The URL can be used to link to this page

Santiago Creek Greenbelt Implementation Plan - 1976THE SANTA ANA RIVERiSANTIAGO CREEK GREENBELT IIF1PLEf9ENTATION PLAN Preparation coordinated ty the Santa Ana River/Santiago Creek Greenbelt Commission 1976 SANTA ANA RIVER/SANTIAGO CREEK GREENBELT COMMISSION 625 North Ross Street, Suite B110 Santa Ana, California 92701 To: Distribution list Subject: Transmittal of the Santa Ana River/Santiago Creek Greenbelt Implementation Plan It is a pleasure to transmit copies of the Santa Ana River/ Santiago Creek Greenbelt Implementation Plan to the public officials of the participating jurisdictions, their respective staffs, and to the members of the Citizen Greenbelt Committees, and others, who devoted so much time towards its development, This Implementation Plan is a follow on action to the Santa Ana River/Santiago Creek Greenbelt Plan, which has been adopted by the Orange County Board of Supervisors as a Component of the Open Space Element of the County's General Plan. The Greenbelt Plan set a goal of establishing a greenbelt corridor along the river and the creek, and recommended the formation of a separate agency to coordinate the planning and actions .for achievement of that goal. This separate agency became a reality in the form of the Greenbelt Commission, This Implementation Plan has been developed by a multijurisdictional effort under the overall coordination of and in accordance with a procedure prescribed by the Greenbelt Co-unission, The procedure provided for each participating jurisdiction to prepare its own portion of this Plan within its respective area. Existing facilities have been included and consideration given to the plans of neighboring jurisdictions. Thus, this Plan is a coordinated composite of local plans for greenbelt areas and/or facilities which have been developed by the participating jurisdictions. The development and publication of this Greenbelt Implementation Plan does not mean that the goal of the Greenbelt Plan has been determined in specific and final detail. This Plan reports the considerable progress that has been accomplished to date, and then describes the plans that currently envision what remains to be done for goal achievement. It should be recognized that this Plan, like any plan concerned with an extensive, multijurisdictional project area, must be periodically updated, The updating action will keep this Plan current by the incorporation of changes based upon lessons learned through past experience and a subsequent determination of refined requirements for the future. The successful execution of this Plan is dependent, in part, upon the same critical factors which contributed to its development, i.e,, the centrally coordinated cooperative efforts of all concerned. It is therefore recommended that the governing bodies of all participating jurisdictions approve and adopt this Plan for execution. DISTRIBUTION LIST (Attached) Very truly yours, TAMES H. WELLS, Jr. Chairman DISTRIBUTION LIST County of Orange Board of Supervisors (13) Citizen Greenbelt Committee (3) Environmental Management Agency (10) General Services Agency (1) Orange County Water District Board of Directors (10) Staff & Administration (14) Citv of Anaheim City Council (6) Citizen Greenbelt Committee (5) Library (3) Parks Department (1) Parks & Recreation Commission (9) Planning Commission (8) Planning Department (1) City of Costa Mesa Citv Council (6) Leisure Services Department (1) Parks Commission (1) Planning Commission (6) Planning Department (1) City of Fountain Vallev City Council (6) Planning Commission (6) Planning Department (1) Recreation Center (1) Recreation & Parks Commission (8) City of Garden Grove City Council Library Planning Commission Planning Department Recreation & Arts Commission. Recreation Department City of Huntington Beach City Council Citizen Greenbelt Committee Library Parks Department Parks & Recreation Commission Planning Commission Planning Department Harbors, Beaches & Parks Commission %.5) Library (9) Planning Commission (6) Real Property Services (1) City of Newport Beach City Council (8) Library (4) Parks, Beaches & Recreation Department(9) Planning Commission (8) Planning Department (1) City of Orange City Council Citizen Greenbelt Committee Community Services Department Library Parks, Recreation & Cultural Arts Planning Commission Planning Department City of Santa Ana City Council Board of Recreation & Parks Library Parks Department Planning Commission City of Villa Park City Council City Staff Citizen Greenbelt Committee Planning Commission City of Yorba Linda City Council Citizen Greenbelt Committee Library Planning Commission Planning Department LOCAL SCHOOL DISTRICTS Coast Community College District North Orange County Community College District Orange County Department of Education Rancho Santiago Community College District Anaheim Union High School District Garden Grove Unified School District Huntington Beach City School District Huntington Beach Union High School District Newport -Mesa Unified School District Orange Unified School District Placentia Unified School District Santa Ana Unified School District Yorba Linda School District OTHER ORGANIZATIONS Associated Riding Clubs of Orange County Audubon Society, Sea & Sage Chapter Boy Scouts of America, Orange County Council California Regional Water Quality Control Board Camp Fire Girls Citizen Direction Finding Commission Coastal Zone Conservation Commission Environmental Coalition -of Orange County Girl Scout Council of Orange County Izaak Walton League, Orange County Chapters League of Women Voters of Orange County Local Agency Formation Commission Orange County Sanitation Districts Sierra Club, Orange County Group Southern California Association of Governments Tri County Conservation League Young Men's Christian Association Young Women's Christian Association Los Angeles District Corps of Engineers Office of Planning & Research, Office of the Governor State of California - The Resources Agency, Department of Parks and Recreation (6) (1) (1) (1) (1) (3) (1) (1) (1) (1) (1) (1) (1) (1) (1) (1) (1) (1) (1) (1) (1) Santa Ana River/Santiago Creek GREENBELT COMMISSION Dr. William I-. Kott Norma B. Gibbs , J. Peter Barrett Anaheim Huntington Beach Newport Beach Fred L. Barrera .Orange August F. Lenain Orange County Water District James H. Wells, Jr., Chairman .Villa Park Dale T. Chaput E. John Berger . Raymond L. Hetherington Jo Orth . . . STAFF Yorba Linda . Greenbelt Coordinator Planner Secretary 9/76 CONTENTS Letter of Transmittal Distribution List Greenbelt Commission and Staff I. Introduction 1 II. Background A. The Santa Ana River 3 1. General 3 a. Area of Origin 3 b. Basin 3 c. Route of Flow 3 d. Santiago Creek 3 2. Flood Menace 4 a. Types of Floods 4 (1) Intermediate Regional Flood 4 (2) Standard Project Flood 4 b. History 4 C. Record of Floods 6 d. Population and Growth in Flood Plain 6 e. Potential Flood Loss 6 f. Flood Protection 6 3. Natural Resource 8 a. General 8 b. Scenic Beauty 8 c. Source of Water 8 d. Santa Ana Regional Interceptor 9 e. Open Space 9 f. Recreation 9 g. Flora and Fauna 9 h. Mining 10 B. Planning for a Greenbelt 10 1. Citizens and Government Interest and Actions 10 a. Tri-County Conservation League 10 b. Government Actions 11 c. Committee of 100 11 2. Greenbelt Plan 12 a. General 12 b. Features of the Plan 12 (1) Purpose 12 (2) Greenbelt Corridor 12 (3) Concept 13 (4) Principal Proposals 13 i c. Implementation - 15 d. Distribution and Awards 15 e. Current Status 15 3. Joint Environmental Cost Benefit Study 15 III. Greenbelt Commission 17 A. Establishment 17 1. Greenbelt Plan Recommendations 17 2.. Board of Supervisors Actions 17 3. Organizational Considerations 18 B, Organizational Structure 18 1. General lg 2. Original Membership lg 3. Governing Body lg 4. Bylaws 1g 5. Citizen Greenbelt Committees 19 6. Staff 19 7. Current Membership 19 C. Purpose, Powers, and Functions 20 1. General 20 2. Powers 20 3. Functions 2p 4. Meetings 21 D. Administration and Logistics 21 1. General 21 2 Membership Assessments 21 3. Logistic Support 21 E. Accomplishments 24 1. General 24 2. Tri-County Master Plan for Santa Ana River 24 3. Special Studies 25 4. Recognition 25 IV. Greenbelt Implementation Plan 26 A. General 26 B. Procedure 26 1. Phase I 26 2. Phase II 27 3. Phase III 27 4. Phase IV 28 5. Definitions of Facilities and Other Areas 28 ii a. Trails (1) Bicycle (2) Equestrian b. Parks (1) State (2) Regional (3) Nature Preserve (4) Community (5) Neighborhood (6) Mini c. Trail Rest Stops d. Trail Park and Ride Facilities e. Water Areas f, Equestrian Centers g. Golf Courses h. Open Space i. Wilderness Area 6. Project Numbering System 7. Map Legends 8. Project Summary Sheets 9. Zoning Designations Greenbelt Corridor 1. General 2. Trails System a. Bicycle Trail b. Equestrian Trail c, Rest stops (1) Site Acquisition (2) Design (3) Development (4) Operation and Maintenance d. Trail Park and Rides e. Trail Linkages to Related Features Lower River Segment a. General (1) County of Orange (2) Huntington Beach (3) Newport Beach (4) Costa Mesa (5) Fountain Valley (6) Santa Ana b. Greenbelt Corridor and Impact c. Existing, Under Construction, Planned Projects (1) Water -Related Recreation Conservation Area (2) Equestrian Trail (3) Bicycle Trail (4) Neighborhood Park Area and h�Cl:J (5) Huntington State Beach Development 4 zs 28 28 28 28 28 28 29 29 29 29 29 29 29 29 29 30 30 30 30 34 34 34 34 34 35 35 36 36 36 36 36 37 37 37 37 38 38 38 39 39 39 39 42 42 42 43 ii 4 (6) Primary Highway & Bicycle Lane 43 (7) Bicycle Trail 43 (8) Santa Ana Rivermouth Open Space Development 43 (9) Primary Highway & Bicycle Lane 43 (10) Trail Landscaping 43 (11) Bicycle Trail 43 (12) Vista Park 44 (13) Pacific Coast Highway Bicycle Trail 44 (14) Fairview Regional Park 44 (15) Bicycle & Pedestrian Bridge Crossing at Rivermouth 44 (16) Bicycle Trail Loop 45 (17) Upgraded Bicycle Trail Linkages to River Trail 45 (18) Golf Course 45 (19) Trail Signing 45 (20) Bicycle Lane 45 (21) Lebard Park 45 (22) Suburbia Park 45 (23) Lebard School 45 (24) Bicycle Lane and Trail 45 (25) Arevalos School 45 (26) Golden Loop Bicycle Lane and Trail 46 (27) Bicycle Lane 46 (28) Equestrian Trail 46 (29) Camping Area 46 (30) Centennial Regional Park 46 (31) Stadium 46 (32) Equestrian Centers 46 (33) Polo Fields & All -Purpose Areas 47 (34) Equestrian Centers 47 (35) Parks and Recreation 47 (36) Campesino Park 47 (37) Bicycle Lane 47 (38) Bicycle Linkage 48 (39) Willowick Golf Course 48 (40) Parks 48 (41) Bicycle Lane 48 (42) Stables 48 (43) Accessory Commercial Uses 48 (44) Park 48 d. Summary of Projects' Current Status 48 e. Summary of Projects' Acquisition, Development and Operation Responsibility 49 f. Planned Project Priorities 49 g. Related Features 49 (1) Huntington Beach 49 (2) Newport Beach 49 (3) Costa Mesa 49 (4) Fountain Valley 49 Middle River Segment 53 a. General 53 (1) County of Orange 54 (2) Orange County Water District (OCWD) 54 iv (3) Anaheim 54 (4) Orange 54 (5) Santa Ana 54 b. Greenbelt Corridor and Impact Area 55 c. Existing, Under Construction, and Planned Projects 55 (1) Equestrian Trail 55 (2) Bicycle Trail 55 (3) Recreation 58 (4) Trail Rest Stop 58 (5) Rancho del Rio 58 (6) Bicycle Lane Crossing 58 (7) Old Santa Ana Regional Park - South 58 (8) Bicycle Lane 59 (9) Old Santa Ana Regional Park - North 59 (10) Equestrian Trail 59 (11) Bicycle Lane 59 (12) Recreation 59 (13) Warner Basin 59 (14) Riverdale Trail Rest Stop 60 (15) Riverdale Park 60 (16) Bicycle Lane 60 (17) Imperial Woods Equestrian Center 60 (18) Bicycle/Equestrian Trail River Crossing 60 (19) Edna Park Expansions 61 (20) Edna Park 61 (21) Forrest Paull Park 61 (22) Bicycle Trail 61 (23) River Trails Stables 61 (24) E1 Parque del Rio 61 (25) Water Conservation Basin/Park 62 (26) Park and Recreation Facility 162 (27) A1ona Park 62 (28) Bicycle Trail 62 (29) River View Golf Course 62 d. Summary of Projects' Current Status 63 e. Summary of Projects' Acquisition, Development and Operation Responsibility 63 f. Planned Project Priorities 63 g. Related Features 63 (1) Orange 63 (2) Anaheim/OCWD/County 63 5. Santa Ana Canyon Segment 65 a. General 65 (1) County of Orange 67 (2) Anaheim 67 (3) Yorba Linda 68 b. Greenbelt Corridor and Impact Area 68 c. Existing, Under Construction & Planned Projects 68 (1) Equestrian Trail 68 (2) Bicycle Trail/Lane 68 v (3) Bicycle Trail 69 (4) Yorba Regional Park 69 (5) Shorb Wells Easement 69 (6) Flood Plain, Open Space 72 (7) Equestrian Trail Crossing 72 (8) Featherly Regional Park 72 (9) Coal Canyon Stables 72 (10) Green River Golf Course 73 (11) Coal Canyon Regional Park 73 d. Summary of Projects' Current Status 73 e. Summary of Projects' Acquisition, Development and Operation Responsibility 73 f. Planned Project Priorities 74 g. Related Features 74 (1) Anaheim 74 (2) Yorba Linda 74 Santiago Creek Segment 77 a. General 77 (1) County of .Orange 78 (a) Lower Santiago Creek Regional Park 78 (b) Live Stream 78 (c) Sand and Gravel Pit Rehabilitation 79 (d) Specific Plan and Draft Environmental Impact Report for Lower Santiago Creek 80 (2) Orange 81 (3) Santa Ana 81 (4) Villa Park 81 b. Greenbelt Corridor and Impact Area 81 c. Existing, Under Construction, and Planned Projects 81 (1) Equestrian Trail 81 (2) Equestrian Trail 84 (3) Bicycle Trail 84 (4) Bicycle Trail 84 (5) Bristol Reservoir Rest Stop 85 (6) Jack Fisher Park 85 (7) Rest Stop - Park & Concession Stand 86 (8) Park 86 (9) Santiago Park and Day Camp 86 (10) Bicycle Lane/Trail 86 (11) Hart Park 86 (12) Hart Park Expansion 86 (13) Recreation Center 87 (14) Bicycle Lane 87 (15) Santiago Golf Course 87 (16) Yorba Park 87 (17) Open Space 87 (18) Equestrian Trail 87 (19) Bicycle Trail 87 (20) Trail Park & Ride 87 (21) Park 88 vi (22) Equestrian Trail (23) Equestrian Trail (24) Bicycle Lane (25) Trail Park and Ride - Vista (26) Trail Park and Ride - Campground (27) Bicycle Lane (28) Equestrian Trail (29) Bicycle Lane (30) Equestrian Trail (31) Equestrian Trail (32) Equestrian Trail (33) Equestrian Trail (34) Park and Ride (35) Bicycle Lane (36) Nature Preserve (37) Wilderness Area (38) Equestrian Trail (39) Equestrian Trail (40) Equestrian Trail (41) Bicycle Lane d. Summary of Projects' Current Status e. Summary of Projects' Acquisition, Development, and Operation Responsibility f. 1. General 2. Greenbelt Corridor and Impact Area 3. Parks 4. Open -Space 5. Bicycle and Equestrian Trails 6. Trail Rest Stops 7. Trail Park and Rides 8. Costs FIGURES No. 1. Santa Ana River Basin 2. kecord of Floods 3, Greenbelt Corridor 4, Membership Acreage in Project Area 5. Membership Assessments/Greenbelt Commission Expenditures 6. Project Numbering System 7. Map Legends 8. Phase I Map of Lower River Greenbelt Corridor and Impact Area 91 91 91 91 93 93 93 93 93 94 94 94 94 94 5 7 14 22 40 vii FIGURES No. 1. Santa Ana River Basin 2. kecord of Floods 3, Greenbelt Corridor 4, Membership Acreage in Project Area 5. Membership Assessments/Greenbelt Commission Expenditures 6. Project Numbering System 7. Map Legends 8. Phase I Map of Lower River Greenbelt Corridor and Impact Area 91 91 91 91 93 93 93 93 93 94 94 94 94 94 5 7 14 22 40 vii No. Page 9. Phase II Map of Lower River - Project Locations 41 10. Huntington Beach Related Features 50 11. Costa Mesa/Newport Beach Related Features 51 12. Fountain Valley Related Features 52 13. Phase I Map of Middle River Greenbelt Corridor and Impact Area 56 14. Phase II Map of Middle River - Project Locations 57 15. Orange Related Features 64 15A. Anaheim/OCWD/County Related Features 66 16. Phase I Map of Santa Ana Canyon Greenbelt Corridor and Impact Area 70 17. Phase II Map of Santa Ana Canyon Project Locations 71 18. Anaheim Related Features 75 19. Yorba Linda Related Features 76 20. Phase I Map of Santiago Creek Greenbelt Corridor and Impact Area 82 21. Phase II Map of Santiago Creek Project Locations 83 22. County/Orange/Villa Park Related Features 92 23. Statistical Summary 95-96 APPENDIXES 101 A. Joint Powers Agreement B. Greenbelt.Commission Organizational Structure C. Bylaws D. Greenbelt Corridor Accomplishments E. Zoning Designations F. Lower River Segment Summary Existing/Planned Projects Current Status G. Supplementary Information for Newport Beach Projects and Attachments "A" & "B" H. Lower River Segment Summary of Projects' Acquisition, Development, and Operation Responsibility I. Lower River Segment Planned Project Priorities J. Middle River Segment Summary of Existing/Planned Projects Current Status K. Middle River Segment Summary of Projects' Acquisition, Development, and Operation Responsibility L. Middle River Segment Planned Project Priorities M. Scenic Corridor Zone --Overlay N. Santa Ana Canyon Segment Summary Existing/Planned Projects 0. Santa Ana Canyon Segment Summary of Projects' Acquisition, Development, and Operation Responsibility P. Santa Ana Canyon Segment Planned Project Priorities Q. County Zoning Code R. Santiago Creek Segment Summary of Existing/Planned- Projects' Current Status S. Santiago Creek Segment Summary of Projects' Acquisition, Development and Operation Responsibility T. Santiago Creek Segment Planned Project Priorities U. Guideline for Development Densities viii V. Guideline for Integrating Development with the Greenbelt Corridor W. Guidelines for the Establishment of Standards for Cleanliness and Appearance of Commercial Equestrian Stables Located Within the Greenbelt Corridor X. Standards and Criteria for Bicycle Trails Y. Methods for Acquiring Use of Land for the Greenbelt Z. Sources of Funding for Greenbelt Projects ix I. INTRODUCTION The purpose of this publication is to describe the planning, the progress made to date, and the planning for future progress in the development of a greenbelt. Ordinarily, one thinks of a greenbelt as being the result o£ a natural occurrence, and not as something that must be developed. Because of its location, the climate, and the changes made in the natural environment by man's increasing presence, this greenbelt is an exception to the ordinary. By planning for the conservation, preservation and enhancement of the remaining natural features and resources, this greenbelt is being developed as a project. The location of this greenbelt project is in Orange County, California, along the Santa Ana River and Lower Santiago Creek. The climate in this part of Southern California is semiarid and except during the winter months, when there is usually only moderate rainfall, the river and the creek are normally dry. The mild climate and the proximity of the ocean, mountains, and deserts have contributed to Orange County having, during the past twenty years, one of the highest population growth rates in the nation. Much of the residential, commercial and industrial development in support of this population growth has been constructed in the flood plains of the river and the creek. Historical and modern records of events tell us that many times "unusually" heavy rains have caused the river and the creek to rage and overflow their normal channels, therefore, there is justifiable concern for the protection of lives and property. This need for protection has resulted in the construction of various forms of flood control measures which often eliminate or severely alter the natural features of the area that are essential to the existence of a greenbelt. -1- This gradual elimination of the natural beauty of the river and the creek became a matter of increasing concern to many citizens, who then expressed their concern to their respective elected officials at the city and county levels of government. This citizen action resulted in the preparation of a plan, in 1971, for the purpose of maximizing the recreation and open space potential of the greenbelt corridor along the river and the creek. Then in 1973, a multijurisdictional, separate public agency was established to coordinate the implementation of the plan. Considerable progress has been made to date, Included in this IMPLEMENTATION PLAN are descriptions of the many greenbelt projects that have been completed, or, are under construction. Also included, are the coordinated plans which have been jointly prepared by the many jurisdictions along the river and the creek for the purpose of making additional progress in the continued development of this greenbelt. Effective execution of this IMPLEMENTATION PLAN will require periodic updating and refinement to ensure that it includes opportunities for improvements and/or othercurrently unforeseen changes. I. BACKGROUND A. The Santa Ana River 1. General a. Area of Origin. Near the eastern end of the San Bernardino Mountain Range, San Gorgonio Mountain rises to a height of 11,485 feet. At about the 8,800 foot level, the melting snow from this towering peak and the winter rains converge in the vicinity of Slushy Meadows, above Barton Flats, and form the beginning of the Santa Ana River. The river received its name from the Spanish explorers along the coastal plain who initially believed that it originated in the nearby Santa Ana Mountains. b. Basin. The Santa Ana is the largest river system in Southern California. Its basin is approximately 3,200 square miles in area and is formed by the San Gabriel, San Bernardino, San Jacinto, and Santa Ana Mountains. The upper basin has approximately 1,100 square miles of -mountains and hills, and includes the towering peaks of San Antonio (10,080 feet), San Gorgonio, San Jacinto (10,805 feet)., and Santiago (5,680 feet). The lower basin is formed by the Santa Ana Mountains and Chino Hills dropping sharply down into the valley and coastal plain in Orange County. FIGURE 1. c. Route of Flow. From its area of origin, the river flows down the mountain forming its own beautiful natural course as it begins its 80 miles plus journey to the Pacific Ocean. Near the base of the mountain its course changes to wide and rocky, sandy and narrow, and wide and shallow. Between the cities of San Bernardino and Riverside, the river's course is controlled by levees to protect residential, industrial and other developments. From La Loma Hills to Mount Rubidoux, levees have been constructed to protect the densely populated Riverside area. Downstream of Mount Roubidoux, the river passes through the flat agricultural lands of the middle Santa Ana Valley to the Prado Dam, which was constructed in 1941, following the flood of 1938. Below Prado Dam the river enters Orange County, via the Santa Ana Canyon, and again follows a natural meandering course for approximately 8 miles, From Imperial Highway to the ocean, a distance of about 20 miles, the river flows initially through a series of water spreading basins and then in a south -south- westerly direction through flood control channels. d. Santiago Creek. Along its route to the ocean, there are numerous tributary streams that £low into the river during the rainy seasons from the surrounding mountains and hills. Santiago Creek has its headwaters in the Santa Ana -3- Mountains. It initially flows northwestward through Santiago Canyon and then southwestward through the cities of Orange and Santa Ana into the Santa Ana River, In 1963, Villa Park Dam was constructed on the creek at a point approximately 9 miles upstream from the river. This reach of the creek is known as the Lower Santiago Creek and is a major segment of this greenbelt project. 2. Flood Menace a. Types of Floods. The U.S. Corps of Engineers has defined'a flood as "an overflow of lands not normally covered by water and that are used or usable by man." Floods have two essential characteristics: the inundation of land is temporary; and the land is adjacent to and inundated by overflow from a river, a stream, or other watercourse, an ocean, or a lake or other body of standing water. Three types of floods have been defined by the Corps of Engineers as follows: (1) Intermediate Regional Flood - A flood having an average frequency of occurrence of once in 100 years, although the flood may occur in any year or more than once in any one year. (2) Standard Project Flood - The flood that may be expected from the most severe combination of meteorologic and hydrologic conditions that is considered reasonably characteristic of the geographic area in which the drainage basin is located, excluding extremely rare combinations. Peak discharges for these floods are generally about 40 to 60 percent of the probably maximum floods for the same basin. As used by the Corps of Engineers, standard project floods are intended as practicable expressions of the degree of protection that should be sought in the design of flood control works, the failure of which may be disastrous. b. History. The semiarid climate of this area, and the normally dry riverbeds, may easily mislead those who have not seen or otherwise become aware of the ability of the Santa Ana River, and its tributaries, to rage and flood beyond their natural and man-made channels. Evidence of these floods has been found in the records of missions and other sources. The river's course at one time entered Anaheim Bay, and then changed to Newport Bay where the sand deposits formed the Newport/Balboa Peninsula. Perhaps the greatest flood in the area occurred in 1861-62, when much of Orange County became an inland sea. Following a drought that began in 1856, the heavy rains began on Christmas Eve, 1861, and continued until 22 January 1862. There are estimates that the water depth in the Santa Ana Canyon reached approximately -4- i Nei <�IN 3QIN lN � r IN len oIn IN f�; (`C< < �,<<<C�Y, C; . 3� le Ile IN Vw le le �rNe IN Nee Ile I � C< < ( / �0�� ole re s9 C I, e14 le a Mew in r<< < t in < C < m w sa C f\�( 5 y'n Ile -33' O (C/y�, -� \� z Mom✓ \..in C, y Nee- ile elm h % /j 3 / 5 h ` \ 6 C Ni firle lN, IS ek Will )Np lee �Nee amNee pi Vr ON IN NN IN VNr IN :,,: <t U -I re N(<< r VeN le r _L eelV.�IN le zo % P= F - - � z lee Ih IN ° if¢� o el' alleelleelli -5- FIGURE 1 25 feet, and portions of the coastal plain were under 4 feet of water. C. Record of Floods. The dates and magnitude of floods occurring in the Santa Ana River Basin, since the year 1850, are depicted in FIGURE 2. The magnitude of a flood's peak discharge is recorded on the graph in cubic feet per second (CFS). d. Population and Growth in Flood Plain. Since the early 1950's, the population and development growth rate in the Santa Ana River flood plain has been one of the fastest in the nation. Most of the growth occurring in Orange County, before the late 1960's, was centered in the flood plain. The population in the area affected by the potential of a flood has grown from about 198,000 in 1950 to over 1,300,000 in 1970. e. Potential Flood Loss. The Corps of Engineers has estimated that under today's conditions, the direct damages from a standard project flood in Orange County would total $3.3 billion, and $540 million from an intermediate project flood. Hundreds of thousands of homes, thousands of businesses and factories, and hundreds of schools would be inundated by a standard project flood, and because of the problems of achieving timely and complete evacuation, an untold number of lives could be lost. f: Flood Protection. With the increase of development in the Santa Ana River Basin, there has been an effort to provide adequate flood control and protection for the lives and property within the flood plain. Levees have been constructed and strengthened, and following the disastrous floods of 1938, Prado Dam was completed in 1941. Then, in.1963, Villa Park Dam was constructed to provide protection along the lower reach of Santiago Creek. The floods of January and February 1969 were the most destructive of record in Orange County. Previous floods had greater potential for destruction, but the county was then relatively undeveloped. Rainfall was practically continuous from 18-25 January, and the widespread flooding resulted in the county being declared a national disaster area on 5 February. Then, the storm of 21-25 February culminated in the disastrous' flood of 25 February. The graph in FIGURE 2, shows that there have been several other floods of even greater magnitude than that of January and February 1969. The Corps of Engineers has recognized the need for improved flood protection along the Santa Ana River, and during the past several years has developed a plan which includes an additional dam at Mentone (in San Bernardino County), enlargement of Prado Dam and Reservoir, and an increase in the capacity of the flood control channels.. The plan was recently submitted to Congress for approval. -6- Igso lgso 1370 logo 1090 900 910 920 930 940 95D 960 970 goo INFLOW INTO PRAUO RESERVOIR MAGNITUDE IN C F S Record of Floods in Santa Ana River Basin -7- FIGURE 2 Natural Resource a. General. For several years there has been a genuine and well-founded concern by certain individuals and organizations that our efforts to provide adequate flood control protection would result in the loss of one of our major natural resources. The river and its tributaries are a source of beauty, as well as an area for the preservation of open space and the natural habitat of native flora and fauna. The river also provides a means for capturing water from rainfall, and through a percolation process our under- ground water basins are replenished. Thus, millions of dollars are saved annually that would otherwise have to be spent on imported water. The true value of the river may also be realized in the forms of scenic beauty, recreational facilities, preservation of historic and archeological sites, and the conservation of natural materials that are essential to the maintenance and/or improvements of our local economy. b. Scenic Beauty. From the county line to the mouth, the the scenic beauty of the river varies considerably. The Santa Ana Canyon is generally recognized as the most beautiful, natural area remaining in the developed portion of the county. The concern for the continued preservation of this beauty has been manifested in several ways. For example: The freeway that traverses the length of the canyon floor has been designated as a "Scenic Highway" by the State of California. In a similar action, the City of Anaheim has established a "Scenic Corridor" for that part of the canyon within the boundary of its city limits. In response to the urging of many citizens, the county and several cities jointly funded the conduct of._a study to determine the environmental cost/ benefits of various plans for development or non -development of the canyon. Portions of the Lower Santiago Creek are also rich in scenic beauty, and this area was included in the study conducted for the canyon. Most of the remaining areas of the river and creek have been encroached upon by developments and/or mining operations which have eliminated or severely reduced any forms of natural beauty. Some of these degraded areas are being restored or enhanced considerably by greenbelt projects. c. Source of Water. Because of the semiarid •climate and barely 12 inches of annual rainfall, the Santa Ana River has long been a major source of water for those who have settled in Orange County. In the 1920's it became apparent that the demand for water was exceeding the supply available from the river and.groundwater. The Metropolitan Water District of Southern California was formed in 1928, and a 242 miles long aqueduct was constructed during the 1930's, with a capability of furnishing a billion gallons per day from the Colorado River to Southern California. In 1933, the Orange -8- County Water District (OCWD) was formed by an act of the California Legislature to provide for the management and conservation of the groundwater basin, including both quality and quantity of water, and the protection of Orange County's water rights in the natural flows of the Santa Ana River. The OCWD owns and utilizes approximately 750 acres of the Santa Ana riverbed between Katella Avenue and the Imperial Highway for ponding imported water and natural flows of the Santa Ana River. The diverted water sinks into the ground, replenishing the underground basin. The water is then pumped from the underground basin, processed and distributed to users. d. Santa Ana Regional Interceptor. The quality of the water flowing in the Santa Ana River, in Orange County, has been degraded by sewage plants in upstream cities using the river as a facility in which to discharge secondary effluent. For over 30 years there have been legal battles between Orange County and upstream agencies regarding the quality and quantity of water flowing via the river into Orange County. To solve the problem, the Santa Ana Watershed Project Authority (SAWPA) was formed, and a project was developed to construct an underground interceptor or brine line, which will intercept residential, industrial, and agricultural wastes normally dumped into the river by cities and businesses in Riverside and San Bernardino counties. The wastes will then be transported via the line to the Orange County Sanitation District's treatment plant, in Fountain Valley, for processing prior to being piped into the ocean. The project is planned to be fully operational by 1986, and portions may be in use in 1977. e. Open Space. The State Legislature has declared that the preservation of open space land is necessary not only for the maintenance of the economy of the State, but also for the assurance of the continued availability of land for the production of food and fiber, for the enjoyment of scenic beauty, for recreation and for the use of natural resources. The river and the creek, and their related green- belt facilities, all contribute to meeting this recognized need for the preservation of open space. f. Recreation. The demand for recreational facilities is directly related to the increasing population, a higher standard of living and more leisure time for recreational pursuits. The river and the creek help to meet this demand by providing a natural setting for bicycle, equestrian and hiking trails systems, linear parks, water oriented recreational facilities and linkages to other parks and recreational areas. g. Flora and Fauna, Vegetation along the Santa Ana River varies considerably, ranging from conifer forests and mixed woodlands in the mountains to an almost total lack of vegetation in lower areas, especially near the coast. In Orange County, the Santa Ana Canyon and upper reaches of the Lower Santiago Creek include a natural riparian growth that provides ideal living conditions for over 200 species of animals and birds. A landscape guide has been published which identifies the trees, shrubs and ground covers that are most likely to thrive in specified zones of climate and soil conditions along the river and creek. h. Mining. Within Orange County, the output from sand and gravel mining operations along the river and the creek has at times (1972) been the second highest in the state. There are other minerals to be found, -especially in the canyon, however,'the,quantities are apparently not sufficient to allow profitable mining operations. The names of Coal Canyon and Gypsum Canyon, which enter the Santa Ana Canyon, are indications of earlier mining operations in those canyons between the river and the creek. B. Planning for a Greenbelt 1. Citizens and Government Interest and Actions a. Tri-County Conservation League, Following a 196/+ Pacific Coast magazine article about the success of the Save the American River Association, several citizens formed the Tri-County Conservation League (TCCL), with its headquarters in Riverside. The founders of the TCCL viewed the Santa Ana River as a priceless asset for the residents of three counties through which the river flows. After adopting a goal to "Save the Santa Ana," the TCCL's individual members increased in number to more than 1,000, and soon there were more than 100 supporting organizations. The members began tours of the river, visualizing and identifying the various actions that were needed to not only save the river, but to preserve, conserve and enhance its many natural resources. It was during these tours that once again the long sought dream of a "coast to crest" or "mountains to the sea" trail system was revitalized. It soon became apparent that the need for the preservation of the river was indeed a regional issue, and the league's supporters increased to include members of the governing boards and staffs of the three counties and their cities along the river. By 1969, the concept of a tri-county, joint planning study had been proposed and generally accepted. Subsequent discussions revealed that the study should be conducted by a private firm, and the purpose and scope should include other considerations that would be related to preservation of the river, e.g., recreation, ecology, historical sites, and, in general, a greenbelt. The likelihood of the study qualifying for federal funding for implementation was recognized. -10- b. Government Actions. On 7 April 1969, the Riverside County Board of Supervisors initiated official action by approving a tri-county joint powers agreement for a proposed Santa Ana River Regional Conservation and Park Study. Included among the provisions of the agreement were the following: Each county would spend an equal sum of money, not to exceed $6,000 each, for the joint employment of consultants to review the scope and pursue a program of implementation of the study; the study would be coordinated with all agencies having interest in the Santa Ana River; and, the County of Riverside would administer the contract and do the actual hiring, in coordination with the Administrative Officers of the Counties of San Bernardino and Orange. Copies of the agreement were sent to Orange and San Bernardino Counties for execution. Within Orange County the proposed study was staffed by the planning department and referred to the Regional Parks Advisory Team (RPAT) for consideration and recommendation. The membership of RPAT, at that time, included the directors of appropriate county districts and departments, and the State Forest Ranger and County Fire Warden. During a special meeting on 6 March 1970, the team agreed with a recommendation from the planning director that the county should participate in the study, but, because of the importance of the program to Orange County, the degree of participation should be more comprehensive than originally proposed. On 19 May 1970, the Orange County Board of Supervisors approved the awarding of a $30,000 contract to the firm of Eckbo, Dean, Austin and Williams (now EDAW, Inc.) for the Tri- County Santa Ana River Study. The contract stated that the goal of the study is to plan for the maximization of the recreational and open space potential.of the Santa Ana River/ Santiago Creek Corridor; and the consultant, among other requirements, must maintain planning coordination with Riverside and San Bernardino Counties, as well as the ten Orange County cities adjacent to the corridor. The proposed tri-county study continued toreceive wide and enthusiastic support, including a resolution adopted on 12 June 1970, by the State Park and Recreation Commission. That resolution noted that the Director of the Parks and Recreation had recommended to the U.S. Department of the Interior that federal assistance in the amount of $1,260,000 be authorized for the project in order to meet the increase in recreational demands in this area of California, and resolved that the Commission fully supported the efforts of San Bernardino, Orange, and Riverside Counties in their acquisition and development plans for the Santa Ana River Basin for park and recreational purposes. C. Committee of 100. The contract for the completion of the Santa Ana River/Santiago Creek Study required the consultant to provide briefings to cities and other groups on the progress being made, and the completed study. In addition to the staffs of the cities in the study area, many citizen groups were interested in the conduct and results of the -11- study. A group of citizens from each of the cities formed what became known as the Santa Ana River Study Advisory Committee of 100. Other interested organizations included the UCI - Project 21 Study Team on Preserving Open Space in Orange County; Izaak Walton League; League of Women Voters of Orange County; California Outdoor Recreation League, Inc. (CORL); League of Cities; Sierra Club Angeles Chapter, Orange County Group; Environmental Coalition; homeowners and landowner associations along the Santiago Creek and the Santa Ana Canyon; Girl Scout Council of Orange County; Orange County Section, TCCL; Audubon Society; and the Associated Riding Clubs of Orange County. The members of these organizations supported the greenbelt study in many ways, including touring the river and the creek and providing comments and recommendations to their city staffs, and to the consultants, and later writing and/or appearing before their respective planning commissions and governing boards at the city and county levels. Much of the success of this greenbelt program may be directly attributed to the sincere concern and active personal involvement of many, many private citizens in the cities and unincorporated area of Orange County. At the annual meeting of the TCCL in Riverside, in.December 1971, Supervisor Ralph Clark, Fourth District, County of Orange, praised the members and other groups for their efforts in support of the project. 2. Greenbelt Plan a. General. By Resolution No. 71-724, of 23 June 1971, the Orange County Board of Supervisors approved the Santa Ana River/Santiago Creek Greenbelt Plan as a component of the Orange County Master Plan of Land Use. The Board's resolution contained other provisions in support of the plan, including: announced intention to appoint a coordinator and a council to implement the plan; directed the director of real property services and the county surveyor to conduct a detailed inventory of all public or semi-public lands owned within the study area so that a data base is available for acquisition of recreational and open space land within the area for said plan; and allocated $500 for printing additional copies for public dissemination. b. Features of the Plan (1) Purpose. The stated purpose of the plan is to maximize the recreation/open space potential of the corridor, in terms of multi -use possibilities and linkages among open spaces in and near the corridor. (2) Greenbelt Corridor. The greenbelt'plan is concerned with the river from its mouth to the county line, and the creek from its confluence with the river to the Villa Park -12- Dam - a reach of the overall creek known as the Lower Santiago Creek. A greenbelt corridor was arbitrarily defined as being one and one-half miles either side of the river and the creek, except in the Santa Ana Canyon where the corridor is construed as being from crest to crest. The corridor is divided into four segments, i.e., the Lower River, from the rivermouth to 17th Street in Santa Ana; the Middle River, from 17th Street to Imperial Highway; the Santa Ana Canyon, from Imperial Highway to the county line, and the Lower Santiago Creek. The corridor comprises approximately 37 miles of river (27) and creek (10), within which - at the time the plan was prepared - there were over 8,000 acres of undeveloped land, exclusive of the river and creek channels. See FIGURE 3. (3) Concept. The Santa Ana River/Santiago Creek corridor should be viewed as a linear greenbelt, linking park nodes and significant open spaces by a bicycle, equestrian and hiking trails system. The river look and atmosphere should be saved or restored, as appropriate, with an emphasis on trees, informal space, and quiet contrast to the surrounding urban texture and "busy-ness." The demands for open space and recreation should be balanced according to the potential of the corridor, i.e., some areas of intensive use, some of natural preserve, many in-between. The Santa Ana River/ Santiago Creek corridor would be Orange County's link of the "coast to crest" greenbelt along the Santa Ana River. (4) Principal Proposals. Lower River: Construct trail systems along the levees;developegional parks at the river mouth (with restored natural estuary - marsh and small boating) and on the state surplus (Fairview) land, possibly linking to Upper Newport Bay; and trail linkages to surrounding areas of greenbelt/recreational. interest, e.g., Mile Square Park. Middle River: Continue the trails system and utilize rehabilitated old san&.pits for water spreading basins that would be recreationally oriented. Santa Ana Canyon: In its entirety, to be preserved open and natural, retaining riparian ecology, hillsides, and natural river bottom, and without bridges crossing the river to the north side at the freeway access points at Weir, Gypsum, and Coal Canyons. Scenic highway/corridor zoning to be utilized to retain the canyon truly open and scenic. The property at the site of proposed Yorba Regional Park to be acquired, and the trails system extended through the canyon and linked to Yorba Linda via the old canal, and to the Butterfield Trail and Main Divide via Coal Canyon. Santia o Creek: Study flood control needs and feasibility of reating gravel pits as retention basins and regional parks; extend and link existing small parks along creek; extend trail system along creek and into parks, and preserve and protect hill setting. -13- L65 ANGELES S4Nr4 m FULL CGUNTY , BpARK n.,,m, mtj +Ball �' CYP E55; o. u+ K ella ' ST. NTON LOS 4L A71T0 CH PM�N artlrdve Blvd. LOWER RIVER SUNSET ml we er BEACH mm� i 9 C FIVAi U 01 \\C 01 A a 1! u BEACH BREA �� fir. —/ 1 Av CORONA DEL h1AR BEACH MAJOR CORRIDOR SEGMENTS ,I Santa Ana River/Santiago Creek Greenbelt Corridor No Scale O SANTA ANA CANYON(— c. r 1 \- LLA PARK DAM' AGO CREEK So�abao co„ � _EUEL.Arr: c -14- Aq 54N CLEMENTE FIGURE 3 MODJE JUAN CAS c. Implementation. The plan gave recommendations for interim and long range implementation measures, e.g., the appointment of a greenbelt coordinator and an advisory council to expedite and lay the groundwork for the eventual establishment of a joint river agency. The plan viewed the agency as a formal cooperative structure, formed by a joint powers agreement and while not constituting another government, providing the coordination of the many jurisdictions in the corridor as needed for implementation of the plan. The agency would supersede the interim coordinator and council (Note: The agency eventually became a reality in the form of the Greenbelt Commission). Special studies were also recommended for the rivermouth, the Santiago Creek and the Santa Ana Canyon. d. Distribution and Awards. The number of copies authorized for the first and second printings of the plan were not adequate to meet the demand. The third printing brought the total to 1,700 copies, all of which were distributed by the end of 1975. Requests for the plan were received from all over the United States, Canada, and as far away as Cape Town, South Africa. The excellence of the plan was further recognized in the form of two Awards; one from the American Society of Landscape Architects, and the other from the American Institute of Planners. e. Current Status. On 27 June 1973, the plan was adopted as a component of the open space element of the Orange County General Plan (Reference: Board of Supervisor's Resolution No. 74-1151). 3. Joint Environmental Cost Benefit Study. One of the interim implementation measures recommended in the greenbelt plan was the conduct of studies for specific areas within the greenbelt corridor that may be endangered, from a greenbelt viewpoint, by various forms and methods of development. The Santa Ana Canyon and the Santiago Creek were identified as two areas in need of study. Then, in August 1972, several citizens expressed concern that the growth in these areas may be taking place without a real understanding of its impact on public costs and revenues, public safety, the environment, jobs and low cost housing. The Orange County Board of Supervisors and the City Councils of Anaheim, Orange, and Yorba Linda authorized a joint study of the two areas. The organization for conduct of the study included a steering committee, with the county administrative officer and city managers as members, and a working committee consisting of staff representatives from participating jurisdictions, augmented by a project coordinator. The study was conducted in three phases: Phase I. Development of a manual method for analyzing the public costs and revenues associated with five possible development configurations for the project area. -15- Phase II. Development of a manual method for analyzing the impact of the alternative developments on non -dollar factors (public safety, environment, and socioeconomic factors) for the same five development configurations. Phase III. "Generalizing" of the model, and its adaptation to electronic data processing implementation. The study was initially in a low budget category, however, in July 1975, a $30,000 HUD 701 federal grant was received and in June 1976 a "Land Use Decision Model" was completed and published. An additional HUD 701 grant for $20,000 was received for a FY 1976-77 joint effort by the county and City of Anaheim to demonstrate the model in an application to the Santa Ana Canyon. This application of the model will use updated input for the numerous variables required, and will further prove the validity of the methodology employed in the development of this tool for land use decision making. -16- III. GREENBELT COMMISSION A. Establishment 1. Greenbelt Plan Recommendations. Within the plan adopted by the Orange County Board of Supervisors, there is a stated need for the establishment of a joint agency. The plan views the agency as a formal cooperative structure to bring together the fragmented jurisdictions and functions of multiple county and city departments, special districts, state and federal agencies, to treat the river -creek corridor as a unified resource. According to the plan, the agency could be established by a joint powers agreement, and would have the following powers and responsibilities: Interrelate the multiple agencies involved, set and coordinate policies and priorities; buy, receive, and hold land; pool all or some publicly held lands and devise a system of equalization or credits to donating agencies; where title transfer is unfeasible, unify development and operation; raise and apply for funds; devise formula whereby member jurisdictions and agencies have proportional financial responsibilities based on population, assessed value, distance from corridor, and other factors; share the burden of acquisition or development costs of special regional facilities; raise matching funds toward state and federal grants; finance administrative and staff work, and special studies; respond to opportunities by negotiating and combining related needs, etc.; identifying threats and dealing with them; decide what needs design review; develop review procedure, possible permit or approval procedure, and detailed guidelines; negotiate and manage zoning, leasing, preserves, easements; develop sand and gravel excavation policy and conditions, and rehabilitation guidelines; review and amend or revise the plan periodically, preferably every two years; advise publicly on development proposals, legislative, or other measures that would affect the corridor; tie in to tri-county or basin -wide organization oriented to the river source, or tie in to county -wide organization for open space and other environmental aspects. The plan proposed that the Board of Supervisors appoint a task force to develop such a unified administrative agency, with appropriate financial plans. The agency would then supersede the interim coordinator and council. 