. In addition, Chapter
12.04.040 in the City's Municipal Code contains regulations regarding cutting,trimming, planting,
pruning, removing, injuring, or interfering with trees, shrubs, or plants on streets, parkways, or
public places. Adherence to the City's Municipal Code would assist in limiting the impacts of tree
removal over the long term.Therefore,these impacts would be reduced to a less than significant
level.
The Specific Plan EIR determined that implementation of the Specific Plan would change the existing
visual character of the area because it would facilitate a new four-story development. In existing
conditions,the Specific Plan (SP)—FVCSP Mixed Industry District zone allows for four-story
structures. Future development within the Specific Plan area is subject to a formal development
review process, which requires adherence to development standards provided in the Specific Plan
and operating under the City's General Plan,which would include maintaining and enhancing high-
quality mixed-use development, retaining interesting architectural design elements, and installing
new sidewalks and natural landscaping features.These regulations would ensure that the design of
proposed buildings would enhance the character and quality of the Specific Plan area and contribute
to a high quality urban environment.Thus, with implementation of existing and proposed design
standards from the Specific Plan, the Specific Plan's impacts to visual character would be less than
significant.
The Specific Plan EIR determined that implementation of the Specific Plan could increase the
amount of light and glare in the area because it proposes to increase land use intensity and building
heights and may result in the use of reflective building materials. Development projects under the
Specific Plan would adhere to the Municipal Code Chapter 21.18.060, which implements restrictions
on exterior lighting. In addition,the Specific Plan outlines development standards and design
requirements to reduce potential glare and light spillover from future development projects. As
such, lighting as a result of Specific Plan implementation is anticipated to be compatible with other
uses in the vicinity of the area and would not introduce a substantial new source of nighttime light
4-3
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx a12/20/19»
ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM
PROJECT No. P1-128 DECEMBER 2019
pollution.Therefore, impacts related to light and glare from development of the Specific Plan area
were determined to be less than significant.
4.1.3 Analysis of Project Impacts
a. Would the Project have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista?
The Project site is located in a fully developed area in the southeastern portion of Fountain
Valley in Orange County. The Project site is approximately 0.2 mile west of the Santa Ana River
and 5 miles north of the Pacific Ocean, although neither the river nor ocean can be seen from
the Project site due to intervening land uses. In addition, the City's General Plan (adopted March
1995, revised November 2017) does not designate any scenic vistas or resources in Fountain
Valley. As a result,the Project site does not have views of any scenic vistas.Therefore,the
proposed Project would not result in adverse impacts on scenic vistas.
The Specific Plan EIR also concluded that no impacts to scenic vistas would occur.The proposed
Project, which is located within the Specific Plan area, would not result in new significant
impacts beyond those identified in the Specific Plan EIR or a substantial increase in the severity
of previously identified significant impacts, and no new mitigation measures are required.
b. Would the Project substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to,trees,
rock outcroppings,and historic buildings within a State Scenic highway?
The Project site is currently occupied by five industrial warehouse buildings and does not
contain any scenic resources or historic structures. In addition,the Project site does not provide
scenic views from adjacent land uses or public roads or sidewalks. According to the California
Scenic Highway Mapping System,there are no State-designated scenic highways or eligible
scenic highways within the City or in the immediate vicinity. Although the Project may require
removal of trees located on the property,the Project would adhere to Chapter 12.04.040 in the
City's Municipal Code and intends to comply with design standards in the Specific Plan.
Therefore,the proposed Project would not result in adverse impacts on scenic resources.
The Specific Plan EIR also concluded that impacts to scenic resources would be less than
significant. Specifically,the removal of mature trees that would occur as a result of
implementation of the Specific Plan would be less than significant with compliance with design
standards in the Specific Plan and adherence to Chapter 12.04.040 in the City's Municipal Code.
The proposed Project, which is located within the Specific Plan area,would not result in new
significant impacts beyond those identified in the Specific Plan EIR or a substantial increase in
the severity of previously identified significant impacts, and no new mitigation measures are
required.
c. Would the Project substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and
its surroundings? (This may include loss of major onsite landscape features, or degradation by
change of character when placed in the context of the existing surroundings.)
The vicinity of the Project site is characterized by a mix of industrial and residential land uses.
The Project site is currently developed with one-and two-story industrial warehouse buildings
4-4
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx(12/20/19)
INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT <
DECEMBER 2019 PROJECT No. P1-128
and surface parking lots.The Project would include demolition of the five existing on-site
industrial warehouse buildings and construction and operation of a new three-story
administration building and surface parking lot on the Project site. In addition, a pedestrian
bridge would extend from the Project site to OCSD's Plant No. 1, directly south of the Project
site.The bridge would consist of two painted exposed Warren steel trusses spanning Ellis
Avenue with a concrete metal deck floor and a metal roof.The bridge would be unconditioned
and open to the air, as well as enclosed with stainless steel cable mesh for protection from any
potential falls.The tallest point of the bridge structure would be a maximum of 30 ft above
grade, and the lowest point of the structure would be a minimum of 19 ft above grade.The
bridge would be supported by reinforced concrete columns located outside of the public right-
of-way on each side of Ellis Avenue. The bridge would connect to the second-floor level of the
new administration building on the north side of Ellis Avenue and then connect to an elevator
tower inside the secure perimeter of Plant No. 1. Security lighting would be included within the
bridge enclosure.The pedestrian bridge would be designed architecturally similarly to the
administration building. As such, the visual character of the site and views of the Project site
from off-site areas would substantially change with implementation of the proposed Project.
However,the Project would enhance the character and quality of the Project site and
surrounding area by introducing updated buildings in place of the dated structures. In addition,
the Project would comply with many development standards outlined in Section 2.1.5 of the
Specific Plan, which includes regulations pertaining to building scale, mass, placement, and
architectural guidelines. At three stories in height, the Project would be consistent with
development standards outlined in the Specific Plan, which allows up to four stories in height.
The proposed Project would require the following variances and deviations: variances for
frontage coverage along Pacific Street and Bandilier Circle; a variance for build-to-corner
requirements at the corner of Ellis Avenue and Bandilier Circle; a variance for parking count
requirements; a variance for curb cuts and driveways along Pacific Street; a 5.5 percent
deviation due to the proposed 18.9 percent street fa4ade opening along Pacific Street(which is
below the minimum 20 percent street fagade opening); a variance for bottom-floor street
fagade requirements along Pacific Street; and a 2.1 percent deviation due to the proposed
building length of approximately 204 ft (which exceeds the maximum building length of 200 ft.
The proposed Project would comply with all other development standards outlined in 2.1.5 of
the Specific Plan.Therefore, with the approval of the above variances and deviations,the
proposed Project would result in less than significant impacts related to the visual character of
the site and views of the site.
The Specific Plan EIR also concluded that impacts to visual character would be less than
significant because development standards outlined in the Specific Plan would enhance the
character and quality of the Specific Plan area.The proposed Project, which is located within the
Specific Plan area, would not result in new significant impacts beyond those identified in the
Specific Plan EIR or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant
impacts, and no new mitigation measures are required.
d. Would the Project create anew source of substantial light or glare which would adversely
affect day or nighttime views in the area?
4-5
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx a12/20/19»
ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM
PROJECT No. P1-128 DECEMBER 2019
Light and glare levels surrounding the Project site are typical for industrial park and residential
uses. However, the Project would include the installation of new lighting, including lighting
associated with signage and security lighting on the Project site. It is not anticipated that the
new pedestrian bridge would be lighted since there is sufficient existing street lighting along Ellis
Avenue.The Project intends to comply with requirements outlined in the Specific Plan, as well
as Section 21.18.060 of the City's Municipal Code,which include regulations pertaining to
exterior lighting and glare.Therefore, new sources of light and glare associated with the
proposed Project would have less than significant impacts to views in the Project area.
The Specific Plan EIR also concluded that impacts as a result of light and glare would be less than
significant because future development would be in compliance with design standards in the
Specific Plan and adherence to Chapter 12.18.060 in the City's Municipal Code.The proposed
Project, which is located within the Specific Plan area, would not result in new significant
impacts beyond those identified in the Specific Plan EIR or a substantial increase in the severity
of previously identified significant impacts, and no new mitigation measures are required.
4.1.3.1 Mitigation Measures
The Specific Plan EIR does not include mitigation related to Aesthetics. No mitigation would be
required for the proposed Project.
4.1.4 Findings Related to Aesthetics
No New Significant Effects Requiring Major Revisions to the Specific Plan EIR. Based on the
foregoing analysis and information,there is no evidence that the proposed Project requires a major
change to the Specific Plan EIR.The Project will not result in new significant environmental impacts
related to Aesthetics, and there is no substantial increase in the severity of impacts described in the
Specific Plan EIR.
No Substantial Change in Circumstances Requiring Revisions to the Specific Plan EIR.There is no
information in the record or otherwise available that indicates that there are substantial changes in
circumstances pertaining to Aesthetics that would require major changes to the Specific Plan EIR.
No New Information Showing Greater Significant Effects than the Specific Plan EIR.This Initial
Study/Addendum has analyzed all available relevant information to determine whether there is new
information that was not available at the time the Specific Plan EIR was adopted, which would
indicate that a new significant effect not reported in that document might occur. Based on the
information and analyses above,there is no substantial new information indicating that there would
be a new significant impact related to Aesthetics requiring major revisions to the Specific Plan EIR.
No New Information Showing Ability to Reduce Significant Effects in the Specific Plan EIR. The
proposed Project would not result in any potentially significant impacts related to Aesthetics. CEQA
does not require consideration of alternatives to the Project or consideration of additional
mitigation measures because there would not be any significant impacts to avoid or reduce related
to this topic, and no mitigation is required.
4-6
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx(12/20/19)
INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT
DECEMBER 2019 PROJECT No. P1-128
4.2 AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY
In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, Lead Agencies
may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the
California Department of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and
farmland. In determining whether impacts to forest resources, including timberland,are significant
environmental effects, Lead Agencies may refer to information compiled by the California Department of
Forestry and Fire Protection regarding the State's inventory of forest land, including the Forest and Range
Assessment Project and the Forest Legacy Assessment project;and forest carbon measurement methodology
provided in Forest Protocols adopted by the California Air Resources Board.
New Significant More Severe No Substantial Change
Impact Impact from Previous Analysis
Would the Project:
a. Convert Prime Farmland,Unique Farmland,or Farmland of
Statewide Importance(Farmland),as shown on the maps
prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and ❑ ❑
Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency,to
non-agricultural use?
b. Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use,or a ❑ ❑
Williamson Act contract?
c. Conflict with existing zoning for,or cause rezoning of,forest
land(as defined in Public Resources Code section 12220(g)),
timberland(as defined by Public Resources Code section ❑ ❑
4526),or timberland zoned Timberland Production(as
defined by Government Code section 51104(g))?
d. Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land ❑ ❑ ❑
to non-forest use?
e. Involve other changes in the existing environment,which,
due to their location or nature,could result in conversion of ❑ ❑
Farmland to non-agricultural use or conversion of forestland
to non-forest use?
4.2.1 Existing Setting
According to the Specific Plan EIR, no agricultural land uses are present within the Specific Plan area,
including the Project site and the Project vicinity.The Specific Plan area does not contain land zoned
or designated for agriculture use or as forest or timberland. The California Department of
Conservation (DOC 2016) designates the entire Specific Plan area as Urban and Built-Up Land.Z
4.2.2 Impacts Identified in the Specific Plan EIR
Agriculture and Forestry are included within Section 4.3, Effects Found Not to be Significant, on page
4-5 of the Specific Plan EIR;this topic was also discussed on pages 17-18 of the Initial Study and was
scoped out.
2 Department of Conservation (DOC). 2016. Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program.Orange County
Important Farmland 2014.July.
4-7
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx a12/20/19»
ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM
PROJECT No. P1-128 DECEMBER 2019
The Specific Plan EIR concluded that implementation of the Specific Plan would not result in impacts
to agricultural and forestry resources because these uses do not currently exist within Specific Plan
area.The developed nature of the Specific Plan area, including the Project site and Project vicinity,
does not make the area suitable for existing or future agricultural or forest land uses.
4.2.3 Analysis of Project Impacts
a. Would the Project convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland,or Farmland of Statewide
Importance(Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping
and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency,to non-agricultural use?
The Project site, like most of Orange County, is in an area that has been designated as Urban
and Built-Up Land by the DOC(2016).The Project site is not currently designated as Prime
Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance. As a result,the proposed
Project would not impact designated farmlands.
The Specific Plan EIR also concluded that no impacts to designated farmlands would occur. The
proposed Project,which is located within the Specific Plan area,would not result in new
significant impacts beyond those identified in the Specific Plan EIR or a substantial increase in
the severity of previously identified significant impacts, and no new mitigation measures are
required.
b. Would the Project conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use,or a Williamson Act
contract?
Within the Specific Plan area,the Project site is designated Mixed Industry District.The Project
site is designated Industrial (Commercial Manufacturing) in the City's General Plan and is zoned
as Specific Plan (SP)—FVCSP Mixed Industry District.The Project site is not zoned or currently
used for agricultural purposes, and no Williamson Act contracts are in effect for the Project site.
As a result, the proposed Project would not conflict with existing zoning or Williamson Act
contracts.
The Specific Plan EIR also concluded that no conflicts with existing zoning or Williamson Act
contracts would occur.The proposed Project, which is located within the Specific Plan area,
would not result in new significant impacts beyond those identified in the Specific Plan EIR or a
substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant impacts, and no new
mitigation measures are required.
c. Would the Project conflict with existing zoning for,or cause rezoning of,forest land (as
defined in Public Resources Code section 12220(g)),timberland (as defined by Public
Resources Code section 4526),or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by
Government Code section 51104(g))?
Within the Specific Plan area,the Project site is designated Mixed Industry District.The Project
site is designated Industrial (Commercial Manufacturing) in the City's General Plan and is zoned
as Specific Plan (SP)—FVCSP Mixed Industry District.The Project site and the surrounding area
4-8
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx(12/20/19)
INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT 4 i2 ItA
DECEMBER 2019 PROJECT No. P1-128
are not zoned as forest land,timberland, or timberland production, and consequently, no
significant impacts would occur.
The Specific Plan EIR also concluded that no conflicts with existing zoning of forestland,
timberland, or timberland production would occur.The proposed Project, which is located
within the Specific Plan area,would not result in new significant impacts beyond those identified
in the Specific Plan EIR or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant
impacts, and no new mitigation measures are required.
d. Would the Project result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest
use?
The Project site is located in a high-density urban setting. No forest or timberland exists at the
Project site or in the surrounding area.The Project would not result in the loss of forest land or
the conversion of forest land to non-forest use.
The Specific Plan EIR also concluded that no loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to
non-forest use would occur.The proposed Project, which is located within the Specific Plan
area,would not result in new significant impacts beyond those identified in the Specific Plan EIR
or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant impacts, and no new
mitigation measures are required.
e. Would the Project involve other changes in the existing environment,which,due to their
location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland to non-agricultural use or
conversion of forestland to non-forest use?
The Project site is developed with five industrial warehouse buildings.The Project site is not
currently used for agricultural purposes and is adjacent to non-agricultural, manufacturing uses.
The Project would not result in the conversion of farmland to non-agricultural use because there
are no agricultural uses on or in the immediate vicinity of the Project site. As a result, the Project
would not result in impacts related to the conversion of agricultural land to non-agricultural
uses.
The Specific Plan EIR also concluded that conversion of farmland to non-agricultural use would
not occur because there are no agricultural uses on or in the immediate vicinity of the Specific
Plan area.The proposed Project,which is located within the Specific Plan area, would not result
in new significant impacts beyond those identified in the Specific Plan EIR or a substantial
increase in the severity of previously identified significant impacts, and no new mitigation
measures are required.
4.2.3.1 Mitigation Measures
The Specific Plan EIR does not include mitigation related to agricultural and forestry resources. No
mitigation would be required for the proposed Project.
4-9
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx a12/20/19»
ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM
PROJECT No. P1-128 DECEMBER 2019
4.2.4 Findings Related to Agricultural and Forestry Resources
No New Significant Effects Requiring Major Revisions to the Specific Plan EIR. Based on the
foregoing analysis and information,there is no evidence that the proposed Project requires a major
change to the Specific Plan EIR.The Project will not result in new significant environmental impacts
related to Agricultural and Forestry Resources, and there is no increase in the severity of impacts
described in the Specific Plan EIR.
No Substantial Change in Circumstances Requiring Revisions to the Specific Plan EIR.There is no
information in the record or otherwise available that indicates that there are substantial changes in
circumstances pertaining to Agricultural and Forestry Resources that would require major changes
to the Specific Plan EIR.
No New Information Showing Greater Significant Effects than the Specific Plan EIR.This Initial
Study/Addendum has analyzed all available relevant information to determine whether there is new
information that was not available at the time the Specific Plan EIR was adopted, which would
indicate that a new significant effect not reported in that document might occur. Based on the
information and analyses above,there is no substantial new information indicating that there would
be a new significant impact related to Agricultural and Forestry Resources requiring major revisions
to the Specific Plan EIR.
No New Information Showing Ability to Reduce Significant Effects in the Specific Plan EIR. The
proposed Project would not result in any potentially significant impacts related to Agriculture and
Forestry. CEQA does not require consideration of alternatives to the Project or consideration of
additional mitigation measures because there would not be any significant impacts to avoid or
reduce related to this topic, and no mitigation is required.
4-10
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx(12/20/19)
INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT
DECEMBER 2019 PROJECT No. P1-128
4.3 AIR QUALITY
Where available,the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution
control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations.
New Significant More Severe No Substantial Change
Impact Impact from Previous Analysis
Would the Project:
a. Conflict or obstruct implementation of the applicable air ❑ ❑
quality plan?
b. Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially ❑ ❑
to an existing or projected air quality violation?
c. Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase to any
criteria pollutant for which the Project region is in
nonattainment under an applicable federal or state ambient ❑ ❑
air quality standard?This includes releasing emissions
which exceed quantitative standards for ozone precursors.
d. Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant ❑ ❑
concentrations?
e. Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number ❑ ❑
of people?
4.3.1 Existing Setting
The proposed Project is located within the South Coast Air Basin (Basin).The South Coast Air Quality
Management District (SCAQMD) is the regional government agency that monitors and regulates air
pollution within the Basin.The Federal Clean Air Act and the California Clean Air Act mandate the
control and reduction of specific air pollutants. Under these Acts, the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) and the California Air Resources Board (CARB) have established ambient air quality
standards for specific "criteria" pollutants, designed to protect public health and welfare. Primary
criteria pollutants include carbon monoxide (CO), reactive organic gases (ROG), nitrogen oxides
(NOx), particulate matter(PM1o), sulfur dioxide (S02), and lead (Pb). Secondary criteria pollutants
include ozone (03), and fine particulate matter (PM2.5).These ambient air quality standards are
levels of contaminants that avoid specific adverse health effects associated with each criteria
pollutant.
Based on the SCAQMD attainment status and ambient air quality monitoring data, ambient air
quality in the vicinity of the Project site has basically remained unchanged since approval of the
Specific Plan EIR.The SCAQMD is in nonattainment for the federal and State standards for 03 and
PM2.5. In addition,the Basin is in nonattainment for the PM10 standard and in attainment/
maintenance for the federal PM1o, CO, and NO2 standards.
To meet these standards, the SCAQMD has established project-level thresholds for volatile organic
compounds (VOC), NOx, and PM2.5.The SCAQMD has established thresholds of significance for
criteria pollutant emissions generated during both construction and operation of projects as shown
in Table C below.
Projects in the Basin with construction-related emissions that exceed any of the emission thresholds
above are considered potentially significant by the SCAQMD.
4-11
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx a12/20/19»
ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM
PROJECT No. P1-128 DECEMBER 2019
Table C: SCAQMD Construction and Operation Thresholds of Significance
(Ibs/day)
VOc NOx co S02 PM10 PM2.5
Construction Thresholds 75 100 550 150 150 55
Operation Thresholds 55 55 550 150 150 55
Source:South Coast Air Quality Management District(1993).
CO=carbon monoxide PMio=particulate matter less than 10 microns in size
Ibs/day=pounds per day SCAQMD=South Coast Air Quality Management District
NO.=nitrogen oxides SO2=sulfur dioxide
PM,.,=particulate matter less than 2.5 microns in size VOC=volatile organic compounds
4.3.2 Impacts Identified in the Specific Plan EIR
The Specific Plan EIR analyzed the Specific Plan's potential Air Quality impacts on pages 3.2-1
through 3.2-31.
The Specific Plan EIR evaluated the potential impacts of the Specific Plan on air quality in the Specific
Plan area and the Basin.The Specific Plan EIR determined that all construction occurring under the
Specific Plan would occur in accordance with applicable regulations and plans to reduce emissions
from construction activities, including SCAQMD Rule 403, SCAQMD Rule 1113, and SCAQMD Rule
1186.The Specific Plan EIR also quantified construction emissions associated with the Specific Plan
using the California Emissions Estimator Model (CaIEEMod) and determined that overall
construction emissions would not exceed SCAQMD thresholds for VOC, NOx, CO, S02, PM10, or PM2.5•
The Specific Plan EIR also evaluated daily operational emissions associated with the Specific Plan
using CaIEEMod.The CaIEEMod analysis included the existing development as part of the baseline,
and evaluated the potential operational impacts of proposed land use changes within the Specific
Plan area.The Specific Plan's net emissions were compared to the SCAQMD thresholds, and impacts
were determined to be below the thresholds.Therefore,the Specific Plan EIR determined
operational air quality impacts would be less than significant.
In addition, the Specific Plan EIR determined that implementation of the Specific Plan would not
conflict with or obstruct implementation of the SCAQMD's adopted 2016 Air Quality Management
Plan (AQMP).The Specific Plan EIR also determined that construction and operation of the Specific
Plan would result in a less than significant cumulative impact.
The Specific Plan EIR found that the Specific Plan has the potential to expose sensitive land uses
(e.g., residential units) to substantial pollutant concentrations.Therefore,the Specific Plan EIR
identified Mitigation Measures MM AQ-5a, MM AQ-5b, and MM AQ-5d through MM AQ-5f to
reduce adverse effects for sensitive receptors within 500 ft of the I-405 freeway and/or for sensitive
receptors near the potential development of a distribution center, rail yard, refinery, chrome plater,
dry cleaning operation, or gas station.The Specific Plan EIR determined that these mitigation
measures would ensure the potential for exposure of hazardous air emissions to sensitive receptors
would be reviewed and project designs revised if necessary to address air quality issues. Further,
MM AQ-5c, which is applicable to all projects in the Specific Plan area, would reduce air quality
4-12
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx(12/20/19)
INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT 4 i2 ItA
DECEMBER 2019 PROJECT No. P1-128
impacts resulting from the placement of the air system intake. Therefore, after implementation of
mitigation, it was determined that impacts related to the exposure of sensitive land uses to
substantial pollution concentrations would be less than significant.
In addition, the Specific Plan EIR determined that impacts associated with construction-and
operation-generated odors would be less than significant.
4.3.3 Analysis of Project Impacts
a. Would the Project conflict or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan?
An AQMP describes air pollution control strategies to be undertaken by a city, county, or air
quality management district in a region classified as a nonattainment area to meet the
requirements of the Federal Clean Air Act.The main purpose of an AQMP is to bring an area into
compliance with the requirements of federal and State ambient air quality standards (AAQSs).
The applicable air quality plan is the SCAQMD's adopted 2016 AQMP. For a project to be
consistent with the 2016 AQMP,the pollutants emitted from project operation should not
exceed the SCAQMD daily threshold or cause a significant impact on air quality, or the project
must already have been included in the AQMP projection. Because the AQMP is based on local
General Plans, projects that are deemed consistent with a specific General Plan are usually
found to be consistent with the AQMP.
The proposed Project would construct a new administration building and associated parking.
The Project site is in the Specific Plan area and is designated Commercial Manufacturing in the
City's General Plan and is zoned as Specific Plan (SP)— FVCSP Mixed Industry District.As
discussed in Section 3.11, Land Use and Planning,the proposed Project land use is consistent
with the City's General Plan designation for the Project site. In addition, as discussed below,
construction of the proposed Project would not result in the generation of criteria air pollutants
that would exceed SCAQMD thresholds of significance. Operational emissions associated with
the proposed Project would not exceed SCAQMD established significance thresholds for VOC,
NOx, CO, S02, PM1o, or PM2.5 emissions. Therefore, the proposed Project would not conflict with
or obstruct implementation of the 2016 AQMP.
The Specific Plan EIR also concluded that no impacts would occur related to conflicts with or
obstruction to implementation of the 2016 AQMP. Similarly,the proposed Project, which is
located within the Specific Plan area, would not result in new significant impacts beyond those
identified in the Specific Plan EIR or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified
significant impacts, and no new mitigation measures are required.
b. Would the Project violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or
projected air quality violation?
The following sections describe the proposed Project's construction-and operation-related air
quality impacts.
4-13
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx a12/20/19»
ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM
PROJECT No. P1-128 DECEMBER 2019
Construction Emissions. Construction activities such as earthmoving and construction vehicle
traffic would generate exhaust emissions and fugitive particulate matter emissions that affect
local and regional air quality. Construction activities are also a source of organic gas emissions.
Solvents in adhesives, non-water-based paints,thinners, some insulating materials, and caulking
materials would evaporate into the atmosphere and would participate in the photochemical
reaction that creates urban ozone.Asphalt used in paving is also a source of organic gases for a
short time after its application. Construction dust could affect local air quality at various times
during construction of the Project.The dry, windy climate of the area during the summer
months creates a high potential for dust generation when, and if, underlying materials are
exposed to the atmosphere.The effects of construction activities would be increased dustfall
and locally elevated levels of particulate matter downwind of construction activity.
The Specific Plan EIR determined that construction emissions associated with construction of
the Specific Plan would not exceed SCAQMD thresholds for VOC, NOx, CO, S02, PM1o, or PM2.5. In
addition, the Specific Plan EIR determined that all construction occurring under the Specific Plan
would occur in accordance with applicable regulations and plans to reduce emissions from
construction activities, including SCAQMD Rule 403, SCAQMD Rule 1113, and SCAQMD Rule
1186.
As previously stated, based on the SCAQMD attainment status and ambient air quality
monitoring data, ambient air quality in the vicinity of the Project site has basically remained
unchanged since approval of the Specific Plan EIR. Construction emissions were estimated for
the proposed Project using CaIEEMod. Specific construction details are not yet known;
therefore, default assumptions (e.g., construction fleet activities)from CalEEMod were used.
Construction of the proposed Project is anticipated to begin in January 2021 and be completed
in May 2023. In addition, construction of the proposed Project would include the demolition of
five industrial warehouse buildings on site,totaling approximately 113,748 sf, which was
included in CaIEEMod. Construction of the proposed Project would be required to comply with
SCAQMD Rule 403, Fugitive Dust; therefore,fugitive dust control measures were also included in
CaIEEMod. Peak daily construction-related emissions are presented in Table D, below. CalEEMod
output sheets are provided in Appendix A.
As shown in Table D, construction emissions associated with the proposed Project would be less
than significant for VOC, NOx, CO, S02, PM2.5,and PM10 emissions. In addition, the proposed
Project would also be required to comply with the applicable regulations and plans to reduce
emissions from construction activities, including SCAQMD Rule 403, SCAQMD Rule 1113, and
SCAQMD Rule 1186.
The Specific Plan EIR determined that construction emissions associated with construction of
the Specific Plan would not exceed SCAQMD thresholds for VOC, NOx, CO, S02, PM1o, or PM2.5.
In addition, the Specific Plan EIR determined that all construction occurring under the Specific
Plan would occur in accordance with applicable regulations and plans to reduce emissions
from construction activities, including SCAQMD Rule 403, SCAQMD Rule 1113, and SCAQMD
Rule 1186. Development of the proposed Project would result in similar, but fewer,
construction-related, short-term air quality impacts to those identified in the Specific Plan EIR.
4-14
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx(12/20/19)
INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT
DECEMBER 2019 PROJECT No. P1-128
Table D: Peak Daily Construction Emissions (Ibs/day)
Peak Construction Emissions VOC NOx CO S02 PM10 PM2.5
(total) (total)
Demolition 3.3 34.8 22.8 0.1 3.0 1.7
Site Preparation 4.0 40.6 21.8 0.0 9.0 5.8
Grading 2.4 24.8 16.4 0.0 3.8 2.4
Building Construction 2.4 21.0 20.3 0.0 2.1 1.2
Paving 1.3 1 10.2 15.1 0.0 0.7 0.5
Architectural Coating 29.4 1.3 2.3 0.0 0.3 0.1
Peak Daily Emissions 29.4 40.6 22.8 0.1 9.0 5.8
SCAQMD Construction Emissions Threshold 75.0 100.0 550.0 150.0 150.0 55.0
Exceed Significance? No No No No No No
Source:LSA(November 2019).
CO=carbon monoxide PMic=particulate matter less than 10 microns in diameter
Ibs/day=pounds per day SCAQMD=South Coast Air Quality Management District
NOx=nitrogen oxide SO,=sulfur dioxide
PM2.5=particulate matter less than 2.5 microns in diameter VOC=volatile organic compounds
Therefore,the proposed Project, which is located within the Specific Plan area, would not result
in new significant impacts beyond those identified in the Specific Plan EIR, and no new
mitigation measures are required.
Operational Emissions.The proposed Project would include construction and operation of a
new administration building and surface parking lot and would relocate the existing
administrative uses from Plant No. 1 to the Project site north of Ellis Avenue. Implementation of
the proposed Project would not result in an increase in OCSD employees because the Project is
characterized as a relocation, rather than an expansion, of existing operations. As a result,the
Project would not increase existing vehicle trips.The new land uses would result area source air
impacts such as emissions generated from the use of landscaping equipment and water heating.
Emission estimates for operation of the proposed Project were calculated using CaIEEMod,
consistent with SCAQMD recommendations.The proposed Project would be designed to
achieve United States Green Building Council Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design
(LEED) Platinum Certification, which was reflected in CalEEMod inputs. Model results are shown
in Table E. CaIEEMod output sheets are provided in Appendix A.
Table E: Operational Emissions (Ibs/day)
Source VOC NOx CO S02 PM10 PM2.5
Area Sources 2.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Energy Sources 0.0 0.2 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0
Mobile Sources 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Emissions 2.5 0.2 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0
SCAQMD Thresholds 55.0 55.0 550.0 150.0 150.0 55.0
Significant? No No No No No No
Source:LSA(November 2019).
CO=carbon monoxide PM,n=particulate matter less than 10 microns in size
Ibs/day=pounds per day SCAQMD=South Coast Air Quality Management District
NOx=nitrogen oxides S02=sulfur dioxide
PM2.1=particulate matter less than 2.5 microns in size VOC=volatile organic compounds
4-15
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx a12/20/19»
ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM
PROJECT No. P1-128 DECEMBER 2019
The primary emissions associated with the Project are regional in nature, meaning that air
pollutants are rapidly dispersed on release.The daily emissions associated with Project
operational trip generation, energy, and area sources are identified in Table E for VOC, NOx, CO,
S02, PM1o, and PM2.5. Further, MM AQ-5c, which is applicable to all projects in the Specific Plan
area,would reduce operational air quality impacts resulting from the placement of the air
system intake.Therefore, with implementation of MM AQ-5c, operational impacts would be less
than significant.
The Specific Plan EIR determined that operational emissions associated with the Specific Plan
would not exceed the SCAQMD significance thresholds and, therefore, would result in a less
than significant impact. In addition, the Specific Plan EIR analysis assumed that the Specific Plan
area was emitting operational air pollutant emissions from its existing land uses and evaluated
existing development as part of the baseline.The Specific Plan EIR focused operational impacts
to proposed land use changes that alter build out, and therefore, determined that
implementation of the Specific Plan would result in a net decrease in VOC, NOx, CO, and S02
emissions. For a worst-case analysis, existing on-site industrial warehouse buildings were
evaluated as vacant as part of the baseline. However, as shown in Table E above,the proposed
Project would not exceed the significance criteria for daily VOC, NOx, CO, S02, PM1o, or PM2.5
emissions;therefore,the proposed Project would not result in new significant impacts beyond
those identified in the Specific Plan EIR or a substantial increase in the severity of previously
identified significant impacts, and no new mitigation measures are required.
c. Would the Project result in a cumulatively considerable net increase to any criteria pollutant
for which the Project region is in nonattainment under an applicable federal or state ambient
air quality standard?This includes releasing emissions which exceed quantitative standards
for ozone precursors.
As indicated in Table E above, the proposed Project individually would not result in significant
regional emissions for criteria pollutants.A project that would result in less than significant
emissions at the individual project level would also result in less than significant cumulative
emissions. As noted above,the proposed Project would also be consistent with the region's
2016 AQM P.
The Specific Plan EIR determined that implementation of the Specific Plan would not result in a
cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the Project region is
nonattainment under an applicable federal or State ambient air quality standard (including
releasing emissions that exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors). Similarly, the
proposed Project would not result in emissions that are cumulatively significant and,therefore,
would not result in new significant impacts beyond those identified in the Specific Plan EIR or a
substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant impacts. No new
mitigation measures are required.
4-16
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx(12/20/19)
ItA
INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT 4 i2
DECEMBER 2019 PROJECT No. P1-128
d. Would the Project expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations?
As discussed in the Specific Plan EIR,the CARB guidebook,Air Quality and Land Use Handbook:A
Community Health Perspective,' recommends avoiding siting sensitive uses (e.g., residences,
schools, day care centers, playgrounds, and hospitals)within 500 ft of a freeway or urban roads
carrying 100,000 vehicles per day, or within 1,000 ft of a distribution center(warehouse)that
accommodates more than 100 trucks or more than 90 refrigerator trucks per day. In addition,
the Specific Plan EIR identified Mitigation Measures MM AQ-5a, MM AQ-5b, and MM AQ-5d
through MM AQ-5f to reduce adverse effects for sensitive receptors within 500 ft of the I-405
freeway and/or for sensitive receptors near the potential development of a distribution center,
rail yard, refinery, chrome plater, dry cleaning operation, or gas station.The Specific Plan EIR
determined that after mitigation, residual impacts related to the exposure of sensitive land uses
to substantial pollution concentrations would be less than significant.
The closest sensitive receptors to the Project site include the single-family residences located
approximately 1,350 ft southeast of the Project site along Alabama Circle. Construction activities
associated with the Project would generate airborne particles and fugitive dust, as well as a
small quantity of pollutants associated with the use of construction equipment (e.g., diesel-
fueled vehicles and equipment) on a short-term basis.As shown in Table D, construction would
generate emissions that are well below the SCAQMD significance criteria. In addition, due to the
distance of the nearest receptors from the Project construction area, Project construction
emissions would not impact sensitive receptors.
The proposed Project would include a new administration building and associated parking, and,
therefore,the proposed Project would not include new sensitive receptors. Once the proposed
Project is constructed,the Project would not be a source of substantial toxic air contaminant
(TAC) emissions. In addition, the nearest sensitive receptors are located approximately 1,350 ft
from the Project site, and, therefore, sensitive receptors would not be exposed to substantial
pollutant concentrations that would cause harmful effects. Because no sensitive receptors
would be impacted by TACs associated with the proposed Project, Mitigation Measures MM AQ-
5a, MM AQ-5b, and MM AQ-5d through MM AQ-5f would not be applicable to the proposed
Project.
The Specific Plan EIR determined that after mitigation, residual impacts related to the exposure
of sensitive land uses to substantial pollution concentrations would be less than significant.
However,the proposed Project would not expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant
concentrations that would cause harmful effects.Therefore,the proposed Project would not
result in new significant impacts beyond those identified in the Specific Plan EIR or a substantial
increase in the severity of previously identified significant impacts, and no new mitigation
measures are required.
' California Environmental Protection Agency(CaIEPA)and California Air Resources Board (CARB).2005.Air
Quality and Land Use Handbook:A Community Health Perspective.April.Website:www.arb.ca.gov/ch/
handbook.pdf(accessed November 24,2019).
4-17
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx a12/20/19»
ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM
PROJECT No. P1-128 DECEMBER 2019
e. Would the Project create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people?
During construction,the various diesel-powered vehicles and equipment in use on site would
create localized odors.These odors would be temporary and are not likely to be noticeable for
extended periods of time beyond the Project site.The potential for diesel odor impacts is,
therefore, considered less than significant.Additionally,the proposed uses that would be
developed within the Project site are not expected to produce any offensive odors that would
result in frequent odor complaints.The proposed Project would not include sensitive receptors;
therefore, odor impacts on the Project would not occur and do not require further evaluation.
Therefore,this impact would be less than significant.
The Specific Plan EIR also determined that impacts associated with construction-and operation-
generated odors would be less than significant. The proposed Project, which is located within the
Specific Plan area and does not propose uses that would produce offensive odors, would not
result in new significant impacts beyond those identified in the Specific Plan EIR or a substantial
increase in the severity of previously identified significant impacts, and no new mitigation
measures are required.
4.3.3.1 Mitigation Measures
Based on the analysis and information above, Mitigation Measures MM AQ-5a, MM AQ-5b, and MM
AQ-5d through MM AQ-5f, included in the Specific Plan EIR, would not be applicable to the
proposed Project because the proposed Project would not include new sensitive receptors within
500 ft of the 1-405 freeway, would not include any distribution center, rail yard, refinery, chrome
plater, dry cleaning operation, or gas station uses, and would not impact any existing off-site
sensitive receptors to TACs associated with the proposed Project.
Based on the analysis contained in the Initial Study/Addendum, Mitigation Measure MM AQ-5c,
included in the Specific Plan EIR,would be applicable to the proposed Project. No additional
mitigation measures related to air quality beyond those identified in the Specific Plan EIR are
required.
MM AQ-5c Placement of Air System Intake. When considering placement and direction of air
intakes,the direction of prevailing winds shall be considered and the most logical
decision shall be made. Design of the proposed development shall face air systems
intakes appropriately, so as to reduce highly concentrated air pollution intake,
considering placement on the opposite side of the building from the pollutant
source. Development and HVAC system design shall be reviewed and approved by
the City Planning and Building Department prior to issuance of a building permit.
Monitoring and maintenance of HVAC systems and air intakes shall be conducted by
the Applicant on a semiannual basis to ensure efficiency of the systems for
development permits involving land uses that include or potentially affect sensitive
populations.
4-18
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx(12/20/19)
INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT
DECEMBER 2019 PROJECT No. P1-128
4.3.4 Findings Related to Air Quality
No New Significant Effects Requiring Major Revisions to the Specific Plan EIR. Based on the
foregoing analysis and information,there is no evidence that the proposed Project requires a major
change to the Specific Plan EIR.The Project will not result in new significant environmental impacts
related to Air Quality, and there is no substantial increase in the severity of impacts described in the
Specific Plan EIR.
No Substantial Change in Circumstances Requiring Revisions to the Specific Plan EIR.There is no
information in the record or otherwise available that indicates that there are substantial changes in
circumstances pertaining to Air Quality that would require major changes to the Specific Plan EIR.
No New Information Showing Greater Significant Effects than the Specific Plan EIR.This Initial
Study/Addendum has analyzed all available relevant information to determine whether there is new
information that was not available at the time the Specific Plan EIR was adopted, which would
indicate that a new significant effect not reported in that document might occur. Based on the
information and analyses above,there is no substantial new information indicating that there would
be a new significant impact related to Air Quality requiring major revisions to the Specific Plan EIR.
No New Information Showing Ability to Reduce Significant Effects in the Specific Plan EIR. This
Addendum has analyzed all available relevant information and has determined that there is no new
information of substantial importance that was unknown and could not have been known with the
exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the Specific Plan EIR was certified indicating that: (1)
mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible,
and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the Project, but the Project
proponent declines to adopt the mitigation measures or alternatives; or (2) mitigation measures or
alternatives that are considerably different from those analyzed in the previous EIR would
substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment, but the Project proponent
declines to adopt the mitigation measures or alternatives.
As discussed above,the proposed Project would result in a potentially significant impact related to
Air Quality. Mitigation was included in the Specific Plan EIR and adopted at the time the EIR was
certified.The mitigation measure that is applicable to the proposed Project is listed in Section
4.3.3.1. Potential Project impacts related to Air Quality would be reduced below a level of
significance with implementation of the applicable mitigation measures, none of which the Project
proponent is declining to adopt.
4-19
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx a12/20/19»
ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM
PROJECT No. P1-128 DECEMBER 2019
4.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
New Significant More Severe No Substantial Change
Impact Impact from Previous Analysis
Would the Project:
a. Have a substantial adverse effect,either directly or through
habitat modifications,on any species identified as a
candidate,sensitive,or special status species in local or ❑ ❑
regional plans,policies,or regulations,or by the California
Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S.Fish and Wildlife
Service?
b. Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or
other sensitive natural community identified in local or
regional plans,policies,regulations or by the California ❑ ❑ ❑
Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S.Fish and Wildlife
Service?
c. Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected
wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act
(including,but not limited to,marsh,vernal pool,coastal, ❑ ❑
etc.)through direct removal,filling,hydrological
interruption,or other means?
d. Interfere substantially with the movement of any native
resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with ❑ ❑
established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors,
or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites?
e. Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting
biological resources,such as a tree preservation policy or ❑ ❑
ordinance?
f. Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat
Conservation Plan,Natural Community Conservation Plan, ❑ ❑
or other approved local,regional,or state habitat
conservation plan?
4.4.1 Existing Setting
The City is urban and developed with few areas of natural open space or habitat occurring in the City
and immediate vicinity. No native habitats or open space areas occur within the Specific Plan area.
Although the Santa Ana River's west bank is adjacent to the Specific Plan area, this portion of the
river is extensively channelized with concrete embankments, and it functions for both flood control
and waste drainage purposes.The Santa Ana River drains to the Pacific Ocean in the City of Newport
Beach. Similarly, the Fountain Valley Channel (Channel), which runs through the west portion of the
Specific Plan area, contains concrete embankments and is not associated with any riparian habitat
areas.
According to the Specific Plan EIR,the Specific Plan area supports a number of healthy, mature
trees,which provide some habitat for both resident and migratory native and non-native bird
species as well as small mammals. Chapter 12.04.040 of the City's Municipal Code contains
regulations regarding cutting,trimming, planting, pruning, removing, injuring, or interfering with
trees, shrubs, or plants on streets, parkways, or public places. Established landscapes in this urban
setting consist predominantly of non-native plant and tree species, which provide habitat for some
4-20
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx(12/20/19)
INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT 4 i2 ItA
DECEMBER 2019 PROJECT No. P1-128
species, primarily birds. However,the Specific Plan area does not support any designated or
recognized sensitive habitats or mapped critical habitat for any species identified as a candidate,
sensitive, or special-status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the
California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) or the United States Fish and Wildlife Service
(USFWS).The Specific Plan area, including the Project site, is not known to support endangered
species, nor does it contain sensitive habitat area that would support those species.
4.4.2 Impacts Identified in the Specific Plan EIR
Biological Resources are included within Section 4.3, Effects Found Not to be Significant, on pages 4-
5 through 4-6 of the Specific Plan EIR;this topic was also discussed on pages 24 through 27 of the
Initial Study and was scoped out.
The Specific Plan EIR concluded that implementation of the Specific Plan would result in less than
significant impacts to biological resources because the Specific Plan area is fully urbanized and does
not contain potential natural habitats for sensitive species and other natural communities. Further,
implementation of the Specific Plan would incorporate and be consistent with existing policies
regarding the protection of biological resources, and therefore, would not significantly impact
biological resources.
4.4.3 Analysis of Project Impacts
a. Would the Project have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat
modifications,on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive,or special status species in
local or regional plans, policies,or regulations,or by the California Department of Fish and
Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
The Project site is in an urbanized area surrounded by existing urban and suburban land uses. In
addition, the improvements associated with the Project would not have the capacity to
significantly affect sensitive biological resources given the amount of previous development that
has occurred in the vicinity and on the Project site. Project construction and operation would
have no impacts either directly or through habitat modification to any species identified as a
candidate, sensitive, or special-status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations,
or by the CDFW or the USFWS. No impacts to these resources are anticipated as a result of the
Project.
The Specific Plan EIR also concluded that no impacts to any species identified as a candidate,
sensitive, or special-status species would occur because the Specific Plan area is fully urbanized
and does not contain potential natural habitats for sensitive species.The Project site is located
within the Specific Plan area and would likewise not impact sensitive species or habitats.The
proposed Project would not result in new significant impacts beyond those identified in the
Specific Plan EIR or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant
impacts, and no new mitigation measures are required.
4-21
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx a12/20/19»
ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM
PROJECT No. P1-128 DECEMBER 2019
b. Would the Project have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive
natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations, or by the
California Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
The Project site does not support any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural communities
identified in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the CDFW or the USFWS. No
impacts to these resources are anticipated as a result of the Project.
The Specific Plan EIR concluded that the Specific Plan area is fully urbanized and does not
include any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural communities.The proposed Project,which
is located within the Specific Plan area, would not result in new significant impacts beyond those
identified in the Specific Plan EIR or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified
significant impacts, and no new mitigation measures are required.
c. Would the Project have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as
defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act(including, but not limited to, marsh,vernal
pool,coastal, etc.)through direct removal,filling, hydrological interruption, or other means?
No federally protected wetlands would be affected by the proposed Project.Therefore, no
impacts to these resources are anticipated as a result of the Project. No mitigation is required.
The Specific Plan EIR concluded that the Specific Plan area is fully urbanized and does not
contain any federally protected wetlands. Intensification of use as a result of implementation of
the Specific Plan could potentially increase the amount of pollutants, such as leaked oil,that
could enter stormwater runoff, impacting the quality of water that flows from the Specific Plan
area and ultimately to the Pacific Ocean. However, implementation of the Specific Plan would
result in less than significant impacts to biological resources as a result of impacts to water
quality because the Specific Plan would comply with existing federal, state, and local water
quality regulations.The proposed Project,which is located within the Specific Plan area,would
not result in new significant impacts beyond those identified in the Specific Plan EIR or a
substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant impacts, and no new
mitigation measures are required.
d. Would the Project interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or
migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife
corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites?
The proposed Project site is not located in a migratory wildlife corridor or native wildlife nursery
site.The existing trees on the Project site may, however, provide suitable habitat for nesting
migratory birds.The removal of trees on the Project site has the potential to impact active bird
nests if vegetation and trees are removed during the nesting season. Nesting birds are protected
under the federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act(MBTA) (Title 33, United States Code [USC], Section
703 et seq.; see also Title 50, Code of Federal Regulations [CFR], Part 10) and Section 3503 of the
California Fish and Game Code.Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would be
subject to the provisions of the MBTA, which prohibits disturbing or destroying active nests. In
4-22
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx(12/20/19)
INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT
DECEMBER 2019 PROJECT No. P1-128
order to comply with the META, Project implementation must be accomplished in a manner that
avoids impacts to active nests during the breeding season. If Project construction occurs
between February 1 and September 15, a qualified biologist would conduct a nesting bird survey
prior to ground-and/or vegetation-disturbing activities to confirm the absence of nesting birds.
Compliance with the MBTA is required for Project implementation, and therefore, does not
constitute mitigation. With compliance with the MBTA, impacts to nesting birds would be less
than significant.
The Specific Plan EIR also concluded that implementation of the Specific Plan would not
interfere with migratory fish or birds. No fish species are known to occur in the portion of the
Channel that is located in Specific Plan area.Although street trees may serve as wildlife
corridors,the distance between major open space areas limit the use of the area as a wildlife
corridor for most species other than birds. In addition,the Specific Plan would protect and
maintain street trees where possible. The proposed Project, which is located within the Specific
Plan area, would not result in new significant impacts beyond those identified in the Specific
Plan EIR or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant impacts, and
no new mitigation measures are required.
e. Would the Project conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological
resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance?
Chapter 12.04.040 of the City's Municipal Code requires that no person or development shall
engage in the planting, trimming, cutting, or removal of any vegetation along any streets,
parkways, or public spaces without prior approval from the City's Public Works Department. The
proposed Project would comply with all City policies and regulations protecting biological
resources.Therefore,the proposed Project would not conflict with any plan, policy, or
ordinance relating to the protection of biological resources, and the impact would be less than
significant.
The Specific Plan EIR also concluded that implementation of the Specific Plan would not conflict
with any plan, policy, or ordinance relating to the protection of biological resources. Further, the
Specific Plan would incorporate and be consistent with existing policies regarding the protection
of biological resources.The proposed Project,which is located within the Specific Plan area,
would also incorporate and be consistent with existing policies regarding the protection of
biological resources and would,therefore, not result in new significant impacts beyond those
identified in the Specific Plan EIR. No new mitigation measures are required.
f. Would the Project conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan,
Natural Community Conservation Plan,or other approved local, regional,or state habitat
conservation plan?
The County of Orange has approved a Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) and a Natural
Community Conservation Plan (NCCP), but the City has not enrolled in such plans and is not
included in the planning area covered by these plans. Consequently,the Project will not conflict
with any such plans. While no designated HCP or NCCP exists in the Project area,the Project
4-23
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx a12/20/19»
ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM
PROJECT No. P1-128 DECEMBER 2019
would comply with all City policies and regulations protecting biological resources.Therefore,
the proposed Project would not conflict with any HCP or NCCP or other local, regional, or State
HCPs.
The Specific Plan EIR also concluded that the Specific plan area does not include any habitat
areas that are protected by an approved local, regional, or state HCP or NCCP.The proposed
Project, which is located within the Specific Plan area, would not result in new significant
impacts beyond those identified in the Specific Plan EIR, and no new mitigation measures are
required.
4.4.3.1 Mitigation Measures
The Specific Plan EIR does not include mitigation related to Biological Resources. No mitigation
would be required for the proposed Project.
4.4.4 Findings Related to Biological Resources
No New Significant Effects Requiring Major Revisions to the Specific Plan EIR. Based on the
foregoing analysis and information,there is no evidence that the proposed Project requires a major
change to the Specific Plan EIR.The Project will not result in new significant environmental impacts
related to Biological Resources, and there is no increase in the severity of impacts described in the
Specific Plan EIR.
No Substantial Change in Circumstances Requiring Revisions to the Specific Plan EIR.There is no
information in the record or otherwise available that indicates that there are substantial changes in
circumstances pertaining to Biological Resources that would require major changes to the Specific
Plan EIR.
No New Information Showing Greater Significant Effects than the Specific Plan EIR.This Initial
Study/Addendum has analyzed all available relevant information to determine whether there is new
information that was not available at the time the Specific Plan EIR was adopted, which would
indicate that a new significant effect not reported in that document might occur. Based on the
information and analyses above,there is no substantial new information indicating that there would
be a new significant impact related to Biological Resources requiring major revisions to the Specific
Plan EIR.
No New Information Showing Ability to Reduce Significant Effects in the Specific Plan EIR. The
proposed Project would not result in any potentially significant impacts related to Biological
Resources. CEQA does not require consideration of alternatives to the Project or consideration of
additional mitigation measures because there would not be any significant impacts to avoid or
reduce related to this topic, and no mitigation is required.
4-24
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx(12/20/19)
INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT i2
DECEMBER 2019 PROJECT No. P1-128
4.5 CULTURAL RESOURCES
New Significant More Severe No Substantial Change
Impact Impact from Previous Analysis
Would the Project:
a. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a ❑ ❑
historical resource as defined in§15064.5?
b. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an ❑ ❑
archaeological resource pursuant to§15064.5?
c. Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological ❑ ❑
resource or site or unique geologic feature?
d. Disturb any human remains,including those interred ❑ ❑
outside of formal cemeteries?
4.5.1 Existing Setting
According to the Specific Plan EIR,the City is located in the Santa Ana Valley-Capistrano Valley
Province, which is a lowland strip separating the coastal hills from the Santa Ana Mountains.This
province includes the flood plain of the northern segment of the Santa Ana River where it flows
through the City.The geology in this area does not contain abundant paleontological resources.
Fossils primarily consist of non-marine species from the Pleistocene and Holocene ages, including
mammoth, bison, horse, camel, sloth, and a variety of birds.
The Specific Plan area was largely developed in the 1970s and primarily consists of industrial uses.
The City's General Plan does not contain a Historic Preservation Element, and no historic or older
structures are known to be located within the Specific Plan area. Although the area has been heavily
developed, subsurface archaeological or paleontological resources that have not been previously
evaluated could potentially exist within the Specific Plan area, including the Project site.
4.5.2 Impacts Identified in the Specific Plan EIR
Cultural Resources are included within Section 4.3, Effects Found Not to be Significant, on pages 4-6
through 4-7 of the Specific Plan EIR; this topic was also discussed on pages 27 through 29 of the
Initial Study and was scoped out.
The Specific Plan EIR determined that redevelopment activities associated with implementation of
the Specific Plan would occur in previously disturbed areas, so it is unlikely that cultural resources
would be encountered. However, the potential remains that previously undiscovered resources
could be exposed during construction activities.The Specific Plan EIR concluded that inclusion of
standard conditions during discretionary project review and approval, including compliance with the
State CEQA Guidelines relating to protocols for discovery of important historic and pre-historic
resources, would ensure that potential impacts to such resources would be reduced to a less than
significant level.Therefore, based on the limited potential for undiscovered cultural resources to
exist within the Specific Plan area and existing procedure requirements regulating the discovery of
buried resources, impacts on cultural resources would be less than significant.
4-25
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx a12/20/19»
ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM
PROJECT No. P1-128 DECEMBER 2019
4.5.3 Analysis of Project Impacts
a. Would the Project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical
resource as defined in §15064.5?
CEQA defines a "historical resource" as a resource that meets one or more of the following
criteria: (1) listed in, or determined eligible for listing in,the California Register of Historical
Resources; (2) listed in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources
Code (PRC) Section 5020.1(k); (3) identified as significant in a historical resource survey meeting
the requirements of PRC Section 5024.1(g); or(4) determined to be a historical resource by a
project's Lead Agency (PRC Section 21084.1 and State CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5[a]).
In its existing condition, the Project site includes five one-and two-story industrial warehouse
buildings that were constructed in 1971.The Project would include the demolition of the five
existing industrial warehouse buildings on the Project site.The City's General Plan does not
contain a Historic Preservation Element and does not provide criteria for identification of
potential historic resources. Based on the analysis contained in the Specific Plan EIR,there are
no historic structures located within the Specific Plan area. A Historic Resources Assessment
(ESA 2018) was prepared for OCSD's Plant No. 1 and included a records search at the California
Historical Resources Information System (CHRIS) South Central Coastal Information Center
(SCCIC), conducted on August 23, 2017.According to the Historic Resources Assessment, Plant
No. 1 and adjacent properties, which include the Project site, are not eligible for inclusion in the
National Register of Historic Places (National Register),the California Register of Historical
Resources (California Register), or the Statewide Historical Resources Inventory(HRI) database
maintained by the California Office of Historic Preservation (OHP). As a result, the Project will
not cause a substantial change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in Section
15064.5.
The Specific Plan EIR concluded that the Specific Plan area does not include any historic or older
structures.The proposed Project, which is located within the Specific Plan area, would not result
in new significant impacts beyond those identified in the Specific Plan EIR or a substantial
increase in the severity of previously identified significant impacts, and no new mitigation
measures are required.
b. Would the Project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological
resource pursuant to§15064.5?
According to the Specific Plan EIR, soils within the Specific Plan area consist of approximately 80
percent Hueneme fine sandy loam, drained, and 20 percent Metz loamy sand, moderately fine
substratum. In its existing state, the Project site is developed with industrial uses and associated
paved surface parking lots.The Project site has been previously disturbed and significantly
altered as a result of past construction activities on the site.
The proposed Project would include the demolition of five existing industrial warehouse
buildings on the Project site. Soils on the Project site have been disturbed previously from
development of the existing warehouse buildings, and any unknown archaeological resources
4-26
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx(12/20/19)
ItA
INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT 4 i2
DECEMBER 2019 PROJECT No. P1-128
would have likely been unearthed at the time of previous activities on the Project site. New
ground-disturbing activities associated with Project construction activities are unlikely to disturb
any previously unknown archaeological resources. In the unlikely event that previously
undiscovered archaeological resources are found, implementation of standard conditions
required by the City of Fountain Valley, including compliance with State CEQA Guidelines Section
15064.5(f) relating to provisions for the accidental discovery of important historic or unique
archaeological resources, would ensure that potential impacts to previously undiscovered
archaeological resources would be less than significant.
The Specific Plan EIR concluded that the presence of cultural resources in the Specific Plan area
is unlikely due to the developed nature of the area. Additionally, the Specific Plan EIR
determined that adherence to City of Fountain Valley standard conditions related to the
unanticipated discovery of archaeological resources would ensure that impacts to cultural
resources would be less than significant should any be recovered within the Specific Plan area.
The proposed Project, which is located within the Specific Plan area,would not result in new
significant impacts beyond those identified in the Specific Plan EIR or a substantial increase in
the severity of previously identified significant impacts, and no new mitigation measures are
required.
c. Would the Project directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or
unique geologic feature?
Similar to Response 4.5.3 (b), the Project site has been previously disturbed and significantly
altered as a result of past construction activities on the site. Due to the developed nature of the
site and surrounding area, it is likely that any unknown paleontological resources would have
been unearthed at the time of previous activities on the Project site.
The Project would include the demolition of five existing industrial warehouse buildings on the
Project site. Soils on the Project site have been disturbed previously from development of the
existing industrial warehouse buildings, and any unknown paleontological resources would have
likely been unearthed at the time of previous activities on the site. New ground-disturbing
activities associated with Project construction activities are unlikely to disturb any previously
unknown paleontological resources. In the unlikely event paleontological resources are
encountered during project excavation, compliance with standard conditions required by the
City of Fountain Valley for protection of such resources would ensure that impacts to unknown
paleontological resources would be less than significant.
The Specific Plan EIR concluded that the Specific Plan area does not contain abundant
paleontological resources.Additionally,the Specific Plan EIR determined that adherence to City
of Fountain Valley standard conditions related to the unanticipated discovery of paleontological
resources would ensure that impacts to paleontological resources would be less than significant
should any be recovered within the Specific Plan area.The proposed Project, which is located
within the Specific Plan area,would not result in new significant impacts beyond those identified
in the Specific Plan EIR or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant
impacts, and no new mitigation measures are required.
4-27
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx a12/20/19»
ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM
PROJECT No. P1-128 DECEMBER 2019
d. Would the Project disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal
cemeteries?
No known human remains are interred on the Project site. Due to the level of past disturbance
on the Project site, it is not anticipated that human remains, including those interred outside of
formal cemeteries, would be encountered during earth removal or disturbance activities. In the
unlikely event that human remains are encountered during Project grading,the proper
authorities would be notified and standard procedures for the respectful handling of human
remains during the earthmoving activities would be adhered to in compliance with State Health
and Safety Code Section 7050.5 and PRC Section 5097.98. Following compliance with existing
State regulations, impacts to unknown human remains would be considered less than
significant.