2. Board of Supervisors Actions. On 17 August 1971, the Board of Supervisors adopted Resolution No. 71-925 for accomplishment of the following: appointment of an ad hoc committee, consisting of representatives of the Orange County Water District, Orange County Sanitation District, the ten corridor cities, the county personnel and planning departments, county counsel, county director of parks, and the Orange County Flood Control District; submission by the ad hoc committee to the Board of the names of three candidates for the position of -17- coordinator; and development by the ad hoc committee and the coordinator of a recommendation for the creation of a permanent coordinating council to oversee implementation of the greenbelt plan. Following the selection of a coordinator on 21 December 1971, the Board, by Resolution No. 72-287, on 21 March 1972, approved a greenbelt implementation program that provided for the preparation of a program plan, and the establishment of various committees, including an organization committee for the purpose of defining the functions and responsibilities of a permanent greenbelt organization. 3. Organizational Considerations. The greenbelt plan recommended that the permanent greenbelt organization be established by a joint powers agreement, and function as a formal cooperative structure with specific powers and responsibilities. While the organization committee was developing a definition of the new agency, a suggestion was made, by at least one of the members of the Board of Supervisors, that the greenbelt program be assigned to the Intergovernmental Coordinating Council of Orange County. The organization committee did not agree with this suggestion and completed the drafting of a joint powers agreement for the establishment of the Santa Ana River/Santiago Creek Greenbelt Commission. Copies of the agreement were transmitted to all of the potential members of the new agency and ratification was accomplished on 14 March 1973. A copy of the agreement is provided in APPENDIX A. B. Organizational Structure 1. General: The agreement for establishment of the Commission was made pursuant to Title 1, Division 7, Chapter 5 of the Government Code of the State of California, which provides for joint powers agreements. The Commission constitutes a separate public agency pursuant to the provisions of Government Code Section 6507, Original -Membership. The original membership consisted of the County of Orange, Orange County Flood Control District, Orange County Water District, and the cities of Anaheim, Huntington Beach, Orange, Santa Ana, Villa Park, and Yorba Linda. There were four other cities that were in the project area, and therefore eligible for membership, however, for various reasons e, g., concern that the Commission would constitute another layer of government, they declined to join, initially. The four cities did express their general support for the greenbelt program. 3. Governing Body. Each of the members of the Commission is a public agency having some jurisdiction in the greenbelt project area, and the Commission's governing body consists of a member from each of the governing boards of its membership. -18- The names of the present and past members of the governing body are listed in APPENDIX B. 4. Bylaws. The Commission has adopted its own bylaws, to govern its functions. A copy of the bylaws is provided in APPENDIX C. 5. Citizen Greenbelt Committees. These committees perform an essential function within the Commission's organizational structure, and contribute significantly to its overall effectiveness. Each commissioner representing a city member of the Commission, nominates a committee of not less than five members to their respective city councils for appointment to the city's Citizen Greenbelt Committee. In many instances the committee members have been active in the greenbelt program for several years, even prior to the establishment of the Commission. The functions and duties of the committees are to: Coordinate and work with the planning staff of their respective city, the Citizen Greenbelt Committees of neighboring cities in the greenbelt corridor, the County of Orange and the Greenbelt Commission in the development of plans for the greenbelt corridor; provide input to the various planning staffs that will represent the desires of the citizens of their respective city regarding greenbelt facilities; and provide information to the citizens of their respective city regarding the status of the planning and development of greenbelt facilities. A Citizen Greenbelt Committee has been appointed by the Board of Supervisors for the unincorporated areas along the greenbelt corridor, and has the same functions and duties as the city committees. A list of present and past Citizen Greenbelt Committee members is provided in APPENDIX B. 6. Staff. The Commission's staff consists of a coordinator, planner, and secretary. The responsibilities and functions of the coordinator are specified in the bylaws - see APPENDIX C. 7. Current Membership. The need for and value of the Greenbelt Commission was recognized by a majority of the citizens and an adequate number of their elected officials; otherwise it would never have been established. Within the organizations of some of the original members there were those who did not share the belief of the majority. By letter dated 19 March 1973, the Clerk of the Council, City of Santa Ana, informed the Board of Supervisors that on 12 March 1973, the City Council had approved membership in the Commission, with a stipulation that the approval was for a trial period of one year ending 30 June 1974. On 25 February 1974, the Santa Ana City Council approved continuance of membership for the following fiscal year ending 30 June 1975. During that year the city staff completed a plan for its portion of the greenbelt corridor and presented it to the Commission on 3 April 1975. On 21 April 1975, the City Council voted to withdraw from the Commission effective 1 July 1975, The city has -19- continued to cooperate with the Commission in keeping the plan current and working with adjacent jurisdictions in the development of plans for compatible greenbelt facilities. On 9 June 1975, the Newport Beach City Council voted to join the membership of the Commission, effective 1 July 1975. During its meeting on 30 March 1976, and by Resolution No. 76-415, the Board of Supervisors notified the Commission of its intention to withdraw the membership of the county and the flood control district, effective 1 July 1976, On 18 August 1976, and by Resolution No. 76-1267, the Board authorized financial support for the Commission. The cities of Costa. Mesa and Fountain Valley have not applied for membership in the Greenbelt Commission, but have authorized their respective staffs to work with the staffs of neighboring cities along the greenbelt corridor, and the Greenbelt Commission, in development of the IMPLEMENTATION PLAN, C. Purpose, Powers, and Functions 1. General. The joint powers agreement states that its purpose is to establish an agency which will coordinate the general plans and other land use policies and decisions of the contracting parties insofar as they pertain to the project area.(greenbelt corridor), with the ultimate objective of providing the optimum amount of open space. The mutual cooperation of the members, in the planning for the appropriate use of land in the greenbelt corridor, constitutes the basis for the common powers to be exercised. It is understood that the power of the Commission to plan for the appropriate use of land in the greenbelt corridor shall not limit the power of any member to zone and rezone property at variance with the recommendations of the Commission. 2. Powers. The Commission has such powers as are necessary to carry out its purpose, including, but not limited to, the power to make and enter into agreements; to incur debts and obligations; to employ necessary personnel, experts, and consultants; to appoint advisory committees; to lease and dispose of office space; to acquire and dispose of personal property; to accept gifts and loans of cash and personal property; and to apply for and accept grants for operating funds, studies and surveys. Any decision or determination by the Commission is advisory, not mandatory, as to any member, except as otherwise provided in the agreement. 3. Functions. The specific functions of the Commission are .to review and comment on proposed land use decisions of the members affecting the greenbelt corridor and to conduct studies and formulate plans for the use of the greenbelt corridor with the objective of providing the optimum amount of open space. To allow accomplishment of its specific functions, the Commission must have access to proposed land use documents prior to approve/deny decisions by its members. -20- All members are required to provide the requisite information in a timely manner. 4. Meetings. The Commission holds regular monthly public meetings to consider and make decisions regarding items of business presented by its staff, members, and other agencies and individuals having an interest in the greenbelt corridor. The date, time, and place of each meeting, and the items of business are published by an agenda, which is mailed to each commissioner and other appropriate addressees by the last day of the week preceding the meeting. D. Administration and Logistics 1. General. During the early stages of attempting to determine the organizational structure and means of obtaining revenue for operation of the new agency, consideration was given to possibly establishing it as a special district with tax levying authority. There was concern that the new agency, in the form of a special district, would be viewed as an additional layer of government and thus reduce the likelihood of general acceptance and approval. 2. Membership Assessments, The joint powers agreement specifies that contributions in the form of membership assessments shall be made by the members of the Commission to defray its costs of operation. Membership assessments are determined on the basis of the number of acres in the originally defined project area. Each member's portion of the operating budget is determined by dividing the total number of acres the member has in the project area by the total number of acres of all of the members in the project area. The number of acres considered for assessment purposes are updated annually to reflect changes resulting from annexations or acquisitions by another public agency. A list of each member's acreage in the project area at the beginning and end of FY 1975-76, as needed for determination of assessments to meet the FY 1976-77 budget, is provided in FIGURE 4. A list of member'sp assessments for each fiscal year, from FY 1973-74 through the end of the first quarter of FY 1976-77, and totals thereof, is provided in FIGURE 5. The figure also includes total revenue and expenditures for the same time period. 3. Logistic Support. By Resolution No. 73-745, on 26 June 1973, the Board of Supervisor's approved a request from the Greenbelt Commission for logistic support, at no expense to the county. A budget unit was established by the county administrative officer and auditor -controller to allow the Commission to operate from the county general fund for all procurement, payroll, and other routine expenditures. Members assessments are deposited in a special trust fund and periodic transfers are made therefrom to offset expenditures from the -21- Santa Ana River/Santiago Creek GREENBELT PROJECT AREA MEMBERSHIP ACREAGE CHANGES (1Ju175 - 30Jun76) Former Revised JURISDICTION Acreage Change Acreage Anaheim 11,170 +149 113319 Huntington Beach 31414 - 31414 Newport Beach 560 - 560 Orange 10,858 +197 11,055 Orange County 24,014 -1,135 (1) 22,879 OCFCD 1,295 -55 (2) 11240 OCWD 929 +135 (3) 1,064 Villa Park 1,303 - 1,303 Yorba Linda 213 +709 922 53,756 1 53,756 (1) 149 (Anaheim) + 709 (Yorba Linda) + 197 (Orange) + 80 (OCWD) = 1,135 (2) 55 (OCWD - Old Santa Ana Regional Park - North). (3) 135 (80 Old Santa Ana Regional Park - South + 55 Old Santa Ana Regional Park - North). _22_ FIGURE 4 MEMBERSHIP ASSESSMENTS/GREENBELT COMMISSION EXPENDITURES city/ Jurisdiction FY 74 FY 75 FY 76 *FY 77 TOTAL Anaheim $12,600 $ 32250 $ 7,312 $ 31738 $ 262900 Huntington Beach 5,000 1,340 21228 11116 9,684 Newport Beach - - 617 177 794 Orange 15,400 4,019 7,103 3,649 30,171 Orange County 22,200 5,831 15,703 ** 61000 49,734 OCFCD 2,000 532 836 ** - 3,368 OCWD 1,000 256 627 354 2,237 Santa Ana 14,800 31841 - - 18,641 Villa Park 1,600 473 871 425 3,369 Yorba Linda 600 158 139 301 1,198 $75,200 $19,700 $35,436 $15,760 $146,096 Interest earned 4,130 4,205 6,783 - 15,118 Total revenue 79,330 23,905 42,219 15,760 161,214 Expenditures 27,876 53,723 53,352 11,836 (146,787) $ 14,427 %� 1st Quarter only **Assessments for Orange County and OCFCD were $7,547 and $408 respectively, however, Board of Supervisors authorized total of $6,000, FIGURE 5 -23- general fund. The logistic support also includes: services by the personnel department (Commission employees are county employees, subject to Commission funding); auditor -controller; tax collector -treasurer; purchasing agent; county counsel; and the provision of office space. E. Accomplishments 1. General. Although functioning in an advisory capacity, the Greenbelt Commission has been responsible, in whole or part, for many significant planning and actual development accomplishments within or related to the greenbelt corridor. Since it was established the Commission has reviewed and provided comments and recommendations on over 200 proposed changes in land use throughout the corridor. The referrals to the Commission have been in the form of environmental impact reports, use permits, variances, conceptual and specific project plans, tentative tracts, zone changes, general plan amendments, etc. The Commission's comments and recommendations have frequently resulted in the proposed changes in land use being more compatible with or even making a constructive contribution to the overall greenbelt program. The Commission has consistently encouraged and endorsed the development and operation of appropriate greenbelt related facilities by private enterprise, e. g., golf courses, equestrian centers, trail user support functions such as bicycle rentals, sales and repairs, and refreshment concessionaire operations at trail rest stops, etc. The Commission's staff has made numerous presentations to college/university classes, service clubs, civic groups and professional organizations, providing information on the progress made and planned in the greenbelt program. 2. Tri-County Master Plan for Santa Ana -River. The efforts made in 1969 and 1970, in support of a tri-county, jointly developed master plan of the river, were unfortunately not successful. On 1 November 1975,.the TCCL and the University of California Extension, Riverside, jointly sponsored a one -day conference at the university on the subject "The Santa Ana Basin as a Recreational System." The purpose of the conference was to bring together public officials and citizens from Orange, Riverside, and San Bernardino counties to discuss past and present plans for the river, how well plans are being coordinated and what remains to be accomplished. There were approximately 100 attendees including:- members or representa- tives from the three Boards of Supervisors, TCCL, Corps of Engineers, Orange County Water District, Tzaak Walton League, Greenbelt Commission, and the county staffs. Mr. Herbert J. Rhodes, Director, Department of Parks and Recreation, State of California, was present, and he advised the conference that of the 48% of the state's parks and recreation funds allocated to Southern California projects, only 22% were spent. He suggested that the three counties enter into a joint powers -24- agreement for the coordinated development of a master plan for the river. During its meeting on 8 January 1976, the Greenbelt Commission adopted Resolution No. 76-101, recommending that the Boards of Supervisors of the three counties enter into a joint powers agreement which will provide for the coordinated development of a master plan for the conservation of the natural resources and enhancement of the recreational potential of the river. The resolution was transmitted to each of the three Boards. Although a joint powers agreement has not been entered into, staff meetings, under the direction of the three Boards, have been held on 24 May, 14 June and 15 July 1976, for the purpose of jointly developing a master plan for the river. 3. Special Studies, The Commission has participated in membership on a number of committees and special task forces with an objective of developing and/or improving various aspects of the greenbelt, e. g., Technical Task Force for the Rehabilitation of Sand and Gravel Pits; Committee for the Development of Trails for the Orange Park Acres, Cowan Heights and E1 Modena Area; Lower Santiago Creek Task -Force; and the City of Orange Equestrian Trails Committee. The Commission also provided membership and administrative support to the Joint Environmental Cost/Benefit Study, for development of the Santa Ana Canyon and Santiago Creek land use decision model. 4. Recognition. In response to a directive from the Board of Supervisors, the Citizen Direction Finding Commission (CDFC) conducted an evaluation of Orange County committees, boards and commissions regarding their performance of duties and whether they are needed. In its report (dated 8 May 1975) to the Board, the CDFC divided the groups evaluated into seven categories, number one of which was described as: "Groups which are needed and determined to be performing in a satisfactory manner." In addition to rating the Greenbelt Commission in category number one, the CDFC reported that of the 35 groups rated, the Greenbelt Commission achieved the fourth highest grade in "quality of response to the private citizens needs." During its annual awards presentation meeting on 19 December 1975, the Orange Section of the American Institute of Planners presented a "Certificate of Recognition" to the Greenbelt Commission for excellence in planning as exhibited in the Santa Ana River/Santiago Creek Greenbelt Plan and Program. A summary of accomplishments in the greenbelt corridor, with Greenbelt Commission relationship, is provided in APPENDIX D. -25- V. GREENBELT IMPLEMENTATION PLAN A. General, The Santa Ana River/Santiago Creek Greenbelt Plan recommendations for interim and long range implementation measures included the appointment of a river plan coordinator and the eventual establishment of a joint River Agency (now the Greenbelt Commission). The reason for these recommendations was the recognized need for overall coordination of the many jurisdictions in the project area, in the actual implementation of the basic greenbelt plan. Prior to the establishment of.the Greenbelt Commission, and for some time thereafter, an effort was made to centrally prepare project plans for the various segments of the greenbelt corridor. Progress was made in the form of funds appropriated for greenbelt purposes, completed sections of trails, land acquisitions for parks, and multijuris- dictional agreements for the development of various greenbelt projects. It became apparent to the Greenbelt Commission, however, that the overall progress of implementation could be expedited, and the likelihood of acceptance of related plans enhanced, if, the plans were developed by the individual jurisdictions for their respective portions of the greenbelt corridor. In August 1975, the Commission approved a procedure and time schedule for completion of the various phases that would lead to accomplishment of the objective. The procedure required the combined efforts of the Citizen Greenbelt Committees and the professional staffs of each member jurisdiction, and coordination with the committees and/or staffs of neighboring jurisdictions as well as the staff of the Commission. It was recognized that completion of the plan would require an expenditure of time and effort by the professional staffs in addition to their normal workloads. Therefore, the Commission transmitted a letter to the governing boards of each member requesting that their staffs be directed to complete the development of the plan in accordance with the prescribed procedure and schedule. The cooperation of non-member jurisdictions was also requested. The Commission provided overall coordination in plan development. B. Procedure. The procedure provides for the development of the plan in four phases, and includes additional guidance. 1. Phase I - Define the physical limits of the greenbelt corridor and a related impact area. The Santa Ana River/Santiago Creek Greenbelt Plan arbitrarily defined the greenbelt corridor as being one and one-half miles either side of the river and the creek, except in the Santa Ana Canyon it was construed as crest to crest. (Note: The "crest to crest" portion of the definition was later affirmed as being the watershed line of the canyon). The joint powers agreement, which established the Greenbelt Commission, used this same definition to describe the project area (or "corridor"). It was recognized.that the prescribed limits were a starting point for planning purposes, and there -26- was a need for the participating jurisdictions to refine the limits to reflect natural, physical features as well as existing and planned facilities within their respective areas of the corridor. Once the corridor was refined and accurately depicted on a map, an impact area would be established in extension of the corridor. The impact area will serve as a transition area and an introduction to the fact that a greenbelt is being approached, and may include natural areas which will provide a visually aesthetic backdrop. The depth of the impact area may vary, and will be a matter of local determination. The need for foresight and thoroughness in completion of this phase is essential since it results in a precise description of the area within which the greenbelt corridor and all of its facilities will be located. In determining the refined limits, consideration should be given to the following: Trails along the river and the creek are the backbone of this entire greenway and recreation system, and thus provide the significant continuous element. Where possible, trails should be planned for construction independent of streets and roads, and bicycle and equestrian trails physically separated. Include property already owned by public agencies; planned or proposed for acquisition or already developed for greenbelt purposes; zoned for mining; located within the flood plain zone; privately owned but planned or being used for recreation purposes; privately owned (undeveloped or developed) and highly desirable for greenbelt use; and property directly visible from the corridor and thus constituting a potential favorable or unfavorable visual impact. 2. Phase II - Within the limits of the greenbelt corridor and impact area described in Phase I, locate and describe specific recreationally oriented facilities and open space areas; depict the route of the trail system and linkages to major facilities within and beyond the corridor; identify projects most suitable for private development, e, g., golf courses, equestrian centers, etc., indicate areas where landscaping is desired along the trail system and approaches through the impact area, and where screening is needed to minimize any adverse visual impacts caused by existing developed areas (The Santa Ana River/Santiago Creek Landscape Guide will be a valuable reference in this effort); and using the prescribed numbering system assign numbers to specific projects. 3. Phase III - Identify current ownership of specific project properties, determine estimated acquisition and development costs, and indicate responsibility for operation and maintenance. The estimated costs may be based on recent experiences with like facilities. Responsibility for operation and maintenance will ordinarily be directly related to ownership, unless otherwise indicated in a lease contract or other form of agreement. -27- 4. Phase IV - Each project should be assigned a priority number which will be used as a guide in the application of funds as they become available for development of the greenbelt corridor. In determination of priority assignments, consideration may be given to the following: Expressed desires o the 5. Definitions of Facilities and Other Areas a. Trails. (1) Bicycle. The bicycle trail system should include existing and planned trails, either local or regional; linkages to the trail systems of neighboring jurisdictions; linkages to local parks, schools and other desirable facilities, and the arterial bikeway system. (2) Equestrian. The equestrian trail system should be depicted as existing and planned. - b. Parks. All parks within a greenbelt jurisdiction's CORRIDOR or IMPACT area should be depicted. Other parks, including regional, nature preserves or others possessing highly desirable facilities, and accessible via an existing or planned trail system, should also be depicted. It is recognized that the following definitions may not be precisely the same as those of all participating jurisdictions, therefore, they are offered as an initial guide. (1) State. Parks which are owned, operated and maintained by the state. Available facilities should be described, e, g., overnight camping, hostels, etc. (2) Regional. County parks of sufficient size and offering facilities which attract potential users from the entire county and even from the entire region. These parks ordinarily include an area of 50 to 500 acres and are often located near or outside urban limits. (3) Nature Preserve. A park area of varying size established for the purpose of preserving such features as rare or endangered plant and animal species and their supporting ecosystems, representative examples of native plant or animal communities, and geological features illustrative of geological processes, significant fossil occurrences or geological features of cultural or economic interest, or topographic features illustrative of representative or unique biogeographical patterns. Access to these parks is normally limited to designated tour trails marked by signs identifying certain species or areas of valued interest. -28- (4) Community. Size ranges from 20 to 50 acres and its facilities are designed to meet the recreational needs of many neighorhoods up to a radius of three miles. Facilities may include a tennis complex, swimming pool, community center and off-street parking. School playgrounds and athletic fields which are open to the public after school hours may be included in this and the following category, i.e., neighborhood. (5) Neighborhood. Size ranges from two to 20 acres and is designed to serve the needs of a neighborhood up to a radius of one-half mile. Facilities may include children's play area, restrooms, storage and recreation office buildings, open turf areas and lighting for night use. (6) Mini. Size limited from one to two acres and vary in design according to the characteristics and needs of the neighborhood. Facilities may include children's play areas, quiet game areas, landscaping and sports activities. c. Trail Rest Stops. Where practical these facilities should be part of existing or planned parks and therefore benefit from the resulting cost benefits to be realized in land acquisition, development, operation, and maintenance, and improved security. In some instances these facilities may be provided by private enterprise, e. g., as part of an equestrian center or a concessionaire operation. d. Trail Park and Ride Facilities. The primary purpose of these facilities is to support the use of the trail system by providing off-street areas where vehicles may be parked and bicycles, children and horses safely unloaded. They and trail rest stops may be combined as one facility. e. Water Areas. Water conservation facilities will normally be developed, operated and maintained by water districts. In some instances the facilities will be expanded to provide varying degrees of recreational features. Small -craft harbors may be oriented primarily for recreation or combined with a nature preserve. f. Equestrian Centers. These facilities will ordinarily provide on -site services in extension of the boarding of horses, e. g., riding instructors, training rings, tack shops, etc. g. Golf Courses. Development of these facilities by private enterprise on leased public land should be encouraged. h. Open Space. Areas within an urban or rural environment, which are not used for buildings or structures, and may become a place of active recreation, a vista, a watershed, a geologic hazard, a natural resource area, etc. Specific greenbelt _29_ projects may not be visualized for these -areas at this time, but it is recognized that the location and nature of these areas are so critical to the integrity of the greenbelt corridor that they must be reserved for future uses that are compatible with the greenbelt concept. i. Wilderness Area. An area where the earth and its community of life are untrammeled by man, where man himself is a visitor who does not remain. It is an area of undeveloped land retaining its primeval character and influence, without permanent improvements or human habitation, which is protected and managed so as to preserve its natural conditions and which 1 generally appears to have been affected primarily by forces of nature, with the imprint of man's work substantially unnoticeable; 2 has outstanding opportunities for solitude or a primitive and unconfined type of recreation; 3 is of sufficient size as to make practicable its preservation and use in an unimpaired condition; and 4 may also contain ecological, geological, or other features of scientific, educational, scenic or historical value. 6. Project Numbering System. The procedure included a standardized system for numbering projects within the corridor. The system allows identification of individual projects by major corridor segments, as established by the greenbelt plan; as well as the location of projects in relation to their respective jurisdictional boundaries. Each project number includes a three letter prefix followed by three digits. The prefix structure will change in accordance with the location of the project in relation to the segment of the corridor and the jurisdiction. The first of the three digits also changes according to the corridor segment. The last two digits of the project number always remains the same as the project traverses jurisdictional boundaries and corridor segments. The project numbering system is described in FIGURE 6. 7. Map Legends. The procedure provided a legend with samples of symbols to be used to depict the various greenbelt facilities and areas on the Phase I and II maps. The legends used for the Phase I and II maps, in the implementation plan, are provided in FIGURE 7. 8. Project Summary Sheets. Standardized sample formats were provided in the procedure for the preparation of summary sheets that included detailed information pertinent to individual projects. The summary sheet entitled "Summary of Existing/Planned Projects' Current Status," lists each project by number; describes the current and planned use; provides property identification by assessor's parcel numbers, or other description; plus acreage; the.zoning jurisdiction and designation; and the ownership and any appropriate amplifying remarks. (Note: In most projects the acreages will be listed -30- SANTA ANA RIVER/SANTIAGO CREEK GREENBELT IMPLEMENTATION PLAN PROJECT NUMBERING SYSTEM LOWER RIVER = L Project Numbers: 001-199 Huntington Beach LHB-001 Newport Beach LNB-001 Costa Mesa LCM-001 Fountain Valley LFV-001 Santa Ana LSA-001 County of Orange LCO-001 �'IIDDLE RIVER = M Project Numbers: 200-399 Santa Ana IISA- 2 0 0 SANTA ANA CANYON = C Project Numbers: 400-599 HB Yorba Linda YL CYL-400 NB Anaheim AN CAN-400 CM County of Orange CO CCO-400 FV SA SANTIAGO CREEK = S Project Numbers: 600-799 CO Santa Ana SA SSA-600 Orange OR MOR-200 Anaheim AN MAN-200 County of Orange CO MCO-200 Orange County Water District CW MCW-200 Orange OR SOR-600 Vi11a Park VP SVP-600 County of Orange CO SCO-600 Orange County Water District CW SCW-600 -31- FIGURE 6 MAP LEGENDS PHASE I 1. Greenbelt Corridor +++ + 2. Impact Area + + ++ PHASE II 1. Trails Bicycle Existing Planned Equestrian Existing ® e ®® Planned 2. Parks, Trail Rest Stops, Trail Park/Ride Facilities 'o aaoo '09000 Existing ooa o oaaao a aaooa a 0000 Planned aaaoao 3. Water Areas: Conservation and/or Recreation Conservation Existing Planned -32- FIGURE 7 4. 5 0 Equestrian Centers 2y. D` m. Existing Planned Gol£ Courses Existing vvzv Planned, Open Space '33� FIGURE 7a for each assessor`s parcel, however, in some instances only the total acreage for the entire project will be provided due to partial parcels and parcels less than one acre being used). The summary sheet entitled "Summary of Projects' Acquisition, Development and Operation Responsibility" also lists each project by number; describes the planned use; identifies the jurisdictions responsible'for acquisition, development, and operation/ maintenance, and an estimated cost for each; appropriate remarks are also included. The summary sheets for the implementation plan are provided in the APPENDICES. 9. Zoning Designations. The zoning designations used by the participating jurisdictions vary between jurisdictions. An explanation of the zoning designations used in the project summary sheets is provided in APPENDIX E. C. Greenbelt Corridor 1. General. In 1963, the California Legislature added a section to the Orange County Flood Control Act, that authorized recreational use of district property to the extent that such use will not impair or diminish the requirements for flood prevention and water conservation. By Resolutions No. F63-99 (1963), and F65-9 (1965), the Board of Supervisors authorized the use of parts of the Santa Ana River, and other channels, for horseback riding and hiking. On 29 September 1971, the Board approved an Orange County Bicycle Trails Program; it was recognized that the background of the program would be a bicycle trail along the entire length of the Santa Ana River. By Resolution No. 71-1088, the Board authorized the expenditure of $100,000 for the purpose of constructing a "pilot" bicycle trail along the Santa Ana River. Then, on 27 June 1972, the Board adopted Resolution No. 72-739 (Implementation of Santa Ana River Corridor Bicycle Trail Operations and Maintenance), which specified the permitted and prohibited uses, hours of use, fees for use by stables, and other administrative and financial requirements concerning the recreational use of the river corridor. These actions, plus the Board's adoption of the Santa Ana River/Santiago Creek Greenbelt Plan, collectively form the legal foundation for the development of a greenbelt corridor, or linear park, along the Santa Ana River. For planning purposes the corridor has been divided into the four major segments shown in FIGURE 3. 2. Trails System. The trails along the greenbelt corridor are the backbone of this linear park and recreation system. The significance of the -system was given recognition on 21 September 1976, when the Regional Director, Bureau of Outdoor Recreation, presented the County of Orange with a certificate designating the Santa Ana River Trail as a national recreation trail. a. Bicycle Trail. Construction of the bicycle trail was started in the Lower River segment of the corridor, and the -34- first section, from Atlanta Avenue in Huntington Beach to Edinger Avenue in Santa Ana, was completed in the fall of 1972. The sections from Atlanta Avenue down to the Talbert Channel and Brookhurst Street, and from Edinger to Katella Avenues were completed in the fall of 1973. The trail proved to be very popular and in 1974 the monthly usage gradually increased as more people, of all ages, heard about this wonderful recreational system along the river, A counter was installed in the trail on the west levee, just south of Adams Avenue, and in August of 1975, a monthly high of over 35,000 was recorded. The total usage for that year was 331,440. In September 1975, the beautiful Imperial Woods trail segment was completed for the three mile reach from Tustin Avenue to Imperial Highway. In the Canyon, along the Santa Ana Canyon Road and beginning at Quintana Drive (just east of Imperial Highway), there is a striped and signed bicycle lane which continues on to Gypsum Canyon Road, across from the entrance to Featherly Park. Near the entrance to Featherly Park is the beginning of the 2.5 mile trail completed by the State Department of Transportation (CALTRANS). This trail extends to and beyond the county line. All together there is a total of approximately 23 miles of existing bicycle trails or lanes along the river. A new trail is under construction for the four mile reach from Katella to Tustin Avenues, and is scheduled for completion in the fall of 1976. Engineering studies are underway for determination of trail routes along the river from Imperial Highway to Featherly Park. b. Equestrian Trail. Since the river is normally dry, its channel and levees have been used as a trail by equestrians for many years. On 15 November 1954, County Ordinance No.715 became effective and permitted horsemen to use the Santa Ana River levee for recreational purposes. On 9 February 1966, by Resolution No. 66-192, the Board of Supervisors designated the east levee of the Santa Ana River, downstream from Santiago Creek, as the Forrest S. Paull Memorial Trail. In its resolution the Board noted that Mr. Paull was an outstanding county equestrian, serving as the first President of the State Horseman's Association, Inc., to be chosen from Orange County, and also that he had made outstanding contributions to state and local equestrian legislation, the county's trail system, and riding activities for and in behalf of the crippled and unfortunate children of the county. The Board authorized the Associated Riding Clubs of Orange County to install a memorial marker to Mr. Paull along the trail. The equestrian trail extends up the river along the levees and presently terminates at the edge of private property in the Santa Ana Canyon, in the vicinity of Weir Canyon. Routing of the trail beyond this point to Featherly Park is under study. The routes of existing trails are marked by signs posted by the county. C. Rest Stops. The very length of the trails system (eventually 27 miles along the river and another 10 miles along -35- the creek) requires a number of rest stops.. As a minimum, each rest stop should provide water for trail users, restroom facilities, trash containers, bicycle racks, and shaded rest areas. For equestrian use, hitching posts or rails and a means for providing water for horses should be included. Other facilities such as parking areas for trail access, and picnic areas with benches and tables, may be provided where funds are available and/or otherwise feasible. In determining the need And location of trail rest stops, various factors must be considered. The number of and distance between rest stops must be balanced by the costs involved; therefore, an effort should be made to select sites where the lowest possible costs may be realized. These cost factors include: site acquisition; design of the facility, development or construction, and operation and maintenance. (1) Site Acquisition. Costs for site acquisition may be eliminated by using existing or planned facilities, which are adjacent to or in close proximity, to the Santa Ana River/Santiago Creek trail system. Where rest stops are needed, and park sites are not available, sites on publicly owned land should be incorporated into a plan. (2) Design. Rest stops should be of a design that blends in with the existing environment and yet is low in cost. Design plans originated or contributed to by volunteer action should be encouraged. Designing of rest stops should also allow facilities to be easily viewed by adjacent roads or streets which are patrolled. This may decrease the likelihood of vandalism. (3) Development. The use of existing parks will not require additional development costs except possibly for trail linkages. Planned parks will not require any additional funds above those projected for the facility development. Any rest stops that require new construction should incorporate building materials that blend with a natural environment, have a low maintenance cost and are less susceptible to vandalism. (4) Operation and Maintenance. Restroom facilities located in planned or existing parks will have the lowest operation and maintenance costs due to the availability of committed maintenance personnel. A rest stop that is independent of a park would result in higher maintenance costs than a rest stop located in a park facility. Also, rest stops that are located outside parks are likely to have a higher rate of vandalism, due to less patrolling and fewer people who may be witnesses to such acts. d. Trail Park and Rides. There is a need for well located facilities along the trail where citizens may park their automobiles and safely unload their children and/or bicycles and -36� enter the trail system. A like need also exists for equestrian users of the trail who transport their horses by trailer to the greenbelt. The size and locations of these facilities will determine whether or not they should be limited to bicyclists or equestrians, or, a combination of the two groups. These facilities may also be concessionaire operated. A charge for protected parking plus income from the sale of refreshments, etc., may offset the costs of operation and maintenance of the facilities. e. Trail Linkages to Related Features. The river portion of the greenbelt corridor traverses the width of the entire County of Orange, from its eastern boundary to the Pacific Ocean; and the Santiago Creek branches from the river extending easterly toward the foothills of the Santa Ana Mountains. There are several areas of recreational or greenbelt interest along the corridor's route that may be easily reached by bicycle trails or lanes, and in some instances equestrian trails. Although not a part of the greenbelt, the proximity and accessibility of these related features enhance the greenbelt's overall value. 3. Lower River Segment. a. General. A tour of the greenbelt corridor may well begin in the Lower River segment, since, near the rivermouth there is a bicycle lane linking the Pacific Coast bicycle trail to the river trails system. The rivermouth is recognized in the Santa Ana River/Santiago Creek Greenbelt Plan as a critical area of the greenbelt corridor, and a recommendation is made that the area be the subject of a special study. In addition to the local jurisdictions, there are several agencies that have shown interest in how various parts of the area may be developed, preserved and/or conserved. The Greenbelt Commission has expressed its concern for the area by recommending in letters to its members, the Corps of Engineers, the Coastal Zone Conservation Commission, and the Southern California"Association of Governments, that final planning for the area be a coordinated effort, including representation from all concerned public agencies as well as the private sector. The greenbelt plan's principal proposals for the Lower River segment are described herein in Section II, B, 2, b, (4). The jurisdictions in the Lower River segment have considered these proposals in the construction of projects and development of plans for their respective portions of the corridor. Their projects and plans are summarized as follows: (1) County of Orange. The County's Master Plan of Regional Parks refers to the adoption by the Board of Supervisors of the greenbelt plan for the Santa Ana River/Santiago Creek Greenbelt Corridor, and lists the projects therein as being in -37- Priority Group One (1972-1980). The county has made considerable progress towards execution of its portion of the plan, e. g., construction, landscaping, irrigation, and improvements of the river trails system; acquisition of property for Fairview Regional Park; joint planning with other agencies for a bicycle bridge across the rivermouth, and development plans for. Fairview and Centennial Regional Parks. (2) Huntington Beach. The city's portion of the Santa Ana River Greenbelt Implementation Plan was approved by the city council on 17 May 1976. In addition to a revised greenbelt corridor and related impact area, and several projects within the corridor, the plan includes a number of trail linked related features. The city borders the Pacific Ocean, and the Pacific Coast bicycle trail parallels its coastline; thus, the area is -very popular for visitors and tourists. Many of the related features are recreationally -oriented and therefore make a significant contribution to the recreational aspects of the greenbelt corridor. (3) Newport Beach. The city council approved the plan for its portion of the corridor on 12 April 1976. A major project within the city's plan is a "Water -Related Recreation and Conservation Area." It includes,a variety of individual projects that are viewed as being collectively appropriate for the several hundred acres of land along the east side ,.of the Lower River segment, near the rivermouth. Newport Beach is also an exceptionally popular area.for visitors and tourists, and its recreationally -oriented related features will be accessible to the greenbelt corridor via a linking trail system. (4) Costa Mesa. The city council authorized its staff to work with the Greenbelt Commission and its neighboring Jurisdictions, and on 20 September 1976, the council approved its portion of the Santa Ana River Greenbelt Corridor Implementation Plan. This plan also includes a "Water -Related Recreation and Conservation Area," which has been coordinated as a conceptual continuation of a like project in the Newport Beach plan. One of the many related features enhancing the greenbelt corridor is identified as the "Institutional Open Space Corridor," which is a broad band of approximately 1,250 acres of publicly owned land extending from the river easterly across central Costa Mesa. This corridor is viewed as being developable as a major linkage between the river trails and upper Newport Bay, and the University of California at Irvine. (5) Fountain Valley. The city's staff was authorized to cooperate with the staffs of neighboring jurisdictions and the Greenbelt Commission in developing a plan for Fountain Valley's area along the west side of the river. A corridor and related impact area were identified, and the routes of an existing bicycle trail and a planned equestrian trail were -38- provided, which link the river trails to nearby Mile Square Regional Park. (6) Santa Ana. The jurisdictional limits of the city are included in the three segments of the corridor, i. e., the Lower River, Middle River, and the Santiago Creek. The city's staff completed a greenbelt plan, which was presented to the Greenbelt Commission during its meeting on 3 April 1975. The plan provides the goals, policies, programs and specific performance and development standards for the future development of a greenbelt park made up of a variety of public and private facilities. By letter dated 7 November 1975, the Mayor of Santa Ana advised the Greenbelt Commission of the city's intention to continue to cooperate in the greenbelt program. The information in the city's plan has been updated, as necessary, for incorporation into this implementation plan. b. Greenbelt Corridor and Impact Area. The original greenbelt corridor width of one and one-half miles either side of the river, in the Lower River segment, included large land areas of high density residential, industrial and commercial developments. The original boundary also bisected Mile Square Regional Park, and the Civic Center in downtown Santa Ana. Refinement of the corridor to a configuration that was compatible with current general plans, and reality, had to be accomplished by the jurisdictions concerned. The same requirement was true for the related impact areas. A Phase I map of the Lower River Greenbelt Corridor and Impact Area is provided in FIGURE 8. C. Existing, Under Construction, and Planned Projects. A description of -the individual projects along the Lower River segment, is provided herein in an order commencing at the rivermouth area and generally progressing upstream. Refer to FIGURE 6 for an explanation of the project numbering system. The system allows identification of individual projects by major corridor segments. The project number does not indicate responsibility for eventual ownership, development; operation or maintenance. Each project's location is shown on the Phase II map in FIGURE 9. Some projects, especially trails, have more than one prefix in their number, because they traverse the boundaries of more than one jurisdiction. (1) Water -Related Recreation and Conservation Area (Planned. LNB-001; LCO-001; LCM-001)i This project area is located along the east side of the river with its northern boundary along the southern edge of the Fairview Regional Park site. The project extends southerly therefrom to the Pacific Ocean, paralleling the Greenville -Banning Channel on its west side and making irregular projections to the east. The specific dimensions of the project area have not yet been determined, however, it is estimated that it will cover approximately 1,000 acres. Within the area the ground elevation ranges from about -39- "' e o.] �c� = Ir n .JI' t. - Il�U J \�' �< JV-"10C]��r��C CCIC��IOE [ �L'_71�L']L'.'-JE / Let, j ( / II 0 JP7C 1�3 e� urr� C_3c7r7E�OClIo[�I�C"7L'Ld,_�,� ✓mil , i�-%� �,v—.—�` 1 U�) fir: s ❑,-t["7 [7iar_ ems— _ L �� ^,�Jla\ r '. � �� ( /J �.. li{J��,I L"If I E" a� r ! I-�•`� C . Y%DJ �� QO Let OO;�,di 1[,�ll o r I �' fill �� _ I If� I . IF c�r�it llllel l:�e — i�IC)[ _- �� I.�� h lIl i 1;11 EMI II 1 IC�k jl li I� I �[ yr, ,��r J1 �[ill� I l' i �� o� 1175 .ded-_� +I 51It1f 1 I- CI {. ��I� I�-J7F„g-ffI(c�llr-g-!` p� _ . )� ij-n .�� p.��W 4i1�Lee - "'}�I)I-7JJ fl � �� ' % \ '" f If I f,�-C I. '=I,��, °',[JIB:.:', 1[ rI{.:.;: IiC 3G4�PI S[._ ; d- J/ �`�j �... �� 1T �i . it n I71 ]la_'I ^r (. r i� 1 II I . f - I �� .i '"�,J� '""� '`C'� &?�' - _ �O, /rya � r r LL r-[ I 1 sill Ili �E. id". - ] "� , _ __ �� !'u ,^. 3�._ ,.� �^<,e rl s' - ,[� f' L r I- In: '.'[,l%iJ. ,��_ hi _ �I� \),�i._,: z.s� _f:..".i. _ 7C�[.. .� / \(�.� ., 'Lv'O� ��'�:`^. - .;.! ! '�I I[ r r ; c=` �I P) cur -d II .I� jL . -. - .. y! '',1I� f;�. .,..f. ,�l , s .f!'t`� ' \ a a'/ .�'a�� j h �t,i13.1 — �L :•� r � [, V P a. , t nit,�! i:� t _3r � L1 (- Fee �e �1 ,i 1E--fi r M.[,f iI FY,TI L� =,-1 „ __ ��_..E; 11 i•:; ._-.� 6;':. -i. l!, '��'pp .1 �� a "v` ;�d' /��`r6^✓, ,��/C1�'�n.Ci^`7L``.n� /' 1 = dl r .. (-' I�lil! t ,, [ 1. t, I, r %D� ,I / :f" - � ', a: i�,i "d: , ,;. - 9 ✓ (jj yg (� L1 lin ,- J [ {I C fLJO r-'l fi j i ll s]' �� l-�U _ yl� ram. ��"'i // •© I. ... -... aa r-=1 L - _ .> \ v'^ �<� �/� JF II 4, ,vC� / ,. 4II a! Ii. f i q!� .. `\ 7 6`� % �� \ U �I�� if. CN11 I i + _ �.. _ r r� a `C" a �/ G��3-�YO " 9 II+N-il7,`'°C LiLlio !11,n ,i i:.—a�—14Ezly.,.-_ [%3.,I„ ( a ? S/�/v ?_ c^� e-: " -,u a - I r r z 9 qa t „s .I )�u`� `IU'1� t •i„.'-I ..y� �--'- r-y �i<., �\ nC .r �(v�.� �'Je C�r'`C,� I �, a�; ,:I'�-�;.. v �' I iI i I I- JI-,;1 9v�.. �_'�i:�'��✓,['.�/x .�7 (�•.