The Specific Plan EIR concluded that the Specific Plan area does not likely contain any
undiscovered human remains. Additionally, the Specific Plan EIR determined that compliance
with State Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 and PRC Section 5097.98 would ensure that
impacts to human remains would be less than significant should any be recovered within the
Specific Plan area.The proposed Project would not result in new significant impacts beyond
those identified in the Specific Plan EIR or a substantial increase in the severity of previously
identified significant impacts, and no new mitigation measures are required.
4.5.3.1 Mitigation Measures
The Specific Plan EIR does not include mitigation related to cultural resources. No mitigation would
be required for the proposed Project.
4.5.4 Findings Related to Cultural Resources
No New Significant Effects Requiring Major Revisions to the Specific Plan EIR. Based on the
foregoing analysis and information,there is no evidence that the proposed Project requires a major
change to the Specific Plan EIR.The Project will not result in new significant environmental impacts
related to Cultural Resources, and there is no increase in the severity of impacts described in the
Specific Plan EIR.
No Substantial Change in Circumstances Requiring Revisions to the Specific Plan EIR.There is no
information in the record or otherwise available that indicates that there are substantial changes in
circumstances pertaining to Cultural Resources that would require major changes to the Specific
Plan EIR.
No New Information Showing Greater Significant Effects than the Specific Plan EIR.This Initial
Study/Addendum has analyzed all available relevant information to determine whether there is new
information that was not available at the time the Specific Plan EIR was adopted, which would
indicate that a new significant effect not reported in that document might occur. Based on the
information and analyses above,there is no substantial new information indicating that there would
be a new significant impact related to Cultural Resources requiring major revisions to the Specific
Plan EIR.
4-28
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx(12/20/19)
INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT
DECEMBER 2019 PROJECT No. P1-128
No New Information Showing Ability to Reduce Significant Effects in the Specific Plan EIR. The
proposed Project would not result in any potentially significant impacts related to Cultural
Resources. CEQA does not require consideration of alternatives to the Project or consideration of
additional mitigation measures because there would not be any significant impacts to avoid or
reduce related to this topic, and no mitigation is required.
4-29
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx a12/20/19»
ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM
PROJECT No. P1-128 DECEMBER 2019
4.6 ENERGY CONSERVATION
New Significant More Severe No Substantial Change
Impact Impact from Previous Analysis
Would the Project:
a. Use large amounts of fuel or energy in an unnecessary, ❑ ❑
wasteful,or inefficient manner.
b. Constrain local or regional energy supplies,affect peak and
base periods of electrical demand,require or result in the
construction of new electrical generation and/or ❑ ❑
transmission facilities,or necessitate the expansion of
existing facilities,the construction of which could cause
significant environmental effects.
c. Conflict with existing energy standards,including standards ❑ ❑
for energy conservation.
4.6.1 Existing Setting
This section evaluates the potential for energy-related impacts associated with the Project and ways
in which the Project would reduce unnecessary energy consumption, consistent with the
suggestions contained in Appendix F of the State CEQA Guidelines. Energy service providers to the
site include Southern California Edison (SCE)for electrical service and Southern California Gas
Company(SCG)for natural gas.
4.6.2 Impacts Identified in the Specific Plan EIR
The Specific Plan EIR analyzed the Specific Plan's potential Energy Conservation impacts on pages
3.13-1 through 3.13-12.
The Specific Plan EIR evaluated issues related to energy conservation associated with
implementation of the Specific Plan.The Specific Plan EIR found that the Specific Plan would
increase energy demand, but would not result in wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption
of energy.The Specific Plan EIR also determined that implementation of standard regulations, as
well as conformance with the City-adopted 2013 California Energy Code,the California Green
Building Standards Code, and policies of the City General Plan would reduce potential impacts.This
impact was considered to be less than significant.
The Specific Plan EIR also determined that implementation of the Specific Plan would not constrain
local or regional energy supplies, necessitating the construction of new or expansion of existing
electrical generation of transmission facilities, resulting in a less than significant impact.
In addition, the Specific Plan EIR found that implementation of the Specific Plan would require new
development within the Specific Plan area to comply with federal, State, and local regulations
governing the use and conservation of energy resources. It was also determined that much of the
redevelopment associated with the Specific Plan would increase energy efficiency and conservation
throughout the Specific Plan area, resulting in a beneficial impact.
4-30
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx(12/20/19)
INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT
DECEMBER 2019 PROJECT No. P1-128
4.6.3 Analysis of Project Impacts
a. Would the Project use large amounts of fuel or energy in an unnecessary,wasteful, or
inefficient manner.
Similar to build out of the Specific Plan,the proposed Project would increase the demand for
electricity and natural gas within the Project area, due to the construction and operation of an
approximately 109,914 sf administration building.Table F, below, shows the estimated potential
increased electricity demand associated with the proposed Project, and Table G, below, shows
the estimated potential increase in natural gas demand associated with the proposed Project.
As shown in Table F,the estimated potential increased electricity demand associated with the
proposed Project is 1.8 gigawatt hour(GWh) per year, while the Specific Plan EIR determined
that build out of the Specific Plan would increase electricity demand by 10.9 GWh per year.
Therefore,the proposed Project would not increase electricity demand beyond the demand
identified in the Specific Plan EIR. In addition, as shown in Table G,the estimated potential
natural gas demand associated with the proposed Project is 19,785 therms (thm) per year, while
the Specific Plan EIR determined that build out of the Specific Plan would increase natural gas
demand by 333,871.9 thm per year.Therefore,the proposed Project would also not increase
natural gas demand beyond demand identified in the Specific Plan EIR.
Table F: Electricity Demand from Proposed Project
Land Use Consumption Factor' Projected Change in Land Estimated Electricity
Use
Administration/Office 16.08 kWh/sf/yr 109,914 sf 1.8 GWh/yr
Source:California Energy Commission(2006);compiled by LSA(November 2019).
Estimated electricity demand for office uses were calculated using statewide average energy consumption factors by land use as
documented in the California Energy Commission's California Commercial End-use Survey.
GWh=gigawatt hour
kWh=kilowatt hour
sf=square foot/feet
yr=year
Table G: Natural Gas Demand from Proposed Project
Land Use Consumption Factor' Projected Change in Land Estimated Natural Gas
Use
Administration/Office 0.18 thm/sf/yr 109,914 sf 19,785 thm/yr
Source:California Energy Commission(2006);compiled by LSA(November 2019).
Estimated natural gas demand for office uses were calculated using statewide average energy consumption factors by land use as
documented in the California Energy Commission's California Commercial End-use Survey.
sf=square foot/feet
thm=therms
yr=year
4-31
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx«12/20/19»
ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM
PROJECT No. P1-128 DECEMBER 2019
In addition, as discussed in the Specific Plan EIR,this estimated energy demand is highly
conservative as the demand factors do not account for the most current efficiency standards of
the Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations (California Green Building Standards Code
[CALGreen]). Implementation of the proposed Project would be required to comply with
applicable federal, State, and local rules and regulations governing the use and conservation of
California's energy resources. Development under the proposed Project would be required to
comply with the regulations of the current California Energy Code, which was adopted by the
City as the Energy Code under Chapter 18.22 of the Fountain Valley Municipal Code, as well as
the City-adopted CALGreen. In addition,the new building would be designed to achieve LEED
Platinum Certification. Therefore,the proposed Project would be consistent with adopted codes
and regulations, and would not contribute to the wasteful or inefficient consumption of energy
resources.
While the Project would result in an increase in electricity and natural gas consumption, the
proposed Project would be consistent with federal, State, and locally established goals, policies,
and regulation governing energy conservation and fostering sustainable development,the
proposed Project is not expected to result in the substantially wasteful or inefficient use of
California's energy resources.Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project is considered
to have a less than significant impact on the consumption and use of energy resources.
The Specific Plan EIR determined that the Specific Plan would not result in the wasteful or
inefficient use of California's energy resources.The proposed Project would not increase
electricity or natural gas demand beyond the demand identified in the Specific Plan EIR.
Therefore,the proposed Project would not result in new significant impacts beyond those
identified in the Specific Plan EIR or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified
significant impacts, and no new mitigation measures are required.
b. Would the Project constrain local or regional energy supplies,affect peak and base periods of
electrical demand, require or result in the construction of new electrical generation and/or
transmission facilities, or necessitate the expansion of existing facilities,the construction of
which could cause significant environmental effects.
The proposed Project is located in the City of Fountain Valley,which is within the County of
Orange (County).The Specific Plan EIR determined that at the time the Specific Plan EIR was
prepared, the Specific Plan area contributed to approximately 36.16 GWh per year of energy
demand, which is approximately 0.17 percent of the County's total energy demand.As discussed
above,the Specific Plan EIR also determined that build out of the Specific Plan would result in an
increase in electricity demand of approximately 10.9 GWh per year, which would result in an
incremental increase in County energy demand for SCE services by approximately 0.0005
percent. As discussed above,the proposed Project would increase energy demand by
approximately 1.8 GWh per year, which would be less than the electricity demand evaluated in
the Specific Plan EIR. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would negligibly affect
local or regional energy supplies.
4-32
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx(12/20/19)
INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT 4 i2 ItA
DECEMBER 2019 PROJECT No. P1-128
The Specific Plan EIR determined that the Specific Plan would result in an incremental increase
in County energy demand for SCE services that would be less than significant.The electricity
demand for the proposed Project would be less than the electricity demand evaluated in the
Specific Plan EIR.Therefore, the proposed Project would not result in new significant impacts
beyond those identified in the Specific Plan EIR or a substantial increase in the severity of
previously identified significant impacts, and no new mitigation measures are required.
c. Would the Project conflict with existing energy standards, including standards for energy
conservation.
The proposed Project would be required to comply with City-adopted codes and regulations
governing energy-efficient design and sustainable development. In addition,the proposed
Project would be designed to achieve LEED Platinum Certification, which would increase energy
efficiency and conservation, and reduce wasteful use of energy resources.Therefore, similar to
implementation of the Specific Plan, it is anticipated that the proposed Project would increase
energy efficiency and conservation.
The Specific Plan EIR determined that the Project would increase energy efficiency and
conservation throughout the Specific Plan area, resulting in a beneficial impact. Similarly,the
proposed Project would implement an energy-efficient design and sustainable development,
and would not result in new significant impacts beyond those identified in the Specific Plan EIR
or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant impacts. No new
mitigation measures are required.
4.6.3.1 Mitigation Measures
The Specific Plan EIR does not include mitigation related to energy conservation. No mitigation
would be required for the proposed Project.
4.6.4 Findings Related to Energy Conservation
No New Significant Effects Requiring Major Revisions to the Specific Plan EIR. Based on the
foregoing analysis and information,there is no evidence that the proposed Project requires a major
change to the Specific Plan EIR.The Project will not result in new significant environmental impacts
related to Energy Conservation, and there is no substantial increase in the severity of impacts
described in the Specific Plan EIR.
No Substantial Change in Circumstances Requiring Revisions to the Specific Plan EIR.There is no
information in the record or otherwise available that indicates that there are substantial changes in
circumstances pertaining to Energy Conservation that would require major changes to the Specific
Plan EIR.
No New Information Showing Greater Significant Effects than the Specific Plan EIR.This Initial
Study/Addendum has analyzed all available relevant information to determine whether there is new
information that was not available at the time the Specific Plan EIR was adopted, which would
indicate that a new significant effect not reported in that document might occur. Based on the
4-33
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx a12/20/19»
ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM
PROJECT No. P1-128 DECEMBER 2019
information and analyses above,there is no substantial new information indicating that there would
be a new significant impact related to Energy Conservation requiring major revisions to the Specific
Plan EIR.
No New Information Showing Ability to Reduce Significant Effects in the Specific Plan EIR. The
proposed Project would not result in any potentially significant impacts related to Energy
Conservation. CEQA does not require consideration of alternatives to the Project or consideration of
additional mitigation measures because there would not be any significant impacts to avoid or
reduce related to this topic, and no mitigation is required.
4-34
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx(12/20/19)
INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT i2
DECEMBER 2019 PROJECT No. P1-128
4.7 GEOLOGY AND SOILS
New Significant More Severe No Substantial Change
Impact Impact from Previous Analysis
Would the Project:
a. Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse
effects,including the risk of loss,injury,or death involving:
I. Rupture of a known earthquake fault,as delineated on
the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning ❑ ❑
Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based
on other substantial evidence of a known fault?
ii. Strong seismic ground shaking? ❑ ❑
iii.Seismic-related ground failure,including liquefaction? ❑ ❑
iv. Landslides? ❑ ❑
b. Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? ❑ ❑
c. Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable,or that
would become unstable as a result of the Project,and ❑ ❑
potentially result in on-or off-site landslide,lateral
spreading,subsidence,liquefaction or collapse?
d. Be located on expansive soil,as defined in Table 18-1-B of
the Uniform Building Code(1994),creating substantial risks ❑ ❑
to life or property?
e. Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of
septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems ❑ ❑
where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste
water?
4.7.1 Existing Setting
The Project area is located within the seismically active region of southern California. However,
according to the State of California Department of Conservation Earthquake Zones of Required
Investigation for the Newport Beach Quadrangle,the Project site is not in an identified Alquist-Priolo
Earthquake Fault Zone.The nearest identified Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone is approximately
4 miles southwest of the Project site.
According to the United States Department of Agriculture Natural Resources Conservation Service's
Web Soil Survey,the soils on the Project site are comprised entirely of Hueneme fine sandy loam,
drained.The shrink-swell potential for Hueneme fine sandy loam, drained, is slight.
According to the City's Public Safety Element of the General Plan,the area along the Santa Ana River
and south of the 1-405,which includes the Project area, has a high potential for liquefaction. In
addition, the City of Fountain Valley, including the Project site, is located within an area of known
subsidence.
4.7.2 Impacts Identified in the Specific Plan EIR
The Specific Plan EIR analyzed the Specific Plan's potential Geology and Soils impacts on pages 3.3-1
through 3.3-12.
4-35
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx a12/20/19»
ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM
PROJECT No. P1-128 DECEMBER 2019
As detailed in the Specific Plan EIR, new land uses anticipated to occur under within the Specific Plan
area would potentially be exposed to moderate to strong seismic ground shaking in the event of an
earthquake on a nearby fault (i.e.,the Newport-Inglewood Fault or the San Andreas Fault). All new
structures constructed in the Specific Plan area would be required to adhere to the most current
building standards of the Fountain Valley Municipal Code and the Fountain Valley Building Code,
which adopt California Building Code (CBC) standards by reference with local amendments.
Compliance with the CBC includes seismic design and construction parameters to ensure the
protection of structures and occupants from seismic hazards during an earthquake. In addition,
applicants of new projects would be required to prepare and submit a site-specific geotechnical
report for review and approval by the City's Building and Safety Division prior to the issuance of a
grading or a building permit. Design of future projects would be required to incorporate the design
requirements for structures and foundations to maintain structural integrity during an earthquake
that are identified in the geotechnical report. In addition, no known faults traverse the Specific Plan
area, and the Specific Plan area is not located in an Alquist-Priolo Fault Zone.Therefore,the Specific
Plan EIR concluded that there is no reasonably foreseeable hazard of fault rupture in the Specific
Plan area, and impacts would be less than significant.
According to the Specific Plan EIR,the City has a very high potential for liquefaction, due to the high
groundwater level (within 10 ft of the surface) throughout the City.The entire City is mapped within
an area potentially susceptible to liquefaction according to the Newport Beach Quadrangle Seismic
Hazard Zone map. Further,the City of Fountain Valley is located within an area of known subsidence
associated with drainage of organic and peat soils.All new structures constructed in the Specific
Plan area would be required to adhere to the most current building standards of the Fountain Valley
Municipal Code,the Fountain Valley Building Code, and the CBC. Adherence to the applicable
building codes, specifically to the soil stability construction parameters, would ensure the maximum
practicable protection available for all structures constructed within the Specific Plan area and their
occupants and visitors. Compliance with the CBC includes procedures to ensure the protection of
structures and occupants from liquefaction and subsidence hazards.As a result, impacts related to
soil instability would be less than significant.
The Specific Plan EIR concluded that, because there are no soils in the Specific Plan area that have a
high expansion potential,the potential for expansive soils to create substantial risks to life or
property would be less than significant.
According to the Specific Plan EIR,the Specific Plan area is developed with most of the land surface
covered by impervious materials such as buildings and paved parking areas. Due to the very small
quantity of soil currently exposed at the surface, and the relatively level topography of the Specific
Plan area,the Specific Plan EIR concluded that the potential for erosion hazards is low.
The Specific Plan EIR concluded that no impacts related to alternative wastewater disposal systems
would occur because the Specific Plan area does not involve use or development of septic tanks or
alternative wastewater disposal systems as sewers are available for the disposal of wastewater.
4-36
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx(12/20/19)
INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT
DECEMBER 2019 PROJECT No. P1-128
4.7.3 Analysis of Project Impacts
a. Would the Project expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects,
including the risk of loss, injury,or death involving:
i. Would the Project expose people or structures to a rupture of a known earthquake fault,
as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by
the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault?
The Project site is located in southern California,which is a seismically active region.
However,the Project site is not in an identified Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone.
Therefore,the proposed Project would not expose people or structures to substantial
adverse effects involving the rupture of a known earthquake fault as delineated on the most
recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map, and no mitigation is required.
The Specific Plan EIR concluded that there is no reasonably foreseeable hazard or fault
rupture in the Specific Plan area and that such impacts would be less than significant.The
proposed Project,which is located in the Specific Plan area, would not result in new
significant impacts beyond those identified in the Specific Plan EIR or a substantial increase
in the severity of previously identified significant impacts, and no new mitigation measures
are required.
ii. Would the Project expose people or structures to a strong seismic ground shaking?
The Project site is located in southern California, a known seismically active region.Active
and potentially active faults in southern California are capable of producing seismic shaking
on the Project site.Thus, it is likely the proposed Project site would periodically experience
ground acceleration as a result of exposure to moderate-to-large magnitude earthquakes,
and seismic ground shaking on one of the nearby regional faults may cause damage to
development.Therefore,the Project has the potential to expose people and structures to
substantial adverse effects related to the site and regional geology, including those
associated with strong seismic ground shaking.
Project design would comply with the seismic design standards and construction parameters
of the CBC,the Fountain Valley Municipal Code, and the Fountain Valley Building Code. In
addition, as part of the discretionary project review process, a Project-specific geotechnical
report would be prepared for the Project,which would identify design requirements for
structures and foundations to maintain structural integrity during an earthquake.The
geotechnical report recommendations would be incorporated into the design of the
proposed Project. Compliance with the design requirements of the CBC and implementation
of the recommendations of the geotechnical report would ensure that impacts related to
strong seismic ground shaking would be less than significant. No mitigation is required.
The Specific Plan EIR concluded that impacts related to strong seismic shaking would be less
than significant with compliance with the CBC and Project-specific geotechnical report
recommendations.The proposed Project would also comply with the CBC and the Project-
4-37
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx a12/20/19»
ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM
PROJECT No. P1-128 DECEMBER 2019
specific geotechnical report recommendations and would, therefore, not result in new
significant impacts beyond those identified in the Specific Plan EIR or a substantial increase
in the severity of previously identified significant impacts. No new mitigation measures are
required.
iii. Would the Project expose people or structures to a seismic-related ground failure,
including liquefaction?
The Project has the potential to expose people and structures to substantial adverse effects
related to the site and regional geology, including those associated with liquefaction.As
stated above, the Project site is mapped within an area with a high potential for
liquefaction. According to the City's Municipal Code, Section 21.14.050,the Project site is in
the Seismic Hazard (SH) overlay zoning district.This section states that development in the
SH overlay zone may be subject to specific design requirements and preparation of a site-
specific soils report due to the high potential for liquefaction to take place. A site-specific
geotechnical report will be prepared for the Project and will include recommendations to
address effects related to or resulting from geologic conditions. In addition,the Project
design will comply with the design requirements of the CBC to address any potential for
seismic-related ground failure that is identified in the geotechnical report. Compliance with
the design requirements of the CBC and implementation of the recommendations of the
geotechnical report would ensure that impacts related to seismic-related ground failure
would be less than significant. No mitigation is required.
The Specific Plan EIR concluded that impacts related to seismic-related ground failure would
be less than significant with compliance with the CBC and Project-specific geotechnical
report recommendations.The proposed Project would also comply with the CBC and
Project-specific geotechnical report recommendations and would, therefore, not result in
new significant impacts beyond those identified in the Specific Plan EIR or a substantial
increase in the severity of previously identified significant impacts. No new mitigation
measures are required.
iv. Would the Project expose people or structures to landslides?
The Project site is relatively flat, and no substantial hillsides or unstable slopes are
immediately adjacent to the site boundary. As a result,there is no potential for landslide
hazards, and no mitigation is required.
The Specific Plan EIR concluded that the risk of landslide and slope instability is minimal as a
result of the relatively level topography of the City.The proposed Project, which is located
within the Specific Plan area,would not result in new significant impacts beyond those
identified in the Specific Plan EIR or a substantial increase in the severity of previously
identified significant impacts, and no new mitigation measures are required.
4-38
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx(12/20/19)
ItA
INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT 4 i2
DECEMBER 2019 PROJECT No. P1-128
b. Would the Project result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil?
As discussed in Section 4.10, Hydrology and Water Quality, construction activities would disturb
and expose topsoil and increase the potential for erosion. However, Project construction would
comply with the requirements of the Construction General Permit, including preparation of a
Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) and implementation of Construction Best
Management Practices (BMPs). Construction BMPs would include, but not be limited to, Erosion
Control and Sediment Control BMPs designed to minimize erosion and retain sediment on site.
Compliance with the Construction General Permit would ensure that impacts related to erosion
would be low.
In the proposed condition, a portion of the Project site would be impervious surface area and
not prone to on-site erosion because no soil would be included in these areas.The remaining
portion of the site would consist of pervious area, which would contain landscaping that would
minimize on-site erosion by stabilizing the soil and allowing for infiltration.Therefore, impacts
related to erosion would be low and less than significant. No mitigation is required.
The Specific Plan EIR concluded that, due to the very small quantity of soil currently exposed at
the surface, and the relatively level topography of the Specific Plan area,the potential for
erosion hazards is low. Similarly,the proposed Project is located within the Specific Plan area
and proposes development of a majority of the site with impervious structures with little soil
exposed at the surface.Therefore,the proposed Project would not result in new significant
impacts beyond those identified in the Specific Plan EIR or a substantial increase in the severity
of previously identified significant impacts, and no new mitigation measures are required.
c. Would the Project be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become
unstable as a result of the Project,and potentially result in on-or off-site landslide, lateral
spreading,subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse?
Refer to Responses 4.6 (a) (iii) and (iv), above,for discussion on the potential impacts associated
with liquefaction and landslides, respectively.There are no substantial hillsides or unstable
slopes on the Project site;therefore,there is no potential for landslide hazards. However,the
Project is located in the City of Fountain Valley, which is mapped as susceptible to subsidence
and liquefaction. A site-specific geotechnical report will be prepared for the Project site to
identify any geologic conditions that could affect the Project.The geotechnical report will
include recommendations to address effects related to or resulting from any identified geologic
conditions. In addition, the Project design will comply with the design requirements of the CBC
to address any potential for unstable geologic units or unstable soils that are identified in the
geotechnical report. Compliance with the design requirements of the CBC and implementation
of the recommendations of the geotechnical report would ensure that impacts related to
unstable geologic units or soils would be less than significant. No mitigation is required.
The Specific Plan EIR concluded that impacts related to unstable geologic units or soils would be
less than significant with compliance with the CBC and Project-specific geotechnical report
recommendations.The proposed Project would comply with the CBC requirements and
4-39
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx a12/20/19»
ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM
PROJECT No. P1-128 DECEMBER 2019
recommendations of the geotechnical report and would,therefore, not result in new significant
impacts beyond those identified in the Specific Plan EIR or a substantial increase in the severity
of previously identified significant impacts. No new mitigation measures are required.
d. Would the Project be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform
Building Code(1994), creating substantial risks to life or property?
As discussed previously, the soils on the Project site are comprised entirely of Hueneme fine
sandy loam, drained, which has a slight shrink-swell potential.Therefore,the on-site soils do not
have a high expansion potential.The potential of the Project being located on expansive soils
thereby creating substantial risks to life or property would be less than significant. No mitigation
is required.
The Specific Plan EIR concluded that, because there are no soils in the Project site that have a
high expansion potential,the potential for expansive soils to create substantial risks to life or
property would be less than significant. The proposed Project, which is located within the
Specific Plan area, would not result in new significant impacts beyond those identified in the
Specific Plan EIR or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant
impacts, and no new mitigation measures are required.
e. Would the Project have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or
alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of
waste water?
The proposed Project would not include the use of septic tanks or alternative methods for
disposal of wastewater into subsurface soils. No on-site sewage disposal systems (e.g., septic
tanks) are planned. The proposed Project would connect to existing public wastewater
infrastructure.Therefore, the proposed Project would not result in any impacts related to septic
tanks or alternative wastewater disposal methods. No mitigation is required.
The Specific Plan EIR concluded that no impacts related to alternative wastewater disposal
systems would occur because sewers are available for the disposal of wastewater.The proposed
Project, which would also connect to sewers for wastewater, would not result in new significant
impacts beyond those identified in the Specific Plan EIR or a substantial increase in the severity
of previously identified significant impacts, and no new mitigation measures are required.
4.7.3.1 Mitigation Measures
The Specific Plan EIR does not include mitigation related to Geology and Soils. No additional
mitigation measures would be required for the proposed Project.
4.7.4 Findings Related to Geology and Soils
No New Significant Effects Requiring Major Revisions to the Specific Plan EIR. Based on the
foregoing analysis and information,there is no evidence that the proposed Project requires a major
change to the Specific Plan EIR.The Project will not result in new significant environmental impacts
4-40
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx(12/20/19)
INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT
DECEMBER 2019 PROJECT No. P1-128
related to Geology and Soils, and there is no substantial increase in the severity of impacts described
in the Specific Plan EIR.
No Substantial Change in Circumstances Requiring Revisions to the Specific Plan EIR.There is no
information in the record or otherwise available that indicates that there are substantial changes in
circumstances pertaining to Geology and Soils that would require major changes to the Specific Plan
EIR.
No New Information Showing Greater Significant Effects than the Specific Plan EIR.This Initial
Study/Addendum has analyzed all available relevant information to determine whether there is new
information that was not available at the time the Specific Plan EIR was adopted, which would
indicate that a new significant effect not reported in that document might occur. Based on the
information and analyses above,there is no substantial new information indicating that there would
be a new significant impact related to Geology and Soils requiring major revisions to the Specific
Plan EIR.
No New Information Showing Ability to Reduce Significant Effects in the Specific Plan EIR. The
proposed Project would not result in any potentially significant impacts related to Geology and Soils.
CEQA does not require consideration of alternatives to the Project or consideration of additional
mitigation measures because there would not be any significant impacts to avoid or reduce related
to this topic, and no mitigation is required.
4-41
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx a12/20/19»
ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM
PROJECT No. P1-128 DECEMBER 2019
4.8 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
New Significant More Severe No Substantial Change
Impact Impact from Previous Analysis
Would the Project:
a. Generate greenhouse gas emissions,either directly or
indirectly,that may have a significant impact on the ❑ ❑ ❑
environment?
b. Conflict with an applicable plan,policy or regulation
adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of ❑ ❑
greenhouse gases?
4.8.1 Existing Setting
Greenhouse gases (GHGs) are present in the atmosphere naturally, are released by natural sources,
or are formed from secondary reactions taking place in the atmosphere. However, over the last 200
years, human activities have caused substantial quantities of GHGs to be released into the atmos-
phere.These extra emissions are increasing GHG concentrations in the atmosphere, and enhancing
the natural greenhouse effect,which is believed to be causing global climate change. The gases that
are widely seen as the principal contributors to human-induced global climate change are:
• Carbon dioxide (CO2)
• Methane (CH4)
• Nitrous oxide (N20)
• Hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs)
• Perfluorocarbons (PFCs)
• Sulfur Hexafluoride (SF6)
While GHGs produced by human activities include naturally-occurring GHGs such as CO2, CH4, and
N20, some gases, like HFCs, PFCs, and SF6 are completely new to the atmosphere. Certain other
gases, such as water vapor, are short-lived in the atmosphere compared to those GHGs that remain
in the atmosphere for significant periods of time, contributing to climate change in the long term.
Water vapor is generally excluded from the list of GHGs because it is short-lived in the atmosphere
and its atmospheric concentrations are largely determined by natural processes, such as oceanic
evaporation. For the purposes of this analysis,the term "GHGs" will refer collectively to the six gases
identified in the bulleted list provided above.
Section 15064.4 of the State CEQA Guidelines states that: "A lead agency should make a good-faith
effort, based to the extent possible on scientific and factual data,to describe, calculate, or estimate
the amount of GHG emissions resulting from a project." In performing that analysis,the lead agency
has discretion to determine whether to use a model or methodology to quantify GHG emissions, or
to rely on a qualitative analysis or performance-based standards. In making a determination as to
the significance of potential impacts,the lead agency then considers the extent to which the Project
may increase or reduce GHG emissions as compared to the existing environmental setting, whether
the Project emissions exceed a threshold of significance that the lead agency determines applies to
the Project, and the extent to which the Project complies with regulations or requirements adopted
to implement a Statewide, regional, or local plan for the reduction or mitigation of GHG emissions.
4-42
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx(12/20/19)
ItA
INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT 4 i2
DECEMBER 2019 PROJECT No. P1-128
Currently,there is no Statewide GHG emissions threshold that has been used to determine the
potential GHG emissions impacts of a project.Thresholds and threshold methodology and are still
being developed and revised by air quality districts in the State.Therefore,this environmental issue
remains unsettled and must be evaluated on a case-by-case basis until such time as South Coast Air
Quality Management District (SCAQMD) adopts significance thresholds and GHG emissions impact
methodology. In addition, the City of Fountain Valley currently has no polices, plans, regulations,
and thresholds of significance, or other municipal laws that directly address climate change.
Therefore, in the absence of a climate action plan for the City, SCAQMD thresholds, when adopted,
would apply to future development in the City.
To provide guidance to local lead agencies on determining significance for GHG emissions in their
CEQA documents, SCAQMD convened a GHG CEQA Significance Threshold Stakeholder Working
Group (Working Group).' Based on the September 2010 Working Group meeting (Meeting No. 15),
SCAQMD suggested a "bright-line" screening-level threshold of 3,000 metric tons of carbon dioxide
equivalent (CO2e) annually for office land use types, which is applicable to the proposed Project and
is used in this analysis.
4.8.2 Impacts Identified in the Specific Plan EIR
The Specific Plan EIR analyzed the Specific Plan's potential GHG impacts on pages 3.4-1 through 3.4-
20.
The Specific Plan EIR analyzed the Specific Plan impacts related to GHGs based on the SCAQMD's
"bright-line" screening-level threshold of 3,000 metric tons of CO2e.The Specific Plan EIR
determined that implementation of the Specific Plan would generate GHG emissions both from
mobile and operational sources, as well as short-term GHG emissions from construction. GHG
emissions associated with construction and operation of the Specific Plan were quantified using
California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod). As identified in the Specific Plan EIR, short-term
construction GHG emissions were considered to be approximately 2,415.2 metric tons per year for
build out of the Specific Plan. When amortized over the 30-year life of the Specific Plan, annual
emissions would be 1,027.4 metric tons of CO2e. In addition, the Specific Plan EIR determined that
build out of the Specific Plan would result in approximately 2,472.4 metric tons of CO2e per year. As
such,the results of CaIEEMod analysis determined that impacts related to GHG emissions would be
less than significant.
In addition, the Specific Plan EIR determined that the Specific Plan would not conflict with any
applicable plan, policy, or regulation of an agency adopted for the purpose of reducing the
emissions of GHGs as Specific Plan-related GHG emissions would be below adopted regional 2035
GHG reduction goals. In addition, consistent with Southern California Association of Governments'
(SCAG) 2016-2040 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy(RTP/SCS)
alignment of transportation, land use, and housing strategies,the Specific Plan EIR determined that
' South Coast Air Quality Management District(SCAQMD).Greenhouse Gases(GHG) CEQA Significance
Thresholds.Website: http://www.agmd.gov/home/regulations/ceqa/air-quality-analysis-handbook/ghg-
significance-thresholds/(accessed May 2018).
4-43
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx a12/20/19»
ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM
PROJECT No. P1-128 DECEMBER 2019
the Specific Plan area is an infill location and would provide residential and commercial uses in
walking distance to proposed recreational uses, entertainment, and commercial retail, which would
result in reduced vehicle miles traveled (VMT), as compared to a project of similar size and land uses
at a more suburban location.
4.8.3 Analysis of Project Impacts
a. Would the Project generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly,that may
have a significant impact on the environment?
The following section describes the proposed Project's construction-and operational-related
GHG emissions and contribution to global climate change.
Construction Emissions. Construction activities associated with the proposed Project would
produce combustion emissions from various sources. During construction, GHGs would be
emitted through the operation of construction equipment and from worker and builder supply
vendor vehicles, each of which typically use fossil-based fuels to operate.The combustion of
fossil-based fuels creates GHGs such as CO2, CH4i and N20. Furthermore, CH4 is emitted during
the fueling of heavy equipment. Exhaust emissions from on-site construction activities would
vary daily as construction activity levels change.
The SCAQMD does not have an adopted threshold of significance for construction-related GHG
emissions. However, lead agencies are required to quantify and disclose GHG emissions.The
SCAQMD requires the construction GHG emissions to be amortized over the life of the Project,
defined as 30 years, added to the operational emissions, and compared to the applicable interim
GHG threshold tier. Using CalEEMod, it is estimated that the proposed Project would generate
approximately 1,083.7 metric tons of CO2e during construction of the Project (compared to
2,415.2 metric tons per year identified for build out of the Specific Plan). When amortized over
the 30-year life of the proposed Project, annual emissions would be 36.1 metric tons of CO2e
(compared to 1,027.4 metric tons per year identified for build out of the Specific Plan).
The Specific Plan EIR analysis determined that impacts related to GHG emissions would be less
than significant. Annual emissions amortized over the 30-year life of the proposed Project would
be substantially below the estimates for the Specific Plan.Therefore, construction of the
proposed Project would not result in new significant impacts beyond those identified in the
Specific Plan EIR or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant
impacts, and no new mitigation measures are required.
Operational Emissions. Development of the proposed Project would contribute to the
significant GHG impacts identified in the Specific Plan EIR. As with the Specific Plan, long-term
operation of the proposed Project would generate GHG emissions from area sources and
indirect emissions from sources associated with energy consumption. Area-source emissions
would be associated with activities such as landscaping and maintenance on the Project site,
and other sources.This analysis assumes that the proposed Project would not increase vehicle
trips as the proposed Project would construct new administration buildings and relocate these
uses from Plant No. 1 to the Project site north of Ellis Avenue.
4-44
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx(12/20/19)
INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT
DECEMBER 2019 PROJECT No. P1-128
Table H: Operational Greenhouse Gas Emissions (MT/yr)
Bio- NBio- Total
Source CH4 NZO CO2e
COz COz COz
Area Sources 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Energy Sources 0.0 515.3 515.3 0.0 0.0 517.3
Mobile Sources 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Waste Sources 15.6 0.0 15.6 0.9 0.0 38.6
Water Usage 5.2 110.8 116.0 0.5 0.0 133.6
Total Operational Emissions 20.8 626.1 646.9 1.5 0.0 689.5
Amortized Construction Emissions 36.1
Total Emissions 725.6
SCAQMD Threshold 3,000
Significant? No
Source:LSA(November 2019).
Note:While the CH4 and N20 emissions are shown as zero,some are actuallyjust less than 1.However,they do contribute to the
CO2e total.
Bio-CO2=biologically generated CO2 MT/yr=metric tons per year
CH4=methane N20=nitrous oxide
CO2=carbon dioxide NBio-CO2=Non-biologically generated CO2
CO2e=carbon dioxide equivalent SCAQMD=South Coast Air Quality Management District
Following guidance from the SCAQMD, GHG emissions were estimated for the proposed Project
using CalEEMod.Table H shows the calculated GHG emissions for the proposed Project.
CaIEEMod output sheets are provided in Appendix A.
As discussed above, according to SCAQMD, a project would have less than significant GHG
emissions if it would result in operational-related GHG emissions of less than 3,000 metric tons
Of CO2e per year. Based on the analysis results,the proposed Project would result in
approximately 725.6 metric tons of CO2e per year and,therefore, would not exceed the
SCAQMD's numeric threshold of 3,000 metric tons of CO2e per year.
The Specific Plan EIR determined that build out of the Specific Plan would result in
approximately 2,472.4 metric tons of CO2e per year, with an overall net decrease of 997.8
metric tons of CO2e per year compared to the existing land uses, and would not exceed the
SCAQMD threshold of 3,000 metric tons of CO2e per year.Therefore,the proposed Project
emissions, which are also below the SCAQMD threshold of 3,000 metric tons of CO2e per year,
would not result in new significant impacts beyond those identified in the Specific Plan EIR or a
substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant impacts, and no new
mitigation measures are required.
b. Would the Project conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the
purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases?
As indicated above,the City does not currently have an applicable plan, policy, or regulation
adopted for the purpose of reducing GHG emissions. In addition, the proposed Project would be
designed to achieve LEED Platinum Certification, which would reduce energy and water
4-45
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx a12/20/19»
ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM
PROJECT No. P1-128 DECEMBER 2019
consumption and reduce area emissions.As with implementation of the Specific Plan,the
Project would not hinder the State's GHG reduction goals established by Assembly Bill (AB) 32
and Senate Bill (SB) 375. In addition, as discussed in the Specific Plan EIR, the Specific Plan would
not conflict with the 2016-2040 SCAG RTP/SCS alignment of transportation, land use, and
housing strategies.The 2016-2040 SCAG RTP/SCS focuses on an integrated land use and
transportation strategy to reduce GHG emissions.The purpose of the SCAG RTP/SCS is to
achieve the regional per capita GHG reduction targets for the passenger vehicle and light-duty
truck sector established by CARB pursuant to SB 375.The proposed Project would involve
construction and operation of a new administration building and a surface parking lot and would
relocate the existing administrative uses from Plant No. 1 to the Project site north of Ellis
Avenue. Implementation of the proposed Project would not result in an increase in OCSD
employees because the Project is characterized as a relocation, rather than an expansion, of
existing operations.As a result, the Project would not increase existing vehicle trips. In addition,
as discussed in the Specific Plan EIR,the Specific Plan area is an infill location and would provide
residential and commercial uses in walking distance to proposed recreational uses,
entertainment, and commercial retail, which would result in reduced VMT, as compared to a
project of similar size and land uses at a more suburban location. As such,the proposed Project
would not conflict with the goals of the SCAG RTP/SCS. Therefore, the proposed Project would
not conflict with any applicable plan, policy, or regulation pertaining to GHGs, and the impact
would remain less than significant.
The Specific Plan EIR determined that build out of the Specific Plan would not conflict with any
applicable plan, policy, or regulation pertaining to GHGs. Similarly, the proposed Project, which
is designed to achieve LEED Platinum Certification and would not conflict with any applicable
plan, policy, or regulation pertaining to GHGs, would not result in new significant impacts
beyond those identified in the Specific Plan EIR or a substantial increase in the severity of
previously identified significant impacts. No new mitigation measures are required.
4.8.3.1 Mitigation Measures
The Specific Plan EIR does not include mitigation related to GHG emissions. No mitigation would be
required for the proposed Project.
4.8.4 Findings Related to Greenhouse Gas Emissions
No New Significant Effects Requiring Major Revisions to the Specific Plan EIR. Based on the
foregoing analysis and information,there is no evidence that the proposed Project requires a major
change to the Specific Plan EIR.The Project will not result in new significant environmental impacts
related to Greenhouse Gas Emissions, and there is no substantial increase in the severity of impacts
described in the Specific Plan EIR.
No Substantial Change in Circumstances Requiring Revisions to the Specific Plan EIR.There is no
information in the record or otherwise available that indicates that there are substantial changes in
circumstances pertaining to Greenhouse Gas Emissions that would require major changes to the
Specific Plan EIR.
4-46
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx(12/20/19)
INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT
DECEMBER 2019 PROJECT No. P1-128
No New Information Showing Greater Significant Effects than the Specific Plan EIR.This Initial
Study/Addendum has analyzed all available relevant information to determine whether there is new
information that was not available at the time the Specific Plan EIR was adopted, which would
indicate that a new significant effect not reported in that document might occur. Based on the
information and analyses above,there is no substantial new information indicating that there would
be a new significant impact related to Greenhouse Gas Emissions requiring major revisions to the
Specific Plan EIR.
No New Information Showing Ability to Reduce Significant Effects in the Specific Plan EIR. The
proposed Project would not result in any potentially significant impacts related to Greenhouse Gas
Emissions. CEQA does not require consideration of alternatives to the Project or consideration of
additional mitigation measures because there would not be any significant impacts to avoid or
reduce related to this topic, and no mitigation is required.
4-47
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx a12/20/19»
ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM
PROJECT No. P1-128 DECEMBER 2019
4.9 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
New Significant More Severe No Substantial Change
Impact Impact from Previous Analysis
Would the Project:
a. Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment
through the routine transport,use,or disposal of hazardous ❑ ❑ ❑
materials?
b. Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment
through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident ❑ ❑
conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into
the environment?
c. Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely
hazardous materials,substances,or waste within one- ❑ ❑
quarter mile of an existing or proposed school?
d. Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous
materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code ❑ ❑
Section 65962.5 and,as a result,would it create a
significant hazard to the public or the environment?
e. For a project located within an airport land use plan or,
where such a plan has not been adopted,within two miles
of a public airport or public use airport,would the Project ❑ ❑
result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in
the Project area?
f. For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip,would
the Project result in a safety hazard for people residing or ❑ ❑
working in the Project area?
g. Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an
adopted emergency response plan or emergency ❑ ❑
evacuation plan?
h. Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss,
injury or death involving wildland fires,including where ❑ ❑
wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where
residences are intermixed with wildlands?
4.9.1 Existing Setting
The five existing industrial warehouse buildings on the Project site were constructed in 1971 and
would be demolished upon Project implementation. Based on the ages of these buildings,there is a
potential for building materials to contain asbestos or lead-based paint (LBP).A potential release of
hazardous materials could occur when asbestos-containing materials (ACM) or LBPs are disturbed
during renovation or demolition activities.This disturbance could be harmful to human health. As
part of the Property Conditions Summary(Jacobs 2016) prepared for the Project, a hazardous
building materials (HBM) survey was conducted, which confirmed that materials containing ACMs
and LBPs are present in the existing industrial warehouse buildings on the Project site.
Standard equipment suspected of potentially containing polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) includes
industrial-capacity transformers, fluorescent light ballasts, and oil-cooled machinery.The visual
inspection of the Project site conducted as part of the Property Conditions Summary identified 461
4-48
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx(12/20/19)
INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT <
DECEMBER 2019 PROJECT No. P1-128
fluorescent light bulbs on the Project site; however,the labeling on the ballasts did not indicate the
presence of PCBs.
Other hazardous materials such as refrigerant (in heating,ventilation, and air conditioning [HVAC]
units), transformers, batteries, and numerous chemicals (e.g., spray paints, solvents, and cleaning
chemicals) were observed on the Project site during the visual inspection.
No existing or proposed schools are located within a 0.25-mile-radius of the Project site.The nearest
schools are Gisler Elementary School and Cox Elementary School, approximately 0.5 mile to the
southwest and 0.8 mile to the northwest, respectively, of the Project site.
The Project site is approximately 6 miles west of John Wayne Airport in the City of Santa Ana.
According to the Airport Land Use Commission,the Project site does not fall within the John Wayne
Airport Planning Area.There are no private airstrips in the vicinity of the Project site.
The Fountain Valley Fire Department (FVFD) is responsible for providing emergency response,fire
prevention, education, and emergency medical services to citizens and visitors to Fountain Valley.
Roads used as response corridors/evacuation routes usually follow the most direct path to or from
various parts of a community. For the Project site, and the surrounding areas,the main corridors
anticipated to be used by emergency services providers are Brookhurst Street, Ellis Avenue, 1-405,
and other arterials and freeways in this part of Fountain Valley. In addition, the City of Huntington
Beach has designated Brookhurst Street as a tsunami evacuation path.
The Project site and the surrounding areas are developed with urban and suburban uses and do not
include brush-and grass-covered areas typically found in areas susceptible to wildfires.
4.9.2 Impacts Identified in the Specific Plan EIR
The Specific Plan EIR analyzed the Specific Plan's potential Hazards and Hazardous Materials impacts
on pages 3.5-1 through 3.5-18.
According to the Specific Plan EIR,the majority of existing buildings in the Specific Plan area were
constructed in the 1960s and 1970s. Based on their age,these structures may have been
constructed with hazardous building materials such as LBPs and ACMs. In addition,fluorescent light
tubes containing mercury vapors,fluorescent light ballasts containing PCBs, and PCB-containing
electrical equipment may be present in the buildings. Demolition and excavation activities could
result in the accidental release and expose of construction workers and the public to hazardous
materials.
Any renovation or demolition would be required by law to follow South Coast Air Quality
Management District (SCAQMD) and California Occupational Safety and Health Administration
(Cal/OSHA) regulations regarding abatement of ACMs and the Cal/OSHA Lead in Construction
Standard for the abatement of LBPs.Together, these regulations require sampling, safe work
practices, and appropriate disposal that would protect workers from harmful exposures to these
substances during construction activities and prevent contamination of surrounding soil or water.
4-49
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx a12/20/19»
ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM
PROJECT No. P1-128 DECEMBER 2019
The Specific Plan EIR concluded that impacts related to the release of hazardous building materials
would be less than significant with compliance with existing laws and regulations.
According to the Specific Plan EIR, existing businesses within the Specific Plan area may use and
store hazardous materials such as solvents, chemicals, or other hazardous materials to support
normal business operations that could expose workers and occupants to hazardous materials or
waste or result in the event of an accidental release.The Specific Plan concluded that this would be
a significant impact prior to mitigation. As such, the Specific Plan EIR included Mitigation Measure
MM HAZ-1, which requires each development and redevelopment project to prepare a Phase I
Environmental Site Assessment (Phase I ESA) and/or additional technical investigations prior to
demolition activities. Prior to demolition, hazardous materials or waste stored at these locations
would be removed and the hazardous materials and waste facilities in these buildings would be
closed in accordance with applicable laws and regulations designed to address hazardous materials
or waste and protect human health and the environment. Compliance with these regulatory
requirements, including preparation of a Phase I ESA and/or additional technical investigations
would ensure that impacts related to exposure to hazardous materials or waste stored or used in
the existing buildings would be less than significant with implementation of Mitigation Measure MM
HAZ-1.
A database search of regulatory records was conducted for the Specific Plan EIR. All sites identified
within the Specific Plan area are either cleanup sites under a tiered permit, non-operating permitted
sites, or underground fuel tanks with cleanup completed. Nonetheless,the Specific Plan EIR
concluded that land use changes could potentially occur on hazardous materials sites and could
result in potential hazards risk to the environment and public health, resulting in a potentially
significant impact. Individual development projects engaging in activities involving the handling of
hazardous substances or waste would be required to receive all necessary permits and authorization
by the appropriate governing agencies.The Specific Plan EIR concluded that, with compliance with
the regulatory codes,the potential for projects to result in substantial adverse impacts related to
redevelopment of an existing known hazardous waste site would be low.The Specific Plan EIR also
included MM HAZ-1, which requires individual development projects within the Specific Plan area to
prepare a Phase 1 ESA prior to commencement of demolition or excavation.The Specific Plan EIR
concluded that implementation of MM HAZ-1 would ensure that impacts from hazardous waste
sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 would be less than significant with
mitigation.
There are no existing or proposed schools within 0.25 mile of the Specific Plan area.Therefore,the
Specific Plan EIR concluded that impacts from emissions or handling of hazardous materials within
the vicinity of a school would be less than significant.
The Specific Plan area lies 3.7 miles northwest of John Wayne Airport, and is located just outside of
the Airport's Influence Area.Therefore,the Specific Plan EIR determined that it is not subject to any
development restrictions from the Airport Environs Land Use Plan (AELUP).Therefore,the Specific
Plan EIR concluded that impacts related to airport land use plans would be less than significant.
4-50
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx(12/20/19)
INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT
DECEMBER 2019 PROJECT No. P1-128
The Specific Plan area does not contain and is not proximate to a private airstrip;therefore,the
Specific Plan EIR concluded that no impacts related to hazards from a private airstrip would occur.
Growth anticipated from development within the Specific Plan area would increase demand for
emergency response capabilities in the immediate vicinity. However,the Specific Plan EIR found that
this intensification of land uses would be consistent with general development in the region and
would not result in a substantial increase in emergency response requirements beyond the capacity
of existing services. Further, projects within the Specific Plan area would be built in compliance with
the City of Fountain Valley General Plan Public Safety Element and the 2004 Huntington Beach/
Fountain Valley Hazard Mitigation Plan including all applicable building, fire, and emergency
response plans. Individual development projects would require approval of the City and payment of
fees to support any required increases and services that would potentially occur.Therefore, impacts
related to impairment of implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency
response plan or emergency evacuation plan would be less than significant.
The Specific Plan area is fully urbanized and is not directly adjacent to hillsides or other wildland
areas.Therefore, the Specific Plan EIR concluded that no risk of loss, injury, or death involving
wildland fires would occur from build out of the Specific Plan.
4.9.3 Analysis of Project Impacts
a. Would the Project create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the
routine transport, use,or disposal of hazardous materials?
Construction activities associated with the proposed Project would use a limited amount of
hazardous and flammable substances/oils during heavy equipment operation for site
excavation, grading, and construction.The amount of hazardous chemicals present during
construction is limited and would be used in compliance with existing government regulations.
The potential for the release of hazardous materials during Project construction is low, and even
if a release would occur, it would not result in a significant hazard to the public, surrounding
land uses, or environment due to the small quantities of these materials associated with
construction vehicles.
The Project proposes to construct a new administration building.The proposed use typically
does not present a hazard associated with the accidental release of hazardous substances into
the environment because employees are not anticipated to use, store, dispose, or transport
large volumes of hazardous materials. Hazardous substances associated with the office uses are
typically limited in both amount and use such that they can be contained without impacting the
environment. Project operation would involve the use of potentially hazardous materials (e.g.,
solvents, cleaning agents, paints,fertilizers, and pesticides)typical of office uses that, when used
correctly and in compliance with existing laws and regulations, would not result in a significant
hazard to residents or workers in the vicinity of the proposed Project. Operational impacts are
considered less than significant, and no mitigation is required.
The Specific Plan EIR concluded that impacts related to the routine transport, use, or disposal of
hazardous materials would be less than significant with compliance with existing government
4-51
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx a12/20/19»
ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM
PROJECT No. P1-128 DECEMBER 2019
regulations. The proposed Project would also comply with existing regulations governing the
transport, use, and disposal of hazardous materials.Therefore,the proposed Project would not
result in new significant impacts beyond those identified in the Specific Plan EIR or a substantial
increase in the severity of previously identified significant impacts because the proposed Project
would not require the transport, use, or disposal of substantial amounts of hazardous materials.
No mitigation measures are required.
b. Would the Project create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through
reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous
materials into the environment?
The following Phase I ESAs were prepared for the proposed Project: Hazardous Building
Materials Survey for 18475 Pacific Street& 18484 Bandilier Circle(Arcadis 2016), Phase 1 ESA for
18429 Pacific Street(Arcadis 2018a), Phase 1 ESA for 18368-18384 Bandilier Circle (Arcadis
2018b), and Phase 1 ESA for 18410-18436 Bandilier Circle (Arcadis 2018c). The Phase I ESAs did
not identify any recognized environmental conditions (RECs), controlled recognized
environmental conditions (CRECs), or historical recognized environmental conditions (HRECs) in
connection with the Project site, and no further investigation was recommended. However, out
of an abundance of caution due to the Project site's previous use for agricultural activities, a
Phase II Soil Sampling Report (Arcadis 2018d) was prepared for four properties.The Phase II
Report evaluated the potential for residual pesticides to be present in near surface soil to
determine if soil contains concentrated amounts of organochlorine pesticides (OCPs). In in the
soil samples analyzed,the Phase II did not detect OCPs at concentrations exceeding the EPA's
regulatory screening criteria.The Phase II determined that no additional assessment,
remediation, or removal is necessary.
The proposed Project would include demolition of the existing on-site industrial warehouse
buildings, which as discussed previously, contain ACMs and LBPs. Any renovation or demolition
would be required by law to follow SCAQMD and Cal/OSHA regulations regarding abatement of
ACMs and the Cal/OSHA Lead in Construction Standard for the abatement of LBPs.Together,
these regulations require sampling, safe work practices, and appropriate disposal that would
protect workers from harmful exposures to these substances during construction activities and
prevent contamination of surrounding soil or water. Demolition activities would also comply
with the recommendations of the Property Conditions Summary, and the Phase I ESAs,which
include recommendations to ensure compliance with existing regulations. In addition, MM HAZ-
1, which requires individual development projects within the Specific Plan area to prepare a
Phase 1 ESA prior to commencement of demolition or excavation, states that project Applicants
shall follow all applicable local, State, and federal codes and regulations, as well as applicable
best management practices, related to the treatment, handling, and disposal of ACMs, LBPs, and
PCBs to ensure public safety.
As stated previously, hazardous materials such as solvents, chemicals, or other hazardous
materials are currently stored and used on the Project site.The public could be exposed to
hazardous materials or waste in the event of an accidental release. Mitigation measure
MM HAZ-1 from the Specific Plan EIR would be applicable to the proposed Project,which
4-S 2
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx(12/20/19)
INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT
DECEMBER 2019 PROJECT No. P1-128
requires each development and redevelopment project to prepare a Phase I ESA and/or
additional technical investigations prior to demolition activities. Prior to demolition, hazardous
materials or waste stored at these locations would be removed and the hazardous materials and
waste facilities in the existing industrial warehouse buildings would be closed in accordance with
applicable laws and regulations designed to address hazardous materials or waste and protect
human health and the environment. Compliance with these regulatory requirements, including
preparation of a Phase I ESA and/or additional technical investigations would ensure that
impacts related to exposure to hazardous materials or waste stored or used in the existing
industrial warehouse buildings would be less than significant with implementation of Mitigation
Measure MM HAZ-1. Compliance with existing regulations and MM HAZ-1 would ensure that
impacts related to the upset of hazardous materials would be less than significant.
Hazardous substances associated with the proposed office uses would be limited in both
amount and use such that they can be contained without impacting the environment. Project
operation would involve the use of potentially hazardous materials (e.g., solvents, cleaning
agents, paints, fertilizers, and pesticides)typical of office uses that, when used correctly and in
compliance with existing laws and regulations, would not result in a significant hazard to
residents or workers in the vicinity of the Project site. Operation of the proposed Project would
not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonable foreseeable
upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the
environment.
The Specific Plan EIR concluded that impacts related to the accidental release of hazardous
materials would be less than significant with implementation of MM HAZ-1, which requires
preparation of a Phase 1 ESA. MM HAZ-1 is also applicable to the proposed Project, and Phase I
ESAs have been prepared and any recommendations related to hazardous materials present in
the existing industrial warehouse buildings will be implemented.Therefore, the proposed
Project would not result in new significant impacts beyond those identified in the Specific Plan
EIR or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant impacts, and no
new mitigation measures are required.
c. Would the Project emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous
materials,substances,or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school?
As discussed above, no existing or proposed schools are located within a 0.25-mile-radius of the
Project site.Therefore,the proposed Project would not result in impacts related to hazardous
materials and proximity to schools, and no mitigation is required.
The Specific Plan EIR concluded that impacts related to emissions or handling of hazardous
materials within the vicinity of a school would be less than significant because no schools are
located within 0.25 mile of the Specific Plan area.Therefore,the proposed Project, which is
located within the Specific Plan area, would not result in new significant impacts beyond those
identified in the Specific Plan EIR or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified
significant impacts because no schools are located in the vicinity of the Project site. No new
mitigation measures are required.
4-53
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx a12/20/19»
ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM
PROJECT No. P1-128 DECEMBER 2019
d. Would the Project be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites
compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and,as a result,would it create a
significant hazard to the public or the environment?
Refer to Response 4.8 (a), above. A records search was conducted as part of the Specific Plan
EIR.The Project site was not identified as a Permitted or Cleanup Site. In addition, of the 10
listed Permitted or Cleanup Sites, none were listed as open cases and none indicated that
further action is required. Specifically, six sites have completed cleanup and the cases are
closed; two sites do not require cleanup; one site is historically permitted; one site had its
closure certification finalized in 2016; and one site requires no further action. Regardless, MM
HAZ-1 in the Specific Plan EIR, which is applicable to the proposed Project, requires preparation
of a Phase I ESA, which would include a government record search.The government records
search will determine if the Project site could pose a potential environmental concern to the
surrounding area, identify any environmental violations associated with activities conducted at
the Project site, and identify if there are any nearby hazardous waste sites that could pose a
hazard to the Project site.The Phase I ESAs did not identify any RECs, CRECs, or HRECs in
connection with the Project site, and no further investigation was recommended. With
preparation of Phase 1 ESAs and implementation of the recommendations contained in the
Phase I ESAs, as required by MM HAZ-1, impacts related to hazards associated with hazardous
materials sites would be reduced to a less than significant level.
The Specific Plan EIR concluded that impacts related to hazardous material sites would be less
than significant with implementation of MM HAZ-1, which requires preparation of a Phase 1
ESA. MM HAZ-1 is also applicable to the proposed Project, and Phase I ESAs have been prepared
and any recommendations related to hazardous waste sites will be implemented.Therefore,the
proposed Project would not result in new significant impacts beyond those identified in the
Specific Plan EIR or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant
impacts, and no new mitigation measures are required.
e. For a project located within an airport land use plan or,where such a plan has not been
adopted,within two miles of a public airport or public use airport,would the Project result in
a safety hazard for people residing or working in the Project area?
As discussed above,the Project site does not fall within the John Wayne Airport Planning Area.
Further,the proposed Project would not result in safety hazards for people living or working in
the area different than would occur under existing conditions. In total, 327 OCSD employees
would move to a new site across Ellis Avenue from Plant No. 1. As a result, the Project would not
increase the number of OCSD employees in the area. Consequently,the risk of safety hazards
associated with John Wayne Airport would not be substantively different in this area of Fountain
Valley with or without the Project.Therefore, no impacts would result, and no mitigation is
required.