� III u. rtl enU70A III :`q�rfLdell ii,wife a , ) f _ ' 1 �I '� p 7 �i� ! , P , rJ J / ., 3:F ,, Ee;., .�. '�r1 'I :- _.r --W _ t�.i a w'rw?.F�� .% U/✓.e -/� _�-�� y1 . �_ed :';t. �3 z aP,m -->a�� , c��,a�/Lrl 'i PHiJ�n;: < /Cif ., �., �I_ i.I _., ? --(. 1�a�7r`+LL?�f .. .,��Ii f. _ i,"I%s�"1.17�'" ��-af,'�,I�CI� J; E��'�"��''.y '/I�oJ%ll] IF �p ,,. f,,.LeeC% Let a nt o, �I i IIt I v/. ` \ fir l 3 0 a >".r ? ' 4-,- � ;'or, I -r r: - 1 • F`•.� / : %/ I Led�� Lev rIt �, t dr.. — L ,7.9 �'` :E 9 �i �4.i+. '3� / �_!I+r., l"- .._. �I , t .J i� /':', ie 7i No < ')f %/% �� nl 1ove ,P I;. .._ [ a ,... <! ,,.. f - j� Ir. _ il,� �,-' _ 1i .;I;,�I �'°,r .L,• �1. �,. ✓w��l `5...'<�1"r! l'LLLed 1 :onis1. aavEi o �•�'� "� 711CCV a.��cv. vEs �' ,Ilfj L IVm IE„ r. ___ > , �"�' � _ j � LILL Llirl '3 d 1 [ E Z- o p° ( �J ed / , 1 MILE I a FILL Iclir.;>` i I ,_]- i -Lh=�F C7EJ 1 - j�t'�, � ��'� �11 /'Y �tj 711E. � z a 4 . r ' _ "AS'.': � �)� I[ l� � Ce"LlIttIrr ' u� \} { II... L' en 1 >✓ I.; limit , r a- i . ,+ II =� i tl' �-\S/✓ . Cr ° I� �{- �b v'll,: !±�- oeii!ICfi�l r'Is !r__ :i, I„ �' .t,._-;. �I:._ ;...I I ii. -1[� rn r ��J� o:./„ - .a 9�• : PP _ f4 '1 ,! al I_ {r i �). \ �W/: w : �_+I _�l:J �I '.•• �� L. r - <.._a �i l..dl �. '"III C H I ~\ E,_ { a. LL .:rl , , (r_.{I �'.; ILr . (_— �`c, is :V111 �4U� �:,- i .`N ! .�I _II :�L IIlil _._ i 'ICI' L L114 �I9li '�, y f'.. :.i �. Q c_a c - �" ,•�' __. li,ti l iE .,71_ tr ,_l:--i 1 i �l11f,J _. : -t.. i:" 1JI 1JI II \ �. �d / f. Tell .- _ r I: .E,_ ,f {I . u-,l., ,. .. .. ¢ -,JJ,I -,Jpf, I, 71u1!it �r, ""__��la[0 �%'rl IS ��J.I tt�' 'tIjj I�j 9 111 �I x a •• > jf �l>�l°{. ..t4,.. AC ! .I• IE ']�-?� qlJ y� �f' .t,i .! I'r_L a��`F '..� �,n ,�..>. i '../.'.' 1 �-? a.. L I Ir ? ' ) .a .: `'•' ' .1 ai r•, iF 4'; @. ,, f[n _1;,aG��.`e,L�.,. i•a"1 _-31 � e 1._h li �ti ��w'f 1 it 41. �IJLIErr�'��j��i• WI ...... .I I'"' - F� I:-. -r .I L'.IJ--�',z r• 'ail I/ y— : J.)'�.aw .F..,..rl yr. IIr.l9 t 1a La -�=I� ", '•' 30 a �_ ,.-z. �I it a.: f `a.: C 1 �.. JJ )< _deededa <N -F: al... §c -.- 3y, 5 O i s JIG- L - 1� ` + Fa it . 9 /7 L >,ne, xl�___ c. � :I, I: II 1a, �I .5 .:.:. it �Ir JE �,. - '^, �•!. ,! 4 - 'tau [ ,. d;�7[?'� .� r __",r• P� L IIr'i 3'w L.,Rf .1 _ v yl _ c - 1JI - . rs. I l it -IP- el is 1 - .. R w c. E S `_:�� f[ :�.-[ 9L ._� ; --_"'[ _ Im � -1 7 I 3p W ,T^ � -,r, �;; ]IILa q -I , ) �.,rJ f?'Ui if) _l _ J 'irI r,�I L<'.-r I" \ �e[�, J of [ -y .J...� „h-./c' �I'G:;`L-L,e 1 11P .. _ u,.._,= „� �R� I t. . J � ' i „ I � �li l v. `/its ('an 4: "z f .r-]'_-'' : ,- f 37i�t'Ar - - a h s., ! r �.! I ... 1�1(.Old✓' 1; aa l -r. r a ., .pilit 71 ,i it yl'. , l L L11.]�I:4) ) Li I. , i.- i _ I'-� r:� i a`,` `_Lil� 4it1 d t _..--I w'' 9 Imo) I' Imo, -I: r i i 1 "��, a ..m og ,I f �{ 1 j I h1 I;TI 11 9r �... d�, 1 i''I IIJr�fl� ] - I� I � -- •I i. r r �5 .Lr LAI[ a ill 14.,u1;.�Ia� 1, �.� ' �n I, + - Lee:,!:._. E C VlaLi10411 �I(l3-r I:7 �n i.n'Il.yp...i!gna f `I- a,li�Il Otte a IF; '` n ,,,k',IFr.T' r 1 ,.1,{.�rL��n o .) i '"y� �� I 41 I^It'. _ Ceded _--1. - yjl� ...�7 411.111;fPJ'L.,7 ,("r. 7J- 9r-! Lll E il, it+ I[ -ti A� ,.l,i '141L,In ;..5 �i - d ��,/"°~`r .' i f- ISS iL: I. -;'k`' " Jr; i- -1� ) -I� fI I��i9 1°� ..il �� '. f" '_.II{ •?'.. If,'h�t, _ ; w{. r,ee� �, s •7;:;{ LI ✓�`�It�ti'iH' 11Ji1�, —.._7, j _.ad1C_,�s Ii i1 I e I SSP��'�� Li1w171_ ?-}II I/. ` ILL Il ov.'o illllfir7 fi`L Il J[ �[ _i IP I P PIyIIIfPd , 3i. tP .��FILL C. f �I e s I A f L ? ti �I \ /� Jt �i rlulin I (a i{_ f itll r 7� j un a. ( Let ] I o fl i i d ali [ — is i3anH ootie .' f� r. lf.l� �I`i'9Coe Pf� f'. 1 I [6.tlFl�_ 6 N. Y., '.?,.p .__, _.1 ,I,!-i,1 y... ,.,..: a' a ,�i.rQI-�1[llJt�i�ltl, �1{ �Ir . i +� -, I I 911 -„ 1 [ { ;t I ,l_ j' r. d �..._„ ,_7 l ECrit E;' � .- o I i' : I ,'rl, �i: � I er: a� ' '�,li � 3ey, ice{{. II,f {_--,�[ili[II li II { !,; I I k �.- I r {fL ,� i e Ir-� Jfl[�4 �I _`rc - I {y' .'i \ -i,: _�ri . 1 I ll -'� - <il It I� i-i' y.�.!.. j r Sa — e _', i al ` al'.�'I SiTzl` ICI O,,ia { f . :F.;'_:.�iL �v,.if .too._ J`fILL -)v If711f itllal `�j I`-snl �l I J I\Zl it ld..: i 1.,,er;. �y, __: qp ..EI_'}rFF,.p�l .�.-: .�i I11'a!`a'.I•- -'a- , E.o If ➢' 'ILL _' �11 _ _ .t_r c «� !I I �� F zl <� - . r, .� ' - o, I?,. 4,I ' � 1 I% NN ( �I�I1111rtcri �T : I tr x = ila +i/ I I9a!' a fi JCL+ .7C 11 �?ci Id C.li7��ll �i illy lI 11ili�IItL a III �: .I s .iii �' I i��. tlr, '1 :i �1t .c^ lii��r 11 - _ �I. �41: .w--...,fl ;a^� (yp I,y� 3.:"�I{ .-tl .� V �I I,_6 ersp`- tl �LOOP Lz11Ff 3H. P-.�i f,l —a}l ,FILL'I`R drf (pica 1� L II i '; ,.:mod 4nlif, II 1'rlllr - �. I.':' 1r.. •1,? i J�... i11.° " t il;i 7.L_,L, _a } -�I a IPL.! -E{I rr6 t tie _fir 11 � _� --rt IJ_ r-I,�:1. '1i y.j it IL o� r : if?)- I.-:..11 -ill. Fell�11!lfll.l,, .i, i tr rlr �4 ,IfIE.-'r or I Fee.. ii• I j_ �y Ji I .I�! If! i 1' lipCle. �-E.., I, ..,al (I F„ 3J1_$,.l_Y: =^�a Iit v' ,p3!'' , ._Ir !. F-�, 3 ILLI+' : S ILLCJ - ,'ril, t r .. li<-.. >% u. I 1 a .? i JI I., =s- �9r`�I'III•-...rlC''-'I tIL!"�Il lI�i111,14,','!.li�i �;il ._.. LedI - I pllff_Lr r iilii a{ - II, ?_i ;��I,p - ,I {I I�_ F,feif'lpeal r[i ... r�. ' Il I+ r ;" -'. zsl`1 . Il�,..adr, [•Let 4 o .1L 7 r C I ! 4 i F C` !t -1 :; is , 7Lif"- ldtl 3�' "� r11 I ❑ : `I `-I) 1 vCLIFF �C 4 E —,c e1n `•� ,. J7 ._l{�4 } 1.< <r , 9 , ti r -'f �[l�fy( li F • �JJ ' r - Cn.FtiGin3 - • -- s r 7r,IL art s rh ,. .�_ i1Ler.° _P �__, y.�r�r�lx r I --,y�,>; l 4 tL h °i 1"ICI[��_m]IIL CMA Fl-a{ d I,� CIC'..�'�st f f,5 1'Ii :;rrj � < a r -.lr ..I JI C I i '7[]L�jCI I %'i- 1l ! w r 111l�1ff�7 I II li L]C[_�LILIF jree- ' ' ! ^ I;f' $ 1 ��. I� fl it FILL I It dial F.'U,t1`' aP /%. �I�Y[JC�LJF`SiEL.-.- �1 I 1, r -�._ .ice too It (Lot 1�447L I f L Oct I ©-�[��[�tCool;` 1, I I 1I. �1 . _ I IL.. C i ik �� \AC�v�5�`�[ ' r t 1 tell I a OF 7. f 1 t } ,[ell_Let -17�L ✓ I �l 6 d nL ! l�l 11 I �[ n [�f 111��i ..... I _ _Feel mom t ff _—+I'iY--._ L Ih 1d. '`E— �! 3 Ij I I i' �� ._.._ �.. IL_e LEI Jl. 1 I N t Pt I• n„J der elf It 10ff�F� rdol , pLet L�©Ll[�,r ILL `Cam; _� fIt Or, It It I de �L lll�iJ. ali' L_ _ �[a4111 n = Fiji n Leer > 99uere > �ofRI 1= , . �..._��'I��i�l�___.� �� i,,� I ��-1�.. �r�� . . ` -40- FIB RE 8 Ej �uG�L� p1Fo000 MIMI �Lip � loll �[j� V ,�°�� 9Jcn' fillip / Cyr �� Lll1 ©T y/ \. �\ �O � �,'�5,�9, ; )'E'�a�do - Lop 3�� c� DooC -MILLE pool; 7jr'n�rl� top �a I; CJr�L91 r 00��-� ��'�� f ffLIP ri; — — a�114 R.li rlf { 13CLi� r 9 'I[ cj.i J] _ (�2t O F �f I.[� ( �rLuh �[��[�� Lam- \ J°'-'7, Ila�iL='I I]L�I � "`"�'� PI71�� r v 1 ��l��LIP aS� �w-%• .. o o f j "•.. a !�[� 111LI.cip �.[i d! cs �_ �, { _ ya�� ifl Al� E Ic-ror_•-�L` SI:5will ,.. ..I`lI L'it ��L;,jf"m pool.. _ I.— [ t7Gib..` _o L �`il--ar�I r ��: `i� ] l l L➢Ill�l� a I II,i - �I lfl rl , n Ip I'�LS� \r%•,a�'.a�l� ,E£�' ^\ r .1 a [ r� E IPJI�� _ A�J_'L I';. E> S �� \ vl f % / / _ p% jL� r��;1 'Q i[ 4-.7 f 11. 4;\ '.1 Lr� `• �, 1��:. o L I y• J�LI � I� MAIL - fii e. � �j sE - o ^1`� �3•lC J '[ll- Ie_1 lc 1 r:�li. { ryIl ,":.11*of '•�, ' J �10 I _ (I¢. of i�'..E ii a i. a� c { ! i,�E ( _,.�;" ,C ate.��"z� ` . ��'.��,,"\3Q a 0 F ,��l ,! ` �l•� k.1, LP1 JIM :A,Ilz,.l{Ia All 1' J�I: r. � � �. is/� �e off' i `1n;�17lfJrT I.'IQ it I�' pl'lu €.kLJ1,,Yop -IJ �;<</<v ,'`/�I poll �11L14"7� ♦.; L { I. - i G ' �' r <i r.. ",t U r IcI p`i oil .a 5M3Inaltla 1J� ,, 1:' i�� ,. - o '�� f j4 r�.. j 1- //�\ +,� � � /' AQ)i � o aor Id,a: `[[I`-,f IL_ -_ 'L —_1i( I.11. {i�7E11 j: _ 71 9,, E ::; r%l' l _ All) �� Jll i111' - 1[ _>ll f" uLf[T - - - ---__ _ 7['�-;h_.._ �� e� lH�<�,y: l r. ��` `� CAL .�P- I k: m �'1 Cfi 1 �, nee + > ?� L ..,L.o: lc �I-, e;a'b ��\� 4l : �1.�� - - �I i,.� 'f '.`F� �� .I :.... ;;•�.:.�:: ,,"P-:.: -i'I _ r, I �, i ir�L! �i <V 'jr i�� y,��/ i ti. Lu , _ 1' 6 . �'7r iii ( r,L r ' "� '. ; - �' °' - _ �;j - �' .� c1MITI!_ r•�3J I':I - `w C`�J��' J v� r - ~ �41 ! Lip Lip a°` ame aoaavN 4' a hF ...� �::" L �- 1]L� g �..C7'ILL � �U co� It L �l k L�� At ILL >a ar.o rislor u, N F r of E j��niaaoeavN1 f_ !f € to °�i J`r/`0�� v 3lJ + - / ©�U 1[' s�Jc of : (IQ a o Ipa as 03 ]l o Ili, i a I{IP" © ��)�. if J�L''! pool Il P 71.E r II II / l (��JJJjjjjjj/ o - - JL �� i a1 ¢ �C1Llf L� S �� , i O �.� C� �� `a v „ j c� ®G,O r`�oIT1i� { ', , o -l:,� wrJ�i.-,.7Lif f._i l� c Mforp _ �i�It .. > ' �0 Milli-� _ � �'�, -lil[9 1 - ��-v. " �I��Jz�� /lip: �� f 'iPi�f ` .k , . :{ • ,{ � [ 1 � _iI� �k 1I _� �� Ih -�� , Hai tL a; , c 1 .' {• rr "..If" :f '[ �I��' gi �� . J �lu . 'i� �1loon lo -`� C L'�� lopo_ 3L;u� JLiLJQ[I �� II `- 1 �� - It 11Rl4l 1 tr Ilr �C i 1PPi .� ir'�pop{ iL' -a �C � L i �. fH, gO O o ik I LL a1J e 3a' J 3 1� � ... = nn auNa�tlia o UQ * �1 t uj :o l > ,�� pop nun V :%' o'�Oprop of �r, iV i�7v -'I' al]' -ap .{n. wi plr �r , 'o L�- vC� 71� JL l€ �lS P 13OI77n3-If--,t, lr'LC [�I>y 1 / ;`ems::.; •.' �1.? rJ. SF -.�C� j i . a. J-1- O I �fj C-' �j q .7I]L i.=: +I r11 �.4 `ItLipI`l��il�l;r I { i a ,�[� /, _ - 8s1�. , Jll—� U�� 11lop L9�p�000.Ali I• n {I� � i `.3iier� ]7 a _ ��"'rrs l _ �� 'I� �FoG [.P3 -� {ICJ rr:.fj9 �.�.'I I �I� . _ �� f� :e dal l31 m -�� E �-' �:;' o' �p 'Lu.� �©❑ ��.�qr= -, ,VI ��7nl i� Lip�' - 4 ,,3 ,1 �a.N - ' �- off` _ a,_�t Lf f , �� . I- o =r(� moo, r r all @1f E,, n�� ] lhls 1 ' r E � , gill, - h cA 1� , 1 ' ��I aiP J€�[lfr0$�I�flJi]�"I� I ti 'F' ��t.LijI I Li -1�� L� x ... ��, �_ ��I� �rf' �, —_} 1 d (J I�� {r EI go- '�r � o �o" - �6j1 i�7888❑ ��. �� t r' J .1� l� _ p� r p o F. 11111OL117 -1 - c �Ir Lit I. _ p { c_ `� :1wr PL 1�I ;jx L�iI�I+ 9,7�(1 ,„"{�. '� ki _I; M"t. P j,, oPe i70r[l-��7©� f �� . �i 6 P P1E it _ L� €�� I �{ �� ill it l6IItI � '. a pz d ' ` zitizz A. 1 ji 1 { 1p - q- is 1sanNMboBeiP� x > p._Alt ♦ [ .. jjC aE 1 {�j'',�l �I'J m�� a Ci0 ""c < ! .+- re O- {' L �V�i�.11lJl�r� Ii—[""�.,-3� -1:�h11[ I 'P`'fl"..�1F '1 �P .:�. m� o �F L �_+ ,JAI > _� � �� Z,-I,epo.: z VJI I�LJI. I' 3 _ l'�,' j 'i 1.�-'-:I�ir7L111111� I�� d[E 13� )._ J� I Z l L�"� �('�Q' :3' i tEA a 1 L. %m B ` G ©Q� Pi[llll lfif-'r� JJ15c, , Ij.'��r�.�: Fjp'7 �'i; L ..:� Al 991-' r1Ui�-i[I�aol �7 q .a L�r,c,.x ti .� i r �"'[.HP . _ L£i,_ ..11��. P,.� i7. .p��cJ�� j .'v I II �. p �, i �' _ if r- ��pc . QI � . z . l . c'V_.1��1� J �.� I]i ldf'll F I a ,� ,Ik, sltll . S -� I+[P�: „WWII ,_, �r . ter._ w.` Ii -F�J- I 9._ ° d o G- �J J jLIU1RLi�rt1 y�--'L,� CIE.:[ T+3�J�1'i I?i I�(=1, Ca. -_s lr�t- �;,f r, Ii�lftiLsl'�'.. pj3•: is onVNin9 -�, lth^e a,- nl tali '47f a j� ljfm lit Gv_�.f -� �I �iW{E%..�>, I`poiiFj':L. II 5.� _ -III l JI 1-,J,•. 3',i,�-,'r �ti,. r" — ALI .�-i.. ., ..; _ E '�C`�€,�.�, �Il'y rl��-'�>�( o l la'l ill _ - �d! — -f �: "`l 1.81111-. _� a ! -_IID�J.i t.._._ LA ILA �'=_�i_L�-7.I_ l' il.[gtva r, j'_� c f" �fVfafif i�L_ 'T I� - 7��,.� ��_�� _ __sZ `__._,� _,•.=ice zE= o.:- i c 11.. �' [, �. 7� ' �� J3f' l J i mC P l n i` 31� e z I"� - �17 L r �' f 7 t!191u 7 kl f al`„ 7`rtI Jsd T�i je Ills - L!� MIS _ 71.71 a� !L[ r-' �7L!!, '� 1 c ��i�3 II,; 'E I ' ��1� L� I III [ vrll of �1'�. �4= luiLf mI- y L al :. �f1 L �, ��:{� L ,� �. �3 �� L�1 �� I -- =1 {�:: I1 �1�III�IU, r, r� JI•I �? 3 i ill 3[hn it - r Imo. 1 Ll a qq 1 ''llII _ K �[ �N(`'c, l 19 � cvi r l,(un eFll a vnoNOtlw { �. [ �. _. ILi JL Cl.] �I i JI { �� '� ,p 11'- f 1 t .1L u.'- = f - 1� .7`. Ire• �J'`., �`_t1-il�?'ji { 1; I�ull�,l Ilc'iE � "� F._I u 1�� LI� � :.:� J. �I �L� 2iI pp 1 .Lv� �._, w ! I`='P�!i�ll 'IPi�44sr ..� o� e' rr�i , .1, II �IfPrII,Iur -Pf .'YI_ �yP, !!f�i P ,�., P �17f vE�P.Ja.J,,, _ s� g {.. 4 :_i0' r, I,. rlNl .. tl ap c Fi o �Qi7 iT�o© -cP—� a" l } 7ftl o / rrtJ�� JL ©oo� I {,iv g F c SQL �f [jd� 1 _ ro — l ,c i_f/ ©Lip I�=== IF�AI ifJ[� P,-� Loo3 '�lrl ��I ELr al Lr _ ! 15 ONtl7M3N ' - _ z ,- �_ILI oo�o�' r .2 �� ,i 11! . J ''.Lot� �Cjfi T 1� 1- r 1 + [Il ILL P'r' @3 ©�' =v I fle L _u icy IC"] 7 al �: ,,,,p l i I. `_•[ 2�-€ . _ ' IIII '' - n^-L��f�Il - ��f,as.y,l ..d I"°t.S ILIA ! l .. �Q�ooL��o�o(lo� I��(� F1f�f_ i�_�L q _ 1 L10�HQLILI _S L 1. �L� U I_..� I �(� f f99 � ��-_TT�J� .�f ..'e ] 7.-J_ L7 —�"- � 7.� �1 ��V�� LIUL II� T'U��- J �C-lF.,PI C'�� ,C4P o r d d C � pop° �. C3�L3� 7O ❑E I .� r W4 F �P, ° z n6 �, s9 �i Ipool� If J/�C'� ❑flopol C]L,�l��L'Di�`3.JJ��' 6 0o E'er i �CJC�L�.�G��DO �JUCv'r �'E`bo pop MCI 2�' �I�fl�.,C�'�OrJOOU,�><,a�, WI�l�® L' � --del L �� _ �O�OUO�U�Q0C\> -41- ��O�OO�L FIGURE 9 °°o°o��S?°� 5 feet above mean sea level to the top of a 70 foot bluff, and at various times the lowland has been the bed of the Santa Ana Rivera The area is generally unoccupied except for a producing oil field south of 19th Street, The southern -most portion is a salt marsh providing a natural habitat for three endangered species of birds. The County's Master Plan of Regional Parks views 830 acres of the area as the site for Talbert Regional Park, and would include camping, picnicking, trails, vista point, wildlife area and botanical gardens. The Newport Beach plan includes the following facilities in the project area: Small craft harbors, bicycle, equestrian and hiking trails, rest stop, neighborhood and view parks, play lot, scenic areas, landscaped entry, private development, and rerouting of Pacific Coast Highway. The Costa Mesa plan is conceptually supportive of the Newport Beach plan. (2) Equestrian Trail (Existing. LHB, LNB, LCM, LFV, LSA-002)t This equestrian trail is located on the east and west levees and is continuous for the entire length of the Lower River segment of the corridor, In addition to several stables located alongside the river levees, access points to the trail are at the following streets: Brookhurst Street and Talbert Channel in Huntington Beach; Hamilton Avenue/Victoria Street; Atlanta Avenue (west levee); Adams Avenue; Talbert Avenue/MacArthur Boulevard; Slater/Segerstrom Avenues; Warner Avenue; Harbor Boulevard; Edinger Avenue; McFadden Avenue; 1st Street; 5th Street; Fairview Street, and 17th Street. (3) Bicycle Trail (Existing and Planned LHB,LCM, LSA-003)! The existing portion of this trail begins on the west levee, approximately 100 yards north of the Pacific Coast Highway bridge, and continues northerly thereon to Adams Avenue where it crosses to the east levee, and then continues upriver to 17th Street. A trail is planned to extend southerly along the east levee from Adams down to an extension of 19th Street. Immediately south of Adams Avenue, there is an automatic mechanical counter built in to the bicycle trail on the west levee. The trail is constructed of asphalt and the width varies from 8 to 10 feet depending upon the width of the levee and space, available for the parallel equestrian trail and maintenance road. Street identification signs are posted on all bridges crossing the river, Access to the trail is available at all street crossings listed for the equestrian trail, plus, Lebard Park (Huntington Beach); Suburbia Park (Costa Mesa); Centennial Park (Santa Ana), and Spurgeon Intermediate School in Santa Ana. (4) Neighborhood Park (Planned. LNB-004): The project site consists of approximately 11 acres located east of the river and south of the Pacific Coast Highway. The planned name is West Newport Park, and construction is expected to commence soon. -42- (5) Huntington State Beach Development (Planned. LHB-004): This project site is located west of the river -mouth on the beach side of Pacific Coast Highway, and will be an expansion and redevelopment of existing facilities on the state beach. (6) Primary Highway and Bicycle Lane (Planned. LCM-004): The Master Plan of Highways calls for an additional river crossing at the extension of 19th Street and Banning Avenue, and the Master Plan of Bikeways (Costa Mesa) includes a proposed bicycle lane in conjunction with this extension to provide an additional access point to the greenbelt corridor. (7) Bicycle Trail (Flanned. LNB-005): This trail will parallel the ocean side of Pacific Coast Highway and provide a linkage between West Newport Park (LNB-004) and the river bicycle trail (LHB-003). (8) Santa Ana Rivermouth Open Space Development (Planned. LHB-005): This project is located west of the river and north of Pacific Coast Highway and includes approximately 38 acres of state owned property and 45 acres of private property. It is an existing and restorable marsh and wetlands area of open space, and has an excellent potential as a habitat site for endangered species, plus, a nature preserve, and areas for recreational uses in support of beach activities. (9) Primary Highway and Bicycle Lane (Planned. LCM-005): The Master Plan of Bikeways (Costa Mesa) includes a proposed bicycle lane on Victoria Street. This will provide an additional access point to the greenbelt corridor. (10) Trail Landscaping (Planned. LHB, LCM, LSA-006): The southern -most portions of the Lower River segment are practically devoid of natural and appealing vegetation. This project will provide landscaping along the existing and planned bicycle trails in the Lower River segment. (11) Bicycle Trail (Existing. LHB-007): This is a bicycle trail link between Lebard School and Park, and the river trail. Although only about 200 feet long, it is a monument to the interest and enthusiasm of the citizen's for the greenbelt program. The trail link was actually constructed by high school students from Estancia High School in Costa Mesa, who were assisted, in many ways, including money and materials donated by members of a homeowner's association, a contractor, school children and by the expertise from the public works personnel of Huntington Beach. Over 12,000 plastic bottles were collected, ground -up, and mixed with the cement as part of the student's ecological project to find a way to better dispose of materials that are normally non -recyclable. The students and supporters completed construction of the trail link to the base -43- of the levee in June 1974, and in October, the Board of Supervisors authorized construction of the final link up to the top of the levee and the river trail. The linkage allowed access to the park and its recreational and restroom facilities, and thus provided the first rest stop for the thousands of users of the river trail. (12) Vista Park (Existing. LCM-007)'. This 6.3 acre park is located north of Victoria Street on the bluffs overlooking the river and adjacent lowlands. The park is linked to the river trails by LCM-005. (13) Pacific Coast Highway Bicycle Trail (Planned. LHB-008): This trail will parallel the ocean side of Pacific Coast Highway, and extend from Brookhurst Street to Beach Boulevard. It will thus contribute to the two-way access between the river trail and the related features in Huntington Beach. (14) Fairview Regional Park (Planned. LCM-008): The project site is located in Costa'Mesa, along the river, south of Adams Avenue and west of the Costa Mesa Golf and Country Club. The major portion of the project's 285 acres is owned by the county (253.15 acres) and the remainder by the city. The Harbors, Beaches and Parks District (HB&PD) is currently acquiring the county's portion with 20 annual payments of $290,157 each. Preliminary plans and a draft environmental impact report (EIR) have been completed, and indicate the park is planned primarily as a scenic greenbelt and archaeological preserve rather than as a conventional urban recreational park. Planned land uses include a nature study area (117 acres), wilderness area (18 acres), aquatic features (15 acres), meadow areas (14 acres),.family activity facilities (103 acres), and circulation and parking (18 acres). Development will be phased, and Phase I"may be completed in 1977 at an estimated cost of $2.9 million. Future development phases will result in the total project cost exceeding $5 million, which will be in addition to the acquisition and operating costs. In April 1976, the Board of Supervisors authorized the negotiation of an agreement with the City of Costa Mesa concerning the acquisition, development, maintenance and operation of the park. (15) Bicycle and Pedestrian Bridge Crossing at Rivermouth (Planned. LHB-009)' The existing Pacific Coast Highway bridge is too narrow for a bicycle lane and a county ordinance prohibits the riding of bicycles on the bridge. Pedestrians may legally walk their bicycles between the city limits of Huntington Beach and Newport Beach along the south side of the bridge, but not along the north side. The State Department of Transportation (CALTRANS) and the county have held meetings and corresponded to develop plans and agree to joint funding for construction of a separate bicycle bridge on the ocean side of the highway. -44- (16) Bicycle Trail Loop (Planned. LCM-009): This proposed bicycle trail loop will allow transit from the river trail through Fairview Regional Park, Costa Mesa Country Club, and Fairview Hospital. (17) Upgraded Bicycle Trail Linkages to River Trail (Planned. LHB-010): This project provides for the upgrading of various trails in Huntington Beach that link to the river trail. Because of the general nature and varied locations of the project, it is not depicted on FIGURE 9. (18) Golf Course (Existing: LCM-010); The Mesa Verde Country Club and Golf Course includes 143 acres of attractive visual open space along the east side of the river and adjacent to the river trail. (19) Trail Signing (Planned. LHB-011): This project will provide signs along the trails in Huntington Beach leading to the river trail. (20) Bicycle Lane (Planned. LCM-011): The Costa Mesa Master Plan of Bikeways includes a proposed bicycle lane on California Street, providing access to the river trail at Suburbia Park. (21) Lebard Park (Existing. LHB-012): This five acre park is alongside the west river levee, and south of Adams Avenue. It is linked to the river trail by LHB-007, and its facilities (restrooms, water, picnic tables, barbecues, tennis courts, and bicycle racks) provide an excellent rest stop for bicyclists on the river trail. (22) Suburbia Park (Existing.. LCM-012): This two acre park is located in Costa Mesa, immediately south of the San Diego Freeway and adjacent to the river trails on the east levee. Limited rest stop facilities (water) are available. (23) Lebard School (Existing. LHB-013): This elementary school in Huntington Beach is linked to the river trail by LHB-007. (24) Bicycle Lane and Trail (Planned. LCM-013): The planned bicycle lane will be located on South Coast Drive, Hyland Avenue, and Sunflower Avenue. The lane will connect to a bicycle trail to be constructed adjacent to and north of the San Diego Freeway, and then link to the river trail. (25) Arevalos School (Existing. LHB-014)` This elementary school is immediately north of Adams Avenue and adjacent to the equestrian trail on the west levee. A bicycle trail link to a northerly extension of the bicycle trail now ending on the west levee at Adams Avenue, would allow students to use the river trail for commuting. -45- (26) Golden Loop Bicycle Lane and Trail (Planned. LSA-050): The City of Santa Ana plans to start construction soon on the "Golden Loop" combination bicycle trail and lane. The "Golden Loop" will be approximately 8.3 miles long and will connect the river trail (at MacArthur Boulevard) to the Santiago Creek (at Santiago Park). (27) Bicycle Lane (Existing. LFV-050): This striped and signed bicycle lane connects the river trail to Mile Square Regional Park via Slater Avenue and Euclid Street. (28) Equestrian Trail (Planned. LFV-052): The City of Fountain Valley is planning construction of an equestrian trail from the river trail on the west levee to Mile Square Regional Park, via an offstreet route and generally following the Ocean View flood control channel. (29) Camping Area (Planned. LCO-053): The City of Santa Ana's Greenbelt Plan includes a project for camping areas along the west levee river trail. The project site is on property presently in the county's unincorporated area, south of Edinger Avenue, east of Harbor Boulevard, and north of Warner Avenue. {30) Centennial Regional Park (Planned, LSA-056)' The site for this planned 100+ acre regional park is adjacent to the east levee and south of Edinger Avenue in Santa Ana, On 14 January 1976, the Board of Supervisors, executed an agreement with the City of Santa Ana for development, operation and maintenance of the park, and selected a landscape architectural firm to develop a plan. The City of Santa Ana has provided a water fountain on the park site property adjacent to the river trail, and a bicycle trail link to a small park on the east end of the property that has restrooms and athletic fields, thus providing another rest stop for bicyclists using the river. trail. (31) Stadium (Planned. LCO-059)' The City of Santa Ana Greenbelt Plan envisions a stadium constructed on approximately 17 acres of land presently in the unincorporated area of the county, adjacent to the west levee and north of Edinger Avenue. Acquisition of the property and operation of the stadium would be by the city, with a total project cost of $113041800. (32) Equestrian Centers (Planned. LSA-062 & 065)' Within the City of Santa Ana Greenbelt Plan there are two equestrian centers contiguously located along the west levee, with the city limits on the southern boundary and McFadden Avenue on the north. The southernmost center would consist of approximately 15 acres and the northernmost would be almost 8 acres. Property acquisition, development and operation, would be entirely by private enterprise, at a total cost of $1,374,300 (LSA-062) and $1,100,000 (LSA-065). -46- (33) Polo Fields & A11-Purpose Areas (Planned. LSA-068 & 071): On the western boundary of the equestrian center immediately south of McFadden Avenue, the City of Santa Ana Greenbelt Plan proposes two combination polo fields and all-purpose areas. LSA-068 will be on approximately 13 acres, and land acquisition, and facility development and operation will all be by the city, at a total cost of $960,000, Some operating costs may be defrayed by lease contracts. LSA-071 will be contiguous to the western boundary of LSA-068 on approximately nine acres. Land acquisition and development will be accomplished by the city, however, operation will be by private enterprise. Totalcost to the city is estimated to be $683,200. (34) Equestrian Centers (Planned. LSA-074 & 083): There are two more equestrian centers proposed in the City of Santa Ana Greenbelt Plan that share 1st Street as a common boundary. LSA-074 is along the west levee, between McFadden Avenue on the south and 1st Street on the north. The plan proposes that private enterprise acquire the 15 acres and develop, operate and maintain the facility. LSA-083 is also along the west levee, with 1st Street on the.south and 5th Street on the north of its 17 acres. This project will also be completely accomplished by private enterprise, (35) Parks and Recreation (Planned. LSA-077 & 080): These two park sites are shown in the City of Santa Ana Greenbelt Plan adjacent to the east levee and lying north and south of 1st Street. Land acquisition, development, operation and maintenance will be entirely by the city. LSA-_077 will consist of 13 acres immediately south of 1st Street, and LSA-080 will include 11 acres between 1st and 5th Streets. Their total costs will be $1,185,300 and $974,700 respectively. (36) Campesino Park (Existing. LSA-086): This 8.6 acre park is located west of the river and north of 5th Street. Recently completed, the City of Santa Ana accepted maintenance responsibility on 10 September 1976. Originally named Harper Park, the city council has changed the name to "Campesino" in recognition that the site was formerly used as a campground by travellers along the river and through the area. Phase I facilities include: Restrooms, soccer and softball field, basketball and volleyball courts, playground and sandlot, picnic area, and a parking lot. Phase II will include a recreation building with food serving facilities. (37) Bicycle Lane (Planned. LSA-089): This striped and signed lane along 5th Street is planned to link the river trail from Euclid Street (west of the river) and Raitt Street (east of the river). Linkage will also be provided to Campesino Park. -47- (38) Bicycle Linkage (Existing. LSA-092): This link connects the western boundary of the Spurgeon Intermediate School's playground to the bicycle trail on the east levee. Students have ready access to the trail for recreation and offstreet commuting. (39) Willowick Golf Course (Existing. LSA-095): This 18 hole golf course is located along the west levee between 5th Street and the Pacific Electric Railroad right-of-way. The course is leased by the City of Garden Grove to private enterprise for operation. The 101 acres constitute an attractive open space enhancement to the greenbelt corridor. (40) Parks (Planned. LSA-098 & 101): The City of Santa Ana Greenbelt Plan includes two city parks along the east levee, generally located north of the Pacific Electric Railroad right-of-way, and west and south of Fairview Street. LSA-098 is the southernmost of the two and includes approximately 30 acres, while LSA-101 is slightly over two acres in size. Both parks will be city acquired, developed, operated and maintained, and are estimated to cost $2,200,000 and $205,000, respectively. It is likely that these projects are in the long range category since the site of LSA-098 is presently occupied by an active commercial business, and a tract map is being processed for the, LSA-101 site. (41) Bicycle Lane (Planned. LSA-104): The City of Santa Ana plans a bicycle linkage to the river trail from the intersection of 5th Street and Fairview Street, via Fairview Street. (42) Stables (Planned. LSA-107)` The City of Santa Ana Greenbelt Plan proposes a privately operated stable on 11.73 acres of city -owned (to be acquired) land, west of the river and south of 17th Street. (43) Accessory Commercial Uses (Planned._::. LSA-110): The site of this project, in the City of Santa Ana Greenbelt Plan, is located generally west of the river and south of 17th Street, and adjacent to the site of LSA-107. The plan indicates that this 6.2 acre site will be used for private operation of commercial centers servicing greenbelt attractions. (44) Park (Planned. LSA-113): This 3.1 acre park is included in the City of Santa Ana Greenbelt Plan as city - owned and operated, and located east of the river and south of 17th Street. Total cost is estimated to be $280,000. d. Summary of.Projects' Current Status. .The project summary sheets for the Lower River segment, listing each project by number and indicating the current and planned use of the project's property, assessor's parcel numbers and acreage, zoning, and ownership, are provided in APPENDIX F. Supplementary information for Newport Beach projects is in APPENDIX G. -48- e. Summary of ProjectsAcquisition, Development, and Operation Responsibility. The project summary sheets for the Lower River segment, listing each project by number, and indicating the planned use and the jurisdictions responsible for property acquisition, project development, and project operation/maintenance, and the estimated costs for each, are provided in APPENDIX H., f. Planned Project Priorities. Each jurisdiction has assigned a priority number or category to the planned projects in the Lower River segment. A summary of the project priority assignments, by each jurisdiction, is provided in APPENDIX I. g. Related Features. Existing recreationally oriented facilities, visitor/tourist attractions, and greenbelt oriented open space areas that are linked to the greenbelt corridor, are included in the category of a related feature. A description of these related features, by jurisdiction, is as follows: (1) Huntington Beach. The Huntington Beach Santa Ana River Greenbelt Corridor Implementation Plan included a map of its related features (FIGURE 10), and described them as being: Tourist facilities, pier, specialty commercial, hotels/ motels, mini -theme park, beach, parks and schools, bicycle trails, and proposed scenic highways and landscape corridors. (2) Newport Beach. The City of Newport Beach Santa Ana River/Santiago Creek Greenbelt Implementation Plan included a related feature as being "Trails Linkage (Upper Newport Bay -Costa Mesa Corridor)." (3) Costa Mesa. The Costa Mesa Santa Ana River Greenbelt Corridor Implementation Plan provided a map (FIGURE 11) which identified related greenbelt facilities and described them as the Institutional Open Space Corridor that is a broad band of approximately 1,250 acres of publicly owned land extending to the east across central Costa Mesa. The area could be developed as a major linkage between the greenbelt and upper Newport Bay and the University of California at Irvine to the east. Other related features identified include California Street School, TeWinkle School, Mesa Verde School, Mesa Verde Park, Adams School, Estancia Park, Balearic School, Tanager Park, Wilson School, Victoria School, Marina View Park and the city's bicycle network. (4) Fountain Valley,. A major related feature along the greenbelt corridor is Mile Square Regional Park. The former Marine Corps Helicopter Training Facility is approximately one mile west of the river trail. Approximately one-half of the mile square area has been developed for recreation, including a county and city park, and a 145 acre golf course privately operated on leased land. A general development plan is being prepared for the remainder of. the total area. FIGURE 12, -49- • RELATEDAND AREAS huntington beach planning department —50— FIGURE 10 CORRIDOR k PARKS MILE OF RIVER NAL OPEN SPACE NPORT BAY IETWORK CU:S�UI 1� - jN. p FOUNTAIN VALLEY ?^ ubt = RELATED FEATURES A la— -`-, IfLj - Al L Symbols x N 1 Legend as per _ -' ;��,��,L�j� Figure 7, Phase II s 97-L� I 2000 0 2000 4000 �� Scale Feet =, c . —_ IF r .' �Jn LCITY OFFj� , p. FOUNTAIN VALLEY . I:_ J �' RECREATION &� CULTURAL CENTER r: I a�: ( F:M 3: 91 HIS 111111 -. 1L� �i` ��^{ 7� Low" 1 'ri-71�"`i VAS � Lb_.,� -.a. A IF ��Is�(�tl i a L!<., I _EDINGER AVL �_,15,�1:,.,J�bF. ro� a .... I :s8•e•v`u•'b a O l O o •e " 0 oa000baoo 000at�'o o•o ao: aaba00'-00000abb MILE SOUAflE',•; abo aaaoboob ooa� a oo'a000.' 'o� 0 oao obo 00000 o^oaooa.' ooaboo oo ooao•b.ol i00000• a00000 OF ' oaREGIONAL PARK 0 0 0 0 o b'da�Mi oaaa000 0 0 0 0, AV 00000.. eea� MILE SOUARE iL - q 1.. GOLF COURSE f' !; i' fir--- `— � 2l� : f�.' .- SLATER AV,j✓C I .-vas ��; �r4��• lid a (xk. r: -52- it os P FIGURE 12 4. Middle River Segment a. General. Back in 1971, the Santa Ana River/Santiago Creek Greenbelt Plan made the following observation about this segment of the greenbelt corridor: s area is in transition, but without clear direction, and with no attention to environmental concerns. Its appearance is barren -- empty parking lots, empty channelized river, empty neglected land. The need is great -- for human scale, order, unifying elements, some refreshing things to look at, some shady and pleasant places to be. The challenge in this area is to repair existing environmental damage and create a pleasing environment and sense of p— a� There are outstanding open space possibilities, if gravel pits and "waste" areas along the river can be rehabilitated and related to the adjacent areas." This observation was obviously not ignored. Shortly after publication of the greenbelt plan, the Orange County Water District (OCWD) contracted with a consulting engineering firm for the preparation of the "Environmental Enhancement Plan - Middle Santa Ana River Greenbelt." This latter plan is compatible with and complementary to the greenbelt plan, and proposes specific projects that would allow the coexistence of water conservation,. flood control, and open space and recreation uses in the Middle River. In 1972, Amendment No. 3 of the County's Master Plan of Regional Parks was published. It made .reference to the greenbelt plan, and also included several greenbelt projects within or nearby the Middle River. In 1974, the Orange County Board of Supervisors approved the "Santa Ana River Environmental Plan," which included several projects for the Middle River, and also identified funds for their development. The initial inertia towards improvement of the greenbelt potential of the Middle River has progressed beyond planning, and on to the completion of actual projects. Construction of the landscaped trail system between Katella and Tustin Avenues, which is nearing completion, will provide a continuous trail system for the entire length of this segment of the greenbelt corridor. Other projects include parks and rest stops, and landscaped, open space water conservation areas, that collectively contribute to the gradual development of this segment of the corridor into a linear park. It is within the Middle River segment that the OCWD owns over 700 acres of land that is used primarily for groundwater recharge and conservation. The OCWD is developing plans that will allow several of their water -spreading basins to be converted into landscaped, water -oriented recreational facilities, while still maintaining their water conservation function. The projects and plans for the Middle River segment of the greenbelt corridor are summarized as follows: -53- (1) County of Orange. All of the trails along the levees of the Middle River segment were constructed either by the County alone, or by the County in cooperation with the OCWD and other jurisdictions. The same is true for the landscaping, irrigation, maintenance and patrolling of the trails. The County includes two parks for this segment in its Master Plan of Regional Parks, and its Santa Ana River Environmental Plan has funded construction of a riverbed trail crossing, and a landscaping project, and also includes plans for trail rest stops and additional landscaping along the trails. (2) Orange County Water District (OCWD). The OCWD is a major landowner in the Middle River segment, owning most of the land in the river area between the Southern Pacific Railroad crossing (south of Ball Road) and the Imperial Highway crossing. It is within this area that the OCWD has most of its water -spreading facilities for recharging of the underground water basin. The underground water basin is Orange County's greatest natural resource, and the OCWD is responsible for its management and conservation, including both the quality and quantity of the water. The OCWD has used its Environmental Enhancement Plan as a basic reference in the development of greenbelt projects. Expenditures for recreation and enhancement features upon District lands are financed through the establishment of the District's Environmental Enhancement Account, whereby 25% of royalties received from sand and gravel operations and 100% of all recreation lease fees are set aside for enhancement purposes. The District has entered into joint powers agreements with neighboring jurisdictions for the development of greenbelt projects, e. g., the Imperial Woods Trail which was a joint project with the Orange County Flood Control District. (3) Anaheim. The city's portion of the Santa Ana River/Santiago Creek Greenbelt Implementation Plan was approved by the city council on 20 January 1976. The city has consistently supported the greenbelt program through its charter and continuing membership in the Greenbelt Commission, and also by cooperating with neighboring jurisdictions and homeowners' associations in the planning and development of greenbelt projects. The city's area of concern extends along the west and north sides of the Middle River segment on into the Santa Ana Canyon. (4) Orange. The city's portion of the Santa Ana River/Santiago Creek Greenbelt Implementation Plan was approved by the city council on 18 May 1976. Long before becoming a charter member of the Greenbelt Commission, the city and especially its citizens strongly supported the greenbelt program. The city's area of concern in the Middle River segment is along the east side of the river, and it has participated in the joint planning of several projects. (5) Santa Ana. The jurisdiction of the City of Santa Ana extends into the Middle River segment, and its greenbelt plan includes several projects in that segment. _54_ b. Greenbelt Corridor and Impact Area. The boundaries of the refined greenbelt corridor and impact area for the Middle River segment are depicted on the Phase I map provided in FIGURE 13. These boundaries were determined by and reflected in the greenbelt plans of the cities of Santa Ana, Orange and Anaheim. c. Existing, Under Construction, and Planned Projects. The location of each project in the Middle River segment is shown on the Phase II map in FIGURE 14. The numbering system is a continuation of that used in the Lower River segment and described in FIGURE 6. (1) Equestrian Trail (Existing/Under Construction. MSA, MOR, MAN-202): The equestrian trail is nearly complete for most of the entire length of the Middle River segment from 17th Street to Imperial Highway. To avoid conflict with the River View Golf Course (MSA-327), the trail crosses from the east to the west levee approximately 100 yards upriver of 17th Street. It continues upriver on the west levee to the Ball.Road/Taft Avenue crossing, and then follows a middle levee (marked by trail signs) upriver between the water spreading basins of the OCWD. Back at Katella Avenue, a crossing is under construction over to the east levee where a new trail system is being constructed on up to Tustin Avenue. This new section of the .river trail is expected to be completed in late 1976 or early 1977, and will feature separation of the equestrian and bicycle trails, especially under the overpasses, plus extensive landscaping. At Tustin Avenue, the trail will connect with the Imperial Woods trail, and continue on the east levee up to Imperial Highway, In addition to Rancho del Rio and River Trails Stables, access points to the trail are at the following streets: 17th Street; Garden Grove Boulevard/ Memory Lane; Chapman Avenue; Orangewood Avenue; Katella Avenue; Ball Road/Taft Avenue; Lincoln Avenue; Glassell.Street; Tustin Avenue; Lakeview Avenue, and Imperial Highway. When completed as a trail park and ride, E1 Parque del Rio (Orange) will also be an access point. (2) Bicycle Trail (Existing/Under Construction. MSA, MOR, MAN-203): The bicycle trail also crosses over from the east to the west levee slightly upstream of 17th Street along the southern boundary of the River View Golf Course. The crossing is in the river bed and was originally asphalt concrete. The winter rains have caused several wash outs, resulting in new designs and the use of Portland cement concrete in certain sections of the crossing. The crossing ramp rises out of the river bed at Edna Park (MSA-257) and continues on the west levee upriver to a termination at Katella Avenue. A new crossing is under construction to the east levee where the new trail system is also under construction up to Tustin Avenue. Upon completion in late 1976 or early 1977, the trail will connect with the Imperial Woods trail and continue on up to Imperial Highway. The plans for the new trail system from Katella to Tustin Avenues provide for extensive landscaping, and when completed this section of the river trail may well be the most beautiful in the corridor. -55- r / Y — — 1 I +,3,� i , 'r, _ T li �` ', �•�1,./'!-r� , - 1��iC�t[� J `. �- AAAAA-.p....... J�AM o- - 17 1<< sr ALI �3• .':�: i. •:' ': k Buz Px•' �� C :1':••As � \� .w, +.� <`,3� � •;,�,�--� r Mar, AAA i.— �� •+e J= .l ;�• Qr, � �I .. J �,"'dsAAI k_I CI I� P ]� �I11, 11111JL IL fl �. - ful at J z i U< 3 �= RL j Is o .. j 4t ...�: �� IAAW 17 �s ._yEUL_I�iG1L r . 6� .' •' • •... a . \ i..:.e. C,€ "1. JijLlo 1 1. if al_��ll 1L�' dri _ 0 L o[i➢Is\ r �I,k i;��y�; j _ L nvmaEnu>tvJ i .. r `�.i ': J � jIIAIi El - C]C— [7Crdlii ALI J��.31via et1� � I'_ ypomp e ` _! L a_ coo " • L- iv; _I!,• Flk�_ ,�?k -.17f ��1�.� uNl. - - _� 1 •� �lYl��: �x - �� WN 1.:�1.11 '�[�IhL_ �1 l� I111��I11 d �JUl[_hJuc. ! ''�1— .��nn C7 !�! I _ •_ : Ica I I' 1'�'it `r.v_=AtaxiaMal -, ;,�{„ .�, -`�iJw. -I�L�l. .�� _�,��IE�� LZti_ w jUSt\�' 4� AMA 1NOdM3N 9 n Il: ill 3 'L' �� I=cc� . ��, gfirv-:�I � �, �� L� � u � ,J �,Is 9111ldpll�il� �-__,_�� (D ;ti �J� 1�... �I_Il IIJI �•�1� dl�•�]i ;L _ 1 �i `' �.. ,rt -j r- ��p. I A h 1 - �� F� L�l�� L 14 �f- IN� �4 "II��"=�fi �f � n �'^-16 �� II' �� i I JL--�fn��I �i 2hi n,�= �� E �..F= j, dlll. I �lkn yl�� ua� �� c Ail __ 1� :� �l l �I - - . _ i kJ l f7[]��u. L� f r3 ��f�ll it 3?I_�� IF �u7 u� I]tl 11�;IdlmU It it M—j I � j� =, 1 ;fa� l�l1oT � � C IF �[�c^-�- " . - I�©�!( .; ��I�i • L — J� �L �C It-7F Ji �� .. c. �..: JIf i lki l i j �� j :�1�� I lL ,�, �I �L�� I ��I z l Itit .', .. a �, s y 17: Ora .�_ f` 1 j --14„ �LIL� II . ��';:� 11 `:a{�NI�li47�i�� Bj 11117 _ �iili i� -i- i ii ii ii i .',didflfi- fryI - �:J �� 1F,p7�' �1=�L _p y-`JL _XC ' 1� .7 II II ii[..,I- Il �•9f7C]L I� JC _�I _,� �I �R. "L��(- "I iS nessvio7� I-iE J� 1 11 { IIIFdr. 7L, �® QJ �.. : p t ('•,�• { ��.".• �I- I' ll 4 .li - �� V _ 3 r .F .� I [JUI \�1. •F" H�I I!- I�'� 11 JL If-"ll of 1[-] SL •il s•,l"'� r �y �J�. "[` iI_il�. Rip I�� _ v �! _ m n n IF�1I�I �u _-��, �3��.I fuI` �j ��(� i.r aV .' RpEMEa B `u `., '-1� 1". �L I �f'7: _' - i— i% F' if �C. S� n L 1 j q/i f -•a I[ �llC�.,J:.�, = E - K \ ,\ rc , .:,, .: c?- :l > l [• Jf ."A( 14: h7L.j_j[,JL-'7 ___ f I!� aLJ[ Jf j17 _ . �� +» �. eat - c ;a w Wi�` - <� 11,1 L J 1 �l >l1 aE :. �I IIII...i 31 I �rD r c l ) ��. -\,� a '�, -FQ ' I I :�r; r ;� •,1, I _3 -'•i ,� �{'' ....,_� ]F' :r_�[41 li ",_. ��9„. ' C'�� 'a �rL1 '/,£. i''I `a� )OI e- 1 ..I I '1 1' i "'. E.J -IL c p �.��- ��t "-•' w '_..1� -_�I � L �._....IL EI. r�� - i �i ��I. vi41 E', .If�lf JLn IoCit]I�tJL T J J[ 7FJC7�L� f - - . .„�I i.4, '; � 1 ] n I -. .U` 9 III L.._ �F , � . , � I _ I Jf 3L.j[ Jt �I 7L i0131JL71 iLdIJ .1L]E3Ci❑❑ 1 "I L a I.. d1 7 af. 'JLI61f'If-IC3C3 �\^ \ '! II � .v. I � � : , , E '... ,' >I! 1 '� I ,j i ` i i ll�-�-; � � _ �� a -,I i7 ' "::.;[ ', i•\ \.Q�� alI rI � 1•> i z c_ c 9 L "AL,l. 1F�€—;r d-`�I^I.9iIL `7L�I�'6d1 Uf�ll�Ll ,,4 IF _.T lr . i.. 4. �� l ..r �I C _i i IJIJLJrJ t l� 77//A�Ijt j '1 - u ] — � • 1 1: �1I-..,�-� r IJ,•-iClk�._kint>J"ma c f if �ii 1��.:71; r / _ .�JC7�. 1��: e PJi° - mow' �� G \ �.Ii II'•! ill �; „z a:11 f cc� �c.-� T If Atr ?' _1rIr7 _� ... ... �1 . 1 P`� _ :� dA_ _i,r 1 A4^ t {T. �� i,,3. a l�l� ��.�'��1� jl 'L 3�- - (,f�F' _ .E. 1c Jc n.��., :I p� Jr l I - L I1 {,I,�:.C�-�Zi1101 �1 �11 jji� i 51i 1�r ul�e}, �i' II �I :I�-1 . .•I�... �• :\ NbbO f �I. �I=e-I� ��{7�IL' ]t Jr if fF Is 1 15 . !-',� t fALI °_ f - °� I II11 J `�L �I 9(�7f_` jfI�J�J� _ j l - �1 - F "1 r� [ . I__ -I . -� .�,._ \ lI i 1: S,'I __ o. ..f• SL1 "'3�Ii . 1'I:"` -�",:._. i :a ..II ♦ "� .. - JIJL'_ _O[-.. - __.�i_IJ�]L7LI .. 1'iIL 1 / • , "I8 '��_si 71� -'T !i 841 I^.11 e.i ^: ';- l � _. _ I+` Ma Ma �f^ ij a MAI;"III f F i } r _ ,l , ti. �J r r (�,��r.:a = � ., 6 R� " 11 i j� J II i (. I'JIJ[lrJ Its�l �F All �'. �; i l ;/ 11 'F�` . II f �� : �, I �'�lllll 1 , 1 1 , J I = 3r li Fit iIJT, III) <; ' i{!,- illli j e ;?^I L '?'— �i,1� -•II �P% ,u`!C�_iltlJjlG�lIu11I[ q p ( ,i _ �_l,-,I i. •�P. P'r` \�— II ., ,� I QC. •R I }I71, �hjir.. n, Italic'I, r1-ralra �Ii'11I 1" 11 .a:�12 �6 �(.d •' �� ':. .' �— �. 11 > -'' dl7.l ..�.�_ _7 �:yi- t -i P� :r.,� / .-III "4 �� '� - >: _ Sr i��4] _ lld �1 �r h _i �P I' o�i!f'j II m• 6s I' 11jL�G1I;_ --'I r1L-.- �F�, �`;� '..� .>i` -illl j: •I ils�fClII �,. 11{ j el. -7 I1-II: {I i�a'�'C t l �F. - r. - - 1 �,r ,�I li II 11 '] - f',�. yy. LI i ? f'e 1 yg,..� 'y �,�"" ° ��.. "' aj •!'7 I` i�l l�z J . r'L >i- '. I n I� r- 1• .. '7i 1 �> 1(�I'�•�IF.='I ; 8 ��i o.. .u: �'h V�-.�i�—".. �, ,� .,.c- �` I� . ��.. i:�_ * .o .�E- I v f .7 �s. �.- ii •Pali fk ,�.�n° !j 'I - °� , mac : _ - �"j>t �rvl '_ 1, I. I: ;'. �.LVv k .�� 1% - A g .I I �1.. I ol� -e1=-• .,r I r J ��.-:w� 3 i i1 L I_.. L, fr..dY �t _ 715 JL _ _ I . I, f .. i, "I`!.7 f .1-. --I ---i.Jc -'t - C 111.'---� r�' fil i3f�, �I 99 f _ l u 1 I r ` I ! i "� c. - I y J r - oi. -�i iI 111 oab ' n .�: { f ?° 1 ,.1 ._,L- v;A i.. , F� . J� 1 -,• ° z,,i f ` r �j it f� AM, s��`' ��] R_J�.1 �L `:'�f ei c cp�,_�� I !I_, l i�7 - i—� lt_. �,!' r, - 7 v�In E._. - r Hk,i1tl, _jl-•J,f� '. \{-' > a;.- _-' o'_I.I,L6 I- n{'r - Liti17��:i� .:p4 Lit _ J7...�� ,.l� ! ��[_�� ;� " «:. ....,..> rr.-�c_,��C�� C, L, . j(35c t j(.��', ; r r •�-� _�.. -_ M . 1-�- 1 1_-3 I�j. �.. -. : •I , J"Is 'III-JC7r�-J�'�Un�`�C :.�L' �� ' Iyj`� i�.�lInIl.II - L--• 3I�f Lr�'"'� ]LEI t j 5i ]T - G]C ACC �� \ LY.. JG IJ II :; 1 � t l E IsAU[_�3 I� �� Ar !__ -_ _ic- �._ -L._ ��L7�-NUI1 r .i k�srFAAA s I c�J 1jU©� �0;�� j �� > .1' c T� � ,�O - — �bi1d1� �� t > I �]O[ �� III ]l3(�i f �L �1J , L, _.E;� c �I�o n� o w C a = Mat' ii. �I11 _� �i-5�,- 0 �� a ` e\L� �i �� - it u l Ifll - Ii°jl . 5� _ II Iii:a� FlculE is =- = c .,> �` S :.�ifaC7ll � i111 11 i1 II'11 Ifif lire if ' � �n� �c ( O Lr k? � I ' s� 9IIJ�_ �I ! - _ - ] I _L_LLLLLLL_�L__,LLL___ __ I L LLLLLLLLLLLIL_,_L...k.IL_ forks keeLL ckkkk - F _ �- m / `"�Iw �� ,Y z . a •r� „f Like Ire �.�dF�� c. .lr� Litt,kii J �qf1 �I 11 kc rILI 90 - _ e. .� ' ' _ IL , J it — 0il�it Y.= ,, I it --] l {r .-�f a �` �✓�'i� 1 I �rILL -� Jr s. �v m31n3Hv F I ll ��,JL ItILL'ILI ILIi nJ1L� �f3IILif A ] C1 .I�I tru Ril J111- ©.. �--_ I�-=._4'L�-_-�. -- r. ��. viz JA ;�1.`all I 1� " ��; ILL ,�{� - !ip,...�.__. ��"v`-'ll��IJ��i �� a� 'f�Ti t{9�7 IL�.:�I�c 1 , . �Go L �I1fiFifJ�[l1��.1CfL - _ I-- ©D�ljl_.JD J„ . LInJkJL44."[Lt IE9J� __��n L_._ hY^ . Dv✓ - � C� 9`'.�i.Jr �` IxTJ�� e� ' L�1 �JI �{r. �L-311� ` © " 'C l� 7(- _] ILft— �_ n'r ,rJC, .. eal_ - 1 �, ", P �Ul... y� 7J .-,_;Ii �L eh � _� I _ f�- L I 4 �I m z�'a, ��tra - '�`_ 1aodMar - >7 1� j. J T� I� �° ��,. -_ _�L -�i� J� -�� . �, n lkk� I rlr�� 4 11 i W �. � t �z alum 4 (11 > 7 --4f 91 7 I J �°.,�' '- f ri. r [ ir��rdf I �� .n �_ 1 n _ ��.a i �k`�� L,, U ?� — �i r�. .-`�3� 1� � L _. ,�c n f It II •�jf .; l[ll3[�I3fl[�I-ifs[] dF•I.. - i:' cCJG1rJ, iJl. •v'J' ' 1 - �I �.11l it �!I_� �L9� "1-_, �� i,_ .. _ -:.... 91 ..��. •�., . _... - �,.- ', : - _ rar�G? .�_. r _ -I 'i� III �� 'I �'- _I _ �:� i-1I31 � l AIL J� i� l�-�I Qi k ��.n u_� —�1�� r lf II �[d[1CaFit— '- ��:, t .. l� _. I '-' I R�I J.I' �` Ir l..el �.�. _ � �� ;` ( `;, z. a . `. 1,+•.,, iy r Ij I 1 Fi'_" �. �I ;r- " -i :Pr'�iL`�'[.,1�r:-,il �� IL, �j -a17f 7 Fill r� -I� a-+� v r 1L1E1�-Lr_2fP ; �. .:II�1C ,I yn'l�j fle. Gr _ ] �� •' �,i j�ILLit i it I ]' i[ ih 1 1 5 ,- la ,I --- r I . rlr -IIn-,r II%: `lal�Ill---- o rzr L i f ,?, �S3 y i �� l; (Ifl;,f.I��f�il,dld��11L_ il;l•IEL�'L 11!][ "�_—_--�( _,fi�_.d` i4 As,kie�le�I_ 3( P _ �r dLl lf�� LiIJ' Jl�l ,i — r ll— - - L, _. i r f" I 1i 113SSV1�J 1 - Jf I- II 34 II 11 IL II. —IL7, I - g�\ - E L 1 11 11 11 v 'Ir P If I^�� Y -1 [:.. ,I\ �'/�� CSy�. a' 'A bZ }�LI m .... i[i. -�I �I H�I IL I�� .�,J.�I L IifO_I`-�ILI gr ,1 If—',i If �1 -ff.1 — 71 a z .l. i' L'-3� Utm�i�H._ w �� If' ,�1 k`PN 1 EMEa giv o�„'1 r , 1'i•, it t '" _ 3 oke 7r= ' r i �`�, I��c� �r ' � w l ItI�`; a KxP •, � '�. �r , 0 1 = F � > ..� p >��,r_ - I_.._j I-' r 1 L 31:If :J >LI r Ire�. - ..o < _ I I. It Ir �]-•1 �E Lee -' GJ ==67 77 �FJ2 �.,i jJ '..I� �: , a ,k. f �I f cJ i. le ll,`l' r i 7 ..1 �E_ 77 :]E_ • -�� J_i]�F .�,l�,rtF +r - 1I r \. t, ", ± )�' l�I� ((� �.g, , I,_-.� % f ..1; �I :I , [- / - 1 a �L - : m' I I r E'J[ Il - h i.�� i J 1 `1 , 1 1 rA 1 �l , A I:, y_ �'!�I II 3� ¶¶ E .- [: .- .I[�[ n a 1o�3ii �i�i�i uuolm X _ A �7111 _ I �_, ° s � ' l - . M . Ili�li'I�f4 ll _ _ �� JL a- ,. 1 �r,�1 al auo�I.a1r11.aLlu�or1 .... ; > ,'�S/t W '1-. .h _] �- IC 3C.._ 3GI6IeLL; G R. j� m "� ,�. ` ,, .Q.� f �, i J L �L df�Ljld 63a _Cq�('a-1? r `a, r�, €1 + -ai�i �11'r Jt-i�-Ii_ ram. ._ ':II„'� r� f_?I r .LEI r ` r v: t �I'QI 11511 n {�3` hl-i7 [ - - Will IHU - ICIp - C' r a� IyS ,1�{ I� I Qa I ' -�� I I 4`. - _ � r7 _ 2. _ " • , ,. 1" r I_SJ 1Ll _e]r ,e 1,acll, J \C1C7LlC] eera�, f�1r dEr,-'�w, - Z 1 1 ��ca: ��L_-7I J�__ L 1 f C".� kerb , - 1 '"� o i� _. �f, IJ, Ir �- jJ a l rloo r r :..i Ir. ! -n .• : A i -_ 3oNvao : i I n' . z 5 s�- --- a 1 n-10 G_ a I c .. ` .:.. _� -�� —1 ,• fiI ham" L�711i] I4 [�__� LJ�L r iu. III J 1�.`:� �a . II d � rt`_ �__3 e lr 11-_��,�. i --- —� — _ i F,1,` a I'� , 5 -� , z,_ c" Il�d �T ,( 1.1 •III 1 a '�fu illl irI _.. = ,:_ a > 1 �o �� I n el n-�1111111 �'4�- -� _• t: <?. ai 9 1 .�!'�-,-:,i:IG��1 ,'' 41:7f i`,'�I °'-i!�L��'�! m f LL I I ,J �.... �Ic�L ][ __!@ IT eg7, fi II �, .��1 g a �I u $ ��., mI! .1�.• "I � .:5 ��-.e'C I'�L .: ,r 7 I• �y 6 1 ' p r - it i tedis ��IP I x3 -,y I r a —z �« n/ n Q o-i rd e 1 I a o o-fk� a �-- —"eL— kk 1� ''.l-.._.,I.: I. `Jf�_ I�: _ -..d �I ..:' it al1 1^ II a '. n.c o C`74, Y1 L� rL�I.. I f I:. a �, r z � s ..o,� � T 5�� F. m �I I�� I IL ,IJIJI I'Jf lilf'i qk�r �` _ , [ .f1 _ - �, ` V 1�Ijlll. — it ifl �I h ,. 1 j 1+ �,.,.f ` ),I�• I -..11 II f + .., al�a ILF •II If 1�m\orr ` �f:. -f _f n� N 17 Ali II jl 31 II Ill i�/� f4E) R' ® liif J_i OFF Il 19 I u.•.' G, r d , �-"�I 1 ��. *, .Ill pil�: • _` V o�.E�` -g�... r: la a r-. �..'�` if 1 III IF I P e - 117 I 1 i ! 1 �r1 . �- 0 4' _ File "j tiV Y r ! -�� `.� 111„ ( 1 - 1� 3 \=1 I• f.,. h>� I. ill r I r I]L p O , q4 _ o - 1 QUO �'• A i Q t• 1 ��.+i 13C Vr 9� i i 1', �M �I F,— JL S J 100 j� ill, all. a �� .CIF 1 It i' III �� z :li I } 1�-" Ill�Fy� al I :�j ` Ilk it O©� LSD vi ICI- Il.:.i: �' `':,p'>�i,°fp a1 I i 'pr'111 I Ors r d I P. zl tLllil r QG.: I 4,� 1 • r II 6' 1. I 1 A a �P I ' d_ 1 I. " tY; ;0} 1 L �, add _i'�. : ail�I I ' 1 a..:C A � . - j �� 7 sp? ,:; ur I-ili' iri-liv` I 11j �� 1 „l�Ir al�rl III .� 7 .,. 1 z- Fir p 'tt '_ NH :._ I I. _ ,1� ti�ILL i-: I A-,� � ^,1 1., 1 ../ alYi� J..._; 1i �a S f d i,, �� .t s l� r 5' nr;lr I ILL I i,l�.� �r�l „I_ " �1 �•] I:: If 1i9R11'lip_ra �' ,•.�3 I' rr, mall, h, f .�('" L "'i7. _.\,,ni','�.. "^1 \fi.. er 'b_.. 1. i...II .I,'i Mn�.-3r',I�a 31. •i7 `.'I ,;i, {.: _ �'.� ,l lr J.� 11—.,� I+ J tl I',`, I.�. 1 rC�]LI}_—il. G•-,I_: I. ..%. :s' ':� I -, n->I .� n Ih ,I l�a--' . �. I� J O. , - i I `_ 1 C �� C LY. (r.,rpp _ r i �o r J I , 4�-c>>� � � I �a? _I..� .• il_ Rl,o I! �_ ;i J.. alf �i C _, it II .I�3di• -'I� l a I s „� ,c \4��a�a. , • .✓<'.1�. It"�` r - f_ bplil� ,.r,i .+por IuI�U c�c. {�,.. �, ��: pt ( I i r L r a� , . ��— „ �'y.�' - .. !'. n -F al, F '1 _ III'a� c I� �� GC '`'. '.� 'JiJYI. I ��I i'I t-�.�'ipy gg AAI ♦ ra,.. ,c C .I�C -3,]��.y _ `Y'.. -5%- FIGURE I4 j, I 1 U, �� Ij iL 4rl [ K\ IeLL I��r��r u• � � , I f'"i I� F• 1 I , l��l �.9L�, �. -a,' r - r�� . `eL,rI,jn\ rk"'�o �A... 'i�. i a .�1, 1�-�4 I Ji�. a, li li li ` to' -�. Access to the trail is available at all street for the equestrian trail, plus, Alona and Edna and when completed E1 Parque del Rio (Orange) Rest Stop and Riverdale Park (Anaheim), crossings listed Parks (Santa Ana) and the Riverdale (3) Recreation (Planned. MAN-207): This 16 acre parcel is located near the west levee and south of Orangewood Avenue in an area zoned PR (Public Recreation). The property has recently been considered by private interests as a possible site for a recreational facility. (4) Trail Rest Stop (Planned. MAN-208): This project is included in Part "B" of the county's Santa Ana River Environmental Plan. The location is adjacent to the trail on the west levee, south of Orangewood Avenue. The property immediately adjacent, to the west, is being considered as the site of a tri-city (Anaheim, Garden Grove, Orange) fire -training facility, which may be funded by the federal Public Works Bill. Informal discussions with officials planning this facility indicate that a mini -rest stop may be included in the plans, plus provisions for requesting medical aid or similar assistance in the event of accidents along the trail. (5) Rancho del Rio (Existing. MAN-209): According to a recently filed application for a use permit, this stable, located west of the river and south of Ball Road will be expanded to an approximate 10 acre equestrian center. The owner's letter accompanying the application indicates his intention to provide rest stop facilities for users of the trail, and also dedicate a portion of the property as a trail linking the river trail with the areas to the west, (6) Bicycle Lane Crossing (Planned. MAWT. 212): This bicycle lane will cross the river on the Ball Road/Taft Avenue bridge crossing and link to the river trail. (7) Old Santa Ana Regional Park -South (Existing/ Planned. MCW-215): This former sand and gravel excavation site (Burris Pit) located west of the river between Ball Road and Lincoln Avenue, is included in the OCWD's Environmental Enhancement Plan and the county's Master Plan of Regional Parks. The OCWD acquired the 80+ acre pit in 1975, and began construction to convert it into a multi -purpose water conservation facility. Restoration of the hazardous side slopes was completed in November 1975, by placing five million cubic yards of material along the steep west bank. The upper portion of the bank has been land- scaped and a paved bicycle trail now extends the full length of the pit along the top of the west bank. Future construction will include the relocation of a Southern California Edison power line as well as a complete reshaping of the pit by removing the existing east bank and widening the reservoir storage area to the river's west levee. Ultimate development is planned for 1979, and it will -58- then serve as an additional multipurpose facility providing water recharge, fishing, boating, picnicking, and riding and hiking trails. (8) Bicycle Lane (Planned. MAN-218): This bicycle lane will cross the river on the Lincoln Avenue bridge, and link to the Santa Ana River trail. (9) Old Santa Ana Regional Park - North (Planned. MAN-221): This 65 acre basin is also owned by the OCWD, and is located along the west side of the river between Lincoln Avenue and Glassell Street. It is also included in the OCWD's Environmental Enhancement Plan and the county's Master Plan of Regional Parks for development as part of the Old Santa Ana Regional Park. At an earlier date it was called Five Coves, since five jurisdictions (Anaheim, OCWD, Orange County Flood Control District (OCFCD), Harbors, Beaches and Parks District (HB&PD), and the County of Orange), had entered into a joint powers agreement for the purpose of developing the area into a water -oriented recreational facility. On 20 July 1976, the Board of Supervisors authorized preparation of an agreement between the county, OCWD, Anaheim, and HB&PD, to conduct a feasibility study and general development plan to determine the recreational potential of the area. The study will also include MCW-215. (10) Equestrian Trail (Planned. MAN-224): The county's Master Plan of Regional Parks indicates that Miller Basin may be linked to the Santa Ana River Greenbelt via Carbon Canyon Channel. The channel may be usable by equestrians without the need to cross surface streets enroute. (11) Bicycle Lane (Planned. MAN-227): This bicycle lane wiicross the river on the Glassell Street bridge and link to the rrver trail. (12) Recreation (Planned. MAN-230): This county owned, 21 acre former dump site (Newkirk) is located on the north side of the river between Newkirk Road and the Atchison, Topeka and Santa Fe Railway (AT&SF, Ry). In 1972,, it was considered as a possible'site for a motorcycle park, however, an environmental study to evaluate the community impact of such a facility, indicated the noise levels and related costs of attempted suppression would be too high. A proposal has since been made to exchange the property for the City of Anaheim's Shorb Wells in the Santa Ana Canyon. If the exchange is made, discussions indicate the city may use the property for recreational use, e. g., soft ball, etc. (13) Warner Basin (Existing/Planned. MAN-233): This sanA and gravel mining area of over 100 acres is being converted into another of the OCWD's water recharge facilities. The -59- property is located on the north side of the river and generally east of Tustin Avenue, and has been considered by the District as a possible water -oriented recreational facility. The District has already landscaped a portion of the property viewable from the greenbelt, and estimates an additional $18,000 expenditure. during FY 1976-77 for more landscaping. (14) Riverdale Trail Rest Stop (Planned. MAN-236): This 2.2 acre surplus parcel was purchased by the OCFCD from CALTRANS, and plans have been completed for its development as a much needed rest stop and neighborhood park. The location is adjacent to the Imperial Woods Trail, east of the Riverside Freeway crossing of the river and north of Riverdale Avenue. Negotiations are underway for the City of Anaheim to operate and maintain the facility after its completion by the county. (15) Riverdale Park (Planned. MAN-239): This park site of 9.3 acres is located adjacent to the Imperial Woods Trail, westerly of Lakeview Avenue. By Resolution No. 73-708 on 19 June 1973, the Board of Supervisors appropriated $125,000 from revenue sharing funds in support of the acquisition of the property by the City of Anaheim. On 1 July 1975, the Board authorized an agreement with the City of Anaheim to share the acquisition costs not to exceed $125,000 each. 'Subsequent to the agreement the city has acquired the property. (16) Bicycle Lane (Planned. MAN-242): This bicycle lane will cross the river on the Lakeview Avenue bridge and link to the river trail. (17) Imperial Woods Equestrian Center (Planned. MAN-245): The site for this 10.5 acre project is located adjacent to the south side of the Imperial Woods Trail and west of Imperial Highway. The OCWD owns the property and has had plans prepared for a $1.25 million equestrian center to be developed and operated by a private lessee. Advertising for bids is pending approval by CALTRANS of an access to the area. (18) Bicycle/Equestrian Trail River Crossing (Planned. MAN-248): The river trail presently terminates on the south levee at Imperial Highway. There is a need to cross the river from the south to the north levee for access to Yorba Regional Park. The point of crossing has not yet been determined, and consideration has been given to construction of a separate bicycle/equestrian bridge on the west (downstream) side of Imperial Highway bridge. A rustic, low -clearance bridge has been discussed, with the design including provisions for it to be anchored on one side and capable of swinging or floating clear of the main channel in the event of a debris carrying flood flow. In the county's Arterial Bikeway System Plan for FY 1976-77, Facility No, ABS 6B proposes that the crossing be made a short distance upstream of the Imperial Highway bridge. -60- (19) Edna Park Expansions (Planned. MSA-251 & 254)* The City of Santa Ana Greenbelt Plan includes two separate expansions of the existing Edna Park. MSA-254 would add almost six acres on the south side, and MSA-251 an additional 8.5 acres. (20) Edna Park (Existing. MSA-257)t This 2.5 acre park is located adjacent to the west levee between 17th Street and Garden Grove Boulevard. The park was constructed by the City of Santa Ana and completed in July 1975. It is the first and most attractive park along the river trail offering rest stop facilities to both bicyclists and equestrians. (21) Forrest Paull Park (Planned. MSA-260): The site for this 3.4 acre trail park and ride facility is adjacent to the west levee and south of Garden Grove Boulevard. For several years the project was identified as "Los Alisos Park;" however, on 13 April 1976, the Board of Supervisors approved the above name. On 9 December 1975, the Board approved the concept of developing the site for recreational trail uses, including parking and rest stop facilities and realignment of equestrian and bicycle trails through the site. On 1 September 1976, the Board approved the selection of an architectural -engineering firm to prepare design plans and specifications for total facility development; authorized negotiation of cooperative agreements for various project features with the City of Orange; authorized negotiation of a cost sharing agreement covering restroom construction with River View Golf, Inc., and authorized disposal of the existing buildings by sale to the highest bidder. (22) Bicycle Trail (Planned. MOR-308)t This bicycle trail is included in Part "B" of the county's Santa Ana River Environmental Plan. The trail will link El Camino Real Park (formerly known as West Orange Park) to the river trail. (23) River Trails Stables (Existing. MOR-309)t This 7.5 acre equestrian facility was developed by, and owned and operated by, private enterprise on land leased from the OCWD. The site is adjacent to the east levee, south of Lincoln and north of Taft Avenues. The owners have made rest stop facilities available to users of the river trail. (24) E1 Parque del Rio (Planned. MCW-312)• This . three acre parcel is adjacent to the east levee and south of Lincoln Avenue. The OCWD's Environmental Enhancement Plan and the county's Master Plan of Regional Parks have included the property as a planned park along the greenbelt. A proposal was prepared in 1972 providing for joint development of the park by the county, OCWD, OCFCD and the City of Orange. The latter was to have ultimate responsibility for maintenance of the park. In May and June 1972, the Board of Supervisors and Board of Directors (OCWD), respectively, approved the proposal in principle and authorized preparation of necessary agreements, Several drafts of a proposed -61- four -party agreement were prepared but never consummated. Since portions of the property were owned by the OCWD and the Santa Ana Valley Irrigation Company (SAVI), a property exchange was required to ensure continuity of the land in the park project. The land exchange was contingent upon the filling of the mined -out sand pits on the properties. The pits have since been filled and the land exchange completed, with the OCWD now owning the property. On 13 June 1976, the Orange City Council approved a proposed concept that the property be developed as a trail "park and ride" facility. On 18 August 1976, the Board of Directors, OCWD, also approved the concept for a "park and ride" facility on the El Parque del Rio site. On 21 September 1976, the Board of Supervisors directed its Environmental Management Agency to incorporate the "park and ride" concept in the planning and development of E1 Parque del Rio. (25) Water Conservation Basin/Park (Planned. MCO-315): This privately owned property is presently the site of a sand and gravel mining operation alongside the east levee, north of Lincoln Avenue. The county's Master Plan of Regional Parks includes the area as part of the Old Santa Ana Regional Park. In its final environmental impact report for the Burris Pit Water Conservation Facility, the OCWD depicts the property as one of the potential sites for additional water spreading basins. If the property is eventually acquired for a water spreading basin, the planning for its conversion will likely include landscaping, and possibly some park -like amenities, for enhancement of the greenbelt. (26) Park and Recreation Facility (Planned. MSA-318): The City of Santa Ana Greenbelt Plan.includes this project as an apparent southerly extension of the existing Alona Park (MSA-321). The property is presently privately owned and covers approximately nine acres along the east side of the river north of 17th Street. (27) Alona Park (Existing. MSA-321): This City of Santa Ana Park is located north of 17th Street, along the east side of the river and adjacent to the River View Golf;Course (MSA-327). The park has been connected to the river trail by a bicycle link and is therefore another rest stop. The 'facilities include restrooms, bicycle racks, play and picnic areas, water, and tennis courts. (28) Bicycle Trail (Existing. MSA-324): This bicycle trail along the east river levee, links the river trail to Alona Park (MSA-321). (29) River View Golf Course (Existing. MSA-327): In 1961, Novel B. James leased a solid waste dump from the City of Santa Ana. On this site, located south of the mouth of the Santiago Creek and east of the river, he built a nine hole golf course. By 1969, there was a need for expansion, however, the only available open space adjacent to the course was the sandy, summer -dry bed of the Santa Ana River. In spite of the doubts -62- of others, James leased the nonrevenue producing riverbed acreage from the county until the year 2011, for a minimum of $2,400 a year, plus a percentage of the gross. The county now assesses taxes on this property. The sandy riverbed proved ideal for construction of an additional nine holes. With generous irrigation and fertilization, the bermuda fairways and bent greens thrive, and are easier to maintain than the turf on the original nine holes. The net result is.a beautiful free enterprise addition to the greenbelt corridor, with a profit instead of a cost to the taxpayer. James has made a part of his leasehold available for the river trail system, which parallels the western edge of his golf course. d. Summary of Projects' Current Status. The project summary sheets for the Middle River segment, listing each project by number and indicating the current and planned use of the projects property, assessor's parcel numbers and acreage, zoning, and ownership, are provided in APPENDIX J. e. Summary of Projects' Acquisition, Development, and Operation Responsibility. The project summary sheets for the Middle River segment, listing each project by number, and indicating the planned use and the jurisdictions responsible for property acquisition, project development, and project operation/maintenance, and the estimated costs for each, are provided in APPENDIX K. f. Planned Project Priorities, Each jurisdiction has assigned a priority number or category to the planned projects in the Middle River segment. A summary of the project priority assignments, by each jurisdiction, is provided in APPENDIX L. g. Related Features. Existing recreationally oriented facilities, visitor/tourist attractions, and greenbelt oriented open space areas that are linked to the greenbelt corridor, are included in the category of a related feature. A description of these related features, by jurisdiction, is as follows: (1) Orange. The Citizen Greenbelt Committees for the City of Orange and the Unincorporated Areas of the County, listed E1 Camino Real Park (formerly known as West Orange Park) as the related feature in the Middle River segment. The park is to be developed on a 20 acre site located approximately one-half mile east of the river, south of Orangewood ,venue, west of Main Street, north of Sycamore Avenue, and east of Olive/Orange flood control channel. Present conceptual planning includes the following facilities: Lake, docks, baseball and football fields, amphitheatre, paved courts, picnic facilities and tot lot. The park will be connected to the river trail by bicycle trail MOR-308. FIGURE 15. (2) Anaheim/OCWD/County, The Citizen Greenbelt Committee for the City of Anaheim listed the following projects as related features in the Middle River segment: Kraemer Water Conservation Basin, planned by the OCwD for location southwest of -63- , ;ems S� �?',' ,j�r�I�IIt ge.m�n� „r��l F1�•�.—non. .o To ��t11s 3�alaawVD �Q u o IIjp ., YTLL I o CO F ran AT coo:= most ;JL CD to iL 113Y VI — "TTIw v b J 4L :�'=__1 !A a �CJr 1l= x aw '.too VITAL! r :., VITAL�LL � Q,� o,.._, ¢ ti � Ix o 0 ell Q All wto LL 'a To _ ¢o, n( A;fT: cf a41 F __ i wu �GI�O� —Toommim—A a - Ell it ,~ L— �� ® 'a— —r 1S NIVw a E a]L—�] �r�`1 .. a', 0 call.� \� coal c o e o j J' Cai .. k a ti�� Ta �l 1 I .g r ,1�� `I a Lal C=I� —� C . s� jlLIZA PI X. A. m 4, r /r V _ ILI MIS •�.. I ..:.....::. MI —. UA19 303110:31VIS \ v. 6 fi �� F" ` I �t A 1 / \ AeLTTAo ITC It,o `,'� �3 � 1 III ��' L 111 ILI am/ jToo � o r� vi _ �J_--. _ --. oo to 1XI1 �7 \ _ Tom, Izl ,k All 02 .®LtdTo Lo To IT o' FIT too So r it rTI ILL ��it rTo � 64 L TTo FIGURE 15 ' •L—="� p 7::atI a ;,-; `'` i ...a I I I :71 ;i ...._ �J. the existing Miller Retarding Basin, east of Kraemer Boulevard, north of Miraloma Avenue, and west of Carbon Creek Channel; Miller Retarding Basin, which is being jointly planned by the OCFCD and the OCWD for combined use with Kraemer. Basin for greater recharge capacity; Anaheim Lake, an existing water spreading basin and recreational lake, located north of Miraloma Avenue, south of Orangethorpe Avenue and east of Miller Street; and the Izaak Walton Nursery, located south of La Palma Avenue, west of Lakeview Avenue, and north of the river. The Kraemer and Miller Basins will be landscaped, and connected to the river trail by a bicycle trail along Kraemer Boulevard (MAN-227), and an equestrian trail along the Carbon Creek Channel (MAN-224). FIGURE 15A, Santa Ana Canyon Segment a. General. The Santa Ana Canyon segment of the corridor is generally bounded by the Chino Hills on the north, the Santa Ana Mountains on the south, Imperial Highway on the west and the county line on the east. There are a number of tributary canyons entering from the north and south sides, including Blue Mud, Bee, Box, Coal, Gypsum and Walnut. The freeway along the canyon floor has a Weir Canyon interchange, however, Weir Canyon drains into the Santiago Creek, upstream of Villa Park Dam, and not into the Santa. Ana Canyon. In earlier days the river flow through the canyon was clear and swift, and Indians camped and hunted along the banks and into the canyon and its tributaries. Historical records indicate that in 1769, members of the Spanish expeditions entered the canyon, and after experiencing an earthquake, Father Crespi named the river "El Rio del Dulcissimo Nombre de Jesus de 1os Temblores," or, "The River of the Sweetest Name of Jesus of the Earthquakes." The name of the nearby Santa Ana mountains, from which, at that time, it was believed the river flowed, has prevailed. In 1810, Governor Arrillaga recognized Jose Antonio Yorba's service to the Spanish Crown, and granted him over 62,000 acres of land along the canyon extending southerly to the ocean. The grant later became known as the Rancho Santiago de Santa Ana. Yorba and his partner, Juan Pablo Peralta, established an extensive ranch consisting of cattle, orchards and crops, and through a system of irrigation ditches they used water from the Santa Ana River to irrigate their lands. In 1868, the ranch was partitioned, and some of the new owners included James McFadden, Columbus Tustin, Alfred Chapman, and Andrew Glassell. Over the years there have been changes in the canyon, especially of late, when a freeway was constructed along its entire length, and housing developments started to creep along its sides. Still, the canyon is a magnificient natural open space resource, the last in the developed portion of the county. The Santa Ana River/Santiago Creek Greenbelt Plan urges that the canyon be considered as a visual whole, from crest to crest (the canyon's watershed line on a topographic map of the area) and the arbitrary one and one-half mile planning area for the greenbelt corridor no longer be applied. The plan recommends conservation of both flood plain and hillsides as an open, natural -65- . II; :,` - FIGURE 15A area, crest to crest, and suggests that this objective be accomplished by agricultural and open space easements, zoning, and public purchase of lands. The freeway access points at Weir, Gypsum, and Coal Canyons, are described in the plan as having been constructed in anticipation of unlimited urbanization of the canyon, and it is recommended that they be limited to -providing useful access to compatible open space uses on the south side of the river. To deter unlimited urbanization, the plan recommends that bridges not be constructed across the river to the north side. The concern for preservation of the natural beauty of the canyon, and the desire to live within its beauty has resulted in strong conflicting forces. The County and the cities of Anaheim, Orange and Yorba Linda jointly funded and participated in a special study to develop a land use decision model that will hopefully assist in determining how the canyon should be developed, or, left undeveloped. Greenbelt projects have.been completed and more are planned, and zoning laws have been effected to ensure that subsequent developments are aesthetically compatible with the greenbelt concept. The projects and plans for the Santa Ana Canyon segment of the greenbelt corridor are summarized as follows: (1) County of Orange. In the eastern half of the canyon lies Featherly Regional Park, one of the most popular parks in the county. To the west of Featherly is Yorba Regional Park, which is in the final stages of completion. A striped/signed bicycle lane runs along both sides of Santa Ana Canyon Road (beginning at Quintana Drive, which is just east of Imperial Highway) and continues on to Gypsum Canyon Road, at the entrance to Featherly Regional Park. Near the entrance to Featherly Regional Park is the beginning of the 2.5 mile bicycle trail constructed by the State (CALTRANS) along the north side of the freeway right-of-way; it continues easterly to and beyond the county line. The county has contracted with an engineering firm to study various possible routes for a trail system through the canyon from Imperial Highway to Featherly Regional Park. The county is awaiting receipt of land from the State to replace the county land used for construction of the freeway. The land being acquired is privately owned and lies between Featherly and Yorba Regional Parks. When acquired, the land will be used to connect the two parks. (2) Anaheim. The city has participated in the planning and development of Yorba Regional Park, and granted an easement to the county for trail use across its land at Shorb Wells, in the Weir Canyon area. A significant contribution to the maintenance of the greenbelt, and preservation of the canyon, was the adoption by the city of its "(SC)" SCENIC CORRIDOR ZONE - OVERLAY. The purpose of this zoning is to provide for the orderly development of the city's scenic areas by encouraging a high quality of development in keeping with the natural amenities of these areas and preserving their unique scenic resources as an asset to the community. The boundary of the zoning in the canyon is defined as -67- that area lying easterly of the intersection of the Newport and Riverside Freeways, westerly of the Orange County line, southerly of the AT&SF Rwy., and northerly of the present or any future south city limits of the City of Anaheim. An extract of the Anaheim Municipal Code, Title Eighteen Zoning, Chapter 18.84 "(SC)" SCENIC CORRIDOR ZONE - OVERLAY, is provided in APPENDIX M. It is recommended that the permitted uses and standards of development established in this zoning action be considered by the controlling jurisdictions as the minimum requirement for all developments within the greenbelt corridor and impact area. (3) Yorba Linda, The City of Yorba Linda and its citizens have long supported and actively participated in the greenbelt program, and the city is a charter and continuing member of the Greenbelt Commission. The city's eastern boundary extends into the western portion of the canyon, but does not make contact with the greenbelt corridor. The city's sphere of influence does extend on easterly to the county line, and northerly to the crest line and boundary of the impact area, Thus, Yorba Linda will have a definite influence on how the northern portion of the canyon is to be preserved and/or developed. The city has constructed bicycle, equestrian and hiking trails, and plans for extension of this system to include linkages to the river trails. b. Greenbelt Corridor and Impact Area. The boundaries of the refined greenbelt corridor and impact area for the Santa Ana Canyon segment are depicted on the Phase I map provided in FIGURE 16. These boundaries were determined by and reflected in the greenbelt plan of the City of Anaheim, and by a coordinated effort between the Citizen Greenbelt Committees of Anaheim, Yorba Linda and the County's Unincorporated Areas. c. Existing, Under Construction and Planned Projects. The location of each project in the Santa Ana Canyon segment is shown on the Phase continuation II map in FIGURE 17.. of that used in the The. numbering other corridor system is a segments and described in FIGURE 6. . (1) Equestrian Trail (Existing/Planned. CAN, CCO- 402): The equestrian trail presently exists along the north levee from Imperial Highway on east to Shorb Wells near the Metropolitan Water District's (MWD) outlet. On 11 May 1976, the Board of Supervisors approved an agreement with an engineering firm to prepare a project report for the Santa Ana River Trail from Imperial Highway to Featherly Regional Park. Access to the existing trail is available at Imperial Highway. (2) Bicycle Trail/Lane (Planned. CAN, CCO-403 and Existing. CCO-403A): With the exception of the CALTRANS trail at the eastern end of the canyon, there are no off -road trails in the canyon at this time. The County's Program of Planning, Right - of -Way Acquisition and Construction for the Arterial Bikeway System (ABS) for FY 1976-77, includes project No's. ABS-6B and 6C for the canyon. ABS-6B is planned to progress upstream beginning at the Imperial Highway Bridge, on the southern river levee; thence, it will progress a short distance upstream and will cross the river to the north levee; thence, proceed upstream to the proposed Yorba Park Road. The alignment is within the City of Anaheim and the unincorporated county. A project report currently under preparation will determine the final alignment and requirements for right-of-way acquisition. 'ABS-6C proposes the construction of an off -road bicycle and equestrian trail in the unincorporated county from proposed Yorba Park Road to Featherly Regional Park at Gypsum Canyon Road. The right-of-way acquisition will be for a strip of land connecting the easterly end of ABS-6B to the existing CALTRANS bicycle trail which extends - easterly from Gypsum Canyon Road to beyond the county line. A paved bikeway will be constructed which will be separated from the equestrian trail planned for development under the Regional Recreation Facilities program. In the interim a striped/signed bicycle lane (CCO-403A) runs along both sides of Santa Ana Canyon Road from Quintana, which is just east of Imperial Highway, and continues on to,Gypsum Canyon Road, at the entrance to Featherly Park. (3) Bicycle Trail (Planned. CAN-407): ABS-2B will complete the acquisition of the remaining parcels within the 60 foot wide strip of abandoned right-of-way of the El Cajon Canal between Rose Drive and Fairlynn Boulevard. A 10 foot wide paved bicycle trail, permitting two-way traffic, is envisioned for future year development with signalization at some street crossings. A portion of the trail at the northerly end has been developed by the City of Yorba Linda. The right-of-way to be acquired now is expected to have use for an equestrian trail as well. This trail when completed will connect to the river trail (ASS-6B) which in turn will be located adjacent to and serve Yorba Regional Park. (4) Yorba Regional Park (Under Construction./Planned. CAN-409): On 18 November 1975, the Board of Supervisors approved an agreement with the City of Anaheim for development and operation of Yorba Regional Park. The agreement included provisions for water, sewage, and drainage assessments, improvement and maintenance of La Palma Avenue, police and fire protection, and city dedication of a trail easement through city property (Shorb Wells) adjacent to the park. The total area of the park is 166 acres, and it is being developed in two phases, with Phase I including the central 100 acres (approximate) and Phase II the ends of the project area. Construction of Phase I is essentially complete, with the remaining work concerned primarily with the final aspects of landscaping. The facilities provided in Phase I are: Lakes for fishing and recreational boating, wading streams, family and group picnic areas, day camping, native area, and equestrian and bicycle trails. (5) Shorb Wells Easement (Existing. CAN-412): An agreement dated 30 September 1975, and approved by the Board of -69- i `- ;.1 �� i_ .I: . . • ..' .. . .' .. 1.._.._.. _. � .' .. .. ... i . .e .... _ . —_ 1 _..__fn. _ ._ -� !� -�, � / i � .,.... � _ . I �I` ��. 1��° _ � r =times, � �. �; �� p � �_ aQ � C� r -� �-.� D ,J � , -_� Cam' o - __ o �„ 1 __��. �; _I �,� - . A �,;. .,. �. ,`�:;� f �� s�a-� �' � '.� f - I ,� f :� a �'� .. a r :� ... r` �. �� GREENBELT CORRIDOR SRNTA ANA CANYON SEGMENT PHASE I 0 2000 L000 Scate Feec � J � S� o- !f — '� � � 4 ..^ .��. .� .�. �yN .'�. �•'. •. ./."... ��.'. . •. �. . � 4v .. •',L'. � ��LA •PALMA AV ' `��e�F?''`,t�. x �''I,�.l � .•rZ ._`yy. .' .fit-�`E0. ��`�,�/ �;.4'. '.pi:...'.'..>- �•f,•••�•�3,._.. .( �, w" t P � � r ,� i I� — `f. '�' P '/ + ^f.' N �- . �. $ j • � -.�.. '�7.' ' .' - i - ��g •Y .•�'�� . .. �I s� ?' CC 1� .a� "qC u �: ➢Y •'.'.I — Y_`'. �.� Tty�"' ...... .. . .� .' . ...... .. ... • .. . �' _ �'. ;. �'. f '�: ,l. .� �j 4' •St i ..�•. . .j. .> . �� ./. •' \• e,•' .�{.. S., •, �'y` .; fi�' 11 .%' � �l+ . . �I�,:� ,. �F L�. . -�o- FIGURE i6 U, left I I GREENBELT CORRIDOR �\ SANTA ANA CANYON SEGMENT PHASE 11 2000 4000 Feet rmzl .� ..1': - — sc.Le �'a,1I��. NN IN LZANN © u ip 'I yY �� GI i I �� yr 1aARfL LL��r'��:'� J�r rl _ s ��i', �r .•, cco ale L HIV IL r�,s cAH-nz� cco-40z cco-424 } Y e IN N Itt�} o CAa09 �. p i me?`c`•cco�sXT, 'Y4TjOlvgL tON RM�v ..f, h0\ RECREAT of *a 14912 ::i::::it00 I. L i V I Y r C 0-403A f,1 G\A CCO-a03 / 1 1I �i 41 I e� a i aaal f! Ngr�ti Pz 'tISO 6 ME o 4 JL"�� 0066800 IILA PALMA AV I CA 403E Ly-i QFAr O vto ... •`;_. ` vZL 1 j iON PQ CCO 430 It It 4'rr1�iNpj�It ANtN II �1*&as most NI It tI h=It s" IN I po cL VELAND ' f , If NATIONAL -IJrai T II 'll ear e mAmme o . . POAEe. 4iI� +. �LJ1- �L1r-L c` :f :: / �\71- FIGURE 17 rrr•• maintenance, and the estimated costs for each, are provided in APPENDIX 0. f. Planned Project Priorities. Each jurisdiction has assigned a priority number or category to the planned projects in the Santa Ana Canyon segment. A summary of the project priority assignments, by each jurisdiction, is provided in APPENDIX P. g. Related Features. Existing recreationally oriented facilities, visitor/tourist attractions, and greenbelt oriented open space areas that are linked to the greenbelt corridor, are included in the category of a related feature. A description of these related features, by jurisdictions, is as follows:. (1) Anaheim. An Equestrian and Hiking Trails Component of the Trails Element of the Anaheim General Plan, was prepared by The Hill and Canyon Task Force Trails Committee, working with the city's planning department, and parks, recreation and arts department. Membership on the committee included representatives of the Citizen Greenbelt Committee; Anaheim Hills, Incorporated; Santa Ana Canyon Property Owners Association; and the Peralta Hills, Westridge, and.Nohl Ranch Homeowners Associations The Trails Committee was established on 29 July 1975, by the Canyon Area General Planning Task Force, and charged with the duties of identifying potential trail routes and proposing a trails plan. Initially, the committee prepared a plan consisting of a "backbone" system throughout the canyon area which provided linkage with county regional trails along the Santa Ana River and Santiago Creek. After the city council approved that plan in principle, the committee continued its work and has identified "feeder" trails in various equestrian oriented areas throughout the canyon. The final plan depicts a trail system of approximately 28 miles, and includes information relative to costs, standards, and implementation. On 14 September 1976, the city council approved the plan as a component of the general plan. The location and routes of the trail system are depicted in FIGURE 18, (2) Yorba Linda. The related features in and near the City of Yorba Linda are as follows: Richard Nixon Lake (formerly known as Yorba Linda Reservoir) consisting of 102 acres of natural open space, and described in the County's Master Plan of Regional Parks as having a potential for linkage via the Old Anaheim Union Water Canal to the Santa Ana River Greenbelt Corridor. Proposed facilities include an arboretum, boating lake and trails. Another significant related feature is the 136 acre (approximate) Yorba Linda Country Club, which includes an 18 hole, 6,432 yard, Par 71, championship golf course, clubhouse and other recreational facilities. The city has an extensive bicycle, equestrian and hiking trails system that has been planned by the Citizen Greenbelt Committee and city/county staffs. Portions of the trail system have been completed, and plans for the remainder are being updated as the city expands its boundaries to the east. The trail system will be linked to the river trail by ABS-2B. FIGURE 19. -74- � \ ;_j �}\ {+m �� )}}}}}})\}} ] _tee °a�G$ \,�/§ �% )!!( }�°�ƒ\\I . |�� v> .o- .,. a= .,*QQOCVV ,.,.,a v G '\.... ..IN � ... o I yr tj -- N F. a a 4' .+ 4.1 4 n m o u }FF j m .>R z bVI Full IF oFFIFF ® ®ok O � y ® l �6 FOODFlIl Ali IF :VF III I ® eIF ryLr`i®yy \FIF.. F.(r1fF FI IF Fl IF P?� f 7 IFima VV — \ JL i RS FAIRMONT�LVD' S i IF I IF --. -... .0..... > FI{�, all\?11IF 'I, i O IF. B✓IF I III, All �NF P o JJILI -- al FIFF FIX a V VI bi ;mIF k at I �y► ; - p �p "S 4'�M31A3MVli I� l"o"Ll IV IF o owo IF I It IF IF - V ss a{ j' aJOU,Z—i-.T{!� IF IF I lii �:. I� FIGURE 19 —76— 6. Santiago Creek Segment a. General. Santiago Creek has its headwaters in the Santa Ana Mountains. From the mountains the flow is to the northwest through Santiago Canyon, and then southwesterly through the cities of Orange and Santa Ana, and finally into the Santa Ana River. The Santa Ana River/Santiago Creek Greenbelt Plan selected that portion of the creek between the Vi11a Park Dam and the Santa Ana River as one of the four major segments of the greenbelt corridor, This segment of the corridor was also visited by the Portola expedition; and Father Juan Crespi's diary indicates that the "arroyo of running water --was given the name of the holy apostle and patron of the Spains, Santiago," which means Saint James. The discovery site was near the corner of Chapman Avenue and Prospect Street. The trail blazed by Portola became E1 Camino Real, which linked the California Missions and permitted settlements to develop along its route. The land grant of 1810, included lower Santiago Creek and the lower Santa Ana River. The present site of the City of Santa Ana was the agricultural center of the Rancho Santiago de Santa Ana. Following the severe drought of 1856-1864, many of the ranchos of Southern California were divided and sold. Two lawyers, Andrew Glassell and Alfred Chapman, participated in the land transactions and they laid out the town of Orange. William Spurgeon bought 76 acres and laid out the town of Santa Ana. In 1877, the Southern Pacific railroad extended its service to Santa Ana, and in 1887, the Santa Fe railroad reached Orange. The population of the area soon increased as people migrated from the East and Mid -west in search of new opportunities. The population growth has continued over the years and has resulted in a definite impact upon the creek. Several times the creek has flooded beyond its normal channels, and Santiago Reservoir and Villa Park Dam were constructed in 1933 and 1963, respectively, to protect the new developments in the area. Portions of the creek are a rich source of sand and gravel, which is used extensively in the construction of the new developments. Today, the nature of the 9.3 miles of the Lower Santiago Creek changes considerably from its confluence with the river on up to Vi11a Park Dam. The lower reaches of the creek are generally narrow and stony rugged, with the bottom natural except in two parks where concrete channels are used for parking lots. The .levees vary from compacted earth material to channel walls constructed of cement rubble or river cobble masonry. From Prospect Street to slightly upstream of Loma Street, the creek is difficult to define among the number of active and abandoned sand and gravel pits. The pit area ends approximately where an extension of Orange Park Boulevard crosses the creek, and from there up to Vi11a Park Dam it is in a relatively natural condition. The Santa Ana River/Santiago Creek Greenbelt Plan recognizes that the creek is the only tributary of the Santa Ana River having some "nature" of its own. To avoid the continued loss of the remaining natural areas, and to improve damaged areas, the plan proposes the following courses of action: Study flood control -77- needs and the feasibility of rehabilitating gravel pits as retention basins and regional parks; preserve agriculture; extend and link existing small parks along the creek; construct trail linkages via the abandoned railroad to the north and south; extend trails along the creek and into parks; and preserve and protect the hill setting. The plan offers suggestions for pit rehabilitation, including: Water spreading; sanitary landfill, flood control, and other uses in their present unrehabilitated condition, e. g., golf driving range, archery, model planes, minibike tracks, ball fields, garden plots, nursery stock or storage, stables, and training area for earth -moving equipment. The need for action to preserve, protect, and enhance was apparent to many, and the Lower Santiago Creek was included with the Santa Ana Canyon as part of the joint study area for development of a land use decision model. The Citizen Greenbelt Committees, the professional staffs of their respective jurisdictions, and others, have studied the creek and its surrounding area as a coordinated effort to develop a comprehensive and realistic plan that considers the requirements for adequate flood control measures as well as protection of the greenbelt. A summary of the projects and plans completed and underway is as follows: (1) County of Orange. (a) Lower Santiagc Creek Regional Park. The County's Master Plan of Regional Parks includes the Lower Santiago Creek Regional Park in its Priority Group One. The area of the park listed in the plan's third amendment is 636.4 acres. Since the third amendment was published in July 1972, the county has acquired additional adjacent property for park/wilderness area purposes, i. e., the former Rinker property (48.9 acres); the B1ome property (34.1 acres), and as Amendment No. 6 to the Master Plan of Regional Parks, on 10 December 1975, the county added an additional 68 acres. These additions bring the total area of the Lower Santiago Creek Regional Park to 787.4 acres., (b) Live Stream. In July 1972, the Orange County Flood Control District (OCFCD), The Orange County Water District (OCWD), and the Irvine Ranch Water District;,(IRWD), retained the engineering firm of Lowry and Associates to conduct a study on Santiago Creek investigating the feasibility of a groundwater recharge facility below Santiago Dam and a perennial live stream running in the creek from above Irvine Park to Walnut Avenue in the City of Orange. The IRWD had anticipated, at the time of the investigation., a surplus of wastewater which could be used as the source of supply for the live stream. It was later determined that the wastewater would be used for upstream agricultural purposes. Alternate sources of water still being considered are excess Metropolitan Water District (MWD) water, and/or existing water wells along the creek, with sufficient capacity to sustain a small stream flowing through the park and returned to the groundwater basin via a water conservation facility. The OCWD is considering the Bond Street pit as a -78- possible water conservation facility. The live stream and/or storm flow would be diverted into the north end of a basin at Villa Park Road where it would enter a constant level desilting lake which could also be used for recreational purposes. The desilted water would exit the lake via a small stream and flow into the Bond Street Pit where it would be infiltrated into the groundwater basin. (c) Sand and Gravel Pit Rehabilitation. In August 1972, the Board of Supervisors appointed The Phase III Sand and Gravel Committee for the purpose of studying and proposing rehabilitation measures for sand and gravel pit excavations in the creek. In November 1973, the committee submitted a proposal for the conduct of an engineering feasibility study which, if approved by all concerned, would permit the filling of certain pits with Class II waste material under controlled conditions that would preclude any adverse impact on underground water quality. In December 1973, the Board, by Resolution No. 73-80, authorized certain actions for conduct of the study. In December 1974, the Board, by Resolution No. 74-1894, authorized deferral of the study until the property which had been selected as a test site was acquired by the county, and directed that a budget level estimate be made for the acquisition cost of the pit test site. On 20 April 1976, the Board authorized negotiations for acquisition of the test site, and on 31 August 1976, the Board approved an agreement with the City of Orange for the appraisal and joint acquisition of the site. As part of a follow-on action to a recommendation from the Phase III Sand and Gravel Committee, the Board, on 11 February 1975, and by Resolution No. 75-196, established a Pit Rehabilitation Task Force to examine the economics of pit rehabilitation, to prepare a priority pragram for acquisition and to develop a plan for progressive rehabili- tation of sand and gravel pits. The task force submitted a report of its findings in November 1975 and recommended that the county acquire the Consolidated Rock .Products (Smith) Pit and the combined Hurwitz/Bucheim pits. Both pits are located in the creek between Vi11a Park Road and Loma Street, and the Hurwitz/ Bucheim pits were the pits recommended earlier by the Phase III Sand and Gravel Committee as a test site for Class II waste disposal. The task force indicated that the Smith pit could be rehabilitated by use as a flood retarding or water recharge basin, or after filling with Class III (inert) materials, it may be suitable for recreational purposes compatible with the greenbelt. The Hurwitz/Bucheim pits were recommended for consideration of use as a flood control retarding basin, or inert fill in a portion of the Bucheim property, and using the balance for either Class II or III waster fill. The Class II waste fill would depend upon the results of the pit lining feasibility study proposed by the Phase III Sand and Gravel Committee. On 25 February 1976, the Board adopted a proposed revision to the county's Sand and Gravel Extraction Zoning District Regulations, which required pit operators to develop plans for rehabilitation -79- of older mining pits. An extracted copy of Section 7-9-104 "SG" Sand and Gravel Extraction" District regulations, of the County Zoning Code, is provided in APPENDIX Q. (d) Specific Plan and Draft Environmental Impact Report for Lower Santiago Creek. In March. 1975, the Project Planning Branch of the Advance Planning Division of the County's Environmental Management Agency (EMA), initiated the preparation of a Specific Plan and Draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for Lower Santiago Creek from the Santa Ana River to Villa Park Dam. The main emphasis of the study is to review alternate types of feasible flood control improvements for the creek and to ensure that the improvements are compatible with the present greenbelt -open space plans. The resolution of the flood control deficiencies is expected to significantly contribute to the implementation of the Santiago Greenbelt. The plan is to be of sufficient detail to enable cost estimates to be determined for the different facilities and to prepare a potential schedule of implementation. Adequate detail and guidance will be provided to enable the appropriate public agency to proceed with the acquisition of land and the construction of development projects with the assurance that those actions are in accord with all approved plans for the creek and its immediate area. In recognition of the extensive planning studies that have already been conducted on the creek area and to ensure that the results of those studies are incorporated into the Specific Plan, a task force was formed of members directly involved in planning for the greenbelt, to provide direct input to the Project Planning staff as the study progresses. The membership of the task force includes representatives from the cities of Orange, Santa Ana, and Villa Park, the Orange County Water District, the Greenbelt Commission, and various districts and departments within the tMA. Beginning in May 1975, the task force has met five times. A draft report of the study is in its final stages of completion and is expected to be distributed in late 1976 or early 1977, to interested parties for review and comments. It will then be submitted to the planning commissions of the cities concerned and the county, and eventually to the Board of Supervisors, for approval. The draft EIR is also being prepared and will also be submitted for review. The draft report includes consideration of several alternatives regarding the flood control measures that may be applied to the project area. The flood control measures considered include flood retarding basins, raising the Villa Park and Santiago dams, increasing the controlled release of the Villa Park Dam, and various forms of channelization. Consideration is also given to water conservation (including a live stream), traffic circulation, landfill proposals, and the greenbelt and its related facilities. A "suggested plan" is presented as a guideline, subject to change and modification as the draft report is reviewed by various local agencies and the general public. The "suggested plan" is comprehensive and detailed, and the greenbelt portion is compatible with and complementary to the existing plans for the Lower Santiago Creek Regional Park, the related trail systems and nearby existing and -80- planned greenbelt facilities. The report describes the ultimate location of trails along the creek, and indicates that until ultimate development of the greenbelt corridor occurs, the development of an interim trail system should be actively pursued. The report estimates that ultimate completion of the greenbelt corridor will occur sometime after 1990. (2) Orange. The city's portion of the Santa Ana River/Santiago Creek Greenbelt Implementation Plan was approved by the City Council on 18 May 1976, In addition to charter membership in the Greenbelt Commission, the city has provided funds and staff man-hours in support of the joint study to develop the land use decision model.for the Santiago Creek and Santa Ana Canyon. The city's Citizen Greenbelt Committee has been exceptionally active in the greenbelt program, and has worked closely with the committees of neighboring jurisdictions and their staffs in the development of greenbelt plans. Members of the committee have attended numerous meetings with developers regarding planned developments along the greenbelt corridor; reviewed and provided comments and recommendations to their city's planning commission and council about the compatibility of plans with the greenbelt, and in general have been a forceful, constructive influence on maintaining the inertia and quality of the greenbelt program. (3) Santa Ana. The jurisdiction of the City of Santa Ana extends into the Santiago Creek segment, and its greenbelt plan includes several projects in that segment. (4) Villa Park. The city's portion of the Santa Ana River/Santiago Creek Greenbelt Implementation Plan was developed concurrently with the City of Orange's portion, and was approved by the City Council on 20 May 1976. The Citizen Greenbelt Committee has worked closely with and generally participated in the greenbelt program in a like manner, in degree and scope, as the committee of Orange. b. Greenbelt Corridor and Impact Area. .The boundaries of the refined greenbelt corridor and impact area for the Santiago Creek segment are depicted on the Phase I map provided in FIGURE 20. These boundaries were determined by and reflected in the greenbelt plans of the cities of Orange, Santa Ana, and Villa Park. c. Existing, Under Construction, and Planned Projects. The location of each project in the Santiago Creek segment is shown on the Phase II map in FIGURE 21. The numbering system is a continuation of that used in the other corridor segments and described in FIGURE 6. (1) Equestrian Trail (Planned. SCO-604): This equestrian trail is planned along the entire length of the Lower Santiago Creek, from the Santa Ana River up to the Vi11a Park Dam — kI'I:.. © d�� t IF k .FI0 : + I + + 4 + + I + / F l�}F 1 IF IF 4 ,^,', +F 7 _ - S. I� I- fl p� ;S FIT 1 � pf L' it 3 3 0 ,11 I ,a _ o � o _3 n O U' U :,. IF.41 7 1, 3 lnu� a. ri �I 1 •4 ' W a � ,/ o l a- t �9 �u o a n. - �. � i �§E �� E.