The Specific Plan EIR concluded that impacts related to airport land use plans would be less than
significant because the Specific Plan area is not located within an airport land use plan area.
Therefore,the proposed Project, which is located within the Specific Plan area, would not result
4-54
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx(12/20/19)
INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT 61- i2 ItA
DECEMBER 2019 PROJECT No. P1-128
in new significant impacts beyond those identified in the Specific Plan EIR or a substantial
increase in the severity of previously identified significant impacts, and no new mitigation
measures are required.
f. For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip,would the Project result in a safety hazard
for people residing or working in the Project area?
No private airports or airstrips are located in the vicinity of the Project site.As a result,the
proposed Project will not affect or be affected by aviation activities associated with private
airports or airstrips. No mitigation is required.
The Specific Plan EIR concluded that no impacts related to hazards from a private airstrip would
occur because no private airstrips are located within or in the vicinity of the Specific Plan area.
Therefore,the proposed Project, which is located within the Specific Plan area, would not result
in new significant impacts beyond those identified in the Specific Plan EIR or a substantial
increase in the severity of previously identified significant impacts, and no new mitigation
measures are required.
g. Would the Project impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted
emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
The Project would involve construction and operation of a new administration building across
the street from Plant No. 1, where the current administrative uses are presently housed. Existing
employees would be relocated across Ellis Avenue from Plant No. 1 to the new administration
building. As stated in Section 4.14, Population and Housing, the proposed Project would not
represent a net increase in employees because the administrative use would provide work space
for existing OCSD personnel currently located at OCSD's Plant No. 1. As a result, no increase
demand for emergency response capabilities in the immediate vicinity of the Project site would
occur.Additionally,the Project would be built in compliance with the City of Fountain Valley
General Plan Public Safety Element and the 2004 Huntington Beach/Fountain Valley Hazard
Mitigation Plan including all applicable building,fire, and emergency response plans.Therefore,
impacts related to impairing the implementation of or physically interfering with an adopted
emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan would be less than significant. No
mitigation is required.
The Specific Plan EIR also concluded that impacts related to an emergency plan would be less
than significant because projects would not result in a substantial increase in emergency
response requirements beyond the capacity of existing services and the Project would be built in
compliance with existing City regulations. Similarly, the proposed Project would not increase
demand for emergency services and would also be built in compliance with City requirements.
Therefore,the proposed Project would not result in new significant impacts beyond those
identified in the Specific Plan EIR or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified
significant impacts, and no new mitigation measures are required.
4-55
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx a12/20/19»
ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM
PROJECT No. P1-128 DECEMBER 2019
h. Would the Project expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury,or death
involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where
residences are intermixed with wildlands?
Wildland fires occur in geographic areas that contain the types and conditions of vegetation,
topography, weather, and structure density susceptible to risks associated with uncontrolled
fires that can be started by lightning, improperly managed camp fires, cigarettes, sparks from
automobiles, and other ignition sources.The Project site and the surrounding areas are
developed with urban and suburban uses and do not include brush-and grass-covered areas
typically found in areas susceptible to wildfires. As a result,the proposed Project would not
expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death associated with wildland
fires. No mitigation is required.
The Specific Plan EIR also concluded that no risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires
would occur because the Specific Plan area is urban and not susceptible to wildfires.Therefore,
the proposed Project, which is located within the Specific Plan area, would not result in new
significant impacts beyond those identified in the Specific Plan EIR or a substantial increase in
the severity of previously identified significant impacts, and no new mitigation measures are
required.
4.9.3.1 Mitigation Measure
Based on the analysis and information above, Mitigation Measure MM HAZ-1 included in the
Specific Plan EIR, would be applicable to the proposed Project. No additional mitigation measures
related to hazards and hazardous materials beyond those identified in the Specific Plan EIR are
required.
MM HAZ-1 Phase I ESA. Prior to demolition of a building or structure and/or excavation of
subsurface improvements, project applicants of site specific development projects
in the Project area shall prepare a Phase I ESA. Consistent with local, state, and
federal regulations, the Phase I ESA shall be subject to City review and address the
following:
• ACM, LBP, and PCBs. Prior to the issuance of any demolition or excavation
permit,the Applicant shall conduct a comprehensive survey of ACM, LBP, and
PCBs. If such hazardous materials are found to be present,the Applicant shall
follow all applicable local, state, and federal codes and regulations, as well as
applicable best management practices, related to the treatment, handling, and
disposal of ACM, LBP, and PCBs to ensure public safety.
• Potential On-Site Hazardous Materials or Conditions.A visual survey and
reconnaissance-level investigation of the existing site shall be conducted to
determine if there are any structures or features within or near the buildings
that are used to store, contain, or dispose of hazardous materials or waste. For
any development within the Project area that has not been subject to a Phase I
ESA or successful remediation efforts in the past, a Phase I ESA shall be
4-56
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx(12/20/19)
INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT
DECEMBER 2019 PROJECT No. P1-128
performed to determine the likelihood of contaminants in areas beyond what
has already been assessed in accordance with USEPA ASTM Practice E 1527-05
as may be amended. If the Phase I ESA finds that contaminated soil or other
hazardous materials or waste are suspected to be present within the area, the
Applicant shall follow all applicable local, state and federal codes and
regulations, as well as applicable best management practices, related to the
treatment, handling, and disposal of each hazardous material or waste.
4.9.4 Findings Related to Hazards and Hazardous Materials
No New Significant Effects Requiring Major Revisions to the Specific Plan EIR. Based on the
foregoing analysis and information,there is no evidence that the proposed Project requires a major
change to the Specific Plan EIR.The Project will not result in new significant environmental impacts
related to Hazards and Hazardous Materials, and there is substantial increase in the severity of
impacts described in the Specific Plan EIR.
No Substantial Change in Circumstances Requiring Revisions to the Specific Plan EIR.There is no
information in the record or otherwise available that indicates that there are substantial changes in
circumstances pertaining to Hazards and Hazardous Materials that would require major changes to
the Specific Plan EIR.
No New Information Showing Greater Significant Effects than the Specific Plan EIR.This Initial
Study/Addendum has analyzed all available relevant information to determine whether there is new
information that was not available at the time the Specific Plan EIR was adopted, which would
indicate that a new significant effect not reported in that document might occur. Based on the
information and analyses above,there is no substantial new information indicating that there would
be a new significant impact related to Hazards and Hazardous Materials requiring major revisions to
the Specific Plan EIR.
No New Information Showing Ability to Reduce Significant Effects in the Specific Plan EIR. This
Addendum has analyzed all available relevant information and has determined that there is no new
information of substantial importance that was unknown and could not have been known with the
exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the Specific Plan EIR was certified indicating that: (1)
mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible,
and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the Project, but the Project
proponent declines to adopt the mitigation measures or alternatives; or(2) mitigation measures or
alternatives that are considerably different from those analyzed in the previous EIR would
substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment, but the Project proponent
declines to adopt the mitigation measures or alternatives.
As discussed above,the proposed Project would result in a potentially significant impact related to
Hazards and Hazardous Materials. Mitigation was included in the Specific Plan EIR and adopted at
the time the EIR was certified.The mitigation measure that is applicable to the proposed Project is
listed in Section 4.9.3.1. Potential Project impacts related to Hazards and Hazardous Materials
would be reduced below a level of significance with implementation of the applicable mitigation
measures, none of which the Project proponent is declining to adopt.
4-57
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx a12/20/19»
ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM
PROJECT No. P1-128 DECEMBER 2019
4.10 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
New Significant More Severe No Substantial Change
Impact Impact from Previous Analysis
Would the Project:
a. Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge ❑ ❑
requirements?
b. Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere
substantially with groundwater recharge such that there
would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the
local groundwater table level(e.g.,the production rate of ❑ ❑
pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would
not support existing land uses or planned uses for which
permits have been granted)?
c. Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site
or area,including through the alteration of the course of a ❑ ❑
stream or river,in a manner which would result in
substantial erosion or siltation on-or off-site?
d. Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site
or area,including through the alteration of the course of a
stream or river,or substantially increase the rate or amount ❑ ❑
of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding
on-or off-site?
e. Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the
capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage ❑ ❑ ❑
systems or provide substantial additional sources of
polluted runoff?
f. Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? ❑ ❑ ❑
g. Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as
mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood ❑ ❑ ❑
Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map?
h. Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures which ❑ ❑ ❑
would impede or redirect flood flows?
i. Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss,
injury or death involving flooding,including flooding as a ❑ ❑
result of the failure of a levee or dam?
j. Inundation by seiche,tsunami,or mudflow? ❑ ❑
4.10.1 Existing Setting
According to the Specific Plan EIR,the Project site is located within the approximately 210-square-
mile Santa Ana River watershed.The Santa Ana River originates approximately 75 miles northeast of
the Project site in the San Bernardino Mountains, crosses through San Bernardino County and
central Orange County, where it is channelized at the Prado Dam before it flows through Orange
County and empties into the Pacific Ocean.The Santa Ana River is located approximately 0.25 mile
to the east of the Project site.
The Project site is underlain by the approximately 350-square-mile Coastal Plain of the Orange
County Groundwater Basin, which is managed by the OCWD. The Orange County Groundwater Basin
is bound by the Puente and Chino Hills on the north,the Santa Ana Mountains on the east, and the
4-58
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx(12/20/19)
INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT
DECEMBER 2019 PROJECT No. P1-128
San Joaquin Hills on the south.The Orange County Groundwater Basin is bound by the Pacific Ocean
on the southwest and by a low topographic divide approximated by the Orange County- Los Angeles
County line on the northwest (DWR 2004).
According to the Federal Emergency Management Agency Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) Map
No. 06059CO254J (December 2, 2009), the Project site is in an area designated as Zone X: Other
Flood Areas. Zone X: Other Flood Areas identifies areas of 0.2 percent annual chance flood (500-year
flood), areas of 1 percent annual chance flood (100-year flood)with average depths of less than 1
foot or with drainage areas less than 1 square mile, and areas protected by levees from a 1 percent
annual chance flood. Specifically, according to the FIRM Map,the Project site is in an area protected
by a levee and the 100-year flood is contained in the Santa Ana Channel. In addition, according to
the Safety Element of the County of Orange General Plan (2005, amended in 2012),the Project site
is in the Prado Dam Inundation Area.
The Pacific Ocean is approximately 5.5 miles from Plant No. 1 and the Project site and, according to
the Tsunami Inundation Map for the Newport Beach Quadrangle, Plant No. 1 and the Project site do
not fall within the tsunami inundation zone.
4.10.2 Impacts Identified in the Specific Plan EIR
The Specific Plan EIR analyzed the Specific Plan's potential Hydrology and Water Quality impacts on
pages 3.6-1 through 3.6-14.
The Specific Plan EIR determined that construction of projects within the Specific Plan area would
increase soil erosion and sediment transport that would have the potential to impact downstream
receiving waters. However, each individual project would be required to comply with the
requirements of the General Construction Permit, prepare and implement a Stormwater Pollution
Prevention Plan, and implement and inspect stormwater pollution prevention measures and control
practices.The Specific Plan EIR also determined that additional development and redevelopment
within the Specific Plan area would not substantially increase the amount of impermeable surfaces
and associated runoff. Rather, redevelopment would have a slightly beneficial impact on urban
runoff and water quality because each project would require more open space, landscaping, and
permeable areas compared to existing conditions. Additionally,future projects would be required to
comply with the County Municipal National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES)
Stormwater Permit, which requires that new development and redevelopment projects incorporate
Low Impact Development (LID) measures to reduce pollutants washing off site and to maintain pre-
development runoff rates. Stormwater runoff from new impervious surface areas would be
infiltrated through bioretention areas where possible. With adherence to existing water quality
regulations governing development and redevelopment, the Specific Plan EIR concluded that
impacts associated with water quality standards and waste discharge requirements during
construction and operation would be less than significant, and no mitigation was required.
The Specific Plan EIR determined that, given the relatively shallow depth of groundwater at the
Project area, it is possible that subsurface excavation during construction could intercept shallow
groundwater tables and that groundwater dewatering may be required. However, groundwater
dewatering activities would be temporary and unlikely to be extensive and would,therefore, not
4-59
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx a12/20/19»
ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM
PROJECT No. P1-128 DECEMBER 2019
substantially affect groundwater levels. Build out of the Specific Plan area would result in
redevelopment and a net increase in approximately 258,011 sf of developed areas and impervious
surfaces.The Specific Plan area is primarily built out and impervious, a condition which does not
support groundwater recharge.The Specific Plan requires a minimum of 3 acres of public space to
be added to the Specific Plan area, which would increase the overall permeable surfaces within the
Specific Plan area. In addition,the Specific Plan requires the installation of landscaped areas or other
pervious surfaces to minimize runoff and provide additional opportunities for groundwater
recharge. Furthermore,the Specific Plan would require development and redevelopment projects to
implement LID and stormwater Best Management Practices (BMPs)to improve water quality and
reduce runoff. Overall, build out of the Specific Plan would reduce runoff and increase opportunities
for permeable area and groundwater recharge.Therefore,the Specific Plan EIR concluded that
impacts to groundwater supply and aquifer levels would be less than significant, and no mitigation
was required.
The Specific Plan EIR determined that build out of the Specific Plan would not alter natural streams,
creeks, lakes, or other water bodies because none are present within the Specific Plan area. The
Specific Plan area is served by an existing municipal stormwater drainage system. Construction
activities could slightly alter on-site drainage patterns; however, any alteration in flows would be
temporary and would continue to be directed into the existing storm drain system. Given that
impermeable surfaces currently cover almost all of the Specific Plan area, implementation of the
Specific Plan would not substantially increase the amount of impermeable surfaces and associated
urban runoff.
The Specific Plan would provide for increased permeable area through development standards that
require new open space, landscaping, and planted areas.As a result,the amount of urban runoff
would decrease as compared to existing conditions. In addition, each development and
redevelopment project would be subject to City review to ensure inclusion of design features that
would continue to convey stormwater runoff to the existing municipal storm drain system.
Therefore,the Specific Plan EIR concluded that impacts related to alteration of existing drainage
patterns of the area such that substantial erosion, siltation, or flooding would occur would be less
than significant.
The Specific Plan EIR determined that while minor flooding may be experienced within the Specific
Plan area, because the Specific Plan area is not subject to the 100-year flooding, people or
structures would not be exposed to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving flooding.
In addition, the Specific Plan area is located adjacent to the Santa Ana River and is likely subject to
inundation in the event of failure or collapse the Prado Dam. However, due to the distance from
Prado Dam and current emergency procedures that address dam failure or flooding, the likelihood
of dam failure is low, and impacts related to flooding would be less than significant.
The Specific Plan EIR concluded that no impacts related to inundation by tsunami would occur
because the Specific Plan area is not located within a tsunami inundation zone.
4-60
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx(12/20/19)
INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT
DECEMBER 2019 PROJECT No. P1-128
4.10.3 Analysis of Project Impacts
a. Would the Project violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements?
The proposed Project would result in changes to existing conditions, including the demolition of
the five existing industrial warehouse buildings and construction and operation of a new
administration building and surface parking lot on the Project site.
Construction and operation of the proposed Project has the potential to introduce additional
pollutants into the storm drain system. During construction activities, excavated soil would be
exposed, and there would be an increased potential for soil erosion and sedimentation
compared to existing conditions. In addition, chemicals, liquid products, petroleum products
(e.g., paints, solvents, and fuels), and concrete-related waste may be spilled or leaked and have
the potential to be transported via storm runoff into receiving waters.
During construction,the total disturbed soil area would be approximately 5.2 acres. Projects
that disturb greater than 1 acre of soil are required to obtain coverage under the State Water
Resources Control Board (SWRCB) Construction General Permit. Project construction would
comply with the requirements of the Construction General Permit, including preparation of a
Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) and implementation of Construction BMPs.
Construction BMPs would include, but not be limited to, Erosion Control and Sediment Control
BMPs designed to minimize erosion and retain sediment on site; and Good Housekeeping BMPs
to prevent spills, leaks, and discharge of construction debris and waste into receiving waters.
During operation, the proposed Project would change the operational pollutants, such as
suspended solids/sediments, nutrients, heavy metals, pathogens (bacteria/viruses), pesticides,
oil and grease,toxic organic compounds, and trash and debris,that are introduced into
stormwater runoff. However,the proposed Project would reduce impervious surface area and
would include BMPs, which combined would reduce the volume of and pollutants in stormwater
runoff from the Project site compared to existing conditions. In its existing condition,the
Project site has an impervious surface area of approximately 205,920 sf, or 91 percent. In the
proposed condition, approximately 166,684 sf, or 73.5 percent, of the Project site would be
comprised of impervious surface area. As such, implementation of the proposed Project would
result in a decrease of impervious surface area on the Project site (from 91 percent to 73.5
percent).
The Project would comply with the requirements of the County Municipal NPDES Stormwater
Permit. In accordance with the County of Orange Model Water Quality Management Plan
(WQMP)template and the Technical Guidance Document for the County of Orange and the City,
a Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) is required to be prepared for the Project, which
details the Low Impact Development features and treatment control BMPs to be included in the
Project to reduce pollutants of concern in stormwater runoff. According to the Conceptual
Water Quality Management Plan (September 2019) prepared for the Project,the proposed
BMPs are bioretention basins. Four locations for bioretention basins have been identified: (1) on
the southeast corner of the site, (2) at the east limit of the parking lot, (3) at the west limit of
the parking lot, and (4) a smaller area within the employee courtyard. After being treated within
4-61
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx a12/20/19»
ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM
PROJECT No. P1-128 DECEMBER 2019
the bioretention basins, stormwater runoff would discharge to the City of Fountain Valley
stormdrain system located within Ellis Avenue. Because stormwater runoff from the Project site
is not currently treated, implementation of BMPs would reduce pollutants of concern in
stormwater runoff and improve water quality of stormwater discharge from the Project site
compared to existing conditions.
With adherence to existing water quality regulations, including the Construction General Permit
and County Municipal NPDES Stormwater Permit, impacts associated with water quality
standards and waste discharge requirements during construction and operation would be less
than significant, and no mitigation is required.
The Specific Plan EIR concluded that impacts related to water quality standards and waste
discharge requirements would be less than significant with compliance with existing regulations.
Similarly,the proposed Project would comply with existing regulations and would not result in
new significant impacts beyond those identified in the Specific Plan EIR or a substantial increase
in the severity of previously identified significant impacts. No new mitigation measures are
required.
b. Would the Project substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with
groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering
of the local groundwater table level (e.g.,the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells
would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which
permits have been granted)?
The potential for groundwater dewatering during construction cannot be ruled out at this time.
As such, it is possible that that subsurface excavation during construction could intercept
shallow groundwater tables and that groundwater dewatering may be required. However,
groundwater dewatering activities would be temporary and unlikely to be extensive and would,
therefore, not substantially affect groundwater levels.
In the existing condition, the Project site consists of primarily impervious surface areas, which
do not promote infiltration.The Project would reduce the impervious surface area of the site,
which can provide more opportunities for infiltration. However, because the infiltration
potential of on-site soils is low, any increase in infiltration would be minimal. As such, the
proposed Project would not substantially change on-site infiltration or alter groundwater
infiltration or recharge.Therefore, Project impacts to groundwater supply and aquifer levels
would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required.
The Specific Plan EIR concluded that build out of the Specific Plan would reduce runoff and
increase opportunities for permeable area and groundwater recharge;therefore, impacts to
groundwater supply and aquifer levels would be less than significant, and no mitigation was
required.Any change in infiltration resulting from the proposed Project would be anticipated to
be minimal. Therefore,the proposed Project would not result in new significant impacts beyond
those identified in the Specific Plan EIR or a substantial increase in the severity of previously
identified significant impacts, and no new mitigation measures are required.
4-62
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx(12/20/19)
INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT 4 i2 ItA
DECEMBER 2019 PROJECT No. P1-128
c. Would the Project substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area,
including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would
result in substantial erosion or siltation on-or off-site?
The Project would not alter the course of a stream or river. Construction activities would slightly
alter on-site drainage patterns and increase the potential for erosion and siltation due to
ground-disturbing activities that would expose the top soil. However, Project construction
would comply with the requirements of the Construction General Permit, including preparation
of a SWPPP and implementation of Construction BMPs. Construction BMPs would include, but
not be limited to, Erosion Control and Sediment Control BMPs designed to minimize erosion and
retain sediment on site.
The Project would not permanently alter drainage patterns of the Project site, which is already
developed. In the proposed condition, a portion of the Project site would consist of impervious
surface area and not prone to on-site erosion or siltation because no soil would be included in
these areas.The remaining portion of the site would consist of pervious area, which would
contain landscaping that would minimize on-site erosion and siltation by stabilizing the soil.The
Project would decrease on-site impervious surface areas, which would decrease stormwater
runoff and decrease the potential for downstream erosion and siltation. In addition, the County
MS4 Permit requires implementation of LID and stormwater BMPs to minimize runoff.The
proposed Project includes bioretention basins in compliance with this requirement. Because the
Project would decrease stormwater runoff from the project site by reducing impervious surface
area and including BMPs, impacts related to alteration of existing drainage patterns in a manner
that could result in on-or off-site erosion or siltation would be less than significant, and no
mitigation is required.
The Specific Plan EIR concluded that impacts related to alteration of existing drainage patterns
of the area such that substantial erosion or siltation would occur and impacts would be less than
significant. The proposed Project would reduce impervious surface area and would comply with
the County MS4 Permit, which requires implementation of LID and stormwater BMPs to
minimize runoff. Because the Project would decrease stormwater runoff from the project site by
reducing impervious surface area and including BMPs, the proposed Project would not result in
new significant impacts beyond those identified in the Specific Plan EIR or a substantial increase
in the severity of previously identified significant impacts, and no new mitigation measures are
required.
d. Would the Project substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area,
including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase
the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on-or off-
site?
Construction activities would slightly alter on-site drainage patterns; however, any alteration in
flows would be temporary and would continue to be directed into the existing storm drain
system.The proposed Project would include on-site drainage features that would accommodate
and convey on-site stormwater runoff such that on-site flooding would not occur.These
4-63
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx a12/20/19»
ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM
PROJECT No. P1-128 DECEMBER 2019
drainage features would convey stormwater runoff to the existing municipal storm drain
system.The proposed Project would reduce impervious surface area and would include
implementation of LID and stormwater BMPs to reduce stormwater runoff discharged from the
Project site. Because the Project would decrease stormwater runoff from the Project site, the
Project would not increase the potential downstream flooding. Implementation of drainage
features and BMPs would ensure that Project impacts related to alteration of existing drainage
patterns of the area such that substantial flooding would occur would be less than significant,
and no mitigation is required.
The Specific Plan EIR concluded that, because each project would include design features that
would convey stormwater runoff to the existing municipal storm drain system, impacts related
to the alteration of existing drainage patterns of the area such that flooding would occur and
impacts would be less than significant.The proposed Project requires implementation of
drainage features and BMPs to minimize runoff and flooding and would,therefore, not result in
new significant impacts beyond those identified in the Specific Plan EIR or a substantial increase
in the severity of previously identified significant impacts. No new mitigation measures are
required.
e. Would the Project create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of
existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of
polluted runoff?
Refer to Responses 4.9 (a) and 4.9 (d). The proposed Project would decrease impervious surface
area on the Project site, which would decrease runoff and pollutant loading from the Project
site. Additionally, the Project would include drainage features that would continue to convey
stormwater runoff to the existing municipal storm drain system. In addition, the County MS4
Permit requires the installation of landscaped areas or other pervious surfaces and
implementation of LID and stormwater BMPs to minimize and treat stormwater runoff.The
proposed Project would include bioretention basins in compliance with this requirement to
reduce both volume of and pollutants in stormwater runoff compared to existing conditions.
Therefore, impacts related to exceedance of the capacity of stormwater drainage systems or
provision of polluted runoff would be less than significant.
The Specific Plan concluded that impacts related to the exceedance of the capacity of
stormwater drainage systems or the provision of polluted runoff would be less than significant.
The proposed Project requires implementation of drainage features and BMPs to minimize
runoff and flooding and would, therefore, not result in new significant impacts beyond those
identified in the Specific Plan EIR or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified
significant impacts. No new mitigation measures are required.
f. Would the Project otherwise substantially degrade water quality?
Refer to Response 4.9 (a), above. With adherence to existing water quality regulations, including
the Construction General Permit and County Municipal NPDES Stormwater Permit, which
includes implementation of construction and operational BMPs, impacts associated with
4-64
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx(12/20/19)
INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT
DECEMBER 2019 PROJECT No. P1-128
degradation of water quality during construction and operation would be less than significant,
and no mitigation is required.
The Specific Plan EIR concluded that impacts related to degradation of water quality would be
less than significant with compliance with existing regulations. Similarly,the proposed Project
would comply with existing water quality regulations and would not result in new significant
impacts beyond those identified in the Specific Plan EIR or a substantial increase in the severity
of previously identified significant impacts. No new mitigation measures are required.
g. Would the Project place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal
Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map?
The proposed Project does not include a housing component. Therefore,the Project would not
place housing in a 100-year flood hazard area. No impacts would occur related to placement of
housing in a 100-year flood hazard area, and no mitigation is required.
The Specific Plan EIR concluded that impacts related to flooding would be less than significant.
Similarly,the proposed Project would not place housing in a 100-year flood hazard area and
would, therefore, not result in new significant impacts beyond those identified in the Specific
Plan EIR or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant impacts. No
new mitigation measures are required.
h. Would the Project place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures which would impede
or redirect flood flows?
As discussed above,the Project site is not located in a 100-year flood hazard area. Because the
Project site is not located in a 100-year flood hazard area,the proposed Project would not place
structures in a 100-year flood hazard area or impede or redirect flood flows, and no mitigation is
required.
The Specific Plan EIR concluded that impacts related to flooding would be less than significant.
The proposed Project is not located in a 100-year flood hazard area and would not result in new
significant impacts beyond those identified in the Specific Plan EIR or a substantial increase in
the severity of previously identified significant impacts. No new mitigation measures are
required.
i. Would the Project expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death
involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam?
The Project site is located in an area protected from inundation by levees (the Santa Ana River
levee system) and within in the Prado Dam Inundation Area.
Prado Dam was designed in the 1930s, but increased its functioning capability due to Seven
Oaks Dam, which was completed in November 1999, and is approximately 40 miles upstream on
the Santa Ana River. During a flood, Seven Oaks Dam stores water destined for Prado Dam for as
long as the reservoir pool at Prado Dam is rising. When the flood threat at Prado Dam has
4-65
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx a12/20/19»
ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM
PROJECT No. P1-128 DECEMBER 2019
passed, Seven Oaks Dam begins to release its stored flood water at a rate that does not exceed
the downstream channel capacity. Working in tandem,the Prado and Seven Oaks Dams provide
increased flood protection to Orange County.
Prado Dam is maintained and inspected to ensure its integrity and to ensure that risks are
minimized. In addition, construction of the Santa Ana River Mainstem Project was initiated in
1989, and is scheduled for completion in 2020.The Santa Ana River Mainstem Project will
increase levels of flood protection to more than 3.35 million people in Orange, San Bernardino,
and Riverside Counties. Improvements to 23 miles of the Lower Santa Ana River channel,from
Prado Dam to the Pacific Ocean, are 95 percent complete, with the remaining bank protection
improvements in Yorba Linda currently under construction. Improvements to the Santa Ana
River channel include construction of new levees and dikes. In addition,the Santa Ana River
Mainstem Project includes improvements to Prado Dam that are currently underway and are
estimated to be completed in 2021.The Prado Dam embankment has been raised and the outlet
works have been reconstructed to convey additional discharges. Remaining improvements to
Prado Dam include acquisition of additional land for the expansion of the Prado Reservoir,
construction of protective dikes, and raising of the spillway(Orange County Flood Division
2018).
Although the Project would construct a new structure in an inundation zone,the proposed
Project would not increase the chance of inundation from failure of Prado Dam. In addition, due
to the distance from Prado Dam and current emergency procedures that address dam failure or
flooding,the likelihood of dam failure is low, and impacts related to flooding as a result of dam
or levee failure would be less than significant. No mitigation is required.
The Specific Plan EIR also concluded that impacts related to flooding as a result of failure of a
dam or levee would be less than significant. Similarly, the proposed Project would not increase
the chance of inundation from failure of Prado Dam and would,therefore, not result in new
significant impacts beyond those identified in the Specific Plan EIR or a substantial increase in
the severity of previously identified significant impacts. No new mitigation measures are
required.
j. Would the Project have inundation by seiche,tsunami,or mudflow?
No large standing bodies of water are located in the immediate vicinity of the Project site that
could cause flooding due to seiches.The Pacific Ocean is approximately 5.5 miles from the
Project site and is not located within the tsunami inundation zone. The Project site is essentially
flat and there are no substantial slopes on or in the vicinity of the Project site. As a result, there
is no risk of mudflow at the Project site. No impacts associated with possible seiche,tsunami,
and mudflow would occur, and no mitigation is necessary.
The Specific Plan EIR also concluded that no impacts related to inundation by seiche,tsunami, or
mudflow would occur.The proposed Project is located within the Specific Plan area and would,
therefore, not result in new significant impacts beyond those identified in the Specific Plan EIR
4-66
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx(12/20/19)
INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT 61- i2 ItA
DECEMBER 2019 PROJECT No. P1-128
or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant impacts. No new
mitigation measures are required.
4.10.3.1 Mitigation Measures
The Specific Plan EIR does not include mitigation related to Hydrology and Water Quality. No
additional mitigation measures would be required for the proposed Project.
4.10.4 Findings Related to Hydrology and Water Quality
No New Significant Effects Requiring Major Revisions to the Specific Plan EIR. Based on the
foregoing analysis and information,there is no evidence that the proposed Project requires a major
change to the Specific Plan EIR.The Project will not result in new significant environmental impacts
related to Hydrology and Water Quality and there is no substantial increase in the severity of
impacts described in the Specific Plan EIR.
No Substantial Change in Circumstances Requiring Revisions to the Specific Plan EIR.There is no
information in the record or otherwise available that indicates that there are substantial changes in
circumstances pertaining to Hydrology and Water Quality that would require major changes to the
Specific Plan EIR.
No New Information Showing Greater Significant Effects than the Specific Plan EIR.This Initial
Study/Addendum has analyzed all available relevant information to determine whether there is new
information that was not available at the time the Specific Plan EIR was adopted, which would
indicate that a new significant effect not reported in that document might occur. Based on the
information and analyses above,there is no substantial new information indicating that there would
be a new significant impact related to Hydrology and Water Quality requiring major revisions to the
Specific Plan EIR.
No New Information Showing Ability to Reduce Significant Effects in the Specific Plan EIR. The
proposed Project would not result in any potentially significant impacts related to Hydrology and
Water Quality. CEQA does not require consideration of alternatives to the Project or consideration
of additional mitigation measures because there would not be any significant impacts to avoid or
reduce related to this topic, and no mitigation is required.
4-67
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx a12/20/19»
ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM
PROJECT No. P1-128 DECEMBER 2019
4.11 LAND USE AND PLANNING
New Significant More Severe No Substantial Change
Impact Impact from Previous Analysis
Would the Project:
a. Physically divide an established community? ❑ ❑ ❑
b. Conflict with any applicable land use plan,policy,or
regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the Project
(including,but not limited to the general plan,specific plan, ❑ ❑
local coastal program,or zoning ordinance)adopted for the
purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect?
c. Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or ❑ ❑
natural community conservation plan?
4.11.1 Existing Setting
According to the Specific Plan EIR, the Specific Plan area includes approximately 35 acres in the
eastern portion of the City of Fountain Valley along I-405 and the Santa Ana River, which serves as
the eastern border for the City.The Specific Plan area currently consists of various light industrial,
retail, and office land uses and supports a variety of commercial businesses including various
clothing outlets,furniture and hardware stores, auto body shops, industrial manufacturing sites,
music stores, and restaurants. While many of the existing structures within the Specific Plan area are
large warehouse-type buildings used by single businesses, there are also multiple smaller
commercial structures that are split between multiple businesses.There are no residential uses
within the Specific Plan area.The Specific Plan area is fully developed with no notable vacant areas.
Land uses surrounding the Specific Plan area include CICSD Treatment Plant No. 1 to the south; light
industrial and commercial uses to the east across the Santa Ana River; an agricultural parcel to the
north; and low-and medium-density residential uses to the north and west. However,the Specific
Plan area is generally separated from and lacks connectivity with these neighborhoods by major
existing roadways.Talbert Avenue, a primary arterial, separates the Specific Plan area from the
residential neighborhood and agricultural parcel to the north. Ward Street, a secondary arterial,
separates the Specific Plan area from the single-family residential neighborhood and the medium-
density apartment development to the west. While several streets provide roadway connectivity
through the Specific Plan area, the area's major high-speed roads, large blocks, and distances to
destinations discourage pedestrian traffic and limit neighborhood connectivity.
Land use and development in the Specific Plan area is primarily governed by the City's General Plan
and Municipal Code.The Project site is designated Industrial (Commercial Manufacturing) in the
City's General Plan and is zoned as Specific Plan (SP)— FVCSP Mixed Industry District.The zoning is
consistent with the General Plan land use designations. Permitted uses in the SP zone are detailed in
the Specific Plan.
While the Specific Plan area lies approximately 4 miles from John Wayne Airport, it remains just
outside of the Airport's Influence Area.Therefore,the Specific Plan area is not subject to any
development restrictions from the Airport Environs Land Use Plan (AELUP).
4-68
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx(12/20/19)
INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT
DECEMBER 2019 PROJECT No. P1-128
4.11.2 Impacts Identified in the Specific Plan EIR
The Specific Plan EIR analyzed the Specific Plan's potential Land Use and Planning impacts on pages
3.7-1 through 3.7-34.
The Specific Plan area is fully developed with no notable vacant areas, and there are no residential
uses within the Specific Plan area. Access between the northern and southern portions of the
Specific Plan area is currently inhibited by the 1-405, and connectivity between land uses is limited to
Euclid Street and Ward Street. The Specific Plan EIR concluded that implementation of the Specific
Plan would not result in new development that would affect travel to and from Districts within the
area. Further, streetscape improvements, district design, and land use plans proposed under the
Specific Plan are intended to enhance connectivity within each of these areas, as well as improve
pedestrian access to and from the commercial and employment centers of the Specific Plan area
from outlying uses and adjacent communities, such as residential uses located to the north and
northwest. Development under the Specific Plan would conform to existing infrastructure
configuration; no road closures or other physical barriers would be installed, and no new large-scale
infrastructure improvements would take place. On the contrary,the current street system, including
pedestrian and bike facilities, would be improved over time with implementation of the Specific
Plan.Therefore,the implementation of the Specific Plan would not physically divide existing
communities, but instead is expected to improve land use connectivity north and south of the 1-405.
Impacts are considered to be less than significant.
The Specific Plan was developed by the City and is designed to be consistent with City's goals to
encourage the development of a place of gathering and activity center within the City and the
Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) planning region.The primary components of
the Specific Plan that would guide future development include updated zoning standards for form-
based development and design standards for new development to address site design, building
facade, size, bulk, and scale, as well as open space and walkability, and to promote and improve
compatibility with existing residential, commercial, manufacturing, and industrial development
surrounding the Specific Plan area.The Specific Plan is designed to comply with City's General Plan
policies and SCAG planning goals and principles.Therefore,the Specific Plan would be consistent
with applicable plans and policies.
According to the Specific Plan EIR,the Specific Plan is required to comply with the planning
principles and goals established by SCAG and relating to the provision of residential opportunities
near transit corridors, encouragement of active multi-modal uses, creation of workplace-oriented
spaces, and encouragement of profitable business uses, and balanced industry and housing
opportunities.The primary components of the Specific Plan that would guide future development
include updated zoning standards for form-based development, and design standards for new
development to address site design, building fagade, size, bulk, and scale, as well as open space and
walkability, and to promote and improve compatibility with existing residential, commercial,
manufacturing, and industrial development surrounding the Specific Plan area.The Specific Plan is
designed to comply with City General Plan policies and SCAG planning goals and principles, and
overall,the Specific Plan would be consistent with applicable plans and policies. In addition to land
use planning policies and regulations,the City and SCAG establish goals and policies oriented
4-69
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx a12/20/19»
ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM
PROJECT No. P1-128 DECEMBER 2019
towards reducing impacts to the human and natural environment that may result from increases in
development, increases in transportation-related emissions, and effects to local and regional
transportation systems. Implementation of the Specific Plan would result in the emissions of
additional air quality and greenhouse gas (GHG) pollutants, noise impacts, and transportation
impacts. Mitigation measures designed to reduce potential impacts to air quality, noise, and
transportation would ensure that impacts associated with the Specific Plan build out are mitigated
to a less than significant level.Therefore, with implementation of mitigation measures,the Specific
Plan is consistent with goals and policies established by SCAG.
The Specific Plan EIR concluded that there are no adopted Habitat Conservation Plans (HCPs) or
Natural Community Conservation Plans (NCCPs) in the Specific Plan area vicinity.The Specific Plan
area does not include any habitat areas that are protected through an approved local, regional, or
State HCP or NCCP.The County has approved an NCCP and an HCP, but the City has not enrolled in
such plans, and is not included in the associated planning area.
4.11.3 Analysis of Project Impacts
a. Would the Project physically divide an established community?
The Project site is currently developed with five existing industrial warehouse buildings.The
proposed Project includes demolition of the five existing industrial warehouse buildings and
construction and operation of a new three-story administration building and surface parking lot
in a fully developed area. In addition, a pedestrian bridge would extend from the Project site to
OCSD's Plant No. 1, directly south of Ellis Avenue.The pedestrian bridge would connect the
proposed Project with the existing OCSD site and would not impact transportation facilities on
Ellis Avenue. Land uses in the vicinity of the Project site include 1-405 to the north, industrial
uses to the north and west, residential uses and the OCWD to the west,the Santa Ana River and
associated trail to the east, and OCSD to the south.The Project would include access to/from
the Project site via driveways, as well as pedestrian and bicycle access to/from the Project site
via sidewalks along the site's eastern, western, and southern boundaries, which are already
developed. As a result, the Project would not result in physical divisions in any established
community.
The Specific Plan EIR also concluded that implementation of the Specific Plan would not divide
an established community because it would conform to the existing infrastructure configuration.
In addition, land use plans proposed under the Specific Plan are intended to enhance
connectivity through pedestrian improvements, provision of public gathering places, and
creation of pedestrian and bike friendly streetscapes.The proposed Project, which is located
within the Specific Plan area and would not divide an established community, would not result
in new significant impacts beyond those identified in the Specific Plan EIR or a substantial
increase in the severity of previously identified significant impacts, and no new mitigation
measures are required.
b. Would the Project conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy,or regulation of an agency
with jurisdiction over the Project(including, but not limited to the general plan,specific plan,
4-70
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx(12/20/19)
INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT
DECEMBER 2019 PROJECT No. P1-128
local coastal program, or zoning ordinance)adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating
an environmental effect?
Locally adopted land use plans, policies, or regulations that would be applicable to the proposed
Project include the Specific Plan, General Plan, and Zoning Code.The Specific Plan designates
the Project site as Mixed Industry District.The Project site is designated Industrial (Commercial
Manufacturing) in the City's General Plan and is zoned as Specific Plan (SP)— FVCSP Mixed
Industry District.The proposed administrative uses are consistent with the commercial
manufacturing designation, which allows for office (administrative, business, and professional)
uses. The Specific Plan anticipated, and the Specific Plan EIR evaluated, a potential net increase
of 811,408 sf for the office uses within the Specific Plan area.The proposed Project, at 109,914
sf, is thus consistent with the build out of new office uses projected in the Specific Plan EIR.
Build out of the Specific Plan would result in an increase in population associated with
approximately 2,063 new employees, 1,444 new residents, and customers of commercial and
retail businesses. Build out of the Specific Plan would increase the density of commercial uses
and introduce new residential uses, thereby increasing the total population of the Specific Plan
area. Implementation of the proposed Project would not result in an increase in OCSD
employees because the Project is characterized as a relocation, rather than an expansion, of
existing operations.Thus, the Project would be consistent with population growth projected in
the Specific Plan.
The proposed Project would be consistent with all locally adopted land use plans, policies, and
regulations, including most development standards outlined in the Specific Plan.The proposed
Project would require the following variances and deviations: variances for frontage coverage
along Pacific Street and Bandilier Circle; a variance for build-to-corner requirements at the
corner of Ellis Avenue and Bandilier Circle; a variance for parking count requirements; a variance
for curb cuts and driveways along Pacific Street; a 5.5 percent deviation due to the proposed
18.9 percent street fagade opening along Pacific Street (which is below the minimum 20 percent
street fagade opening); a variance for bottom-floor street fagade requirements along Pacific
Street; and a 2.1 percent deviation due to the proposed building length of approximately 204 ft
(which exceeds the maximum building length of 200 ft.The proposed Project would comply with
all other development standards outlined in 2.1.5 of the Specific Plan.Therefore, with the
approval of the above variances and deviations,the proposed Project would be consistent with
development standards outlined in the Specific Plan.
The Project would be subject to existing local and regional land use plans and policies
established by the City and SCAG. The Project would be designed to comply with City General
Plan policies and SCAG planning goals and principles, and overall,the Project intends to be
consistent with applicable plans and policies. In addition to land use planning policies and
regulations,the City and SCAG establish goals and policies oriented towards reducing impacts
related to noise and transportation.The Project would be in compliance with SCAG policies
following the incorporation of mitigation measures related to noise and transportation,which
would reduce impacts to a less than significant level. With implementation of the mitigation
measures,the Project would be consistent with the applicable goals and policies of SCAG and
the City's General Plan, and impacts would, therefore, be less than significant.
4-71
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx a12/20/19»
ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM
PROJECT No. P1-128 DECEMBER 2019
The Specific Plan EIR concluded the Specific Plan was created by the City, and therefore, would
be consistent with applicable land use plans, policies, and regulations.The proposed Project,
which is located within the Specific Plan area, would be consistent with the Specific Plan,the
General Plan, and the Zoning Code.Therefore,the proposed Project would not result in new
significant impacts beyond those identified in the Specific Plan EIR or a substantial increase in
the severity of previously identified significant impacts, and no new mitigation measures are
required.
c. Would the Project conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural
community conservation plan?
As discussed in Response 4.4.3 (f), the Project site and the surrounding areas are not subject to
any HCP or NCCP.Therefore,the proposed Project would not conflict with any HCP or NCCP
relating to the protection of biological resources.
The Specific Plan EIR also concluded that the Specific Plan area and vicinity are not subject to
any HCP or NCCP. Similarly,the proposed Project is located within the Specific Plan area and
would not conflict with any HCP or NCCP.Therefore,the proposed Project would not result in
new significant impacts beyond those identified in the Specific Plan EIR or a substantial increase
in the severity of previously identified significant impacts, and no new mitigation measures are
required.
4.11.3.1 Mitigation Measures
Based on the analysis and information above, Mitigation Measures MM N-1, MM T-1, MM T-2a
through b, and MM T-7 (refer to Sections 3.13, Noise, and 3.17,Transportation/Traffic) shall apply,
are included in the Specific Plan EIR, and would be applicable to the proposed Project.
4.11.4 Findings Related to Land Use and Planning
No New Significant Effects Requiring Major Revisions to the Specific Plan EIR. Based on the
foregoing analysis and information,there is no evidence that the proposed Project requires a major
change to the Specific Plan EIR.The Project will not result in new significant environmental impacts
related to Land Use and Planning, and there is no substantial increase in the severity of impacts
described in the Specific Plan EIR.
No Substantial Change in Circumstances Requiring Revisions to the Specific Plan EIR.There is no
information in the record or otherwise available that indicates that there are substantial changes in
circumstances pertaining to Land Use and Planning that would require major changes to the Specific
Plan EIR.
No New Information Showing Greater Significant Effects than the Specific Plan EIR.This Initial
Study/Addendum has analyzed all available relevant information to determine whether there is new
information that was not available at the time the Specific Plan EIR was adopted, which would
indicate that a new significant effect not reported in that document might occur. Based on the
information and analyses above,there is no substantial new information indicating that there would
4-72
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx(12/20/19)
INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT
DECEMBER 2019 PROJECT No. P1-128
be a new significant impact related to Land Use and Planning requiring major revisions to the
Specific Plan EIR.
No New Information Showing Ability to Reduce Significant Effects in the Specific Plan EIR.This
Addendum has analyzed all available relevant information and has determined that there is no new
information of substantial importance that was unknown and could not have been known with the
exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the Specific Plan EIR was certified indicating that: (1)
mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible,
and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the Project, but the Project
proponent declines to adopt the mitigation measures or alternatives; or (2) mitigation measures or
alternatives that are considerably different from those analyzed in the previous EIR would
substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment, but the Project proponent
declines to adopt the mitigation measures or alternatives.
As discussed above,the proposed Project would result in a potentially significant impact related to
Land Use and Planning. Mitigation was included in the Specific Plan EIR and adopted at the time the
EIR was certified.The mitigation measures that are applicable to the proposed Project are listed in
Sections 4.13.3.1 and 3.17.3.1. Potential Project impacts related to Land Use and Planning would be
reduced below a level of significance with implementation of the applicable mitigation measures,
none of which the Project proponent is declining to adopt.
4-73
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx a12/20/19»
ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM
PROJECT No. P1-128 DECEMBER 2019
4.12 MINERAL RESOURCES
New Significant More Severe No Substantial Change
Impact Impact from Previous Analysis
Would the Project:
a. Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource
that would be of value to the region and the residents of ❑ ❑
the state?
b. Result in the loss of availability of a locally important
mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general ❑ ❑
plan,specific plan,or other land use plan?
4.12.1 Existing Setting
There are no known mineral resources within the Specific Plan area, including the Project site, and
there are no operational mineral recovery sites within the Specific Plan area or in the nearby Project
vicinity.'
4.12.2 Impacts Identified in the Specific Plan EIR
Mineral Resources are included within Section 4.3, Effects Found Not to be Significant, on pages 4-5
through 4-6 of the Specific Plan EIR; this topic was also discussed in page 44 of the Initial Study and
was scoped out.The Specific Plan EIR concluded that implementation of the Specific Plan would not
result in impacts to mineral resources because there are no known mineral resources within the
Specific Plan area.
4.12.3 Analysis of Project Impacts
a. Would the Project result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be
of value to the region and the residents of the state?
In 1975,the California Legislature enacted the Surface Mining and Reclamation Act, which,
among other things, provided guidelines for the classification and designation of mineral lands.
Areas are classified on the basis of geologic factors without regard to existing land use and land
ownership.The areas are categorized into four Mineral Resource Zones (MRZs):
• MRZ-1:An area where adequate information indicates that no significant mineral deposits
are present, or where it is judged that little likelihood exists for their presence.
• MRZ-2:An area where adequate information indicates that significant mineral deposits are
present, or where it is judged that a high likelihood exists for their presence.
• MRZ-3:An area containing mineral deposits,the significance of which cannot be evaluated.
s California Department of Conservation (DOC), Division of Mine Reclamation. Mines Online.
Website: http://maps.conservation.ca.gov/mol/index.html (accessed November 24,2019).
4-74
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx(12/20/19)
INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT
DECEMBER 2019 PROJECT No. P1-128
• MRZ-4:An area where available information is inadequate for assignment to any other MRZ
zone.
Of the four categories, lands classified as MRZ-2 are of the greatest importance. Such areas are
underlain by demonstrated mineral resources or are located where geologic data indicate that
significant measured or indicated resources are present. MRZ-2 areas are designated by the
State of California Mining and Geology Board as being"regionally significant." Such designations
require that a Lead Agency's land use decisions involving designated areas are to be made in
accordance with its mineral resource management policies, and that it consider the importance
of the mineral resource to the region or the State as a whole, not just to the Lead Agency's
jurisdiction.
The Project site has been classified by the California Department of Mines and Geology as
MRZ-3, indicating it is located in an area containing mineral deposits for which the significance
cannot be determined using available data.'Though the Project site is in MRZ-3, no known
mineral resources are located on the Project site, and the Project site is not designated or zoned
for the extraction of mineral deposits.
The proposed Project would not result in the loss of a known commercially valuable mineral
resource. No impacts to known mineral resources would occur as a result of the proposed
Project.
The Specific Plan EIR also concluded that no impacts to known mineral resources would occur.
Similarly,the proposed Project is located within the Specific Plan area and would not result in
new significant impacts beyond those identified in the Specific Plan EIR or a substantial increase
in the severity of previously identified significant impacts. No new mitigation measures are
required.
b. Would the Project result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource
recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan, or other land use plan?
Refer to Response 4.11.3 (a), above.The proposed Project would not result in the loss of a
known locally important mineral resource. No impacts to known mineral resources would occur
as a result of the proposed Project.
The Specific Plan EIR also concluded that no impacts to locally important mineral resource
recovery sites would occur. Similarly,the proposed Project is located within the Specific Plan
area and would not result in new significant impacts beyond those identified in the Specific Plan
EIR or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant impacts. No new
mitigation measures are required.
6 DOC, Division of Mines and Geology. Mineral Land Classification Map. Newport Beach Quadrangle,Special
Report 143, Plate 3.24.Website:ftp://ftp.consrv.ca.gov/pub/dmg/pubs/sr/SR_143/Partlll/Plate_3-24.pdf
(accessed November 24, 2019).
4-75
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx a12/20/19»
ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM
PROJECT No. P1-128 DECEMBER 2019
4.12.3.1 Mitigation Measures
The Specific Plan EIR does not include mitigation related to mineral resources. No additional
mitigation measures would be required for the proposed Project.
4.12.4 Findings Related to Mineral Resources
No New Significant Effects Requiring Major Revisions to the Specific Plan EIR. Based on the
foregoing analysis and information,there is no evidence that the proposed Project requires a major
change to the Specific Plan EIR.The Project will not result in new significant environmental impacts
related to Mineral Resources, and there is no increase in the severity of impacts described in the
Specific Plan EIR.
No Substantial Change in Circumstances Requiring Revisions to the Specific Plan EIR.There is no
information in the record or otherwise available that indicates that there are substantial changes in
circumstances pertaining to Mineral Resources that would require major changes to the Specific
Plan EIR.
No New Information Showing Greater Significant Effects than the Specific Plan EIR.This Initial
Study/Addendum has analyzed all available relevant information to determine whether there is new
information that was not available at the time the Specific Plan EIR was adopted, which would
indicate that a new significant effect not reported in that document might occur. Based on the
information and analyses above,there is no substantial new information indicating that there would
be a new significant impact related to Mineral Resources requiring major revisions to the Specific
Plan EIR.
No New Information Showing Ability to Reduce Significant Effects in the Specific Plan EIR.The
proposed Project would not result in any potentially significant impacts related to Mineral
Resources. CEQA does not require consideration of alternatives to the Project or consideration of
additional mitigation measures because there would not be any significant impacts to avoid or
reduce related to this topic, and no mitigation is required.
4-76
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx(12/20/19)
ItA
INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT 4 i2
DECEMBER 2019 PROJECT No. P1-128
4.13 NOISE
New Significant More Severe No Substantial Change
Impact Impact from Previous Analysis
Would the Project:
a. Increase exposure of persons to or generation of noise
levels in excess of standards established in the local general ❑ ❑
plan or noise ordinance,or applicable standards of other
agencies?
b. Increase exposure of persons to or generation of excessive ❑ ❑
ground-borne vibration or ground-borne noise levels?
c. Result in a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise
levels in the Project vicinity above levels existing without ❑ ❑
the Project?
d. Result in a substantial temporary or periodic increase in
ambient noise levels in the Project vicinity above levels ❑ ❑
existing without the Project?
e. For a project located within an airport land use plan or,
where such a plan has not been adopted,within 2 miles of a
public airport or public use airport,would the Project ❑ ❑
expose people residing or working in the Project area to
excessive noise levels?
f. For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip,would
the Project expose people residing or working in the Project ❑ ❑
area to excessive noise levels?
4.13.1 Existing Setting
The Specific Plan EIR identified the primary source of ambient noise in the Specific Plan area as being
associated with roadway traffic noise, which has not changed substantially since preparation of the
Specific Plan EIR. As such, the noise measurements completed for the Specific Plan EIR are
applicable to the proposed Project. Table 3.8-4 of the Specific Plan EIR shows the results of short-
term ambient noise monitoring that was gathered from the Hyundai Motor America North American
Corporate Campus Hyundai Project. Monitoring was conducted at four unique locations around that
project site, which coincides with the northwestern most corner of the Specific Plan area.The noise
monitoring results indicate that existing daytime ambient noise levels in the area range from 53.9 A-
weighted decibels (dBA) to 70.8 dBA equivalent continuous sound level (Leq) (refer to page 3.8-3 in
the Specific Plan EIR for a definition of all acoustical terms used in this section).Traffic on
surrounding roadways is the primary noise source affecting the existing ambient noise levels in the
Project vicinity. Other noise in the Project vicinity includes various stationary sources, especially
urban-related activities (e.g., mechanical equipment, parking areas, and conversations, etc.)that
may represent a single event or a continuous occurrence. Regulatory requirements and standards
that govern the generation of and exposure to noise within the community have not changed since
the preparation of the Specific Plan EIR. Potential impacts of the proposed Project as compared to
the Specific Plan with respect to noise are discussed below.
4-77
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx a12/20/19»
ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM
PROJECT No. P1-128 DECEMBER 2019
4.13.2 Impacts Identified in the Specific Plan EIR
The Specific Plan EIR analyzed the Specific Plan's potential Noise impacts on pages 3.8-1 through
3.8-26.
The Specific Plan EIR evaluated the potential noise and vibration impacts that could result from the
Specific Plan.The Specific Plan EIR determined that construction of the Specific Plan could result in
significant temporary noise impacts to nearby noise-sensitive receptors.'Therefore,the Specific
Plan EIR identified Mitigation Measure MM N-1 to reduce the noise levels resulting from
construction of the Specific Plan for off-site noise-sensitive uses to a less than significant level.
The Specific Plan EIR also evaluated ground-borne vibration and ground-borne noise levels
associated with construction of the Specific Plan. The Specific Plan EIR determined that ground-
borne vibration from construction activities would not exceed thresholds, and impacts would be less
than significant.
In addition, the Specific Plan EIR evaluated the potential increase in ambient noise levels due to
increased traffic and associated noise.The Specific Plan EIR determined that the maximum noise
level increase would be less than 1 decibel (dB) in any location, and were considered to be less than
significant.
The Specific Plan EIR also evaluated potential impacts from the exposure of persons to excessive
ground-borne vibration or noise levels, including truck deliveries and trash hauling, mechanical
equipment, and parking areas.The Specific Plan EIR determined that implementation of the Specific
Plan would result in less than significant impacts associated with these noise sources.
4.13.3 Analysis of Project Impacts
a. Would the Project increase exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of
standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance,or applicable standards of
other agencies?
Construction-and operation-period noise impacts of the proposed Project as compared to the
impacts identified in the Specific Plan EIR are discussed below.
Construction Impacts. Noise generated by the construction period for the proposed Project
would temporarily increase noise levels in the vicinity of the Project site. Each stage of
construction would involve a different mix of operating equipment, and noise levels would vary
based on the amount and types of equipment in operation as well as the location of the activity.
These activities would be similar for the proposed Project as compared to the Specific Plan.
The Specific Plan EIR identified that the closest sensitive receptors to construction associated
with the Specific Plan would be located approximately 75 ft from construction activities and
' Table 3.8-11 of the Specific Plan EIR indicates the anticipated noise levels of construction equipment noise
levels.
4-78
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx(12/20/19)
INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT 4 i2 ItA
DECEMBER 2019 PROJECT No. P1-128
would be subject to a maximum noise level reaching approximately 94.5 dBA Leo.The closest
sensitive receptors to the proposed Project would be located approximately 1,350 ft from the
Project site.Therefore, attenuated for distance, these receptors would be subject to a noise
level of approximately 69.4 dBA Leo. As identified in the Specific Plan EIR, the City's Municipal
Code Section 6.28.050 states that exterior noise standards for residential zones can reach up to
75 dBA from 7:00 a.m.to 10:00 p.m. and up to 70 dBA from 10:00 p.m.to 7:00 a.m. for any
period of time. In addition, pursuant to the City's Municipal Code Section 6.28.070 (Special
Provisions), noise due to construction activities would be exempt from the Noise Ordinance
between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m. on weekdays and 9:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m. on
Saturdays, with no construction activities permitted on Sundays or legal holidays.The Specific
Plan EIR requires the implementation of Mitigation Measure MM N-1 to further reduce noise
levels by requiring mobile equipment to be muffled and requiring best management practices
for hauling activities. In order to reduce construction noise to the maximum extent feasible,
Mitigation Measure MM N-1 would also be applicable to the proposed Project.
The Specific Plan EIR determined that construction of the Specific Plan could result in significant
temporary noise impacts to nearby noise-sensitive receptors. However,the proposed Project
site is located further from sensitive receptors than those identified in the Specific Plan EIR, and
would not be subject to construction noise exceeding exterior noise standards for residential
zones.Therefore, construction of the proposed Project would not result in new significant
impacts beyond those identified in the Specific Plan EIR or a substantial increase in the severity
of previously identified significant impacts, and no new mitigation measures are required.
Operation-Period Impacts.The proposed Project would involve the construction and operation
of a new administration building and surface parking lot and would relocate the existing
administrative uses from Plant No. 1 to the Project site north of Ellis Avenue. Implementation of
the proposed Project would not result in an increase in OCSD employees because the Project is
characterized as a relocation, rather than an expansion, of existing operations. As a result,the
Project would not increase existing vehicle trips. However,the proposed Project would
redistribute traffic from Plant No.1 to the Project site north of Ellis Avenue, which would result
in an increase of traffic noise in the vicinity of the Project.The proposed Project would also
generate stationary noise during operation that could result in a permanent increase in the
ambient noise environment. Potential impacts associated with these noise sources are discussed
below.
Traffic Noise. As identified in the Specific Plan EIR, traffic is a major source of noise in the Project
vicinity.The amount of noise varies according to many factors, such as volume of traffic,vehicle
mix (percentage of cars and trucks), average traffic speed, and distance from the receiver.A
characteristic of sound is that a doubling of a noise source is required in order to result in a
perceptible (3 dBA or greater) increase in the resulting noise level.