� 1 3C 3 0 � C- € a � ❑oe3- 0 � I 0 J ➢.., 4c e- x Q ttt�r._ eU J f� E� I ,I G_- - C� 14 S o_- r --�L.. /. 1 �U t� t _ .. •� .,.� \\, .. .ti ._. "1Lt!.�I,�I -:'`l - .._ fly -u. .a�ii�_Z_fl '9 :. �- VI �J.�- •'.,. 15� �' i -`j�L B��'c' -alb hj it, _ 4bit ,•, G m T .. f - t I� — 1 , ] - �� 11 �rv�lv��lprplprllr ➢ �,�J ,Jfd iaFi r` f'`„"� t `gym.IF IF alccAtitI (IFif Cf IF I �� 1 o.� fc� `��IF t I IF I IF IF /J _, I 2lIS §_!I'yl - §G-:_��_�� VILLA PARK RC F1.1'��..- 1 FIJI Lam 31 IL L_ L— ^ .Ilk Jl fit© o ,r _ ..�.�L� _��; IL, 11. _I It III 7� COLLINS AV © y_. a .al1'L C�I'I C JI7LF G=��JLJL� 2 'p0 _ JFITTV. .411 I I T � Imp It_ -]I � l["� I _ _ •� ]y 3[tl.l` 2 - FIT 11 IF I; �..�\C�JI l➢.=r�Ll �CJ t�- i1dJ� JI. _ dl� Th!111111-111�1�1C�'I' �I ILA � �;�—� � < F i§� I p� 7 1 L �� tl� �� :? a�� l(7 of➢f�Cl 11 p fzl� l q E,itt f �Ll i l� �l 1�� 11 �� 1� l�� I �� IF lk. IF IF VF ooI Fir 1� L `t` / JJ In.n 7 llj( 1l�7I €,II_��11 t 1I 1 2 dk ➢ 1�IF- \'4!``' �� v� �L 11 �11L _ i(�il I`� 3 JL. ]�1 J 1� �a"4; ] II. L 11L 1�➢� CHAPMAN AV +O� ,<. CL7�i \\ I . A—�L ,l „ ICI d13L7�C[ 11I ➢1� 1` pILI � a i' If fl©off — fIF( �,,, I Hill � lLF _ , i( III ,L.,r i;I _IIL O� ICI J ] nfL 1,11 IL 1 A 11 M 1C� LILIC.J © • f \1- . 1 I!Ilc '-�—^ JL *� I —Ili, FL � �....ntll_'I� - cfLOP� p C-1 �I��f II. - e? ,`� T ' 2�L�� 1IFF, �� I 9III illf]fd hI - I I Lei'l1121 �' �� kI �©0000 _� �r I �!it F Ea L_ ➢l�� S l7dl I �� UCl 9L 9 A I -_. .��a�- _ �?r C� .t ... ❑LI��f�.713L]'It�9i�-_ „\ GARDE,N,GROVE FWYLJ Imo` GjU? I - IF I MEMORY LANE k-__'• -'�4' tL. I��]lllJitk Jl� .➢I Ilk ... , .1 I' �tI� lllair�P \ tea_IIt }�Ip� Lil �IF �:� U�'u��a , /, rljF9 �o � a� , ! � [i i..!ji '. l I :L , 1 L c_3 nt 1 � !` �• -,�iC QL�� t ,.. F a� V, i4➢1➢1� pl �(�� @➢f ter, CI It C_J i - 3�^ - r ,[� _ •�Jl��ili I i 4J 1�j� � JI �VFkAjkFI 1163_� �I�a �f � ��,� f "I InabIk1-� _ dE --` lf'fi �ai�f �fFINE ➢,a ]rl� ail p-�I�� .' E Ir �� . J I, , It FIFF IF 1 lu j f rill GREENBELT CORRIDOR Iflt;�� a 1! °�1��➢� �lt� ©�� ry:] c ➢I—�L✓ SANTIA60 CREEK SEGMENT x ] �� iiL- II ➢.� �I.� IEIS i1113 1 `i�l 11 l f �6\ \ 91 11 �1� ��_� 1 -, ®® PHASE i kicI l c�r f.lC -:.11 31 1 L J 0 II 1(9111 JI E 7k 1 I II. t z000 o :aoo u000 IlLif7171.7j77.]1I filS1'U k�.L Seale. reee q �L 7f 7I ]I 7 91 R ]E' 9[ P' 11 I Itdt [j,-1F' "IL I ! E]t"•�I 1 1 ,� L -,__ RJl j] �[ L ][If( [ lllIF C[ JLIE LII IIIO I11Llf lf. JI ..]C, 1Ldf 11 11�.. � _ RIT 7 �� 30 t ➢ �G �ol�ti r LAIN ©[:�e3�311L`j©C !! \j 1l - 4. _�f a . l j� 0� ©© ��❑❑f a 7l f 7L n 'c_ , 1poIje� n3©cuo� �( �I r! I ��o�ooL l� ��/� t. 7 L a 7E3o �°r oo�douc ' �t I FL.-82- li�r I 1t 7 c L11 w� I - o �E] oo® L� j JFIT Ilk ��°I�1L�rifn�!➢Ill➢��]Q tl§ �I]CCI��qq�[ a k•1[�OC �� pq6, FIGURE 20 �nri�eiFll,ld� Rr ".! ��= 3fll_3LL]C�f1L11 (hY7G3��JJJL �� i ` Q e qw L _ . ->�IF GAG c� ; s LI ©1f it tr "L ., / Gamkpin ' c NL _ ire rim me A a'7 ; j{ ---�n .� a 1 If`�j`'_cl ��' v��1 a' -- J 7 �t/ i 1. cpl f rr -ON ��4LJlbtH� I` 1 1 'f�G.I)L1,�Li al .'I I IN IF Jill. FJFII. _G y.A� i ��..� / S { yob ✓ FAG--i� ��IB %i ii �r��1 1L Jae f�� — �� _ �•. �Fee Fee IYLfI .. - -RON it N - _ •IN IN per / a� I� L r t fS I r I LIIFee L4ll�._ rJim ILF1, ._,4-._'—_•r' j OF, % a L pUp Feel � l P / 4LS�i��Li�9?9u�� l_.,_ L IF s __LJIJ I e I // l _ ] tt�74 [ . l L` I(„ . II. I, IG ' r rmil_ co 707 _ .. ` ry v Who f L, f { � q Lwe JL h iI t ti-. s� soR� i f I I F J I 1 G ON447 feelT AV 1 (I 604A Jj SOR 704 F BiEtkl�l�Y II ,_I Li OLD L__AfIrJ o ` sco7ot } � LOWL n;— �" raj{r� 'l2 If11 ttfJ� s Rbvi 't jJL T lI µ SVP 659 Ni -�� JL I �Idltl�l �Id, IF} - x! 5S+ I'I d n Q. o ! i VILLA PARK RO tRd SOR-686 / Itr N. 'P'',�. .i nSOR 695 t - �C I - I' 1 SOR 668 O1� :Let 698 Da, / r / F /# -' it �C . _ VI SVP JI Jf �� nJ� / V� �� ' fi I I^F-IFFI me ,_+1 p Felt ` SCO 665 n I 1� er + I I _-.�..J�J �7 �L� 1 p u � - df SOR 6 �� ! -'t- I COLLINS AV C 1 �n ]I O ANiMkIM `� d'Cf�l L[1�� r rem:�� __ — - JIIF 1 f�JL�l6iJim SCO-653 a JL �.., '�. �� JL�©©[_` J JI - SOR OSA BOND AV (5 \� •�flEGIGxAIfl Dk l• �Flee—sfa. 71�LSI �cJ[ I�L7LJC7 � ��IF 3 NO.] ir ii 641 r _ ' a I Fee '.i 6 + sco 67a /rIN I-Nimpere Np IF utti i� "4 l Fri I( �vY`� 1[ILLLL� BIZFee ! 1IF E� J _. �i 91 �IF] 11 Li�CI[ I[�f 11�L[JCi[ v . _ `'I ` 1j _ qd p J [ 7 ] �J [� �I,II SL313 --!' 'o"�'SOR-656 ' s / U\ -� ifl[i�i[��LJ,flu[ a �L!"_3SCO_65D ' ULF per7C I { L% ,� ; '° r -_% ti 3 - JI.. ] n.! ....-a ^j[ _Jl��_ CHAPMAN AV a 1/ L(-�IdLLLf[Jl ��{� , — [L�e��f`Il� N �7 311 — eFIN ((,� ��77S�7OR 626 p= ` _.� - JL�L7r1LJ]©LLJ /� / �. "1 rr��L LLIJ�IIfG�]L7CJC71 I[ r a JL—I L��d i;� /� 1 [] C�` 1<- 7 9 LIfiV�u Cil I©LL LuL[ .. ..0 L76J �� Na - { ��` //��'- - i - �. y9 IL1Ll L- LV i SOR-538L11 - i� 9/1 / \ • 49 IN GARDEN GROVE FWY a - LIIJ _ �jIS, Ai—�L,ja.' �J < ✓/LU�ermi'� /i _ 7J cSSA- 0 A' it Free 7 EN GROVE BL / R'� 55A 674 �` L� O LiIJ��43� i I k�Z j i. \ (e . 11 .% e OF F is ,... ......_ . MEMORY LANE . © _ I ,/ i \gym �` � - _.. ! .. c.➢�.jrL7y^I�J,', - rgfi III.�..^'�'H �,l.`IE- "� Ott, 6041 55A_b C .�.. ,fi'. I .SOR 623„k soil It", 629FPF-��U_�Il'1 1..11Jf�©L�'V�, j� °� L -:>`i ,�l �'I't.. _ It SOR 605A Y/ �I L 1J r .. r [ ( pew ! t SSA-620 1L'"I 1�� - J j� .I fAJ i��V� 7 �I, . Of .... ....... sco 6os "i P 71 II a r feel 3 Oj r.-9Lf1J� l ; �er .. f]LI E) I- p > SSA 60B 05 I� C aEF t f � L� � � ` 'Y Critt�� ) _ C ��.. I II F' �V SSA 617 p I -. I �� G repel L" ppit OFF Fell �� per E.r 13 r �7� a�o-� A pier' OR `1.�'i �FIffELFROFFLU) mill �� '�� I� ' I •r�� u{I� 31,E �ti �• irepte lk,'EL-.ILA.�f i t7re •sra I n I�Ir I I� >_ ,i� P 4.r:� 1 rAFi�- �l l R\7a ,<>!"�� IL If l(� J�� i] I r I rl4,a r NU LL �J�I� �Ii3I'-il �f �! L 'I f �� 1I lil II I 1." ttg } L_ L i �L," �S �a i '� live ;�FOFF11 ;I I[ f Its f i I I II ol�,� ' J��l�: u�ili(1' ll�lf IF i' I; ?�; ,�i r: l a` . �`FF f �i� ��, NRON .7 , - III 11 ~ - II i�f1 d j tL i IFN � S. ' 9 �f r.. n QI ` III I[711 .'r II 'a Fe fITI41 !.; I Jr.f" za�� 1 Lt7L -.� -a.-� ,[)� "' `�� Fee NOR jig Lit isi: It m'�fi itIiiij � l 1. JIL i [I I fi fi I` �. ,' 1�4I ! �rJa'7 �G 1�7 G s��,per y d fi� t f u ash i•FeeJf� IL l� ��7- I 11K n � - 9I i ��p 3 .I I f 71 it it pa.. 4)h+kU ° a "`rL I IL -� { P II�� I�I r {�II 'I' IJA�— It�J �i EiLr` ¢'� 3) % �'' GREENBELT CORRIDOR 6- It n II L. in I 3� E?91 dr I [N t ° ji. - �I l `ZGI L �'�- ®�� / r'a \f r �� - —a +4 SRNTINGO CREEK SEGMENT _ �tl v } i 1 j a 'NO91 l h7� ��.^� .� 91 "- II I I 1 L� JfL _ uuuu /\`/ ��f,/ / PHASE II �1 Jr nl 4 t II SlIl�+31 +p �I _LEI ° �[� F� %Os�r'' �[ 9[ �I hr 11 iil It I II 11 j 7 1J ) 7] �, J�. _ j[ - I.�I r l �I If 1 {J 1 it ! .� L lip,11 1 I�tl `1 j. ��, J iil �kf �171 II III �1 �� / 2aoa 2ooa "fiuL i. 'f it iL it �ngfiouFtWilI ��-/�l 1 LLB LLa {� 7[ ;Eil] ' lk ULFRI If I �LJL7 l 11 L ( i� nt �LLLL�3 u JLJr�I F - n[Ilu iL�la!- o�o�oo�� ' il r LIB �a _� ��. �( �' LOU r= {L• 4r �If 'I1CC71-I�i�!f�f 1i=1[_�m�� 'A�'_iL =. 1�i}!q �J �i . PI r Iir {._ I �� 5LIP —83— RIeuBE 21 /�.° �i�� b/.�� The trail's route and responsibility for acquisition, development, operation and maintenance, and related costs, are all dependent upon a determination of the ultimate flood control channel configuration, which is currently under study by the County's Project Planning Branch, EMA. It is estimated that this trail may not be completed until sometime after 1990. (2) Equestrian Trail (Planned. SOR, SCO-604A): This project is intended to provide an interim trail along a portion of the creek until eventual completion of SCO-604. The trail will begin at Loma Street, along the north side of the creek, and continue generally upstream for a distance of approximately two miles to the eastern end of SOR-704. The route is depicted on FIGURE 21 and described in detail as follows: East from Loma Street to easement along southern boundary of AP 370-11-4, to easement along northwest boundary of AP 370-11-6, easterly along a dedicated trail on southern boundaries of AP 370-11-19 and AP 85-541-5 to AP 93-280-16 in the creek; then northeast in the creek channel to AP 93-280-2, easterly in creek channel to AP 93-250-36, and southeasterly in creek channel to AP 93-250-372 to east end of SOR-704. (3) Bicycle Trail (Planned, SCO-605): The County's Arterial Bikeway System Program published in June 1975, includes a bicycle trail along the creek from the river upstream to Irvine Regional Park The trail is programmed for development in increments, i. e., ABS-7A: Santa Ana River to Bristol Street in FY 76/77; ABS-7B: Bristol to Cambridge Streets in FY 77/78; ABS-7C: Cambridge Street to the Southern Pacific ROW in FY 77-78; and ABS-7D: Southern Pacific ROW to Irvine Regional Park ASAP. The County's ABS Program for 1976-77, published in July 1976, does not include ABS-7A. The trail route along the creek and the schedule for completion is, like the equestrian trail SCO-604, dependent upon a determination of the ultimate flood control channel configuration, which is currently under study by the County's Project Planning Branch, EMA. (4) Bicycle Trail (Planned. SOR, SSA, SCO-605A): This project is intended to provide an interim bicycle trail from the river to the vicinity of Villa Park Dam via a route that is essentially alongside the creek. The route of this interim trail was determined by a coordinated planning action between the Citizen Greenbelt Committees of the cities of Orange, Santa Ana, and Villa Park, the committee for the County's Unincorporated Area, and staff representatives of their respective jurisdictions. The route as approved by the cities and transmitted to the county for adoption is as follows: Beginning at the existing bicycle trail on the west levee of the Santa Ana River, and at a point in the immediate vicinity of the Garden Grove Boulevard bridge, the trail will cross the river to the east levee and enter the City of Santa Ana on Memory Lane, proceed easterly thereon as a striped and signed trail, beyond Flower Street, through. an alley to the Southern Pacific Railroad, and then along the railroad -84- right-of-way to the creek bottom. Within the creek the trail continues upstream along the south levee, with undercrossings at the Santa Ana Freeway and Main Street, and on to Valencia Avenue where the trail crosses to the north levee and continues thereon to an undercrossing at Parker Street, then through the Santiago Day Camp to undercrossings at the Garden Grove Freeway and Glassell Street, through Hart Park to Cambridge Street. At this point, from Cambridge Street to Tustin Avenue, the route may likely require additional study and a public hearing to consider various alternatives and determination of the most acceptable alignment. A recommended route for consideration is as follows: Proceed south on Cambridge Street along.an existing striped and signed trail, beyond Fairway Drive, to the northern side of the Garden Grove Freeway right-of-way, then easterly thereon to Tustin Avenue, and north as a striped and signed trail to the creek. Within the creek again, the trail proceeds along the south levee with undercrossings at the Newport Freeway and Chapman Avenue, on to the planned bicycle trail along the Southern Pacific Railroad right-of-way, northerly, to Collins Avenue, then easterly thereon along a striped and signed trail to Prospect Avenue, southerly thereon to Bond Avenue. (Note: the route between Collins and Bond Avenues will likely require a public hearing due to parking restrictions). At Bond Avenue the route proceeds easterly as a signed and striped trail to Hewes Avenue and north/northeasterly along a striped and signed trail to Villa Park/Santiago Canyon Road. The trail then proceeds easterly along Santiago Canyon Road on an existing striped and signed trail to Loma Street where it turns north, and as a striped and signed trail on to Taft/Serrano Avenue. It then continues east as a separate trail along the south side of the planned route of the extension of Taft/Serrano Avenue, as presently depicted on the County's Master Plan of Arterial Highways, to that portion of AP 93-208-15 which is planned for acquisition by the Orange County Flood Control District. (Note: The precise route of this portion of the trail will. be dependent upon the final alignment of the Taft/Serrano Avenue extension). The trail then enters the creek and continues to the east end of SOR-704. (5) Bristol Reservoir Rest Stop (Planned. SSA-608): The City of Santa Ana Greenbelt Plan includes the 3.5 acre Bristol Reservoir, which is adjacent to the south levee of the creek and east of Bristol Street. This property is well located for a rest stop with bicycle racks, hitching posts, drinking fountains and benches. (6) Jack Fisher Park (Existing. SSA-611): This 3.9 acre city park is located directly east of Flower Street and adjacent to the creek's north levee. The park was constructed in 1932 as part of the Work Progress Administration (WPA). Facilities include restrooms, wood stoves, picnic tables and benches, a log cabin for public meetings, and playground equipment. Parking is available along Flower Street. _85_ (7) Rest Stop -Park & Concession Stand (Planned. SSA-614): The site of this project, in the City of Santa Ana Greenbelt Plan, is located north of the creek and east and west of Main Street. The plan indicates that this 1.8.3 acre site will be used for private operation of commercial centers servicing greenbelt attractions. (8) Park (Planned. SSA-617): This park is included in the City of Santa Ana Greenbelt Plan for location on a 7.9 acre site south of the creek and west of Main Street. The park will be city owned and operated and the acquisition and develop- ment costs are estimated to be $711,000, (9) Santiago Park and Day Camp (Existing.' SSA-620): This 27 acre park and day camp is located along both sides of the creek for almost a mile between Main Street and the Garden Grove Freeway. The facility is divided into two use areas: Santiago Day Camp between Santiago Boulevard and the Garden Grove Freeway; and Santiago Park, which is located between Main Street and_Santiago Boulevard. The day camp was opened in 1957 for camping purposes, while the park was completed in 1936 as a WPA project. Day camp facilities include hiking trails, picnic tables and restrooms. The park has lighted tennis courts, activity fields, recreation buildings, hiking trails, picnic tables and barbecue pits, playgrounds, lawn bowling courts, offstreet parking, and restrooms. (10) Bicycle Lane/Trail (Planned. SSA-622): This project is part of the City of Santa Ana's Golden Loop bicycle trails/lane which will commence as LSA-050 at the Santa Ana River and MacArthur Boulevard, and eventually becomes SSA-622 on Lincoln Avenue where it will connect with the creek trail. (11) Hart Park (Existing. SOR-623): This 38 acre _. park is located in the City of Orange, north and south of the creek and east of Glassell Street. The park was initially constructed under the WPA program in 1933, and an expansion towards the freeway was completed in 1975. Facilities include activity fields, an outdoor swimming pool with shower and locker rooms, tennis courts, picnic facilities including gas stoves and fire ring, a clubhouse, drinking fountains, concession stands, offstreet parking, and restrooms. (12) Hart Park Expansion (Planned. SOR-626): This 15 acre site is located directly east of and adjacent to Hart Park, and will be used for expansion of this popular park. The present concept provides for this property to be developed as a passive area of the park. The City of Orange has also indicated a desire to further expand the park easterly of Cambridge Street an to 4.5 acres currently, owned by the County (AP No. 390-371-7). Additional expansion may include the creek and adjacent vacant land between Glassell Street and the Garden Grove Freeway. ME] Z (13) Recreation Center. (Planned. SOR-629): This 10 acre site,located easterly and southerly of Hart Park, is a former sand and gravel pit that is being planned for private development and operation as a tennis club. The facility will have ten tennis courts, a swimming pool and a clubhouse. (14) Bicycle Lane (Existing. SOR-632): This signed and striped bicycle lane provides a linkage to the creek via' Cambridge Street. Upon completion of the creek bicycle trail (SOR-605A), it will also provide a linkage to Hart Park for residents north of the creek. (15) Santiago Golf Course (Existing. SOR-635): This nine hole golf course is located within the creek floodplain westerly of Tustin Street,. east of Cambridge Street, and north of Fairway Drive. The course is privately owned but open to the public, with an overall length of 2,236 yards covering 26 acres. Facilities include a pro shop, cafe and off street parking. (16) Yorba Park (Existing, SOR-638): This 7.9 acre park, located easterly of the creek and south of Chapman Avenue, was completed in 1968 on land formerly used as a sanitary landfill. Methane gas release and ground settling have been problems in maintaining the park. Facilities include four baseball diamonds, tot lot, restrooms, concession building, and offstreet parking. Adjacent to and south of Yorba Park is a YMCA facility (AP No. 392-071-2, 5.04 acres). It is in an interim stage of development with present facilities limited to a recreation center in which a number of indoor activities are made available. Future expansion is anticipated. (17) Open Space (Planned. SOR-641): This 28 acre property is located on both sides of the creek, south of Walnut Avenue, and generally west of the SPRR right-of-way. The City of Orange had included the property �s a community park in its Master Plan of Parks, however, due to the proximity of the Lower Santiago Creek Regional Park, and its planned facilities, the city has approved the use for open space as part of the greenbelt corridor. (18) Equestrian Trail (Planned. SCO-644): This equestrian trail will link the creek trail to the City of Villa Park via the Southern Pacific Railroad right-of-way, which is in the process of being acquired by the county. (19) Bicycle Trail (Planned. SCO-647): The County's Arterial Bikeway System Program includes Project ABS-8A as an offroad bicycle trail along the Southern Pacific Transportation Company's right-of-way from Collins to Newport Avenues. The trail will connect with SCO-605 as it crosses the creek. Signals will be provided at street crossings. (20) Trail Park & Ride (Planned. SCO-650): This 44.6 acre site is within the Lower Santiago Creek Regional Park, _87_ and is located on both sides of the creek, west of Prospect Street, and north of Spring Street. 'The site is planned to be developed as an active park/trail park and ride, which will provide offstreet areas where vehicles may be parked and bicycles, children and horses safely unloaded. The facility will also provide a needed rest stop at the intersection of the creek trails with the SPRR trails (SCO-644 &_-647). (21) Park (Planned. SCO-653): This 68 acre site is located south of the creek, north of Bond Avenue, and west of Hewes Street. On 10 December 1975, the Board of Supervisors approved Amendment No. 6 to the Master Plan of Regional Parks which included this property in the Lower Santiago Creek Regional Park, and authorized its acquisition. The site is level and is considered to be ideal for locating the park's high activity recreational facilities, including sports activity fields and courts, tennis complex, swimming pool, picnic areas, trails and landscaping, recreation center building, offstreet parking and restrooms. (22) Equestrian Trail (Planned. SOR-656): This equestrian trail is planned to link the creek trail to Crawford Canyon Road, thus providing an important linkage from the equestrian oriented areas and trails of E1 Modena and Cowan Heights to the creek and Lower Santiago Creek Regional Park. (23) Equestrian Trail (Existing. 01P-659): This trail links the planned creek equestrian trail (SCO-604) with the City of Villa Park equestrian trails system via Villa Park Road and Lemon Street. It will provide additional access to the creek corridor and Lower Santiago Creek Regional Park, and will also link to the Anaheim Hills equestrian trails system. (24) Bicycle Lane (Existing/Planned. SVP-662): The existing portion of this bicycle lane extends from the SPRR on the west along Villa Park Road easterly to Lemon Street. The planned portion continues along Villa Park Road across the creek to Hewes Street. When completed, the lane will link; the Villa Park bicycle trail system to the creek trail and the Lower Santiago Creek Regional Park. 1. (25) Trail Park and Ride - Vista (Planned. SCO-665): This 6.8 acre site is located north of Santiago Canyon Road, south of the creek and west,of Santiago Boulevard, and is within the Lower Santiago Creek Regional Park. The planned use is similar to that of project SCO-650, and also will provide a vista point overlooking the creek corridor. (26) Trail Park and Ride - Campground (Planned. SOR-668): This 48 acre site is within the boundaries of the Lower Santiago Creek Regional Park and is located north of Santiago Canyon Road, on both sides of the creek and east of Loma Street. Of the total project area, 16 acres are currently �.E'.I.E owned by the county and are the former site of refuse disposal station No. 22. This disposal site is presently experiencing methane outgassing and ground settling, and is being considered for some interim practical greenbelt use. In addition to providing a trail park and ride facility, this project will also include an area for organized group camping. (27) Bicycle Lane (Existing/Planned. SOR-671): The existing portion of this bicycle lane extends from Loma Street easterly along Santiago Canyon Road to Orange Park Boulevard. The planned portion continues along Santiago Canyon Road from Orange Park Boulevard, in an easterly and then southerly direction to Chapman Avenue and a linkage to Irvine Regional Park via SCO-677. (28) Equestrian Trail (Existing/Planned. SCO-674): The existing portion of this equestrian trail extends from Santiago Canyon Road on south along Orange Park Boulevard to Chapman Avenue. The planned portion continues east along Chapman Avenue to Irvine Regional Park. When completed this equestrian trail will provide a linkage between the creek trail and Lower Santiago Creek Regional Park (via SOR-686) and Irvine Regional Park. (29) Bicycle Lane (Existing. SCO-677): This bicycle lane links the creek and Lower Santiago Creek Regional Park to the Vi11a Park Dam and Irvine Regional Parks via Orange Park Boulevard and Chapman Avenue. (30) Equestrian Trail (Planned. SOR-680): This project will provide an .equestrian trail loop linking the creek equestrian trail (SOR-604A) to the City of Vi11a Park equestrian trails system, Anaheim Hi11s equestrian trails system, Edison Wilderness Park and Cerro Vi11a Park. (31) Equestrian Trail (Planned. SOR-683): This equestrian trail provides a linkage between the west and east portions of SOR-680. (32) Equestrian Trail (Planned. SOR-686): This equestrian trail, located north of Santiago Canyon Road and south of the creek, will link the creek trail with the planned Handy Creek equestrian trail and SCO-674. This project will most likely be developed in conjuration with SOR-695. (33) Equestrian Trail (Planned. SOR-692): This planned trail will provide a linkage from SOR-686 and SOR-695 easterly to the creek trail and trail SCO-707. (34) Park and Ride (Planned. SOR-695): The City of Orange P4aster Plan of Parks proposes a joint city/Orange Unified School District project to develop a community park in conjunction with planned junior high and elementary schools �� located north of Santiago Canyon Road, south of the creek and west of Windes Drive. Facilities proposed include community and recreation buildings, nature areas, picnic areas, athletic fields to be shared with the schools, an equestrian corral, equestrian trails, offstreet parking, and restrooms. The planned park and ride would incorporate the parking areas with the corral and equestrian trails, with linkages to trails SOR-686, 692, and 698. (35) Bicycle Lane (Planned, SOR-698): This bicycle lane will provide access to the creek greenbelt, specifically projects SCO-701 and SOR-704, via Windes Drive. It will also link the planned park and ride (SOR-695) to these facilities;, thus reducing automobile traffic on Windes Drive. (36) Nature Preserve (Planned. SCO-701): This 34 acre site was acquired by the county in April 1976 and has been included within the Lower Santiago Creek Regional Park. It is generally located south of the creek, west of the Villa Park Dam and at the terminus of Windes Drive. Improvements on the property consist of a 2,000 sq. ft. residence, a 400 sq* ft* guest house, a horseshoe pit, shuffleboard court, barbecue pits and restrooms. In addition, there is an orange grove on the property as well as a number of large oak trees. Plans for this project area include preserving the site in its natural state as a nature preserve, as well as development of a nature interpretive center for the area in conjunction with project SOR-704, with parking, picnic areas and restroom facilities. (37) Wilderness Area (Existing/Planned. SOR-704): This 49 acre site is located north of the creek, west of the Villa Park Dam and at the terminus of Windes Drive. The project area was acquired by the county in October 1974, as part of the Lower Santiago Creek Regional Park, On 6 April 1976, the area was designated as a "Wilderness Area" by the Board of Supervisors. The property supports a modified riparian woodland, containing dense stands of coast live oak, California sycamore,, walnut and arroyo willow trees, as well as many introduced_spec.ies, including a, number of citrus trees, which were planted by the former owner. Plans for this project area include equestrian and hiking trails around the property, as well as an arboretum with nature trails. Additional parking and/or access for this project and, project SCO-701, will be made available at the park and ride facility on Santiago Canyon Road (SOR-0695). (38) Equestrian Trail (Planned: SCO-707): This trail will provide a loop around SOR-704 and adjacent county/ privately owned properties to the south and east. Linkages will be provided to the main creek equestrian trail, as well as trails SOR-692 and SCO-710. (39) Equestrian Trail (Under Construction. SCO-710): This trail will provide a linkage from the main creek equestrian trail and Lower Santiago Creek Regional Park to the Villa Park Dam and Irvine Regional Parks, -90- (40) Equestrian Trail (Planned. SCO-713): This trail will provide a linkage from the main creek equestrian trail to the Anaheim Hills equestrian trails system, with an ultimate link to the Santa Ana Canyon greenbelt corridor and trails. The precise route of this trail is yet to be determined. (41) Bicycle Lane (Planned, SOR-716): This planned trail will link the creek bicycle trail with the Santa Ana Canyon greenbelt corridor and trails via a planned northerly extension of Loma Street to Imperial Highway. d. Summary of Projects' Current Status. The project summary sheets for the Santiago Creek segment, listing each project by number and indicating the current and planned use of the projects property, assessor's parcel numbers and acreage, zoning, and ownership, are provided in APPENDIX R, e. Summary of Projects' Acquisition, Development, and Operation Responsibility. The project summary sheets for the Santiago Creek segment, listing each project by number, and indicating the planned use and the jurisdictions responsible for property acquisition, project development, and project operation/maintenance, and the estimated costs for each, are provided in APPENDIX S. f, Planned Project Priorities. Each jurisdiction has assigned a priority number or category to the planned projects in the Santiago Creek segment, A summary of the project priority assignments, by each jurisdiction, is provided in APPENDIX T. g. Related Features. Existing recreationally oriented facilities, visitor/tourists attractions and greenbelt oriented open space areas that are linked to the greenbelt corridor, are included in the category of a related feature. A description of these related features, by jurisdictions, is as follows: (1) County of Orange. Upstream of the Villa Park Dam are two regional parks, i, e., Villa Park Dam Regional Park (291 acres) and Irvine Regional Park (186 acres). Both of these parks will be linked to the Lower Santiago Creek Regional Park by bicycle and equestrian trails. Villa Park Dam Regional Park includes over 200 acres that have been designated as "Wilderness Area," and available facilities are an administration building, restrooms, picnic areas, and.a parking area, Irvine Regional Park was one of the original two regional parks in the county and contains picnic areas, a children's zoo, a lake for boating, concessions, maintenance yard, and other related facilities. The Villa Park Country Club is located north of the creek across from the end of Windes Drive. The club's facilities include stables, an arena, and a swimming pool. The location of these related features is shown on FIGURE 22. -91- o � i ® FL N H \ i • o era ® ® ® ® V] Rt H e •. . 6 O Beae •••� ioi°oj Jo'o'i ooe ®, IN\� a0900 Ez•e ••aa W W 'i • >I 0,4 r'e °'a' a ° a Mot w .b 'a'°'o o'a' a/ rA ooaao z w i0IL 60oii OR O \ Sol -all r obeeao• % �;. Q.O moas _ ._.CAN O ® ®/� SANTIAGd % \y� ® p kdJ clock N = p 1°i t �Iplfl 'i;:;' is Q O 3 W a I a ® Lu a/OpNDY CREEK a2 ® WCY _Jc a ee �_k.®/ It, ® cc W34 o0Alcohol coo 6AN )Iada 3ONVHO ® pocc000a000 ace** Y ace oo '• '.4 Altob as oc oaooaeeooba nee a t ve ooeeoeae ¢ 0000 ® 0000vvaee000co a a Oe00o 6 00000 q!J .: oa000ao 4 above beamQO Y.,_�• bee boo boo �`` J oaaoo hN WT coca ace; \` > Jaz Vy be \ o �\ 0ao0 yW 2 ao aaa 0it 0 0o �, 0oc - Ursa cove co `�- !-Q ea _ zz a �s ®°°oboe , 1StfWOI r" \ P S�� Nw Z a a 6cocoa�� as �aA Y' l�W ¢'� m� •Iraw,I. to �k r i�li Oea a °eoea a000060000O '.._I^,^.. oe •cocoa caee••avao 1al -� oa °oae°ee o°°a°°°aeb° , a 0000a00 aeaaaecoo _i . a as 0000a ace 0a a° '�a�l � e°Ji coo••°° s �� ''ah J� I p It eto cocoa team ae0leae . 1 OOeebeeb aaa - ... d —92— oevbeeaob C FIGURE 22 ® �..te __v. °°°°°°°♦ �,. ,,� ��mn. a �� (2) Orange/Villa Park, The Cerro Villa Park site is located east of the Citv of Villa Park and north of Santiago Canyon Road. The property is a 27 acre landfill that is currently planned for limited improvement as a natural park. North of the Cerro Villa Park site is the planned Edison Wilderness Area, which will surround the planned Edison substation. Planned park use is currently limited toridingand hiking trails. The Lazy "B" Golf Course, and Tennis and Swim Club are south of Santiago Canyon Road and are linked to the creek area by bicycle trail SCO-677. The Santiago Tennis Club is adjacent to the south side of Santiago Canyon Road and west of SOR-695. An equestrian trail is planned as part of the flood control improvements along Handy Creek, which is a tributary of Santiago Creek. The trail will link SOR-604A to SCO-674. The Santiago Creek will be linked to the Santa Ana Canyon by a bicycle trail (SOR-716) and an equestrian trail (SCO-713). The location of these related features is shown on FIGURE 22, D. Summary 1. General. Over five years have passed since the Santa Ana River/Santiago Creek Greenbelt Plan was adopted and published. Many of the proposals in that plan have become a reality in the form of existing projects and other forms of accomplishment, or, are included as part of this Implementation Plan. FIGURE 23 is a statistical summary of this Plan. It lists, for each of the four major segments of the greenbelt corridor, the total acreage within the corridor, the impact area, existing and planned parks, and open space; and, the existing and planned mileages for bicycle and equestrian trails, and their related landscaping projects. Costs are provided for acquisition and development of planned projects (not existing), and for the operation and maintenance of both existing and planned projects. 2. Greenbelt Corridor and Impact Area. There are 6,595 acres in the newly defined greenbelt corridor. If the County acquires the 1,600 acres south of the Santa Ana Canyon, for Coal Canyon Regional Park (CCO-430), the total would then be 8,195 acres, or 12.3 square miles of greenbelt. This total is very close to the 8,400 acres, or 13 square miles proposed in the original Greenbelt Plan. The 25,293 acres of impact area are intended to enhance the greenbelt corridor by serving as a transition area and an introduction to the fact that a greenbelt is being approached. Included in the impact area are natural areas which will provide a visually aesthetic backdrop. 3. Parks. Included in this 3,610 acres (672 existing and 2,938 planned) are regional and local parks, trail park and rides, and rest stops. When the County completes its planning for the Santiago Creek, another 536 acres may be added to bring the total to 4,146. The landscaped trail system, which will -93- eventually extend the entire length of the river in the County (27 miles) and the Lower Santiago Creek (10 miles), will actually be a linear park, and will add an approximate 250 additional acres, for a total of 4,396 acres of parks in the greenbelt corridor. 4. Open Space. This 942 acres (699 existing and 243 planned) includes golf courses and equestrian centers, plus agricultural areas that are in the flood plain. 5. Bicycle and Equestrian Trails. The Orange County portion of the "mountains to the sea" trail system is nearing completion, with over 54 miles of equestrian trails (33.9 existing and 20.5 planned) and over 60 miles of bicycle trails (27.8 existing and 32.4 planned), along the greenbelt corridor. The trail system is the heart of the corridor and is already enjoyed by several hundred thousands of citizens each year. The regional significance of the trail has been recognized by its designation as a "national recreation trail." 6. Trail Rest Stops. There are many rest stops along the trails and more are planned. Existing rest stops are listed with identification of the facilities available as follows: (B) bicyclists; (E) equestrian; and (BE) bicyclists and equestrians. Lebard Park (B), Centennial Park (B), Alona Park (B), Edna Park (BE), River Trails Stables (E), Rancho del Rio (E), Yorba Regional Park (BE), Featherly Regional Park (B), Coal Canyon Stables (E), Jack Fisher Park (B), Santiago Park (B), Hart Park (B),and Yorba Park (B). 7. Trail Park and Rides. These much needed facilities are planned for development at the Forrest Paull Park (off the west levee and south of Garden Grove Boulevard), and at El Parque del Rio (off the east levee and south of Lincoln Avenue). 8. Costs. The cost figures for acquisition, development, and operation and maintenance, reflect the most recent experience of the participating jurisdictions. Acquisition and development costs are provided only for planned projects, while, operation and maintenance costs are provided for both existing and planned projects. There are some projects for which costs have not yet been estimated; therefore, the total costs indicated in FIGURE 23 must be recognized as likely being somewhat less than what will be realized. This factor contributes to the need for periodic updating of the plan. -94- STATISTICAI. SUMMARY GREENBELT CORRIDOR IMPACT AREA Segment Acreage Acreage Lower River 2,839 2,008 Middle River 11522 39139 Santa Ana Canyon 11158 17,536 Santiago Creek 17076 2,610 TOTALS 6 595 25,293 PARKS ACREAGE COSTS Operation & Segment Existing Planned Acquisition Development Maintenance Lower River 156 504 $ 59046,000 $14,136,000 $ 664,560 Middle River 30 528 6509000 39726,000 3342897 Santa Ana Canyon 326 1,666 217509000 19386,000 4155400 Santiago Creek 160 * 240 3 813 598 6 681 570 720 501 TOTALS 672 2,938 $1292593598 $2599295570 $291355358 *Includes 83 acres "existing" and 168 acres "planned" of 787.4 total acres in Lower Santiago Creek Regional Park. The nature of use and related costs for the remaining 536.4 acres will be determined as part of the Specific Plan and Draft Environmental Impact Report being prepared by the County's Project Plans Branch for the Lower Santiago Creek. OPEN SPACE Lower River 244 184 $ 3,745,Z00- Middle- Santa Ana Canyon 420 - - - - Santiago Creek 26 38 372,160 - TOTALS 699 243 $ 41117,360 $ 702 800 $ EQUESTRIAN TRAILS MILEAGE COSTS Segment Existing 'Planned Acquisition Development Operation & Maintenance Lower River Middle River Santa Ana Canyon Santiago Creek 19.3 10.7 2.0 1.9 1.2 1.8 5.0 12.5 $ - - - 1057273 $ 6,000 97000 259000 37 955 $ 29050 1,250 700 1 442 TOTALS 33.9 20.5 $ 1052273 $ 77,955 $ 59442 -95- FIGURE 23a BICYCLE TRAILS MILEAGE COSTS Operation 6 Segment Existing Planned Acquisition Development Maintenance Lower River 11.3 8.2 - $ 481,700 $ 5,860 Middle River 10.7 0.5 - 30,000 3,360 Santa Ana Canyon 2.5 7.3 42,000 238,900 27934 Santiago Creek 3.3 16.4 426 352 511 970 5 415 TOTALS 27.8 32.4 468,352 $1,2629570 $ 179569 LANDSCAPING Lower River - 11.7 - $ 633,115 $ 113,724 Middle River 8.7 - - - 84,564 Santa Ana Canyon - - - - - Santiago Creek - - - - TOTALS 8.7 11.7 $ 633 115 $ 198,288 -96- FIGURE 23b V. Execution A. General. This Plan is a coordinated composite of many local plans which have been developed by the participating jurisdictions for their respective areas of the greenbelt corridor. The successful execution of this Plan is dependent upon the same critical factors which contributed to its develop- ment, i, e., the centrally coordinated cooperative efforts of all concerned. The coordination should be provided by a separate agency, with membership consisting of representatives of the participating jurisdictions. The Greenbelt Commission, in its present or some other form of updated organizational structure, and appropriate responsibilities and functions, may well provide the required coordination. The functions to be performed should include but not necessarily be limited to: Reviewing and commenting on all proposed changes in land use that may influence the greenbelt corridor and its existing or planned facilities; maintaining guidelines which will assist decision making jurisdictions in ensuring that proposed developments within the greenbelt corridor, or the impact area, are compatible with the greenbelt concept; provide a forum for public input relative to the execution of the Implementation Plan; provide a source of current information on possible funding sources for greenbelt projects; encourage the development, operation and maintenance of appropriate greenbelt projec�4s by private enterprise; provide coordination on multijurisdictional projects to avoid duplications or omissions; collect and publish information on current standards for the development, efficiency and safety of operation, and maintenance of greenbelt facilities; and periodically update the Implementation Plan to reflect the current status of existing facilities and planning for the greenbelt. B. Review of Proposed Changes in Land Use. Prior to submission to the decision making body of the cognizant jurisdiction, applications or plans for changes in land use, or development of projects within the greenbelt corridor, or the impact area, will be sent to the Greenbelt Commission for review and comments relative to compatibility with the Implementation Plan. This procedure will apply to all applications and plans with the exception of the following: 1. Accessory structures including garages, carports, patios, swimming pools., and similar appurtenances. 2. Additions to existing structures, interior modifications, and/or alterations, providing they do not substantially increase the density or result in an adverse visual impact on the greenbelt corridor/impact area. 3. Minor lot line adjustments or variances, for residences, that will not side yard and setback -97- 4. Minor encroachment permits and exceptions (a change in regulation requirements to a degree less than that which necessitates a variance). 5. Business licenses, e. g., for sale of beer and wine, etc., in established commercial areas. 6. Minor temporary land uses having negligible and short lived influence on the environment, e. g., Christmas tree sale lots, firework stands, mobile home offices, etc. 7. Permits for demolition and removal of buildings and related structures, that will not result in the site constituting an adverse impact on the greenbelt corridor/impact area. 8. Variances or other land use actions regarding minimum standards for parking. 9. Emergency projects required to repair, maintain, restore, demolish or replace property or facilities that would otherwise constitute an immediate hazard to public safety. C. Guidelines. The following guidelines are provided for use in ensuring that proposed changes in land use, or plans for project development, are compatible with the greenbelt concept. The guidelines may also be of use in the review of general plans, and the preparation or updating of local ordinances that will control the development, operation and maintenance of facilities within the greenbelt corridor or impact area. 1. Development Densities. On 3 January 1974, the Greenbelt Commission approved a recommendation regarding develop- ment densities adjacent to the greenbelt corridor. A copy of the guideline is provided in APPENDIX U. 2. Integrating Development With the Greenbelt Corridor. The Greenbelt Commission has recognized that existing; zoning and desired use of land could lead to certain forms of development that may not be compatible with the greenbelt concept'. Thus, the Greenbelt Commission prepared a guideline which proposes various means by which industrial, commercial, and residential development may be integrated with the greenbelt corridor, without a loss in land value, and return, and without sacrificing the essentials of the greenbelt concept. A copy of the guideline is provided in APPENDIX V. 3. Guideline for Signs. The "(SC)" Scenic Corridor Zone --Overlay, in APPENDIX M, contains regulations for signs which are considered appropriate for the greenbelt corridor and the impact area. 4. Guideline for the Establishment of Standards for Cleanliness and Appearance of Commercial Equestrian Stables Located Within the Greenbelt Corridor, The guideline developed by the Greenbelt Commission for the stated purpose is provided in APPENDIX W. On 1 April 1976, the City of Huntington Beach published Ordinance No. 2039, entitled "Permanent Commercial Horse Facilities Standards." A copy of this ordinance is provided as ATTACHMENT "A" to APPENDIX W. .On 12 October 1976, the Board of Supervisors received a report from a Board appointed Equine Task Force containing recommendations on County equine activities, including proposed equine standards for commercial stables. On 26 October 1976, the Board adopted the Task Force's recommenda- tions for inclusion in a County ordinance. A copy of the Task Force's recommendations is provided in ATTACHMENT "B" to APPENDIX W. The content of APPENDIX W and its attachments constitute a comprehensive, up-to-date guideline for use in developing or updating standards for control of equine facilities in or near the greenbelt corridor. 5. Landscape Guide. On 28 February 1974, the Greenbelt Commission awarded a contract to the landscape architectural firm of EDAW, Inc., for preparation of a landscape guide.to be used as a basic reference in the selection of trees, shrubs, and ground cover for planting along the greenbelt corridor. The landscape guide was published in October 1974, and the governing boards of the member jurisdictions adopted the guide as a basic reference in landscape planning, and have assisted in its distribution. The guide divides the greenbelt corridor into four zones, and based on the climate and soil characteristics therein, lists the trees, shrubs, and ground cover that are most likely to thrive within each zone. A copy of the landscape guide is contained in the pocket on the inside back cover of this Plan. 6. Criteria for Developments Within the Greenbelt Corridor and Impact Area. The "(SC)" Scenic Corridor Zone --Overlay in APPENDIX M. is recommended for use as a criteria for development standards to ensure an orderly, and high quality of development in keeping with the natural amenities of the greenbelt corridor and impact area. D. Public Meetings. The Greenbelt Commission should hold monthly or quarterly public meetings for the purpose of reviewing proposed changes in land use, and plans for development of projects and greenbelt facilities within the greenbelt corridor and impact area. Comments and recommendations should be solicited from the various Citizen Greenbelt Committees and other interested parties or agencies: E. Standards for Development, Efficiency and Safety of Operation, and Maintenance of Greenbelt Facilities. The Greenbelt Commission has compiled a list of approved standards and criteria £or bicycle and equestrian trails, and has prepared a proposed general criteria for the site selection, design, development, and operation and maintenance of trail rest stops. The Greenbelt Commission has also concerned itself with the maintenance and -99- patrolling of the trails system throughout the greenbelt corridor. In a letter dated 4 April 1974, to the Board of Supervisors, the Greenbelt Commission recommended the establishment and operation of a single agency managed trails system maintenance program, and the development of specifications for an expanding trails system maintenance contract. By Resolution No. 75-817, the Board authorized the expenditure of Harbors, Beaches, and Parks District funds for the operation and maintenance of the river trails system. APPENDIX X includes the standards and criteria for bicycle and equestrian trails, and trail rest stops. ATTACHMENT "A" to APPENDIX X is a copy of the Greenbelt Commission's letter of 4 April 1974. F. Methods for Acquiring Use of Land for the Greenbelt. There are various methods available for acquiring the use of land for greenbelt purposes. These methods include acquisition in fee, acquisition in less than fee, incentive programs, and zoning and land use controls. A description of the various methods is provided in APPENDIX Y. G. Source of Funding for Greenbelt Projects. The greenbelt corridor and its extensive existing and planned trail system is already recognized for its regional significance. Thus, it is expected that several projects may qualify for federal and state funding support, as well as local funds. A description of possible funding sources for various categories of greenbelt projects is provided in APPENDIX Z. H. Corps of Engineer Flood Control Project. The Los Angeles District of the U.S. Corps of Engineers has completed a Review Report on the Santa Ana River Main Stem -- including Santiago Creek. The Corps $741 million recommended project for improving flood control measures along the river and the creek will influence a number of existing and planned greenbelt projects. The project has been included in the Congressional Public Works Omnibus Bill, with $700,000 specified for first phase funding. President Gerald Ford signed the bill in late October 1976. Following hearings by the Senate and House appropriation committees, in the spring or summer of next year, the $700,000 may be made available on 1 October 1977. Effective execution of this Implementation Plan should include continued liaison with the Corps of Engineers. By a letter dated 6 November 1975, the Greenbelt Commission provided comments, and recommendations to the Corps of Engineers regarding the flood control project and its possible impact on the greenbelt corridor. A copy of the letter is included in pages 133 - 138 of APPENDIX 1 of the Corps review report. I. Compliance With Environmental Impact Report Requirements. It is possible that many of the planned greenbelt projects will be categorically exempt from the environmental assessment process, or, will qualify for a negative declaration. Each project will have to be evaluated on an individual basis in relation to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970 -- as amended. -100- VI. APPENDIXES -101- AN AGREEMENT PROVIDING FOR THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE SANTA. ANA RIVER AND SANTIAGO CREEK GREENBELT COMMISSION This is an agreement between the COUNTY OF ORANGE, the ORANGE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT, the ORANGE COUNTY WATER DISTRICT, and those cities along the Santa Ana River and Santiago Creek which subscribe to it. The parties are all public agencies having some jurisdiction in the project area which shall be described generally as the Santa Ana River and Santiago Creek, and the land within one and one-half miles of the River and Creek on both sides, and the land from crest to crest in the Santa Ana Canyon. This Agreement is made pursuant to Title 1, Division 7, Chapter 5 of the Government Code of the State of California, which provides for joint powers agreements. Section 1. Establishment of Commission There is established THE SANTA ANA RIVER AND SANTIAGO CREEK GREENBELT COMMISSION, which is referred to as "Commission" in this Agreement. The Commission shall constitute a separate public agency pursuant to the provisions of Government Code Section 6507. Section 2. Purpose The purpose of this Agreement is to establish an agency which will coordinate the general plans and other land use policies and decisions of the contracting parties insofar as they pertain to the project area, with the ultimate objective of providing the optimum amount of open space for public uses. Section 3. Common Powers to be Exercised Common powers to be exercised pursuant to this Agreement are the powers of each party to plan for the appropriate use of land in the project area and to cooperate with the other parties to the Agreement. It is understood that the power of the Commission to plan for the appropriate use of land in the project area shall not limit the power of any member to zone and rezone property at variance with the recommendations of the Commission. The APPEN➢IX A-1 Commission is designated pursuant to Government Code Section 6506 as the agent to exercise the common powers provided for in this Agreement and to administer and otherwise execute this Agreement. Section 4. Specific Powers The Commission shall have such powers as are necessary to carry out the above purpose, including, but not limited to, the power to make and enter into agreements; to incur debts and obligations; to employ necessary personnel, experts, and consultants; to appoint advisory committees; to lease and dispose of office space; to acquire and dispose of personal property; to accept gifts and loans of cash and personal property; and to apply for and accept grants for operating funds, studies and surveys. Any decision or determination by the Commission shall be advisory, not mandatory, as to any member, except as otherwise provided in this Agreement. Section 5. Manner of Exercising Powers The powers of the Commission shall be subject to the restrictions upon the manner of exercising the powers of the County of Orange. Section 6. Specific Functions The specific functions of the Commission shall be to review and comment on proposed land use decisions of the members affecting the project area and to conduct studies and formulate plans for the use of the project area with the objective of providing the optimum amount of open space. It is understood that the Commission will, to the maximum extent possible, utilize the services and facilities of members, including the advice of the legal counsel of the various members, in performing its functions. Except as provided in Section 20 of this Agreement relating to the supply of office space and equipment and Section 6505.5 of the Government Code relating to the services of the County Treasurer and Auditor -Controller, the cost of said services and facilities shall not be deducted from A-2 the membership assessment levied on the members pursuant to Section 14 of this Agreement. Section 7 Specific Obligations of Members The Commission shall have access to proposed land use documents prior to approve/deny decisions by the members. All parties to this Agreement shall provide the requisite information in a timely manner. Section 8. Membership Membership in the Commission shall be voluntary and shall be limited to the County of Orange, the Orange County Flood Control District, the Orange County Water District, and any incorporated city within Orange County, any part of which falls within the project area. The eligible agencies signing this Agreement prior to or within two months of the effective date of this Agreement shall constitute the initial members of the Commission. There- after, any eligible agency desiring to gain membership in the Commission may do so by subscribing to this Agreement and satisfying any conditions or requirements for membership which may be imposed by the Commission. Section 9. Governing Body The governing body of the Commission shall consist of: (1) Two members of the Orange County. Board of Supervisors representing the County of Orange and the Orange County Flood Control District, both selected by the Orange County:: Board of Supervisors. (2) One member of the Board of Directors of the Orange County Water District selected by said Board. (3) One member of the city council from each member city selected by the respective city councils. The Board of Supervisors, Board of Directors of the Orange County Water District, and respective city councils, shall appoint alternate members with the same qualifications who shall serve in the absence of regular members with full voting powers. Each member of the governing board shall serve at the pleasure of his appointing power. A-3 Section 10. Quorum A quorum of the governing body shall consist of a majority of its members. Action shall be taken by vote of a majority of a quorum; except, however, the Commission shall not enter into an agreement nor adopt or amend its Bylaws except at a meeting where two-thirds of all members of the governing body are present and then upon affirmative action of the majority of all members of the governing body. Section 11. Bylaws The Commission may adopt such Bylaws or procedures consistent with this Agreement as it may find appropriate to govern its functions. Section 12. Funds and Property The Treasurer of Orange County shall be the Treasurer of the Commission and the Auditor -Controller of Orange County shall be the Auditor of the Commission. All funds of the Commission shall be maintained in the County Treasury. The duties of the Treasurer and Auditor shall be as defined in Sections 6505 and 6505.5 of the Government Code of the State of California. The records of the Treasurer and Auditor shall be open at all times during normal business hours to the inspection of any authorized representative of any member. Section 13. Fiscal Year The Commission shall be operated on a fiscal year beginning on July 1 of each year and continuing through June 30 of the succeeding year. Section 14. Budgets and Membership Assessments Prior to May 1 of each year, the Commission shall adopt a budget for the following fiscal year. Contributions in the form of membership assessments shall be made by the members of the Commission for the purpose of defraying its costs of operation. Each member shall be advised of the amount of its assessment for any fiscal year by May 15 of the previous fiscal year. The assessment for each fiscal year shall be paid by each member on or before August 1 of such year. A-4 Membership assessments shall be determined on the basis of number of acres in the project area. Acreage owned in fee by the Orange County Flood Control District and the Orange County Water District shall be attributed to said Districts and not to the County or the respective cities within which said acreage lies. Each member shall pay that portion of the operating budget which is determined by dividing the total number of acres the member has in the project by the total number of acres all of the members have in the project area, In determining the initial budget, the following figures shall be used. Thereafter, the Commission may adjust the acreage totals as may be necessary. Number of Acres Jurisdiction in Project Area Anaheim 8,444 Costa Mesa 41125 Fountain Valley 39202 Garden Grove 12468 Huntington Beach 31456 Newport Beach 393 Orange 102446 Orange County 15,130 Orange County Flood Control District 1,357 Orange County Water District 929 Santa Ana 91968 Villa Park 1,228 - Yorba Linda 426 . TOTAL 60,572 In the event any member withdraws from the Commission subsequent to the establishment of a budget for the following fiscal year, the Commission shall revise the budget as may be necessary by June 15. Membership assessments for the remaining members shall be increased only with the consent of the said members. Section 15. Limits of Liability The Commission's debts, liabilities, and obligations shall not constitute debts, liabilities, or obligations of any party to this Agreement. A-5 Section 16. Withdrawal Any member may withdraw from the Commission by filing a resolution of its governing body to that effect by May 1 of'any year. Such withdrawal shall be effective at the commencement of the following fiscal year and the withdrawing member shall not be liable for the membership assessment levied for said following fiscal year. Section 17. Termination This Agreement may be terminated by resolutions of the governing boards of two-thirds of the members, including the County of Orange. Upon termination, all claims against the Commission shall be paid and the remaining assets, if any, distributed among the members and former members, if any, in proportion to the total contributions they have made tv the Commission. Section 18. Term This Agreement shall continue in effect until terminated in the manner prescribed above. Section 19. Effective Date This Agreement shall become effective when signed by the County of Orange, the Orange County Flood Control District, and any number of entities eligible for membership having an aggregate of 30,000 acres in the project area, in accordance with the figures in Section 14 of this Agreement, and not including the acreage of the County and the Flood Control District. Within thirty (30) days of such effective date, a meeting of the Commission shall be called by the County. Section 20. Interim Administration The County,of Orange shall coordinate the formation of the Commission. The County shall provide a place for Commission meetings and, until the commencement of the first full fiscal year following the effective date of this Agreement, the County shall provide the Commission with office space and equipment. Thereafter, the cost of any office space and equipment to be provided may be deducted from the County's membership assessment A-6 for the ensuing fiscal year. In the event this Agreement becomes effective after April 1, 1973 and prior to February 1, 1974, the Commission may meet and adopt an interim budget for the period prior to July 1, 1974. The Commission may establish membership assessments for said period. Each member shall be advised of the amount of said assessment, and the same shall be paid within two months of the adoption of said interim budget. Failure to pay such an interim membership assessment by April 1, 1974 shall constitute withdrawal from the Commission. Section 21. Multiple Copies In lieu of circulating a single document among the entities eligible for membership in the Commission, this Agreement shall be prepared in multiple copies, each of which may be signed by the County of Orange and an entity eligible for membership. Signed Agreements shall be filed initially with the Clerk of the Orange County Board of Supervisors, who shall notify all entities eligible for membership of the effective date of this Agreement. A-7 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement. Dated: ATTEST: WILLIAM E. ST. JOHN County Clerk and ex-officio Clerk of the Board of Supervisors of Orange County, California 1. DATED: ATTEST: COUNTY OF ORANGE, a political sub -division of the State of California By Chairman or its Board o Supervisors 197 SUBSCRIBING MEMBER Clerk Title I certify that the Santa Ana River/Santiago Creek Greenbelt Commission on did approve the Date request of the City of for membership in the Commission with the condition that the City pay an assessment of $ for the year sy Chairman o the Greenbe t Commission Santa Ana River/Santiago Creek GREENBELT COMMISSION ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE and Present and Past Members The organizational structure of the Greenbelt Commission, includes the Commission, the Citizen Greenbelt Committees, and the Commission's staff. The members of the Commission are elected officials appointed to serve as commissioners from their respective jurisdictions, i. e., city councilmen/councilwomen, or members of the Board of Supervisors or Board of Directors. The alternates are also elected officials" The members of the Citizen Greenbelt Committees are appointed by the governing board of their respective jurisdictions. The Commission's staff serves under the direction of the Commission. Those members of the Commission or Citizen Greenbelt Committees who have served as chairman are indicated by an asterisk The names of members are listed in alphabetical order. GREENBELT COMMISSION: Jurisdiction Anaheim County of Orange, _and Flood Control District Huntington Beach Newport Beach Commissioner Dr. William I. Kott R. Jerry Sneegas Ronald W. Gaspers Ralph B. Clark Ralph A. Diedrich Norma B. Gibbs *Dr. Donald D. Shipley J. Peter Barrett Orange Fred L. Barrera Robert D. Hoyt James A. Jackman Joe Temple Orange County Water Preston K. Allen District August F. Lenain Alternate Pbley Cal e Don R. Roth Richard Siebert Henry Duke Donald A. McInnis John Fonley APPENDIX B-1 GREENBELT COMMISSION (cont.) Jurisdiction Commissioner Alternate Santa Ana Jerry M. Patterson Vernon S. Evans James E. Ward Villa Park Dorothy M. Potter James P. Reichert Harold F...Tipton *James H. Wells Yorba Linda *Dale T. Chaput Rudolph Castro George Machado Anton M. Groot Henry W. Wedaa CITIZEN GREENBELT COMMITTEES: *Donald J. Fears Buzz Long Joe Wade Dione Hesketh Frank Reitzel John Willoughby Madeline Krpan Robert Rodenberger County Unincorporated Areas William Gregory Paul Lima Eugene St. Amand Shirley Grindle Charles Lopez Huntington Beach Fred Bolding Betty -Kennedy Glen Kimmel Margaret Carlberg Edward Kerins *Fred Roth Newport Beach (The City Planning Commission performed the functions of the Citizen Greenbelt Committee) William Agee William Frederickson Hall Seely Paul L. Balalis *Jacqueline E. Heather George Cokas Paul L. Hummel Orange Donald Baker Mary Jane Blomgrem Sandy Burnside Daryl D. Hansen Tony oZbolt *Jeri Reeder *Judy Watson Pat Yeakley B-2 CITIZEN GREENBELT COMMITTEES (cont.) Orange County Water District The functions of the committee were accomplished by the District's staff liaison with the local community) Santa Ana *Jean Ankrum Hugh Dunn Villa -Park Thomas Cleary J. Ward Dawson Yorba Linda Kenneth Bradley *John Gamblin Marge Holler Frances Latimore Rene Romero Sue Kaiser Jack Neelon Richard Jolliff Sohn F. McGee Donald S. Perley Andrew J. Unetic *Carol Kawanami' Harold Shapiro Beth Stevens *Dr. Richard Tooley GREENBELT COMMISSION'S STAFF: Coordinator: E. John Berger (21Dec73 to present) Charles R. Sackett (14Mar73 to 7Dec73) Planner: Raymond L. Hetherington (21Jun74 to present) Secretary: Jo Orth (16Aug76 to present) Eileen M. Emo (19Nov73 to 30Aug76) B-3 BYLAWS GREENBELT COMMISSION ARTICLE 1 - AUTHORITY The authority for the activities of the Greenbelt Commission shall be the joint powers agreement, originally entered into by: Anaheim Huntington Beach Orange Orange County Orange County Flood Control District Orange County Water District Santa Ana Villa Park Yorba Linda ARTICLE 2 - ORGANIZATION 1. Greenbelt Commission Commission members shall be appointed by their present jurisdictions in accordance with the joint powers agreement. As a body, the Commission shall have the following duties: . 1.1 Appoint a Greenbelt Coordinator to serve at the pleasure of the Commission. 1.2 Approve an annual operating budget, and its allocation among the participating jurisdictions. 1.3 Exercise approval authority over all proposed expenditures not within the approved budget. 1.4 Exercise approval authority over all budgeted expenditures in excess of $100.00. 1.5 Establish project priorities for the preparation of Greenbelt program plans. APPENDIX C-1 1.6 Provide policy direction to the Greenbelt Coordinator. 1.7 Authorize special studies. (2) 1.8 Utilize the Santa Ana River/Santiago Creek Greenbelt Plan - as adopted by the Board of Supervisors on June 23, 1971, as a component of the Orange County Master Plan of Land Use, and on June 27, 1973, as a component of the Open Space Element of the Orange County General Plan - as the basic reference plan in developing, reviewing and coordinating the development of•plans for the greenbelt corridor. 2. Chairman and Vice Chairman The Chairman and Vice Chairman shall be elected by a majority vote of all Commission members. The Chairman and Vice Chairman shall be elected no later than the first meeting of a fiscal year. They shall hold office for that year or until resignation from the Commission. 2.1 Duties of Chairman The Chairman shall be the presiding officer and shall preserve order and decorum at ail meetings of the Commission. He shall be authorized to sign for the Commission on all matters delegated to him by the Commission. 2.2 Duties of the Vice Chairman In the absence of the Chairman, the Vice Chairman shall assume the duties and powers of the Chairman. 2.3 Chairman Pro Tempore In the absence of the Chairman and Vice Chairman at any meeting, a Chairman Pro Tempore may be selected by a majority vote of members present to assume the duties and powers of the Chairman. Greenbelt Coordinator The Greenbelt Coordinator or his representative shall prepare an agenda for each meeting and shall attend each meeting. He shall maintain record of proceedings. Meetings will be tape recorded. The tapes will be retained until approval of minutes at the subsequent meeting. The tapes then will be erased. The Greenbelt Coordinator shall perform the functions called out in the joint powers agreement, and as directed by the Commission. C-2 The Greenbelt Coordinator shall also: 3.1 Hire and discharge all other Commission employees as may be necessary to effectively facilitate the business of the Commission, and in accordance with the approved budget. 3.2 Manage the affairs of the Commission in accordance with the directives of the Commission. 3.3 Call on staff members of participating jurisdictions for support in activities necessary to further the objectives of the Commission. 3.4 Submit a monthly report on Greenbelt activities to the Commission and other interested parties. 3.5 Submit a monthly report on budget performance to the Commission. 3.6 Represent the Commission in discussions with the technical agencies impacting the Greenbelt. 3.7 Provide recommendations to participating jurisdictions on actions in or affecting the Greenbelt corridor. (2) 4. Citizen Greenbelt Committees Each Commissioner representing a city member of the Commission, shall nominate a committee, of not less than five members, to their respective City Councils for appointment to the city's Citizen Greenbelt Committee. The functions and duties of the committees will be: 4.1 Coordinate and work with the planning staff of their respective city, the Citizen Greenbelt Committees of neighboring cities in the greenbelt corridor, the County of Orange and the Greenbelt Commission in the development of plans for the greenbelt corridor. 4.2 Provide input to the various planning staffs that will represent the desires of the citizens of their respective city regarding greenbelt facilities. 4.3 Provide information to the citizens of their respective city regarding the status of the planning and development of greenbelt facilities. 4.4 Utilize the administrative, clerical, and planning capabilities of the Greenbelt Commission staff, as feasible, in execution of their functions and duties. C-3 ARTICLE 3 - MEETINGS (1) 1. Regular The regular meeting of the Commission shall be he on the first Thursday of each month at 7:30 p.m. Meetings will be held in the County Administration Building, 515 North Sycamore Street in Santa Ana. 2. Quorum and Majority A majority of members 'of the Commission constitute a quorum for the transaction of business. 3. Voting Each question before the Coamiissibn may be voted upon by a voice vote. A roll call vote shall betaken on any question upon demand by any member. Questions before the Commission will be decided by a majority vote of those present, except that a majority vote of total Commission membership will be required for: Approval of an annual budget. Hiring or firing of the Greenbelt Coordinator. 4. Motions by Chairman The Chairman may make or second any motions without stepping down from the chair. (1) Amended Greenbelt Commission meeting 3/7/74. (2) Amended Greenbelt Commission meeting 9/5/74. C-4 GREENBELT CORRIDOR ACCOMPIA-DaMENT5 The following list is a summary of significant planning and actual development accomplishments which have occurred within the Santa Ana River/Santiago Creek Greenbelt Corridor. The majority of these accomplishments were the direct result, in whole or part, of actions by the Greenbelt Commission. 1. Total Project a. Establishment of Santa Ana River/Santiago Creek Greenbelt Commission. b. Designation of Citizen Greenbelt Committees within each member Jurisdiction, and the extensive participation by these committees in the development of greenbelt corridor project plans. c. Coordinated participation and joint efforts between the member and non-member jurisdictions within the corridor. d. Development of the following guidelines for use within the corridor: (1) Development densities. (2) Signs. (3) Standards for cleanliness and appearance of commercial equestrian stables. (4) Integrating development with the greenbelt corridor. (5) Landscaping. e. Study of water needs for irrigation by the OCFCD. f. Preparation of procedure and time schedule for develop- ment of Greenbelt Implementation Plan, and coordination of multijurisdictional effort towards its completion. g. Izaak Walton League adoption of Greenbelt Corridor as a project area for provision of trees and plants, free -of -charge to the Greenbelt Program. h. Review and comments on Corps of Engineers flood control and trails plan for river and creek. APPENDIX D-1 i. Adopted and transmitted a resolution (No. 76-101) to the Boards of Supervisors of the Counties of Orange, Riverside and San Bernardino, recommending that the three counties enter into a joint powers agreement which will provide for the coordinated development of a master plan for the conservation of the natural resources and enhancement of the recreational potential of the Santa Ana River. j. Reviewed and provided staff briefings and written comments and recommendations on over 200 proposed changes in land use throughout the Greenbelt Corridor, e. g., EIR's, use permits, variances, project plans, tentative tracts and general plan amendments. k. Numerous color slide presentations to colleges/ universities, civic groups, service clubs, city councils, commissions and boards, and professional organizations. 1. Preparation and distribution of "Tour Guides for the Greenbelt Corridor." 2. Trails a. Obtained $50,000 federal grant for bicycle trail extension from Edinger to Katella Avenues. b. Completion of approximately 20 miles of bicycle and equestrian trails from the Pacific Coast Highway to Imperial Highway. c. Development of plans for bicycle and equestrian trails from Kate Avenue to Tustin Avenue. d. Commencement of plan development and budgeting for trails from Imperial Highway to the county line. e. Completion of CALTRANS bicycle trail from Gypsum Canyon Road to county line. f. Development of a proposed Arterial Bikeway System trail along the Santiago Creek, and its approval by the cities of Orange and Villa Park. g. County revenue sharing funds obtained for bicycle trails for all cities that submitted a plan and request. 3. Lower River. a. Refinement of Greenbelt Corridor and designation of related impact area, and establishment of project lists and priorities. D-2 b. Coordination with State to construct bicycle bridge across river mouth south of Pacific Coast Highway. c. Construction of bicycle trail link from Lebard Park to river levee trail. d. Extensive planting of river levee banks with ice plants by volunteer Girl and Boy Scouts in 1973-74. e. Fairview Regional Park land acquired for $3.65 million. f. Centennial Park site included in Master Plan of Regional Parks, and negotiations commenced between the City of Santa Ana and the Harbors, Beaches and Parks District (HB&PD) for determination of ownership, design, development, operations and maintenance. g. Site searches, with private investors, for location of privately operated equestrian centers. h. Site search for park and ride facility for use of equestrians with horse trailers. 4. Middle River a. Refinement of Greenbelt Corridor and designation of related impact area, and establishment of project list and priorities. b. Siting and construction of new river trail bicycle crossing between Edna and A1ona Parks. C. Issuance of permit by Orange County Flood Control District (OCFCD) to City of Santa Ana for use of Edna property as a park, and completion of the park with excellent trail rest stop facilities in 1975. d. Decision by Board of Supervisors to use former OCFCD maintenance yard for greenbelt project; and approval of Greenbelt Commission's concept for use of the property as a trail park and ride facility. e. Obtained $375,000 county revenue sharing funds for E1 Camino Real Park. f. Expansion of grass area in river bottom of River View Golf Course. g. Obtained $300,000 grant received for rehabilitation of Burris Sand and Gravel Pit, and conversion of pit to water conservation/recreation facility. h. Proposal for and approval by City of Orange, Orange County Water District (OCWD), and Board of Supervisors, for development of E1 Parque del Rio site as a "park and ride" facility in support of the river trails system. D-3 i. Joint powers agreement developed between OCWD, OCFCD, Orange County Harbors, Beaches and Parks District (HB&PD), Anaheim and Orange County for 5 Coves. Project approved and $300,000 federal grant obtained. Design underway for development as water conservation/recreation facility. j. Newkirk dump site recreation use study completed; planning for park size and possible exchange for City of Anaheim property in Santa Ana Canyon. k. Obtained $20,000 county revenue sharing funds for trail rest stop. 1. Siting and development of River Trail Stables with trail rest stop. M. Expansion of Rancho del Rio Equestrian Center with trail rest stop. n. Acquisition of CALTRANS property for development of Riverdale Rest Stop. o. Design of plans for Warner Basin water conservation/ recreational facility. p. Establishment of Izaak Walton League nursery on OCWD property. q. Imperial Woods Equestrian Center design completed and access study underway. 5. Santa Ana Canyon a. Refinement of Greenbelt Corridor and designation of related impact area, and establishment of project lists and priorities. b. Joint environmental cost/benefit study approved and funded by federal grant and cities of Anaheim, Orange, Yorba Linda and County of Orange. Study area includes .Santa Ana Canyon and Santiago Creek. Land use decision model completed and evaluative application underway. C. Yorba Regional Park lands acquired, design completed and Phase I construction completed. d. Featherly Regional Park extension acquisition effort underway, including connection with Yorba Regional Park. e. Plans completed and approved for private expansion of Coal Canyon Stables. D-4 f. Feasibility study and preliminary appraisal authorized for acquisition of property for Coal Canyon Regional Park with eventual trail linkage to Cleveland National Forest, 6. Santiago Creek a. Refinement of Greenbelt Corridor and designation of related impact area, and establishment of project lists and priorities. b. Sand and Gravel Committee study completed for rehabilitation of inactive sand and gravel pits. C. Establishment of Lower Santiago Creek Planning Task Force for flood control and greenbelt improvements. d. Revenue sharing funds obtained for Hart Park Extension. e. Obtained $375,000 revenue sharing funds for application to acquisition of Rinker property, now acquired and designated "Wilderness Area." f. Board of Supervisors approved acquisition of Blame property. g. Board of Supervisors approved appraisal and acquisition of 68 additional acres for inclusion in Lower Santiago Creek Regional Park. D-5 ZONING DESIGNATIONS Anaheim PR Public Recreation. RSA-432000 Residential, Agricultural. City of Orange R-O Recreation - Open Space District. S-G Sand - Gravel District. R-1-7 Single Family Residential, 7,000 sq, ft, minimum lot size District. R-3-A Multiple Family Residential (Restricted) District. C-1 Local Business District. R-1-6 Single Family Residential, 6,000 sq. ft. minimum lot size District. R-1-10 Single Family Residential, 10,000 sq. ft. minimum lot size District. R-1-40 Single Family Residential, 40,000 sq. ft. minimum lot size District. Costa Mesa PDR-LD Planned Residential Development - Low Density. PDR-MD Planned Residential Development - Medium Density. I&R Institutional & Recreational. MP Industrial Park District. Countv of Orange Al General Agricultural District. A1(SR) General Agricultural District (Sign Restrictions). A1(0) General Agricultural District (Oil Production). A1(FP-2) General Agricultural District (Floodplain). C1 Local Business District. M1 Light Industrial District. R2 Group Dwellings District. 100-M1-201000 Light_ Industrial District, 100 ft, minimum required building site width, 20,000 sq. ft. minimum required building site area. R4 Suburban Residential District. AR Agricultural Residential District. SG Sand and Gravel Extraction District. APPENDIX E Countv of Orange (cont.) 100-E4(20,000) Small Estates District, 100 ft, minimum required building site width, 20,000 sq. ft. minimum required for each dwelling unit. E4(151000) Small Estates District, 15,000 sq. ft. minimum required for each dwelling unit. E4-1 Small Estates District, 1 acre minimum required building site area. 100-C1-10,000 Local Business District, 100 ft* minimum required building site width, 10,000 sq. ft. minimum required building site area. R2-(1500) Group Dwellings District, 1500 sq. ft. minimum required for each dwelling unit. 100-M1-10,000 Light Industrial District, 100 fte minimum required building site width, 10,000 sq. ft. minimum required building site area. Huntington Beach CF-R Civic Facilities - Recreational. CF-E Civic Facilities - Educational Institution. R5 Office - Professional. Santa Ana 0 Open Space. Al General Agriculture. C2 General Commercial R2 Limited Multiple Family Residential. Cl Community Commercial, M1 Light Industrial, R1 Single Family Residential. E-2 z z 0 Z O F Q U v: H .1 W W e awc z Gw. w w s r P w oO O mwt wwioc o P P z° z° u 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 .4 m v7nl .y cJ mo I i i i i l oz a F > a > Y >, E M 0. U O C G a a � C v m p I a a W U O a 0 Z G 6 z o � y w'C m O c 4 6 W a Qa< m m �GVIrG F i ~ O E a > u ¢ _ > u. •, u X c m a C t+amG Cm.> To a -IQ > U a a U U U UU U U U f U Z m p� m Z m c m w U u C 6 6 a+ I F C f 6 c e c m c c m U to U U U U 2 5 U Z 2 U C u L u 3 v 3 a 3 a a o nm m w a W K Zti 3 o Zti ,+ a C u G 0 > w W zm'w w.c w vi eA as 3 a t C o h a aaa u y a- as azia i S a s C C a 0 w a > > w m Fri z s EEi O F U W E K < W W 5 F HO G �av ov u Q vi O G F > > C 1 C am 4 0 n u � F0 N G> U N O a .i U=m 0 U =M=W UvUv m mvmi 2 6 U C 6 G K G G F C NIA IO I 11 1 b n a N N N 3 � > N > C .-I x Y m M H m w w m m H u F N F H aw w w vl � w = = o c U 4 T S U a c G 7 U N K > q Q H m" E � v G Y Ci m c c a m� u .Y G m > 06 s Gas xGaa c�i c� a a t m c C O C U U x U S 3 s > 7 a 3 a S T m C C a T d I xF ul u >m U U e c� •O G .-V Y � u > U 0.5 O w r.m aac> � G G G ro t U I� N a a a a a Z S y. u m a - t • q 0. ~ > 4 O �+6 W U 5 U a co U wwrn z m .Em 4 wi M P 2 U 5 5 U y w W rn Ool Oo I0o m z ¢ E. axyo�, o o T �i i itl a w o a ii i i a a y a o ~ P 1 N N \ 3 m 5 C G P W W w w VI fn � u q q q N C .a U � S a H 3 m 3 0 S r1 Ca G N � ` O G K � T .�G w L C K. W q m w rn q 1 £ 6 > 0 3 2W] 'o G O Y u MG � m a -Ga N Y m > C G m H � w m C\ W E O t7 < 2 t�i rn O F Z i � I W a F p E Z F Z O Z F p Z V G U w W � O C. 6 M I W P U N W E C Z O a t; 3 cE� O C) F F K C O 01 C O � 11 1 1^ I ti o ono" ~ q G G Y h G I C � a zz E a p z \ wtH F U C W W 1 O a '1T O E+ 6 U w W W U i F. as < z ¢w. W P.S F A P O O VIa C O V y F 6 C v c u a G u N y A G G N F 6 W 3 > a c > o � i 6 P. Na . y O 'i U O .d 11 1~ I I I I I ml I I a F. N > MME W > y O F w s c� a 0.' a �s 0 .� m> a< 3; � 3 3� 3 Q Q, v 6 a G N G W V a° � .°�w a°w a°F. .° ., w � � ti� y� C$ m 0 A L D ti� w � � s .�i L u > G3 � w a o a. l a m w o D O D A a m a C a; a� Z y> u N u> E O z° w z w z° w z° .�. z° w �n z 0 F z � H y .z. a a o o c = _ = _ _ _ _ _ _ _ oa z 0 i+ p q d 6 0 m = _ _ _ = c = = c _ c _ _ _ _ _ a c c c c c x N y `n �n W U � m 6 �+ 2 O E N w w Fe Sao z ¢ w F w wxF c F a .+ m i x o F i i i i i i i i i i�� i i i� � i w N xc> m o w w W ca a ti ti � .. G C D N N W Z O 0. P M w F 6 W 6 W �' N � F fi r L F F +O� 5 C G F F a C u z i i a w .9i a m > y, a x as° U C v j q A K U F �a w w a� a a a a ¢ a a a a a U Z Z O F Z S U' a a a w 3 0 a 3 a � d .°� u .°� u .i u ,.°° .. ��GG •• > > > -w � a r a u \ A �N C W C 5 f° a W y u> fi u> u> E u> E w O z° w v� z° z° � a z° ram+ m z a F 6 U � � K OK _ - a � _ _ _ _ U c>_ U_ _ _ _ Z O F H GG 6 cc 6 6 cc 6 A _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ G G � � h y w w W o a ¢ .� .i :a w o z aao ¢ m r� P. E M �' V a s .+ i i i i i i i i i o a y a V w O to y I � � P O G o C 0 C C � zW Z .Y Y' �61 [4 M W A G \ � .-i 6 .-a 6�i F .15 tiSM F u ❑ w a G y m � WaZ M � a E m � � cL E � 4 a a U W C� a� W C m va o of o Q � � a h y � a z .a ,a a a o F U to .+ a W W H K K < W W P W O r to O� h f 6 m E 3 m m 3 0 t E N a C 3 CIO 3 o m � o L M >L H W W C u u> E C m N G wrn um 0 0r6 W atn uw 0 [n W w HU Ovtn 5 ¢ 6 N G GG 6 6 4 3 m II O o I I I l I o C I I I I h N M T T .Y C H T a ¢ a 3 m W > W 3 0 3 N m> qq X.dII C > r i T > w 3 o N 4 Z u Z 4a�n Z vdi .N.l �n U - Z a a w ¢ a I 0 U h W Z [4 w O Z M 2 F 3 ❑ W O N I I� I m I m I I C I O [L [nKU �n OW w W I x a a� C a F wa zZ a X >, m m ro F C G m a e z w 3 a Z z yIa 0 .1 aLi u� .+ t a a 7 0 W 5 _ C yW a a a 3 y •.>' N O Z H W O F Z H W .i A c� O U GG r-I 6 y m a a 5 m {6v 0.' 6 z w o w x E. C O H O tK 1 w K U rh0w W I A 6 Wz Y m W M C N F {aZ W E U [�] U rL ww a � va, a z a F a ++ m \ L ti c� 3 u 0. qXq E� n W a a. a m �;;x m� vc > � w � � a `� � H .�°a N C • 3 +C+ F > u G � m m 0.•a0 O L > > w E E T � a U m T F m m O C an 0. d Y u C G m m N 3 m m ++ 4 c� L +a-� a a L L y y WC O u sm' o C m u O p •u 3 m o C G z -+ >. 3 ..1- H O M m >, � > ci c'{i � -°+ +- L P C a .aL C GG o m 3 U a 6 U C � C G > ry � a E W " m N w c m 'gym m m m a •m a 0. m � C m m 0. C u G O C> �F L m Y m �+ L+ �+ G 3 � 6 a G � 3 a+ ] 'm] 4 > m O •a L m .. N u E L T L m 00 C C u G M m G G u > X H G � m G '+ 0. Y N t +i a m a w C 'mm O G +i � m C u ._. C W p C � I N N N N q � 0. � z -, ,� m a c m +ai E a £ a N G C m 7 •O P L R. ++ � w 4 6 U F C 0 z z° z z° mz mzA =z — o T >. E mo cE oe cnvuo+- ciowo Foc OU :JUFY 4 >;U eL D cn �.c rZ n 3 r` fe 30 MO J.r�aYi r-�a3U D T N U u F a - C C H W H C v 0 - O t 0 N N To c O C �U N L O N � aF rn rn ¢ i H Y o F >. UDo N N O O v e e e � N N C F N W O D F ppN m C H J Y C U O N O C O O U �n 'D U \ O � U.ti H � O amW E > G O M C O E v . z Z•- ?C -O •U EWZO Zvm -�C ✓. � _XZo Z m c Q v 00 - > -C ti•+o -E�4 N .� o u O ✓� o NLo M O t � VI u Q O U ..adO M NZ o N N v Cv� _ OL Opt � a • M n M o L' W ✓� O ti .-i N Z % e 3 M v WWti3+Om3'r m0 .r0 W02o VI\ 3�M0 v0� �00 o TMoar�o�nN N NNrm TM��[1. O N NUV`o-OM G' o K t rrvO v. 1-. •O ^Nm r o O M i O ~ �' •M 'O -.a C > M •O N •• O M .L'" ..i � > a+ E Z v� - O C � C ..� .-i '7 •d O..-i O > N .y V..-f C C O S O O m C� .i .G opZw 0 0 �� a! L N E T o i 0 T 4• m M ++ K K 0 O ''�+ O O V 04= O 2 u� OWL •• in � v t~i C v v C +L+ N H K U C a+ Y �O •O u G O C T i. • O C O>> W C 0 - 0 � F. �.+ E E C Cap O z .O s 0 x > •0 •-� Y O G. i+ M U � •+ O E E o ti p 0 m .i O o f- a� VJ4.�M mU;V UI L•z'�YVJ tnU�Qm..]ySYpSSV�vIC �iU C1Z �mFv; C ti a¢ t M m T f+ U O O '1U Z O C F v Q K w M 0 C O 0 4 O U O O a+ o_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ vo te _ _ _ _z _ _ _ _ _ Uv a-• U�nM r. v K M 3CCM>r. MUO C0 O a U C O•tl U O > G C Z x m T � o mUI '70'!_ O iOZ. ~ U O x ti ti x 00 0 � 000 o V m ' O Om O 00 0 0 o 0 U O d U d u d I n 4 oc ea�i a in ._ �. 4.,H •.i Z vi TI i E E N 0 3 O C C ti � O W N N N m O ttl O O F O N TP �n C C T U N U U +` C C C c0 U1 J N O 0 W O N '��n v> U mum U mum U+ YW C N UU 4 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 00 m Y• A _ m T +� C _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ O O O 0 U � Z O �J C 4 O O U F. 00 vi Q C N V N C v O ti E W 0 N C N = %Cd CCm>�clU J O 0 Oy U K_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ U O h rJ 3+ O > d m ZCU I>-� vUmFm ¢Z U m Zmmml+ •V Eat �'6v C ZZZ -ZZ> E3 od C �. Om v E w Z O wo C ti.n C Z Z •r C r H v'O N W UUU ODUuT �KVGC UCv x mr. om M 0> Q 3 c0 m v ^irvM Min �O ems.+ you oUo O v v O 0 u w 0 0 0 0 0tc. tC. 4w.owvw ....1CTO N•pN �Uww •00 0.G0. c.0. G c.G 'O �Q C v 'O 'O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N M .+t0 mU.4F< -100.-1 1GG GG0.GG Vl'OC vOO •• �W O O n a 0 y C u C C G C C C C C I •O U N W a G O C ++ v O O v mwwwwwwb O N mUUm wm� m� mm�n q Sto w� U K F N & 0. Nha .K m m T ~O- O. 0.0 � 3 w O U xo 0. +� d K i v o r. eom � x ~ U v u 0 CO'C) {�yo U 0, or - _ N>CEt 3C0 z.t U o d u C ti O C > >Oa+O _ _ _ m•O O_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ v .ama 3 U a O U W O N 0. N W o. 3 Z U }( Q O x N O N A 4 N O Z 7 ZGZ C c O G U O t/J V) 0. U 3A Z m �mrno--i tv enc�n .p�mrno.y rven C O �x ww om p d 0 0 z= N z cz ENGINEERING AND ECONOMIC FEASIBILITY STUDY CONSTRUCTION COSTS GENE:RAL The cost of constructing the basic features of this marina will be about the same for whoever builds it. There will be differences in the methods and cost of financing, however, depending on who develops the various components. One of the itcm:3 included in the scope of this study was a determination of the relative feasibility of various combinatlons of public and private ownership alter - Each of these alternatives carries a different price tag and cost allocation. Also, as berthing basins are deleted from public owner- ship, Federal participation decreases. Thus, in order• to develop cost estimates for the various schemes of public versus private ownerships, these schemes must first be defined and then analyzed as to how each scheme will affect Federal partici- pation. Because part of the financing will probably be through a State loan, certain basic requirements for State participation must be met as well as those of the Federal Government. SPONSOI?SHIP SCHEi�IF,S `11he physical layout plan for the marina is shown on Plate 2_. Its capacity is 3009 r(�creational boats, including berths for 150 boats around the water perimeter of Newport Shores to be built by others. In order to analyze the fiscal aspects of building and operating the marina, construction costs are considered for sponsorship schemes in which responsi- hi.l.i_ties for construction and operation are geographically divided as follows: L. The entire marina to tie owned by the Harbor Di:strict. 2. }3asinc A, B and C to be owned by the Harbor Uistr:ict. Ba�1n D to be in private ownership but to -- )rovide at least 260 berths and operate within the mar•inu fr,jm^work. 3. Pa:;int; A anti B to be owned by the Harbor Di:;l.ricL. Ha:.inr.; C and D to be in private ownership IMt, 1:() pr•nvida at. lr.arl; 1120 berths and to operate w i t,h i u t:hr marina framework. ATTACHMENT "A" TO APPENDIX G 4. Basins A and B to District, but the Basin C deleted from the project. be owned by the.Harbor and.D areas to be completely It should be noted that under Schemes 2, 3 and 4 the Harbor District will not be responsible for bridging Victoria Street and that under Scheme 3 and 4, the Harbor District will not be responsible for bridging 19th Street. Each of the above schemes would meet the criteria for Federal and State participation by providing for public ownership of all waterways in the publicly owned basins, including (1) berthing areas, (2) a harbor master area with a public landing, (3) public ownership and construction of all bulkheads, (4) public ownership of a strip 20 feet wide surrounding the entire wetted perimeter. For each of the four schemes, two alternatives for land management of the perimeter lands of the publicly owned basins are considered. Public parti- cipation is maximized under sub -scheme "a" by acquiring all. of the perimeter lands and turning them over to the Harbor District for leasing out to private enter. prise, as is being done at Dr.na Point Harbor. Public participation is minimized under sub -scheme "b" by acquiring only the lands of the publicly owned basins that are to be converted to water area plus the 20 foot marginal working strip, the slip -related parking lots and the harbormaster's office site. The remaining lands within the project boundary would be :Left in private ownership to be developed and managed by their owners for the various marina -related uses of the overall development plan. Obviously, these lands would have to be filled with materials excavated from the water areas before they could be used for such purposes, and thereafter their worth would be :increased several fold. The public sponsors should be compensated for bringing about this increase thru some form of agreement with the land owners at time of acquisition. To simplify this accounting problem for the purposes of this study, the cost of Land acquisition under the sub -scheme "b" alternatives i. merely reduced by the estimated cost to the public c:poncor of excavating and placing on the privately held adjacent lands the amount of fill material r::qu:i.red to bring these lands up to project grade. CORi: nit, IiNC1N1;1:RS PARTICIPA 1ON It h_i heen a long stand.7nZ Federal policy to partly;ipate in the development of public harbors or marinas. Thla; program is the responsibility of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. At the direction of Congress they undertake a thorough study of the project and make their recommendation through the Secretary of the Army to Congress. If the project is approved by Congress, detailed engineering studies are made and when the local sponsor's funds are ready, Congress can appropriate necessary construction funds. In order to qualify for these Federal funds, a number of conditions must be met by the local public agencies: 1. The harbor must be administered by a public agency. 2. A pubic landing must be available to all on equal terms. 3. All harbor Facilities, public or private, must be available to all on equal terms. Moreover, an economic analysis that will be made by the Corp; must show a favorable ratio of general public benefits to Federal costs. The Federal share, by Congressional policy, is 50 percent of the con- structiorr costs of the general navigation features, the remainder to be provided by local interests, in this case, the Harbor District. For this marina, these features are ,the entrance jetties, the navi- gation lights, the revetted slopes around the curve of the inner part of the entrance channel, and dredging of the entrance channel and the main channeJ through the four basins. The analysis of benefits is basi- ca.l_1y a dotermination of the depreciated value of the x•ecreational-boat fleet (this being considered a measure of the benefits of the fleet to its owners), the sport -fishing benefits, and the reduction of damaire to hoat:s of all classes; because of the sheaterr provided by the harbor. These benefits are comlxr.rreel to the costs of con..tr•ucting and maintaining Lhe I;csnrrral navigation feature.; and acquiring the Jarrci:; to he occupied by these • r;eneral navigai,.ion fen ttr rr:;;. 'Phr• Corp:. 04' }ing.inecrs will make their own cconumic rinnl,y;i:•, ;,.ccurdang to their established ;uluclin r,. Irnr ver, in order to determine the feai:, i b I . itv o(' ohi,;;.i.n i ng Corp;; of Englneer participation and funding, the following analysis was made, based on the Corps guidelines: (1) Total Public Harbor, 4 basins and 3000 boats Annu«1 Co:;ts 1st Cost -Construction $7,400,000 Cost of land acquisition 1 725 000 TOTAL 9,125,000 Annual Cost (50 year life) Land and Construction* $ 6503000 Maintenance 120 000 TOTAL 770,000 Annual Benefits Depreciated value of boats $28,000,000 Average annual benefit 210003000 B,,mefit-Cost ratio 2.6 (2) Basin, A, B and C Yubli.c with 2740 boats Annual Costs lst Cost -Construction $639202000 Cost of land 125905000 TOTAL �T,510,000 Annual Costs (50 year life) Land and Construction* $ 6103000 Maintenance 1003000 TOTAL 710,000 Annual Benefits llei.�reciated value of boats $25,000,000 Average Annual Benefit 1,812,000 IWfm. 'jt.-Cost ratio 2.6 (3) Basins A and Y Public wi h 1874 boats nnuaa Costs 1st. Cost -Construction $ 635203000 Cost of land 1,3901000 TOTAL T7,910,000 Annual Cost (50 year life) Land and Construction* $ 5601OOO Maintenance 90 000 mOTAL $ 5� 0 Annual IIenefits Depreciated value of boats $17,0002000 Average Annual benefit 1,1221000 Benefit -Cost ratio 1.7 "Amort.i-r.ataon of first costs in 50 years at 6-7/8 percent compound interest. 'fhc above analysis shows that so long as at least Basins A and B are operated by the Harbor District, participation by the Corps of Engineers with a Federal expenditure of over $3,000,000 can be justified. YHOJL;C'.0 P1RST COST '1'tu: following is a breakdc,rn of first costs of the marina, including highway bridges, assuming Corps reyuir•emerrts will be met: TABLE 2 Cost of Construction (Ili millions of dollars) 1Tr•;r Federal Public and Wave Absorber 1.250 1.25U - Irr•r•cll;i.nr; I'.ntrance Channcl�` 0.715 0.715 - N;ivil;nt.i n Aid 1�oundationr O.045 0.045 - uul Valuation - 3.000 - I';�c.i J' is Cva;;t. II i_F;tivrny P,riuE;e - _ _ 2. 010 5. 010 - Public or I`I'A;Pi Federal Public Private BASIN A Dredging Main Channel# 0.425 0.425 - Bul.kheading Main Channel - 0.060 - Dredging and Bulkheading Boat fiasirrs - 1.300 - Interior Roads - 0.075 - Harbor Master• & Admin. Fac. - 0.600 - Land Valuation -Public - 1.710 Land Valuation-Pub/Priv.* - - 3.050 Sub Total 0.425 4.590 3.050 BASIN A-B Pacific Coast Highway Bridge 2.900 BASIN It llr�edl;i.r�1; Main Channel* 0.625 0.625 - Dulkheading Main Channel - 0.395 - Dredging & Bulkheading Boat Basins - 3,230 __ Interior Roads - O.1400 - Suppc�rt Land Utilities - 1.460 - Lund Valuation Public - 1.030 - Land Valuation Pub/Priv.## - __ _ 0.690 Sub Total 0.625 7.140 0.690 snslras s-c 19th St. Bridge - 3.000 - I;A:iIN C Dredt�,inq Main Channel# 0.400 0.400 - Iiu.l.khcad.i.ng Main Channel. - O.Il10 - Dredl�;_inl; & Bulkheading Ho,•tt. It;i;;ins - 1.600 - Intuc.ior Roads - 0.175 - ;ur>hort Land UL:iliL'ies - 0.930 - Lanri Vnluat..ion Public - 1.010 - l.,:u�d Valuation Yub/Priv.#'� - - 0.750 .,ub Total 0.400. 1l.525 0.750 BA:1ird, c-i, V i cLnr• i;i ;Street. Lr'idge 0.700 - "A"-6 I'P fj G BASIN D Public or Federal Public Private Dredging Main Channel Bulkheading ;gain Channel Dredging & Bulkheading Boat Basin Interior Roads Support Land Utilities Control Structure for Banning -Greenville Channel Land Valuation Public Land Valuation Pub/Priv.