As identified in the Specific Plan EIR (Table 3.8-14), the 1-405 southbound ramps/Ellis Avenue/
Euclid Street intersection (the closest intersection to the Project site) carries approximately
3,492 AM peak hour trips or approximately 34,920 average daily trips.The proposed Project
would only result in a redistribution of vehicular traffic and would not add any new trips to the
4-79
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx a12/20/19»
ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM
PROJECT No. P1-128 DECEMBER 2019
surrounding circulation system.Therefore, the proposed Project daily trips would not result in a
doubling of traffic volumes on nearby roadways and would not result in a perceptible increase in
traffic noise levels at sensitive receptors in the Project vicinity, which are located approximately
1,350 ft southeast of the site. While traffic noise may increase on other roadway segments
within the immediate vicinity of the site, land uses in this area consist of a variety of light
industrial (e.g.,warehousing), retail, and office uses, which would not be sensitive to increased
traffic noise levels.Therefore, Project-related vehicle noise would be considered less than
significant.
The Specific Plan EIR determined that the maximum noise level increase would be less than 1 dB
in any location, and impacts were considered to be less than significant. Similar to the Specific
Plan,the proposed Project would not result in a doubling of traffic volumes on nearby roadways
and would not result in a perceptible increase in traffic noise levels at sensitive receptors in the
Project vicinity.Therefore, the proposed Project would not result in new significant impacts
beyond those identified in the Specific Plan EIR or a substantial increase in the severity of
previously identified significant impacts, and no new mitigation measures are required.
Stationary Source Noise. Operation of the proposed Project would contribute new noise sources
that would incrementally increase noise levels.The noise sources that may be present during
operation of the Project include delivery and trash trucks, mechanical equipment, and typical
parking lot activities.
The closest sensitive receptors to the proposed Project include the single-family residences
located approximately 1,350 ft southeast of the Project site along Alabama Circle.These
sensitive receptors are located further than those identified in the Specific Plan EIR (nearest
residences include the Adobe River Avenue Neighborhood, located approximately 75 ft west of
the Specific Plan area). As such, due to noise attenuation based on the increased distance from
the nearest sensitive receptors, noise levels from Project-related stationary noise sources would
remain a less than significant impact on off-site sensitive receptors.
The Specific Plan EIR determined that implementation of the Specific Plan would result in less
than significant impacts associated with stationary noise sources. Similarly, noise levels from the
proposed Project stationary noise sources would be a less than significant impact on off-site
sensitive receptors, due to their greater distance from the proposed Project site.Therefore, the
proposed Project would not result in new significant impacts beyond those identified in the
Specific Plan EIR or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant
impacts, and no new mitigation measures are required.
b. Would the Project increase exposure of persons to or generation of excessive ground-borne
vibration or ground-borne noise levels?
Construction of the proposed Project would occur in phases that would include demolition, site
preparation, grading, building construction, and architectural coating. During construction,
ground-borne vibration would be generated from various types of construction equipment such
as loaded trucks,jack hammers, and bulldozers.
4-80
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx(12/20/19)
INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT
DECEMBER 2019 PROJECT No. P1-128
The Specific Plan EIR determined that there are no fragile historic structures in the Specific Plan
area that could be affected by construction vibration. In addition, the Specific Plan EIR identified
that ground-borne vibration from construction activities could potentially be felt by surrounding
sensitive uses; however, vibration levels at the closest sensitive receptors would not exceed the
threshold of 0.1 inches per second. The closest sensitive receptors to the proposed Project are
located further than those identified in the Specific Plan EIR (nearest residences include the
Adobe River Avenue Neighborhood, located approximately 75 ft west of the Specific Plan area).
As such, due to noise attenuation based on the increased distance from the nearest sensitive
receptors, ground-borne vibration impacts would remain less than significant for the proposed
Project.
The Specific Plan EIR determined that vibration levels at the closest sensitive receptors would
not exceed the threshold of 0.1 inches per second.The proposed Project would not result in
new significant impacts beyond those identified in the Specific Plan EIR as the closest sensitive
receptors to the proposed Project are located further than those identified in the Specific Plan
EIR. No new mitigation measures are required.
c. Would the Project result in a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the
Project vicinity above levels existing without the Project?
Please refer to Response 4.13 (a), above.Audible increases in noise levels generally refer to a
change of 3 dB or more, as this level has been found to be barely perceptible to the human ear
in outdoor environments. Implementation of the proposed Project would not result in
substantial increases in traffic noise levels on local roadways in the Project vicinity or
operational noise at sensitive receptor locations.Therefore, Project-related noise increases and
impacts associated with permanent increases in noise levels would be a less than significant
impact.
The Specific Plan EIR determined that impacts associated with permanent increases in noise
levels would be less than significant. Similarly,the proposed Project, which would not result in
substantial increases in traffic noise levels or operational noise, would not result in new
significant impacts beyond those identified in the Specific Plan EIR, and no new mitigation
measures are required.
d. Would the Project result in a substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise
levels in the Project vicinity above levels existing without the Project?
Refer to Response 4.13 (a), above. Project-related construction activities could result in high
intermittent noise levels but would be reduced to a less than significant level with
implementation of Mitigation Measure MM N-1, which requires mobile equipment to be
muffled and the use of BMPs for hauling activities. In order to reduce construction noise to the
maximum extent feasible, Mitigation Measure MM N-1 would also be applicable to the
proposed Project.
4-81
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx a12/20/19»
ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM
PROJECT No. P1-128 DECEMBER 2019
The Specific Plan EIR determined that construction of the Specific Plan could result in a
temporary increase in noise levels during construction. Similarly, construction of the proposed
Project could result in a temporary increase in noise levels during construction. However, the
proposed Project would not subject sensitive receptors to construction noise exceeding exterior
noise standards for residential zones.Therefore,the proposed Project would not result in new
significant impacts beyond those identified in the Specific Plan EIR, and no new mitigation
measures are required.
e. For a project located within an airport land use plan or,where such a plan has not been
adopted,within 2 miles of a public airport or public use airport,would the Project expose
people residing or working in the Project area to excessive noise levels?
The Project site is approximately 6 miles west of John Wayne Airport in Santa Ana.According to
the Airport Land Use Commission,the Project site does not fall within the John Wayne Airport
Planning Area.The Project would not expose employees or visitors of the proposed office uses
to aviation-related noise levels different than that which would occur under existing conditions.
Further,the Project site is not in the 2016 Annual 60 to 75 Community Noise Equivalent Level
Noise Contours area for John Wayne Airport.Therefore, no aviation-related noise impacts
would occur.
The Specific Plan project area is not located within an airport land use plan or within 2 miles of a
public airport and would not expose residents or employees to excessive aviation-related noise
levels.The proposed Project, which is located within the Specific Plan area, would not result in
new significant impacts beyond those identified in the Specific Plan EIR, and no new mitigation
measures are required.
f. For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip,would the Project expose people residing
or working in the Project area to excessive noise levels?
No private airfields are located in the vicinity of the Project site.Therefore,the proposed Project
would not result in noise impacts associated with a private airfield.
The Specific Plan project area is not located within the vicinity of a private airstrip and would not
expose residents or employees to excessive aviation-related noise levels.The proposed Project,
which is located within the Specific Plan area, would not result in new significant impacts
beyond those identified in the Specific Plan EIR, and no new mitigation measures are required.
4.13.3.1 Mitigation Measures
Based on the analysis and information above, Mitigation Measure MM N-1 included in the Specific
Plan EIR would be applicable to the proposed Project.
MM N-1 Construction Noise Management Plan.A Construction Noise Management Plan
shall be prepared by the Applicant and approved by the City prior to Grading Permit
issuance.The Plan would address noise and vibration impacts and outline measures
4-82
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx(12/20/19)
INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT
DECEMBER 2019 PROJECT No. P1-128
that would be used to reduce impacts. Measures would include but not be limited
to:
• To the extent that they exceed the applicable construction noise limits,
excavation, foundation-laying, and conditioning activities shall be restricted to
between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m. Monday through Friday, and 9:00
a.m. and 8:00 p.m. Saturdays, in accordance with Section 6.28.070 of the
Fountain Valley Municipal Code.
• The Applicant's construction contracts shall require implementation of the
following construction best management practices (BMPs) by all construction
contractors and subcontractors working in or around the Project area to reduce
construction noise levels:
o The Applicant and its contractors and subcontractors shall ensure that all
construction equipment,fixed or mobile, is properly muffled according to
manufacturer's specifications or as required by the City's Building and
Safety Division,whichever is the more stringent.
o The Applicant and its contractors and subcontractors shall place noise-
generating construction equipment and locate construction staging areas
away from sensitive uses, where feasible, to the satisfaction of the Building
and Safety Division.
o The Applicant and its contractors and subcontractors shall implement noise
attenuation measures which may include, but are not limited to, noise
barriers or noise blankets to the satisfaction of the City's Building and Safety
Division.
• The Applicant's contracts with its construction contractors and subcontractors
shall include the requirement that construction staging areas, construction
worker parking, and the operation of earthmoving equipment within the Project
area, are located as far away from vibration-and noise-sensitive sites as
possible. Contract provisions incorporating the above requirements shall be
included as part of the Project's construction documents, which shall be
reviewed and approved by the City.
• The Applicant shall require by contract specifications that heavily loaded trucks
used during construction shall be routed away from residential streets to the
extent possible. Contract specifications shall be included in the proposed
Project's construction documents, which shall be reviewed by the City prior to
issuance of a grading permit.
• Property owners and occupants located within 500 feet of the boundary of a
construction project occurring under the Specific Plan shall be sent a notice, at
4-83
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx a12/20/19»
ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM
PROJECT No. P1-128 DECEMBER 2019
least 15 days prior to commencement of construction of each phase, regarding
the construction schedule of the Project.A sign, legible at a distance of 50 feet,
shall be posted at the construction site.All notices and signs shall be reviewed
and approved by the City prior to mailing or posting and shall indicate the dates
and duration of construction activities, as well as provide a contact name and a
telephone number where residents can inquire about the construction process
and register complaints.
4.13.4 Findings Related to Noise
No New Significant Effects Requiring Major Revisions to the Specific Plan EIR. Based on the
foregoing analysis and information,there is no evidence that the proposed Project requires a major
change to the Specific Plan EIR.The Project will not result in new significant environmental impacts
related to Noise, and there is no substantial increase in the severity of impacts described in the
Specific Plan EIR.
No Substantial Change in Circumstances Requiring Revisions to the Specific Plan EIR.There is no
information in the record or otherwise available that indicates that there are substantial changes in
circumstances pertaining to Noise that would require major changes to the Specific Plan EIR.
No New Information Showing Greater Significant Effects than the Specific Plan EIR.This Initial
Study/Addendum has analyzed all available relevant information to determine whether there is new
information that was not available at the time the Specific Plan EIR was adopted, which would
indicate that a new significant effect not reported in that document might occur. Based on the
information and analyses above,there is no substantial new information indicating that there would
be a new significant impact related to Noise requiring major revisions to the Specific Plan EIR.
No New Information Showing Ability to Reduce Significant Effects in the Specific Plan EIR.This
Addendum has analyzed all available relevant information and has determined that there is no new
information of substantial importance that was unknown and could not have been known with the
exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the Specific Plan EIR was certified indicating that: (1)
mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible,
and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the Project, but the Project
proponent declines to adopt the mitigation measures or alternatives; or(2) mitigation measures or
alternatives that are considerably different from those analyzed in the previous EIR would
substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment, but the Project proponent
declines to adopt the mitigation measures or alternatives.
As discussed above,the proposed Project would result in a potentially significant impact related to
Noise. Mitigation was included in the Specific Plan EIR and adopted at the time the EIR was certified.
The mitigation measure that is applicable to the proposed Project is listed in Section 4.13.3.1.
Potential Project impacts related to Noise would be reduced below a level of significance with
implementation of the applicable mitigation measures, none of which the Project proponent is
declining to adopt.
4-84
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx(12/20/19)
INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT i2
DECEMBER 2019 PROJECT No. P1-128
4.14 POPULATION AND HOUSING
New Significant More Severe No Substantial Change
Impact Impact from Previous Analysis
Would the Project:
a. Induce substantial population growth in an area,either
directly(for example,by proposing new homes and ❑ ❑
businesses)or indirectly(for example,through extension of
roads or other infrastructure)?
b. Displace substantial numbers of existing housing,
necessitating the construction of replacement housing ❑ ❑
elsewhere?
c. Displace substantial numbers of people,necessitating the ❑ ❑
construction of replacement housing elsewhere?
4.14.1 Existing Setting
According to the Specific Plan EIR,the City's population in 2010 totaled 55,313 people, while Orange
County had a population of 3,010,232. In 2010,the City's unemployment rate equaled 8 percent.
Jobs and housing are considered to be balanced when there are an equal number of employed
residents and jobs within a given area, with a ratio of approximately 1.0. The City has approximately
1.5 jobs for every employed resident, which is comparable to the ratio for Orange County and
suggests that the City is a net importer of labor. An estimated 18.0 percent and 84.1 percent of the
City's employed residents work within the City and County, respectively.
According to the Specific Plan EIR,the City currently has a housing stock of 19,167 units. Between
1990 and 1999,the City's housing stock increased 4.8 percent. Between 2000 and 2010,the City's
housing stock grew approximately 3.7 percent,which is lower than that experienced County-wide
(8.2 percent).To address the need for additional housing in the community,the City has adopted a
Housing Plan as part of the 2014 Housing Element for its General Plan, which establishes goals,
policies, and programs to facilitate development of more housing within the City.Although the
Specific Plan area does not currently support a residential population or residential uses, residential
neighborhoods are located to the north and west of the Specific Plan area.
4.14.2 Impacts Identified in the Specific Plan EIR
The Specific Plan EIR analyzed the Specific Plan's potential Population and Housing impacts on pages
3.9-1 through 3.9-18.
The Specific Plan is intended to guide future land use changes occurring within the Specific Plan area
through adoption of development standards and policies, including provisions for new housing and
employment opportunities.The Specific Plan EIR determined that implementation of the Specific
Plan would facilitate approximately 258,010 sf of net new development and 491 new housing units
within the Specific Plan area.
Consistent with the goals and policies of the City's General Plan and the adopted Housing Element,
projected housing development within the Specific Plan area would involve creating more housing
opportunities and minimizing impacts to existing neighborhoods. In addition, the Specific Plan
4-85
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx a12/20/19»
ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM
PROJECT No. P1-128 DECEMBER 2019
contains objectives to support the City's commitment to providing adequate housing for families
and individuals of all economic levels.Although the estimated increase in housing would be
insignificant relative to the existing number of housing units in the City,the Specific Plan would
adhere to City policies to provide adequate housing. Therefore, housing impacts are considered less
than significant.
The Specific Plan EIR determined that the addition of 491 housing units would result in a net
population increase of approximately 1,444 residents. However, population growth associated with
implementation of the Specific Plan is considered incremental relative to the existing population in
the Specific Plan area. In addition, implementation of the Specific Plan would result in the creation
of approximately 2,063 jobs. Similar to population growth, employment growth associated with
implementation of the Specific Plan is considered incremental relative to the existing jobs in the
Specific Plan area. Employment growth would be consistent with the Specific Plan's goals to create a
sustainable economy through development of a broad mix of retail, entertainment, office, and light
industrial uses in the Specific Plan area.Therefore, potential impacts related to population and
employment growth are considered less than significant.
The Specific Plan EIR concluded that land use changes occurring in the Specific Plan area would have
no impact on existing housing or people.The Specific Plan area is fully developed and the proposed
land use changes would be integrated within the existing industrial uses.The Specific Plan area does
not currently support residential uses, and no demolition of residential uses is anticipated upon
implementation of the Specific Plan. Conversely, the overall housing stock of the City would increase
with implementation of the Specific Plan.The Specific Plan does not identify land uses changes in
residential areas or the conversion of residential neighborhoods to non-residential uses, and
therefore, it is not anticipated that housing or people would be displaced. Impacts related to the
displacement of housing or people would be less than significant.
4.14.3 Analysis of Project Impacts
a. Would the Project induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly(for
example, by proposing new homes and businesses)or indirectly(for example,through
extension of roads or other infrastructure)?
The proposed Project would not provide new housing opportunities or extend roads or other
infrastructure to areas not previously served.The Project would include demolition of the five
existing industrial warehouse buildings and construction and operation of a new three-story
administration building and surface parking lot on the Project site. OCSD's existing
administrative functions and personnel will be shifted from Plant No. 1 to the new headquarters
facility. In addition, a pedestrian bridge would connect the Project site to OCSD's Plant No. 1 site
south of Ellis Avenue.Thus,the Project would not represent a net increase in businesses or jobs
because the administrative use would provide work space for existing OCSD personnel.
Therefore, impacts to population growth would be less than significant as it is unlikely the
Project would create new jobs in the area.
The Specific Plan EIR also concluded that implementation of the Specific Plan would not induce
substantial population growth in the area because increases in the number of housing units,
4-86
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx(12/20/19)
INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT
DECEMBER 2019 PROJECT No. P1-128
population, and jobs in the Specific Plan area would be considered incremental relative to
existing levels.The proposed Project would similarly not increase population or job growth as it
will serve the existing employees from the established Plant No. 1 facility. Therefore,the
proposed Project would not result in new significant impacts beyond those identified in the
Specific Plan EIR or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant
impacts, and no new mitigation measures are required.
b. Would the Project displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the
construction of replacement housing elsewhere?
The proposed Project would not displace any existing housing, and there are no existing or
proposed residential uses on the Project site.Therefore,there would be no impacts related to
the displacement of substantial numbers of housing.
The Specific Plan EIR also concluded that implementation of the Specific Plan would not displace
substantial numbers of existing housing because the Specific Plan area does not currently
contain and is not planned for residential uses. Similarly, the proposed Project would not
displace any existing housing and would not result in new significant impacts beyond those
identified in the Specific Plan EIR or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified
significant impacts. No new mitigation measures are required.
c. Would the Project displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of
replacement housing elsewhere?
There are no existing or proposed residential uses on the Project site.The proposed Project
would not displace housing and would not, therefore, displace a substantial number of people,
necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere.Therefore,there would be no
impacts related to the displacement of substantial numbers of people.
The Specific Plan EIR also concluded that implementation of the Specific Plan would not displace
a substantial number of people because the Specific Plan area does not support residential
populations and is not planned for residential uses. Similarly,the proposed Project,which is
located within the Specific Plan area, would not displace housing or result in new significant
impacts beyond those identified in the Specific Plan EIR or a substantial increase in the severity
of previously identified significant impacts. No new mitigation measures are required.
4.14.3.1 Mitigation Measures
The Specific Plan EIR does not include mitigation related to population and housing. No additional
mitigation measures would be required for the proposed Project.
4.14.4 Findings Related to Population and Housing
No New Significant Effects Requiring Major Revisions to the Specific Plan EIR. Based on the
foregoing analysis and information,there is no evidence that the proposed Project requires a major
change to the Specific Plan EIR.The Project will not result in new significant environmental impacts
4-87
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx a12/20/19»
ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM
PROJECT No. P1-128 DECEMBER 2019
related to Population and Housing, and there is no substantial increase in the severity of impacts
described in the Specific Plan EIR.
No Substantial Change in Circumstances Requiring Revisions to the Specific Plan EIR.There is no
information in the record or otherwise available that indicates that there are substantial changes in
circumstances pertaining to Population and Housing that would require major changes to the
Specific Plan EIR.
No New Information Showing Greater Significant Effects than the Specific Plan EIR.This Initial
Study/Addendum has analyzed all available relevant information to determine whether there is new
information that was not available at the time the Specific Plan EIR was adopted, which would
indicate that a new significant effect not reported in that document might occur. Based on the
information and analyses above,there is no substantial new information indicating that there would
be a new significant impact related to Population and Housing requiring major revisions to the
Specific Plan EIR.
No New Information Showing Ability to Reduce Significant Effects in the Specific Plan EIR. The
proposed Project would not result in any potentially significant impacts related to Population and
Housing. CEQA does not require consideration of alternatives to the Project or consideration of
additional mitigation measures because there would not be any significant impacts to avoid or
reduce related to this topic, and no mitigation is required.
4-88
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx(12/20/19)
ItA
INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT 61- i2
DECEMBER 2019 PROJECT No. P1-128
4.15 PUBLIC SERVICES
New Significant More Severe No Substantial Change
Impact Impact from Previous Analysis
Would the Project:
a. Result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated
with the provision of new or physically altered
governmental facilities,need for new or physically altered
governmental facilities,the construction of which could
cause significant environmental impacts,in order to
maintain acceptable service ratios,response times or other
performance objectives for any of the public services:
I. Fire protection? ❑ ❑
ii. Police protection? ❑ ❑
iii. Schools? ❑ ❑
iv. Other public facilities? ❑ ❑
4.15.1 Existing Setting
The City provides public services that serve the Specific Plan area. The City has two fire stations,
both located approximately 1.0 mile from the Specific Plan area,that provide the community with
emergency response services. Neither of these stations is located within the Specific Plan area.The
Fountain Valley Police Department (FVPD) operates out of a central location at City Hall and
provides police protection to the community.The Fountain Valley School District(FVSD) includes
seven elementary schools, and three middle schools. Fountain Valley High School, located within the
City, is part of the Huntington Beach Union High School District (HBUHSD).The City's Recreation and
Community Services Division operates a total of 20 parks within the City.The City includes additional
public services, such as the library and recreational facilities. However,these services are located
outside of the Specific Plan area.
4.15.2 Impacts Identified in the Specific Plan EIR
The Specific Plan EIR analyzed the Specific Plan's potential Public Services impacts on pages 3.10-1
through 3.10-16.
Implementation of the Specific Plan would result in a net increase of approximately 258,010 sf of
new development and construction of approximately 491 new residential units. As described in
Section 4.14, Population and Housing, build out of the Specific Plan would result in an increase in
service demands from an estimated 2,063 new employees, 1,444 new residents, and customers of
commercial and retail businesses. In addition,the Specific Plan EIR determined the associated
increase in demand for fire protection and emergency services within the Specific Plan area could
potentially impact operational services of fire protection and emergency medical providers.
Although the Specific Plan does not contain any specific development standards that address fire
protection services,the City's General Plan (1995) contains fire protection goals and associated
policies (Goal PS-6.4, Policy PS-6.4.1, and Policy PS-6.4.2)to ensure that equipment and facilities are
provided and maintained to meet reasonable standards of safety, dependability, and efficiency.
Pursuant to the City's Fire Code, all new structures built within the Specific Plan area would be
4-89
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx a12/20/19»
ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM
PROJECT No. P1-128 DECEMBER 2019
required to meet standard fire code requirements and be subject to review by the City Fire Marshal,
ensuring that the Project would provide adequate infrastructure for firefighting services. Therefore,
compliance with the City's General Plan and Fire Code would ensure less than significant impacts to
fire and emergency medical services.
Similar to fire services,the increase in population from new employees, residents, and customers in
the Specific Plan area could generate an increased need for police services and additional patrol.
Although the Specific Plan does not contain specific development standards addressing police
protection, Section 2.0.3.E states that all developments shall comply with applicable regulations,
including the City's Municipal Code and development review procedures.As part of the City's
development review and approval process,the City of Fountain Valley Planning and Building
Department would review proposed developments in the Specific Plan area and provide specific
recommendations related to security features and opportunities to reduce crime. Further,the City's
General Plan contains police service and law enforcement goals and associated policies (Goal PS-6.6,
Policy PS-6.6.1, and Policy PS-6.6.3) to ensure that the City provides effective and rapid response to
all emergencies.The Specific Plan EIR concluded that an increase in the number of residents and
employees generated by Specific Plan build out would not be expected to significantly decrease
adequate service levels or response times. Based on City growth projections,the FVPD does not
currently anticipate the need for additional resources, and therefore, potential impacts to police
services are considered less than significant.
Similar to fire and police services, the increase in population from new employees and residents in
the Specific Plan area could generate increased enrollment at schools in the FVSD and HBUHSD.To
account for these increases in demand for public school services, FVSD and HBUHSD require the
payment of development fees for both residential, and non-residential development within the City.
These fees are calculated on a per-square-foot basis on new development and would be collected
for the 491 housing units and commercial development projects based on their square footage.As a
result of payment of these required fees, potential impacts to schools resulting from development
under the Specific Plan are considered less than significant.
Similarly to other public services discussed above,the increase in population from new employees
and residents in the Specific Plan area could incrementally increase the demand for other public
facilities, including libraries.Although there are no library facilities located within the Specific Plan
area, increased demand would not exceed existing service capabilities of the nearby Fountain Valley
Library or other nearby libraries.The Orange County Public Libraries (OCPL) System allows access to
materials from all branches.Therefore, the incremental increase in demand for library services
would not result in the need for new or physically altered facilities or additional staff, and potential
impacts to library services are considered less than significant.
4.15.3 Analysis of Project Impacts
a. i. Would the Project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the
provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically
altered governmental facilities,the construction of which could cause significant
4-90
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx(12/20/19)
ItA
INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT 4 i2
DECEMBER 2019 PROJECT No. P1-128
environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or
other performance objectives for fire protection?
The proposed Project would result in the demolition of the five existing industrial warehouse
buildings on the Project site, and construction and operation of a new three-story
administration building and surface parking lot on the Project site. In addition, a pedestrian
bridge would connect the Project site to OCSD's Plant No. 1 south of Ellis Avenue.The
proposed Project would relocate the existing administrative uses from Plant No. 1 to the
Project site north of Ellis Avenue. Implementation of the proposed Project would not result in
an increase in OCSD employees because the Project is characterized as a relocation, rather
than an expansion, of existing operations. As such,the Project would not result in an increase
in jobs or employment beyond what currently exists at Plant No. 1.
The FVFD is responsible for providing emergency response,fire prevention, education, and
emergency medical services to citizens and visitors to the City of Fountain Valley.The Project
may result in limited effects on fire services during the construction period (such as any
potential calls for service FVFD may receive regarding conditions at the Project site), but these
effects would be temporary in nature and would cease following completion.As stated in
Section 4.14, Population and Housing, new development proposed as part of the Project
would not represent a net increase in businesses or jobs because the administrative use would
provide work space for existing OCSD personnel currently located at OCSD's Plant No. 1.
Consequently, operation of the administration building would not result in increased demand
for fire services in the Project vicinity compared to existing conditions. Further, the Project
intends to comply with policies related to fire and emergency medical services in the City's
General Plan and Fire Code, ensuring minimal impacts to public services.Therefore,the
Project would not result in adverse impacts to fire services.
The Specific Plan EIR also concluded that implementation of the Specific Plan would not result
in adverse impacts related to provision of fire services because development under the
Specific Plan would comply with the General Plan and the Fire Code. Similarly,the proposed
Project intends to comply with the General Plan and the Fire Code,thereby reducing impacts
to fire services.Therefore,the proposed Project, which is located within the Specific Plan area,
would not result in new significant impacts beyond those identified in the Specific Plan EIR or
a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant impacts, and no new
mitigation measures are required.
a. ii. Would the Project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the
provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically
altered governmental facilities,the construction of which could cause significant
environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or
other performance objectives for police protection?
As stated previously,the proposed Project would relocate the existing administrative uses
from Plant No. 1 to the Project site north of Ellis Avenue. Implementation of the proposed
Project would not result in an increase in OCSD employees because the Project is
4-91
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx a12/20/19»
ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM
PROJECT No. P1-128 DECEMBER 2019
characterized as a relocation, rather than an expansion, of existing operations. As such,the
Project would not result in an increase in jobs or employment beyond what currently exists at
Plant No. 1.
The FVPD is responsible for the prevention, detection, and investigation of crime in the City.
Similar to Response 4.14 (a), construction and operation of the proposed Project may result in
increased demand for police protection services.Although the Project site would be fenced
during construction, construction activities may result in temporary effects on police services,
including any potential calls for service FVPD may receive regarding conditions at the Project
site.As stated in Section 4.14, Population and Housing, new development proposed as part of
the Project would not represent a net increase in businesses or jobs because the
administrative use would provide work space for existing OCSD personnel currently working
on the OCSD Plant No. 1 site. Consequently, operation of the administration building would
not result in increased demand for police services in the Project vicinity compared to existing
conditions. Further,the Project intends to comply with policies related to police services in the
City's General Plan and Municipal Code, ensuring minimal impacts to public services.
Therefore,the Project would not result in adverse impacts to police services.
The Specific Plan EIR also concluded that implementation of the Specific Plan would not result
in adverse impacts related to provision of police services because development under the
Specific Plan would comply with the General Plan and the Fire Code. Similarly,the proposed
Project intends to comply with the General Plan and Municipal Code,thereby reducing
impacts to police services.Therefore,the proposed Project,which is located within the
Specific Plan area, would not result in new significant impacts beyond those identified in the
Specific Plan EIR or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant
impacts, and no new mitigation measures are required.
a. iii. Would the Project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the
provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically
altered governmental facilities,the construction of which could cause significant
environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or
other performance objectives for schools?
The proposed Project does not include any residential uses and, as such, would not induce
population growth that would generate an increased demand for schools.The schools nearest
to the Project site are Gisler Elementary School and Cox Elementary School, approximately 0.5
mile to the southwest and 0.8 mile to the north, respectively.The relocation of OCSD
employees and functions from the existing Plant No. 1 to the Project site is not expected to
result in substantial population growth because the Project would not increase the number of
staff employed by the OCSD.Therefore,the proposed Project would have a less than
significant impact on school services and facilities.
The Specific Plan EIR also concluded that implementation of the Specific Plan would not result
in adverse impacts related to schools because residential and commercial development would
be required to pay development fees to FVSD and HBUHSD.The proposed Project does not
4-92
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx(12/20/19)
INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT
DECEMBER 2019 PROJECT No. P1-128
involve residential or commercial development and, therefore, would not be subject to such
development fees. Further,the Project would not impact school enrollment because it would
not result in a substantial increase in population.Therefore, the proposed Project would not
result in new significant impacts beyond those identified in the Specific Plan EIR or a
substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant impacts, and no new
mitigation measures are required.
a. iv. Would the Project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the
provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically
altered governmental facilities,the construction of which could cause significant
environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or
other performance objectives for other public facilities?
As stated previously,the proposed Project would relocate the existing administrative uses
from Plant No. 1 to the Project site north of Ellis Avenue. Implementation of the proposed
Project would not result in an increase in OCSD employees because the Project is
characterized as a relocation, rather than an expansion, of existing operations. As such,the
Project would not require an increase in jobs or employment beyond what currently exists at
Plant No. 1. Refer to Section 4.16, Recreation, for the discussion on Project impacts related to
parks.
The proposed Project does not include any residential uses and, as such, would not induce
substantial population growth that would generate an increased demand for public facilities
(e.g., libraries). In addition,the Project would not increase the number of OCSD employees.
While it is possible employees may use libraries or other public facilities in Fountain Valley
during lunch breaks or after-work hours,the Project would not increase the number of
employees and would not,therefore, increase the existing use of libraries or other public
facilities or contribute to substantial physical deterioration of those facilities.Therefore,the
proposed Project would not impact other public facilities in Fountain Valley.
The Specific Plan EIR also concluded that implementation of the Specific Plan would not result
in adverse impacts related to libraries or other public facilities because the incremental
increase in demand for library services would not result in the need for new or physically
altered facilities or additional staff. Similarly, the proposed Project would not impact libraries
because it would not result in a substantial increase in population.Therefore,the proposed
Project would not result in new significant impacts beyond those identified in the Specific Plan
EIR or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant impacts, and no
new mitigation measures are required.
4.15.3.1 Mitigation Measures
The Specific Plan EIR does not include mitigation related to public services. No additional mitigation
measures would be required for the proposed Project.
4-93
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx a12/20/19»
ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM
PROJECT No. P1-128 DECEMBER 2019
4.15.4 Findings Related to Public Services
No New Significant Effects Requiring Major Revisions to the Specific Plan EIR. Based on the
foregoing analysis and information,there is no evidence that the proposed Project requires a major
change to the Specific Plan EIR.The Project will not result in new significant environmental impacts
related to Public Services, and there is no substantial increase in the severity of impacts described in
the Specific Plan EIR.
No Substantial Change in Circumstances Requiring Revisions to the Specific Plan EIR.There is no
information in the record or otherwise available that indicates that there are substantial changes in
circumstances pertaining to Public Services that would require major changes to the Specific Plan
EIR.
No New Information Showing Greater Significant Effects than the Specific Plan EIR.This Initial
Study/Addendum has analyzed all available relevant information to determine whether there is new
information that was not available at the time the Specific Plan EIR was adopted, which would
indicate that a new significant effect not reported in that document might occur. Based on the
information and analyses above,there is no substantial new information indicating that there would
be a new significant impact related to Public Services requiring major revisions to the Specific Plan
EIR.
No New Information Showing Ability to Reduce Significant Effects in the Specific Plan EIR.The
proposed Project would not result in any potentially significant impacts related to Public Services.
CEQA does not require consideration of alternatives to the Project or consideration of additional
mitigation measures because there would not be any significant impacts to avoid or reduce related
to this topic, and no mitigation is required.
4-94
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx(12/20/19)
INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT i2
DECEMBER 2019 PROJECT No. P1-128
4.16 RECREATION
New Significant More Severe No Substantial Change
Would the Project: Impact Impact from Previous Analysis
a. Increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional
parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial ❑ ❑
physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be
accelerated?
b. Include recreational facilities or require the construction or
expansion of recreational facilities which might have an ❑ ❑
adverse physical effect on the environment?
4.16.1 Existing Setting
According to the Specific Plan EIR,the City's Recreation and Community Services Division operates a
total of 20 parks within the City.There are no parks or recreational facilities within the Specific Plan
area.The nearest parks are Los Alamos Park, located at 17901 Los Alamos Street(approximately
0.25 mile northwest of the Specific Plan area) and Ellis Park, located at 10301 Ellis Avenue
(approximately 0.25 mile west of the Specific Plan area). Mile Square Park, located at 16801 Euclid
Street, is the largest park within the City at one square mile in size. It contains golf courses and other
recreational and athletic facilities, as well as two lakes and a 20-acre urban nature area planted with
California native plants. The City's Recreation Center and Sports Park, located at 16400 Brookhurst
Street, is a multi-purpose recreational facility featuring a gym, a playground, and multiple sports
fields and courts. While the Specific Plan area itself does not contain any parks, it provides access to
an unimproved segment of the Santa Ana River Trail, which contains recreational opportunities for
hikers, bicyclists, and equestrians.
4.16.2 Impacts Identified in the Specific Plan EIR
Recreation impacts were discussed on pages 50 through 51 of the Initial Study and the topic was
scoped out. However,the Specific Plan EIR analyzed the Specific Plan's potential Public Services
impacts, including impacts to Recreation, on pages 3.10-1 through 3.10-16.
The Specific Plan does not include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of
recreational facilities. Implementation of the Specific Plan would result in a net increase of
approximately 258,010 sf of new development and construction of approximately 491 new
residential units. As described in Section 4.14, Population and Housing, build out of the Specific Plan
would result in an increase in population associated with approximately 2,063 new employees,
1,444 new residents, and customers of commercial and retail businesses. Build out of the Specific
Plan would increase the density of commercial uses and introduce new residential uses, thereby
increasing the total population of the Specific Plan area.The Specific Plan EIR determined that the
addition of new employees and residents in the Specific Plan area could increase demands on area
parks and recreational facilities; however,while there are no parks within the Specific Plan area,
there are multiple parks and recreational opportunities within the City that could accommodate the
increase in population.Therefore, impacts to recreational opportunities would be less than
significant.
4-95
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx a12/20/19»
ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM
PROJECT No. P1-128 DECEMBER 2019
The Specific Plan EIR found that the City currently surpasses the National Recreation and Park
Association's recommended parkland-to-resident ratio of 4 to 6 acres of parkland per 1,000
residents. In addition,the Specific Plan includes open space requirements and bicycle network
improvements to satisfy increased demand and to allow better connectivity to recreational facilities
and adjacent land uses. Pursuant to the Quimby Act and the City's Municipal Code Chapter
21.78.070, development of the 491 residential units proposed under the Specific Plan would
contribute to the park dedication fee of 5 acres of park for every 1,000 new residents.This fee
would contribute to development of park areas within the City, thereby further reducing potential
impacts from the Specific Plan on parks and recreation facilities in the City. Although build out of the
Specific Plan would incrementally increase demand for parks and recreational facilities, new or
physically altered facilities would not be necessary because the Specific Plan includes open space
requirements. In addition, the payment of a park dedication fee would address impacts on existing
parkland. As a result, potential impacts from the Specific Plan on local and regional parks would be
less than significant.
4.16.3 Analysis of Project Impacts
a. Would the Project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other
recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or
be accelerated?
No existing parks or other recreation uses are located adjacent to the Project site.The nearest
parks are Moon Park, approximately 0.2 mile east of the Project site on the opposite side of the
Santa Ana River, and Ellis Park, approximately 0.3 mile west of the Project site.The Project does
not propose any residential uses and, therefore, would not increase the population near those
parks.As discussed in Section 4.14, Population and Housing, the Project is not anticipated to
result in the creation of new jobs and employees in the area. Although it is possible employees
might use Moon Park, Ellis Park, or other parks in Fountain Valley during lunch breaks or after-
work hours,the proposed Project would not increase the number of employees in the
immediate area and would not, therefore, increase the use of those parks or contribute to
substantial physical deterioration of those facilities. Further, the proposed Project intends to
comply with development standards outlined in the Specific Plan, which require the provision of
100 sf of public open space per 1,000 sf building area.Therefore,the Project would not impact
existing neighborhood and regional parks and recreational facilities.
The Specific Plan EIR also concluded that implementation of the Specific Plan would not result in
adverse impacts related to parks and recreational facilities because the incremental increase in
demand for parks can be accommodated by existing City facilities. Similarly, the proposed
Project would not impact parks and recreational facilities because it would not result in an
increase in population. In addition,the Project intends to provide open space as part of the
development standards outlined in the Specific Plan. Therefore, the proposed Project would not
result in new significant impacts beyond those identified in the Specific Plan EIR or a substantial
increase in the severity of previously identified significant impacts, and no new mitigation
measures are required.
4-96
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx(12/20/19)
INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT 61- i2 ItA
DECEMBER 2019 PROJECT No. P1-128
b. Would the Project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of
recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment?
Refer to Response 4.16.3 (a), above.The proposed Project would not include recreational
facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities.
The Specific Plan does not include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion
of recreational facilities.The Specific Plan EIR concluded that implementation of the Specific
Plan would not result in adverse impacts related to recreational facilities because the
incremental increase in demand for parks can be accommodated by existing City facilities.
Similarly,the proposed Project would not include recreational facilities or require the
construction or expansion of recreational facilities.Therefore, the proposed Project would not
result in new significant impacts beyond those identified in the Specific Plan EIR or a substantial
increase in the severity of previously identified significant impacts, and no new mitigation
measures are required.
4.16.3.1 Mitigation Measures
The Specific Plan EIR does not include mitigation related to recreation. No additional mitigation
measures would be required for the proposed Project.
4.16.4 Findings Related to Recreation
No New Significant Effects Requiring Major Revisions to the Specific Plan EIR. Based on the
foregoing analysis and information,there is no evidence that the proposed Project requires a major
change to the Specific Plan EIR.The Project will not result in new significant environmental impacts
related to Recreation, and there is no substantial increase in the severity of impacts described in the
Specific Plan EIR.
No Substantial Change in Circumstances Requiring Revisions to the Specific Plan EIR.There is no
information in the record or otherwise available that indicates that there are substantial changes in
circumstances pertaining to Recreation that would require major changes to the Specific Plan EIR.
No New Information Showing Greater Significant Effects than the Specific Plan EIR.This Initial
Study/Addendum has analyzed all available relevant information to determine whether there is new
information that was not available at the time the Specific Plan EIR was adopted, which would
indicate that a new significant effect not reported in that document might occur. Based on the
information and analyses above,there is no substantial new information indicating that there would
be a new significant impact related to Recreation requiring major revisions to the Specific Plan EIR.
No New Information Showing Ability to Reduce Significant Effects in the Specific Plan EIR. The
proposed Project would not result in any potentially significant impacts related to Recreation. CEQA
does not require consideration of alternatives to the Project or consideration of additional
mitigation measures because there would not be any significant impacts to avoid or reduce related
to this topic, and no mitigation is required.
4-97
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx a12/20/19»
ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM
PROJECT No. P1-128 DECEMBER 2019
4.17 TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC
New Significant More Severe No Substantial Change
Impact Impact from Previous Analysis
Would the Project:
a. Conflict with an applicable plan,ordinance or policy
establishing measures of effectiveness for the performance
of the circulation system,taking into account all modes of
transportation including mass transit and non-motorized ❑ ❑
travel and relevant components of the circulation system,
including but not limited to intersections,streets,highways
and freeways,pedestrian and bicycle paths,and mass
transit?
b. Conflict with an applicable congestion management
program,including,but not limited to level of service
standards and travel demand measures,or other standards ❑ ❑
established by the county congestion management agency
for designated roads or highways?
c. Result in a change in air traffic patterns,including either an
increase in traffic levels or a change in location which ❑ ❑
results in substantial safety risks?
d. Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature(e.g.,
sharp curves or dangerous intersections)or incompatible ❑ ❑ ❑
uses(e.g.,farm equipment)?
e. Result in inadequate emergency access? ❑ ❑
f. Substantially disrupt alternative transportation,including ❑ ❑
pedestrian,bicycle,and transit facilities?
4.17.1 Existing Setting
The Project site for the new Administration Headquarters complex is located in Fountain Valley,
California.The proposed Project site is bordered by industrial uses to the north, Pacific Street to the
east, industrial uses and Bandilier Circle to the west, and Ellis Avenue and OCSD's Plant No. 1 site to
the south.As mentioned in the Project Description,the Project site is in the Fountain Valley
Crossings Specific Plan area, which the City of Fountain Valley adopted on January 23, 2018.The
Project site is designated Industrial (Commercial Manufacturing) in the City's General Plan and is
zoned as Specific Plan (SP)—FVCSP Mixed Industry District.
4.17.1.1 Existing Roadways
Access to OCSD Plant No. 1 is currently provided as the south leg of the 1-405/Ellis Avenue-Euclid
Avenue intersection.Access to the Project site is currently available from either Bandilier Circle or
Pacific Street. Regional access to the site is primarily provided via 1-405 and local traffic uses Ellis
Avenue to reach the Project site.
• Ellis Avenue: Ellis Avenue is a four-lane arterial divided by a striped median with dedicated left-
turn lanes for local streets. Ellis Avenue is located directly adjacent to the Project site. According
to the City's Circulation Plan, Ellis Avenue is designated as a Secondary Arterial.The posted
speed limit is 45 miles per hour. On-street parking is prohibited, and no bicycle facilities are
4-98
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx(12/20/19)
INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT
DECEMBER 2019 PROJECT No. P1-128
provided. Sidewalks are provided on both sides of the roadway. Ellis Avenue is serviced by
Orange County Transportation Authority Bus Route 37, which provides service between La
Habra and Fountain Valley via Euclid Avenue.
• Bandilier Circle: Bandilier Circle is a two-lane undivided local street that provides access to
warehouse, office, and retail uses, including direct access to the Project site. On-street parking is
permitted. No bicycle or pedestrian facilities are provided on this roadway.
• Pacific Street: Similar to Bandilier Circle, Pacific Street is a two-lane undivided local street that
provides access to warehouse, office, and retail uses, including direct access to the Project site.
On-street parking is permitted. No bicycle or pedestrian facilities are provided on this roadway.
4.17.1.2 Existing Intersections
The upstream and downstream signalized intersections adjacent to the Project site on Ellis Avenue
(i.e., Ward Street/Ellis Avenue and 1-405 southbound ramps/Ellis Avenue-Euclid Street) were
recently evaluated in the Fountain Valley Crossings Specific Plan Transportation Impact Analysis
(TIA) (Fehr& Peers,August 2017). According to the existing intersection level of service (LOS)
analysis,Ward Street/Ellis Avenue operates at LOS C in the a.m. peak hour and LOS B in the p.m.
peak hour, while 1-405 southbound ramps/Ellis Avenue-Euclid Street operates at LOS C in the a.m.
peak hour and at unsatisfactory LOS F during the p.m. peak hour.
4.17.2 Impacts Identified in the Specific Plan EIR
The Fountain Valley Crossings Specific Plan TIA evaluated the effects of the proposed land use plan
on the surrounding circulation system, including intersections and freeway segments, in accordance
with the Orange County Congestion Management Plan guidelines and the Fountain Valley General
Plan.According to the Specific Plan EIR,the following impacts from implementation of the Specific
Plan related to Transportation/Traffic were identified in Table 3.11-8 and in Table 3.11-10.
Construction activities anticipated to occur under the proposed Fountain Valley Crossings Specific
Plan would potentially create short-term traffic impacts due to congestion from construction
vehicles (e.g., construction trucks, construction worker vehicles, and equipment, etc.), traffic lane
and sidewalk closures, and loss of on-street parking. With implementation of a Construction Impact
Mitigation Plan (identified as Mitigation Measure MM T-1 in the Specific Plan EIR), construction
impacts would be less than significant with mitigation.
Under existing with Project conditions, increased traffic generated by build out of the Specific Plan
would increase congestion at 3 of the 20 study intersections. While implementation of the Specific
Plan would include transit, pedestrian, and bike improvements and a Transportation Demand
Management (TDM) Program to minimize new vehicle trips, potential peak-period congestion would
still exceed existing City and California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) LOS thresholds.
Intersection impacts to Euclid Street and Newhope Street/Northbound 1-405 Ramps (Intersection
No. 15) and Ellis Avenue/Euclid Street and Southbound 1-405 Ramps (Intersection No. 19)would be
temporarily significant and unavoidable. With implementation of intersection improvements,
4-99
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx a12/20/19»
ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM
PROJECT No. P1-128 DECEMBER 2019
intersection impacts to all other impacted intersections would be less than significant with
implementation of mitigation.
Increased traffic generated by build out of the proposed Fountain Valley Specific Plan under existing
conditions would increase congestion at 11 freeway facilities, resulting in significant and
unavoidable impacts.
Increases in traffic would incrementally increase delays at the intersections of residential roads with
local arterials in the Specific Plan area, degrading the effectiveness and performance of the
circulation system. However, such increases in delays at residential side streets would be
incremental and would not exceed established thresholds under existing conditions.Therefore,
impacts would be adverse but less than significant.
Implementation of the Specific Plan would not substantially disrupt alternative transportation, and
impacts would be less than significant without mitigation.
Buildout of the Specific Plan area would contribute towards potential cumulative short-term traffic
impacts due to congestion from construction vehicles (e.g., construction trucks, construction worker
vehicles, and equipment, etc.),traffic lane and sidewalk closures, and loss of on-street parking. With
implementation of a Construction Impact Mitigation Plan, construction impacts would be less then
significant with mitigation.
Under Future Year(2035) cumulative conditions, increased traffic would contribute considerably to
increased congestion at 4 of the 20 study intersections. While multiple improvements to
transportation facilities, including transit, pedestrian, and bike facilities are assumed to be
completed by 2035, potential peak-period congestion would still exceed City and Caltrans LOS
thresholds. Intersection impacts to MacArthur Boulevard and Harbor Boulevard (Intersection No.
13)would be significant and unavoidable. Impacts at Euclid Street and Newhope Street/Northbound
1-405 Ramps (Intersection No. 15) would be temporarily significant and unavoidable before
implementation of planned roadway improvements. Impacts at Intersection No. 15 would be
reduced to less than significant once planned improvements by other agencies have been
implemented. With implementation of additional intersection improvements, all other impacted
intersections would be improved to less than significant with mitigation.
Under cumulative conditions, traffic from build out of the Specific Plan would cumulatively
contribute to congestion at seven freeway facilities. Operational conditions at freeway facilities in
the Specific Plan area and surrounding vicinity would be depleted beyond thresholds.Therefore,
impacts to freeway facilities would be a significant and unavoidable impact.
4.17.3 Analysis of Project Impacts
a. Would the Project conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance or policy establishing measures
of effectiveness for the performance of the circulation system,taking into account all modes
of transportation including mass transit and non-motorized travel and relevant components of
the circulation system, including but not limited to intersections,streets, highways and
freeways, pedestrian and bicycle paths,and mass transit?
4-100
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx(12/20/19)
ItA
INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT 4 i2
DECEMBER 2019 PROJECT No. P1-128
The proposed Project includes moving the existing operations of an administrative office
building across Ellis Avenue to the proposed Project site.There will not be an increase in the
number of employees and the existing administrative building will not be reoccupied.Therefore,
this Project will only result in a redistribution of vehicular traffic; no new trips will be added to
the surrounding circulation system.The proposed Project would be consistent with the findings
from the Specific Plan, and the project would not result in any new or more severe impacts that
were not previously identified in the Specific Plan.
As such,the results of the Fountain Valley Crossings Specific Plan TIA are still considered valid
and can be maintained for the majority of the study area intersections and all freeway
segments. One difference from the approved TIA would be the redistribution of peak-hour
volumes at 1-405 southbound ramps/Ellis Avenue-Euclid Street, in which the south leg is the
OCSD main driveway serving the existing administrative building. Operationally, the
redistribution of project trips (southbound through to southbound right-turn, northbound
through to eastbound left-turn, northbound right-turn to eastbound through, and the removal
of northbound left-turns) may improve the operation of this intersection. It should be noted
that this intersection is subject to Caltrans'jurisdiction and has been identified by Orange
County Transportation Authority(OCTA) as one of the improvements for the 1-405 Improvement
project.
The Project includes improvements to pedestrian circulation with the construction of a 128 ft
long pedestrian bridge across Ellis Avenue to connect Plant No. 1 with the new Administration
Headquarters complex on the Project site.The Project will not modify the roadway to affect
existing bicycle,transit, or vehicular travel.
The Specific Plan EIR concluded that impacts to any applicable plans, ordinances, or policies
establishing measures of effectiveness for the performance of the circulation system as a result
of traffic would be significant and unavoidable. The proposed Project, which is located within
the Specific Plan TIA study area, would not add additional traffic trips to the circulation system,
and would not result in new significant impacts beyond those identified in the Specific Plan EIR,
and no new mitigation measures are required. Mitigation Measure T-1,from the Specific Plan
EIR is applicable to the proposed Project and is described below. However, Mitigation Measures
T-2a,T-2b, and T-7, from the Specific Plan EIR are not applicable to the proposed Project, as no
new additional trips are generated. Mitigation measures T-2a,T-2b, and T-7 identified in the
Specific Plan EIR are not applicable to the proposed Project. As previously mentioned, the
proposed Project would not add additional traffic trips to the circulation system, and would not
result in any new significant impacts beyond those identified in the Specific Plan EIR. As such,
the proposed Project would not be subject to mitigation measures associated with fair-share
payments of improvements located within the Specific Plan study area.
b. Would the Project conflict with an applicable congestion management program, including, but
not limited to level of service standards and travel demand measures, or other standards
established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways?
4-101
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx a12/20/19»
ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM
PROJECT No. P1-128 DECEMBER 2019
As the Congestion Management Agency (CMA)for Orange County,the OCTA is responsible for
establishing, implementing, and monitoring the County's Congestion Management Program
(CMP).Through its implementation of the CMP,the OCTA works to ensure that roadways
operate at acceptable LOS and reviews development proposals to ensure that transportation
impacts are minimized. OCTA has established a threshold of 2,400 or more daily trips for
projects adjacent to the CMP Highway System.The Project is not located near a CMP monitoring
facility.
As described in Response 4.17 (a),the proposed Project will not add any new trips to the
surrounding circulation system.Therefore, the proposed Project is not expected to conflict with
the applicable CMP, and there is no substantial change from the conclusions in the Specific Plan
EIR.
The Specific Plan EIR concluded that conflict with an applicable CMP established by the County
CMA for the 1-405 freeway segments as a result of traffic would be significant and unavoidable.
The proposed Project, which is located within the Specific Plan TIA study area and would not add
additional traffic trips to the circulation system, would not result in new significant impacts
beyond those identified in the Specific Plan EIR, and no new mitigation measures are required.
No feasible mitigation was identified in the Specific Plan EIR.
c. Would the Project result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in
traffic levels or a change in location which results in substantial safety risks?
The proposed Project would not interfere with air traffic patterns, nor would it increase traffic
levels.There would be no impacts related to air traffic.
The Specific Plan EIR concluded that the build out of the Specific Plan would have no impact on
air traffic patterns because there are no airport facilities in the Specific Plan area and
implementation of the proposed Specific Plan would not substantially impacts surrounding
airports (e.g.,John Wayne Airport).The proposed Project, which is located within the Specific
Plan area, would not result in new significant impacts beyond those identified in the Specific
Plan EIR, and no new mitigation measures are required.
d. Would the Project substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or
dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses(e.g.,farm equipment)?
The proposed Project will consolidate the six existing driveways on the project frontage of
Bandilier Circle into one driveway(providing access to employee and public parking) and
consolidate the five existing driveways on Pacific Street into two driveways (one for bus and
large vehicle access and one for employee and public parking). Consolidation of the driveways
along both streets will remove turning-movement conflicts as a result of driveways currently
being spaced too closely.The proposed Project will not make any further physical changes to
the surrounding circulation system.
4-102
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx(12/20/19)
ItA
INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT 4 i2
DECEMBER 2019 PROJECT No. P1-128
The Specific Plan EIR concluded that the implementation of the Specific Plan would have a less
than significant impact on the increase of hazards due to design features or incompatible uses.
The proposed Project would remove the existing turning-movement conflicts and would not
include design features that would increase hazards.Therefore,the proposed Project would not
result in new significant impacts beyond those identified in the Specific Plan EIR, and no new
mitigation measures are required.
e. Would the Project result in inadequate emergency access?
The Construction Impact Mitigation Plan (Mitigation Measure MM T-1 of the EIR) shall ensure
adequate emergency access is maintained throughout the duration of all construction activities.
Direct access for emergency vehicles would be provided via all three project driveways on
Pacific Street and Bandilier Circle.The proposed Project would not alter the existing roadway
network and would provide one vehicular access driveway on Bandilier Circle and two vehicular
access driveways on Pacific Street.The proposed Project would comply with all applicable codes
and ordinances for emergency vehicle access.
The Specific Plan EIR concluded that implementation of the Specific Plan would have a less than
significant impact on emergency access. Because the proposed Project would comply with
applicable codes and ordinances for emergency vehicle access, it would not result in new
significant impacts beyond those identified in the Specific Plan EIR, and no new mitigation
measures are required.
f. Would the Project substantially disrupt alternative transportation, including pedestrian,
bicycle,and transit facilities?
Pedestrian access to the Project site will be possible by existing sidewalks on Ellis Avenue.The
Project will provide direct pedestrian access between the existing OCSD Plant No. 1 and the
Project site by constructing an approximately 128 ft long pedestrian bridge over Ellis Avenue.
There are no designated bicycle routes in the City's Bicycle Master Plan adjacent to the Project
site; however, bicyclists may share the roadway with vehicles on Ellis Avenue in order to reach
the Class II Bike Path network via Ward Street and Ellis Avenue west of Ward Street. In addition,
bicyclists may share the roadway with vehicles up to MacArthur Boulevard to reach the Class I
Santa Ana River Trail.The proposed Project does not alter the existing roadways and would not
conflict with this planned project.
OCTA operates Bus Line 37 with stops along Ellis Avenue in the Project vicinity. Employees are
able to utilize the Bus Line 37 service to access the existing OCSD Plant No. 1 site and the
proposed Project site. As the proposed Project would not increase the number of employees, no
new transit trips are anticipated to be generated.
Because the Project is consistent with existing and planned pedestrian, bicycle, and transit
facilities, implementation of the proposed Project would not conflict with any adopted policies,
plans, or programs regarding bicycle or pedestrian facilities.
4-103
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx a12/20/19»
ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM
PROJECT No. P1-128 DECEMBER 2019
The Specific Plan EIR concluded that implementation of the Specific Plan would not substantially
disrupt alternative transportation, and impacts would be less than significant.The proposed
Project, which is located within the Specific Plan area and is consistent with existing and planned
pedestrian, bicycle, and transit facilities, would, therefore, not result in new significant impacts
beyond those identified in the Specific Plan EIR. No new mitigation measures are required.
4.17.3.1 Mitigation Measures
The TIA outlined improvement measures for all impacted intersections to bring project operations
back to acceptable or pre-project conditions. All intersections were able to be mitigated back to a
less than significant level with the exception of Harbor Boulevard/MacArthur Boulevard at which the
impact is considered significant and unavoidable due to the fact that the intersection is shared with
the Cities of Costa Mesa and Santa Ana and the City of Fountain Valley cannot guarantee the
implementation of mitigation measures.The TIA explains in detail why improvements to freeway
segments are not considered feasible at this time; therefore, all identified impacts to the freeway
system are considered significant and unavoidable.
Based on the analysis and information above,the one mitigation measure (MM T-1) listed below
from the Specific Plan EIR would be applicable to the proposed Project. No additional mitigation
measures related to transportation/traffic beyond those identified in the Specific Plan EIR are
required.
MM T-1 Construction Impact Mitigation Plan. Future development occurring under the
proposed Fountain Valley Crossings Specific Plan shall be required to prepare a
Construction Impact Mitigation Plan for review and approval prior to issuance of a
grading or building permit to address and manage traffic during construction and
shall be designed to:
• Prevent traffic impacts on the surrounding roadway network;
• Minimize parking impacts both to public parking and access to private parking to
the greatest extent practicable;
• Ensure safety for both those constructing the project and the surrounding
community; and
• Prevent substantial truck traffic through residential neighborhoods.
The Construction Impact Mitigation Plan shall be subject to review and approval by
the following City departments: Planning& Building, Public Works, and Police to
ensure that the Construction Impact Mitigation Plan has been designed in
accordance with this mitigation measure.Additionally,the plan shall be prepared
and implemented in coordination with any affected agencies such as OCTA and
Caltrans.The review of the plan shall occur prior to issuance of grading or building
permits. It shall, at a minimum, include the following:
4-104
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx(12/20/19)
INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT
DECEMBER 2019 PROJECT No. P1-128
Ongoing Requirements throughout the Duration of Construction.
• A detailed Construction Impact Mitigation Plan for work zones shall be
maintained. At a minimum, this shall include parking and travel lane
configurations; warning, regulatory,guide, and directional signage; and area
sidewalks, bicycle lanes, and parking lanes.The Construction Impact Mitigation
Plan shall include specific information regarding the project's construction
activities that may disrupt normal pedestrian and traffic flow and the measures
to address these disruptions. Such plans shall be reviewed and approved by the
Planning& Building and Public Works Departments prior to commencement of
construction and implemented in accordance with this approval.
• Work within the public right-of-way, deliveries, haul trips, and construction
employee trips shall be performed during off-peak vehicular traffic hours. No
construction work would be permitted on Sundays and national holidays that
City offices are closed. Construction work includes, but is not limited to dirt and
demolition material hauling and construction material delivery. Work within the
public right-of-way outside of these hours shall only be allowed after the
issuance of an after-hours construction permit. Exceptions may be made for
time sensitive construction activities (e.g., pouring concrete).