** Sub Total 0.240 0.240 - - 0.525 - - 0.58o - - 0.075 - - 0.550 - - o.40o - - o.410 - - 0.320 0.2110 2.780 0.320 TOTAL 3.700 30.645 4.810 TOTAL (Public & Private) 35.455 TOTAL (Federal, Public, Private) 39.155 To be constructed by the Corps of Engineers t*Public sponsorship for sponsorship sub -scheme sub -scheme "b". "a", private for The for each S'ollowing breakdown of the Table: of costs to participating sponsorship schemes is shown interests in the TABLE 3 Cost. Hreakddwn by Sponsorshi Schemes (irt millions of dollars ,onsorsh.ip Schemc° ] . Harb n. 41:i1,h Innd:; t,ubl.lc 3.7 35.i1 - u. With land:•. pr.tvate 3.2 29.1 6.3 C, Public n. With land;; public 3.5 31.5 41 i h. With lrtu�lr; f,r:i.vate 3.1 25.8 10.2 A, 131 Public: u.. With .Land;; public 3.1 23.4 12.6 L). WIth t:tnci:; private 2.9 lq9 l 17.1 POTENTIAL REVENUES GP:N[saAL The income produced by the overall project will come fthom three principal sources: slip rentals in the water area, taxes levied against the berthed craft and leases of land parcels for various uses. Slip rentals and numbers of boats to be taxed under each sponsorship scheme will not vary appreciably with any reasonable modification. of the water -area corrfiE;urat; i on in future planning, as the ratio 'of berthing a.r•ca to fairway and channel area must remain approximately the same for navigational reasons. Income from the land area, on the other hand, may vary cons.1derably according to the purposes for which it is used and with intensity of use. Use- lntens.ity is closely related to the number of people (below congestion limits) that are attracted to the area either as permanent residents or as participants in marina activities who come from out- side the project boundaries. `.C'hu current trend in Orange County is toward cur- taiLment of the number of residents in any given area by impo:;:irig various types -of governmental controls. Thcr;cl controls take the form of zoning restrictions, building -height restrictions, restrictions on the allowable number of residential units per acre, review -hoard control over new development, etc. An example of high -intensity use is Marina del Rey, in l.os Aui;elcs County, where high-rise buildings are permitted and where facilities that attract thousands oI• v.lsitor:: are encouraged. .An example of low- i.ntensU y use is Huntington Harbour, where minimum restriction as well as low -density zoning rc%ru latJ on:; are imposed. f NCOMI: FROM SLIPS Sl_i.p r•cntal rate, are estimated at $2.50 and �2.25 per• fool of length per month for slips over and under 3t, {•t�t•i, r•cr,l,cct;ively, based on current rates in nearby rn:,r•intio. An avcraCc occupancy rate of 95% is assumed, mnhinC; t,h� annual income per foot of slip $28.50 ,inrl :�;25.6�, respect:ivel.y. It is also assumed that the I,crt:Lin;; n,•ca;; together with their designated parking urea:; rrrc Lo be 1ca:;ed to private enterprise for slip- c „n:;t.r•uct:inn and operation, as is now being done at Dana Point Harbor, and that the annual income to the H Lrbor District will be 200 of the slip rentals. The income to the Harbor District by basins and by sponsorship schemes is shown in the following table: TABLE 4 Annual Slip Income BASIN A Berthing area 460,000 sq. £t. Gross income: 117 slips x 50 ft. @ 28.50: $167,000 164 slips x 35 ft. @ 25.65: $147 000 31 ,000 Harbor District lease income, 20� $ 62,800 BASIN B Berthing area 1,760,000 sq. ft. Gross income: 1452 slips x 35 ft. @ $25.65:$1,304,000 Harbor District lease income, 20b $ 260,800 BASItd C Berthing area 862,000 sq. ft. Gross income: 866 slips x 30 ft. @ 25.65: $666,000 Harbor District lease income, 20% $133,20D BASIN D Berthing area 244,000 sq. ft. Gross income: 260 slips x 30 ft. @ 25:65: $2003000 Harbor District lease income, 20% $ 40,000 Sponsorship Scheme 1: public ownership all Basins $496,`S�0 Sponsorship Scheme 2: public ownership Basins A,B,C 456,800 Sponsorship Schemes 3 & 4: public ownership Basins A,B 323,600 BOAT `PAX HEVENIJE The taxes derived from privately owned lands, Improvements built on these lands, furnishings in these improvements and most other private properties belonging to the tenants are normally used to pro- vide community services for residents of those lands. Because such taxes are all presumably returned to the taxpayers in the form of police and fire protection, schools, roads, sanitation, etc., they cannot be con- sidered as project revenues. Additional taxes derived from berthed boats, on the other hand, are generated only as a result of more berthing area being provided, and those additional boats do not increase the demand for normal community services. Only those services provided by the harbor management are increased, and this ihcrease is reflected in the harbor operations costs which are taken into account in the economic analysis. For this reason boat taxes are considered to be direct revenues resulting from harbor con- struction, regardless of their ultimate disposition. Orange County levies taxes on the boats in its harbors on the basis of their assessed value, i.e., one-fourth of their actual depreciated value. The estimated harbor boat tax revenue is therefore con- sidered to be one fourth of the depreciated appraised value of the boats used in the benefit/cost analysis for Corps of Engineers participation. Assuming a 95 percent occupancy factor, the berthed boats would then have an assessed value of $9,590,000. The 1973 tax rate £or the Newport, Harbor area is $9.18# per $100 of assessed valuation, and at this rate the boat tax revenue produced by the project- under Schemes 1, 2 and 3 would be approximately $880,000 annually. Under Scheme 4 it would be approximately $570,000 annually. INCOME FROM LAND AREAS All land areas within the project boundary not occupied by roads, slip -parking lots, the harbormaster's office and the green strip along the Santa Ana River are considered leasable. The principal purposes for which the leased land will be used are condominum-type housing developments, motels and hotels, restuarants and various commercial and recreational activities. As previously stated, the primary requisite for a succossful leasing program of this nature is a fairly large number of permanent residents who will make use *Orange L'ounty `1'ax Assessor's Office, Marine Division "A"-10 or tii.k facilities providea other than the living units ti,°ms lvcs. For this reason, a fairly generous allo- c4t'on of condominum sites was provided for fea:.ibi7ity-testing purposes. It was assumed that about ?,500 units would be built on these sites, which avuru t;:; ❑bulAt G units per acre for the 1120 acre site. In a,i111.1on, site;; were provided for about 1,000 hotel and ia,tcl units. It was felt that the resulting marina pul,ulnt..i-rni would a:;aurc the success of the restaurants, arnl the (:ommercial and recreational activities to be i)r•nV!drld. n Apri.l, 196/3 Victor Gruen and Associates made a rc-:a.uQy of Mur• i ria del Rey which provided data on rcvcuuc:; bei.nL, obtained by the harbor administration fr•uM .1case of marina lands for various purposes. That was; f,rinr to the construction of any high-rise buildings v,hirn the level of development approximated that desired for h' U st Newport Marina. The results of that study have been upgraded to present price levels to give the 1Iollow.inf; tab''-e of land lease revenues that is considered :r;plicablc to the project area. TABLE 5 Annual Revenues Obtainable for Marina Lands Yarcr]_ Uc Income per Square Foot -_ ]scot-;ura.nt.r. P•1c,t;cl:; * & IloLcl.s $ 0.90 0.60 VarinU8 ales & Recreation 0,35 Condominium;,, Cvndran:iniuma, General Bluff Area 0.20 0.40* Derived for this report by considering the larger numb_r or units per acre possible and better vistas of the cast -boundary condominiums. An aruiLy;;is of available lease parcels indicates that a :;;,1,:;far.Lur} use-plan maxi.micing revenue potentials w:itlrc,at. violating County hei.;ht and unit -density criteria chin do dove.loped. Fir st, a group of view condominiums wouL<: be :;ited along the east boundary rising to about the: level of the adjacent mesa lands. These structures r,he,u ] r,omm;,rid premium lease return;, provided their vl •i; c,f th harshorr Jo not; obscured by development to the o-Ie:;L. Nett, a Cew ci,annel-vice, restaurant sites would br� rc,c,er'vcd ulor,r; the water front, as they will probably produce the hi.ghe:a revenue per square -foot. Then enough �c,od hotel and motel sites will be reserved to :;at, is fy the anticii;ated transient needs. They must be near or have easy access to main travel routes croc,ing the marina. In general, the remain- ing parcc7:c alon(; the waterfront will he offered. ma.lnl.y for two or three story condominiums, and tho�r. noL along the water but generally contiguous to maim roads will be offered as sites for various commercLa.] and recreational uses. '1'hc revenue rates from Table 5 were applied to the area:, o.f the various parcels in one typical development scheme for the site which adhered E;encrally to the prl.nciples previously described. The estimated income is shown in the following Table: TABLE 6 Annual Income from Lease of Land Acres Basin A Income Launching Ramp 3 $ 18,000 ]icsidcntial 12 190,000 Commerciaa 8 164,000 23 $ 372,000 liar irr Y3 Rc:i_dcnLial 28 510,000 Commcrc.i as 211 1163 , 000 Recreational 8 120,000 $1,a93,00a t3 F1 S lrl �' Residential 20 284,000 Commercial 10 252,000 Re<:rcaLi:onal 5 76,000 35 $�iz,000 13:.1:;i-n ll ]icsidential 14 360,000 Comrne:r•c ial 5 80,000 Hecx•eatirux:ll 3 46 000 22 $�I$- , p "A"-12 A summary of annual income to the Harbor District from all sources for each of the sponsorship schemes is presented in the following table: TABLE 7 Annual Harbor District Income From All Sources (In Thousands 'of Dollars) Slips Boat Land Sponsorship Scheme Rentals Taxes Leases Total 1. All water areas public a. With lands public 496.8 880 2356o 3,936.8 b. With lands private 496.8 880 — 1537608 2. Basins A, E, C Public a. With lands public 456.8 880 2,074 3,410.8 b. With lands private 456.8 880 — 1,336.8 3. Basins A, B Public a. With lands public 323.E 880 15462 2,665.E b. With lands private 323.6 880 — 1,203e6 4. Basins A, B Public and no Marina in Basins C,D a. With lands public 323.E 570 11462 2,355.6 b. With lands private 323.6 570 — 893.6 ECONOMIC ANALYSIS 'FUNDING SCHEDULE One of the controlling factors in the economic analysis of the proposed marina project is the re- quired scheduling of funds that must be provided by the Harbor District for each of the sponsorship schemes considered. Deferred expenditures may be reduced to present worth for comparison with project revenues, which must also be reduced to present worth for valid analysis. It is assumed that all lands would have to be acquired prior to start of construction. The construction features to be accomplished by the Corps of Engineers will probably be completed over a two or three year period, with matching funds for at least half of the total being required prior to pro- ject implementation. All bridge construction should be accomplished as early in the program as possible so that work on piers and abutments will not interfere with basin development. The lead time required for fabrication of steel superstructure components will necessitate early funding also, so that most of the funds for bridge construction will be needed very early in the development program. Roads and utilities cannot be installed until the land areas of the project plan are filled and consolidated. Much of the excava- tion for production of fill material, on the other hand, must await completion of perimeter walls to retain the fill, and construction of these walls is one of the costliest features of the project. In general, it appears that over half of the required public funds must be available prior to commencement of -work and that most of the remainder will be needed about a year later. Although the construction period may cover about four years, it is assumed for the purposes of this study that all public funds must be available at the start of the project. Some savings may result from deferred funding of portions of the program, but until a firm plan is agreed upon, it is considered unsafe to rely on this possibility. "A"-14 REVENUE SCHEDULE For the purposes of this report, it is assumed that the leasing of berthing areas for slip construction will begin at the end of the first three years of construc- tion (as some overlap of construction and slip -leasing is permissible) and that the slips will be rented and occupied in uniformly increasing numbers to full capa- city over the succeeding four years. In order to simplify the calculations, no revenues are considered receivable during the first two years of this period and the full -capacity revenues from slip rentals and boat taxes (reduced to 95 percent occupancy) are con- sidered to be receivable from the beginning of the third year (five years after project implementation) to the end of the assumed project life 45 years later. Under sub -scheme "a" of the project -sponsorship alternatives, revenues from land -area leases will also help to support the project. These revenues are also assumed to become receivable in full amount beginning the fifth year after project implementation. ANNUAL COSTS The annual revenues will be partially offset by the annual costs of administering, patroling and maintaining the harbor. These annual costs are esti- mated at $300,000 for sponsorship scheme 1, $280,000 for sponsorship scheme 2, and $250,000 for sponsorship schemes 3 and 4; Unlike the revenues however, they will begin at the beginning of the slip -leasing period and continue throughout the life of the project. REVENUE -COST RATIO One measure of the economic feasibility of a project is a comparison of the sum of all of its revenues with all of its costs reduced to annual amounts averaged over the, life of the project. If the ratio exceeds one to one, the project is considered to be economically justified. In order to reduce costs and revenues to a common basis, a project life must be establ.i:;hed, which for this project is assumed at 5O years as required for analysis of Corps of Engineers projects. The estimated first costs to the Harbor District arr_ shown in Table 2, and for this comparison, it is assumed that they will be met with borrowed capital. For each sponsorship scheme it is assumed that a State loan of $10,000,000 can be obtained, repayable over a 30-year period 3t 4.5 percent compound interest in 30 uniform annual installments. The remainder of the first cost is assumed to be met with institutional loans tYiaL will be repayable over a 50 year period at 8.0 percent compound interest in 50 uniform anr_ual installments. The debt -servicing costs would therefor be the 30 year capital recovery factor (.Q6139) applied to the first $10,000,000 of cost, plus the 50 year, 8� capital recovery factor (.08174) applied to the remainder of the cost. To the debt -servicing costs must be added the annual costs of maintaining the harbor. Because they do not start for three years after the project implementation date, however, these costs should be reduced by the ratio of the 50 year to the 47 year sinking fund (.00174/.00220= .790). At the end of the project life, the public land areas, water areas, and improvements will have a salvage value for which credit may be taken in the cost accounting. Inasmuch as the land and water areas do not deteriorate with age and most of the improve- ments, such as bulkhead walls, roads and utility systems, suffer only minor deterioration if continuously maintained, the salvage value of the public portions of the harbor is considered to be 80 percent of the initial Harbor District cost for each of the sponsor- ship schemes evaluated. In taking an annual credit for this salvage value, it may be assumed that the prospective salvagor establishes a sinking fund to the District's credit on the project implementation date into which he pays a uniform annual amount, which at 8 percent compound interest: will reach the estimated harbor purchase price 50 years hence. This amount is 80 percent o£ the 50 year sinking fund factor (.00174 x .80) multiplied by the Harbor District's first cost as shown in Table 2. The District's annual costs may then be reduced by this annuity. The harbor revenues are those shown in Table 7, but because they do not start for five years after the _ project implementation date, they must be reduced by the ratio of the �15 year to the 50 year compound amount factor at 8 percent interest (386.505/573�770 = .672). These revenues and the comparable annual costs for each of the sponsorship schemes, :with resultant revenue -cost ratios, are shown in the following table. "A"-16 TABLE 8 Economic Analysis of 50-Year Project (annual values in thousands of dollars) Costs Rev./Cost Ratio 0 N U bO O z N N K ri O M K-i C N N Fi N Fr U 4� U bO 1) a1 Cd e Sponsorship 5 A i+ CD W N Orl A. m r-I Q) m c, 4� o :+ . i N m o Scheme a) rq ca o:E: m U E+ o w m .a N [Ail water public Land public 2646 2690 237 -48 2879 .92 1.1' Ia. Land private 925 2175. 237 -41 2371 .39 •53 fib. 2. Basins A,B,C pub. a. Land public 2292 2371 221 -44 2548 .90 1.18 b. Land private 898 1905 221 -36 2090 .43 .61 3• Basins A,B pub. Land public 1791 1709 198 -31 1873 .96 1.42 �a. b. Lend private 809 1358 198 -27 1529 .53 .88 4. Basins A,B pub. & boats in ,no Basins C,D Ia. Land nublic 1583 1709 198 -31 1873 .85 1.25 b. Land private 600 1358 198 -27 1529 •39 .66 prom this analysis it is apparent that the scheme "b" alternatives all lack justification by a fairly wide marin. Under the scheme "a" alternatives, however, the large revenues from land leases considerably exceed the increa)es in costs resulting from the additional rave -land acquisition, and for the first 30 ,years they are marfinally sub -feasible. After the State loan has bean retired, however, all of the scheme "a" alternatives shn>: ;oo;l feasibility for the last 20 years. The mletliocl of analysis u red in Table 8 is quite sensitive to interest rates. For example, if the interest rate on the loan obtained from the private sector is reduced from 8 to 7 percent, the revenue -cost ratio will increase about 15 percent, making all of the scheme "a." projects economically feasible for the entire project life: Thus, if prevailing interest rates were to improve in the future, or if the State would increase its share of the funding at its lower interest rate, the economics of the project would be measurably enhanced. It must be realized that the estimates of costs and revenues on which this analysis is based are of a very preliminary nature. While an effort was made to use conservative figures, these estimates must be refined by more detailed planning of project com- ponents and by market studies of prospective revenues before they can be accepted as authoritative. Never- theless, the strong indications of project feasibility demonstrated by this analysis and consideration of the many benefits that would result from the project warrant continuance of efforts to achieve project implementation. SOURCE OF FUNDS Implementation of the project must be geared to the Corps of Engineer's time schedule. The earliest definite assurance that a Federal project will be implemented will be the allocation by Congress of funds with which to start the Corps' General Design Memoranda. If an effort is made in 1974 to secure such a project for the marina site and this effort is maintained over the next few years, experience with other projects has shown that about 7 years will be consumed in reaching this GDM-funding mile- post. At that time, the.Corps will begin the detailed planning of those components of the project which it will construct. About three more years will then be consumed in the design effort and preparation of contract plans and speci- fications before actual construction can begin. In the case of liana Point Harbor, this three year period was used to accumulate funds thru the District;'s taxing powers, and it is assumed that this action will be repeated. The assessed tax base of OranCe Coulity is now about $4 billion, and the harbors, Peaches and Parks District's share of the annual tax levy is now $0.22 on hundred dollars assessed value. The District is now using most of its tax funds to raise the status of its County Parks program to desired standards. This goal should be reached within a few years, and assuming that continuance of the same tax rate can be justified,some of the funds can then be diverted to other uses. For the purposes of this report it is assumed that the Corps' GDM will be funded in 1981 and that $0.05 of the tax levy can be diverted to accumulate project funds. This would amount to $2,000,000 per year or $6,000,000 by 1984, the assumed year of project implementation. Another source of funding is the harbors loan loan program of the State Department of Navigation and Ocean Development. It is assumed that a $10,000,000 State loan can be obtained in 1984 at the present annual interest rate of 4.5 percent. Th's will probably be a 30 year loan with a 5 year moratorium on commencement of repayment of principal. The remaining funding requirement would then have to be met with Harbor Revenue Bonds, which will be assumed to draw 8 percent interest with any maturity period desired up to 50 years. DEB'P SERVICING It is assumed that retirement of the District's debts assumed in the financing of the project would be accomplished generally by continuation of the $0.05 per hundred tax levy allocation for the first five years after project implementation and there- after with harbor revenues augmented as necessary by taxation. A suggested debt -servicing program for each of the sponsorship alternatives considered in this report is outlined in the following table. TABLE 9 Suggested Debt -Servicing Programs (all figures except tax rates in millions of dollars) Scheme la. All water areas pub. with perim. lands pub. Required: 35.4-6=29.4: State 10.0, Rev. Bonds 19.4 Funds ars 1984-87 1987-89 1989-2014 2014- mands state Loan 0.,45 0.45 0.67 - Revenue Bonds I.59 1.59 1.59 1.59 Harbor Opr. & Maint: - 0.30 0.30 0.30 Total 2.04 2.34 2.56 1.89 Met By Harbor Income (Gross) - - 3.94 3.g4 Taxes 2.04 2.34 - - Tax Rate* $0.0510 $0.0585 - - Harbor Income (Net) - - 1.38 2.05 Scheme lb. All water areas pub. with perim. lands pri. Funds 8equired: 29.1-6=23.1: State 10.0, Rev. Bonds 13.1 Years 1984-87 1987-89 1989-2014 2014-34 Demands State Revenue Bonds Harbor Apr..& Maint. 0.45 1.07 - 0.115 1.U7 0.28 0.67 1.07 0.28 - 1.07 0.28 Total 1.52 1.80 2.02 1.35 Met By Harbor Income (Gross) - - 7..38 1.38 Taxes 1.52 1.80 .64 - `Pax Rate# $0.0380.$0.0450 $0.016 - Harbor Income (Net) - _ _ $0.03 *Per $100 of assessed value assuming tax base of $�+ billion "A"-20 Continued Scheme 2a. Basins A,B,C pu'tl-c :rith Perim. lands public Funds Required: 31.5-6=25.5: S.ae 10, Rev. Bonds 15.5 Years 1984-8? 1987-89 1989-2014 2014-34 Demands State Loan 0.45 0.45 0.67 - Revenue Bonds 1.27 i.27 1.27 1.27 Harbor Maint. & Opr. - 0.28 0.28 0.28 Total 1.72 2.00 2.22 1.55 P9et By Harbor Income (Gross) - - 3.41 3.41 Taxes 1972 2.00 - - I'ax Hate` $0.0430 $0.0500 - [arbor Income (Idet ) - - 1.19 1. 86 Scheme 2b. lia:)ins A,B,C public with perim. lands private Funds Required: 25.8-6=19.8: State 10, Rev. Bands 9.8 Year:; 1984--87 1987-89 1989-2014 2014-34 llemands State Loan 0.45 0.45 0.67 - lievenue Bonds 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 Harbor Opr. & Maint. - 0.28 0.28 0.28 Total 1.25 1.53 1.75 1.08 [ict By 11zrbor Income (Grass) - - 1.34 1.34 'faxes 1.25 1.53 0.41 - Pa-, 1<ate- $0.0312 $0.0382 $O.olo3 - lart,ur lncotr.c Net) - - - 0.26 �`Pcr �100 0l' a:;r,e:;oed value assuming tax base Tab1e 9 Continued Scliemc_ 3a. Baai.n:.; A,B pub. ':rith perim. lands public b'undn Hequi.red: 23.4--6=17.4: State 10, Rev. Bonds 7.4 Year:;1984787 Demands 1987-89 1989-2014 2014-34 State Loan Revenue Bonds Harbor Opr. & Maint. 0.45 0.60 - 0.45 0.60 0.25 0.67 0.60 0.25 - 0.60 0.25 'Dotal 1.05 1.25 1.52 0.85 Ifarbor :Lnco;ne (Gross) - - 2.67 2.67 Taxer, 1. 05 1 . 25 - - Tax Rate* $0.0262 $0.0312 - - 1[arbor Income (Net) - - 1.15 1.82 Schcrne 3b • ISasins A,B pub . riith perim. lands private 1l'undn Required: 10.1-6=13.1: State 10, Rev. Bonds 3.1 Year:; _ 1984-87 1987-89 1989-2014 2014-34 Demands State Loan 0.45 0.45 0.67 - Revenue Bonds 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 Harbors Opr. & Maint. - 0.25 0.25 0.25 'total 0.7U 0.95 1.17 0.50 Met By Harbor Income (Gross) - - 1.20 1.20 Taxes: 0.70 0.95 - - t'a>: Hatc* $O.o175 $0.0238 - 1lar•bor income (Net) - - 0.03 0.70 *I'er• $l00 of �s:;c.;sed value tissum3ng tax base of :Gh billi.on ;'al. ) Continued S^fleme 4a. Basins A,B pub. itr perim. lands public and no marina in Basins C,D ruci ., Required: 23.4-6=17.4: State 10, Rev. Bonds 7.4 Years errands 19d4-d7 19t5y- 4 2olU-�U State Loan 0.45 O.US 0.67 - Revenue Bonds 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60 Harbor Opr. & Maint. - 0.25 0.25 0.25 Total 1.05 1.25 1.52 0.85 rnet 11y F{arbur Income (Gross) - - 2.36 2.36 Taxc:, 1.05 1.25 - - 'ar. Rate* $0.0262 $0.0312 - -. ]larbor Income (Net) - - 0.84 1.51 Scheme 4b. Basin:: A,B pub. with perim. lands private and no marina in Basins C,D Pund:� Required: 19.1-6=13.1: State 10, Rev. Bonds 3.1 Year• 1984-87 1987-89 1989-2o1U 2014-34 _ remands :fate Toan 0.45 0.l15 0.67 - }tevr.>>rue Bondc•. 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 ]]arbor Opr. & Maint. - 0.25 0.25 0.25 Total 0.70 0.95 1.17 0.50 �4%t By ' llar•b�,r• 1.ncome (Gros ;) - - 0. 89 0.89 Tax(!:; 0.70 0.95 0.28 - T;i;: lfate* $0.0 L75 $0.0238 $0.0070 - Il:irtmr• lnr.nmc (Net;) - - - 0.39 `1';�r $l00 r>(' a;:;ca:;ed value, a:.:.umi.ng tax ba:,e of }4 i� i I I i_rni IND I RGC'P B};Nh;i'•.C'I'S In addition to the direct. -revenue^ benefits used for financial justification of the project, several indir�c:t benefits w111 result. The tax base of the area will be increased not only by virtue of the taxable developments within t%re project boundary but also because of new developments in presently depressed areas outside the project boundary that will be up�,raded by the presence of the marina. The increase in population of the affected area will cr•eate.a demand for new jobs and additional commercial services, which should result in still more tar•able development in the form of small marine - related .Lndustries, shopping centers, household rcpa:ir and servicing facilities, etc., which in turn cause a d.isproporti.on�tely small increase in the need for cornrnurr:LL'y-support services. In F;encral, the upgrading of the area will have many ittdLr•ect and intanp;ible benefits, which, though dii'f.icu.(.t to evaluate, have a real worth which should be considered 1n justification of the project. "A"-24 RECREATION AND OPEN SPACE ELEMENT SECTION 12 - IMPLEMENTATION The proposals contained herein will cost money. A basic premise of this Recreation and Open Space Element is that open spaces serve a public need, provide public services, and are a necessary part of a high -quality living environment; and that, therefore, the expenditure of public funds for preservation and improvement of open space is warranted. While it is anticipated that acquisition of land for all of the park and trail proposals in the undeveloped areas will be implemented through dedication of land by the developer, many of the open space proposals will require public purchase of the land or of an easement. The City of Newport Beach has adopted an Open Space Zoning District; however, privately -owned land can only be zoned as open space with the agreement of the property owner. It is obvious that public purchase of land for open space in an area with the high land values of Newport Beach is going to be an expen- sive proposition. It is anticipated that land values are going to continue to increase. Therefore, the City should acquire these lands as soon as possible and will consider the best possible use of existing City owned lands. There are many possible means of raising the revenues necessary for public purchase and improvement of open space lands, including building exise tax, municipal bond issures, special assessment districts, and grants from State and Federal agencies. ATTACiiMENT "B" TO APPENDIX G Where the open space areas have regional significance, the City will request the participation of the County, State, or Federal Government. Grants from Federal and State Agencies The City of Newport Beach will apply to the State and Federal govern - rents for funds to assist in acquisition and development of some of its park and open -space land. The most common grant source is the Land and Water Conservation Fund; however, there are some other open -space grants from the Federal government that are available. In addition to these far-reaching grants, the City will also apply to the County for matching funds. in the development of a portion of the bicycle trails system that coincides with the County Master Plan. In addition to Federal and County grants, the City is also eligible to receive monies through the Federal 1-evenue-sharing program, both from the Federal level and the County level.. Wherever applicable, the City will take advantage of these revenue -sharing funds. State Park Bond Issue of 1974 Additional funds could conceivably be available to the City of Newport Beach if the State Park Bond Issue of 1974 is approved by the voters in June. This is a $Z50,000,000 bond issue with $90,000,000 being distributed to cities and counties. Based on the projected popula tion in 1980, Newport Beach's share would be about $206,000. This money would be used for both acquisition and development of park sites. "B"_2 Excise Tax Fund A major portion of funds that will be utilized to implement park de- velopment in the City of Newport Beach will come from the Building Excise Tax Fund. This is a fund that imposes a 15 cents per square foot development tax on all residential, commercial, and industrial developments within the City and is used exclusively for the develop- ment of fire stations, libraries a.nd parks. Since its inception in 1964, this Fund has accumulated $1,900,000 of which $1,500,000 has been expended. Thirty-five percent of that amount has gone into park development. These funds have been expended in accordance with City Council Policy I-4 which is a cost -sharing policy on undeveloped land. Council Policy I-4 identifies the responsibilities of the City and private land owners when land developments are proposed, relating to the acquisition and development cf local parks, view parks, bicycle trails, and other open -space elements. It is anticipated that the privately -owned lands designated as open space within and adjacent to the Upper Bay will be acquired by the State or Federal government as a wildlife preserve. If the State or Federal government does not acquire all of the Upper Bay area in- dicated as open space on the Open Space Plan, the City will explore other possibilities for acquisition. Revenue Projections Figure 5 projects the various potential revenue sources by year until 1990 - 1991. Priorities for City Open Space Acquisition and Improvements ciaure 6 indicates the open space areas and facilities for which it is anticipated that City expenditures will be required, listed in three priority groupings. These priority groupings are based on three major factors: 1) The need to reduce activity park deficiencies in certain sections of the City; 2) The ecological significance of the areas; and 3) The prob-ability that the opportunity for preservation of open space will be lost in t�,e near future. Also included, are suggested time phases for acquisition and improve- men.t, recognizing the fact that not all of these proposals can be accomplished at once. However; if the opportunity arises to acquire any of these areas sooner than indicated, this should be done. The proposed means of acquisition, estimated costs, and funding sources are also indicated on the chart. (All cost estimates are based on constant dollars; inflation is not taken into account. Although in- flation will increase actual costs, it will also increase revenues such that the net effect on relative costs should be negligible.) ��B��_4 The costs of those projects earmarked for local bond issue funding and State Bond Issue of 1974 funding if passed) add up to a total of '3J0009000. If it becomes possible to lease the State-owned property at low cost, the local bond issue would not be necessary. Projects Proposed to Be 'Funded by Other Levels of Government Following is a list of open space projects which are heyond the re- sponsibility and scope of local funding, and for which the City will seek County, State, and/or Federal funding: 1. Upper Newport Bay flora and fauna reserve and associated equestrian and hiking trails. 2. Santa Ana River Greenbelt and associated equestrian and hiking trails. 3. Land for public parking lots on State property on Coast Highway. 4. Additional public restrooms for beaches. 59 Regional park north of Upper Bay. LL O r-1 p U U "O p 79 W O O H Cl O O O p O O O O ! U oa ay I wo ti R o O O O O O O 7 R7 N N N N N N ti o O o O o 0 p O O O O p Oli O N O T �-- a G �n o O O M O p � � O n O m rn 0 o W Un o w o o x o 0 mo v o o O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 CD 0 0 0 0 o O O O O O O O O CD O O O O O Cl Cl W O v O O O rl V' N N O O O O O 01 N O W tn m m m m m cd I Oi 1 U I Ol � m Qi I T I m 0 ub o i� o C/ 'O xri G1 w O O •-1 qg td 0 0 Cl 0 o O o 0 0 0 0 0 m y o 0 0 0 0 0 7 � z � O y O h tD G o 1$ o o Lw o N !n O vt O O C OO C0 M U 6 p � O � O G W M +sr XV W O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O C: w H CD�n O 'D [� � M N O QO ri r-1 r-1 r--1 ti �--1 Ol dP O � �1 LC 64 H9 N 41 m m ao a. m _v N O tJ J W � ro L60 C O C O N Nog ox W U 4L tH i1.7 III `o o j Sw •Fmk, os o m o � � o O W 0 rnWy U w C O u� 41 >. O p U U 4, �n N � H w v v m M W � i o v v� �Cd L9 o o a� 0 G i M C k� x a a N a. o •b �j ro O v � F° Co N 00 N +. N 1 O m r, U W o b 1.+ ro � O O O GJ O U O I CpC KN b v� o r O � N Qj «� C h' 0 a a nro. v o � I � ro m i m b O tx� F ' O O � O U �7 .S '-1 i E-� O O � O N ti U � m �-q c 5 ' ro i i U I N L TJ v C 0 L T O O v u a ro fy c N > o v >. N � 0 m � v F ro r F � 4. N Or •ti N F m o id • U M,p m G as 0 0 0 0 0 0 m O O O O O 0 0 0 o c N O O O O p O O O O O C,'J W 84 64 dig 4% yq. O O O O O G O O O O �3 o o I o •ti U C7 cn 89 .es es ny O O O O O O 0 0 O O O O O O �O O U W H Vi eR yg O � O O O O O 000 0 O o O O O O O O O u'i v1 O O �D �D CD d r ✓1 lIi Op N N O coC�C O [n) R1 +A O a9 H ++? d? O O O O N O O O O O C O O O O O O O O e-1 rf N N M yy U iL vs ers an 00 es 0 av 0 00 0 0 o 0 0 0 > tv 0O o 0 0 o p o C.) L P. to 000000pOoo p o0000000 0 C> 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 O 0 O ; 0 0 0 0 0 Co 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 O 0 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O N u'1 O O O O N �-i vt M Vt N O 4% M 64 6R i.A M N rn p cn rn rn F � rN-1 F i•. M a Z W F I F z z z o Z F W o U O fF qZO C 6 E O h z u z w vWi F cC W C W > C W F � m W £ C 2 3 `c Nw m i a F 6 w 0 W E W C �+ Z K O M S¢5 rn C m X m G b v Y A d M V F W m fi A' v 3 m w E _ -__ Z Z z z Z z z¢ W w m I 1 1 I 1 I 1 I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 t p T 3 � _ Z U 1 1 1 I 1 I 1 I I I 1 1 I l l l l l a fi p I T 3 m _ Z 2 Z 1 U o Z m OmIAF d T9 a d d F a a d y T O O H H Y.miQ o N u> u O u d S m 4 E 6 m m l d u .-Iw d C C o m m pow u Ofi+i w 0 WYa�m.-IWmNN�0?mN�ua� u 0 zHIS vdi . vv v v v v vvvvv �vv 000 O W F r C D U Z Z EE L u 6 en u a o u C N u u m w .Gi G u m j m t w G S m 6 m W u w a w a u 6 a m G C Fqm m m u aai run cTi N C W% w' i w3r3N Wv P Z w Q1 W O t m � Q Z m U Z U U H H H t mp T T i p U Z Z m U Fu i h £ R 3 x � a G a m 6 m o .3r a mp m0 T C u e r a z xG waa 0 £ Z 5 U N H �I C E fi b u L w a m a w d S L dd� mL O E m¢O C V N yti .roi ..0 6 u d o y� w E R1 d y o G m vm u � d d.G � 6 d L Low fi mE to P u m Co �N ro j y a 1 m N T C G ti F C ro ro wJ U U 5 U U Um U£ U U L F 00 p N C m V £ T A m O U U u W U rn U£ U L C � E 9 0 a rl m r6 4 N V p a fi Y G cTi ro "� m U o m o o a o 0 0 00 £ m O m E as o w U C G T ] U � N ++ OaA CJ 7 N a U E o C e G O Y 4 U ] o F9 .Oi F P I O £ O � U • G E a a n > m u £ to U a \ £ o a m T T a C x on 4z O m N I I O L £ G r viF N +-iL N u = m P.Sm U SmU,mx E m E E E U U U U 0 � E u G > u +y C N C A E \ o 0 V T G C O N O O N £ C u+G1F 0 S]ml"wa sGm U E 0 0 U U U N a, a M i �a a m V Y T u .] U E m a M rn m Wv� m m ON mo z E d ro e I I I I I p I C G C W GG U N �n 6 w w w v� to w to to w to to W ~ ~ o O GG C CC G CC Oqq G c m m m a U W to W vi 6� [n w w N w w In to w to vl W W O 'a yZ •-1 U C v+ c-� w p. 6 w o. W w w W w w W o O O y O O O p O O o o O O U O W O M y j G 3 m 5 2 m m m m C m > > > 6 0 o a o m 3 3 9 o 'imam y y v' U y o C m a y u N 1 d M O N U F r9C+ u E 6 y � O W a £ q C N m �n UOw R] O U30 W Z.i y C G O a yZ avyi Z.�Z.i - � � m C W C _ 8 E t C \ A C N d d 6 P. of y h W M VJ O. g u � O w C w F y E o O I I 1 E m oE w v O G I C G O o m m t P. W % m U 6 pp 6 GG CC GG N G 6 6 M w w z U G r¢i� In O rn a W W A 00 G m .I $ u Cv [u 3u d E x .•E, P W 9 O a Ou gd L L 3 O z° z LOWER RIVER SEGMENT PLANNED PROJECT PRIORITIES Proj ect Jurisdiction Number Description Priority County of Orange LCM-008 Fairview Regional Park Group One LSA-056 Centennial Regional Park Group One LCO-001 Talbert Regional Park Group Two Note: Above priority groups established in County Master Plan of Regional Parks, Amendment No. 3. LSA-056 added to Group One by Board Resolution No. 73-1384, Huntington Beach LHB-008 PCH Bicycle Trail 1 LHB-010 Upgraded Bicycle Trails 2 LHB-011 Signing Bicycle Trails 3 LHB-006 River Trail Landscaping 4 Note: Remaining Huntington Beach projects were not assigned priorities. Newport Beach LNB-001 Water -Related Recreation/ 1 Conservation Area LNB-004 West Newport Park 1 LNB-005 Bicycle Trail 1 Costa Mesa' LCM-008 Fairview Regional Park 1 LCM-003 Bicycle Trail 2 LCM-009 Bicycle Trail Loop 3 LCM-011 Bicycle Lane 4 LCM-006 River Trail Landscaping 5 LCM-013 Bicycle Lane/Trail 6 LCM-005 Bicycle Lane 7 LCM-004 Bicycle Lane 8 Fountain Valley LFV-052 Equestrian Trail - Santa Ana LSA-056 Centennial Regional Park 1 LSA-107 Stables 2 LCO-059 Stadium 3 LSA-065 Equestrian Center 4 LSA-071 Polo Field 5 LCO-053 Camping Area 6 LSA-083 Equestrian Center 7 LSA-110 Accessory Commercial Uses 8 LSA-068 Polo Field 9 LSA-113 Park 10 LSA-104 Park 11 LSA-101 Park 12 APPENDIX I-1 Jurisdiction ect er Descr ion Santa Ana LSA-080 Park & Recreation 13 (continued) LSA-077 Park & Recreation � 14 LSA-074 Equestrian Center 15 LSA-062 Equestrian Center 16 Note: Remaining projects in Lower River segment of City of Santa Ana Greenbelt Plan were not assigned priorities. I-2 O U w Z C c W dw A F 4 a00 Oat mot W 4 6 e d P. W t: 3 d E > 3 d E F E d O ++ m u T u w G u¢ V O X V O ¢ d a w 0¢> z y w° Y Wq mp m�p I s ❑ .c o. c q U q 3 3 o 0 a W o o c 0 0 \ \ T T u u 0 F f] G F CF C u U U U 0 U U U U 0 U U U U 0 O s'a is \ \ \ a d d d o a a o a w w z z w n+ a s a w a a I O O U O OU OU GG CC cc C a C o o f O LGq O O y .CSC N C L LCC � >. LGG T L F u I I 1 I I I I I r r4 C4 m m 3 a m 3 a a � u a Q W2 M 6 w a W Z W K < W w Q H[ oo. �nW i � a o m Y m um C G a O E m •m m 3 0 C q w q 3 O C 3 m \ L L 2 G C w C > > G o H o w L L- Cu >4mB uu ((]] qq 2QQ 3�03__ Uy�_C F oUUUo w+w ow coo 0 8 v�l P T �❑❑tl C p U a U 6 U U U 3 3 F 6 y z N z F N W Z ^� w G C Z > � o z a E. w c� o a H F � Z iC W A O G Y cn 6 U O n a Y .+ m 7 a aG' a 0 >• vi e w c > � a. > 3 \ cGi 6 z S 9 O A �m >.� T w > q .c qqu c " a 3 - = 3 4 'fi � G O o � OZ W Caw UY U z 0 z c� i i i m C T 9 \ 0 C n cE'i � � o a. e e � +'+ e o K o _ _ � LG .C❑❑ _ _ _ F T a .G a ¢ 6 U U 6 W c i � I 6 W GWO CW H a � G .-� 3 No� � 1 W m I I� a �� u C m p m � v L A � 6 m ti N W V ti m G G C Y > uY � wY u m C C N C G .-+ Z U ti U w 3 A Nm 3 A U m C j � C u C u u F+ O G W V G � M p v C L G u � u 3 w vui 3 P. W �n P w r-`''i w i �� E C U +� C T+i U ti e ¢ 6 � O O V O 4 C m m m E E W M E 6 w a w z . W6 m 2 A W Y E O 6 Y X w C a � a o c m � m W � O u w ] O I 6 T >+ U en I� v � u ca > O T a A 0 6 a X G-I • ° C CN � b T vim O wm U tnU N V g E H W U C u U' � G N Z O O U G q F G F C m q N�P c c¢i a °i xFw a m y v� o N E �+ wL ° a � u M � U y '.7 � N N++ s u 4 m X •i F U W m a e a u w ,J E Y 9 w w a w d m uGi T w � s e a z d u u ~ > E+ E v a e c >+ a ¢ v w u o o N m d u y 6 W C y o w o 3 3 3 .-I m laa Y a Y a E > E w E > d a W F fi L n a o 3o W m mm O zu 3w 3o W 3w uJ Z a Z O C W F aZ L O Z F O U w0 � o ti U U 3 O T T T U U U U O u � T 7 U U U W u R u W W [G G F N _ 4 P. F a m E � C y v m w �w H b u D i 6 N N m > vwi w > C U > C 6 ON O C m owep vm n � y 3 G w m v O O O w w O v O Z Y P m G 3 •� u G m �n 6 w • v .a .V90 v.G rj m .�.� m Et �� o mG m m w m uv u 7 cvmi u u 6>> G W 3w nmwp .O.iQZ o w o Nm03 OZ o O 0 6 6 fL 6 U 6 C 6 ur z H H N .e C0 3 O3 CC GNG 0 U CC CC p 6 6 6 Q U 3 T I u U V I 6 E E E U V E L c fi T r G > C ❑ m iCmE 3 00 t O o U O U o U E \ C N � 6 T �l G G .GVCG C] C o y U O U U U 6 0 V C G u X > U u F ro C 6 m 0 C v m mY m K 3 n a O W •� C Y .iZm 3 CF 03 M m N W G v � F.i .cl6 •G> a6 a.l 6N o Opp.I OE.. ...wm vGM [w[]] yuvm F j c a F N u> u U� C v 0 3 m m •C W q.�.]I-Ei OmE iZ OZ o Z CZ NZ K HO CU a0 ZZ.�Z e ..] W F F 11 1 I I 1 -I 1 1 I 1 I Z yZ F. O rO+ U GG qq pp qq GG FQQ O >. T qq C� .GaGG tGG > 7 C C C C J G 3 O ^Oi 6 6 a U m rn h U U P. U O v� In In H F E .O] Z W O T O CFi C m C O = G 6 6 e e a T 6 6 6 T U m �Oi 6 6 M U [n to to U U P. O O [n vl vi O � N F E E E E ti .a E E E E v E E O O O .'� F 3 ❑❑ CC� 6 A N U (q] pp pp qq C m Ncc 3 G C 3 3 3 C C G 66O U m to In U U O O O w W m C G C i % C Z Tm X C Y,+Y T [Fl G � \ : + ;[ } \ 0 }Kw 0 u = }) 4 ~ w \ \ \ \\ \ \ } } \ \) \) } }\ } \\ j ) 0 0 0 0 0 0 \ MIDDLE RIVER SEGMENT PLANNED PROJECT PRIORITIES Project Number Description Prioritl County of Orange MCW-215 Old Santa Ana Park - South Group One MAN-221 Old Santa Ana Park - North Group One MCW-312 El Parque del Rio Group One MCO-315 Old Santa Ana Park (Noble Pit) Group One MAN-224 Equestrian Trail to Miller Basin Group Two MAN-233 Warner Basin Park Group Two Note: Above priority groups established in.County Master Plan of Regional Parks. Project identification determined by name and/or location. OCWD MCW-215 Old Santa Ana Park - South 1 MAN-221 Old Santa Ana Park - North 1 MCW-312 E1 Parque del Rio 1 MCO-315 Old Santa Ana Park (Noble Pit) 1 MAN-224 Equestrian Trail to Miller Basin 1 MAN-233 Warner Basin Park 1 MAN-245 Imperial Woods Equestrian Center 1 Anaheim MAN-236 Riverdale Rest Stop 1 MCW-215 Old Santa Ana Park - South 2 MAN-221 0ld Santa Ana Park - North 3 MAN-239 Riverdale Park 4 MAN-230 Recreation (Newkirk) 5 MAN-248 Bicycle Equestrian Trail Crossing 6 at Imperial Highway MAN-212 Bicycle Lane Crossing 7 at Ball Road/Taft Avenue MAN-218 Bicycle Lane, Lincoln Avenue 7 MAN-227 Bicycle Lane Crossing 8 at Glassell Street MAN-224 Equestrian Trail along Carbon 9 Creek Channel to Miller Basin MAN-242 Bicycle Lane Crossing, 10 Lakeview Avenue MAN-233 Warner Basin Park 11 MAN-245 Imperial Woods Equestrian Center 12 MAN-208 Orangewood Rest Stop 13 Orange MOR-308 Bicycle Trail to E1 Camino Real Park 1 MCW-312 E1 Parque del Rio 2 MCO-315 0ld Santa Ana Park (Noble Pit) 3 Note: Above priorities developed by the Citizen Greenbelt Committees of the City of Orange and the County Unincorporated Area, APPENDIX. L-1 T�jProject risdiction Number Description Priority to Ana MSA-260 Forrest au11 Park 1 MSA-254 Edna Park Expansion 2 MSA-251 Edna Park Expansion 3 MSA-318 Park & Recreation Facility 4 L-2 EXTRACT: Anaheim Municipal Code, Title 18 Zoning Chapter 18.84 18.83.070 18.84.010 "(SC)" SCENIC CORRIDOR ZONE --OVERLAY 040 Well Servicing. No well servicing shall be perforn-ted except between the hours of seven a.nn, and seven p.m. except in case of emergency, if at the time at well servicing or mauntenauce any of the conditions described in Section 18.83.061.040 exist. .050 Oil Removal. Oil produced ill the drill site shall be removed therefrom by an underground pipeline or pipelines. Sucli pipeline or pipelines shrill he constructed within one hundred eighty days after the date the first well un I tic drill site is completed. .060 Equipment Storage. There shall be no storage of material, machinery or vehicle which is not for immediate use or servicing of an installation on the drill site. .070 Site and Installation Maintenance. The drill site and all permanent installations shall he maintained in a neat, clean :and orderly condition, and all surfaces at - permanent installations within the drill site shall be painted and maintained in a neat and orderly manner. .080 Height of Installation. Except as otherwise hcrei❑ specifically permitted, no permanent installations at the drill site shall be or project more than eight fee[ above the surface of the surrounding ground. .090 Signs. No sign which is visible from outside of the drill site shall be caused, permitted or allowed to be or remain any place on the drill site except: .091 Sudt signs as are required by hiw; .092 Warning signs; .093 No trespassing signs. 100 Gas Burning. Natural gas shall not be vented to the atmosphere ran burned by oprn flare. 110 Landscaping Requirements. Shrubs shall be planted and maintained along the exterior of the fence or wall enclosing the drill site. This requirement shall not be constructed to limit or prohibit additional site hcautification by landscaping or other platting. Ord. 2197 § 1 (part);October 19, 1965,) 18.83.070 BASIC SAFETY REGULATIONS. In addition to the provts'ions contained herein, the drilling for and production of oil shall be subject to the regulations of Chapter i7.1 _2 of the Anaheim Municipal Code. (Ord. 2197 § 1 (par);October 19, 1965). 581 Chapter 18.84 ••(SC)" SCENIC CORRIDOR ZONE —OVERLAY Sections: 18.84.010 Description and purpose.. 18.84.020 Permitted uses and strue- t u res—Genera I. 18.84.030 Site development standards General. 18.84.040 Development in single-family residential and agricultural (Sc) zones. 18.84.050 Development in multiple- fantily residential (SC) _= zones. 18.84.060 Development in commercial (SC) zones. 18.84.070 Development in industrial (SC) zones. 18.84.01.0 DESCRIPTION AND PUKPOSE. The Scenic Coridor Overlay (SC) Zone is intended to provide for and promote orderly growth in certain areas of the City designated as being of distinctive, scenic importance, while implementing local govermncnlal agency actions I'or tine protection, preservation and enhancement of the unique and natural scenic assets of Ihese areas as a valuable resource to [he community. (Ord. 3397 § 2 art); February 11, 1975.) ]8.84.015 DELINEATION OF (SC) ZONE BOUNDARIES. Areas of the City designated as being within the Scenic Corridor Overlay (SC) Zone, and reasons for said designation are as specified hcrein: .010 Santa Ana Crayon (SC) Zone; shall be delisted as [fiat area lying easterly of the intellection' of the Newport and Riverside Freeways, westerly of the Orange County line, southerly of the Atchison, Topeka and Santa Fe Railroad right-of-way, and northerly of the present or any future south city limits of the City of Anahcim. 11tis area has been so designated as an area of distinctive natural and rural beauty characterized and excmplilicd by the nterrelationship between such primary natural features as the rolling terrain, winding river, Eucalyptus tree windbreaks and the profusion of (Annhc,m 85 75) APPENDIX M-1 (SC)" SCENIC CORRIDOR ZONE —OVERLAY natural vegetation. (Ord. 3391 s 2 (part); February II,1975.1 I8.84.020 PERh1ITTED USES AND STRUCTURES —GENERAL. ['lie (SC) Zone is established to be combined with other zones wi(hin the Scenic (Iorridor (e.g., RS-71.00(SC), RM-2400(SC), ('L(SC), ML(S('),atc.). The regulations which apply to property in any zone with which the (SC) Zone s combined shall remain [he same, except as to the mutters specified in this chapter. This chapter shall apply in lieu of or in addition to and shall supersede the corresponding regulations of such zone with which the (SC) Lone is combined. (Ord. 2929 1 (part); June I, 197L) 18.84.030 SITE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS —GENERAL, The Scenic Corridor. site development standards are intended to provide for. the continued orderly development of the City's scenic areas by encouraging a high quality of development in keeping with the natural amenities of these areas and preserving their unique scenic resources as an asset to the community. Tile site development standards prescribed hereinafter for the underlying zones within said Corridor are` established to insure harmony with adiacent uses of land and to Tetaro the scenic characteristics of these. areas. 18.84.036 OUTDOOR ADVERTISING — GENERAL. Billboards, as defined in this title, are prohibited on any parcel located witlibl the (SC) Zone, otherwise the sign regulations for the underlying zone in which such land is located, as provided in Chapter 18.05 "Outdoor Advertising," shall apply for any such zone combined with the (SC) Zone, except for commercial zones as otherwise provided herein. (Ord. 3397 § '_ (part): February 11, 1975.) 18.84.Q38 TREE PRESERVATION. Preservation of significant stands and single specified trees in the Scenic Corridor is intended to preserve the natural beauty of the Santa Ana Canyon environment, increase the visual identity and duality of the area, and protect the remaining natural amenities from premature removal or destruction. 582 18.84.020-18.84.030 .010 Definitions. In the context of this ordinance, the following; words shall have the meaning respectively ascribed to them: ,.Specimen 'I "tee., is helcbv debug[ as Lucalyptus varieties (Eucalyptus), Quercus varieties (Oak), Schinus varieties (Pepper), or Platauus varieties (Sycamore) tree with a trunk measuring eight (8) inches or greater in diautc(cr, measured at a point tour (4) feet above ground level, which has been found by the City of Anaheim to be of high value because of is type and/or historic association. "Stand" is hereby defined as rive (5) or more Specimen Trees located on any parcel of land. 020 Scope. It shall be unlawful to cuI down, destroy, or remove any Stand of Eucalyptus Specimen Trees or any single Oak, Pepper, or Sycamore Specimen Tree growing within the boundaries of the Scenic Corridor Zone, unless prior approval has been granted by the Development Services Department. . .021 Criteria for Approval. In determining whether or not to grant approval for removal or destruction of a Stand of Eucalyptus Specimen Trees or any single Oak, Her, or Sycamore Specimen Tree, the decision shall be based -on both of the following: .0211 The replacement of the Stand of Specimen Trees or single Specimen Tree with trees front the following specified list: Square Frwtagc of Coverage in Botanical Name Common Name Ten 110) Years Albizia Julibrissin Silk Tree 500 Alms Rhmabifolia White Aldcr 300 Arbutus Menzleb Madrone 500 Brachychiton Acrifultum Hame Tree 30u Certatonia Sihqua Carob Tree 300 Cercls Occidentalis Western Redbud 175 Chorisia Speciusa Floss Silk True 175 Cir namornum Camphora Camphor Tice 175 Cupanta Anacardioides Carrot Wood 300 Erythnna Caffea Kafftrbuon Coral 500 Eucalyptus Species Gum Tree 75 Ficus Species Fig Tree 300 G leditsia Tnacamthos Honey Locust Soo Iacaranda Acutifolia Jacaranda 700 Kotreutcna Furmosana Chinese "Flame Tree Soo Liyuidantbar Formosana Chinese Sweet Gum 300 Pinus Canariensis Canary Island Pine 175 Pinus Coulten Coulter Pine 300 Pin us Holepensis Aleppo Pine 700 Pinus Padiata Monterey Pine Sun Plalanus Racemosa California Sycamore 700 P[crocarya Stenoptera Chinese Wingnut 700 Pinus Kawakanl Evergreen Pcar 500 lJucrcus Aprtfoha California Live Oak 300 M—Z "(SC) " SCENIC CORRIDOR ZONE — OVERLAY 18.84.040 18.84.050 Square Footage of Coverage in &rtanical Name Gammon Name 7"en (10) Yens 1ah.x liaby'lomca Weeping Willow 501) Sdunus Molls California Pepper 500 "I 1puana'Ilpu 'ripu'I rue 500 Ulnros Parnloild acmpnr nuns Chinese IUm 500 I Walnut) Jugians ('ahlornica S. Ca. 13lack Walnut 500 02t2 Fstahlisluuenl of good cause for removal or destruction of the Stand of Specimen Trees of single Specimen Tree, based on one or more of the following criteria: .02 12 1 Diseased trees whose condition is a source of present danger to healthy treesin the immediate vicinity, providing a certificate attesting such fact has been filed with the City of Anaheim by a licensed free surgeon authorized to do business within the City. 02122 Trees whose general health and condition are a source of present danger of falling in respect to existing or proposed structures, and interference with utility service. .02123 Trees so weakened by age, disease, storm, lire, excavation, removal of adjacent trees, or any injury see as to cause imminent danger to persons or properly. .030 Appeal. Any decision . made regarding approval for removal or destruction of any Stand of Specimen Trees may be appealed by the property owner of affected resident or property owner in the City of Anaheim to the ('ity (•0UI1Cil. (Ord. 3412 § 1 ; April 8, 1975: )rd. 3423 § 2; May 13, 1975.) 18.84.040 DEVELOPMENT IN SINGLL- FAMILY RESIDENTfAL ANU AGRICULTURAL (SC) ZONES. 18,84.041 PERMITTED BUILDINGS AND USES. Those uses which are automatically or conditionally permittcd in the specific zones shall' be permitted automatically ur conditionally except the following USCS shall be excluded: .010 Hotels, motels and motor inns; .020 Billboards; .030 Drivc-in, walk-up or senuencloscd restaurants; .040 Open-air theaters; .050 Bon"ow pits, 582-1 060 Concrete hatching ur mixing of Portland or asphaltic concrete. .070 Dumps (sanitary landfill); .080 Excavation, processing, storage, wholesaling and distribution of sand, gravel and other IlOnftrel minends. .090 Refuse, disposal or transfer, .100 Animal hospitals and kennels; .I 10 Sewage treatment plants; .120 Automobile or truck sales agency (new or used); .130 Car washes; .140 Amusement parks; .150 Circuses, carnivals, rodeos, or Fairgrounds; .160 Racetracks, .170 Pawnshops; .180 Planned unit shopping centers; .190 Transportation ter lhials; .200 Explosives storage. ]8.84.042 SITE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS. Notwithstanding the site development standards of the residential or a} icultural zone in which located', the following additional standards shall apply: .010 Building and Structural Height Limitations: .011 The maximum overall height of any building or mobilehome shall be twenty-five feet measured from the highest portion of structure to the highest finished grade level at the foundation. .012 Roof -mounted equipment including exterior -mounted and ground -mounted radio and television antennas shall not be permitted. (Ord. 292O § I (part); lone 1, 1971.) 18.84.050 DEVELOPMENT BV biULT1PLE-FAMILY RESIDEN- TIAL (SC) ZONES. 18.84.051 PERMITTED BUILDINGS AND USES. Those uses which are ❑utontatically or conditionally permitted in the specific zones' sha11 be permitted automatically or conditionally except the following uses shall be ex hided: .010 hotels, motels and motor inns. 18.84.052 SITE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS. Notwithstanding the site (Anaheim tl-5 75) M-3 "(SC) " SCENIC CORRIDOR ZONE —OVERLAY 18.84,050 development standards of the multiple -family residential zone in which located, the following additional standards shall apply: 010 Minimum Site Area: All sites shall be of sufficient size and width to accommodate the anticipated number of dwelling units and parking spaces, open areas, end other structures and uses for which 582-2 a�,n�im esys� M-4 "(SC)" SCENIC CORRIDOR ZONE —OVERLAY provisions are made in these zones. further, the minimum project area shall be five acres and such five acre projects may develop as condominium projects or as multiple -family subdivisions. .020 Building Location: On all lots adjacent to Freeways, expressways, arterial highways and railroad rights -of -way, buildings and nmbilchontc coaches shall be located no closer than fifty fcc[ to tine right-oi-way line. 030 Parking Area Landscaping: .031 Tile required fitly feet shall be used for recreation and open space or may be used for open parking and vehicular aceessways; provided that a minimum ten foot wide screen planting (may include trees or shrubs, etc., a minimum forty-two inch high decorative masonry wall, a forty-two inch high earthen )erm, or any combination of these) shall be maintained adjacent to the right-ol-way line. .032 All open parking areas and their adjacent vehicular, accessways shall be landscaped. Landscaping shall include at least one tree per three thousand square feet of open parking area and vehicular accessway evenly distributed throughout the open parking areas. (Ord. 1_929 y I (part); ]title 1, 1971.) 18.84.D60 DEVELOPMENT IN COMh1ERC1AL (SC1 ZONES. 18.84,061 PERMITTED BUILDINGS AND USES. Those uses which are aUtontatically or conditionally permitted in the specific zones shall be permitted automatically or conditionally except [he following uses shall be excluded: .010 Office or commercial use of a residential structure; .020 Automobile, truck or mobilehonte sales lots (new or used); .030 Billboards except temporary tract signs as provided in Section 18.05.072; .040 Service stations except where integrated with a shopping center. 