• "Flagger" construction personnel shall be required at construction site
entrances.
• The closure of major arterials shall be limited to non-peak vehicular traffic hours
only.
• Streets and equipment shall be cleaned in accordance with established Public
Works requirements.
• Trucks shall only travel on a City-approved truck routes. Limited queuing may
occur on the construction site itself.
• Materials and equipment shall be minimally visible to the public; the preferred
location for materials is to be on-site, with a minimum amount of materials
within a work area in the public right-of-way, subject to a current Use of Public
Property Permit.
• Any requests for work before or after normal construction hours within the
public right-of-way shall be subject to review and approval through the After
Hours Permit process administered by the Building and Safety Division.
• Provision of off-street parking for construction workers,which may include the
use of a remote location with shuttle transport to the site, if determined
necessary by the City.
• The Construction Impact Mitigation Plan shall ensure adequate emergency
access is maintained throughout the duration of all construction activities.
Consistent with the requirements and regulations of the MUTCD, adequate
emergency access shall be ensured through measures such as coordination with
4-105
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx a12/20/19»
ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM
PROJECT No. P1-128 DECEMBER 2019
local emergency services,training for flagmen for emergency vehicles traveling
through the work zone, temporary lane separators that have sloping sides to
facilitate crossover by emergency vehicles, and vehicle storage and staging
areas for emergency vehicles.
Project Coordination Elements That Shall Be Implemented Prior to
Commencement of Construction.
• The traveling public shall be advised of impending construction activities which
may substantially affect key roadways or other facilities (e.g., information signs,
portable message signs, media listing/notification, Hotline number, and
implementation of an approved Construction Impact Mitigation Plan) in a
manner appropriate to the scale and type of projects.
• A Use of Public Property Permit, Excavation Permit, Sewer Permit, or Oversize
Load Permit, as well as any Caltrans permits required for any construction work
requiring encroachment into public rights-of-way, detours, or any other work
within the public right-of-way shall be obtained.
• Timely notification of construction schedules shall be provided to all affected
agencies (e.g., Police Department, Fire Department, Public Works Department,
and Community Development Department) and to all owners and residential
and commercial tenants of property within a radius of 500 feet.
• Construction work shall be coordinated with affected agencies in advance of
start of work.Approvals may take up to two weeks per each submittal.
• Planning & Building and Public Works Departments approval of any haul routes
for earth, concrete, or construction materials and equipment hauling shall be
obtained.
4.17.4 Findings Related to Transportation/Traffic
No New Significant Effects Requiring Major Revisions to the Specific Plan EIR. Based on the
foregoing analysis and information,there is no evidence that the proposed Project requires a major
change to the Specific Plan EIR.The Project will not result in new significant environmental impacts
related to Transportation/Traffic, and there is not substantial increase in the severity of impacts
described in the Specific Plan EIR.
No Substantial Change in Circumstances Requiring Revisions to the Specific Plan EIR.There is no
information in the record or otherwise available that indicates that there are substantial changes in
circumstances pertaining to Transportation/Traffic that would require major changes to the Specific
Plan EIR.
No New Information Showing Greater Significant Effects than the Specific Plan EIR.This Initial
Study/Addendum has analyzed all available relevant information to determine whether there is new
information that was not available at the time the Specific Plan EIR was adopted, which would
indicate that a new significant impact not reported in that document might occur. Based on the
4-106
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx(12/20/19)
INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT
DECEMBER 2019 PROJECT No. P1-128
information and analyses above,there is no substantial new information indicating that there would
be a new significant impact related to Transportation/Traffic requiring major revisions to the
Specific Plan EIR.
No New Information Showing Ability to Reduce Significant Effects in the Specific Plan EIR.This
Addendum has analyzed all available relevant information and has determined that there is no new
information of substantial importance that was unknown and could not have been known with the
exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the Fountain Valley Crossings Specific Plan EIR was
certified indicating that: (1) mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible
would in fact be feasible, and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the
Project but the Project proponent declines to adopt the mitigation measures or alternatives; or(2)
mitigation measures or alternatives that are considerably different from those analyzed in the
previous EIR would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment, but the
project proponent declines to adopt the mitigation measures or alternatives.
As discussed above,the proposed Project would result in a potentially significant impact related to
Transportation/Traffic. Mitigation was included in the Specific Plan EIR and adopted at the time the
EIR was certified.The mitigation measure that is applicable to the proposed Project is listed in
Section 4.17.3.1. The potential Project impact related to Transportation/Traffic would be reduced
below a level of significance with implementation of applicable the mitigation measure from the
Specific Plan EIR.The proposed Project would not contribute to the significant unavoidable impacts
identified in the Specific Plan EIR.
4-107
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx a12/20/19»
ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM
PROJECT No. P1-128 DECEMBER 2019
4.18 TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
New Significant More Severe No Substantial Change
Impact Impact from Previous Analysis
Would the Project:
a. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a
tribal cultural resource,defined in Public Resources Code
section 21074 as either a site,feature,place,cultural
landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size
and scope of the landscape,sacred place,or object with
cultural value to a California Native American tribe,and that
is:
i. Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of
Historical Resources,or in a local register of historical
resources as defined in Public Resources Code section
5020.1(k).
ii. A resource determined by the lead agency,in its
discretion and supported by substantial evidence,to be
significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision
(c)of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1.In applying ❑
the criteria set forth in subdivision(c)of Public
Resource Code Section 5024.1,the lead agency shall
consider the significance of the resource to a California
Native American tribe.
4.18.1 Existing Setting
According to the Specific Plan EIR,the City is located in the Santa Ana Valley-Capistrano Valley
Province, which is a lowland strip separating the coastal hills from the Santa Ana Mountains.This
province dominates the inner portion of Orange County and includes the flood plain in the Santa
Ana River in the northern segment near the City. The moderate climate, fertile soils, and abundant
natural resources made southern California, including Orange County and the Fountain Valley area,
ideal for human habitation, which may have begun in the area as much as 11,000 years ago. During
the late prehistoric period,the Gabrieleno and the Juaneno groups occupied Orange County. The
Gabrieleno inhabited a large area of the Los Angeles Basin including the watersheds of Los Angeles,
San Gabriel, and Santa Ana Rivers, several streams in the Santa Monica and Santa Ana Mountains,
the coast from Aliso Creek to Topanga Creek, and the islands of San Clemente, San Nicholas, and
Santa Catalina.The Juaneno territory extended from Northern San Diego County to the San Joaquin
Hills along Orange County's central coast, and inland from the Pacific Ocean into the Santa Ana
Mountains. Both groups lived in residential villages along the County's rivers and traveled to
seasonal camps for hunting,fishing, shellfish collecting, and hard seed processing. Initial Spanish
settlement in the Orange County region came in the late 1500s, and the Mission San Juan Capistrano
was established in Orange County in 1775. Prior to Spanish migration,the native population had
been decimated by diseases, likely spread via coastal stopovers by early Spanish maritime explorers.
Additionally, multiple epidemics took a great toll on Native American populations between
approximately 1800 and the early 1860s, along with the cultural and political upheavals that came
with European, Mexican, and American settlement.The mission period was followed by the Mexican
period as colonists moved into California and occupied land granted to them by the Mexican
4-108
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx(12/20/19)
INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT
DECEMBER 2019 PROJECT No. P1-128
government. By the end of the Mexican period and as California moved towards statehood in 1850,
the populations of Native Americans in California as a whole declined.
According to the Specific Plan EIR,the Fountain Valley area was inundated by large areas of
wetlands from the 1880s to the early 1900s. Early settlers constructed drainage canals to drain the
land and make it usable for agriculture and other development.Agriculture dominated the area in
the early 1900s.The City was incorporated in 1957.The large population growth that the City
experienced in the 1960s took place within the framework of a Master Plan adopted before any
developments had begun.The Project area was developed primarily in the 1970s with a range of
public and private structures and industrial areas.
No known archaeological resources are within the boundaries of the Specific Plan area. However,
the Specific Plan area has some potential for undiscovered Native American archaeological
resources, as well as other known regional resources, to occur.There are four recorded
archaeological sites within the vicinity of the Specific Plan area.The potential for such subsurface
resources, which may not have been evaluated during original development of the Specific Plan
area, may exist.
4.18.2 Impacts Identified in the Specific Plan EIR
The Specific Plan EIR analyzed the Specific Plan's potential Tribal Cultural Resources impacts on
pages 3.14-1 through 3.14-8.
The Specific Plan EIR explained that seven unique groups and/or individuals were contacted under
Senate Bill (SB) 18 and Assembly Bill (AB) 52 (including one tribe that was included on both AB 52
and SB 18 notification lists), and only one response was received. Mr.Andrew Salas of the
Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians-Kizh Nation responded via email on October 25, 2015. Mr. Salas
did not request consultation with the City, or identify any tribal cultural resources in the Specific
Plan area, but did request that a tribal monitor from the Gabrielei)o Band of Mission Indians-Kizh
Nation be present during ground-disturbing construction work.This request was considered, and
protocols for inadvertent discovery, including the retention of a qualified Native American Monitor,
were incorporated into Mitigation Measure MM TRC-1b. In addition to Native American
consultation, the City submitted a request for review of the Native American Heritage Commission
(NAHC) Sacred Lands Inventory File on November 12, 2015.The NAHC responded to the City's
request on December 8, 2015, and identified four recorded archaeological sites within the United
States Geological Survey(USGS) quadrangle in which the Specific Plan area is located. Review of
these sites was conducted, and it was concluded that all known sites are located outside the City
and,thus, are also outside of the Specific Plan area.
The Specific Plan EIR determined that there have been no previously identified tribal cultural
resources within the boundaries of the Specific Plan area or in the immediate vicinity.Additionally,
given the developed nature of the site and that development activities associated with the Specific
Plan would occur in previously disturbed areas, it is unlikely that tribal cultural resources would be
encountered within the Specific Plan area.Additionally, none of the Native American tribes
contacted through the SB 18 and AB 52 processes described above identified any tribal cultural
resources in the Specific Plan area. However,the Specific Plan area vicinity was a favorable
4-109
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx a12/20/19»
ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM
PROJECT No. P1-128 DECEMBER 2019
environment for Native American settlement.The Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians-Kizh Nation
noted in a response to the City's consultation process that the area is considered sensitive.
Therefore, it is possible that the Specific Plan area contains buried tribal cultural resources, which
could be preserved beneath the existing industrial warehouse buildings and paved surfaces. Effects
on tribal cultural resources are highly dependent on the individual project site conditions and the
characteristics of future projects that may be proposed with the Specific Plan area. If such resources
were discovered, any activity that would cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a
tribal cultural resource would be a significant impact. However, with the implementation of
Mitigation Measures MM TCR-1a, MM TCR-1b, and MM TCR-1c, which require procedures to be
taken in the event unknown cultural resources are discovered during construction, impacts to tribal
cultural resources would be less than significant. The mitigation measures are outlined in further
detail at the end of Section 4.18.3, below.
4.18.3 Analysis of Project Impacts
a. i. Would the Project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural
resource,defined in Public Resources Code section 21074 as either a site,feature, place,
cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the
landscape,sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe,
and that is listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in
a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code section 5020.1(k).
Chapter 532, Statutes of 2014 (i.e.,AB 52), requires that lead agencies evaluate a project's
potential to impact "tribal cultural resources." Such resources include sites,features, places,
cultural landscapes, sacred places, and objects with cultural value to a California Native
American tribe that are eligible for inclusion in the California Register of Historical Resources
or included in a local register of historical resources (PRC, Section 21074). AB 52 also gives
lead agencies the discretion to determine, supported by substantial evidence, whether a
resource falling outside of the definition stated above nonetheless qualifies as a "tribal
cultural resource."
Also per AB 52 (specifically PRC Section 21080.3.1), OCSD must consult with California Native
American tribes that are traditionally and culturally affiliated with the geographic area of the
proposed Project and have previously requested that OCSD provide the tribe with notice of
such projects.
In compliance with AB 52, letters were distributed on September 28, 2017,to local Native
American tribes who have previously requested to be notified of future projects proposed by
OCSD.The letters notified each tribe of the opportunity to consult with OCSD regarding the
proposed Project, which included the Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians— Kizh Nation, the
Juaneno Band of Mission Indians/Acjachemen Nation, and the San Gabriel Band of Mission
Indians. In compliance with AB 52,tribes have 30 days from the date of receipt of notification
to request consultation on the proposed Project. No responses or requests for consultation
were received from the Juaneno Band of Mission Indians/Acjachemen Nation or the San
Gabriel Band of Mission Indians during the 30-day period. On October 5, 2017, Andrew Salas,
4-110
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx(12/20/19)
INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT
DECEMBER 2019 PROJECT No. P1-128
Chairman of the Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians—Kizh Nation, sent a letter to OCSD
stating that the proposed Project lies within a sensitive area for tribal cultural resources. He
requested to be consulted on the Project. OCSD responded to the request via email on
October 5, 2017, and October 24, 2017,to arrange a meeting with the Gabrieleno Band of
Mission Indians—Kizh Nation,to which Mr. Salas has not responded. Due to the length of time
since receiving any additional response from the Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians— Kizh
Nation,the AB 52 consultation process is considered closed.
The Project site is fully developed with five one-to two-story industrial warehouse buildings
and surface parking lots. It is possible that the Project site contains unknown buried tribal
cultural resources, which could be preserved beneath the existing buildings and paved
surfaces.The proposed Project would involve the demolition of five existing on-site industrial
warehouse buildings and the construction and operation of a new three-story administration
building, surface parking lot, and pedestrian bridge connecting the Project site to the OCSD
Plant No. 1 site south of Ellis Avenue. If such resources were discovered during construction
activities, any activity that would cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a
tribal cultural resource would be considered a significant impact. However, with the
implementation of Mitigation Measures MM TCR-1a, MM TCR-1b, and MM TCR-1c, which
were included in the Specific Plan EIR, impacts to tribal cultural resources would be reduced to
a less than significant level. Mitigation Measure MM TCR-1a would require pre-construction
training prior to any grading or other development activities associated with Project
implementation. In the event of inadvertent discovery of tribal cultural resources during
Project construction, Mitigation Measure MM TCR-1b would require retention of a qualified
registered professional archaeologist(RPA) and a qualified Native American Monitor to
evaluate the significance of the discovery pursuant to the Cultural Resources Treatment Plan
procedures, which are outlined in Mitigation Measure MM TCR-1c. Therefore,
implementation of Mitigation Measures MM TCR-1a, MM TCR-1b, and MM TCR-1c would
require procedures to be taken in the event unknown tribal cultural resources are discovered
during Project construction, and impacts to tribal cultural resources would be reduced to a
less than significant level.
The Specific Plan concluded that impacts related to tribal cultural resources would be less
than significant with mitigation. Similarly,the Project is located within the Specific Plan area
and would incorporate the same mitigation to reduce impacts to tribal cultural resources.
Therefore,the proposed Project would not result in new significant impacts beyond those
identified in the Specific Plan EIR or a substantial increase in the severity of previously
identified significant impacts, and no additional mitigation measures are required.Applicable
mitigation measures are outlined at the end of Section 4.18.3, below.
a. ii. Would the Project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural
resource,defined in Public Resources Code section 21074 as either a site,feature, place,
cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the
landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe,
and that is a resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by
substantial evidence,to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c)of
4-111
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx a12/20/19»
ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM
PROJECT No. P1-128 DECEMBER 2019
Public Resources Code Section 5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of
Public Resource Code Section 5024.1,the lead agency shall consider the significance of the
resource to a California Native American tribe.
See Response 4.18.3 (a) (i), above. With the implementation of Mitigation Measures MM TCR-
1a, MM TCR-1b, and MM TCR-1c, included in the Specific Plan EIR, impacts to tribal cultural
resources would be reduced to a less than significant level.
The Specific Plan concluded that impacts related to tribal cultural resources would be less
than significant with mitigation. Similarly, the Project is located within the Specific Plan area
and would incorporate mitigation to reduce impacts to tribal cultural resources.Therefore,
the proposed Project would not result in new significant impacts beyond those identified in
the Specific Plan EIR or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant
impacts, and no additional mitigation measures are required. Applicable mitigation measures
are outlined below.
4.18.3.1 Mitigation Measures
Based on the analysis and information above, Mitigation Measures MM TCR-1a, MM TCR-1b, and
MM TCR-1c, included in the Specific Plan EIR, would be applicable to the proposed Project.
MM TRC-1a Pre-Construction Training: For individual discretionary development projects, pre-
construction training for construction personnel shall be conducted prior to
commencement of any grading or other development activities. A qualified
archaeologist, meeting the Secretary of the Interior's Professional Qualifications
Standards for archaeology(2008) and approved by the City, shall conduct tribal
cultural resources identification and protocol training prior to site disturbance
activities. Construction personnel shall be informed of the types of archaeological or
tribal cultural resources that may be encountered, and of the proper protocols for
agency notification. Construction personnel shall attend the training and shall retain
documentation demonstrating attendance.
MM TRC-1b Inadvertent Discovery: In the event of any inadvertent discovery of archaeological
or tribal cultural resources during construction, ground-disturbing activities shall be
suspended until an evaluation is performed.The Applicant shall retain a qualified
registered professional archaeologist (RPA) and a qualified Native American Monitor
selected by the City.The City's selection of a Native American Monitor will be based
on cultural affiliation with the Project area,which may include consultation with the
NAHC. In the event of discovery, construction personnel shall notify the City,the
RPA, and Native American Monitor.The RPA and Native American Monitor shall
evaluate the significance of the discovery pursuant to the Treatment Plan
procedures outlined in MM TCR-1c, below. Work shall not resume until
authorization is received from the City. If human remains are found, in compliance
with California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5, all ground disturbances must
cease and the County Coroner must be contacted to determine the nature of the
remains. In the event the remains are determined to be Native American in origin by
4-112
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx(12/20/19)
INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT
DECEMBER 2019 PROJECT No. P1-128
the Coroner,the Coroner is required to contact the NAHC within 24 hours to
relinquish jurisdiction.
MM TCR-1c Archaeological Data Recovery: If cultural resources are encountered during
development activities,the City shall implement a Cultural Resources Treatment
Plan to address resource identification, significance evaluation, and any necessary
mitigation.The Treatment Plan shall be prepared by a City-approved RPA and a City-
approved Native American Monitor, and at a minimum shall include:
• A review of historic maps, photographs, and other pertinent documents to
predict the locations of former buildings, structures, and other historical
features and sensitive locations within and adjacent to the specific development
area;
• A context for evaluating resources that may be encountered during
construction;
• A research design outlining important prehistoric and historic-period themes
and research questions relevant to the known or anticipated sites in the study
area;
• Specific and well-defined criteria for evaluating the significance of discovered
remains; and
• Data requirements and the appropriate field and laboratory methods and
procedures to be used to treat the effects of the Project on significant
resources.
The City, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, may also
determine that resource is significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c)
of PRC Section 5024.1. If the RPA determines that the find may qualify for listing in
the California Register,the site shall be avoided or the resource preserved in place,
or if avoidance or preservation in place is not determined feasible, a data recovery
plan shall be developed.The preferred mitigation shall be to avoid the resource or
preserve in place.Any required testing or data recovery shall be directed by a
qualified RPA and Native American Monitor prior to construction being resumed in
the affected area.The Treatment Plan shall also include submission of a final
technical report,funded by the developer and approved by the City.
4.18.4 Findings Related to Tribal Cultural Resources
No New Significant Effects Requiring Major Revisions to the Specific Plan EIR. Based on the
foregoing analysis and information,there is no evidence that the proposed Project requires a major
change to the Specific Plan EIR.The Project will not result in new significant environmental impacts
related to Tribal Cultural Resources, and there is no substantial increase in the severity of impacts
described in the Specific Plan EIR.
4-113
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx a12/20/19»
ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM
PROJECT No. P1-128 DECEMBER 2019
No Substantial Change in Circumstances Requiring Revisions to the Specific Plan EIR.There is no
information in the record or otherwise available that indicates that there are substantial changes in
circumstances pertaining to Tribal Cultural Resources that would require major changes to the
Specific Plan EIR.
No New Information Showing Greater Significant Effects than the Specific Plan EIR.This Initial
Study/Addendum has analyzed all available relevant information to determine whether there is new
information that was not available at the time the Specific Plan EIR was adopted, which would
indicate that a new significant effect not reported in that document might occur. Based on the
information and analyses above,there is no substantial new information indicating that there would
be a new significant impact related to Tribal Cultural Resources requiring major revisions to the
Specific Plan EIR.
No New Information Showing Ability to Reduce Significant Effects in the Specific Plan EIR.This
Addendum has analyzed all available relevant information and has determined that there is no new
information of substantial importance that was unknown and could not have been known with the
exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the Specific Plan EIR was certified indicating that: (1)
mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible,
and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the Project, but the Project
proponent declines to adopt the mitigation measures or alternatives; or(2) mitigation measures or
alternatives that are considerably different from those analyzed in the previous EIR would
substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment, but the Project proponent
declines to adopt the mitigation measures or alternatives.
As discussed above,the proposed Project would result in a potentially significant impact related to
Tribal Cultural Resources. Mitigation was included in the Specific Plan EIR and adopted at the time
the EIR was certified.The mitigation measures that are applicable to the proposed Project are listed
in Section 4.18.3.1. Potential Project impacts related to Tribal Cultural Resources would be reduced
below a level of significance with implementation of the applicable mitigation measures, none of
which the Project proponent is declining to adopt.
4-114
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx(12/20/19)
INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT i2
DECEMBER 2019 PROJECT No. P1-128
4.19 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
New Significant More Severe No Substantial Change
Impact Impact from Previous Analysis
Would the Project:
a. Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the ❑ ❑
applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board?
b. Require or result in the construction of new water or
wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing ❑ ❑
facilities,the construction of which could cause significant
environmental effects?
c. Require or result in the construction of new stormwater
drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities,the ❑ ❑
construction of which could cause significant environmental
effects?
d. Reduce sufficient water supplies available to serve the
Project from existing entitlements and resources,or require ❑ ❑
new or expanded entitlements?
e. Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment
provider which serves or may serve the Project that it has ❑ ❑
adequate capacity to serve the Project's projected demand
in addition to the provider's existing commitments?
f. Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to ❑ ❑
accommodate the Project's solid waste disposal needs?
g. Conflict with federal,state,and local statutes and ❑ ❑
regulations related to solid waste?
4.19.1 Existing Setting
The Specific Plan area is served by a network of utility lines, including sewer lines, water mains, and
storm drains that were generally constructed during the 1970s and 1980s; this infrastructure was
sized and installed to accommodate development anticipated at that time.
According to the Specific Plan EIR,the City receives its water from three main sources: (1)the Lower
Santa Ana River Groundwater Basin (Orange County Groundwater Basin), which is managed by the
Orange County Water District(OCWD); (2) imported Colorado River and State Water Project(SWP)
water delivered by the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (MWD)through the
Municipal Water District of Orange County(MWDOC); and (3) recycled water from the OCWD's
Green Acres Project(GAP). MWDOC is Orange County's wholesale supplier and is a member agency
of the MWD.The City's water supply is comprised of 60 percent groundwater, 24 percent imported
water, and 14 percent recycled water. Water distribution service within the Project area is provided
by the Fountain Valley Water Utility,which operates as a division of the City Public Works
Department.
Wastewater collection and treatment service in the Specific Plan area is provided by the OCSD.
OCSD currently operates two wastewater treatment facilities that accommodate wastewater from
residential, commercial, and industrial sources.The City owns, operates, and maintains the sewer
collection system within the City limits and its sphere of influence. The sewer system comprises
4-115
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx a12/20/19»
ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM
PROJECT No. P1-128 DECEMBER 2019
approximately 133 miles of collection and transmission pipe that sends City effluent to the OCSD for
treatment and disposal. Wastewater generated within the Specific Plan area is conveyed to Plant
No. 1, located directly south of the Specific Plan area south of Ellis Avenue. Existing wastewater
facilities servicing the Specific Plan area were constructed in the late 1960s and early 1970s. No
known deficiencies exist with the system, and the existing wastewater collection system adequately
services the Specific Plan area.
According to the Specific Plan EIR,the City contracts Rainbow Environmental Services to collect solid
waste generated throughout the City, including the Specific Plan area. Rainbow Environmental
Services provides waste collection, recycling, and disposal services for residential customers with
trash can service. Rainbow Environmental Services provides a Materials Recovery Facility(MRF)to
ensure compliance with State laws regarding waste stream diversion and ensuring that a minimum
of 75 percent of solid waste is diverted from landfills into reuse and recycling under AB 341. Solid
waste generated from the City is transported to a MRF within the City of Huntington Beach
approximately 3 miles northwest of the Specific Plan area,where solid waste is manually and
mechanically separated into recyclable and non-recyclable materials. Non-recyclable materials and
solid waste are then transported to Frank R. Bowerman Landfill, a 725-acre, non-hazardous,
municipal solid waste landfill located within the City of Irvine, approximately 13.5 miles east of the
Specific Plan area.The Frank R. Bowerman Landfill is permitted to receive 11,500 tons per day (tpd)
of solid waste and receives a daily average of approximately 6,800 tpd;this landfill is scheduled to
close in the year 2053. It is subject to regular inspection by State regulatory agencies such as the
California Department of Resource Recycling and Recovery(CalRecycle),the California Regional
Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), and the South Coast Air Quality Management District
(SCAQMD) to ensure compliance with applicable plans, policies, and regulations.
4.19.2 Impacts Identified in the Specific Plan EIR
The Specific Plan EIR analyzed the Specific Plan's potential Utilities impacts on pages 3.12-1 through
3.12-29.
According to the Specific Plan EIR,the RWQCB, in connection with the implementation of the
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) program, has imposed requirements on
the treatment of wastewater and its discharge into local water bodies, including the Santa Ana
River.Wastewater produced by new land uses and development in the Specific Plan area would
meet these requirements through treatment at the OCSD Plant No. 1. In addition,the
implementation of wastewater low impact development (LID) designs and best management
practices (BMPs) required by the Specific Plan would also help meet wastewater quality treatment
standards.Therefore, RWQCB wastewater treatment requirements would not be exceeded, and
potential impacts are considered less than significant.
The Specific Plan area is currently fully developed and existing wastewater flows are treated within
the capacity of OCSD.The Specific Plan EIR determined that implementation of the Specific Plan
would result in an increase in current wastewater flows by approximately 0.13 percent, and
increases in wastewater flows would be fully treatable by existing facilities.The OCSD Reclamation
Plant No. 1 would have sufficient capacity to serve the Specific Plan area demand in addition to the
4-116
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx(12/20/19)
INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT 4 i2 ItA
DECEMBER 2019 PROJECT No. P1-128
provider's existing commitments.Therefore, impacts in regard to wastewater generation are
considered less than significant.
The Specific Plan EIR concluded that wastewater collection and conveyance systems within the
Specific Plan area are currently sufficient in terms of size and age to service existing Specific Plan
area development. Due to existing available capacity to treat wastewater existing and future
wastewater in the City, construction or expansion of wastewater treatment facilities would not be
required. However, it is possible that new development within the Specific Plan area would require
on-site upgrades to serve the proposed new uses. For future development, individual development
projects occurring under the Specific Plan would be reviewed to determine whether site-specific
infrastructure improvements would be required as part of Specific Plan approval. Further,
implementation of the Specific Plan would generate increased sewage flows within the existing
sewer system. Development of land uses under the Specific Plan would incrementally trigger the
need for expansion or replacement of individual sewer line segments, resulting in potentially
significant impacts. Implementation of MM UT-3 and compliance with existing local regulations
would ensure the funding of necessary improvements to the wastewater system to serve future
land uses anticipated to occur under the Specific Plan. With assurance of adequate funds to finance
the capital improvements necessary as provided for in MM UT-3, impacts would be reduced to less
than significant levels with mitigation.Therefore, potential impacts to wastewater infrastructure
would be reduced to less than significant with mitigation.
According to the Specific Plan EIR, additional commercial, industrial, office, retail, and residential
uses to be developed under the Specific Plan would increase water demand. Based on water
demand factors for the City and other service areas within the County, water demand resulting from
implementation of the Specific Plan is expected to increase by approximately 499,855 gallons per
day (gpd) (560.3 acre-feet per year [acre-ft/yr]).The increased demand for water would have the
potential to result in the need for additional water supply infrastructure. Currently,the Specific Plan
area is largely developed and is served by an existing water supply system which provides sufficient
service. Development under the Specific Plan would occur within the existing developed spaces of
the Specific Plan area and is not expected to require substantial alterations to the existing water
system given the incremental and limited increase in water demand from the Specific Plan.
However, new land uses anticipated to occur under the Specific Plan could nonetheless result in the
need for construction of new water facilities or expansion of existing infrastructure such as upsizing
of certain pipeline segments. However, the individual development projects would be reviewed to
determine any necessary alterations to existing infrastructure to serve the development site. As part
of development review of individual projects, additional CEQA review may be required that would
analyze potential effects including the alteration of existing systems or construction of additional
infrastructure.The construction or implementation of necessary on-site infrastructure
improvements would occur in conformance with applicable State and City development codes and
regulations. Due to the limited increase in water demand associated with the Specific Plan, as well
as conformance to mandated water supply infrastructure regulations and standards, and with
assurance of adequate funds to finance the capital improvements necessary for the Specific Plan as
described in MM UT-3, impacts to the environment due to potential construction or expansion of
water supply facilities are considered less than significant with mitigation.
4-117
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx a12/20/19»
ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM
PROJECT No. P1-128 DECEMBER 2019
Implementation of the Specific Plan would result in partial redevelopment of the Specific Plan area
for increased retail, commercial, industrial, warehouse, office, and residential uses.As the Specific
Plan area is largely developed with impermeable surfaces, redevelopment under the Specific Plan
would primarily involve replacement rather than expansion of impermeable surfaces. Any potential
increased development of impermeable surfaces and building square footage may result in
increased stormwater and urban runoff that enters the City's storm drainage system. Storm drain
infrastructure within the Specific Plan area presently accommodates and conveys stormwater flows
adequately, and additional development under the Specific Plan is not expected to impede
stormwater conveyance. However, it is possible that new development within the Specific Plan area
would require on-site upgrades to serve the proposed new uses. Necessary improvements to site
hydrology may be required to accommodate redevelopment and would be identified as part of
review of proposed projects. While the location and extent of stormwater system improvements
necessary to service individual development projects is presently undetermined, specific
information regarding the improvement or construction of these facilities would be determined
prior to approval of a proposed project. Any construction of necessary facilities would be subject to
applicable State and City development codes and regulations.As part of the development review of
individual projects, additional CEQA review may be required, which would analyze potential effects
including the potential alteration of the existing system.The Specific Plan EIR concluded that build
out of the Specific Plan would not have significant adverse effects to the environment resulting from
the construction of additional storm drain infrastructure, and impacts are considered less than
significant.
Commercial, industrial, and residential uses anticipated to occur under Specific Plan implementation
would incrementally increase water demand throughout the development of the Specific Plan area.
The Specific Plan EIR determined that the increased demand for water in the Specific Plan area
would have the potential to result in the need for new or expanded water infrastructure and/or
water supplies. While redevelopment of the Specific Plan area would result in a projected net
increase in water demand by approximately 560.3 acre-ft/yr,the MWDOC and the City currently
project an estimated 11,800 acre-ft/yr of potable water will be available at the time of build out of
the Specific Plan, approximately 1,025 acre-feet more than current demands. Individual
developments within the Specific Plan area would be required to obtain a Will Serve letter from the
district prior to planning approval.As such,the MWD, MWDOC, and the City anticipate their ability
to meet full-service demands through 2040 during both normal, dry, and multiple dry years. Further,
increasing reliance on recycled water, City-mandated water efficiency requirements, water
conservation measures, and implementation of higher efficiency systems would contribute to
decreased water demands within the Specific Plan area.Therefore, while implementation of the
Specific Plan would result in an increase in water demand, impacts to existing and projected City
water supply are considered less than significant.
Under implementation of the Specific Plan, redevelopment of the Specific Plan area is expected to
result in a net increase of approximately 258,010 sf of retail, industrial, commercial, warehouse, and
office development and 491 residential units.This would result in an increase in solid waste
generation and a subsequent need for waste disposal.According to the Specific Plan, the estimated
potential net increase in solid waste generation in the Specific Plan area is 4,828.76 pounds (Ibs) of
solid waste per day, equating to 2.41 tpd.Assuming the required diversion rate of 75 percent is
4-118
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx(12/20/19)
INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT
DECEMBER 2019 PROJECT No. P1-128
applied,this would result in up to an additional 1.81 tpd of non-recyclable waste that would need to
be disposed in a landfill. It is not anticipated that an additional net 258,010 sf of development would
substantially strain Rainbow Environmental Services' ability to service the Specific Plan area. In
addition, the MRF has available capacity to receive and process an additional 1,000 tpd of solid
waste under their existing permit.As such,the MRF possesses adequate capacity to receive an
estimated 2.41 tpd of additional waste, or approximately 0.006 percent of the facility's permitted
daily capacity. Furthermore, disposal of approximately 1.81 tpd of non-recyclable solid waste at the
Frank R. Bowerman Landfill would incrementally contribute to the facility's typical daily intake and
would not result in exceedance of the facility's total daily capacity.Therefore, impacts resulting from
additional solid waste generation under the Specific Plan are considered less than significant.
California State law AB 341 requires that at least 75 percent of solid waste be diverted from landfills.
As previously discussed, solid waste generated by the Specific Plan area would be transported to an
MRF that separates and sorts solid waste to ensure a minimum of 75 percent is diverted for
recycling and reuse before being transported to the Frank R. Bowerman Landfill. In addition,
development under the Specific Plan would be required to comply with all applicable City solid
waste regulations, permitting processes, and policies in effect at the time of operation, including the
policies and regulations described under the City's Municipal Code Chapter 6.08, Solid Waste.
According to the Specific Plan EIR, as the City is in compliance with applicable State, federal, and
local regulations and implementation of the Specific Plan would not conflict with regulations related
to solid waste, no impact would occur.
4.19.3 Analysis of Project Impacts
a. Would the Project exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional
Water Quality Control Board?
OCSD would be the wastewater treatment provider for the proposed Project.The proposed
Project would involve the operation of a new administration building, and as such, would result
in the generation of wastewater. However, as discussed in Section 4.14.3,the Project would not
represent a net increase in population or employees within the Specific Plan area. Because the
number of employees would not increase,there would be no net difference in wastewater
generation within the Specific Plan area compared to existing conditions. Wastewater produced
by the Project would meet NPDES requirements through treatment at the OCSD Plant No. 1 site.
In addition, the implementation of wastewater LID designs and BMPs required by the Specific
Plan would help meet wastewater quality treatment standards.Therefore, RWQCB wastewater
treatment requirements would not be exceeded, and potential impacts related to the proposed
Project are considered less than significant.
The Specific Plan concluded that impacts related to exceedance of RWQCB wastewater
treatment requirements would be less than significant. Similarly,the Project is located within
the Specific Plan area and would not exceed RWQCB wastewater treatment requirements.
Therefore,the proposed Project would not result in new significant impacts beyond those
identified in the Specific Plan EIR or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified
significant impacts, and no new mitigation measures are required.
4-119
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx a12/20/19»
ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM
PROJECT No. P1-128 DECEMBER 2019
b. Would the Project require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment
facilities or expansion of existing facilities,the construction of which could cause significant
environmental effects?
The proposed Project would involve the operation of a new administration building, and as such,
would result in the generation of wastewater. However, as discussed in Section 4.14.3,the
Project would not represent a net increase in population or employees within the Specific Plan
area because the administrative use would relocate existing OCSD personnel from MD Plant
No. 1 to the Project site. Because the number of employees would not increase, there would be
no net difference in wastewater generation within the Specific Plan area compared to existing
conditions.The Specific Plan EIR determined that build out of the Specific Plan, including the
Project site, would result in an increase in current wastewater flows by approximately 0.13
percent, and increases in wastewater flows would be fully treatable by existing facilities.
Because the Project would not increase regional wastewater flows and OCSD Reclamation Plant
No. 1 would have sufficient capacity to serve the Specific Plan area and Project demand in
addition to the provider's existing commitments,the Project would not require expansion of
existing wastewater treatment facilities or construction of new facilities.
Although the project would not increase the total wastewater generated in the Specific Plan
area,the relocation of existing MD personnel from Plant No. 1 to the Project site would have a
potential to increase wastewater generated on the Project site.Therefore, implementation of
the Project could generate increased sewage flows within the existing sewer system on and
adjacent to the Project site. Further, development of land uses under the Specific Plan could
incrementally trigger the need for expansion or replacement of individual sewer line segments,
resulting in potentially significant impacts. Implementation of MM UT-3 and compliance with
existing local regulations would ensure the funding of necessary improvements to the
wastewater system to serve future land uses anticipated to occur under the Specific Plan. With
assurance of adequate funds to finance the capital improvements necessary as provided for in
MM U-3, impacts would be reduced to less than significant with mitigation.Therefore, while
implementation of the Project would result in an increase in wastewater generation,the Project
would not necessitate new wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities,
and impacts are considered less than significant with mitigation.
The proposed Project would involve the operation of a new administration building, and as such,
would require water use. However, as discussed in Section 4.14.3,the Project would not
represent a net increase in population or employees within the Specific Plan area because the
administrative use would relocate existing OCSD personnel from MD Plant No. 1 to the Project
site. Because the number of employees would not increase,there would be no net difference in
water use within the Specific Plan area compared to existing conditions.
Although the Project would not increase the total water demand in the Specific Plan area,the
relocation of existing OCSD personnel from Plant No. 1 to the Project site would have a potential
to increase water demand on the Project site as compared to the existing on-site uses. The new
administration building proposed as part of the Project would have the potential to increase
water demand as compared to warehouse uses due to the greater number of people working at
4-120
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx(12/20/19)
ItA
INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT 4 i2
DECEMBER 2019 PROJECT No. P1-128
the Project site, as well as the general increase in land use intensity that would occur. The
increased demand for water would have the potential to result in the need for additional water
supply infrastructure on and adjacent to the Project site.The Project could result in the need for
construction of new water facilities or the expansion of existing infrastructure such as upsizing
of certain pipeline segments. Due to the limited increase in water demand associated with the
Project, as well as conformance to mandated water supply infrastructure regulations and
standards, and with assurance of adequate funds to finance the capital improvements necessary
for the Project as described in MM UT-3, impacts to the environment due to potential
construction or expansion of water supply facilities are considered less than significant with
mitigation.Therefore, while implementation of the Project would result in an increase in water
demand, the Project would not necessitate new water treatment facilities or expansion of
existing facilities, and impacts are considered less than significant with mitigation.
The Specific Plan concluded that impacts related to construction of new water or wastewater
treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities would be less than significant with
mitigation. Similarly,the Project is located within the Specific Plan area and would not require
construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities,
but would nonetheless incorporate the same Specific Plan mitigation to reduce impacts.
Therefore,the proposed Project would not result in new significant impacts beyond those
identified in the Specific Plan EIR or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified
significant impacts, and no additional mitigation measures are required.Applicable mitigation
measures are outlined at the end of Section 4.19.3, below.
c. Would the Project require or result in the construction of new stormwater drainage facilities
or expansion of existing facilities,the construction of which could cause significant
environmental effects?
The proposed Project would decrease impervious surface area on the Project site,which can
provide more opportunities for infiltration on the Project site. However, because the infiltration
potential of on-site soils is low, any increase in infiltration would be minimal. Additionally, the
Project would include drainage features that would continue to convey stormwater runoff to
the existing municipal storm drain system. In addition,the County MS4 Permit requires the
installation of landscaped areas or other pervious surfaces and implementation of LID and
stormwater BMPs to minimize and treat stormwater runoff.The proposed Project includes
bioretention basins in compliance with this requirement. Therefore, because the Project would
decrease stormwater runoff from the project site by reducing impervious surface area and
including BMPs,the Project would not necessitate new stormwater drainage facilities or
expansion of existing facilities, and impacts are considered less than significant.
The Specific Plan concluded that impacts related to exceedance of the capacity of stormwater
drainage facilities would be less than significant. Similarly,the Project is located within the
Specific Plan area and would not exceed the capacity of stormwater drainage facilities.The
proposed Project requires implementation of drainage features and BMPs to minimize runoff
and flooding and would,therefore, not result in new significant impacts beyond those identified
4-121
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx a12/20/19»
ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM
PROJECT No. P1-128 DECEMBER 2019
in the Specific Plan EIR or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant
impacts. No new mitigation measures are required.
d. Would the Project reduce sufficient water supplies available to serve the Project from existing
entitlements and resources,or require new or expanded entitlements?
Refer to Response 4.19.3 (b), above.The proposed Project would require water use related to
the operation of a new administration building. As discussed previously, new development
proposed as part of the Project would not represent a net increase in population because the
administrative use would provide work space for existing OCSD personnel. Consequently,the
Project would not increase water demand in the Specific Plan area compared to existing
conditions.Therefore,the Project would not result in the need for expanded or new water
supplies. As discussed in the Specific Plan EIR,the MWD, the MWDOC, and the City anticipate
their abilities to meet full-service demands through 2040 during both normal, dry, and multiple
dry years. Further, increasing reliance on recycled water, City-mandated water efficiency
requirements, water conservation measures, and implementation of higher efficiency systems
would contribute to decreased water demands within the Specific Plan area. In addition, the
Project would be required to obtain a Will Serve letter from OCWD prior to planning approval.
Therefore,while the Project would result in an increase in water demand, impacts to existing
and projected City water supply are considered less than significant.
The Specific Plan concluded that impacts related to water supply would be less than significant.
Similarly,the Project is located within the Specific Plan area and sufficient water supplies are
available to serve the Project from existing entitlements and resources.Therefore,the proposed
Project would not result in new significant impacts beyond those identified in the Specific Plan
EIR or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant impacts, and no
new mitigation measures are required.
e. Would the Project result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which
serves or may serve the Project that it has adequate capacity to serve the Project's projected
demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments?
Refer to Response 4.19.3 (b), above. OCSD Reclamation Plant No. 1 would have sufficient
capacity to serve the Specific Plan area and Project demand in addition to the provider's existing
commitments. As discussed previously, new development proposed as part of the Project would
not represent a net increase in population because the administrative use would provide work
space for existing OCSD personnel. Because the number of employees would not increase,there
would be no net difference in wastewater generation within the Specific Plan area compared to
existing conditions.Therefore, because implementation of the Project would not result in an
increase in wastewater generation,the Project would not exceed the capacity of wastewater
treatment facilities, and impacts are considered less than significant.
The Specific Plan concluded that impacts related to wastewater treatment providers would be
less than significant with mitigation.The Project is located within the Specific Plan area, and
wastewater flows from the Project site can be accommodated by the existing wastewater plant.
4-122
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx(12/20/19)
ItA
INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT 61- i2
DECEMBER 2019 PROJECT No. P1-128
Therefore,the proposed Project would not result in new significant impacts beyond those
identified in the Specific Plan EIR or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified
significant impacts, and no additional mitigation measures are required.Applicable mitigation
measures are outlined in at the end of Section 4.19.3, below.
f. Would the Project be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate
the Project's solid waste disposal needs?
Refer to Response 4.19.3 (a), above.The operation of a new administration building as part of
the proposed Project would result in the generation of solid waste. During construction, waste
generation would increase as a result of the Project. As discussed previously, new development
proposed as part of the Project would not represent a net increase in population because the
administrative use would provide work space for existing OCSD personnel. Consequently, during
operation, waste generation would not be anticipated to increase compared to existing
conditions.Although construction of the Project would result in an increase in solid waste
generation and a subsequent need for waste disposal,the Specific Plan EIR concluded that
Rainbow Environmental Services would be able to adequately serve the Specific Plan area's
waste disposal needs.Thus, it is not anticipated that waste disposal required for the
administration building, one development within the Specific Plan area, would substantially
strain Rainbow Environmental Services' ability to service the Project.Therefore, impacts
resulting from additional solid waste generation under the Project are considered less than
significant.
The Specific Plan concluded that impacts related to landfills would be less than significant.
Similarly,the Project is located within the Specific Plan area and would be served by a landfill
with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the Project's solid waste disposal needs.
Therefore,the proposed Project would not result in new significant impacts beyond those
identified in the Specific Plan EIR or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified
significant impacts, and no new mitigation measures are required.
g. Would the Project conflict with federal,state,and local statutes and regulations related to
solid waste?
Refer to Response 4.19.3 (a), above.The operation of a new administration building as part of
the proposed Project would result in the generation of solid waste.The Project would comply
with all applicable City solid waste regulations, permitting processes, and policies in effect at the
time of operation, including the policies and regulations described under the City's Municipal
Code Chapter 6.08, Solid Waste. According to the Specific Plan EIR, as the City is in compliance
with applicable State,federal, and local regulations. Therefore,the Project would not conflict
with regulations related to solid waste, and no impact would occur.
The Specific Plan concluded that impacts related to solid waste would be less than significant.
Similarly,the Project is located within the Specific Plan area and would not conflict with federal,
State, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste.Therefore, the proposed Project
would not result in new significant impacts beyond those identified in the Specific Plan EIR or a
4-123
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx a12/20/19»
ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM
PROJECT No. P1-128 DECEMBER 2019
substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant impacts, and no new
mitigation measures are required.
4.19.3.1 Mitigation Measures
Based on the analysis and information above, Mitigation Measure MM UT-3, included in the Specific
Plan EIR, would be applicable to the proposed Project.
MM UT-3 FVCSP Utility Infrastructure Financing Program:The City shall ensure adequate
financing for funding of infrastructure improvements to serve the FVCSP through
implementation of the FVCSP Utility Infrastructure Financing Program, including
preparation of an AB 1600 fee justification study,for the FVCSP area.The Financing
Program shall be developed prior to the approval of the first entitlements for a
development within the Project area,following adoption of the Project. All new
development within the FVCSP shall be conditioned to be subject to payment of its
fair share of any impact fees identified under this program.The City shall determine
the costs of and establish a funding program for the following capital improvements
to upgrade water and wastewater delivery as needed to serve the demands of new
land uses anticipated to occur under the FVCSP.
The Program shall also:
a. Identify the cost of improvements to or replacement of undersized water and
wastewater lines within the FVCSP area needed to serve the Project.
b. Clearly apportion existing and projected demand on these facilities and costs
between existing users,the City, and proposed future development.
c. Identify potential funding mechanisms for sewer and water line construction,
including the equitable sharing of costs between new development, the City and
existing users, including development impact fees, grants, assessments, etc.
d. Identify development impact fees for all residential and non-residential
development to ensure that development pays its fair share of public
infrastructure costs.
e. Include a regular fee update schedule, consistent with the City's Capital
Improvement Program.
4.19.4 Findings Related to Utilities and Service Systems
No New Significant Effects Requiring Major Revisions to the Specific Plan EIR. Based on the
foregoing analysis and information,there is no evidence that the proposed Project requires a major
change to the Specific Plan EIR.The Project will not result in new significant environmental impacts
related to Utilities and Service Systems, and there is no substantial increase in the severity of
impacts described in the Specific Plan EIR.
4-124
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx(12/20/19)
ItA
INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT 61- i2
DECEMBER 2019 PROJECT No. P1-128
No Substantial Change in Circumstances Requiring Revisions to the Specific Plan EIR.There is no
information in the record or otherwise available that indicates that there are substantial changes in
circumstances pertaining to Utilities and Service Systems that would require major changes to the
Specific Plan EIR.
No New Information Showing Greater Significant Effects than the Specific Plan EIR.This Initial
Study/Addendum has analyzed all available relevant information to determine whether there is new
information that was not available at the time the Specific Plan EIR was adopted, which would
indicate that a new significant effect not reported in that document might occur. Based on the
information and analyses above,there is no substantial new information indicating that there would
be a new significant impact related to Utilities and Service Systems requiring major revisions to the
Specific Plan EIR.
No New Information Showing Ability to Reduce Significant Effects in the Specific Plan EIR. This
Addendum has analyzed all available relevant information and has determined that there is no new
information of substantial importance that was unknown and could not have been known with the
exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the Specific Plan EIR was certified indicating that: (1)
mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible,
and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the Project, but the Project
proponent declines to adopt the mitigation measures or alternatives; or(2) mitigation measures or
alternatives that are considerably different from those analyzed in the previous EIR would
substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment, but the Project proponent
declines to adopt the mitigation measures or alternatives.
As discussed above,the proposed Project would result in a potentially significant impact related to
Utilities and Service Systems. Mitigation was included in the Specific Plan EIR and adopted at the
time the EIR was certified. The mitigation measure that is applicable to the proposed Project is listed
in Section 4.19.3.1. Potential Project impacts related to Utilities and Service Systems would be
reduced below a level of significance with implementation of the applicable mitigation measures,
none of which the Project proponent is declining to adopt.
4-125
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx a12/20/19»
ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM
PROJECT No. P1-128 DECEMBER 2019
4.20 MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
New Significant More Severe No Substantial Change
Impact Impact from Previous Analysis
a. Does the Project have the potential to degrade the quality
of the environment,substantially reduce the habitat of a
fish or wildlife species,cause a fish or wildlife population to
drop below self-sustaining levels,threaten to eliminate a ❑ ❑
plant or animal community,substantially reduce the
number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant
or animal or eliminate important examples of the major
periods of California history or prehistory?
b. Does the Project have impacts that are individually limited,
but cumulatively considerable?("Cumulatively
considerable"means that the incremental effects of a ❑ ❑
project are considerable when viewed in connection with
the effects of past projects,the effects of other current
projects,and the effects of probable future projects)?
c. Does the Project have environmental effects which will
cause substantial adverse effects on human beings,either ❑ ❑
directly or indirectly?
4.20.1 Analysis of Project Impacts
a. Does the Project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment,substantially
reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop
below self-sustaining levels,threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community,substantially
reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate
important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory?
As discussed in Section 4.4 Biological Resources, of this Initial Study/Addendum,the Project site
is partially developed and is located in an urban area.The Project site does not contain an open
body of water that could serve as natural habitat in which fish could exist.The Project site does
not support any special-status wildlife or plant species or their habitats because the site is
currently developed and lacks natural habitat.The existing landscaping trees on the Project site
may, however, provide suitable habitat for nesting migratory birds.The removal of trees on the
Project site has the potential to impact active bird nests if vegetation and trees are removed
during the nesting season. However, Project construction would comply with the requirements
of the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (META)to avoid impacts to active nests during the breeding
season. With compliance with the META, impacts to nesting birds would be less than significant.
For these reasons,the Project does not have the potential to degrade the quality of the
environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife
population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal
community, or substantially reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered
plant or animal.
The Specific Plan EIR concluded that implementation of the Specific Plan would result in less
than significant impacts to biological resources because the Specific Plan area is fully urbanized
and does not contain potential natural habitats for sensitive species and other natural
4-126
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx(12/20/19)
ItA
INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT 4 i2
DECEMBER 2019 PROJECT No. P1-128
communities. Similarly,the Project would result in less than significant impacts to biological
resources because the Project site is located within the Specific Plan area and is fully urbanized
and developed. Neither the Specific Plan nor the proposed Project has the potential to degrade
the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species,
cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels,threaten to eliminate a
plant or animal community, or substantially reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or
endangered plant or animal.As such,the proposed Project would not result in new significant
impacts beyond those identified in the Specific Plan EIR, and no new mitigation is required.
As discussed in Section 4.5, Cultural Resources, of this Initial Study/Addendum, the Project site
has been previously disturbed and significantly altered as a result of past construction activities
on the site. Due to the developed nature of the site and surrounding area, it is likely that any
unknown archaeological or paleontological resources would have been unearthed at the time of
previous activities on the Project site. However, in the event that previously unknown cultural
resources are encountered, Project construction would comply with standard conditions
required by the City of Fountain Valley, detailed in Section 4.5, to ensure proper handling and
recovery of these resources.With compliance with standard conditions regulating the handling
and treatment of cultural resources,the Project would not have the potential to eliminate
important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory.
The Specific Plan EIR concluded that, based on the limited potential for undiscovered cultural
resources to exist within the Specific Plan area and existing procedures and requirements
regulating the discovery of buried resources, impacts on cultural resources would be less than
significant. The Project site is located within the Specific Plan area and has limited potential for
cultural resources to exist on-site. In the event that unknown resources are discovered, Project
construction would comply with standard conditions required by the City of Fountain Valley
regulating the discovery of buried resources that would ensure impacts would be less than
significant. Neither the Specific Plan nor the proposed Project has the potential to eliminate
important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory. As such, the
proposed Project would not result in new significant impacts beyond those identified in the
Specific Plan EIR or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant
impacts, and no new mitigation is required.
b. Does the Project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable?
("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable
when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects,the effects of other current
projects, and the effects of probable future projects)?
The proposed Project would redevelop the Project site to replace the five existing industrial
warehouse buildings with an administration building and associated parking. Based on the
Project Description and the preceding responses, impacts related to the proposed Project are
less than significant or can be reduced to less than significant levels with incorporation of
mitigation measures.The proposed Project's contribution to any significant cumulative impacts
would be less than cumulatively considerable.
4-127
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx a12/20/19»
ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM
PROJECT No. P1-128 DECEMBER 2019
Cumulative impacts for Agricultural and Forestry Resources, Biological Resources, Cultural
Resources, or Mineral Resources were not specifically discussed in the Specific Plan EIR because
implementation of the Specific Plan would have no impact or a less than significant impact on
these resources. However, because there would be no impact or impacts would be less than
significant for these resources,the Specific Plan would not result in significant cumulative
impacts related to these environmental topics.
The Specific Plan EIR concluded that Cumulative Impacts would be less than significant for
Aesthetics, Air Quality, Geology and Soils, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, Hazards and Hazardous
Waste, Hydrology and Water Quality, Land Use, Operational Noise, Population and Housing,
Public Services, Utilities and Service Systems, Energy Conservation, and Tribal Cultural
Resources.
The Specific Plan EIR concluded that cumulative construction noise impacts and cumulative
construction traffic impacts would be less than significant with implementation of Mitigation
Measures MM N-1 and MM T-1, respectively.
Implementation of the Specific Plan EIR would result in significant and unavoidable impacts at
MacArthur Boulevard and Harbor Boulevard because the required improvements to mitigate
this impact would be infeasible due to the location within another jurisdiction. Cumulatively
considerable impacts to the intersection of Euclid Street and Newhope Street/Northbound 1-405
Ramps could be addressed through implementation of standard Caltrans' intersection
monitoring and periodic signal timing updates and would reduce impacts to this intersection to
less than significant levels once implemented. However, because the City has no control over
the timing and implementation of such improvements,the Specific Plan EIR concluded that
impacts to this intersection would be cumulatively considered temporarily significant and
unavoidable. Traffic impacts at all other intersections were concluded to be less than significant
or would be reduced to less than significant with mitigation.
As stated above, impacts related to the proposed Project are less than significant or can be
reduced to less than significant levels with incorporation of mitigation measures, and the Project
contribution to any significant cumulative impacts would be less than cumulatively considerable.
As detailed in the preceding sections, the proposed Project would not increase the severity of
impacts or result in new impacts beyond those analyzed in the Specific Plan EIR.Therefore, the
proposed Project would not result in new significant cumulative impacts beyond those identified
in the Specific Plan EIR or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant
impacts. No new mitigation is required.
c. Does the Project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on
human beings, either directly or indirectly?
The Project site is currently developed and is located in an urban area.The proposed Project
would redevelop the Project site to replace the five existing industrial warehouse buildings with
an administration building and associated parking.The design of the proposed Project would be
consistent with the existing City zoning and General Plan designations for the site and the
4-128
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx(12/20/19)
INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT
DECEMBER 2019 PROJECT No. P1-128
development standards of the Specific Plan. Based on the Project Description and the preceding
responses, development of the proposed Project would not cause substantial adverse effects on
human beings related to air quality, greenhouse gas emissions, hazardous materials, and noise,
because all potentially significant impacts of the Revised Project can be mitigated to a less than
significant level.Therefore, the proposed Project would not result in new significant impacts
beyond those identified in the Specific Plan EIR or a substantial increase in the severity of
previously identified significant impacts. No new mitigation is required.
4.20.1.1 Mitigation Measures
No mitigation is required beyond those specified in Sections 4.1 through 4.19.
4.20.2 Findings Related to Mandatory Findings of Significance
No New Significant Effects Requiring Major Revisions to the Specific Plan EIR. Based on the
foregoing analysis and information,there is no evidence that the proposed Project requires a major
change to the Specific Plan EIR.The Project will not result in new significant environmental impacts
related to Mandatory Findings of Significance, and there is no substantial increase in the severity of
impacts described in the Specific Plan EIR.
No Substantial Change in Circumstances Requiring Revisions to the Specific Plan EIR.There is no
information in the record or otherwise available that indicates that there are substantial changes in
circumstances pertaining to Mandatory Findings of Significance that would require major changes to
the Specific Plan EIR.
No New Information Showing Greater Significant Effects than the Specific Plan EIR.This Initial
Study/Addendum has analyzed all available relevant information to determine whether there is new
information that was not available at the time the Specific Plan EIR was adopted, which would
indicate that a new significant effect not reported in that document might occur. Based on the
information and analyses above,there is no substantial new information indicating that there would
be a new significant impact related to Mandatory Findings of Significance requiring major revisions
to the Specific Plan EIR.
No New Information Showing Ability to Reduce Significant Effects in the Specific Plan EIR.This
Addendum has analyzed all available relevant information and has determined that there is no new
information of substantial importance that was unknown and could not have been known with the
exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the Specific Plan EIR was certified indicating that: (1)
mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible,
and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the Project, but the Project
proponent declines to adopt the mitigation measures or alternatives; or(2) mitigation measures or
alternatives that are considerably different from those analyzed in the previous EIR would
substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment, but the Project proponent
declines to adopt the mitigation measures or alternatives.
4-129
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx a12/20/19»
ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM
PROJECT No. P1-128 DECEMBER 2019
As discussed above,the proposed Project would result in a potentially significant impact related to
Mandatory Findings of Significance. Mitigation was included in the Specific Plan EIR and adopted at
the time the EIR was certified.The mitigation measures that are applicable to the proposed Project
are listed in Sections 4.13.3.1 and 4.17.3.1. Potential Project impacts related to Mandatory Findings
of Significance would be reduced below a level of significance with implementation of the applicable
mitigation measures, none of which the Project proponent is declining to adopt.
4-130
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx(12/20/19)
INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT 1
DECEMBER 2019 PROJECT No. P1-128
This page intentionally left blank
4-131
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx«12/20/19»
INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT
DECEMBER 2019 PROJECT No. P1-128
5.0 REFERENCES
The following references were used in the preparation of this Initial Study/Addendum:
Airport Land Use Commission.Airport Environs Land Use Plans Notification Area for John Wayne
Airport. Website: http://www.ocair.com/commissions/aluc/docs/jwanotf2008.pdf(accessed
May 23, 2018).
Arcadis. 2016. Hazardous Building Materials Survey for 18475 Pacific Street & 18484 Bandilier Circle.
November 23.
---. 2018a. Phase I ESA for 18429 Pacific Street. October 2.
---. 2018b. Phase I ESA for 18368- 18384 Bandilier Circle. October 2.
---. 2018c. Phase I ESA for 18410- 18436 Bandilier Circle. October 2.
---. 2018d. Final Limited Phase II Environmental Site Assessment, Four Fountain Valley, CA
Properties, Located at: 18368, 18410& 18484 Bandilier Circle & 18429 & 18475 Pacific
Street in Fountain Valley, CA. October 2.
California Air Resources Board (CARB), 2005.Air Quality and Land Use Handbook:A Community
Health Perspective. April. Website: https://www.arb.ca.gov/ch/handbook.pdf(accessed
May 25, 2018).
California Department of Transportation (Caltrans). California Scenic Highways Mapping System,
Orange County. Website: http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/LandArch/16_livability/scenic_
highways/(accessed May 21, 2018).
California Emergency Management Agency, California Geological Survey, and University of Southern
California. 2009.Tsunami Inundation Map for Emergency Planning, Newport Beach
Quadrangle, March 15, 2009.
California Energy Commission (CEC), 2006. California Commercial End-Use Survey. March. Website:
http://www.energy.ca.gov/2006pu blications/CEC-400-2006-005/CEC-400-2006-005.PDF
(accessed May 25, 2018).
California Environmental Protection Agency (CaIEPA) and California Air Resources Board (CARB).
2005.Air Quality and Land Use Handbook:A Community Health Perspective.April. Website:
www.arb.ca.gov/ch/handbook.pdf(accessed May 23, 2018).
City of Fountain Valley. 1995a. General Plan Land Use Element. March 21. Website: http://www.
fountain valley.org/413/General-Plan (accessed July 25, 2017).
5-1
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx a12/20/19»
ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM
PROJECT No. P1-128 DECEMBER 2019
---. 1995b. General Plan Public Safety Element. March 21. Website: http://www.fountainvalley.
org/413/General-Plan (accessed July 25, 2017).
---. 2008. City of Fountain Valley General Plan Circulation Element.June 2.
---. 2018a. Fountain Valley Municipal Code. Chapter 6.28 Noise Control. February. Website:
http://gcode.us/codes/fountainvalley/(accessed May 25, 2018).
---. 2018b. Fountain Valley Municipal Code. Chapter 18.22 California Energy Code. February.
Website: http://gcode.us/codes/fountainvalley/(accessed May 25, 2018).
---. Zoning Map. http://www.fountainvalley.org/421/Zoning (accessed July 24, 2017).
City of Huntington Beach.Tsunami Evacuation Routes. Website: https://www.huntingtonbeach
ca.gov/government/departments/fire/safety tips/Tsun ami Prepared ness.cfm (accessed
May 10, 2018).
County of Orange. 2005,Amended 2012. General Plan, Safety Element.
ESA. 2018. Draft Orange County Sanitation District Plant No. 1 Historic Resources Assessment.
February.
Federal Emergency Management Agency. 2009. Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) Map No.
06059CO254J. December 2.
Fehr& Peers. 2017. Fountain Valley Crossings Specific Plan Transportation Impact Analysis. August.
Fountain Valley Fire Department. Mission Statement.Website: http://www.fountainvalley.org/
251/Mission-Statement (accessed July 24, 2017).
Fountain Valley Police Department. Department History. Website: http://www.fountainvalley.org/
884/Department-History (accessed August 4, 2017).
Jacobs. 2016. Property Condition "Summary" for 18475 Pacific Street (18484 Bandelier Circle,
Fountain Valley. December 12.
John Wayne Airport, Orange County, 2016. Noise Abatement Program. Website: http://www.ocair.
com/reportspublications/AccessNoise/noiseabatementquarterly/2016/na2016-g4.pdf
(accessed May 25, 2018).
Orange County Public Works, Orange County Flood Division. Santa Ana River Project. Website:
http://www.ocflood.com/sarp (accessed May 11, 2018).
Orange County Transportation Authority. 2017. Orange County Congestion Management Program.
October.
5-2
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx(12/20/19)
INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT 61- i2 ItA
DECEMBER 2019 PROJECT No. P1-128
South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD), 1993. CEQA Air Quality Handbook.
---. 2005. Rule 403. Fugitive Dust. Amended June 3. Website: http://www.agmd.gov/docs/
default-source/rule-book/rule-iv/rule-403.pdf(accessed May 25, 2018).
---. 2015.SCAQMD Air Quality Significance Thresholds. March. Website: http://www.agmd.gov/
docs/default-source/ceqa/handbook/scaqmd-air-quality-significance-
thresholds.pdf?sfvrsn=2 (accessed May 25, 2018).
---. 2016a.Air Quality Management Plan.
---. 2016b. Rule 1113.Architectural Coatings. Amended February 5. Website: http://www.agmd.
gov/docs/default-source/rule-book/reg-xi/r1113.pdf?sfvrsn=17 (accessed May 25, 2018).
---. 2017a. Final 2016 Air Quality Management Plan. March. Website: http://www.agmd.gov/
docs/default-source/clean-air-plans/air-quality-management-plans/2016-air-quality-
management-plan/final-2016-aqmp/final2016agmp.pdf?sfvrsn=15 (accessed May 25, 2018).
---. 2017b. Rule 1168.Adhesive and Sealant Applications.Amended January 7. Website:
http://www.agmd.gov/docs/default-source/rule-book/reg-xi/rule-1168.pdf(accessed
May 25, 2018).
---. 2018. Greenhouse Gases (GHG) CEQA Significance Thresholds. Website: http://www.agmd.
gov/home/rules-compliance/ceqa/air-quality-analysis-handbook/ghg-significance-
thresholds (accessed May 25, 2018).
State of California Department of Conservation. 2016. Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program.
Orange County Important Farmland 2014.July.
---. Guidelines for Classification and Designation of Mineral Lands. Website: http://www.
conservation.ca.gov/smgb/Guidelines/Documents/ClassDesig.pdf(accessed July 26, 2017).
---. Division of Mine Reclamation. Mines Online. Website: http://maps. conservation.
ca.gov/mol/index.html (accessed May 10, 2018).
---. Division of Mines and Geology. Mineral Land Classification Map. Newport Beach
Quadrangle, Special Report 143, Plate 3.24. Website:ftp://ftp.consrv.ca.gov/pub/dmg/
pubs/sr/SR_143/Partlll/Plate_3-24.pdf(accessed May 10, 2018).
---. Earthquake Zones of Required Investigation, Newport Beach Quadrangle. Website:
http://gmw.consrv.ca.gov/SHP/EZRIM/Maps/NEWPORT_BEACH_EZRIM.pdf(accessed
May 18, 2018).
---. Division of Mine Reclamation. Mines Online. Website: http://maps.conservation.ca.gov
/mol/index.html (accessed May 10, 2018).
5-3
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx a12/20/19»
ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM
PROJECT No. P1-128 DECEMBER 2019
State of California Department of Water Resources. 2004. California's Groundwater Bulletin 118.
South Coast Hydrologic Region. Coastal Plain of Orange County Groundwater Basin.
February 27.
United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. Web Soil Survey.
Website: https:Hwebsoilsurvey.sc.egov.usda.gov/App/WebSoilSurvey.aspx (accessed
May 18, 2018).
5-4
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx(12/20/19)
INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT 1
DECEMBER 2019 PROJECT No. P1-128
lquvw
APPENDIX A
CALEEMOD OUTPUT SHEETS
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx«12/20/19»
ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM
PROJECT No. P1-128 DECEMBER 2019
This page intentionally left blank
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx(12/20/19)
INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT 1
DECEMBER 2019 PROJECT No. P1-128
lquvw
APPENDIX B
SUMMARY OF MITIGATION MEASURES
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx«12/20/19»
ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM
PROJECT No. P1-128 DECEMBER 2019
This page intentionally left blank
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx(12/20/19)
INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT
DECEMBER 2019 PROJECT No. P1-128
AESTHETICS
The Specific Plan EIR does not include mitigation related to aesthetics. No mitigation would be
required for the proposed Project.
AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY RESOURCES
The Specific Plan EIR does not include mitigation related to agricultural and forestry resources. No
mitigation would be required for the proposed Project.
AIR QUALITY
Based on the analysis and information contained in the Initial Study/Addendum, Mitigation
Measures MM AQ-5a, MM AQ-5b, and MM AQ-5d through MM AQ-5f included in the Specific Plan
EIR would not be applicable to the proposed Project because the proposed Project would not
include new sensitive receptors within 500 ft of the 1-405 freeway,would not include any
distribution center, rail yard, refinery, chrome plater, dry cleaning operation, or gas station uses,
and would not impact any existing off-site sensitive receptors to TACs associated with the proposed
Project.
Based on the analysis contained in the Initial Study/Addendum, Mitigation Measure MM AQ-5c,
included in the Specific Plan EIR,would be applicable to the proposed Project. No additional
mitigation measures related to air quality beyond those identified in the Specific Plan EIR are
required.
MM AQ-Sc Placement of Air System Intake. When considering placement and direction of air
intakes,the direction of prevailing winds shall be considered and the most logical
decision shall be made. Design of the proposed development shall face air systems
intakes appropriately, so as to reduce highly concentrated air pollution intake,
considering placement on the opposite side of the building from the pollutant
source. Development and HVAC system design shall be reviewed and approved by
the City Planning and Building Department prior to issuance of a building permit.
Monitoring and maintenance of HVAC systems and air intakes shall be conducted by
the Applicant on a semiannual basis to ensure efficiency of the systems for
development permits involving land uses that include or potentially affect sensitive
populations.
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
The Specific Plan EIR does not include mitigation related to biological resources. No mitigation
would be required for the proposed Project.
CULTURAL RESOURCES
The Specific Plan EIR does not include mitigation related to cultural resources. No mitigation would
be required for the proposed Project.
B-1
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx a12/20/19»
ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM
PROJECT No. P1-128 DECEMBER 2019
ENERGY CONSERVATION
The Specific Plan EIR does not include mitigation related to energy conservation. No mitigation
would be required for the proposed Project.
GEOLOGY AND SOILS
The Specific Plan EIR does not include mitigation related to geology and soils. No mitigation would
be required for the proposed Project.
GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
The Specific Plan EIR does not include mitigation related to GHG emissions. No mitigation would be
required for the proposed Project.
HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
Based on the analysis contained in the Initial Study/Addendum, Mitigation Measure MM HAZ-1
included in the Specific Plan EIR,would be applicable to the proposed Project. No additional
mitigation measures related to hazards and hazardous materials beyond those identified in the
Specific Plan EIR are required.
MM HAZ-1 Phase I ESA. Prior to demolition of a building or structure and/or excavation of
subsurface improvements, project applicants of site specific development projects
in the Project area shall prepare a Phase I ESA. Consistent with local, state and
federal regulations, the Phase I ESA shall be subject to City review and address the
following:
• ACM, LBP, and PCBs. Prior to the issuance of any demolition or excavation
permit,the Applicant shall conduct a comprehensive survey of ACM, LBP, and
PCBs. If such hazardous materials are found to be present,the Applicant shall
follow all applicable local, state, and federal codes and regulations, as well as
applicable best management practices, related to the treatment, handling, and
disposal of ACM, LBP, and PCBs to ensure public safety.
• Potential On-Site Hazardous Materials or Conditions.A visual survey and
reconnaissance-level investigation of the existing site shall be conducted to
determine if there are any structures or features within or near the buildings
that are used to store, contain, or dispose of hazardous materials or waste. For
any development within the Project area that has not been subject to a Phase I
ESA or successful remediation efforts in the past, a Phase I ESA shall be
performed to determine the likelihood of contaminants in areas beyond what
has already been assessed in accordance with USEPA ASTM Practice E 1527-05
as may be amended. If the Phase I ESA finds that contaminated soil or other
hazardous materials or waste are suspected to be present within the area, the
Applicant shall follow all applicable local, state and federal codes and
B-2
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx(12/20/19)
INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT i2
DECEMBER 2019 PROJECT No. P1-128
regulations, as well as applicable best management practices, related to the
treatment, handling, and disposal of each hazardous material or waste.
HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
The Specific Plan EIR does not include mitigation related to hydrology and water quality. No
mitigation would be required for the proposed Project.
LAND USE AND PLANNING
Based on the analysis and information contained in the Initial Study/Addendum, Specific Plan EIR
Mitigation Measures MM N-1, MM T-1, MM T-2a through b, and MM T-7a (refer to Noise and
Transportation/Traffic, below) would be applicable to the proposed Project.
MINERAL RESOURCES
The Specific Plan EIR does not include mitigation related to mineral resources. No mitigation would
be required for the proposed Project.
NOISE
Based on the analysis and information contained in the Initial Study/Addendum, Mitigation Measure
MM N-1 included in the Specific Plan EIR would be applicable to the proposed Project.
MM N-1 Construction Noise Management Plan.A Construction Noise Management Plan
shall be prepared by the Applicant and approved by the City prior to Grading Permit
issuance.The Plan would address noise and vibration impacts and outline measures
that would be used to reduce impacts. Measures would include but not be limited
to:
• To the extent that they exceed the applicable construction noise limits,
excavation, foundation-laying, and conditioning activities shall be restricted to
between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m. Monday through Friday, and 9:00
a.m. and 8:00 p.m. Saturdays, in accordance with Section 6.28.070 of the
Fountain Valley Municipal Code.
• The Applicant's construction contracts shall require implementation of the
following construction best management practices (BMPs) by all construction
contractors and subcontractors working in or around the Project area to reduce
construction noise levels:
0 The Applicant and its contractors and subcontractors shall ensure that all
construction equipment,fixed or mobile, is properly muffled according to
manufacturer's specifications or as required by the City's Building and
Safety Division,whichever is the more stringent.
B-3
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx a12/20/19»
ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM
PROJECT No. P1-128 DECEMBER 2019
o The Applicant and its contractors and subcontractors shall place noise-
generating construction equipment and locate construction staging areas
away from sensitive uses, where feasible, to the satisfaction of the Building
and Safety Division.
o The Applicant and its contractors and subcontractors shall implement noise
attenuation measures which may include, but are not limited to, noise
barriers or noise blankets to the satisfaction of the City's Building and Safety
Division.
• The Applicant's contracts with its construction contractors and subcontractors
shall include the requirement that construction staging areas, construction
worker parking, and the operation of earthmoving equipment within the Project
area, are located as far away from vibration-and noise-sensitive sites as
possible. Contract provisions incorporating the above requirements shall be
included as part of the Project's construction documents, which shall be
reviewed and approved by the City.
• The Applicant shall require by contract specifications that heavily loaded trucks
used during construction shall be routed away from residential streets to the
extent possible. Contract specifications shall be included in the proposed
Project's construction documents, which shall be reviewed by the City prior to
issuance of a grading permit.
• Property owners and occupants located within 500 feet of the boundary of a
construction project occurring under the Specific Plan shall be sent a notice, at
least 15 days prior to commencement of construction of each phase, regarding
the construction schedule of the Project.A sign, legible at a distance of 50 feet,
shall be posted at the construction site.All notices and signs shall be reviewed
and approved by the City prior to mailing or posting and shall indicate the dates
and duration of construction activities, as well as provide a contact name and a
telephone number where residents can inquire about the construction process
and register complaints.
POPULATION AND HOUSING
The Specific Plan EIR does not include mitigation related to population and housing. No mitigation
would be required for the proposed Project.
PUBLIC SERVICES
The Specific Plan EIR does not include mitigation related to public services. No mitigation would be
required for the proposed Project.
B-4
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx(12/20/19)
INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT
DECEMBER 2019 PROJECT No. P1-128
RECREATION
The Specific Plan EIR does not include mitigation related to recreation. No mitigation would be
required for the proposed Project.
TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC
Based on the analysis and information contained in the Initial Study/Addendum, Mitigation Measure
MM T-1 would be applicable to the proposed Project. No additional mitigation measures related to
transportation/traffic beyond those identified in the Specific Plan EIR are required.
MM T-1 Construction Impact Mitigation Plan. Future development occurring under the
proposed Fountain Valley Crossings Specific Plan shall be required to prepare a
Construction Impact Mitigation Plan for review and approval prior to issuance of a
grading or building permit to address and manage traffic during construction and
shall be designed to:
• Prevent traffic impacts on the surrounding roadway network;
• Minimize parking impacts both to public parking and access to private parking to
the greatest extent practicable;
• Ensure safety for both those constructing the project and the surrounding
community; and
• Prevent substantial truck traffic through residential neighborhoods.
The Construction Impact Mitigation Plan shall be subject to review and approval by
the following City departments: Planning& Building, Public Works, and Police to
ensure that the Construction Impact Mitigation Plan has been designed in
accordance with this mitigation measure.Additionally,the plan shall be prepared
and implemented in coordination with any affected agencies such as OCTA and
Caltrans.The review of the plan shall occur prior to issuance of grading or building
permits. It shall, at a minimum, include the following:
Ongoing Requirements throughout the Duration of Construction
• A detailed Construction Impact Mitigation Plan for work zones shall be
maintained. At a minimum, this shall include parking and travel lane
configurations; warning, regulatory,guide, and directional signage; and area
sidewalks, bicycle lanes, and parking lanes.The Construction Impact Mitigation
Plan shall include specific information regarding the project's construction
activities that may disrupt normal pedestrian and traffic flow and the measures
to address these disruptions. Such plans shall be reviewed and approved by the
Planning& Building and Public Works Departments prior to commencement of
construction and implemented in accordance with this approval.
B-5
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx a12/20/19»
ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM
PROJECT No. P1-128 DECEMBER 2019
• Work within the public right-of-way, deliveries, haul trips, and construction
employee trips shall be performed during off-peak vehicular traffic hours. No
construction work would be permitted on Sundays and national holidays that
City offices are closed. Construction work includes, but is not limited to dirt and
demolition material hauling and construction material delivery. Work within the
public right-of-way outside of these hours shall only be allowed after the
issuance of an after-hours construction permit. Exceptions may be made for
time sensitive construction activities (e.g., pouring concrete).
• "Flagger" construction personnel shall be required at construction site
entrances.
• The closure of major arterials shall be limited to non-peak vehicular traffic hours
only.
• Streets and equipment shall be cleaned in accordance with established Public
Works requirements.
• Trucks shall only travel on a City-approved truck routes. Limited queuing may
occur on the construction site itself.
• Materials and equipment shall be minimally visible to the public; the preferred
location for materials is to be on-site, with a minimum amount of materials
within a work area in the public right-of-way, subject to a current Use of Public
Property Permit.
• Any requests for work before or after normal construction hours within the
public right-of-way shall be subject to review and approval through the After
Hours Permit process administered by the Building and Safety Division.
• Provision of off-street parking for construction workers,which may include the
use of a remote location with shuttle transport to the site, if determined
necessary by the City.
• The Construction Impact Mitigation Plan shall ensure adequate emergency
access is maintained throughout the duration of all construction activities.
Consistent with the requirements and regulations of the MUTCD, adequate
emergency access shall be ensured through measures such as coordination with
local emergency services,training for flagmen for emergency vehicles traveling
through the work zone, temporary lane separators that have sloping sides to
facilitate crossover by emergency vehicles, and vehicle storage and staging
areas for emergency vehicles.
Project Coordination Elements That Shall Be Implemented Prior to
Commencement of Construction
B-6
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx(12/20/19)
INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT
DECEMBER 2019 PROJECT No. P1-128
• The traveling public shall be advised of impending construction activities which
may substantially affect key roadways or other facilities (e.g., information signs,
portable message signs, media listing/notification, Hotline number, and
implementation of an approved Construction Impact Mitigation Plan) in a
manner appropriate to the scale and type of projects.
• A Use of Public Property Permit, Excavation Permit, Sewer Permit, or Oversize
Load Permit, as well as any Caltrans permits required for any construction work
requiring encroachment into public rights-of-way, detours, or any other work
within the public right-of-way shall be obtained.
• Timely notification of construction schedules shall be provided to all affected
agencies (e.g., Police Department, Fire Department, Public Works Department,
and Community Development Department) and to all owners and residential
and commercial tenants of property within a radius of 500 feet.
• Construction work shall be coordinated with affected agencies in advance of
start of work.Approvals may take up to two weeks per each submittal.
• Planning & Building and Public Works Departments approval of any haul routes
for earth, concrete, or construction materials and equipment hauling shall be
obtained.
TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
Based on the analysis and information contained in the Initial Study/Addendum, Mitigation
Measures MM TCR-1a, MM TCR-1b, and MM TCR-1c, included in the Specific Plan EIR, would be
applicable to the proposed Project.
MM TRC-1a Pre-Construction Training: For individual discretionary development projects, pre-
construction training for construction personnel shall be conducted prior to
commencement of any grading or other development activities. A qualified
archaeologist, meeting the Secretary of the Interior's Professional Qualifications
Standards for archaeology(2008) and approved by the City, shall conduct tribal
cultural resources identification and protocol training prior to site disturbance
activities. Construction personnel shall be informed of the types of archaeological or
tribal cultural resources that may be encountered, and of the proper protocols for
agency notification. Construction personnel shall attend the training and shall retain
documentation demonstrating attendance.
MM TRC-lb Inadvertent Discovery: In the event of any inadvertent discovery of archaeological
or tribal cultural resources during construction, ground-disturbing activities shall be
suspended until an evaluation is performed.The Applicant shall retain a qualified
registered professional archaeologist (RPA) and a qualified Native American Monitor
selected by the City.The City's selection of a Native American Monitor will be based
on cultural affiliation with the Project area,which may include consultation with the
B-7
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx a12/20/19»
ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM
PROJECT No. P1-128 DECEMBER 2019
NAHC. In the event of discovery, construction personnel shall notify the City,the
RPA, and Native American Monitor.The RPA and Native American Monitor shall
evaluate the significance of the discovery pursuant to the Treatment Plan
procedures outlined in MM TCR-1c, below. Work shall not resume until
authorization is received from the City. If human remains are found, in compliance
with California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5, all ground disturbances must
cease and the County Coroner must be contacted to determine the nature of the
remains. In the event the remains are determined to be Native American in origin by
the Coroner,the Coroner is required to contact the NAHC within 24 hours to
relinquish jurisdiction.
MM TCR-1c Archaeological Data Recovery: If cultural resources are encountered during
development activities,the City shall implement a Cultural Resources Treatment
Plan to address resource identification, significance evaluation, and any necessary
mitigation.The Treatment Plan shall be prepared by a City-approved RPA and a City-
approved Native American Monitor, and at a minimum shall include:
• A review of historic maps, photographs, and other pertinent documents to
predict the locations of former buildings, structures, and other historical
features and sensitive locations within and adjacent to the specific development
area;
• A context for evaluating resources that may be encountered during
construction;
• A research design outlining important prehistoric and historic-period themes
and research questions relevant to the known or anticipated sites in the study
area;
• Specific and well-defined criteria for evaluating the significance of discovered
remains; and
• Data requirements and the appropriate field and laboratory methods and
procedures to be used to treat the effects of the Project on significant
resources.
The City, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, may also
determine that resource is significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c)
of PRC Section 5024.1. If the RPA determines that the find may qualify for listing in
the California Register,the site shall be avoided or the resource preserved in place,
or if avoidance or preservation in place is not determined feasible, a data recovery
plan shall be developed.The preferred mitigation shall be to avoid the resource or
preserve in place.Any required testing or data recovery shall be directed by a
qualified RPA and Native American Monitor prior to construction being resumed in
B-8
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx(12/20/19)
INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT i2
DECEMBER 2019 PROJECT No. P1-128
the affected area.The Treatment Plan shall also include submission of a final
technical report,funded by the developer and approved by the City.
UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
Based on the analysis and information contained in the Initial Study/Addendum, Mitigation Measure
MM UT-3, included in the Specific Plan EIR, would be applicable to the proposed Project.
MM UT-3 FVCSP Utility Infrastructure Financing Program:The City shall ensure adequate
financing for funding of infrastructure improvements to serve the FVCSP through
implementation of the FVCSP Utility Infrastructure Financing Program, including
preparation of an AB 1600 fee justification study,for the FVCSP area.The Financing
Program shall be developed prior to the approval of the first entitlements for a
development within the Project area,following adoption of the Project. All new
development within the FVCSP shall be conditioned to be subject to payment of its
fair share of any impact fees identified under this program.The City shall determine
the costs of and establish a funding program for the following capital improvements
to upgrade water and wastewater delivery as needed to serve the demands of new
land uses anticipated to occur under the FVCSP.
The Program shall also:
a. Identify the cost of improvements to or replacement of undersized water and
wastewater lines within the FVCSP area needed to serve the Project.
b. Clearly apportion existing and projected demand on these facilities and costs
between existing users,the City, and proposed future development.
c. Identify potential funding mechanisms for sewer and water line construction,
including the equitable sharing of costs between new development, the City and
existing users, including development impact fees, grants, assessments, etc.
d. Identify development impact fees for all residential and non-residential
development to ensure that development pays its fair share of public
infrastructure costs.
e. Include a regular fee update schedule, consistent with the City's Capital
Improvement Program.
MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
No mitigation is required beyond measures specified above.
B-9
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx a12/20/19»
ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING PROJECT INITIAL STUDY/ADDENDUM
PROJECT No. P1-128 DECEMBER 2019
This page intentionally left blank
B-10
P:\ORC1601\Environmental\Addendum\Revised Addendum 12-2019.docx(12/20/19)
PART A
CONTRACT AGREEMENT
C-CA-072619
TABLE OF CONTENTS
CONTRACT AGREEMENT
SECTION - 1 GENERAL CONDITIONS.................................................................. 1
SECTION - 2 MATERIALS AND LABOR.................................................................4
SECTION - 3 PROJECT..........................................................................................4
SECTION -4 PLANS AND SPECIFICATONS ........................................................5
SECTION - 5 TIME OF COMMENCEMENT AND COMPLETION ..........................5
SECTION - 6 TIME IS OF THE ESSENCE .............................................................5
SECTION - 7 EXCUSABLE DELAYS......................................................................6
SECTION - 8 EXTRA WORK...................................................................................6
SECTION - 9 CHANGES IN PROJECT...................................................................7
SECTION - 10 LIQUIDATED DAMAGES FOR DELAY.............................................7
SECTION - 11 CONTRACT PRICE AND METHOD OF PAYMENT .........................7
SECTION - 12 SUBSTITUTION OF SECURITIES IN LIEU OF RETENTION OF
FUNDS ..............................................................................................9
SECTION - 13 COMPLETION................................................................................. 10
SECTION - 14 CONTRACTOR'S EMPLOYEES COMPENSATION....................... 10
SECTION - 15 SURETY BONDS ............................................................................ 12
SECTION - 16 INSURANCE.................................................................................... 13
SECTION - 17 RISK AND INDEMNIFICATION.......................................................22
SECTION - 18 TERMINATION................................................................................22
SECTION - 19 WARRANTY....................................................................................23
SECTION - 20 ASSIGNMENT.................................................................................24
SECTION - 21 RESOLUTION OF DISPUTES ........................................................24
SECTION - 22 SAFETY & HEALTH ........................................................................24
SECTION - 23 NOTICES.........................................................................................25
C-CA-072619
CONTRACT AGREEMENT
ORANGE COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT
CONTRACT NO. P1-128C
HEADQUARTERS COMPLEX SITE PREPARATION
THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into, to be effective, this June 24, 2020, by and
between Resource Environmental, Inc., hereinafter referred to as "CONTRACTOR" and the
Orange County Sanitation District, hereinafter referred to as "OCSD".
WITNESSETH
That for and in consideration of the promises and agreements hereinafter made and exchanged,
OCSD and CONTRACTOR agree as follows:
SECTION — 1 GENERAL CONDITIONS
CONTRACTOR certifies and agrees that all the terms, conditions and obligations of the
Contract Documents as hereinafter defined, the location of the job site, and the conditions under
which the Work is to be performed have been thoroughly reviewed, and enters into this Contract
based upon CONTRACTOR's investigation of all such matters and is in no way relying upon
any opinions or representations of OCSD. It is agreed that this Contract represents the entire
agreement. It is further agreed that the Contract Documents are each incorporated into this
Contract by reference, with the same force and effect as if the same were set forth at length
herein, and that CONTRACTOR and its Subcontractors, if any, will be and are bound by any
and all of said Contract Documents insofar as they relate in any part or in any way, directly or
indirectly, to the Work covered by this Contract.
A. Contract Documents Order of Precedence
"Contract Documents" refers to those documents identified in the definition of"Contract
Documents" in the General Conditions — Definitions.
CONFORMED C-CA-072619
CONTRACT NO. P1-128C
HEADQUARTERS COMPLEX SITE PREPARATION
Page 1 of 26
1. In the event of a conflict between one Contract Document and any of the other
Contract Documents, the provisions in the document highest in precedence shall be
controlling. The order of precedence of the Contract Documents is as follows:
a. Supplemental Agreements—the last in time being the first in precedence
b. Addenda issued prior to opening of Bids —the last in time being the first in
precedence
c. Contract Agreement
d. Permits and other regulatory requirements
e. Special Provisions
f. General Conditions (GC)
g. Notice Inviting Bids and Instruction to Bidders
h. Geotechnical Baseline Report (GBR), if attached as a Contract Document
i. Plans and Specifications — in these documents the order of precedence shall be:
i. Specifications (Divisions 01-17)
ii. Plans
iii. General Requirements (GR)
iv. Standard Drawings and Typical Details
j. CONTRACTOR's Bid
2. In the event of a conflict between terms within an individual Contract Document, the
conflict shall be resolved by applying the following principles as appears applicable:
a. Figured dimensions on the Contract Documents shall govern. Dimensions not
specified shall be as directed by the ENGINEER. Details not shown or
specified shall be the same as similar parts that are shown or specified, or as
C-CA-072619 CONFORMED
CONTRACT NO. P1-128C
HEADQUARTERS COMPLEX SITE PREPARATION
Page 2 of 26
directed. Full-size details shall take precedence over scale Drawings as to
shape and details of construction. Specifications shall govern as to material
and workmanship.
b. The Contract Documents calling for the higher quality material or workmanship
shall prevail. Materials or Work described in words, which so applied, have a
well known technical or trade meaning shall be deemed to refer to such
recognized standards. In the event of any discrepancy between any Drawings
and the figures thereon, the figures shall be taken as correct.
C. Scale Drawings, full-size details, and Specifications are intended to be fully
complementary and to agree. Should any discrepancy between Contract
Documents come to the CONTRACTOR's attention, or should an error occur in
the efforts of others, which affect the Work, the CONTRACTOR shall notify the
ENGINEER, in writing, at once. In the event any doubts or questions arise with
respect to the true meaning of the Contract Documents, reference shall be
made to the ENGINEER whose written decision shall be final. If the
CONTRACTOR proceeds with the Work affected without written instructions
from the ENGINEER, the CONTRACTOR shall be fully responsible for any
resultant damage or defect.
d. Anything mentioned in the Specifications and not indicated in the Plans, or
indicated in the Plans and not mentioned in the Specifications, shall be of like
effect as if indicated and mentioned in both. In case of discrepancy in the
Plans or Specifications, the matter shall be immediately submitted to OCSD's
ENGINEER, without whose decision CONTRACTOR shall not adjust said
discrepancy save only at CONTRACTOR's own risk and expense. The
decision of the ENGINEER shall be final.
CONFORMED C-CA-072619
CONTRACT NO. PI-128C
HEADQUARTERS COMPLEX SITE PREPARATION
Page 3 of 26
In all matters relating to the acceptability of material, machinery or plant equipment;
classifications of material or Work; the proper execution, progress or sequence of the
Work; and quantities interpretation of the Contract Documents, the decision of the
ENGINEER shall be final and binding, and shall be a condition precedent to any payment
under the Contract, unless otherwise ordered by the Board of Directors.
B. Definitions
Capitalized terms used in this Contract are defined in the General Conditions, Definitions.
Additional terms may be defined in the Special Provisions.
SECTION — 2 MATERIALS AND LABOR
CONTRACTOR shall furnish, under the conditions expressed in the Plans and Specifications, at
CONTRACTOR'S own expense, all labor and materials necessary, except such as are
mentioned in the Specifications to be furnished by OCSD, to construct and complete the
Project, in good workmanlike and substantial order. If CONTRACTOR fails to pay for labor or
materials when due, OCSD may settle such claims by making demand upon the Surety to this
Contract. In the event of the failure or refusal of the Surety to satisfy said claims, OCSD may
settle them directly and deduct the amount of payments from the Contract Price and any
amounts due to CONTRACTOR. In the event OCSD receives a stop payment notice from any
laborer or material supplier alleging non-payment by CONTRACTOR, OCSD shall be entitled to
deduct all of its costs and expenses incurred relating thereto, including but not limited to
administrative and legal fees.
SECTION — 3 PROJECT
The Project is described as:
CONTRACT NO. P1-128C
HEADQUARTERS COMPLEX SITE PREPARATION
C-CA-072619 CONFORMED
CONTRACT NO. P1-128C
HEADQUARTERS COMPLEX SITE PREPARATION
Page 4 of 26
SECTION —4 PLANS AND SPECIFICATONS
The Work to be done is shown in a set of Plans and Specifications entitled:
CONTRACT NO. P1-128C
HEADQUARTERS COMPLEX SITE PREPARATION
Said Plans and Specifications and any revision, amendments and addenda thereto are attached
hereto and incorporated herein as part of this Contract and referred to by reference.
SECTION — 5 TIME OF COMMENCEMENT AND COMPLETION
CONTRACTOR agrees to commence the Project within 15 calendar days from the date set forth
in the "Notice to Proceed" sent by OCSD, unless otherwise specified therein and shall diligently
prosecute the Work to completion within three hundred and two (302) calendar days from the
date of the "Notice to Proceed" issued by OCSD, excluding delays caused or authorized by
OCSD as set forth in Sections 7, 8, and 9 hereof, and applicable provisions in the General
Conditions. The time for completion includes five (5) calendar days determined by OCSD likely
to be inclement weather when CONTRACTOR will be unable to work.
In addition, CONTRACTOR shall accomplish such milestones within the periods of performance
set forth in Appendix A of the Special Provisions entitled "Work Completion Schedule."
SECTION — 6 TIME IS OF THE ESSENCE
Time is of the essence of this Contract. As required by the Contract Documents,
CONTRACTOR shall prepare and obtain approval of all shop drawings, details and samples,
and do all other things necessary and incidental to the prosecution of CONTRACTOR's Work in
conformance with an approved construction progress schedule. CONTRACTOR shall
coordinate the Work covered by this Contract with that of all other contractors, subcontractors
and of OCSD, in a manner that will facilitate the efficient completion of the entire Work and
accomplish the required milestone(s), if any, by the applicable deadline(s) in accordance with
CONFORMED C-CA-072619
CONTRACT NO. P1-128C
HEADQUARTERS COMPLEX SITE PREPARATION
Page 5 of 26
Section 5 herein. OCSD shall have the right to assert complete control of the premises on
which the Work is to be performed and shall have the right to decide the time or order in which
the various portions of the Work shall be installed or the priority of the work of subcontractors,
and, in general, all matters representing the timely and orderly conduct of the Work of
CONTRACTOR on the premises.
SECTION — 7 EXCUSABLE DELAYS
CONTRACTOR shall only be excused for any delay in the prosecution or completion of the
Project as specifically provided in General Conditions, "Extensions for Delay", and the General
Requirements, "By CONTRACTOR or Others— Unknown Utilities during Contract Work".
Extensions of time and extra compensation arising from such excusable delays will be
determined in accordance with the General Conditions, "Extension of Time for Delay" and
"Contract Price Adjustments and Payments", and extensions of time and extra compensation as
a result of incurring undisclosed utilities will be determined in accordance with General
Requirements, "By CONTRACTOR or Others— Unknown Utilities during Contract Work".
OCSD's decision will be conclusive on all parties to this Contract.
SECTION — 8 EXTRA WORK
The Contract Price as set forth in Section 11, includes compensation for all Work performed by
CONTRACTOR, unless CONTRACTOR obtains a Change Order signed by a designated
representative of OCSD specifying the exact nature of the Extra Work and the amount of extra
compensation to be paid all as more particularly set forth in Section 9 hereof and the General
Conditions, "Request for Change (Changes at CONTRACTOR's Request)", "OWNER Initiated
Changes", and "Contract Price Adjustments and Payments".
In the event a Change Order is issued by OCSD pursuant to the Contract Documents, OCSD
shall extend the time fixed in Section 5 for completion of the Project by the number of days, if
C-CA-072619 CONFORMED
CONTRACT NO. P1-128C
HEADQUARTERS COMPLEX SITE PREPARATION
Page 6 of 26
any, reasonably required for CONTRACTOR to perform the Extra Work, as determined by
OCSD's ENGINEER. The decision of the ENGINEER shall be final.
SECTION — 9 CHANGES IN PROJECT
OCSD may at any time, without notice to any Surety, by Change Order, make any changes in
the Work within the general scope of the Contract Document, including but not limited to
changes:
1. In the Specifications (including Drawings and designs);
2. In the time, method or manner of performance of the Work;
3. In OCSD-furnished facilities, equipment, materials, services or site; or
4. Directing acceleration in the performance of the Work.
No change of period of performance or Contract Price, or any other change in the Contract
Documents, shall be binding until the Contract is modified by a fully executed Change Order.
All Change Orders shall be issued in accordance with the requirements set forth in the General
Conditions, "Request for Change (Changes at CONTRACTOR's Request)" and "OWNER
Initiated Changes".
SECTION — 10 LIQUIDATED DAMAGES FOR DELAY
Liquidated Damages shall be payable in the amounts and upon the occurrence of such events
or failure to meet such requirements or deadlines as provided in the Special Provisions,
"Liquidated Damages."
SECTION — 11 CONTRACT PRICE AND METHOD OF PAYMENT
A. OCSD agrees to pay and the CONTRACTOR agrees to accept as full consideration for the
faithful performance of this Contract, subject to any additions or deductions as provided in
approved Change Orders, the sum of One Million Five Hundred Fifty-Five Thousand
Dollars ($1,555,000) as itemized on the Attached Exhibit "A".
CONFORMED C-CA-072619
CONTRACT NO. P1-128C
HEADQUARTERS COMPLEX SITE PREPARATION
Page 7 of 26
Upon satisfaction of the conditions precedent to payment set forth in the General
Requirements, Additional General Requirements and General Conditions (including but
not limited to Sections entitled "Mobilization Payment Requirements" and "Payment
Itemized Breakdown of Contract Lump Sum Prices"), there shall be paid to the
CONTRACTOR an initial Net Progress Payment for mobilization. OCSD shall issue at the
commencement of the job a schedule which shows:
1. A minimum of one payment to be made to the CONTRACTOR for each successive
four (4) week period as the Work progresses, and
2. The due dates for the CONTRACTOR to submit requests for payment to meet the
payment schedule.
After the initial Net Progress Payment, and provided the CONTRACTOR submits the
request for payment prior to the end of the day required to meet the payment schedule,
the CONTRACTOR shall be paid a Net Progress Payment on the corresponding monthly
payment date set forth in the schedule.
Payments shall be made on demands drawn in the manner required by law, accompanied
by a certificate signed by the ENGINEER, stating that the Work for which payment is
demanded has been performed in accordance with the terms of the Contract Documents,
and that the amount stated in the certificate is due under the terms of the Contract.
Payment applications shall also be accompanied with all documentation, records, and
releases as required by the Contract, Exhibit A, Schedule of Prices, and General
Conditions, "Payment for Work— General". The Total amount of Progress Payments shall
not exceed the actual value of the Work completed as certified by OCSD's ENGINEER.
The processing of payments shall not be considered as an acceptance of any part of the
Work.
C-CA-072619 CONFORMED
CONTRACT NO. P1-128C
HEADQUARTERS COMPLEX SITE PREPARATION
Page 8 of 26
B. As used in this Section, the following defined terms shall have the following meanings:
1. "Net Progress Payment" means a sum equal to the Progress Payment less the
Retention Amount and other qualified deductions (Liquidated Damages, stop
payment notices, etc.).
2. "Progress Payment" means a sum equal to:
a. the value of the actual Work completed since the commencement of the Work
as determined by OCSD;
b. plus the value of material suitably stored at the worksite, treatment plant or
approved storage yards subject to or under the control of OCSD since the
commencement of the Work as determined by OCSD;
C. less all previous Net Progress Payments;
d. less all amounts of previously qualified deductions;
e. less all amounts previously retained as Retention Amounts.
3. "Retention Amount" for each Progress Payment means the percentage of each
Progress Payment to be retained by OCSD to assure satisfactory completion of the
Contract. The amount to be retained from each Progress Payment shall be
determined as provided in the General Conditions—"Retained Funds; Substitution of
Securities."
SECTION — 12 SUBSTITUTION OF SECURITIES IN LIEU OF RETENTION OF FUNDS
Pursuant to Public Contract Code Section 22300 et seq., the CONTRACTOR may, at its sole
expense, substitute securities as provided in General Conditions — "Retained Funds;
Substitution of Securities."
CONFORMED C-CA-072619
CONTRACT NO. P1-128C
HEADQUARTERS COMPLEX SITE PREPARATION
Page 9 of 26
SECTION — 13 COMPLETION
Final Completion and Final Acceptance shall occur at the time and in the manner specified in the
General Conditions, "Final Acceptance and Final Completion", "Final Payment" and Exhibit A-
Schedule of Prices.
Upon receipt of all documentation, records, and releases as required by the Contract from the
CONTRACTOR, OCSD shall proceed with the Final Acceptance as specified in General
Conditions.
SECTION — 14 CONTRACTOR'S EMPLOYEES COMPENSATION
A. Davis-Bacon Act:
CONTRACTOR will pay and will require all Subcontractors to pay all employees on said
Project a salary or wage at least equal to the prevailing rate of per diem wages as
determined by the Secretary of Labor in accordance with the Davis-Bacon Act for each
craft or type of worker needed to perform the Contract. The provisions of the Davis-Bacon
Act shall apply only if the Contract is in excess of Two Thousand Dollars ($2,000.00) and
when twenty-five percent (25%) or more of the Contract is funded by federal assistance. If
the aforesaid conditions are met, a copy of the provisions of the Davis-Bacon Act to be
complied with are incorporated herein as a part of this Contract and referred to by
reference.
B. General Prevailing Rate:
OCSD has been advised by the State of California Director of Industrial Relations of its
determination of the general prevailing rate of per diem wages and the general prevailing
rate for legal holiday and overtime Work in the locality in which the Work is to be
performed for each craft or type of Work needed to execute this Contract, and copies of
the same are on file in the Office of the ENGINEER of OCSD. The CONTRACTOR
C-CA-072619 CONFORMED
CONTRACT NO. P1-128C
HEADQUARTERS COMPLEX SITE PREPARATION
Page 10 of 26
agrees that not less than said prevailing rates shall be paid to workers employed on this
public works Contract as required by Labor Code Section 1774 of the State of California.
Per California Labor Code 1773.2, OCSD will have on file copies of the prevailing rate of
per diem wages at its principal office and at each job site, which shall be made available to
any interested party upon request.
C. Forfeiture for Violation:
CONTRACTOR shall, as a penalty to OCSD, forfeit Two Hundred Dollars ($200.00) for
each calendar day or portion thereof for each worker paid (either by the CONTRACTOR or
any Subcontractor under it) less than the prevailing rate of per diem wages as set by the
Director of Industrial Relations, in accordance with Sections 1770-1780 of the California
Labor Code for the Work provided for in this Contract, all in accordance with Section 1775
of the Labor Code of the State of California.
D. Apprentices:
Sections 1777.5, 1777.6, 1777.7 of the Labor Code of the State of California, regarding
the employment of apprentices are applicable to this Contract and the CONTRACTOR
shall comply therewith if the prime contract involves Thirty Thousand Dollars ($30,000.00)
or more.
E. Workday:
In the performance of this Contract, not more than eight (8) hours shall constitute a day's
work, and the CONTRACTOR shall not require more than eight (8) hours of labor in a day
from any person employed by him hereunder except as provided in paragraph (B) above.
CONTRACTOR shall conform to Article 3, Chapter 1, Part 7 (Section 1810 et seq.) of the
Labor Code of the State of California and shall forfeit to OCSD as a penalty, the sum of
Twenty-five Dollars ($25.00) for each worker employed in the execution of this Contract by
CONTRACTOR or any Subcontractor for each calendar day during which any worker is
CONFORMED C-CA-072619
CONTRACT NO. P1-128C
HEADQUARTERS COMPLEX SITE PREPARATION
Page 11 of 26
required or permitted to labor more than eight (8) hours in any one calendar day and forty
(40) hours in any one week in violation of said Article. CONTRACTOR shall keep an
accurate record showing the name and actual hours worked each calendar day and each
calendar week by each worker employed by CONTRACTOR in connection with the Project.
F. Registration; Record of Wages; Inspection:
CONTRACTOR shall comply with the registration requirements of Labor Code Section 1725.5.
Pursuant to Labor Code Section 1771.4, the Work is subject to compliance monitoring by the
California Department of Industrial Relations. CONTRACTOR shall maintain accurate payroll
records and shall submit payroll records to the Labor Commissioner pursuant to Labor Code
Section 1771.4(a)(3). Penalties for non-compliance with the requirements of Section 1776 may
be deducted from progress payments per Section 1776.
CONTRACTOR shall comply with the job site notices posting requirements established by
the Labor Commissioner per Title 8, California Code of Regulations Section 16461(e).
SECTION — 15 SURETY BONDS
CONTRACTOR shall, before entering upon the performance of this Contract, furnish Bonds
approved by OCSD's General Counsel —one in the amount of one hundred percent (100%) of
the Contract amount, to guarantee the faithful performance of the Work, and the other in the
amount of one hundred percent (100%) of the Contract amount to guarantee payment of all
claims for labor and materials furnished. As changes to the Contract occur via approved
Change Orders, the CONTRACTOR shall assure that the amounts of the Bonds are adjusted to
maintain 100% of the Contract Price. This Contract shall not become effective until such Bonds
are supplied to and approved by OCSD. Bonds must be issued by a Surety authorized by the
State Insurance Commissioner to do business in California. The Performance Bond shall
remain in full force and effect through the warranty period, as specified in Section 19 below. All
Bonds required to be submitted relating to this Contract must comply with California Code of
C-CA-072619 CONFORMED
CONTRACT NO. P1-128C
HEADQUARTERS COMPLEX SITE PREPARATION
Page 12 of 26
Civil Procedure Section 995.630. Each Bond shall be executed in the name of the Surety
insurer under penalty of perjury, or the fact of execution of each Bond shall be duly
acknowledged before an officer authorized to take and certify acknowledgments, and either one
of the following conditions shall be satisfied:
A. A copy of the transcript or record of the unrevoked appointment, power of attorney, by-
laws, or other instrument, duly certified by the proper authority and attested by the seal of
the insurer entitling or authorizing the person who executed the Bond to do so for and on
behalf of the insurer, is on file in the Office of the County Clerk of the County of Orange; or
B. A copy of a valid power of attorney is attached to the Bond.
SECTION — 16 INSURANCE
CONTRACTOR shall purchase and maintain, for the duration of the Contract, insurance against
claims for injuries to persons, or damages to property which may arise from or in connection
with the performance of the Work hereunder, and the results of that Work by CONTRACTOR,
its agents, representatives, employees, or Subcontractors, in amounts equal to the
requirements set forth below. CONTRACTOR shall not commence Work under this Contract
until all insurance required under this Section is obtained in a form acceptable to OCSD, nor
shall CONTRACTOR allow any Subcontractor to commence Work on a subcontract until all
insurance required of the Subcontractor has been obtained. CONTRACTOR shall maintain all
of the foregoing insurance coverages in force through the point at which the Work under this
Contract is fully completed and accepted by OCSD pursuant to the provisions of the General
Conditions, "Final Acceptance and Final Completion". Furthermore, CONTRACTOR shall
maintain all of the foregoing insurance coverages in full force and effect throughout the warranty
period, commencing on the date of Final Acceptance. The requirement for carrying the
foregoing insurance shall not derogate from the provisions for indemnification of OCSD by
CONFORMED C-CA-072619
CONTRACT NO. P1-128C
HEADQUARTERS COMPLEX SITE PREPARATION
Page 13 of 26
CONTRACTOR under Section 17 of this Contract. Notwithstanding nor diminishing the
obligations of CONTRACTOR with respect to the foregoing, CONTRACTOR shall subscribe for
and maintain in full force and effect during the life of this Contract, inclusive of all changes to the
Contract Documents made in accordance with the provisions of the General Conditions,
"Request for Change (Changes at CONTRACTOR's Request)" and/or"OWNER Initiated
Changes", the following insurance in amounts not less than the amounts specified. OCSD
reserves the right to amend the required limits of insurance commensurate with the
CONTRACTOR's risk at any time during the course of the Project. No vehicles may enter
OCSD premises/worksite without possessing the required insurance coverage.
CONTRACTOR's insurance shall also comply with all insurance requirements prescribed by
agencies from whom permits shall be obtained for the Work and any other third parties from
whom third party agreements are necessary to perform the Work (collectively, the "Third
Parties"), The Special Provisions may list such requirements and sample forms and
requirements from such Third Parties may be included in an attachment to the General
Requirements. CONTRACTOR bears the responsibility to discover and comply with all
requirements of Third Parties, including meeting specific insurance requirements, that are
necessary for the complete performance of the Work. To the extent there is a conflict between
the Third Parties' insurance requirements and those set forth by OCSD herein, the
requirement(s) providing the more protective coverage for both OSCD and the Third Parties
shall control and be purchased and maintained by CONTRACTOR.
A. Limits of Insurance
1. General Liability: Two Million Dollars ($2,000,000) per occurrence and a general
aggregate limit of Four Million Dollars ($4,000,000) for bodily injury, personal injury
and property damage. Coverage shall include each of the following:
C-CA-072619 CONFORMED
CONTRACT NO. P1-128C
HEADQUARTERS COMPLEX SITE PREPARATION
Page 14 of 26
a. Premises-Operations.
b. Products and Completed Operations, with limits of at least Two Million Dollars
($2,000,000) per occurrence and a general aggregate limit of Four Million
Dollars ($4,000,000)which shall be in effect at all times during the warranty
period set forth in the Warranty section herein, and as set forth in the General
Conditions, "Warranty (CONTRACTOR's Guarantee)", plus any additional
extension or continuation of time to said warranty period that may be required
or authorized by said provisions.
C. Broad Form Property Damage, expressly including damage arising out of
explosion, collapse, or underground damage.
d. Contractual Liability, expressly including the indemnity provisions assumed
under this Contract.
e. Separation of Insured Clause, providing that coverage applies separately to
each insured, except with respect to the limits of liability.
f. Independent CONTRACTOR's Liability.
To the extent first dollar coverage, including defense of any claim, is not
available to OCSD or any other additional insured because of any SIR,
deductible, or any other form of self insurance, CONTRACTOR is obligated to
assume responsibility of insurer until the deductible, SIR or other condition of
insurer assuming its defense and/or indemnity has been satisfied.
CONTRACTOR shall be responsible to pay any deductible or SIR.
g. If a crane will be used, the General Liability insurance will be endorsed to add
Riggers Liability coverage or its equivalent to cover the usage of the crane and
exposures with regard to the crane operators, riggers and others involved in
using the crane.
CONFORMED C-CA-072619
CONTRACT NO. P1-128C
HEADQUARTERS COMPLEX SITE PREPARATION
Page 15 of 26
h. If divers will be used, the General Liability insurance will be endorsed to cover
marine liability or its equivalent to cover the usage of divers.
2. Automobile Liabilitv: The CONTRACTOR shall maintain a policy of Automobile
Liability Insurance on a comprehensive form covering all owned, non-owned, and
hired automobiles, trucks, and other vehicles providing the following minimum limits
of liability coverage:
Either (1) a combined single limit of One Million Dollars ($1,000,000) and a general
aggregate limit of Two Million Dollars ($2,000,000) for bodily injury, personal injury
and property damage;
Or alternatively, (2) One Million Dollars ($1,000,000) per person for bodily injury and
One Million Dollars ($1,000,000) per accident for property damage.
3. Umbrella Excess Liability: The minimum limits of general liability and automobile
liability insurance required, as set forth above, shall be provided for either in a single
policy of primary insurance or a combination of policies of primary and umbrella
excess coverage. Excess liability coverage shall be issued with limits of liability
which, when combined with the primary insurance, will equal the minimum limits for
general liability and automobile liability.
4. Drone Liability Insurance: If a drone will be used, drone liability insurance must be
maintained by CONTRACTOR in the amount of One Million Dollars ($1,000,000) in a
form acceptable by OCSD.
Worker's Compensation/Employer's Liability: CONTRACTOR shall provide such
Worker's Compensation Insurance as required by the Labor Code of the State of
California, including employer's liability with a minimum limit of One Million Dollars
($1,000,000) per accident for bodily injury or disease. If an exposure to Jones Act
C-CA-072619 CONFORMED
CONTRACT NO. P1-128C
HEADQUARTERS COMPLEX SITE PREPARATION
Page 16 of 26
liability may exist, the insurance required herein shall include coverage with regard to
Jones Act claims.
Where permitted by law, CONTRACTOR hereby waives all rights of recovery by
subrogation because of deductible clauses, inadequacy of limits of any insurance
policy, limitations or exclusions of coverage, or any other reason against OCSD, its
or their officers, agents, or employees, and any other contractor or subcontractor
performing Work or rendering services on behalf of OCSD in connection with the
planning, development and construction of the Project. In all its insurance coverages
related to the Work, CONTRACTOR shall include clauses providing that each insurer
shall waive all of its rights of recovery by subrogation against OCSD, its or their
officers, agents, or employees, or any other contractor or subcontractor performing
Work or rendering services at the Project. Where permitted by law, CONTRACTOR
shall require similar written express waivers and insurance clauses from each of its
Subcontractors of every tier. A waiver of subrogation shall be effective as to any
individual or entity, even if such individual or entity (a) would otherwise have a duty
of indemnification, contractual or otherwise, (b) did not pay the insurance premium,
directly or indirectly, and (c) whether or not such individual or entity has an insurable
interest in the property damaged.
5. Pollution Liability Insurance: CONTRACTOR shall purchase and maintain insurance
for pollution liability covering bodily injury, property damage (including loss of use of
damaged property or property that has not been physically injured or destroyed),
cleanup costs, and defense costs (including costs and expenses for investigation,
defense, or settlement of claims). Coverage shall carry limits of at least Two Million
Dollars ($2,000,000) and shall apply to sudden and non-sudden pollution conditions
CONFORMED C-CA-072619
CONTRACT NO. P1-128C
HEADQUARTERS COMPLEX SITE PREPARATION
Page 17 of 26
(including sewage spills), both at the site or needed due to migration of pollutants
from the site, resulting from the escape or release of smoke, vapors, fumes, acids,
alkalis, toxic chemicals, liquids or gases, waste materials, or other irritants,
contaminants or pollutants.
If CONTRACTOR provides coverage written on a claims-made basis, OCSD has the
right to approve or reject such coverage in its own discretion. If written on a claims-
made basis, the CONTRACTOR warrants that any retroactive date applicable to
coverage under the policy precedes the effective date of this Contract, and that
continuous coverage will be maintained, or an extended discovery period will be
exercised, for a period of two years beginning from the time that the Project under
this Contract is completed.
6. Limits are Minimums: If CONTRACTOR maintains higher limits than the minimums
shown in this Section, OCSD requires and shall be entitled to coverage for the higher
limits maintained by the CONTRACTOR.
B. Deductibles and Self-Insured Retentions
Any deductibles or self-insured retentions must be declared to and approved by OCSD. At
the option of OCSD, either: the Insurer shall reduce or eliminate such deductibles or self-
insured retentions as respects OCSD, its Directors, officers, agents, CONSULTANTS, and
employees; or CONTRACTOR shall provide a financial guarantee satisfactory to OCSD
guaranteeing payment of losses and related investigations, claim administration, and
defense expenses.
C. Other Insurance Provisions
1. Each such policy of General Liability Insurance and Automobile Liability Insurance
shall be endorsed to contain, the following provisions:
C-CA-072619 CONFORMED
CONTRACT NO. P1-128C
HEADQUARTERS COMPLEX SITE PREPARATION
Page 18 of 26
a. OCSD, its Directors, officers, agents, CONSULTANTS, and employees, and all
public agencies from whom permits will be obtained, and their Directors,
officers, agents, and employees are hereby declared to be additional insureds
under the terms of this policy, but only with respect to the operations of
CONTRACTOR at or from any of the sites of OCSD in connection with this
Contract, or acts and omissions of the additional insured in connection with its
general supervision or inspection of said operations related to this Contract.
b. Insurance afforded by the additional insured endorsement shall apply as
primary insurance, and other insurance maintained by OCSD shall be excess
only and not contributing with insurance provided under this policy.
2. Each insurance policy required herein shall be endorsed to state that coverage shall
not be cancelled by either party, except after thirty (30) days prior written notice by
certified mail, return receipt requested, and that coverage shall not be cancelled for
non-payment of premium except after ten (10) days prior written notice by certified
mail, return receipt requested. Should there be changes in coverage or an increase
in deductible or SIR amounts, CONTRACTOR undertakes to procure a manuscript
endorsement from its insurer giving 30 days prior notice of such an event to OCSD,
or to have its insurance broker/agent send to OCSD a certified letter describing the
changes in coverage and any increase in deductible or SIR amounts. The certified
letter must be sent Attention: Risk Management and shall be received not less than
twenty (20) days prior to the effective date of the change(s). The letter must be
signed by a Director or Officer of the broker/agent and must be on company
letterhead, and may be sent via e-mail in pdf format.
CONFORMED C-CA-072619
CONTRACT NO. P1-128C
HEADQUARTERS COMPLEX SITE PREPARATION
Page 19 of 26
3. Coverage shall not extend to any indemnity coverage for the active negligence of
any additional insured in any case where an agreement to indemnify the additional
insured would be invalid under California Civil Code Section 2782(b).
4. If required by a public agency from whom permit(s) will be obtained, each policy of
General Liability Insurance and Automobile Liability Insurance shall be endorsed to
specify by name the public agency and its legislative members, officers, agents,
CONSULTANTS, and employees, to be additional insureds.
D. Acceptability of Insurers
Insurers must have an "A2, or better, Policyholder's Rating, and a Financial Rating of at
least Class VIII, or better, in accordance with the most current A.M. Best Rating Guide.
OCSD recognizes that State Compensation Insurance Fund has withdrawn from
participation in the A.M. Best Rating Guide process. Nevertheless, OCSD will accept
State Compensation Insurance Fund for the required policy of worker's compensation
insurance, subject to OCSD's option, at any time during the term of this Contract, to
require a change in insurer upon twenty (20) days written notice. Further, OCSD will
require CONTRACTOR to substitute any insurer whose rating drops below the levels
herein specified. Said substitution shall occur within twenty (20) days of written notice to
CONTRACTOR by OCSD or its agent.
E. Verification of Coverage
CONTRACTOR shall furnish OCSD with original certificates and mandatory endorsements
affecting coverage. Said policies and endorsements shall conform to the requirements
herein stated. All certificates and endorsements are to be received and approved by
OCSD before Work commences. OCSD reserves the right to require complete, certified
copies of all required insurance policies, including endorsements, affecting the coverage
required by these Specifications at any time.
C-CA-072619 CONFORMED
CONTRACT NO. P1-128C
HEADQUARTERS COMPLEX SITE PREPARATION
Page 20 of 26
F. Subcontractors
CONTRACTOR shall be responsible to establish insurance requirements for any
Subcontractors hired by CONTRACTOR. The insurance shall be in amounts and types
reasonably sufficient to deal with the risk of loss involving the Subcontractor's operations
and work. OCSD and any public agency issuing permits for the Project must be named as
"Additional Insured" on any General Liability or Automobile Liability policy obtained by a
Subcontractor. The CONTRACTOR must obtain copies and maintain current versions of
all Subcontractors' policies, Certificate of Liability and mandatory endorsements effecting
coverage. Upon request, CONTRACTOR must furnish OCSD with the above referenced
required documents.
G. Required Forms and Endorsements
1. Required ACORD Form
a. Certificate of Liability Form 25
2. Required Insurance Services Office, Inc. Endorsements (when alternative forms are
shown, they are listed in order of preference)
In the event any of the following forms are cancelled by Insurance Services Office,
Inc. (ISO), or are updated, the ISO replacement form or equivalent must be supplied.
a. Commercial General Liability Form CG-0001 10 01
b. Additional Insured Including Form CG-2010 10 01 and
Products-Completed Operations Form CG-2037 10 01
C. Waiver of Transfer of Rights of Form CG-2404 11 85; or
Recovery Against Others to Us/ Form CG-2404 10 93
Waiver of Subrogation
3. Required State Compensation Insurance Fund Endorsements
a. Waiver of Subrogation Endorsement No. 2570
b. Cancellation Notice Endorsement No. 2065
CONFORMED C-CA-072619
CONTRACT NO. P1-128C
HEADQUARTERS COMPLEX SITE PREPARATION
Page 21 of 26
4. Additional Required Endorsements
a. Notice of Policy Termination Manuscript Endorsement
5. Pollution Liability Endorsements
There shall be a Separation of Insured Clause or endorsement, providing that
coverage applies separately to each insured, except with respect to the limits of
liability. There shall also be an endorsement or policy language containing a waiver
of subrogation rights on the part of the insurer.
OCSD, its directors, officers, agents, CONSULTANTS and employees and all public
agencies from whom permits will be obtained as well as their directors, officers,
agents, and employees shall be included as insureds under the policy. Any
additional insured endorsement shall contain language at least as broad as the
coverage language contained in ISO form CG 20 10 11 85 or alternatively in both
CG 20 10 10 01 and CG 20 37 10 01 together.
SECTION — 17 RISK AND INDEMNIFICATION
All Work covered by this Contract done at the site of construction or in preparing or delivering
materials to the site shall be at the risk of CONTRACTOR alone. CONTRACTOR shall save,
indemnify, defend, and keep OCSD and others harmless as more specifically set forth in
General Conditions, "General Indemnification".
SECTION — 18 TERMINATION
This Contract may be terminated in whole or in part in writing by OCSD in the event of
substantial failure by the CONTRACTOR to fulfill its obligations under this Agreement, or it may
be terminated by OCSD for its convenience provided that such termination is effectuated in a
manner and upon such conditions set forth more particularly in General Conditions,
"Termination for Default" and/or"Termination for Convenience", provided that no termination
may be effected unless proper notice is provided to CONTRACTOR at the time and in the
C-CA-072619 CONFORMED
CONTRACT NO. P1-128C
HEADQUARTERS COMPLEX SITE PREPARATION
Page 22 of 26
manner provided in said General Conditions. If termination for default or convenience is
effected by OCSD, an equitable adjustment in the price provided for in this Contract shall be
made at the time and in the manner provided in the General Conditions, "Termination for
Default" and "Termination for Convenience".
SECTION — 19 WARRANTY
The CONTRACTOR agrees to perform all Work under this Contract in accordance with the
Contract Documents, including OCSD's designs, Drawings and Specifications.
The CONTRACTOR guarantees for a period of at least one (1) year from the date of Final
Acceptance of the Work, pursuant to the General Conditions, "Final Acceptance and Final
Completion" that the completed Work is free from all defects due to faulty materials, equipment
or workmanship and that it shall promptly make whatever adjustments or corrections which may
be necessary to cure any defects, including repairs of any damage to other parts of the system
resulting from such defects. OCSD shall promptly give notice to the CONTRACTOR of
observed defects. In the event that the CONTRACTOR fails to make adjustments, repairs,
corrections or other work made necessary by such defects, OCSD may do so and charge the
CONTRACTOR the cost incurred. The CONTRACTOR's warranty shall continue as to any
corrected deficiency until the later of(1) the remainder of the original one-year warranty period;
or (2) one year after acceptance by OCSD of the corrected Work. The Performance Bond and
the Payment Bond shall remain in full force and effect through the guarantee period.
The CONTRACTOR's obligations under this clause are in addition to the CONTRACTOR's
other express or implied assurances under this Contract, including but not limited to specific
manufacturer or other extended warranties specified in the Plans and Specifications, or state
law and in no way diminish any other rights that OCSD may have against the CONTRACTOR
for faulty materials, equipment or Work.
CONFORMED C-CA-072619
CONTRACT NO. P1-128C
HEADQUARTERS COMPLEX SITE PREPARATION
Page 23 of 26
SECTION — 20 ASSIGNMENT
No assignment by the CONTRACTOR of this Contract or any part hereof, or of funds to be
received hereunder, will be recognized by OCSD unless such assignment has had prior written
approval and consent of OCSD and the Surety.
SECTION — 21 RESOLUTION OF DISPUTES
OCSD and the CONTRACTOR shall comply with the provisions of California Public Contract
Code Section 20104 et. seq., regarding resolution of construction claims for any Claims which
arise between the CONTRACTOR and OCSD, as well as all applicable dispute and Claims
provisions as set forth in the General Conditions and as otherwise required by law.
SECTION — 22 SAFETY & HEALTH
CONTRACTOR shall comply with all applicable safety and health requirements mandated by
federal, state, city and/or public agency codes, permits, ordinances, regulations, and laws, as
well as these Contract Documents, including but not limited to the General Requirements,
Section entitled "Safety" and Exhibit B OCSD Safety Standards.
C-CA-072619 CONFORMED
CONTRACT NO. P1-128C
HEADQUARTERS COMPLEX SITE PREPARATION
Page 24 of 26
SECTION — 23 NOTICES
Any notice required or permitted under this Contract shall be sent by certified mail, return receipt
requested, at the address set forth below. Any party whose address changes shall notify the
other party in writing.
TO OCSD: Orange County Sanitation District
10844 Ellis Avenue
Fountain Valley, California 92708-7018
Attn: Clerk of the Board
Copy to: Orange County Sanitation District
10844 Ellis Avenue
Fountain Valley, California 92708-7018
Attn: Construction Manager
Bradley R. Hogin, Esquire
Woodruff, Spradlin & Smart
555 Anton Boulevard
Suite 1200
Costa Mesa, California 92626
TO CONTRACTOR: Resource Environmental, Inc.
6634 Schilling Avenue
Long Beach, CA 90805
Copy to: Cynthia Skiff, Vice-President
Resource Environmental, Inc.
6634 Schilling Avenue
Long Beach, CA 90805
CONFORMED C-CA-072619
CONTRACT NO. P1-128C
HEADQUARTERS COMPLEX SITE PREPARATION
Page 25 of 26
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Contract Agreement as the
date first hereinabove written.
CONTRACTOR: Resource Environmental, Inc.
6634 Schilling Avenue
Long Beach, CA 90805
By
Printed Name
Its
CONTRACTOR's State License No. 864417 (Expiration Date — 9/30/2021)
OCSD: Orange County Sanitation District
By
David John Shawver
Board Chairman
By
Kelly A. Lore
Clerk of the Board
By
Ruth Zintzun
Purchasing & Contracts Manager
C-CA-072619 CONFORMED
CONTRACT NO. P1-128C
HEADQUARTERS COMPLEX SITE PREPARATION
Page 26 of 26
EXHIBIT A
SCHEDULE OF PRICES
C-EXA-080414
TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXHIBIT A
SCHEDULE OF PRICES
EXA-1 BASIS OF COMPENSATION............................................................................. 1
EXA-2 PROGRESS PAYMENTS .................................................................................. 1
EXA-3 RETENTION AND ESCROW ACCOUNTS........................................................ 1
EXA-4 STOP PAYMENT NOTICE.................................................................................3
EXA-5 PAYMENT TO SUBCONTRACTORS................................................................3
EXA-6 PAYMENT OF TAXES .......................................................................................3
EXA-7 FINAL PAYMENT...............................................................................................4
EXA-8 DISCOVERY OF DEFICIENCIES BEFORE AND AFTER FINAL PAYMENT ...6
ATTACHMENT 1 - CERTIFICATION FOR REQUEST FOR PAYMENT.........................7
ATTACHMENT 2 - SCHEDULE OF PRICES...................................................................8
C-EXA-080414
EXHIBIT A
SCHEDULE OF PRICES
EXA-1 BASIS OF COMPENSATION
CONTRACTOR will be paid the Contract Price according to the Schedule of
Prices, and all other applicable terms and conditions of the Contract
Documents.
EXA-2 PROGRESS PAYMENTS
Progress payments will be made in accordance with all applicable terms and
conditions of the Contract Documents, including, but not limited to:
1. Contract Agreement— Section 11 — "Contract Price and Method of
Payment;"
2. General Conditions—"Payment— General";
3. General Conditions—"Payment—Applications for Payment";
4. General Conditions—"Payment— Mobilization Payment Requirements;"
5. General Conditions—"Payment— Itemized Breakdown of Contract Lump
Sum Prices";
6. General Conditions— "Contract Price Adjustments and Payments";
7. General Conditions— "Suspension of Payments";
8. General Conditions— "OCSD's Right to Withhold Certain Amounts and
Make Application Thereof'; and
9. General Conditions— "Final Payment."
EXA-3 RETENTION AND ESCROW ACCOUNTS
A. Retention:
OCSD shall retain a percentage of each progress payment to assure
satisfactory completion of the Work. The amount to be retained from each
progress payment shall be determined as provided in General Conditions—
"Retained Funds; Substitution of Securities". In all contracts between
CONTRACTOR and its Subcontractors and/or Suppliers, the retention may not
exceed the percentage specified in the Contract Documents.
CONFORMED C-EXA-080414
CONTRACT NO. P1-128C
HEADQUARTERS COMPLEX SITE PREPARATION
Page 1 of 8
B. Substitution of Securities:
CONTRACTOR may, at its sole expense, substitute securities as provided in
General Conditions—"Retained Funds; Substitution of Securities." Payment of
Escrow Agent:
In lieu of substitution of securities as provided above, the CONTRACTOR may
request and OCSD shall make payment of retention earned directly to the
escrow agent at the expense of the CONTRACTOR. At the expense of the
CONTRACTOR, the CONTRACTOR may direct the investment of the
payments into securities consistent with Government Code §16430 and the
CONTRACTOR shall receive the interest earned on the investments upon the
same terms provided for in this article for securities deposited by the
CONTRACTOR. Upon satisfactory completion of the Contract, the
CONTRACTOR shall receive from the escrow agent all securities, interest and
payments received by the escrow agent from OCSD, pursuant to the terms of
this article. The CONTRACTOR shall pay to each Subcontractor, not later than
twenty (20) calendar days after receipt of the payment, the respective amount
of interest earned, net of costs attributed to retention withheld from each
Subcontractor, on the amount of retention withheld to ensure the performance
of the Subcontractor. The escrow agreement used by the escrow agent
pursuant to this article shall be substantially similar to the form set forth in
§22300 of the California Public Contract Code.
C. Release of Retention:
Upon Final Acceptance of the Work, the CONTRACTOR shall submit an
invoice for release of retention in accordance with the terms of the Contract.
D. Additional Deductibles:
In addition to the retentions described above, OCSD may deduct from each
progress payment any or all of the following:
1. Liquidated Damages that have occurred as of the date of the application for
progress payment;
2. Deductions from previous progress payments already paid, due to OCSD's
discovery of deficiencies in the Work or non-compliance with the
Specifications or any other requirement of the Contract;
3. Sums expended by OCSD in performing any of the CONTRACTOR'S
obligations under the Contract that the CONTRACTOR has failed to
perform, and;
4. Other sums that OCSD is entitled to recover from the CONTRACTOR
under the terms of the Contract, including without limitation insurance
deductibles and assessments.
C-EXA-080414 CONFORMED
CONTRACT NO. P1-128C
HEADQUARTERS COMPLEX SITE PREPARATION
Page 2 of 8
The failure of OCSD to deduct any of the above-identified sums from a
progress payment shall not constitute a waiver of OCSD's right to such sums or
to deduct them from a later progress payment.
EXA-4 STOP PAYMENT NOTICE
In addition to other amounts properly withheld under this article or under other
provisions of the Contract, OCSD shall retain from progress payments
otherwise due the CONTRACTOR an amount equal to one hundred twenty-five
percent (125%) of the amount claimed under any stop payment notice under
Civil Code §9350 et. seq. or other lien filed against the CONTRACTOR for
labor, materials, supplies, equipment, and any other thing of value claimed to
have been furnished to and/or incorporated into the Work; or for any other
alleged contribution thereto. In addition to the foregoing and in accordance with
Civil Code §9358 OCSD may also satisfy its duty to withhold funds for stop
payment notices by refusing to release funds held in escrow pursuant to public
receipt of a release of stop payment notice executed by a stop payment notice
claimant, a stop payment notice release bond, an order of a court of competent
jurisdiction, or other evidence satisfactory to OCSD that the CONTRACTOR
has resolved such claim by settlement.
EXA-5 PAYMENT TO SUBCONTRACTORS
Requirements
1. The CONTRACTOR shall pay all Subcontractors for and on account of
Work performed by such Subcontractors, not later than seven (7) days after
receipt of each progress payment as required by the California Business
and Professions Code §7108.5. Such payments to Subcontractors shall be
based on the measurements and estimates made pursuant to article
progress payments provided herein.
2. Except as specifically provided by law, the CONTRACTOR shall pay all
Subcontractors any and all retention due and owing for and on account of
Work performed by such Subcontractors not later than seven (7) days after
CONTRACTOR'S receipt of said retention proceeds from OCSD as
required by the California Public Contract Code §7107.
EXA-6 PAYMENT OF TAXES
Unless otherwise specifically provided in this Contract, the Contract Price
includes full compensation to the CONTRACTOR for all taxes. The
CONTRACTOR shall pay all federal, state, and local taxes, and duties
applicable to and assessable against any Work, including but not limited to
retail sales and use, transportation, export, import, business, and special taxes.
The CONTRACTOR shall ascertain and pay the taxes when due. The
CONTRACTOR will maintain auditable records, subject to OCSD reviews,
confirming that tax payments are current at all times.
CONFORMED C-EXA-080414
CONTRACT NO. P1-128C
HEADQUARTERS COMPLEX SITE PREPARATION
Page 3 of 8
EXA-7 FINAL PAYMENT
After Final Acceptance of the Work, as more particularly set forth in the
General Conditions, "Final Acceptance and Final Completion", and after
Resolution of the Board authorizing final payment and satisfaction of the
requirements as more particularly set forth in General Conditions — "Final
Payment", a final payment will be made as follows:
1. Prior to Final Acceptance, the CONTRACTOR shall prepare and submit an
application for Final Payment to OCSD, including:
a. The proposed total amount due the CONTRACTOR, segregated by
items on the payment schedule, amendments, Change Orders, and
other bases for payment;
b. Deductions for prior progress payments;
c. Amounts retained;
d. A conditional waiver and release on final payment for each
Subcontractor (per Civil Code Section 8136);
e. A conditional waiver and release on final payment on behalf of the
CONTRACTOR (per Civil Code Section 8136);
f. List of Claims the CONTRACTOR intends to file at that time or a
statement that no Claims will be filed,
g. List of pending unsettled claims, stating claimed amounts, and copies of
any and all complaints and/or demands for arbitration received by the
CONTRACTOR; and
h. For each and every claim that resulted in litigation or arbitration which
the CONTRACTOR has settled, a conformed copy of the Request for
Dismissal with prejudice or other satisfactory evidence the arbitration is
resolved.
2. The application for Final Payment shall include complete and legally
effective releases or waivers of liens and stop payment notices satisfactory
to OCSD, arising out of or filed in connection with the Work. Prior progress
payments shall be subject to correction in OCSD's review of the application
for Final Payment. Claims filed with the application for Final Payment must
be otherwise timely under the Contract and applicable law.
3. Within a reasonable time, OCSD will review the CONTRACTOR'S
application for Final Payment. Any recommended changes or corrections
will then be forwarded to the CONTRACTOR. Within ten (10) calendar days
C-EXA-080414 CONFORMED
CONTRACT NO. P1-128C
HEADQUARTERS COMPLEX SITE PREPARATION
Page 4 of 8
after receipt of recommended changes from OCSD, the CONTRACTOR will
make the changes, or list Claims that will be filed as a result of the
changes, and shall submit the revised application for Final Payment. Upon
acceptance by OCSD, the revised application for Final Payment will
become the approved application for Final Payment.
4. If no Claims have been filed with the initial or any revised application for
Final Payment, and no Claims remain unsettled within thirty-five (35)
calendar days after Final Acceptance of the Work by OCSD, and
agreements are reached on all issues regarding the application for Final
Payment, OCSD, in exchange for an executed release, satisfactory in form
and substance to OCSD, will pay the entire sum found due on the approved
application for Final Payment, including the amount, if any, allowed on
settled Claims.
5. The release from the CONTRACTOR shall be from any and all Claims
arising under the Contract, except for Claims that with the concurrence of
OCSD are specifically reserved, and shall release and waive all unreserved
Claims against OCSD and its officers, directors, employees and authorized
representatives. The release shall be accompanied by a certification by the
CONTRACTOR that:
a. It has resolved all Subcontractors, Suppliers and other Claims that are
related to the settled Claims included in the Final Payment;
b. It has no reason to believe that any party has a valid claim against the
CONTRACTOR or OCSD which has not been communicated in writing
by the CONTRACTOR to OCSD as of the date of the certificate;
c. All warranties are in full force and effect, and;
d. The releases and the warranties shall survive Final Payment.
6. If any claims remain open, OCSD may make Final Payment subject to
resolution of those claims. OCSD may withhold from the Final Payment an
amount not to exceed one hundred fifty percent (150%) of the sum of the
amounts of the open claims, and one hundred twenty-five percent (125%)
of the amounts of open stop payment notices referred to in article entitled
stop payment notices herein.
7. The CONTRACTOR shall provide an unconditional waiver and release on
final payment from each Subcontractor and Supplier providing Work under
the Contract (per Civil Code Section 8138) and an unconditional waiver and
release on final payment on behalf of the CONTRACTOR (per Civil Code
Section 8138)within thirty (30) days of receipt of Final Payment.
CONFORMED C-EXA-080414
CONTRACT NO. P1-128C
HEADQUARTERS COMPLEX SITE PREPARATION
Page 5 of 8
EXA-8 DISCOVERY OF DEFICIENCIES BEFORE AND AFTER FINAL PAYMENT
Notwithstanding OCSD's acceptance of the application for Final Payment and
irrespective of whether it is before or after Final Payment has been made,
OCSD shall not be precluded from subsequently showing that:
1. The true and correct amount payable for the Work is different from that
previously accepted;
2. The previously-accepted Work did not in fact conform to the Contract
requirements, or;
3. A previous payment or portion thereof for Work was improperly made.
OCSD also shall not be stopped from demanding and recovering damages
from the CONTRACTOR, as appropriate, under any of the foregoing
circumstances as permitted under the Contract or applicable law.
C-EXA-080414 CONFORMED
CONTRACT NO. P1-128C
HEADQUARTERS COMPLEX SITE PREPARATION
Page 6 of 8
ATTACHMENT 1 — CERTIFICATION FOR REQUEST FOR PAYMENT
I hereby certify under penalty of perjury as follows:
That the claim for payment is in all respects true, correct; that the services mentioned
herein were actually rendered and/or supplies delivered to OCSD in accordance with the
Contract.
I understand that it is a violation of both the federal and California False Claims Acts to
knowingly present or cause to be presented to OCSD a false claim for payment or
approval.
A claim includes a demand or request for money. It is also a violation of the False
Claims Acts to knowingly make use of a false record or statement to get a false claim
paid. The term "knowingly" includes either actual knowledge of the information,
deliberate ignorance of the truth or falsity of the information, or reckless disregard for the
truth or falsity of the information. Proof of specific intent to defraud is not necessary
under the False Claims Acts. I understand that the penalties under the Federal False
Claims Act and State of California False Claims Act are non-exclusive, and are in
addition to any other remedies which OCSD may have either under contract or law.
I hereby further certify, to the best of my knowledge and belief, that:
1. The amounts requested are only for performance in accordance with the
Specifications, terms, and conditions of the Contract;
2. Payments to Subcontractors and Suppliers have been made from previous payments
received under the Contract, and timely payments will be made from the proceeds of
the payment covered by this certification;
3. This request for progress payments does not include any amounts which the prime
CONTRACTOR intends to withhold or retain from a Subcontractor or Supplier in
accordance with the terms and conditions of the subcontract; and
4. This certification is not to be construed as Final Acceptance of a Subcontractor's
performance.
Name
Title
Date
CONFORMED C-EXA-080414
CONTRACT NO. P1-128C
HEADQUARTERS COMPLEX SITE PREPARATION
Page 7 of 8
ATTACHMENT 2 — SCHEDULE OF PRICES
See next pages for Bid Submittal Forms (Resource Environmental, Inc.)
BF-14 SCHEDULE OF PRICES, Page 1 - 2
C-EXA-080414 CONFORMED
CONTRACT NO. P1-128C
HEADQUARTERS COMPLEX SITE PREPARATION
Page 8 of 8
Bid Submitted By: Resource Environmental, Inc.
(Name of Firm)
BF-14 SCHEDULE OF PRICES
INSTRUCTIONS
A. General
For Unit Prices, it is understood that the following quantities are approximate only and are
solely for the purpose of estimating the comparison of Bids, and that the actual value of Work
will be computed based upon the actual quantities in the completed Work,whether they be
more or less than those shown. CONTRACTOR's compensation for the Work under the
Contract Documents will be computed based upon the lump sum amount of the Contract at
time of award, plus any additional or deleted costs approved by OCSD via approved Change
Orders, pursuant to the Contract Documents.
Bidder shall separately price and accurately reflect costs associated with each line item,
leaving no blanks. Any and all modifications to the Bid must be initialed by an authorized
representative of the Bidder in accordance with the Instructions to Bidders, Preparation of Bid.
Bidders are reminded of Instruction to Bidders, Discrepancy in Bid Items,which, in summary,
provides that the total price for each item shall be based on the Unit Price listed for each item
multiplied by the quantity;and the correct Total Price for each item shall be totaled to
determine the Total Amount of Bid.
All applicable costs including overhead and profit shall be reflected in the respective unit costs
and the TOTAL AMOUNT OF BID. The Bid Price shall include all costs to complete the Work,
including profit, overhead, etc., unless otherwise specified in the Contract Documents. All
applicable sales taxes, state and/or federal, and any other special taxes, patent rights or
royalties shall be included in the prices quoted in this Bid.
B. Basis of Award
AWARD OF THE CONTRACT WILL BE MADE ON THE BASIS OF THE LOWEST
RESPONSIVE AND RESPONSIBLE BID.
Note 1: Base Bid. Includes all costs necessary to furnish all labor, materials, equipment and
services for the construction of the Project per the Contract Documents.
BF-14 SCHEDULE OF PRICES C-BF-053119
CONTRACT NO. P1-128C
HEADQUARTERS COMPLEX SITE PREPARATION
Page 1 of 2
Bid Submitted By: RL60ur« C yirtMYl�iH1' .1 =1'1G.
(Name of Firm)
EXHIBIT A
SCHEDULE OF PRICES
BASE BID ITEMS (Refer to Note 1 in the Instructions):
Item Description Unit of Measurement Extended Price
No.
1. Mobilization as described in Division 01, Section 01 15 50 and in conformance with the Lump Sum $100,000.00
Contract Documents for the lump sum price of...
2. Demolition Activities and All Other Contract Work: Furnish all labor, materials, and
equipment necessary for the completion of the Demolition Activities and all other Contract
Work, except for the Work specified in Bid Items 1, 3, and 4, as described in Division 01, Lump Sum $ k1Lkl15'000.00
Section 01 15 50 and in conformance with the Contract Documents for the lump sum price
of...
3. Demobilization as described in Division 01, Section 01 15 50 and in conformance with the Lump Sum $25,000.00
Contract Documents for a lump sum price of...
4. SWPPP Maintenance(ALLOWANCE) as described in Division 01, Section 01 15 50 and in Allowance $15,000.00
conformance with the Contract Documents for an allowance of...
TOTAL AMOUNT OF BID (BASIS OF AWARD) $ 1�55 5 4 c0O •bc)
BF-14 SCHEDULE OF PRICES C-BF-053119
CONTRACT NO. P1-128C
HEADQUARTERS COMPLEX SITE PREPARATION
Page 2 of 2
oJ�1V SAN17gTO9 Orange Count Sanitation District Administration Building
5� o, g � 10844 Ellis Avenue
2 9 Fountain Valley, CA 92708
OPERATIONS COMMITTEE (714)593 7433
9oTFCTN0 THE ENVQ����2
Agenda Report
File #: 2020-1033 Agenda Date: 6/3/2020 Agenda Item No: 6.
FROM: James D. Herberg, General Manager
Originator: Kathy Millea, Director of Engineering
SUBJECT:
HEADQUARTERS COMPLEX SITE PREPARATION, PROJECT NO. P1-128C
GENERAL MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION
RECOMMENDATION: Recommend to the Board of Directors to:
A. Approve a Professional Construction Services Agreement with HDR, Inc. to provide
construction support services for Headquarters Complex Site Preparation, Project No. P1-
128C, for a total amount not to exceed $178,000; and
B. Approve a contingency of $17,800 (10%).
BACKGROUND
The Orange County Sanitation District (Sanitation District) is replacing the existing Administration
Building and other buildings at Plant No. 1 with a new Headquarters Building north of Ellis Avenue
across from Plant No. 1.
RELEVANT STANDARDS
• Ensure the public's money is wisely spent
• Comply with California Government Code Section 4526 to engage the best qualified firm "on
the basis of demonstrated competence and qualifications" and negotiate fair and reasonable
fees"
PROBLEM
Existing buildings on the site north of Ellis Avenue need to be demolished for construction of the
Headquarters Complex. The main construction project will take longer to complete if these buildings
are not demolished in advance.
This project requires the design consultant to provide as-needed services during construction
including submittal review, responding to Contractor's requests for information, reviewing
construction change orders, participating in meetings, site visits, and preparing record drawings.
Orange County Sanitation District Page 1 of 3 Printed on 5/27/2020
powered by LegistarTM
File #: 2020-1033 Agenda Date: 6/3/2020 Agenda Item No: 6.
PROPOSED SOLUTION
Award a Professional Construction Services Agreement for Headquarters Complex Site Preparation,
Project No. P1-128C, with the design consultant HDR, Inc.
TIMING CONCERNS
Engineering support services will be required at the start of construction. Construction is anticipated
to start in July 2020.
RAMIFICATIONS OF NOT TAKING ACTION
The engineering support services needed to facilitate and review construction activities would not be
available by the Engineer of Record, which may negatively impact the contract execution.
PRIOR COMMITTEE/BOARD ACTIONS
June 2016 - Approved a Professional Design Services Agreement with HDR, Inc. to provide
engineering design services for the architectural and engineering design services for the
Headquarters Complex, Site and Security, and Entrance Realignment Program, Project No. P1-128,
for an amount not to exceed $11,785,709, and approved a contingency of $1,178,571 (10%).
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
HDR, Inc. has successfully furnished engineering services for the design of this project and their
support services during construction will provide continuity through the completion of the project.
Staff negotiated with HDR, Inc. for these support services in accordance with the Sanitation District's
adopted policies and procedures. A review of the proposed price was conducted using estimated
quantities of requests for information, submittals, meetings, site visits, change order review, and
design revisions, as well as the level of effort for preparing record drawings. Based on this review,
staff determined the negotiated fee to be fair and reasonable for these services.
CEQA
On January 23, 2018, the City of Fountain Valley certified the Program Environmental Impact Report
for the Fountain Valley Crossings Specific Plan (State Clearinghouse No. 2015101042) that
evaluated the total buildout of the Specific Plan area with a goal of revitalizing the existing light
industrial use.
Following that, the Sanitation District prepared an Initial Study/Addendum for the Administrative
Headquarters Building, Project No. P1-128, dated December 2019, to the City's Program
Environmental Impact Report. The addendum concluded that no further environmental review was
required. (Public Resources Code Section 21166; CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162 and 15164.)
A Notice of Determination will be filed with the Orange County Clerk-Recorder after the Sanitation
District Board approval of the construction contract for the Headquarters Complex Site Preparation,
Project No. P1-128C.
Orange County Sanitation District Page 2 of 3 Printed on 5/27/2020
powered by LegistarTM
File #: 2020-1033 Agenda Date: 6/3/2020 Agenda Item No: 6.
FINANCIAL CONSIDERATIONS
This request complies with authority levels of the Sanitation District's Purchasing Ordinance. This
item has been budgeted (FY 2019-20 Budget Update, Appendix A, Page A-8, Headquarters
Complex, Project No. P1-128) and the budget is sufficient for this action.
ATTACHMENT
The following attachment(s) may be viewed on-line at the OCSD website (www.ocsd.com) with the complete agenda
package:
• Professional Construction Services Agreement
TG:dm:gc
Orange County Sanitation District Page 3 of 3 Printed on 5/27/2020
powered by LegistarT"
PROFESSIONAL CONSTRUCTION SERVICES AGREEMENT
This PROFESSIONAL CONSTRUCTION SERVICES AGREEMENT (Agreement), is
made and entered into to be effective the 24t" day of June, 2020 by and between the ORANGE
COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT, hereinafter referred to as "SANITATION DISTRICT", and
HDR Engineering, Inc., hereinafter referred to as "CONSULTANT".
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, the SANITATION DISTRICT desires to engage a CONSULTANT to provide
Construction Support Services for Contract No. P1-128C, Headquarters Complex Site
Preparation; and
WHEREAS, CONSULTANT is qualified to provide the necessary services for
Construction Support Services in connection with these requirements; and
WHEREAS, the SANITATION DISTRICT has adopted procedures in accordance with
the SANITATION DISTRICT's Purchasing Ordinance Section 4.03(B) for the continuation of
services and has proceeded in accordance with said procedures to perform this work; and
WHEREAS, at its regular meeting on June 24, 2020 the Board of Directors, by Minute
Order, accepted the recommendation of the Operations Committee to approve this Agreement
between the SANITATION DISTRICT and CONSULTANT.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the promises and mutual benefits, which will
result to the parties in carrying out the terms of this Agreement, it is mutually agreed as follows:
1. SCOPE OF WORK
CONSULTANT agrees to furnish necessary professional and technical services to
accomplish those project elements outlined in the Scope of Work attached hereto as
"Attachment A", and by this reference made a part of this Agreement.
A. The CONSULTANT shall be responsible for the professional quality, technical
accuracy, completeness, and coordination of all design, drawings, specifications,
and other services furnished by the CONSULTANT under this Agreement,
including the work performed by its Subconsultants. Where approval by the
SANITATION DISTRICT is indicated, it is understood to be conceptual approval
only and does not relieve the CONSULTANT of responsibility for complying with
all laws, codes, industry standards and liability for damages caused by errors,
omissions, noncompliance with industry standards, and/or negligence on the part
of the CONSULTANT or its Subconsultants.
B. CONSULTANT is responsible for the quality of work prepared under this
Agreement and shall ensure that all work is performed to the standards of best
engineering practice for clarity, uniformity, and completeness.
PCSA CONTRACT NO. P1-128C
Revised 072619 HEADQUARTERS COMPLEX SITE PREPARATION
Page 1 of 19
C. In the event that work is not performed to the satisfaction of the SANITATION
DISTRICT and does not conform to the requirements of this Agreement or any
applicable industry standards, the CONSULTANT shall, without additional
compensation, promptly correct or revise any errors or deficiencies in its designs,
drawings, specifications, or other services within the timeframe specified by the
Project Engineer/Project Manager. The SANITATION DISTRICT may charge to
CONSULTANT all costs, expenses and damages associated with any such
corrections or revisions.
D. All CADD drawings, figures, and other work shall be produced by CONSULTANTS
and Subconsultants using the SANITATION DISTRICT standard software.
Conversion of CADD work from any other non-standard CADD format to the
SANITATION DISTRICT format shall not be acceptable in lieu of this requirement.
Electronic files shall be subject to an acceptance period of thirty (30) calendar
days during which the SANITATION DISTRICT shall perform appropriate
acceptance tests. CONSULTANT shall correct any discrepancies or errors
detected and reported within the acceptance period at no additional cost to the
SANITATION DISTRICT.
E. All professional services performed by the CONSULTANT, including but not
limited to all drafts, data, correspondence, proposals, reports, and estimates
compiled or composed by the CONSULTANT, pursuant to this Agreement, are
for the sole use of the SANITATION DISTRICT, its agents and employees.
Neither the documents nor their contents shall be released to any third party
without the prior written consent of the SANITATION DISTRICT. This provision
does not apply to information that (a) was publicly known, or otherwise known to
the CONSULTANT, at the time that it was disclosed to the CONSULTANT by the
SANITATION DISTRICT, (b) subsequently becomes publicly known to the
CONSULTANT other than through disclosure by the SANITATION DISTRICT.
2. COMPENSATION
Total compensation shall be paid to CONSULTANT for services in accordance with the
following provisions:
A. Total Compensation
Total compensation shall be in an amount not to exceed One Hundred Seventy-
eight Thousand Dollars ($178,000). Total compensation to CONSULTANT
including burdened labor (salaries plus benefits), overhead, profit, direct costs,
and Subconsultant(s) fees and costs shall not exceed the sum set forth in
Attachment "E" - Fee Proposal.
B. Labor
As a portion of the total compensation to be paid to CONSULTANT, the
SANITATION DISTRICT shall pay to CONSULTANT a sum equal to the
burdened salaries (salaries plus benefits) actually paid by CONSULTANT
charged on an hourly-rate basis to this project and paid to the personnel of
PCSA CONTRACT NO. P1-128C
Revised 072619 HEADQUARTERS COMPLEX SITE PREPARATION
Page 2 of 19
CONSULTANT. Upon request of the SANITATION DISTRICT, CONSULTANT
shall provide the SANITATION DISTRICT with certified payroll records of all
employees' work that is charged to this project.
C. Overhead
As a portion of the total compensation to be paid to CONSULTANT, the
SANITATION DISTRICT shall compensate CONSULTANT and Subconsultants
for overhead at the rate equal to the percentage of burdened labor as specified in
Attachment "E" - Fee Proposal.
D. Profit
Profit for CONSULTANT and Subconsultants shall be a percentage of consulting
services fees (Burdened Labor and Overhead). When the consulting or
subconsulting services amount is $250,000 or less, the maximum Profit shall be
10%. Between $250,000 and $2,500,000, the maximum Profit shall be limited by
a straight declining percentage between 10% and 5%. For consulting or
subconsulting services fees with a value greater than $2,500,000, the maximum
Profit shall be 5%. Addenda shall be governed by the same maximum Profit
percentage after adding consulting services fees.
As a portion of the total compensation to be paid to CONSULTANT and
Subconsultants, the SANITATION DISTRICT shall pay profit for all services
rendered by CONSULTANT and Subconsultants for this project according to
Attachment "E" - Fee Proposal.
E. Subconsultants
For any Subconsultant whose fees for services are greater than or equal to
$100,000 (excluding out-of-pocket costs), CONSULTANT shall pay to
Subconsultant total compensation in accordance with the Subconsultant amount
specified in Attachment "E" - Fee Proposal.
For any Subconsultant whose fees for services are less than $100,000,
CONSULTANT may pay to Subconsultant total compensation on an hourly-rate
basis and as specified in the Scope of Work. The SANITATION DISTRICT shall
pay to CONSULTANT the actual costs of Subconsultant fees and charges in an
amount not to exceed the sum set forth in Attachment "E" - Fee Proposal.
F. Direct Costs
The SANITATION DISTRICT shall pay to CONSULTANT and Subconsultants
the actual costs of permits and associated fees, travel, and licenses for an
amount not to exceed the sum set forth in Attachment "E" - Fee Proposal. The
SANITATION DISTRICT shall also pay to CONSULTANT actual costs for
equipment rentals, leases or purchases with prior approval of the SANITATION
DISTRICT. Upon request, CONSULTANT shall provide to the SANITATION
PCSA CONTRACT NO. P1-128C
Revised 072619 HEADQUARTERS COMPLEX SITE PREPARATION
Page 3 of 19
DISTRICT receipts and other documentary records to support CONSULTANT's
request for reimbursement of these amounts, see Attachment "D" —Allowable
Direct Costs. All incidental expenses shall be included in overhead pursuant to
Section 2 - COMPENSATION above.
G. Other Direct Costs
Other Direct Costs incurred by CONSULTANT and its Contractor due to
modifications in scope of work resulting from field investigations and field work
required by Contract. These items may include special equipment, test
equipment and tooling and other materials and services not previously identified.
Refer to attachment "D" Allowable Direct Costs for payment information.
H. Reimbursable Direct Costs
The SANITATION DISTRICT will reimburse the CONSULTANT for reasonable
travel and business expenses as described in this section and further described in
Attachment "D" - Allowable Direct Costs to this Agreement. The reimbursement of
the above-mentioned expenses will be based on an "accountable plan" as
considered by Internal Revenue Service (IRS). The plan includes a combination of
reimbursements based upon receipts and a "per diem" component approved by
IRS. The most recent schedule of the per diem rates utilized by the SANITATION
DISTRICT can be found on the U.S. General Service Administration website at
http://www.gsa.gov/portal/category/l 04711#.
The CONSULTANT shall be responsible for the most economical and practical means
of management of reimbursable costs inclusive but not limited to travel, lodging and
meals arrangements. The SANITATION DISTRICT shall apply the most economic
and practical method of reimbursement which may include reimbursements based
upon receipts and/or"per diem" as deemed the most practical.
CONSULTANT shall be responsible for returning to the SANITATION DISTRICT
any excess reimbursements after the reimbursement has been paid by the
SANITATION DISTRICT.
Travel and travel arrangements—Any travel involving airfare, overnight stays or
multiple day attendance must be approved by the SANITATION DISTRICT in
advance.
Local Travel is considered travel by the CONSULTANT within the SANITATION
DISTRICT general geographical area which includes Orange, Los Angeles,
Ventura, San Bernardino, Riverside, San Diego, Imperial, and Kern Counties.
Automobile mileage is reimbursable if CONSULTANT is required to utilize
personal vehicle for local travel.
Lodging — Overnight stays will not be approved by the SANITATION DISTRICT for
local travel. However, under certain circumstances overnight stay may be allowed
at the discretion of the SANITATION DISTRICT based on reasonableness of
PCSA CONTRACT NO. P1-128C
Revised 072619 HEADQUARTERS COMPLEX SITE PREPARATION
Page 4 of 19
meeting schedules and the amount of time required for travel by the
CONSULTANT. Such determination will be made on a case-by-case basis and at
the discretion of the SANITATION DISTRICT.
Travel Meals — Per-diem rates as approved by IRS shall be utilized for travel
meals reimbursements. Per diem rates shall be applied to meals that are
appropriate for travel times. Receipts are not required for the approved meals.
Additional details related to the reimbursement of the allowable direct costs are
provided in the Attachment "D" - Allowable Direct Costs of this Agreement.
I. Limitation of Costs
If, at any time, CONSULTANT estimates the cost of performing the services
described in CONSULTANT's Proposal will exceed the not-to-exceed amount of
the Agreement, including approved additional compensation, CONSULTANT
shall notify the SANITATION DISTRICT immediately, and in writing. This written
notice shall indicate the additional amount necessary to complete the services.
Any cost incurred in excess of the approved not-to-exceed amount, without the
express written consent of the SANITATION DISTRICT's authorized
representative shall be at CONSULTANT's own risk. This written notice shall be
provided separately from, and in addition to any notification requirements
contained in the CONSULTANT's invoice and monthly progress report. Failure to
notify the SANITATION DISTRICT that the services cannot be completed within
the authorized not-to-exceed amount is a material breach of this Agreement.
3. REALLOCATION OF TOTAL COMPENSATION
The SANITATION DISTRICT, by its Director of Engineering, shall have the right to
approve a reallocation of the incremental amounts constituting the total compensation,
provided that the total compensation is not increased.
4. PAYMENT
A. Monthly Invoice: CONSULTANT shall include in its monthly invoice, a detailed
breakdown of costs associated with the performance of any corrections or
revisions of the work for that invoicing period. CONSULTANT shall allocate costs
in the same manner as it would for payment requests as described in this Section
of the Agreement. CONSULTANT shall warrant and certify the accuracy of these
costs and understand that submitted costs are subject to Section 11 - AUDIT
PROVISIONS.
B. CONSULTANT may submit monthly or periodic statements requesting payment
for those items included in Section 2 - COMPENSATION hereof in the format as
required by the SANITATION DISTRICT. Such requests shall be based upon the
amount and value of the work and services performed by CONSULTANT under
this Agreement and shall be prepared by CONSULTANT and accompanied by
such supporting data, including a detailed breakdown of all costs incurred and
project element work performed during the period covered by the statement, as
may be required by the SANITATION DISTRICT.
PCSA CONTRACT NO. P1-128C
Revised 072619 HEADQUARTERS COMPLEX SITE PREPARATION
Page 5 of 19
Upon approval of such payment request by the SANITATION DISTRICT,
payment shall be made to CONSULTANT as soon as practicable of one hundred
percent (100%) of the invoiced amount on a per-project-element basis.
If the SANITATION DISTRICT determines that the work under this Agreement or
any specified project element hereunder, is incomplete and that the amount of
payment is in excess of:
i. The amount considered by the SANITATION DISTRICT's Director of
Engineering to be adequate for the protection of the SANITATION DISTRICT; or
ii. The percentage of the work accomplished for each project element.
He may, at his discretion, retain an amount equal to that which insures that the
total amount paid to that date does not exceed the percentage of the completed
work for each project element or the project in its entirety.
C. CONSULTANT may submit periodic payment requests for each 30-day period of
this Agreement for the profit as set forth in Section 2 - COMPENSATION above.
Said profit payment request shall be proportionate to the work actually
accomplished to date on a per-project-element basis. In the event the
SANITATION DISTRICT's Director of Engineering determines that no satisfactory
progress has been made since the prior payment, or in the event of a delay in the
work progress for any reason, the SANITATION DISTRICT shall have the right to
withhold any scheduled proportionate profit payment.
D. Upon satisfactory completion by CONSULTANT of the work called for under the
terms of this Agreement, and upon acceptance of such work by the SANITATION
DISTRICT, CONSULTANT will be paid the unpaid balance of any money due for
such work, including any retained percentages relating to this portion of the work.
E. Upon satisfactory completion of the work performed hereunder and prior to final
payment under this Agreement for such work, or prior settlement upon
termination of this Agreement, and as a condition precedent thereto,
CONSULTANT shall execute and deliver to the SANITATION DISTRICT a
release of all claims against the SANITATION DISTRICT arising under or by
virtue of this Agreement other than such claims, if any, as may be specifically
exempted by CONSULTANT from the operation of the release in stated amounts
to be set forth therein.
F. Pursuant to the California False Claims Act (Government Code Sections 12650-
12655), any CONSULTANT that knowingly submits a false claim to the
SANITATION DISTRICT for compensation under the terms of this Agreement
may be held liable for treble damages and up to a ten thousand dollars ($10,000)
civil penalty for each false claim submitted. This Section shall also be binding on
all Subconsultants.
PCSA CONTRACT NO. P1-128C
Revised 072619 HEADQUARTERS COMPLEX SITE PREPARATION
Page 6 of 19
A CONSULTANT or Subconsultant shall be deemed to have submitted a false
claim when the CONSULTANT or Subconsultant: a) knowingly presents or
causes to be presented to an officer or employee of the SANITATION DISTRICT
a false claim or request for payment or approval; b) knowingly makes, uses, or
causes to be made or used a false record or statement to get a false claim paid
or approved by the SANITATION DISTRICT; c) conspires to defraud the
SANITATION DISTRICT by getting a false claim allowed or paid by the
SANITATION DISTRICT; d) knowingly makes, uses, or causes to be made or
used a false record or statement to conceal, avoid, or decrease an obligation to
the SANITATION DISTRICT; or e) is a beneficiary of an inadvertent submission
of a false claim to the SANITATION DISTRICT, and fails to disclose the false
claim to the SANITATION DISTRICT within a reasonable time after discovery of
the false claim.
5. CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS (DIR) REGISTRATION
AND RECORD OF WAGES
A. To the extent CONSULTANT's employees and/or Subconsultants who will perform
Work during the design and preconstruction phases of a construction contract for
which Prevailing Wage Determinations have been issued by the DIR and as more
specifically defined under Labor Code Section 1720 et seq, CONSULTANT and
Subconsultants shall comply with the registration requirements of Labor Code
Section 1725.5. Pursuant to Labor Code Section 1771.4, the Work is subject to
compliance monitoring and enforcement by the DIR.
B. The CONSULTANT and Subconsultants shall maintain accurate payroll records
and shall comply with all the provisions of Labor Code Section 1776 and shall
submit payroll records to the Labor Commissioner pursuant to Labor Code
Section 1771.4(a) (3). Penalties for non-compliance with the requirements of
Section 1776 may be deducted from progress payments per Section 1776.
C. Pursuant to Labor Code Section 1776, the CONSULTANT and Subconsultants
shall furnish a copy of all certified payroll records to SANITATION DISTRICT
and/or general public upon request, provided the public request is made through
SANITATION DISTRICT, the Division of Apprenticeship Standards or the
Division of Labor Enforcement of the Department of Industrial Relations.
D. The CONSULTANT and Subconsultants shall comply with the job site notices
posting requirements established by the Labor Commissioner per Title 8,
California Code of Regulation Section 16461(e).
6. DOCUMENT OWNERSHIP — SUBSEQUENT CHANGES TO PLANS AND
SPECIFICATIONS
A. Ownership of Documents for the Professional Services performed.
All documents, including but not limited to, original plans, studies, sketches,
drawings, computer printouts and disk files, and specifications prepared in
connection with or related to the Scope of Work or Professional Services, shall
be the property of the SANITATION DISTRICT. The SANITATION DISTRICT's
ownership of these documents includes use of, reproduction or reuse of and all
PCSA CONTRACT NO. P1-128C
Revised 072619 HEADQUARTERS COMPLEX SITE PREPARATION
Page 7 of 19
incidental rights, whether or not the work for which they were prepared has been
performed. The SANITATION DISTRICT ownership entitlement arises upon
payment or any partial payment for work performed and includes ownership of
any and all work product completed prior to that payment. This Section shall
apply whether the CONSULTANT's Professional Services are terminated: a) by
the completion of the Agreement, or b) in accordance with other provisions of this
Agreement. Notwithstanding any other provision of this paragraph or Agreement,
the CONSULTANT shall have the right to make copies of all such plans, studies,
sketches, drawings, computer printouts and disk files, and specifications.
B. CONSULTANT shall not be responsible for damage caused by subsequent
changes to or uses of the plans or specifications, where the subsequent changes
or uses are not authorized or approved by CONSULTANT, provided that the
service rendered by CONSULTANT was not a proximate cause of the damage.
7. INSURANCE
A. General
i. Insurance shall be issued and underwritten by insurance companies
acceptable to the SANITATION DISTRICT.
ii. Insurers must have an "A-" Policyholder's Rating, or better, and Financial
Rating of at least Class Vill, or better, in accordance with the most current
A.M. Best's Guide Rating. However, the SANITATION DISTRICT will accept
State Compensation Insurance Fund, for the required policy of Worker's
Compensation Insurance subject to the SANITATION DISTRICT's option to
require a change in insurer in the event the State Fund financial rating is
decreased below "B". Further, the SANITATION DISTRICT will require
CONSULTANT to substitute any insurer whose rating drops below the levels
herein specified. Said substitution shall occur within twenty (20) days of
written notice to CONSULTANT, by the SANITATION DISTRICT or its agent.
iii. Coverage shall be in effect prior to the commencement of any work under
this Agreement.
B. General Liability
The CONSULTANT shall maintain during the life of this Agreement, including the
period of warranty, Commercial General Liability Insurance written on an
occurrence basis providing the following minimum limits of liability coverage: Two
Million Dollars ($2,000,000) per occurrence with Four Million Dollars ($4,000,000)
aggregate. Said insurance shall include coverage for the following hazards:
Premises-Operations, blanket contractual liability (for this Agreement), products
liability/completed operations (including any product manufactured or
assembled), broad form property damage, blanket contractual liability,
independent contractors liability, personal and advertising injury, mobile
equipment, owners and contractors protective liability, and cross liability and
severability of interest clauses. A statement on an insurance certificate will not be
accepted in lieu of the actual additional insured endorsement(s). If requested by
PCSA CONTRACT NO. P1-128C
Revised 072619 HEADQUARTERS COMPLEX SITE PREPARATION
Page 8 of 19
SANITATION DISTRICT and applicable, XCU coverage (Explosion, Collapse
and Underground) and Riggers/On Hook Liability must be included in the
General Liability policy and coverage must be reflected on the submitted
Certificate of Insurance.
C. Umbrella Excess Liability
The minimum limits of general liability and Automotive Liability Insurance
required, as set forth herein, shall be provided for through either a single policy of
primary insurance or a combination of policies of primary and umbrella excess
coverage. Umbrella excess liability coverage shall be issued with limits of liability
which, when combined with the primary insurance, will equal the minimum limits
for general liability and automotive liability.
D. AutomotiveNehicle liability Insurance
The CONSULTANT shall maintain a policy of Automotive Liability Insurance on a
comprehensive form covering all owned, non-owned, and hired automobiles,
trucks, and other vehicles providing the following minimum limits of liability
coverage: Combined single limit of One Million Dollars ($1,000,000) or
alternatively, Five Hundred Thousand Dollars ($500,000) per person for bodily
injury and Five Hundred Thousand Dollars ($500,000) per accident for property
damage. A statement on an insurance certificate will not be accepted in lieu of
the actual additional insured endorsement.
E. Drone Liability Insurance
If a drone will be used, drone liability insurance must be maintained by
CONSULTANT in the amount of one million dollars ($1,000,000) in form
acceptable to the SANITATION DISTRICT.
F. Worker's Compensation Insurance
The CONSULTANT shall provide such Workers' Compensation Insurance as
required by the Labor Code of the State of California in the amount of the
statutory limit, including Employer's Liability Insurance with a minimum limit of
One Million Dollars ($1,000,000) per occurrence. Such Worker's Compensation
Insurance shall be endorsed to provide for a waiver of subrogation in favor of the
SANITATION DISTRICT. A statement on an insurance certificate will not be
accepted in lieu of the actual endorsements unless the insurance carrier is State
of California Insurance Fund and the identifier"SCIF" and endorsement numbers
2570 and 2065 are referenced on the certificate of insurance. If an exposure to
Jones Act liability may exist, the insurance required herein shall include coverage
for Jones Act claims.
G. Errors and Omissions/Professional Liability
CONSULTANT shall maintain in full force and effect, throughout the term of this
Agreement, standard industry form professional negligence errors and omissions
insurance coverage in an amount of not less than Two Million Dollars
PCSA CONTRACT NO. P1-128C
Revised 072619 HEADQUARTERS COMPLEX SITE PREPARATION
Page 9 of 19
($2,000,000) with limits in accordance with the provisions of this Paragraph. If
the policy of insurance is written on a "claims made" basis, said policy shall be
continued in full force and effect at all times during the term of this Agreement,
and for a period of five (5) years from the date of the completion of the services
hereunder.
In the event of termination of said policy during this period, CONSULTANT shall
obtain continuing insurance coverage for the prior acts or omissions of
CONSULTANT during the course of performing services under the term of this
Agreement. Said coverage shall be evidenced by either a new policy evidencing
no gap in coverage or by separate extended "tail" coverage with the present or
new carrier.
In the event the present policy of insurance is written on an "occurrence" basis, said
policy shall be continued in full force and effect during the term of this Agreement or
until completion of the services provided for in this Agreement, whichever is later.
In the event of termination of said policy during this period, new coverage shall be
obtained for the required period to insure for the prior acts of CONSULTANT during
the course of performing services under the term of this Agreement.
CONSULTANT shall provide to the SANITATION DISTRICT a certificate of
insurance in a form acceptable to the SANITATION DISTRICT indicating the
deductible or self-retention amounts and the expiration date of said policy, and
shall provide renewal certificates not less than ten (10) days prior to the
expiration of each policy term.
H. Proof of Coverage
The CONSULTANT shall furnish the SANITATION DISTRICT with original
certificates and amendatory endorsements effecting coverage. Said policies and
endorsements shall conform to the requirements herein stated. All certificates
and endorsements are to be received and approved by the SANITATION
DISTRICT before work commences. The SANITATION DISTRICT reserves the
right to require complete, certified copies of all required insurance policies,
including endorsements, effecting the coverage required, at any time. The
following are approved forms that must be submitted as proof of coverage:
• Certificate of Insurance ACORD Form 25 (5/2010) or equivalent.
• Additional Insurance (ISO Form) CG2010 11 85 or
(General Liability)
The combination of (ISO Forms)
CG 2010 1001 and CG 2037 1001
All other Additional Insured endorsements must
be submitted for approval by the SANITATION
DISTRICT, and the SANITATION DISTRICT
may reject alternatives that provide different or
less coverage to the SANITATION DISTRICT.
PCSA CONTRACT NO. P1-128C
Revised 072619 HEADQUARTERS COMPLEX SITE PREPARATION
Page 10 of 19
• Additional Insured Submit endorsement provided by carrier for the
(Auto Liability) SANITATION DISTRICT approval.
• Waiver of Subrogation State Compensation Insurance Fund
Endorsement No. 2570 or equivalent.
• Cancellation Notice State Compensation Insurance Fund
Endorsement No. 2065 or equivalent.
I. Cancellation Notice
Each insurance policy required herein shall be endorsed to state that coverage
shall not be cancelled by either party, except after thirty (30) days' prior written
notice. The Cancellation Section of ACORD Form 25 (5/2010) shall state the
required thirty (30) days' written notification. The policy shall not terminate, nor
shall it be cancelled, nor the coverage reduced until thirty (30) days after written
notice is given to the SANITATION DISTRICT except for nonpayment of
premium, which shall require not less than ten (10) days written notice to the
SANITATION DISTRICT. Should there be changes in coverage or an increase in
deductible or SIR amounts, the CONSULTANT and its insurance broker/agent
shall send to the SANITATION DISTRICT a certified letter which includes a
description of the changes in coverage and/or any increase in deductible or SIR
amounts. The certified letter must be sent to the attention of Risk Management,
and shall be received by the SANITATION DISTRICT not less than thirty (30)
days prior to the effective date of the change(s) if the change would reduce
coverage or increase deductibles or SIR amounts or otherwise reduce or limit the
scope of insurance coverage provided to the SANITATION DISTRICT.
J. Primary Insurance
All liability policies shall contain a Primary and Non-Contributory Clause. Any
other insurance maintained by the SANITATION DISTRICT shall be excess and
not contributing with the insurance provided by CONSULTANT.
K. Separation of Insured
All liability policies shall contain a "Separation of Insureds" clause.
L. Non-Limiting (if applicable)
Nothing in this document shall be construed as limiting in any way, nor shall it
limit the indemnification provision contained in this Agreement, or the extent to
which CONSULTANT may be held responsible for payment of damages to
persons or property.
M. Deductibles and Self-Insured Retentions
Any deductible and/or self-insured retention must be declared to the SANITATION
DISTRICT on the Certificate of Insurance. All deductibles and/or self-insured
retentions require approval by the SANITATION DISTRICT. At the option of the
PCSA CONTRACT NO. P1-128C
Revised 072619 HEADQUARTERS COMPLEX SITE PREPARATION
Page 11 of 19
SANITATION DISTRICT, either: the insurer shall reduce or eliminate such
deductible or self-insured retention as respects the SANITATION DISTRICT; or
the CONSULTANT shall provide a financial guarantee satisfactory to the
SANITATION DISTRICT guaranteeing payment of losses and related
investigations, claim administration and defense expenses.
N. Defense Costs
Liability policies shall have a provision that defense costs for all insureds and
additional insureds are paid in addition to and do not deplete any policy limits.
O. Subconsultants
The CONSULTANT shall be responsible to establish insurance requirements for
any Subconsultant hired by the CONSULTANT. The insurance shall be in
amounts and types reasonably sufficient to deal with the risk of loss involving the
Subconsultant's operations and work.
P. Limits Are Minimums
If the CONSULTANT maintains higher limits than any minimums shown above,
then SANITATION DISTRICT requires and shall be entitled to coverage for the
higher limits maintained by CONSULTANT.
8. SCOPE CHANGES
In the event of a change in the Scope of Work, requested by SANITATION DISTRICT,
the parties hereto shall execute an amendment to this Agreement setting forth with
particularity all terms of the new Agreement, including but not limited to any additional
CONSULTANT's fees.
9. PROJECT TEAM AND SUBCONSULTANTS
CONSULTANT shall provide to SANITATION DISTRICT, prior to execution of this
Agreement, the names and full description of all Subconsultants and CONSULTANT's
project team members anticipated to be used on this project by CONSULTANT.
CONSULTANT shall include a description of the scope of work to be done by each
Subconsultant and each CONSULTANT's project team member. CONSULTANT shall
include the respective compensation amounts for CONSULTANT and each
Subconsultant on a per-project-element basis, broken down as indicated in Section 2 -
COMPENSATION.
There shall be no substitution of the listed Subconsultants and CONSULTANT's project
team members without prior written approval by the SANITATION DISTRICT.
PCSA CONTRACT NO. P1-128C
Revised 072619 HEADQUARTERS COMPLEX SITE PREPARATION
Page 12 of 19
10. ENGINEERING REGISTRATION
The CONSULTANT's personnel are comprised of registered engineers and a staff of
specialists and draftsmen in each department. The firm itself is not a registered
engineer but represents and agrees that wherever in the performance of this Agreement
requires the services of a registered engineer, such services hereunder will be
performed under the direct supervision of registered engineers.
11. AUDIT PROVISIONS
A. SANITATION DISTRICT retains the reasonable right to access, review, examine,
and audit, any and all books, records, documents and any other evidence of
procedures and practices that the SANITATION DISTRICT determines are
necessary to discover and verify that the CONSULTANT is in compliance with all
requirements under this Agreement. The CONSULTANT shall include the
SANITATION DISTRICT's right as described above, in any and all of their
subcontracts, and shall ensure that these rights are binding upon all Subconsultants.
B. SANITATION DISTRICT retains the right to examine CONSULTANT's books,
records, documents and any other evidence of procedures and practices that the
SANITATION DISTRICT determines are necessary to discover and verify all
direct and indirect costs, of whatever nature, which are claimed to have been
incurred, or anticipated to be incurred or to ensure CONSULTANT's compliance
with all requirements under this Agreement during the term of this Agreement
and for a period of three (3) years after its termination.
C. CONSULTANT shall maintain complete and accurate records in accordance with
generally accepted industry standard practices and the SANITATION
DISTRICT's policy. The CONSULTANT shall make available to the
SANITATION DISTRICT for review and audit, all project related accounting
records and documents, and any other financial data within 15 days after receipt
of notice from the SANITATION DISTRICT. Upon SANITATION DISTRICT's
request, the CONSULTANT shall submit exact duplicates of originals of all
requested records to the SANITATION DISTRICT. If an audit is performed,
CONSULTANT shall ensure that a qualified employee of the CONSULTANT will
be available to assist SANITATION DISTRICT's auditor in obtaining all project
related accounting records and documents, and any other financial data.
12. LEGAL RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN PARTIES
The legal relationship between the parties hereto is that of an independent contractor
and nothing herein shall be deemed to make CONSULTANT an employee of the
SANITATION DISTRICT.
13. NOTICES
All notices hereunder and communications regarding the interpretation of the terms of
this Agreement, or changes thereto, shall be effected by delivery of said notices in
person or by depositing said notices in the U.S. mail, registered or certified mail, return
receipt requested, postage prepaid.
PCSA CONTRACT NO. P1-128C
Revised 072619 HEADQUARTERS COMPLEX SITE PREPARATION
Page 13 of 19
Notices shall be mailed to the SANITATION DISTRICT at:
ORANGE COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT
10844 Ellis Avenue
Fountain Valley, CA 92708-7018
Attention: Digna Olmos, Principal Contracts Administrator
Copy: Tom Grant, Project Manager
Notices shall be mailed to CONSULTANT at:
HDR Engineering, Inc.
3230 El Camino Real, Suite 200
Irvine, CA 92602
Attention: Aaron Meilleur, Principal in Charge
Copy: Janelle Moyer, Project Manager
All communication regarding the Scope of Work, will be addressed to the Project Manager.
Direction from other SANITATION DISTRICT's staff must be approved in writing by the
SANITATION DISTRICT's Project Manager prior to action from the CONSULTANT.
14. TERMINATION
The SANITATION DISTRICT may terminate this Agreement at any time, without cause,
upon giving thirty (30) days written notice to CONSULTANT. In the event of such
termination, CONSULTANT shall be entitled to compensation for work performed on a
prorated basis through and including the effective date of termination.
CONSULTANT shall be permitted to terminate this Agreement upon thirty (30) days
written notice only if CONSULTANT is not compensated for billed amounts in
accordance with the provisions of this Agreement, when the same are due.
Notice of termination shall be mailed to the SANITATION DISTRICT and/or
CONSULTANT in accordance with Section 13 - NOTICES.
15. DOCUMENTS AND STUDY MATERIALS
The documents and study materials for this project shall become the property of the
SANITATION DISTRICT upon the termination or completion of the work. CONSULTANT
agrees to furnish to the SANITATION DISTRICT copies of all memoranda,
correspondence, computation, and study materials in its files pertaining to the work
described in this Agreement, which is requested in writing by the SANITATION DISTRICT.
16. COMPLIANCE
A. Labor
CONSULTANT certifies by the execution of this Agreement that it pays
employees not less than the minimum wage as defined by law, and that it does
not discriminate in its employment with regard to race, color, religion, sex or
PCSA CONTRACT NO. P1-128C
Revised 072619 HEADQUARTERS COMPLEX SITE PREPARATION
Page 14 of 19
national origin; that it is in compliance with all federal, state and local directives
and executive orders regarding non-discrimination in employment; and that it
agrees to demonstrate positively and aggressively the principle of equal
opportunity in employment.
B. Air Pollution
CONSULTANT and its subconsultants and subcontractors shall comply with all
applicable federal, state, and local air pollution control laws and regulations.
17. AGREEMENT EXECUTION AUTHORIZATION
Both the SANITATION DISTRICT and CONSULTANT do covenant that each individual
executing this document by and on behalf of each party is a person duly authorized to
execute agreements for that party.
18. DISPUTE RESOLUTION
In the event of a dispute arising between the parties regarding performance or
interpretation of this Agreement, the dispute shall be resolved by binding arbitration
under the auspices of the Judicial Arbitration and Mediation Service ("JAMS"), or similar
organization or entity conducting alternate dispute resolution services.
19. ATTORNEY'S FEES, COSTS AND NECESSARY DISBURSEMENTS
If any action at law or in equity or if any proceeding in the form of an Alternative Dispute
Resolution (ADR) is necessary to enforce or interpret the terms of this Agreement, the
prevailing party shall be entitled to reasonable attorney's fees, costs and necessary
disbursements in addition to any other relief to which it may be entitled.
20. PROGRESS REPORTS
Monthly progress reports shall be submitted for review by the tenth day of the following
month and must include as a minimum: 1) current activities, 2) future activities, 3)
potential items that are not included in the Scope of Work, 4) concerns and possible
delays, 5) percentage of completion, and 6) budget status.
21. WARRANTY
CONSULTANT shall perform its services in accordance with generally accepted industry
and professional standards. If, within the 12-month period following completion of its
services, the SANITATION DISTRICT informs CONSULTANT that any part of the
services fails to meet those standards, CONSULTANT shall, within the time prescribed
by the SANITATION DISTRICT, take all such actions as are necessary to correct or
complete the noted deficiency(ies).
PCSA CONTRACT NO. P1-128C
Revised 072619 HEADQUARTERS COMPLEX SITE PREPARATION
Page 15 of 19
22. INDEMNIFICATION
To the fullest extent permitted by law, CONSULTANT shall indemnify, defend (at
CONSULTANT's sole cost and expense and with legal counsel approved by the
SANITATION DISTRICT, which approval shall not be unreasonably withheld), protect
and hold harmless the SANITATION DISTRICT and all of SANITATION DISTRICT's
officers, directors, employees, consultants, and agents (collectively the "Indemnified
Parties"), from and against any and all claims, damages, liabilities, causes of action,
suits, arbitration awards, losses,judgments, fines, penalties, costs and expenses
including without limitation, attorneys' fees, disbursements and court costs, and all other
professional, expert or consultants fees and costs and the SANITATION DISTRICT's
general and administrative expenses (individually, a "Claim", or collectively, "Claims")
which may arise from or are in any manner related, directly or indirectly, to any work
performed, or any operations, activities, or services provided by CONSULTANT in
carrying out its obligations under this Agreement to the extent of the negligent,
recklessness and/or willful misconduct of CONSULTANT, its principals, officers, agents,
employees, CONSULTANT's suppliers, consultants, subconsultants, subcontractors,
and/or anyone employed directly or indirectly by any of them, regardless of any
contributing negligence or strict liability of an Indemnified Party. Notwithstanding the
foregoing, nothing herein shall be construed to require CONSULTANT to indemnify the
Indemnified Parties from any Claim arising from:
(A) the sole or active negligence or willful misconduct of the Indemnified Parties; or
(B) a natural disaster or other act of God, such as an earthquake; or
(C) the independent action of a third party who is neither one of the Indemnified Parties
nor the CONSULTANT, nor its principal, officer, agent, employee, nor
CONSULTANT's supplier, consultant, subconsultant, subcontractor, nor anyone
employed directly or indirectly by any of them.
Exceptions (A) through (B) above shall not apply, and CONSULTANT shall, to the fullest
extent permitted by law, indemnify the Indemnified Parties, from Claims arising from
more than one cause if any such cause taken alone would otherwise result in the
obligation to indemnify hereunder.
CONSULTANT's liability for indemnification hereunder is in addition to any liability
CONSULTANT may have to the SANITATION DISTRICT for a breach by
CONSULTANT of any of the provisions of this Agreement. Under no circumstances
shall the insurance requirements and limits set forth in this Agreement be construed to
limit CONSULTANT's indemnification obligation or other liability hereunder.
The terms of this Agreement are contractual and the result of negotiation between the
parties hereto. Accordingly, any rule of construction of contracts (including, without
limitation, California Civil Code Section 1654) that ambiguities are to be construed
against the drafting party, shall not be employed in the interpretation of this Agreement.
PCSA CONTRACT NO. P1-128C
Revised 072619 HEADQUARTERS COMPLEX SITE PREPARATION
Page 16 of 19
23. DUTY TO DEFEND
The duty to defend hereunder is wholly independent of and separate from the duty to
indemnify and such duty to defend shall exist regardless of any ultimate liability of
CONSULTANT and shall be consistent with Civil Code Section 2782.8. Such defense
obligation shall arise immediately upon presentation of a Claim by any person if, without
regard to the merit of the Claim, such Claim could potentially result in an obligation to
indemnify one or more Indemnified Parties, and upon written notice of such Claim being
provided to CONSULTANT. Payment to CONSULTANT by any Indemnified Party or the
payment or advance of defense costs by any Indemnified Party shall not be a condition
precedent to enforcing such Indemnified Party's rights to indemnification hereunder. In
the event a final judgment, arbitration, award, order, settlement, or other final resolution
expressly determines that the claim did not arise out of, pertain to, or relate to the
negligence, recklessness, or willful misconduct of the CONSULTANT, to any extent,
then the DISTRICT will reimburse CONSULTANT for the reasonable costs of defending
the Indemnified Parties against such claims.
CONSULTANT's indemnification obligation hereunder shall survive the expiration or
earlier termination of this Agreement until such time as action against the Indemnified
Parties for such matter indemnified hereunder is fully and finally barred by the applicable
statute of limitations.
24. CONSULTANT PERFORMANCE
The CONSULTANT's performance shall be evaluated by the SANITATION DISTRICT.
A copy of the evaluation shall be sent to the CONSULTANT for comment. The
evaluation, together with the comments, shall be retained by the SANITATION
DISTRICT and may be considered in future CONSULTANT selection processes.
25. COMPLIANCE WITH SANITATION DISTRICT POLICIES AND PROCEDURES
CONSULTANT shall comply with all SANITATION DISTRICT policies and procedures
including the OCSD Safety Standards, as applicable, all of which may be amended from
time to time.
26. CLOSEOUT
When the SANITATION DISTRICT determines that all Work authorized under the
Agreement is fully complete and that the SANITATION DISTRICT requires no further
work from CONSULTANT, or the Agreement is otherwise terminated or expires in
accordance with the terms of the Agreement, the SANITATION DISTRICT shall give the
Consultant written notice that the Agreement will be closed out. CONSULTANT shall
submit all outstanding billings, work submittals, deliverables, reports or similarly related
documents as required under the Agreement within thirty (30) days of receipt of notice of
Agreement closeout.
Upon receipt of CONSULTANT's submittals, the SANITATION DISTRICT shall
commence a closeout audit of the Agreement and will either:
PCSA CONTRACT NO. P1-128C
Revised 072619 HEADQUARTERS COMPLEX SITE PREPARATION
Page 17 of 19
i. Give the CONSULTANT a final Agreement Acceptance: or
ii. Advise the CONSULTANT in writing of any outstanding item or items which must be
furnished, completed, or corrected at the CONSULTANT's cost.
CONSULTANT shall be required to provide adequate resources to fully support any
administrative closeout efforts identified in this Agreement. Such support must be
provided within the timeframe requested by the SANITATION DISTRICT.
Notwithstanding the final Agreement Acceptance the CONSULTANT will not be relieved
of its obligations hereunder, nor will the CONSULTANT be relieved of its obligations to
complete any portions of the work, the non-completion of which were not disclosed to
the SANITATION DISTRICT (regardless of whether such nondisclosures were
fraudulent, negligent, or otherwise); and the CONSULTANT shall remain obligated under
all those provisions of the Agreement which expressly or by their nature extend beyond
and survive final Agreement Acceptance.
Any failure by the SANITATION DISTRICT to reject the work or to reject the
CONSULTANT's request for final Agreement Acceptance as set forth above shall not be
deemed to be acceptance of the work by the SANITATION DISTRICT for any purpose
nor imply acceptance of, or agreement with, the CONSULTANT's request for final
Agreement Acceptance.
27. ENTIRE AGREEMENT
This Agreement constitutes the entire understanding and agreement between the
Parties and supersedes all previous negotiations between them pertaining to the subject
matter thereof.
[Signatures Follow on Next Page]
PCSA CONTRACT NO. P1-128C
Revised 072619 HEADQUARTERS COMPLEX SITE PREPARATION
Page 18 of 19
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Agreement has been executed in the name of the SANITATION
DISTRICT, by its officers thereunto duly authorized, and CONSULTANT as of the day and year
first above written.
CONSULTANT: HDR ENGINEERING, INC.
By
Date
Printed Name & Title
ORANGE COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT
By
David John Shawver Date
Board Chairman
By
Kelly A. Lore Date
Clerk of the Board
By
Ruth Zintzun Date
Purchasing & Contracts Manager
Attachments: Attachment "A" — Scope of Work
Attachment "D" —Allowable Direct Costs
Attachment "E" — Fee Proposal Form
Attachment "I" — Cost Matrix & Summary
Attachment "L" — OCSD Safety Standards
DO:ms
PCSA CONTRACT NO. P1-128C
Revised 072619 HEADQUARTERS COMPLEX SITE PREPARATION
Page 19 of 19
ATTACHMENT "A"
SCOPE OF WORK
HEADQUARTERS COMPLEX SITE PREPARATION
CONTRACT NO. P1-128C
PROFESSIONAL CONSTRUCTION SERVICES AGREEMENT
REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL
ATTACHMENT A — SCOPE OF WORK
SCOPE OF WORK CONTRACT NO. P1-128C
Page 1 of 9
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. SUMMARY.............................................................................................................................3
II. PROJECT SCHEDULE..........................................................................................................3
III. PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION.............................................................................................3
PHASE 4—CONSTRUCTION AND INSTALLATION SERVICES........................................................3
Task4.1 — Project Management..................................................................................................4
Task 4.2 — Initial Project Meetings...............................................................................................4
Task4.3 —Submittal Reviews .....................................................................................................5
Task 4.4 — Request for Information (RFIs) ..................................................................................5
Task 4.5— Contract Document Modifications, Design Changes and Change Orders.................6
Task 4.6 — Construction Progress Meetings and Site Visits........................................................6
Task4.7 — Specialty Services .....................................................................................................7
PHASE 5—COMMISSIONING SERVICES—NOT USED...........................................................7
PHASE6—CLOSEOUT..............................................................................................................7
Task 6.1 — Final Inspection and Punch Lists...............................................................................7
Task6.2 — Record Drawings .......................................................................................................7
IV. STAFF ASSISTANCE............................................................................................................8
SCOPE OF WORK CONTRACT NO. P1-128C
Page 2 of 9
I. SUMMARY
Provide construction engineering support services for the construction and installation,
commissioning, and closeout phases of this project.
II. PROJECT SCHEDULE
The schedule for the services specified in this Scope of Work shall be provided per the
construction contract schedule, and the following schedule constraints:
Task(s) Period of Performance
Submittals As described under Task 4.3 titled "Submittal
Reviews"
Requests for Information As described under Task 4.4 titled "Requests
for Information (RFIs)"
Record Drawings Draft Record Drawings shall be submitted to
OCSD within 60 days of receipt from OCSD of
the approved Contractor's As-Built Drawings.
The final Record Drawings shall be submitted
within 21 days of receipt of OCSD comments
on the Draft Record Drawings.
III. PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION
All Orange County Sanitation District (OCSD) projects are divided into six phases.
CONSULTANT shall provide engineering support services for Phase 4 Construction and
Installation Services, Phase 5 Commissioning, and Phase 6 Closeout.
Phase 1 — Project Development— Completed
Phase 2 — Preliminary Design — Completed
Phase 3 — Final Design — Completed
Phase 4— Construction and Installation Services
Phase 5 — Commissioning Services — Not Used
Phase 6 — Closeout
PHASE 4— CONSTRUCTION AND INSTALLATION SERVICES
OCSD will administer and provide field inspection for construction contract. Construction and
support services shall be provided by the CONSULTANT as requested by OCSD.
CONSULTANT shall provide the key management personnel as described in their proposal on
this project. CONSULTANT shall not reassign the key project personnel without prior approval
of OCSD. OCSD may request reassignment of any of the CONSULTANT's or their
subconsultant's personnel, based on that individual's performance.
For all services, CONSULTANT shall refer to Engineering Design Guidelines, Chapter 01 for
detailed requirements.
Quality Assurance/Quality Control (QA/QC): CONSULTANT shall administer a program of
QA/QC procedures for producing quality work and shall effectively manage and control the
work. Specific procedures shall include but not be limited to planning, coordination, tracking,
checking, reviewing, and scheduling the work. CONSULTANT shall subject all work products
prepared by the CONSULTANT to the CONSULTANT's in-house QA/QC procedures prior to
SCOPE OF WORK CONTRACT NO. P1-128C
Page 3 of 9
submittal to Orange County Sanitation District (OCSD). QA/QC hours and costs shall be
incorporated into other tasks within this Scope of Work.
Task 4.1 — Project Management
CONSULTANT shall be responsible for detailed management of the project, including
managing its subconsultants, and shall keep OCSD apprised of the status of the project.
CONSULTANT shall not reassign the key personnel without prior acceptance by OCSD.
OCSD may request reassignment of any of the CONSULTANT's personnel, based on that
individual's poor performance.
CONSULTANT shall conduct monthly project management meetings with OCSD's Project
Manager. These meetings shall be attended by OCSD's Project Manager and
CONSULTANT's Project Manager at a mutually agreeable time. The purpose of the meetings
shall be to review the CONSULTANT Project Manager's progress report and the status of the
project scope, budget, and any issues which may affect completion of the project. Meetings
should be arranged so that the progress report can be submitted shortly prior to or at each
meeting.
CONSULTANT shall prepare and submit monthly invoices to OCSD no later than the second
Wednesday of the following month. The invoices shall document the hours and billing rate for
each person that works on the project for each task in the WBS. Overhead, profit, and any
direct costs shall also be shown for each task. As part of the summary section of the invoice,
CONSULTANT shall also include the following information:
• Budget
• Current billing period invoicing
• Previous billing period "total invoiced to date"
• Budget amount remaining
• Current billing period "total percent invoice to date"
• Current billing period "total percent completed to date"
The monthly progress report and project schedule shall be submitted with the project invoice as
part of the monthly request for payment.
CONSULTANT shall also provide the percent budget spent for each of OCSD's WBS cost
codes (i.e. by work package and phase). OCSD shall provide a list of cost codes by phase to
the CONSULTANT.
CONSULTANT shall also provide a summary of progress and expenditures to date.
OCSD will provide a sample invoice structure to CONSULTANT at the beginning of the project.
Task 4.2 — Initial Project Meetings
4.2.1 - Construction Hand-Off Workshop
CONSULTANT shall participate in a one-hour construction hand-off workshop. The purpose of
the workshop is for the CONSULTANT and OCSD design teams to transfer project-specific
knowledge to the OCSD construction management and inspection staff who will be managing
and monitoring construction. Topics that might be covered in this meeting include the
following:
• Overview of objective of the project
• Review of project elements
SCOPE OF WORK CONTRACT NO. P1-128C
Page 4 of 9
• Review of sequencing constraints
• Key issues to be addressed during construction
• Identification of risks and discussions of contingency plans
The workshop will be led by OCSD's Project Engineer and CONSULTANT's Project Discipline
Leads. CONSULTANT shall include its Project Manager, and Project Engineer, and one other
discipline lead.
4.2.2 - PMWeb Procedures Meeting and Submittal Review Procedures
CONSULTANT shall participate in a one-hour PMWeb procedure meeting and Submittal
Procedure Meeting. The purpose of this meeting is to review the roles and logistics for review
and approval of construction contract documents and Contractor Submittals. The
CONSULTANT's Project Manager and Project Engineer shall attend in person.
The project will utilize PMWeb as the web-based Project Control Management System
(PCMS). The PCMS shall be utilized for Project communication, tracking, and management.
PCMS utilization is to facilitate the electronic exchange of information, the automation of key
processes, and the overall management of the contract. When required by the OCSD, paper
documents shall also be provided. In the event of discrepancy between the electronic version
and paper documents, the electronic documents within PCMS shall govern.
4.2.3 - Preconstruction Conference
CONSULTANT shall participate in a one-hour Preconstruction Conference attended by OCSD
staff, CONSULTANT, the Contractor, subcontractors, and vendors. This meeting will be
scheduled and presided over by OCSD. In this meeting, OCSD's Resident Engineer will
describe CONSULTANT's role in the project as the Design Engineer and the services
CONSULTANT shall provide during construction. OCSD will prepare meeting minutes and
CONSULTANT shall review and comment on the minutes.
Task 4.3—Submittal Reviews
OCSD will receive and log-in all submittals from the Contractor. OCSD will forward copies of
selected shop drawing and submittals requiring CONSULTANT review. CONSULTANT shall
review the shop drawings and submittals for conformance with the requirements of the
Contract Documents and return the submittal review comments to OCSD within ten calendar
days after receipt of submittal. CONSULTANT shall return comments to OCSD allowing
enough time for OCSD to incorporate all comments into a combined review comment set that
OCSD will return to the Contractor. CONSULTANT shall accommodate occasional expedited
reviews for time sensitive submittals. Submittals shall include but not be limited to shop
drawings, vendor tests, certifications, and test reports. All submittals will be made available
electronically (PDF) through PMWeb.
See Section V - "Quantitative Assumptions" in this Scope of Work for the estimated number of
submittals.
Task 4.4— Request for Information (RFIs)
OCSD will log in and forward to CONSULTANT certain RFIs generated by the Contractor or
OCSD. CONSULTANT shall return written responses to OCSD as soon as possible or within
three calendar days of receipt of RFI, clarifying the requirements of the Contract Documents.
CONSULTANT shall generate necessary sketches, figures, and modifications to the drawings
SCOPE OF WORK CONTRACT NO. P1-128C
Page 5 of 9
for clarifications. When required to avoid schedule delay or additional construction-related
costs, CONSULTANT shall expedite the review of time sensitive RFIs.
If any changes to the Contract Drawings are required, the CONSULTANT shall prepare these
drawings and submit them as PDF files to OCSD. The CONSULTANT shall update all
AutoCAD drawings and specifications upon OCSD acceptance of any changes resulting from
RFIs and change orders.
CONSULTANT shall also allocate time for required efforts to analyze and provide input on
issues that may arise on a weekly basis.
See Section V- "Quantitative Assumptions" in this Scope of Work for the estimated number of
RFIs.
Task 4.5— Contract Document Modifications, Design Changes and Change
Orders
If the Contract Documents require modifications due to changed conditions, OCSD requested
changes, omissions, or design errors; CONSULTANT shall prepare preliminary Request for
Proposal (RFP) documents and forward them to OCSD, as needed. OCSD shall review the
RFP and request CONSULTANT to incorporate any changes. OCSD will issue the change
order documents in a formal Request for Proposal (RFP) or Field Change Order (FCO) to the
Contractor. CONSULTANT shall forward design calculations and other design backup
documents as necessary to OCSD.
Any Contract Document that requires changes shall be identified with date of change and
reference (RFI number, RFP number, FCO number, etc.) shown on the document. Changes
shown on drawings shall be clearly marked and "clouded" for accurate identification of the
scope of change by the Contractor and inspection staff. CONSULTANT shall maintain up-to-
date Contract Documents. When a change is required on a Contract Drawing that has
previously undergone a change, the updated drawing showing the previous change shall be
used as the base document to identify new changes.
CONSULTANT shall submit complete change documentation to OCSD for use in RFIs, RFPs,
and FCOs. This change documentation shall include plan drawings, schematics, details,
schedules, and specifications, as required.
CONSULTANT shall prepare cost estimates for the changes when requested by OCSD.
See Section V- "Quantitative Assumptions" in this Scope of Work for the estimated number of
hours.
Task 4.6— Construction Progress Meetings and Site Visits
CONSULTANT shall attend construction progress meetings, as requested by the OCSD's
Resident Engineer. The scope shall include time for meeting preparation, travel time, follow-
up, and review of meeting minutes. Progress meeting minutes will be prepared by OCSD.
CONSULTANT shall attend or be available by phone for an internal one-hour construction
weekly progress meetings.
CONSULTANT shall make field visits to assist in field problem resolution and design
clarification/verification to help resolve construction issues as they arise and as requested by
OCSD. CONSULTANT shall report the nature of the field site visits, the problem resolved, and
identify staff requesting the site visit in CONSULTANT's monthly project report. OCSD will
provide project inspection, except as required in other sections of this scope.
SCOPE OF WORK CONTRACT NO. P1-128C
Page 6 of 9
See Section V- "Quantitative Assumptions" in this Scope of Work for the estimated number of
hours.
Task 4.7—Specialty Services
4.7.1 Geotechnical Engineering Services
CONSULTANT shall provide field personnel to provide field geotechnical engineering services
as they may be needed during the course of the project.
See Section V- "Quantitative Assumptions" in this Scope of Work for the estimated number of
hours.
PHASE 5— COMMISSIONING SERVICES — NOT USED
PHASE 6— CLOSEOUT
Closeout tasks include completion of punch list work by the Contractor, final inspection,
completion of record drawings, and electronic data. CONSULTANT shall submit a final invoice
at the completion of the project.
Task 6.1 — Final Inspection and Punch Lists
CONSULTANT's construction coordinator shall attend the final inspection job walk with the
Contractor and OCSD staff. CONSULTANT shall make recommendations on the completion of
the work including, but not limited to, completion of punch list items, site cleanup, and SWPPP.
CONSULTANT shall assist OCSD in developing punch lists of items required to be completed
prior to final acceptance of the project by OCSD.
Task 6.2 — Record Drawings
When requested by OCSD, CONSULTANT shall attend preliminary as-built meetings with
OCSD and Contractor and shall inspect the Contractor's as-built drawings to verify that the
Contractor has included all relevant information from approved change orders and RFIs. As
part of the review process, CONSULTANT shall verify that the Contractor's as-built set
correctly reflects the information included in the approved shop drawings, RFIs, approved Field
Change Orders, plan clarifications, plan changes, and other deviations from the conformed
drawings, and that the information in the set is complete. CONSULTANT shall allow for four
(4) meetings/visits per year to review CONTRACTOR's as-built/markup drawings.
CONSULTANT shall transpose the As-Built set to a CAD ready set after each meeting.
After Final Completion of the project OCSD will transmit to CONSULTANT the Final Field
Markup Set of drawings. At that time, the CONSULTANT shall meet with OCSD's inspectors
and Resident Engineer to review the Contractor's Final Field Markup Set.
CONSULTANT shall prepare Draft Record Drawings based on the Final Field Markup Set for
all drawings in accordance with the requirements in the CAD Manual. The CONSULTANT
shall submit the Draft Record Drawings to the OCSD Resident Engineer. The Draft Record
Drawings will be reviewed for content and CAD compliance by OCSD staff. A comment log will
be returned to the CONSULTANT and, if any comments are generated, the CONSULTANT
shall revise the record drawings and resubmit to the RE for review of the changes and
acceptance of the record drawings.
SCOPE OF WORK CONTRACT NO. P1-128C
Page 7 of 9
When no additional comments are identified, CONSULTANT shall prepare the Final Record
Drawings and submit them along with the Contractor's field markup set to the Project Manager.
All record drawings shall contain a stamp indicating:
"Record Drawings
These record drawings have been prepared based on information provided by
others. The Engineer has not verified the accuracy of this information and shall not
be responsible for any errors or omissions which may be herein as a result."
The stamp shall optimally be placed in the bottom right-hand corner of the border and may be
included via x-ref. If importing the stamp via x-ref interferes with content in the bottom right
hand corner, the stamp may also be placed in other open space along the bottom of the
border. In addition, a note shall be placed over the engineer's seal stating that "This drawing
was originally approved for construction by [name of engineer] on [date] and sealed by [name
of engineer] a licensed professional engineer in the State of California No. [License number] ".
CONSULTANT shall submit an electronic copy of the record drawings to OCSD for review and
approval. The acceptance of the record drawings shall be deemed a condition for completion
of work.
Contractor-generated drawings described in the Design Guidelines and the shop drawings will
not be updated by CONSULTANT.
The format and quantities for delivery of the submittals shall be listed below:
Contents Draft Record Drawings Final Record Drawings
Hard Copy Sets None None
All related electronic files, Transmit Electronic Files to Transmit Electronic Files to
including CAD and compiled OCSD OCSD
PDFs
IV. STAFF ASSISTANCE
OCSD staff member or designee assigned to work with CONSULTANT on the construction
phase of this project is Tom Grant at (714) 593-7287, e-mail to: tgrant(cocsd.com
V. QUANTITATIVE ASSUMPTIONS
The assumptions listed in the following table below shall be the basis for the assumed level of
effort.
SCOPE OF WORK CONTRACT NO. P1-128C
Page 8 of 9
Task Description Assumption
4.1 Project Management 10 months duration from
construction NTP to construction
completion
4.3 Submittals 30 original submittals
15 resubmittals
10 2nd and later resubmittals
4.4 Requests for Information 40 RFIs
4.4 Weekly Assistance 80 hrs (2 hours/week during active
construction)
4.5 Contract Document 120 hrs
Modifications, Design
changes and Change Orders
4.6 On-Site Meetings & Site Visits 10 visits @ 2 hours each
(not including meetings 25 progress Meetings @ 1 hour
specified in Task 4.2) each
4.7.1 Geotechnical Engineering 80 hours
Support
SCOPE OF WORK CONTRACT NO. P1-128C
Page 9 of 9
ATTACHMENT " D"
ALLOWABLE DIRECT COSTS
ATTACHMENT D
ALLOWABLE DIRECT COSTS
LONG DISTANCE All long distance telephone charges incurred will be reimbursed as direct costs.
TELEPHONE CHARGES Telephone charges to area codes serving Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, and
San Bernardino Counties will not be reimbursed.
FACSIMILE TRANSMISSION Facsimile transmission charges will not be reimbursed, except the long distance toll
CHARGES charges, as described above.
In-house reproduction of records and documents will not be reimbursed by the
REPRODUCTION AND SANITATION DISTRICT. Use of an outside copy service for specialty items and
PRINTING CHARGES volume reproduction will be reimbursed at direct cost. Use of a professional
printing service will be reimbursed at actual cost.
OVERNIGHT MAIL DELIVER Use of Federal Express, Express Mail, UPS, or such similarly-related service, as
AND MESSENGER SERVICE well as a messenger service, will be reimbursed at direct cost only when necessary.
POSTAGE Incidental postage will not be reimbursed by the SANITATION DISTRICT.
FILM PROCESSING Film processing will be reimbursed at actual cost.
COMPUTER USAGE Computer use by Consultant and/or support staff will not be reimbursed.
MILEAGE Per mile reimbursement will be at the current rate set by the Internal Revenue
Service.
TEMPORARY STAFF The use of outside temporary support staff will be reimbursed at direct cost with
prior approval of the SANITATION DISTRICT.
OFFICE SUPPLIES The purchase of office supplies by Consultant will not be reimbursed.
The cost of lodging including room and all applicable taxes will be reimbursed on a
per diem basis as an allowable maximum as established by U.S. General Service
Administration. Lodging incidentals as defined by IRS are included in the per diem
rates. Lodging personal incidentals including movies, internet, laundry service, valet
LODGING service, room service, etc., will not be reimbursed. Receipts must be provided for
the actual incurred cost.
Cancellations of the hotel reservations by the Consultant must be per the hotel
policy. Late cancellations, early or late departure will not be reimbursed by the
SANITATION DISTRICT.
The cost of ground transportation for taxi, shuttle, train, etc., will be reimbursed.
GROUND TRANSPORTATION Limousine service will not be reimbursed. The Consultant shall use the most
economic and practical mode of transportation that is reasonably available.
PCSA CONTRACT NO. P1-128C
Revision 062316 HEADQUARTERS COMPLEX SITE PREPARATION
Page 1 of 2
Airline ticket cost including one bag will be reimbursed only if pre-approved by the
SANITATION DISTRICT. First class tickets will not be reimbursed unless
AIRFARE pre-approved by the SANITATION DISTRICT. Membership dues for corporate card
frequent user programs or the cost of airline club membership will not be
reimbursed.
Rental car cost for intermediate or standard model, mid-size car(Class "C")or the
AUTO RENTAL smaller car compatible with the specific need and rental car gas will be reimbursed.
Receipts must be provided to substantiate requested reimbursements.
Parking fees for hotel, airport, rail station, etc. will be reimbursed. Consultant shall
PARKING FEE use the most economic and practical parking location as reasonably available.
Excessive parking fees that are deemed unreasonable by the SANITATION
DISTRICT will not be reimbursed.
Travel meals will be reimbursed on a per diem basis as established by U.S.
General Service Administration. Per diem rates include gratuities (tips) and will not
TRAVEL MEALS be separately reimbursed by the SANITATION DISTRICT. Personal expenses such
as cost of alcoholic beverages will not be reimbursed. No receipts are required for
the approved meals. The daily total reimbursement for meals shall not exceed the
SANITATION DISTRICT per diem rate which is available upon request.
PER DIEM DAILY RATE FOR The SANITATION DISTRICT may utilize per diem daily rate that includes lodging,
LODGING AND MEALS meals and incidentals (M&IE)as established by IRS and U.S. General Service
administration for pre-approved travel when reasonable.
RENTAL EQUIPMENT Consultant will be reimbursed at actual cost, no mark-up.
OCSD may authorize other items that may be necessitated due to modifications in
scope of work resulting from field investigations and field work required by Contract.
These items may include special equipment, test equipment and tooling and other
OTHER DIRECT COSTS materials and services not previously identified. These items will be reimbursed
based on actual cost incurred. A one-time mark-up of 15%for additional equipment
rentals, materials and outside services required for field work and investigations
may be allowed, as applicable, if justified. No additional markup is allowed by
Consultant on other direct costs resulting from work performed by its Contractors.
Cost of miscellaneous personal items such as, but not limited to newspapers,
toiletries, shoeshine, tobacco products, pay TV, movies, valet services, health club
MISCELLANEOUS charges, in-room mini bars, clothing and footwear will not be reimbursed.
ATM/bank fees incurred by Consultant while traveling will not be reimbursed.
Costs for project team lunches will not be reimbursed unless pre-approved by the
SANITATION DISTRICT.
PCSA CONTRACT NO. P1-128C
Revision 062316 HEADQUARTERS COMPLEX SITE PREPARATION
Page 2 of 2
ATTACHMENT " E"
FEE PROPOSAL FORM
ATTACHMENT "E"
FEE PROPOSAL FORM
Submitted by: HDR Inc.
(Name of Firm)
Consultant Name: HDR Inc.
Raw Labor $ 58,169
Fringe Costs 49.85% $ 28,997
Burdened Labor
(Raw Labor+Fringe) $ 87,166
Overhead 81.56% $ 71,093
Subtotal
(Burdened labor+OH)
$ 158,259
Note: Round all values to nearest dollar. Profit 10.00%
(%of Subtotal) $ 15,826
Total Direct Costs,
not to exceed $ 3,915
TOTAL-"Consultant" Not to Exceed $ 178,000
Major Subconsultant A Name:
Raw Labor
Fringe Costs $
Burdened Labor $
(Raw Labor+Fringe)
Overhead $
Subtotal $ -
(Burdened labor+OH)
Note: Round all values to nearest dollar. Profit 10.00% $
(%of Subtotal)
Total Direct Costs,
not to exceed
TOTAL-Major Subconsultant A Not to Exceed $ -
PCSA CONTRACT NO. P1-128C
Revision 081613 HEADQUARTERS COMPLEX SITE PREPARATION
ATTACHMENT "E"
FEE PROPOSAL FORM
Submitted by: HDR Inc.
(Name of Firm)
Major Subconsultant B Name:
Raw Labor
Fringe Costs $
Burdened Labor $
(Raw Labor+Fringe)
Overhead $ -
Subtotal $
(Burdened labor+OH)
Note: Round all values to nearest dollar. Profit 10.00% $
(%of Subtotal)
Total Direct Costs,
not to exceed
TOTAL-Major Subconsultant B Not to Exceed $ -
Major Subconsultant C Name:
Raw Labor
Fringe Costs $
Burdened Labor $
(Raw Labor+Fringe)
Overhead $
Subtotal $
(Burdened labor+OH)
Note: Round all values to nearest dollar. Profit 10.00% $
(%of Subtotal)
Total Direct Costs,
not to exceed
TOTAL-Major Subconsultant C Not to Exceed $ -
PCSA CONTRACT NO. P1-128C
Revision 081613 HEADQUARTERS COMPLEX SITE PREPARATION
ATTACHMENT "E"
FEE PROPOSAL FORM
Submitted by: HDR Inc.
(Name of Firm)
Subconsultants Under$100,000
Subconsultant 1
Subconsultant 2
Subconsultant 3
Subconsultant 4
Subconsultant 5
TOTAL-Subconsultants Under$100,000 $ -
SUMMARY
Consultant $ 178,000
Major Subconsultant A $ -
Major Subconsultant B $
Major Subconsultant C $
Subconsultants Under$100,000 $ -
GRAND TOTAL-Not to Exceed I $ 178,000
PCSA CONTRACT NO. P1-128C
Revision 081613 HEADQUARTERS COMPLEX SITE PREPARATION
ATTACHMENT "I"
COST MATRIX & SUMMARY
HEADQUARTERS COMPLEX SITE PREPARATION,Contract No.P1-128C
PCSA
Attachment I-Cost Matrix and Summary
Labor hours
0
Project Element 1 y 4) 3 w t a
Headquarters Complex 10 Q 0 c a ° 2 G m
m a d i0 d c d C7 a t a`r `m .o a u Q C•o y
a d u y w y y d u d •rn d Q._ c d Burdened
2 ; O C C C O C d C O C C O y U c A C_
E .o •E•� •� •� •E •m c •� c •�u •E .o u E Burdened Labor& Allowable
Task Item a` a y w w w U) w U) w t9 w 0 ru m ¢ Q. m 0 a 2 a Total Hours Raw Labor Fringe Costs Labor Overhead Overhead Profit Total Subs Direct Costs Total Fees
Average Actual Salary 130.00 76.00 80.00 53.00 39.00 70.00 90.00 50.00 53.00 33.00 63.00 56.00 43.00 59.00 34.00 49.85% 81.56% 10.00%
Fully Burdened Hourly Rate(includes payroll costs,OH,and Profit)
PHASE 4-CONSTRUCTION AND INSTALLATION SERVICES
4.1 Project Management 16 106 32 16 170 12,568.00 6,265.15 18,833.15 15,360.32 34,193.46 3,419.35 0.00 1,250.00 38,862.81
4.2 Initial Project Meetings 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
4.2.1 Construction Handoff Meeting 1 1 2 156.00 77.77 233.77 190.66 424.431 42.44 0.00 0.00 466.87
4.2.2 PMWeb Procedures Meeting&Submittal Review Procedures 4 4 4 12 756.00 376.87 1,132.87 923.97 2,056.83 205.68 0.00 0.00 2,262.51
4.2.3 Preconstruction Conference 1 1 2 156.00 77.77 233.77 190.66 424.43 42.44 0.00 0.00 466.87
4.3 Submittal Reviews 16 50 32 12 42 8 48 22 230 14,108.00 7,032.84 21,140.84 17,242.47 38,383.31 3,838.33 0.00 560.00 42,781.64
4.4 Request for Information(RFIs) 20 50 36 12 40 16 8 26 28 14 250 16,244.00 8,097.63 24,341.63 19,853.04 44,194.67 4,419.47 0.00 700.00 49,314.14
4.5 Contract Document Mods,Design Changes and Change Orders 8 4 12 4 32 4 8 20 28 120 6,564.00 3,272.15 9,836.15 8,022.37 17,858.52 1,785.85 0.00 300.00 19,944.37
4.6 Construction Progress Meetings and Site Visits 9 36 45 3,564.00 1,776.65 5,340.65 4,355.84 9,696.49 969.65 0.00 200.00 10,866.14
Subtotal-Phase 4 Construction and Installation Services 60 225 122 28 114 16 0 0 20 86 50 20 42 32 16 831 54,116.00 26,976.83 81,092.83 66,139.31 147,232.13 14,723.21 0.00 3,010.00 164,965.35
PHASE6-CLOSEOUT
6.2 Record Drawings 1 2 2 10 10 57 81 4,053.00 2,020.42 6,073.42 4,953.48 11,026.90 1,102.69 0.00 905.00 13,034.55
Subtotal-Phase 6 Closeout 2 2 10 0 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 57 0 0 81 4,053.00 2,020.42 6,073.42 4,953.48 11,026.90 1,102.69 0.00 905.00 13,034.59
TOTAL-PHASES 2 AND 3 62 227 132 28 124 16 0 0 20 86 50 20 99 32 16 912 58,169.00 28,997.25 87,166.25 71,092.79 158,259.04 15,825.90 0.00 3,915.00 177,999.94
Rounded-Use for Attach E-Fee Proposal Form 58,169.00 28,997.00 87,166.00 71,093.00 158,259.00 15,826.00 0.00 3,915.00 178,000.00
Profit Calculations
Min Threshold 250,000 10%
Max Threshold 2,500,000 5%
Proposed Burdened Labor&Overhead 158,259.04 10.00%
ATTACHMENT " L"
OCSD SAFETY STANDARDS
oJ�jV SAN17gTO9 Orange Count Sanitation District Administration Building
5� o, g � 10844 Ellis Avenue
2 9 Fountain Valley, CA 92708
OPERATIONS COMMITTEE (714)593 7433
9oTFCTN0 THE ENVQ����2
Agenda Report
File #: 2020-1067 Agenda Date: 6/3/2020 Agenda Item No: 7.
FROM: James D. Herberg, General Manager
Originator: Lorenzo Tyner, Assistant General Manager
SUBJECT:
FY 2020-21 & FY 2021-22 BUDGET PRESENTATION
GENERAL MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION
RECOMMENDATION:
Information Item.
BACKGROUND
Staff will provide an overview of the FY 2020-21 and FY 2021-22 Budgets, including Orange County
Sanitation District Revenues, Capital Improvement and Operating expenditures, and long-term
liabilities. These budgets will be proposed for adoption at the June 24, 2020 Board meeting.
RELEVANT STANDARDS
• Produce Operating and Capital Improvement Program Budgets every two years, with an
annual update
ATTACHMENT
The following attachment(s) may be viewed on-line at the OCSD website (www.ocsd.com) with the complete agenda
package:
• FY 2020-21 & FY 2021-22 Budget Presentation
Orange County Sanitation District Page 1 of 1 Printed on 5/26/2020
powered by LegistarTM
a+bt
•a
Proposed
Summary
.. Fiscal Years 2020-21 and
'►�' � %' � - '� 2021 -22
tr44
t 4--7 —�'Oto !M
-w Presenter: Wally Ritchie, Controller
--- Operations Committee
June 3, 2020
M acr i
r
V W-G.
Budget Presentations
February — Budget Assumptions
March — Revenues
April — Expenditures
May — Capital Improvement Program
June — Budget Overview
i -
Proposed Budget
AI
loom P
ei
it
Summa
ry
Revenues FY 20-21 FY 21 -22
Fees and Charges $ 354 M (72%) $ 363 M (73%)
Property Taxes $ 100 M (21 %) $ 102 M (21 %)
Interest/Other $ 34 M ( 7%) $ 32 M ( 6%)
Total Revenues $ 488 M $ 497 M
Outlays FY 20-21 FY 21 -22
Net CIP $ 148 M (37%) $ 241 M (36%)
Operating $ 176 M (44%) $ 177 M (27%)
Debt Service $ 73 M (18%) $ 240 M (36%)
Other $ 3 M ( 1 %) $ 4 M ( 1 %)
Total Outlays $ 400 M $ 662 M
Ir
.-Nevenue Component
�v M� Ail
nd Charges ,
Property Taxes
Fees and Charges $102 M
$354 M 21 %
Interest / Other 72%
$34 M Fees and Charges Interest / Other
7%
$363 M $32 M
73% 6%
Property Taxes
$100 M
21 %
Proposed Revenues Proposed Revenues
FY 20-21 = $488 Million FY 21 -22 : = $497 Million
Revenue
pp
Proposed
FY 20-21 FY 21 -22
General User Fees $ 321 M $ 329 M
Permit User Fees $ 13 M $ 13 M
Capital Facilities Capacity Charges $ 20 M $ 21 M
Total Fees & Charges $ 354 M $ 363 M
Property Tax and Other
Revenue
Proposed
FY 20-21 FY 21 -22
Property Tax Revenue $ 100 M $ 102 M
Interest Revenue $ 13 M $ 12 M
Other $ 21 M $ 20 M
Total General Income $ 134 M $ 134 M
OCSD Outlay
Categories
- '' t
LM .3
Proposed
FY 20-21 FY 21 -22
Net Capital Improvement $ 148 M $ 241 M
Operating Expense $ 176 M $ 177 M
Debt Service $ 73 M $ 240 M
Other $ 3M $ 4M
Total Outlays $ 400 M $ 662 M
Proposed Operating
xpense
Summary
im-
Proposed
Description FY 20-21 FY 21 -22
Salaries and Wages $ 102. 1 M $ 107.3 M
Contractual Services 19.2 M 19.4 M
Repairs and Maintenance 28.4 M 24.2 M
Operating Mat'Is & Supplies 21 .5 M 21 .3 M
Utilities 8.4 M 8.4 M
Professional Services 5.7 M 5.8 M
Other 11 .8 M 11 .8 M
Cost Allocation (20.8 M) (21 .7 M)
Subtotal Net Operating Requirements 173.9 M 174.1 M
Self-Insurance 2.4 M 2.4 M
Total Net Operating Requirements $ 176.3 M $ 176.5 M
Salaries
and Benefits ,
7
Proposed
FY 20-21 FY 21 -22
SALARIES & BENEFITS $ 102 . 1 $ 107.3
Salaries & Wages $ 79.3 $ 83.3
Benefits $ 22 .8 $ 24 .0
* Salaries & Benefits make up less than 26% of the total budget
Contractual
Services ' =
Proposed
FY 20-21 FY 21 -22
CONTRACTUAL SERVICES $ 19.2 $ 19.4
Solids Removal $ 12.4 $ 12.4
Security Services $ 1 .6 $ 1 .6
Temporary Services $ 0.5 $ 0.5
Janitorial $ 0.5 $ 0.5
County Service Fee $ 0.5 $ 0.5
Repairs ♦ Maintenance
MEN" t
Proposed
FY 20-21 FY 21 -22
REPAIRS & MAINTENANCE $ 28.4 $ 24.2
Services $ 14.5 $ 13.0
Materials $ 9.4 $ 6.6
Service Agreements $ 4.5 $ 4.6
*Includes Bushard Diversion Structure repair, Sunflower Trunkline liner repairs,
centrifuge overhaul, primary & secondary clarifier repairs, digester cleaning,
various pump and drive repairs
Operating Materials and
Supplies
Proposed
FY 20-21 FY 21 -22
OPER. MATIS & SUPP $ 21 .5 $ 21 .3
Odor Control $ 6.9 $ 7.3
Chemical Coagulants $ 10.6 $ 10.6
Other Chemicals $ 0.6 $ 0.6
Other $ 3.4 $ 2.8
*Chemicals are 84% of Operating Materials and Supplies
Utilities
Proposed
FY 20-21 FY 21 -22
UTILITIES $ 8.4 $ 8.4
Power $ 6. 1 $ 6. 1
Water $ 1 . 1 $ 1 . 1
Natural Gas $ 0.7 $ 0.7
Telephone $ 0.5 $ 0.5
Departmental Operating
=.:
Summa BR-41
,ry
-,
FY 20-21 FY 21 -22 FY 20-21 FY 21 -22
Department Budget Budget FTEs FTEs
General Manager $ 4.3 M $ 4.4 M 18 18
Human Resources 6.6 M 7.0 M 26 26
Administrative Services 27.3 M 28. 1 M 101 101
Environmental Services 19.3 M 20.3 M 93 93
Engineering 5.6 M 5.6 M 117 117
Operations/Maintenance 110.8 M 108.7 M 284 284
Total $ 173.9 M $ 174.1 M 639
CIP
Authorization
- :
� l
Proposed
FY 20-21 FY 21 -22
Replacement/Rehabilitation $ 101 M $ 177 M
Additional Capacity $ 14 M $ 11 M
Strategic Initiatives $ 44 M $ 72 M
Regulatory $ 6 M $ 2 M
Total Authorized Outlay $ 165 M $ 262 M
Savings & Deferrals ($ 17 M) ($ 21 M)
Total Projected Net CIP $ 148 M $ 241 M
CIP
Program
�? k
10 - Year Net CIP
(in millions)
$400
$347
$350 $309
$294
$300 $257
� $323
$301 <96
$250
$200 $241 9
$148
$150
$100
$50
$0
FY 20-21 FY 21-22 FY 22-23 FY 23-24 FY 24-25 FY 25-26 FY 26-27 FY 27-28 FY 28-29 FY 29-30
* 10 — Year total for CIP - $4.7 Billion
Proposed
FY 20-21 FY 21 -22
Principle $ 31 M $ 202 M
Interest $ 42 M $ 38 M
Total Debt Service $ 73 M $ 240 M
* FY 21 -22 -
$ 72 M 2012A Refunding is callable
$ 102 M 2018A Refunding matures
$ 174 M callable or matures
Future Debt Service
Future Debt Service
(in millions)
$1,000
$900
$800
$700
$600
$500
$400
$300
$200
$100
$0
2020 2025 2030 2035 2040
C'm 0
(1)
rm
O
■ �
ORANGE COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT
COMMON ACRONYMS
ACWA Association of California LOS Level Of Service RFP Request For Proposal
Water Agencies
APWA American Public Works MGD Million Gallons Per Day RWQCB Regional Water Quality
Association Control Board
AQMD Air Quality Management MOU Memorandum of SARFPA Santa Ana River Flood
District Understanding Protection Agency
ASCE American Society of Civil NACWA National Association of Clean SARI Santa Ana River
Engineers Water Agencies Interceptor
BOD Biochemical Oxygen Demand NEPA National Environmental Policy SARWQCB Santa Ana Regional Water
Act Quality Control Board
California Air Resources Non-Governmental Santa Ana Watershed
CARB Board NGOs Organizations SAWPA Project Authority
CASA California Association of NPDES National Pollutant Discharge SCADA Supervisory Control And
Sanitation Agencies Elimination System Data Acquisition
National Water Research Southern California
CCTV Closed Circuit Television NWRI Institute SCAP Alliance of Publicly Owned
Treatment Works
CEQA California Environmental O& M Operations&Maintenance SCAQMD South Coast Air Quality
Quality Act Management District
Capital Improvement Orange County Council of SOCWA South Orange County
CIP Program OCCOG Governments Wastewater Authority
CRWQCB California Regional Water OCHCA Orange County Health Care SRF Clean Water State
Quality Control Board Agency Revolving Fund
CWA Clean Water Act OCSD Orange County Sanitation SSMP Sewer System
District Management Plan
CWEA California Water Environment OCWD Orange County Water District SSO Sanitary Sewer Overflow
Association
EIR Environmental Impact Report OOBS Ocean Outfall Booster Station SWRCB State Water Resources
Control Board
EMT Executive Management Team OSHA Occupational Safety and TDS Total Dissolved Solids
Health Administration
US Environmental Protection Professional
EPA Agency PCSA Consultant/Construction TMDL Total Maximum Daily Load
Services Agreement
FOG Fats, Oils, and Grease PDSA Professional Design Services TSS Total Suspended Solids
Agreement
Per-and Polyfluoroalkyl Waste Discharge
gpd gallons per day PFAS Substances WDR Requirements
GWRS Groundwater Replenishment PFOA Perfluorooctanoic Acid WEF Water Environment
System Federation
Water Environment&
ICS Incident Command System PFOS Perfluorooctanesulfonic Acid WERF Reuse Foundation
IERP Integrated Emergency POTW Publicly Owned Treatment WIFIA Water Infrastructure
Response Plan Works Finance and Innovation Act
Water Infrastructure
JPA Joint Powers Authority ppm parts per million WIIN Improvements for the
Nation Act
Local Agency Formation PSA Professional Services WRDA Water Resources
LAFCO Commission I Agreement I Development Act
ORANGE COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT
GLOSSARY OF TERMS
ACTIVATED SLUDGE PROCESS—A secondary biological wastewater treatment process where bacteria reproduce at a high
rate with the introduction of excess air or oxygen and consume dissolved nutrients in the wastewater.
BENTHOS —The community of organisms, such as sea stars, worms, and shrimp, which live on, in, or near the seabed, also
known as the benthic zone.
BIOCHEMICAL OXYGEN DEMAND (BOD) — The amount of oxygen used when organic matter undergoes decomposition by
microorganisms.Testing for BOD is done to assess the amount of organic matter in water.
BIOGAS—A gas that is produced by the action of anaerobic bacteria on organic waste matter in a digester tank that can be used
as a fuel.
BIOSOLIDS—Biosolids are nutrient rich organic and highly treated solid materials produced by the wastewater treatment process.
This high-quality product can be recycled as a soil amendment on farmland or further processed as an earth-like product for
commercial and home gardens to improve and maintain fertile soil and stimulate plant growth.
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (CIP) — Projects for repair, rehabilitation, and replacement of assets. Also includes
treatment improvements, additional capacity, and projects for the support facilities.
COLIFORM BACTERIA—A group of bacteria found in the intestines of humans and other animals, but also occasionally found
elsewhere, used as indicators of sewage pollution. E. coli are the most common bacteria in wastewater.
COLLECTIONS SYSTEM — In wastewater, it is the system of typically underground pipes that receive and convey sanitary
wastewater or storm water.
CERTIFICATE OF PARTICIPATION (COP)—A type of financing where an investor purchases a share of the lease revenues of
a program rather than the bond being secured by those revenues.
CONTAMINANTS OF POTENTIAL CONCERN (CPC) — Pharmaceuticals, hormones, and other organic wastewater
contaminants.
DILUTION TO THRESHOLD (D/T) —The dilution at which the majority of people detect the odor becomes the D/T for that air
sample.
GREENHOUSE GASES (GHG) — In the order of relative abundance water vapor, carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, and
ozone gases that are considered the cause of global warming ("greenhouse effect").
GROUNDWATER REPLENISHMENT SYSTEM(GWRS)—Ajoint water reclamation project that proactively responds to Southern
California's current and future water needs. This joint project between the Orange County Water District and OCSD provides 70
million gallons per day of drinking quality water to replenish the local groundwater supply.
LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS)—Goals to support environmental and public expectations for performance.
N-NITROSODIMETHYLAMINE (NDMA) — A N-nitrosamine suspected cancer-causing agent. It has been found in the GWRS
process and is eliminated using hydrogen peroxide with extra ultra-violet treatment.
NATIONAL BIOSOLIDS PARTNERSHIP(NBP)—An alliance of the NACWA and WEF,with advisory support from the EPA. NBP
is committed to developing and advancing environmentally sound and sustainable biosolids management practices that go beyond
regulatory compliance and promote public participation to enhance the credibility of local agency biosolids programs and improved
communications that lead to public acceptance.
PER-AND POLYFLUOROALKYL SUBSTANCES (PFAS) — A large group (over 6,000) of human-made compounds that are
resistant to heat,water,and oil and used for a variety of applications including firefighting foam,stain and water-resistant clothing,
cosmetics, and food packaging. Two PFAS compounds, perfluorooctanesulfonic acid (PFOS)and perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA)
have been the focus of increasing regulatory scrutiny in drinking water and may result in adverse health effects including
developmental effects to fetuses during pregnancy, cancer, liver damage, immunosuppression,thyroid effects, and other effects.
PERFLUOROOCTANOIC ACID (PFOA) — An ingredient for several industrial applications including carpeting, upholstery,
apparel, floor wax, textiles, sealants,food packaging, and cookware(Teflon).
PERFLUOROOCTANESULFONIC ACID (PFOS)—A key ingredient in Scotchgard, a fabric protector made by 3M, and used in
numerous stain repellents.
PLUME—A visible or measurable concentration of discharge from a stationary source or fixed facility.
PUBLICLY OWNED TREATMENT WORKS (POTW)—A municipal wastewater treatment plant.
SANTA ANA RIVER INTERCEPTOR (SARI) LINE—A regional brine line designed to convey 30 million gallons per day of non-
reclaimable wastewater from the upper Santa Ana River basin to the ocean for disposal,after treatment.
SANITARY SEWER—Separate sewer systems specifically for the carrying of domestic and industrial wastewater.
SOUTH COAST AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT DISTRICT (SCAQMD) — Regional regulatory agency that develops plans and
regulations designed to achieve public health standards by reducing emissions from business and industry.
SECONDARY TREATMENT — Biological wastewater treatment, particularly the activated sludge process, where bacteria and
other microorganisms consume dissolved nutrients in wastewater.
SLUDGE—Untreated solid material created by the treatment of wastewater.
TOTAL SUSPENDED SOLIDS(TSS)—The amount of solids floating and in suspension in wastewater.
ORANGE COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT
GLOSSARY OF TERMS
TRICKLING FILTER—A biological secondary treatment process in which bacteria and other microorganisms, growing as slime
on the surface of rocks or plastic media, consume nutrients in wastewater as it trickles over them.
URBAN RUNOFF—Water from city streets and domestic properties that carry pollutants into the storm drains, rivers, lakes, and
oceans.
WASTEWATER—Any water that enters the sanitary sewer.
WATERSHED—A land area from which water drains to a particular water body. OCSD's service area is in the Santa Ana River
Watershed.