18.84.061. SITE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS. Notwithstanding the site development standard, of the commercial zone in which located, the following additional standards shall apply: 010 Yards and Setbacks: .011 Adjacent to freeways, 18.84.060 expressways or scenic highways all buildings shall maintain a landscaped setback area having a minimum depth of one hundred feet. .012 Adjacent to major, primary, secondary, hillside primary or hillside secondary highways, all buildings shall maintain a landscaped setback area having a ntimmum dePill of fifty feet. .013 Adjacent to collector and local streets, all buildings shall maintain a landscaped m setback area having a milruuu depth of twenty I. .014 Improvement of Required Setbacks: The required landscaped setbacks listed above shall be either fLllly landscaped or may be used as part of an automobile parking area; provided that a minimum twenty foot wide screen planting area shall be maintained adjacent to any right-of-way line. Where the developer provides a three foot high landscaped berm adjacent to the right-of-way line the planting and landscaping may be reduced to fourteen I. .0141 Where the rear of a commercial building abuts upon a local street where two-thirds of property in the block on the opposite side of the street is zoned for residential use, a six foot high masonry wall shall be provided to the rear of said screen planting area for the full width of the subject property. .0142 Where an interior site boundary line abuts a residential zone a minimum tell foot screen landscaped setback shall be provided adjacent to the property line. .020 Landscaping: ncaping: In addition to the required setback and slope landscaping, all parking areas and vehicular accessways shall be landscaped. Landscaping shall include at least one tree per lluec thousand squ;tra Feet of parking area and/or vehicular accessway evenly distributed throughout the parking area. There sha11 be an average of' forty-eight square feet of liter area provided per tree. Said planter areas shall have a minimum dimension of six feet. .030 Building and Structural Height Lhnitations: .031 The maximum building height shall be thirty-five feet above the average linished grade. levels of the building site on which it is located measured at the exterior building walls. .032 Roof -mounted equipment including exterior-ntotill led 4and ground -mounted radio and television antennas 583 M-5 "PC" PLANNED COMMUNITY ZONE 18.84.070- 18.85.020 shall not he permitted. .040 Outdoor Advertising. All signs in any commercial zone combined with the (SC) Zone shall be in compliance with the sign. provisions for the CL-HS (Commercial, Limited Hillside Zone) as specified in Section 18.05.091 (Outdoor Advertising — CL-HS Zone). (Ord. 2929 § I (part); June 1, 1971; Ord. 3397 § 2 (part); February 11, 1975.) 18.84.070 DEVELOPMENT IN INDUSTRIAL (SC) ZONES. 18,84,071 PERMITTED BUILDINGS AND USES. Those uses which are automatically or conditionally permitted in the specific zones shall be permitted automatically or conditionally except the following uses shall be excluded: .010 Building material storage yard; .020 Contractor storage yard; .030 Draying, freighting or trucking yard or terminal; .040 Large equipment storage or rental; .050 Rags, paper, metals or junk storage or sales; .060 Rock, sand or gravel, wholesale storage or distribution; .070 Auto or truck storage (new or use d ); .080 Mobilehome parks or travel trailer parks; 090 Billboards; .100 Amusement parks; 1 10 Circuses, carnivals or rodeos; .120 Drive-in, walk-up or semienclosed restaurants; .130 Borrow pits; .140 Concrete batching or mixing of Portland or asphaltic concrete; .150 Dumps; .160 Open-air theaters; .170 AN outdoor aspects of permifted uses unless screened from the freeway ur scenic highway by the use of wall, landscaping or both. (Ord. 2929 § 1 (part); June I. 1971.1 - 584 Chapter 18.85 "PC" PLANNED C0111A1UNITY ZONE Sections: 1 &85.010 Description and purpose. 18.85.020 Permitted uses and structures. 18.85.030 Minimum site area. 18.85.040 Initiation of Planned Com- munity Zoning and (lie General Plan of Development. 18.85.050 General Plan of Develop- ment —Adoption: 18.85.060 Final specific plans— Requiremen ts. 18,85.070 Reclassification from PC Zoning. 18.85.100 Dedication and improvements. 18.85.010 DESCRIPTION AND PURPOSE. The purpose of Planned Community Zoning is to encourage, preserve and improve the health, safety and general welfare of the people residing within the community, by encouraging the use of contemporary land planning principles. The provisions of this zone are intended to allow diversification of uses, relationships and heights of buildings and open spaces in planned building groups while insuring compliance with the spirit, intent and other provisions of the zoning ordinance. (Ord. 2931 § 1 (part); May 27, 1971.) 18.85.020 PERMITTED USES AND STRUCTURES. The . provisions of this zone are intended to allow diversification of uses, relationships and heights of buildings and open spaces in planned building groups while insuring compliance with the spirit, intent and other provisions of the zoning ordinance. .010 Planned Residential Housing Developments which comply with the land use and zoning proposals and population densities set forth on the General Plan may be approved by conditional use permit. .020 Where other types of development can not be adequately provided for under the zoning plan or element, due to terrain, size and shape of the property, etc., tile. City would have the option of approving a variance. M-6 i z 0 Z O F U a W C F K C G FC vmOiOr m O c 6 a • C C u oa U v v t~i u 53 j m4 C mm c'c cl o w� o G U� N 3 Y �.Ei oG 3 TG C6 d h BU i+ c QQGG cc C LCC O pC ? d IGa adi C� r y Z vLid� C uz3 Sd urn Cj�Z Qa vdi c0.+a N V w E a T U C „ I I I I I I I I I I I Y °G a a v� d 0 Ij m 3 3 ti j .i a n>" a m mz > wmmm m w m m m m a ¢ z yI yy \ c Y _ u > s o d wmo°aa dI O y o y¢I 6 U U U Z F 6 V 6 Z O aF m C U T v � N Z O ZC ¢ a 6 6 E F a 0 a m w O w a a ¢ m c z w a o� m aF C U 6 t. oa o V U 1. k. V U V T v x > > U3NZa L {y 6 6 6 6 >. A O C.i C � 1 I o ,o x m 0 c c° o m cmi � c a ¢_ o z 0 U y P O 6 w aw � Z 6 G N NO a �n o 0 {; 3 1' R H � i 0 E e ? c e u u 3 "c e e e ¢ ¢ m u c 3 P 0 0 .�+ c m o � � T C C 6 6 +� v ; 'a 3 T .G N tJ C e L .� c> c m m �, .. � � r > > w c a 9 H t+ T 9 C w P. a 3 �r +�+ G u � G C C m 3 v T a C a N � d W m C OT O 3 ax x° ¢ ¢aa z z z° z RE T d w N cN U v 3 F U V F m O a u m 16 • E H .y 3 m m 9 = u E w ti 6 o o m> a o �O 0 Wm z3 vtivP z°N O'U 36U QaN'� W 2n0 3 C In In HF. M coo 0 T T O T T u T L m Lr7N II I JII N o T T T U vi U U U U I U U U - •1 -a-I yyW u V U i-1 E+ � W m m 6 C U - U T T G C > G u 7 m x NY fi C M u G .mi H u C eFO t L O m� m w w H m C��F HW m[I.Sv W Z Z L O U U F T 3 m S u G m Y 0 v hl E n ti 6 o B n a G m 3 a m ?a w C o Nti Y w C > G a fi N \ 6 m A C U C O A y+ Z N Uo 5 i o H F G m C N C N .FI 6 v E Ev fi� U U U u 6 tl mtl gm O C I I 1 y a m O F 6 3 u T F3 .>Iw 0 ]9 a fi E W P. U .I II E C m�• > v _ a\ H 3 > m L eap m 3 m m C m > m a w E �H �H U O\ m E D � a � e I v> o v e o O L o v C m C a O Cm u M E T > > v o C P. P. U u O 6 o a A C C o m 3 o U 3 T O D w vi c� w ww o € co �z U U CUJ y z z SANTA ANA CANYON SEGMENT PLANNED PROJECT PRIORITIES Project Jurisdiction Number Description Priorit Anaheim CCO-418 Equestrian Trail Crossing 1 CAN-403 Bicycle Trail 2 CCO-403 Bicycle Trail 3 CCO-402 Equestrian Trail 4 CCO-430 Coal Canyon Regional Park 5 CAN-407 Bicycle Trail Crossing 6 The above priorities were developed by the Citizen Greenbelt Committees of the Cities of Anaheim, Yorba Linda, and the County's Unincorporated Areas, APPENDIX P EAIRACT County Zoning Code, Tract 7, Division 9 § 7-9-103 1. Fences and walls, maximum height: 1. Within intersection areas —Same as section 7-9-137.4(b) and (c). 2. Along the boundary of the cluster development —Seven and one-half (71/2) feet except within inter- section areas. m. Off-street parking: 1. At least two (2) usable automo- bile parking spaces, in a garage or carport, each not less than ten (10) feet by twenty (20) feet, shall be provided and maintained within the building site for each dwelling unit. 2. At least one off-street automobile parking space for each two (2) dwelling units shall be provided for visitors and guests. Such parking space shall be convenient and accessible for visitors and guests and shall not be within the minimum travel way of any street tentative tract map. (g) Multiple -family residential development. For the purpose of complying with the re- quirements of this section "multiple - family residential development" includes all residential developments wherein some or all of the lots contain more than one dwelling unit in accordance with the ap- plicable zoning regulations. Multiple-fam:l_v residences that are de- veloped in accordance with final subdivi- sions approved pursuant to the provisions of paragraph (c)(1) of this section shall comply with the building line requirements for the R2 District as designated by section 7-9-127.1, building line designation, of this code unless otherwise specified by the recorded PC development plan. Notwith- standing the provisions of any adopted PC development plan or text, condominium projects and community apartment proj- ects are permitted subject to a use permit, .as provided in section 7-9-150. (h) The prcr .ling regulations in paragraphs (f) and i.7) shall be subject to the follow- ing exceptions: Planning Supp. No, 3 ¢ 7-9-104.1 (1) Where there is a difference in eleva- tion of three (3) feet or more between adjacent building pads on lots having a common side property line, R1 side yard regulations shall apply to that common side yard only. (2) Where an area is subject to the PD "Planned Development" District regu- lations, the yards specified in the ap- proved conditional permit shall apply. (3) Where otherwise provided in sections 7-9-123 and 7-9-124, the regulations of said sections shall apnl-. (i) Building site area, required. ]?:xcept as pro- vided in sections 7-9-123 and 7-9-124, the minimum building site area for each use conducted on any property shall be as specified on the recorded development plan. (Code 19612 § 78.0219.1; Ord. No. 2757, § 1, 5-844 ; Ord. No. 2809, § 1, 2-5- 75) Sec. 7-9-104. SG "Sand and Gravel Extraction" District regulations.* Ali references to inls section shall include sections 7-9-104.1 through 7-9-104.19, The phrase "mining operations" when used in this section shall mean mining, quarrying and the commercial extraction of rock, sand. gravel, earth, clay and similar materials. "Director" means the Director of the Orange County En- vironmental Management Agency. (Ord. No. 2893, § 2, 2-25-76) Sec. 7-9-104.1. Purpose and intent. Rock, sand, gravel, earth, clay and similar materials are valuable natural resources whose recovery in a responsible manner is encouraged. These regulations are intended to povide for mining, quarrying, and the commercial extrac- tion and processing of these materials in a manner which is both environmentally sensitive and compatible with existing and future land uses. These regulations are also intended to implement the Surface Mining and fieclamation °Editor'e Hate —Section 1 of Ord. No. 2893, adopted Feb. 25, 1976, repealed fornler §§ 7-9-104-7-9-304.9. relative to SG "Sand and Gravel Extraction" District regulations, and derived from Ord. No. 2iC561 § 3, en- acted Feb. 28, 1073. Section 2 of said Ord. No. 2893 amended the Code by adding §§ 7-9-104-7-9-li9, rel- ative to the same subject matter, as hercir, set out. 2681 APPENDIX Q-1 § 7.9-104.1 ORANGE COUNTY CODE § 7.9-104.6 Act of 1975. These regulations, together with the "Sand, Gravel and .Mineral Extraction Code of the County of Orange" (Division 10) are in- tended to insure that sites -are mined in a safe and reasonable manner with progressive recta. nation to a natural appearing or otherwise usable condition compatible with adjacent areas. (Ord. No. 2893, § 27 2-25-76) Sec. 7-9-104.2. SG site permits. Except as provided in sections 7-9-104.13 and 7-9-104,14, every site zoned SG "Sand and Gravel Extraction" shall have a single compre- hensive SG site permit which shall delineate all of the uses permitted on that particular site.`An SG site permit shall consist of the plan of operations, the drainage and erosion control plan, the vehicular access plan, and the reclama- tion plan required by section 7-9-104.7 as said plans are approved by the Planning Commission or the Board of Supervisors, and any additional conditions required by the Planning Commis- sion or the Board of Supervisors approving said plans. Except as provided in sections 7-9-104.13 and 7-9-104.14, no uses shall be permitted in the SG "Sand and Gravel Extraction" District unless authorized by an SG site permit. (Ord. No. 2893, § 21 2-25-76) Sec, 7-9404.3. Uses permitted subject to an SG site permit. The following uses may be permitted in the SG "Sand and Gravel Extraction" District with an SG site permit: (a) Alining, quarrying, and the commercial ex- traction of rock, sand, gravel, earth, clay and similar materials. (Ord. No. 2893, § % 2-25-76) Sec. 7-9404.4. Additional uses permitted sub- ject to an SG site permit. The following additional uses may be per- mitted in the SG "Sand and Gravel Extrac- tion" District with an SG site permit: (a) Storage, stockpiling, distribution and sale of rock, sand, gravel, earth, clay and sim. ilar materials. (b) The installation and operation of plants or apparatus for rock crushing or cement treatment of base materials, and appur- tenant screening, blending, washing, load- ing and conveyor facilities. 'Planning Supp. No. 3 EEO (c) Concrete batching plants and mixing plants for either Portland cement or as- phaltic concrete. (d) The manufacture of concrete and clay products and prestressed structural units in conjunction and concurrent with exca- vation on the site. (e) Sanitary landfilling, including inert mate- rials disposal sites. (f) Shops, garages and warehouses for the repair, maintenance and storage of equip- ment and supplies necessary for the con- duct of the uses permitted. (g) Offices for the conduct of the uses per- mitted. (h) Not more than two (2) single-family dwell- ing units for employees engaged in guard. ing or carrying on .the uses permitted. (i) Public and private parks and recreation areas and appurtenant buildings and im- provements when they are compatible with all other authorized uses on the site and the reclamation of the site. (j) Agricultural and other types of open space uses. (k) Any other uses necessary or incidental to mining operations on the site. (Ord. No. 2893, § 2, 2-25-76) Sec. 7-9-104.5. Compliance with other laws. Any uses permitted in the SG "Sand and Gravel Extraction" District shall comply with all other applicable.laws and ordinances 'and, specifically, with "The Sand, Gravel and Min- eral Extraction Code of the County of Orange" (Division 10) insofar as said code is applicable to the uses permitted. (Ord. No. 2893, § 21 2-25-76) Sec. 7-9404.6. Guidelines and standards for SG site permits and mining opera- tions. (a) The following are guidelines to be fol- lowed in preparing and reviewing the docu- ments required by section 7-9-104.7: The Planning Commission may approve ap- plications for SG site permits which do not adhere to the guidelines in this subsection Q-Z § 7-9-10a.6 PLANNING g v-s-loss where, in the judgment of the Planning Commission, these guidelines are not appro- priate. Persons wishing to deviate from any of the standards suggested in the guideiittes in this subsection shall submit tivritten jus- tification to the Planning Commission. (1) Dust control: Roads, driveways and parking areas on the site should be maintained so as to control dust. Means may include oiling or hard -sur- facing such areas or a watering pro- gram. (2) Setbacks: Structures and extraction op- erations should be set back an appro- priate distance from property lines and in no event less than the distances shown an the ''P,uilding Lines Chnrt" contained in ser_tion 7-0-127.i. The ap- propriate distance will depend upon top- ographical feat�.tres, safety considera- tions, environmental considerations, ex- isting adjacent. uses, and probable fu- ture adjacent uses. (3) Days a.iul ko+trs of operation: These should be specified in the SG site per- mit and may vary denendine anon the scope, nature and location of the op- eration. Primary factors to consider in establishing the days and hours of op- eration for a given site are adjacent uses, noise and traffic. (4) Off-street parking: Off-street parking should be provided on the site for all equipment and for all cars of employ- ees. (5) Screening: Extracting and processing operations should be screened in such a manner that they are not readily visible from any public street. Planting may be used as a screen in accordance with a landscaping plan. Screening should be set back at least twenty (20) feet from any intersection of driveways, streets or sidewalks. (6) Fencing: Fencing should be provided and maintained as necessary for safety around all extraction operations. Such fencing should be a minimum of six (6) feet in height with the bottom not more 'than four (4) inches above the ground. Any gates should be locked when not in regulaz, use. (7) Dr¢ivage: Surface drainage should be controlled in a manner meeting the ap- proval of the Director of -the Environ- mental hfanagement Agency to prevent silt or loose material from filling any existing drainage course or encroaching upon adjoining property and improve- ments. All provisions to control natural watercourses should be designed to pre- vent overflow or diversion of water away from the natural point of dis- charge and such provisions should be subject to the review and approval of the Orange County Flood Control Dis- trict. (8) Removal of buildings ¢nd equipnten.t: Buildings and equipment used in min- ing operations should be removed within six (6) months of the termination of mining operations on the site. (s) Reciamatiu>t schedule: Reclamation of each area should commence as soon as excavation operations have been com- pleted within the area, and continue in a diligent manner prior to or cou- cun•enth• with the extension of exraca- tion operations to a ne�v area. (10) Grading: Slopes and overburden stock- piles should be graded :tnd smoothed so as to control erosion and prevent the creation of potentially dangerous areas. The property should be so graded that stagnant water will not be permitted to collect. (11) Soils: 111easures should be taken to con- sider the quality of soils which will be required to sustain plant life pursuant to any landscaping plan. (12) Tinting: The sequence and approximate time frames within which the sees shown are proposed to he excavated and otherwise used should be illustrated in increments of from tweh•e (12) to thirty-six (36) months. (b) Section 7-9-145 relating to off-street parking shall not apply to land in the SG "Sand and Gravel Extraction" District. (c) In no event shall excavation in any pit - type of mining operation be permitted in ex- Planning Supp. No. d �3 § 7-9-104.6 ORANGE COUNTY CODE § 7-9-104,7 cess of one hundred fifty (150) feet in depth nant equipment and fences. Where such as measured from existing grade. (Ord. No. facilities are proposed to be relocated 2893, § 2, 2-25-76) over the course of the life of the use permit, their various proposed locations Scc. 7-9-104.7. SG site permit applications, shall be shown. (a) Applications for SG site permits shall include: (I) A draft environmental impact report where it has been determined in accord- ance with County procedures that such a report is required. Where such a re- port has been prepared, the measures pro- posed therein for the mitigation of pos- sible adverse environmental effects of the proposed operation shall be incor- porated into the various plans required by this section to the extent feasible. (2) A report of a comprehensive soils en- gineering and engineering geologic inves- tigation prepared by a registered civil en- gineer and a certified engineering geolo- gist, relative to the setbacks, slopes and excavations proposed. (3) A plan of operations which shall include a recent aerial photograph of the site and a map or maps and appurtenant notes which illustrate the following: a. Property lines and lease lines, including a legal description of the site. b. The existing topography of the site and land within five hundred (500) feet of the site and any structures, water- courses, levees, drainage facilities, util- ity easements and facilities, roads and driveways existing within said areas. c. The location and condition of any aban- doned pits and previously mined areas on the site. d-The area or areas to be excavated and typical cross sections of slopes to be formed or modified, e. The depth of all proposed excavations. f. The sequence and approximate time frames within which the areas shown are proposed to be excavated and other- wise used. g. The location of all proposed structures, including processing plants and appurteEM - Planning Supp. No. 4 h. Existing vegetation. i. Landscaping, if any, proposed to be planted in addition to that indicated on the reclamation plan. j. Details of areas for the storage of over- burden and waste material and any proposed berms. k. Proposed points of ingress and egress, haul roads, driveways and parking areas on the site. (4) A drainage and erosion control plan ap- proved by the Director. This plan shallin- elude a map or maps and appurtenant notes which illustrate the following: a. The location and approximate depth of proposed settling basins, desilting ponds, recycling ponds and other bodies of wa- ter. Where such facilities are proposed to be relocated nllpnr the ^life of the use permit, their various pro- posed locations shall be shown. b. The existing groundwater level and an- nual fluctuation of all areas to be ex- cavated, c. Methods to be. taken for the disposition of drainage and for the control of ero- sion, erosion cutback and sedimentation. d.If applicable, provisions to be taken for the conservation and protection of groundwater. Approvals obtained or re- quired from the appropriate Regional Water Quality Control Board shall be indicated. (5) A vehicular access plan describing, in ad- dition to the points of ingress and egress to the site, the streets and highways to be used by vehicles going to and coming from the site, and the type and size and quantity of vehicles anticipated. This plan shall be designed in a manner so as to minimize additional vehicular traffic over local residential streets, and this plan shall be approved by the Director. Q-4 § 7-9-104.7 PLANNING § 7-9-104.9 (6) A reclamation plan consisting of a map or maps and appurtenant notes which ful- ly illustrate and set forth how and when each portion of the site will be restored to a natural appearing or otherwise usable condition. The plan shall include call of the information required by Section 2772 of the California Public Resources Code. In addition, the plan shall include a land- scaping plan prepared by a licensed land- scape architect or a person who -is other- wise qualified. (Where the landscaping plan is not prepared by a licensed land- scape architect, the qualifications of the person preparing the plan shall be stated.) The landscaping plan shall take into ac- count the nature of the soil on the site. (b) Unless otherwise approved by the Di- rector, any maps submitted pursuant to this section shall be drawn to a scale of one (1) inch equals one hundred (100) feet and con- tours shall illustrate five-foot intervals. (c) The level of derail of the plans and re- ports required by this section may vary ac- cording to the scope of the mining operation involved and the nature of the site. These plans and reports may be combined kith the approval of the Director. (Ord. No. 2893, § 2, 2-25- 76) Sec. 7-9-104.8. Standards for approval of SG site permii applications. (a) SG site permit applications and appliro- tions for amendments to SG site permits may be approved when the Planning Commission or the Board of Supervisors finds: (1) That the plans and reports submitted ade- quately describe the proposed operation; (2) That the plans and reports submitted in- corporate adequate measures to mitigate the probable significant adverse environ- mental effects of the proposed operation; (3) That the plans and reports submitted in. corporate adequate measures to restore the site in a diligent manner to a natural .appearing or otherwise usable condition compatible with adjacent areas; (4) That the uses proposed are compatible with the objectives, policies and general land uses and programs specified in the Orange County General Plan; and Planning Supp. No. 1 (5) That the uses proposed are not likely to cause serious public health or safety prob- lems. (b) Reclamation plans and amendments to reclamation plans may be approved when the Planning Commission or the Board of Super. visors finds: (1) That the plan as proposed or amended is sufficiently detailed; (2) That the plan as proposed or amended in- corporates adequate measures to restore the site (excluding abandoned pits and previously mined areas) in a diligent man- ner to a.natural appearing or otherwise usable condition compatible with adjacent areas. (c) Where the Planning Commission or the Board of Supervisors disapproves an applica- tion for an SG site permit or a reclamation plan, that body shall specify- in writing the basis for its disapproval. In addition, the Planning Commission or the Board of Super- visors may set forth such facts as it deems appropriate in making such findings. -(Ord. No. 2893, § 21 2-25-46) Sec. 7-9-10I.9. Reclamation of mined areas re- quired. (a) Where an SG site permit has been is- sued or a reclamation plan has been approved, persons owning the land which is the subject of the SG site permit or reclamation plan shall undertake or cause to be undertaken, in a timely manner, the reclamation of any area used for mining operations in accordance with said SG site permit or reclamation plan. (b) The failure to undertake or cause to be undertaken reclamation work required by sub- section (a) in a timely manner shall be,.and the same is hereby declared to be, unlawful and a public nuisance endangering the health, safety, and general welfare of the public and a detriment to the surrounding community. There shall be a hearing held by the Board of Supervisors on due notice to the owner and operator to determine the fact of noncompli- ance with subsection (a) and the extent of the public nuisance. (c) In addition to any other remedy pro- vided by law for the abatement, removal and R-5 § 7-9-104.9 ORANGE COUNTY CODE § 7-9-104.10 enjoinment of such public nuisance, the Board of Supervisors, after notice and hearing as per subsection (b), may cause the necessary remedial and reclamation work to be done, and the cost thereof shall be assessed against the owners of the property. The notice shall be irf writing and mailed to all persons whose names appear on the latest equalized assessment roll as owners of the real property at the addresses shown on said assessment roll, or as other- wise known by the Board of Supervisors to be the owners or operators of the property in- volved. The Director shall also cause at least one (1) copy of such notice to be posted in a conspicuous place on the premises. No assess- ment shall be held, invalid for failure to post or to mail or correctly address any notice if this section has been substantially complied with, (d) The Board of Supervisors 'shall at the hearing make findings which specify the un- lawful condition and the corrective work re- quired to be done, and if said corrective work is not commenced thirty (30) days after re- ceipt of such order and diligently prosecuted to completion, the County of Orange may cause such aUA. w AJU dOue, ill which case, L'ne cost and expense of such work, including the in- cidental expenses incurred by the County, will be assessed against the owners of the property and become a lien upon such property, (e) If upon the expiration of the thirty -day period provided for in this section the work has not been done or commenced, and is not being prosecuted with diligence, the County shall proceed to do such work or cause such work to be done. Upon completion of such work, the Director shall file a written report with the Board of Supervisors setting forth the fact that the work has been completed and the cost to be assessed. The Board of Supervisors shall thereupon fix a time and place for hearing protests against the assessment of the cost of such work. The Clerk of the Board of Super- visors, directed by the Board, shall thereafter give notice in writing to the owners and oper- ators of the property of the hour and place that the Board will pass upon said report and will hear protests against said assessments. Such notice shall also set forth the amount of the proposed assessment, Upon the date and hour set for the hearing of protests, the Board shall hear and consider the report from the Planning Supp, No, 1 Director and all protests, if there be any, and then proceed to confirm, modify or reject the assessments. (f) A list of assessments as finally con- firmed by the Board shall be sent to the Tax Collector for collection. If any assessment is not paid within ten (10) days after its con- firmation by the Board, the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors shall cause to be filed in the office of the County Recorder of the County of Orange a notice of lien. (g) From and after the date of the record- ation of such notice of lien, the amount of the unpaid assessment shall be a lien on the prop- erty against which the assessment is made, and such assessment shall bear interest at the rate of six (6) per cent per annum until paid in full. Such lien shall continue until the amount of the assessment and all interest thereon shall have been paid. The lien shall be subordinate to tax liens and all fixed special assessment liens previously imposed upon the same prop- erty, but shall have priority over all contractual liens which may thereafter be created against the property. From and after the date of re- rOrdation of queh notiop of lia_n all „ g shall be deemed to have notice of the content thereof. (Ord. No. 2893, § 29 2-25-i6) Sec. 7.9404.10. Security for reclamation. (a) Where it is determined by the Director that mining operations in the SG "Sa11d and Gravel Extraction" District are within three (3) years of termination, an extraction permit shall not be issued for that site pursuant to the "Sand, Gravel and Mineral Extraction Code of the County of Orange" (Division 10) until the owner or operator furnishes the Coun- ty of Orange with security in an amount de- termined by the Director to be sufficient for the reclamation of the site in accordance with the SG site permit or reclamation plan for that site. (b) Any security given pursuant to this section shall be approved by the County Counsel and shall be in one of the following forms: (1) A bond or bonds by one or more duly au- thorized corporate sureties. (2) Cash or a passbook or certificate of de- posit in a local financial institution pay- able to the County of Orange. § 7.9-104.10 PLANNING § 7-9-104.13 (3) A letter of credit from a financial institu- tion payable to the County of Orange upon demand when accompanied by a letter from the Director stating that the princi- pal has not complied with the rehabilita- tion requirements of the SG site permit or reclamation plan. (Ord. No. 2893, 2, 2-25-76) Sec. 7-9-104.11. On•ner-initiated zone changes. Any request for a change of zone to the SG "Sand and Gravel Extraction" District shall be accompanied by an application for an SG site permit. The Planning Commission shall hear and consider the zone change request and the application for an SG site permit simul- taneously. The zone change shall not be recom- mended for adoption unless an SG site permit is approved. Any such SG site permit shall be conditioned upon the zone change becoming effective. In such case. the SG site permit ap- plication shall also be considered by the Board of Supervisors and if approved shall not be come final until the ordinance applving the SG "Sand and Gravel Extraction" District reg- ulations is effective. (Ord. No. 2893, § 2, 2-25- 76) Sec. 7-9-104.12. Sites zoned "SG" between March 30, 1973 and January 1, 1976. As to any site placed in the SG "Sand and Gravel Extraction" District beticeen 1Iarch 301 1973 and January 1, 1976, the legal description of the property, the general plan of operation, the ultimate use proposal, and the Rehabilita- tion Plan and any amendments thereto in ef- fect on January_, 1976 and the standards formerly set forth in section 7-9-351.8 of the Codified Ordinances of the County of Orange shall constitute an SG site permit for purposes of these regulations. (Ord. No. 2893, § 2, 2- 25-76) Sec. 7-9-104.13. County -initiated zone changes (a) This section pertains to those mining operations existing in the unincorporated por- tion of Orange County on January 1, 1976 out. the SG "Sand and Gravel Extraction" Dis- trict. The County may place such sites in the SG "Sand and Gravel Extraction" District. Thereafter, the owner of any such site may apply for an SG site permit at any time. l-ntll Planning Supp. No. 3 - ari SG site permit is approved for any such site, the uses thereon shall be regulated as nonconforming uses are generally. Any such uses may not be expanded, discontinued for a period in excess of one (1) year, or altered in any significant way without an SG site permit unless such expansion, discontinuation, or al- teration is permitted by applicable prior en- titlements to use. Alternations which are solely the result of implementing a reclamation plan as required by this section shall not require an SG site permit. (b) Notwithstanding section 7-9-151, �iithin one hundred twenty (120) days of the effective date of the ordinance placing any :ite described in subsection (a) in the SG "Sand and Gravel Extraction" District, the owner or operator thereof shall file a reclamation plan for the site with the Director. A reclamation plan for pur. poses of this section shall be as defined in sec- tion 7-9-104.7(a) (6), Any such reclamation plan shall be heard and considered as provided in sections 7-9-104,19 and 7-9-104.8. (c) Reclamation plans submitted pursuant to this section need not apply to areas within the site which were mined prior to January 1, 1976 if such areas will not be used for any future extraction operations. The scope of any such exempt previously mined areas shall be determined on a case -by -case basis, taking into account the relationship of the area claimed to be previously mined to current and proposed future mining operations. (d) It shall be unlawful to conduct extrac- tion operations on any site described iu sub- section (a) after one hundred twenty (120) days from the effective date of the ordinance placing the site in the SG "Sand and Gravel I?x- traction" District without a reclamation pl:m on file with the Director. (e) It shall be unlawful to conduct extrac- tion operations on any site described in sub- section (a) after a reclamation plan for the site has been disapproved, until a subsequent reclamation plan for the site is approved. (f) After a reclamation plan for any site described in subsection (a) has been approved, it shall be unlawful to conduct mining opera- tions which do not conform with said plan, and it shall be unlawful for the owner of the site and the person who secured the approval of 2687 Q-7 § 7-9-104.13 ORANGE COUNTY CODE 4 7.9-104.16 the reclamation plan, if other than the owner, D fail to implement said plan. (Ord. No. 2893, § 27 2-25-76) Sec. 7-9.104.14. Sites zoned "SG" prior_ to March 30, 1973. (a) This section pertains to those sites zoned SG "Sand and Gravel Extraction" prior to March 30, 1973. The owner of any such site may apply for an SG site permit at any time. Until an SG site permit is approved for any such site, the uses thereon shall be regulated in accordance with prior entitlements to use and the standards previously contained in these reg- ulations. Any such uses may not be expanded, discontinued for a period in excess of one (1) year, or altered in any significant way without an SG site permit unless such expansion, dis- continuation, or alteration is permitted by appli- cable prior entitlements to use. Alterations which are solely the result of implementing a reclamation plan as required by this section shall not require an SG site permit. (b) Notwithstanding section 7-9-151, the owner or operator of any site described in sub- section (a) shall file a reclamation plan for the site with the Director not later than October 1, 1976. A reclamation plan for purposes of this section shall be as defined in section 7-9-104.7- (a) (6). Any such reclamation plan shall be heard and considered as provided in sections 7-9- 104.19 and 7-9-104.8. (c) Reclamation plans submitted pursuant to this section need not apply to areas tivithin the site which were mined prior to January 1, 1976 if such areas will not be used for any future extraction operations. The scope of any such exempt previously mined areas shall be determined on a case -by -case basis, taking into account the relationship of the area claimed to be previously mined to current and proposed future mining operations. (d) It shall be unlawful to conduct extrac- t tion operations on any site described in sub- section (a) after October 17 1976 without a reclamation plan on file with the Director. ( e) It shall be unlawful to conduct extrac- tion operations on any site described in subsec- tion (a) after a reclamation plan for the site has been disapproved, until a subsequent rec- lamation plan for the site is approved. Planning Supp. No. 3RIO (f) After a reclamation plan for any site described in subsection. (a) has been approved, it shall be unlawful to conduct mining opera- tions which do not conform with said plan, and it shall be unlawful for the owner of the site and the person who secured the approval of the reclamation plan, if other than the owner, to faiI to implement said plan. (Ord. No. 2893, § 1, 2-25-76) Sec. 7-9-104.15. Amendments to SG eife per- mits.. Upon application of the permittee, SG site permits and reclamation plans may be amended any number of times. Applications for amend- ments to SG site permits and reclamation plans shall be in a format acceptable to the Director and shall include information appropriate to the scope of the amendment requested. (Ord. No. 2893, § 27 2-25-76) Sec. 7-9-104.16. Interim administrative SG aite permit amendments. (a) Upon application of the permittee, where changed circumstances necessitate a change in any SG site permit issued pursuant to section 7-9-104.9, the Director may approve operations which deviate from an approved SG site permit for a period of up to one hundred twenty (120) days, provided the Director determines that the public health, safety and welfare are not en- dangered by such interim operations. Within said 120-day period the owner or operator of the site in question shall apply for an amend- ment to the SG site permit pursuant. to section 7-9-104.15. Interim administrative SG site per- mit amendments may not be extended beyond the initial 120-day period. (b) Whenever the Director grants an in- terim administrative SG site permit • amend- ment pursuant to this section, he shall notify the Planning Commission within seven (7) days of the action taken and of the reasons for such action. A copy of the Director's report shall be given to the permittee. The Planning Commission may revoke or modify any interim administrative SG site permit amendment, pro- vided that the permittee shall be given at least five (5) days' notice of the Commission's con-. sideration of the matter and an opportunity to address the Commission prior to any such action. The Planning Commission need not Q—�' § 7-9-IO4.16 PLANNING § 7-9-305.10 schedule a consideration of the matter if the Commission does not wish to overrule or modify the action of the Director. (Ord. No. 2893, § % 2-25-76) Sec 7-9-104.17. Suspension or revocation of SG site permits. In addition to any other means of enforc- ing these regulations, the Board of Supervisors may suspend or revoke an SG site permit or any other entitlement to conduct mining opera- tions granted pursuant to the Orange County Zoning Code when the Board determines, in ac- cordance with this section, that a permittee is violating material terms of an SG site permit or that a reclamation plan is not being imple- mented. Prior to any such suspension or revocation, the Director shall specify the nature of the violation or the failure to implement a reclam- ation plan in writing and demand at least twice over a period of not less than thirty (30) days that the permittee correct the violation or failure. When adequate steps have not been taken to insure the immediate correction of the ..clot..'... ... fa:l t..., ... :ham �.. C.. ., - Director, the Director shall request the Board Of Supervisors to set a hearing to consider whether the SG site permit or other entitle- mentto mining operations should be suspended or revoked. The owner and operator of the site in question shall be given at least fifteen (15) days' notice of any such hearing. Whenever the Board of Supervisors suspends or revokes an SG site permit or other entitle- ment to conduct mining operations pursuant to this section, it shall do so by resolution, which revolution shall set forth the facts upon which the Board bases its action. A resolution of suspension 'shall also set forth any conditions which must be met to re- instate the SG site permit or other entitle. ment to conduct mining operations. Prior to the reinstatement of any suspended SG site permit oil other entitlement to conduct mining operations, the permittee shall submit a com- pliance plan to the Planning Commission for approval. The Director may approve mining op. erations and other uses in accordance with an approved compliance plan. Upon certification by the Director that a permittee has corrected all Planning Supp. No. 4 violations and satisfied any conditions of re- instatement in accordance with an approved compliance plan, the Planning Commission shall reinstate a suspended SG site permit or other entitlement to conduct mining operations. (Ord. No. 2893, § 2, 2-25-76) Sec. 7-9-104.18. Fees. Fees for filing applications and plans pursu- ant to these regulations shall be established by resolution of the Board of Supervisors. (Ord. No. 2893, § 2, 2-25-76) Sec. 7-9-104.19. Procedures. (a) Applications for SG site permits and reclamation plans shall be filed with the Di- rector and heard and considered by the Plan- ning Commission. Any such application or plan shall be in a format acceptable to the Director, and any such application or plan shall not be accepted for filing unless, in the judgment of the Director, it is reasonably complete. (b) Except where an application is submit. ted in connection with an owner -initiated zone change pursuant to section 7-0-101,11, there shall be a public hearing on each appucation for an SG site permit and each reclamation plan filed within one hundred twenty (120) days of filing, provided that the applicant or person submitting the plan may reque.<t, and the Director may grant, extensions of this period. Notice of such public hearings shall be given in the manner set forth in section 7-9-150 pertaining to use permits. (c) Public hearings on SG site permit ap- plications and reclamation plans may Ue con- tinued. The Planning Commission may approve, conditionally approve, or disapprove applica- tions for SG site permits and reclamation plans. a (d) Except where n application is submit - ill connection with an owner -initiated zone change pursuant to section 7-9-10 1.11, any such actin: of the Planning Commission is final, in the absence of an appeal, after fourteen (14) days. Any such action may be appealed to the Board of Supervisors within that fourteen -day period by any person, whereupon the Board of Supervisors shall conduct a public hearing to conSider the matter within forty-five (15) days of the date the appeal is filed. Such appeal shall be filed with the Director. Notice of the 2688.1 Q_q ¢ 7-9-104.19 ORANGE COUNTY CODE § 7-9-105.5 Board of Supervisorspublic hearing shall be mailed by the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors to the applicant or person submitting a rec- lamation plan, to the person who filed the appeal (if other than the applicant or person submitting a reclamation plan), and to all per. sons owning property within three hundred (300) feet of the exterior boundaries of the site. (e) These procedures apply to applications for amendments to SG site permits and rec- lamation plans, except that such applications shall be heard within fifty (50) days of filing unless the applicant requests, and the Director grants, an extension of this period. (Ord. No. 2893, § 2, 2-25-76) Sec. 7-9-105. RM-,lI "Resource 111anagement— Minerals" District regulations. All references to this section shall include sections 7-9-105.1 through 7-9-105.7. (Ord. No. 2915, § 19 5-26-761 Sec. 7-9-105.1. Purpose and intent. The RM-H1 District, a combining district, is established to provide a method for identifying and classifying potential future mineral extrac- tion sites, areas containing mineral deposits which require further evaluation, and desig- nated areas of statewide and regional signifi- cance within the meaning of the Surface Mining and Land Reclamation Act of 1975. It is in- tended that the requirements of this district will protect economically significant deposits of rock, sand, gravel, earth, clay or other min- erals from encroachment by incompatible uses and will provide adequate notice to interested persons that the materials may possibly be ex- tracted from the site in the future. This district is intended to be an interim dis- trict to be applied only until a determination.is made as to whether the property should be re- zoned to a district permitting mineral extrac- tion. It is further intended that the district should include sufficient area around the future ex- traction site to pr vide an adequate buffer between extraction operations and adjacent uses. (Ord. No. 2915, § 1, 5-26-76) Planning Supp. No. 4 Sec. 7-9.105.2. Application. In any district where the district symbol is followed by, as a part of such symbol, paren. thetically enclosed letters "RM-M", thus (RM- M), the additional requirements, limitations and standards of this district shall apply. The dis. trict symbol shall constitute the "base district" and the (RM-M) suffix shall constitute the "combining" district. In the event of conflicting provisions of such a combined district, the re. quirements of the (RM-M) district shall take precedence over the requirements of the base district. A petition to apply the P.M-M District may be Hated by the property owner or by the Board of Supervisors or'the Planning Commission in m copliance with the provisions of section 7-9- 105.6 (Requirements for filing) and with stand- ard zone change procedures. The district may be applied to designated areas of statewide and regional significance in conformance with the General Plan, and to additional areas found to be potentially valuable future mineral extrac- tion areas. (Ord. No. 29152 § 17 5 26-76) Sec. 7-9-105.3. Lrses permitted. The following uses shall be permitted subject to the approval of a use permit by the Planning Commission as provided by section 7-9-150. Any use permitted by the "base district" regulations except 'those uses specifically pro- hibited by section 7-9-105.4. (Ord. No. 2915, § 1, 5-26-76) Sec. 7-9•I05.4. Uses prohibited. All uses not specifically permitted by a use permit approved in compliance with provisions of this district. (Ord. No. 2915, § 1, 5-26-76) See. 7-9-105.5. Site development standards. The establishment, operation and mainte- nance of the uses permitted by this district shall be in compliance with the following stand- ards: (a) Minimum building site area: Ten (10) acres. (b) Minimum building site width: No mini- mum. 2688.2 O 6 F VI G E N e u o a o uNa u C r tv w Y C G G 6 of ¢C 44 t ¢.ue jet mY a Tur O ttyy ~ 0 u H m O g u V a W V{ m 6 c.9..0u.�-I Z>Zhc. P. o.6U6U 3mz O aP.6 mp. .�p.6 "WM Z O z ] U A > W O Ta z cm ] G a Z O Z G O U O m Ow \G w O O O O qa o T T O C C66 � U C ?W I I I I I I I I I 1 I I I I U 6 Z F 6 a w aeo ¢ w W S E G F W C O r a 0 yam m 0 0 n I I m Inoy w w T m w w of � G 3 C 3 L u C H ¢ ¢ c o C c o y y h ti y W u 6 y ti B rn C F w � E F > w U E Y Y Y �U u 99 1u• 3 uvui m m m" S � � ,n �ila o m 0 vaa m > - a .. a° aL \ e O� I6 wo w 6+m+ G m C 0 as U6 m¢Y¢ a a iaF ,z3 ca c.m+s c°'.m. cmu""e i43T.Y m"ocoi> mzw>mm uW "< z 0 aF 2 la ~ FI al a o 0 a ❑ o 0 w ~ I I I I I I I I I I I I I a .o+ w O oO 3 n 3 I I I ma cai a`i o z m o Nom a n n v n o w o m m n u � 3 C Y N C F C C C W 3 u u m a cza Y Y Y U ¢ 6 Y > > 6 6 ¢ u u 0 m a m u ya u u m o i3 W a 6 C o � OY a o O t 0 0 h m > > m Z UO O u COa wo ou 00 u0 0 u U n T M T O CIn T G M b ?F >FHU C TT0 T C> u y uT 4 aTi O u 3w 0 w am O U UUL U �nL Uw W to �n uUP.000tnUaUA p� N Z F 6 Z la a z c z zci � UU aaav� y H U 6 Z H O F N q0 b Z U O O a H U U W O W I+a] 1 1 1 1 I 1 m I I 1 1 1 I I 1 a � ❑ 6 z6 6 a w a z 6 Z Zao m a F z a x w ❑ n' y 1 a cai o m o W c 00 az n a v UU �•. m ❑I C 3 3 w 3 a mL u O ❑ U a a° � w G a U - _ C u m - F G u 6 yy C � � o I� 6 � C L C +ui 6 +I pW� a > m w 6 w ,Y � > G N T u 8 d +� �aFZ .Gi m X a � � > Z.I-IWa� Zrl oFmq W�m 9 W w o T N c 6 � � _ � _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Z> PoP,� > L > U > {m{yy > pmp..,� G pmp.. ? 9 u m 6 O P.6G nY rGI W 6P.6U6 UDR VGi �nZ �v�i z E 6 H c? .v = a o F � � rn � r< � _ _ _ _ _ � _ _ _ d Z y o Z m H O N ry p� G {y C G C u N N 6 £ U U U U (n rii [n F hdd � � W U I 1 1 I I I I m m yy 6 U 6 H 6 �l 6 .Ni F cc�� Z W 6 W H F F S F y z aow w a macai - i I I I I r I I vl ov, m I � I o y a i � m a m ..INm n o a = _ _ _ y �' a ^� .,x„ m m `c m a a °u ti.+ = C C � a E V = U � U z � _ Y y _ > Y Cy". _ a Y .) u m 9 � V C M U U C wa _ _ _ _ w� y "- z m y a m `y' m Z E Y O U d F T Z O O H fn 6 .� w a a ¢w Z w a o a o vNiO 6 �I O a z° >w w c > w � m m fi Z 3 In U �y _ _ _ _ _ U_ _ Mom_ _ U_ �_ _ _ _ _ _ U_ a_ a m o.. I I P I� N I� I I� N�� I I� I I I I I .x c a u° C a ro U 6 F U 6 Z Z E [ Z E C a � G U z - e � H 0 w a o � o �o F a Na ww N a F F w n Z w 5 E Ff a0 O r Nai O 4 a ¢ al d 3 9 Y N Y u V G U G Y G Y 9 H N G F N > °•so vwic ❑ GG Z w N Z O N N w N N to > C N rrpp�= N3 T 1 I u a Y e e V e e m c m C a u w a w k� G S a � X � O 0 m 6 u w u U N v N � p m w v O O m O v 3 u o _ Urn U m oaL UUw Up. CrPn�Ua 6 in a vwi m 0 00 ti O _ z 0 00 0 0 00 T m � o U U U U U U a U O G m G O F 6 m U .] aao mv� mo 0 o T a a a mm o m my m a a w � u1I C X F u E 3 3 Z a a z X u u x u o a a w a > m a a F a o o d co 0 0 m m U 6 H s z z 0 o C.I ua u 3 OLY TI F +1 > 6 0 0 Z O 6 W U .l aao z xF °iFa w a o«, Ox a U O m 6 C C E F U a W tttWggq £ O ~ ~ Y v C W S O < r] L C � .-I 3 2 > d C a A N W o U U N Om O o � i I m� a a W ma� m G � O I+ 3Y O C a c s m o e c Up. U O uyi F G v� U 6 y\ p H N m T > o o L y {at W U C W Up U G N � Z 6 2 U O N G G G F T T 6 j U a U rn n U U U U w m m m m V G > U a W m F F m W W w N � Z W a C H Z o Ha o i z W h vi � ti tUal W oao w o o O _ 3 w 1 O O � u h w 6 O 8o b G G F m 4 S N T U D O > P. U O U i-1 eOi1 U \ N O b 0 0 O U 00 O T T O u u u ^] U U U U U W 1 � N O 6 �ao �Ntin .-1 v N i i N� rwna cai mo oNov a 6 m n s m U u u � � u W W W w Rl 3 3 z u c a U N W > > > w cEi a wm y a X r, a i0 �E F C O W > w fi L o O T Z gy a a° t+ m a > c O v3vl Z Wv� UN 0.0 Z O F d U Z C O N F O O O O A T A o T o .7 h U U U U U U V m O 6 F 6 w o a t+ W F W a O o a i iII I I I I a o w o a G C z Z 3 W OI \ F � C Z W a wm o \\\ \ \ \ }\ \ \ \{ \ \ \ \ \ 2 _ ! � � /}\ \ ; \§ \ \ \ \ \ \ } \ 0 ti m TO TO CET rn E m u v£H3 ^ u G 3 n 6 u Y u 0 6 v G C G 6'�Om > E 6 G ma uX u C G m C C = M u LP. 66 GY W rn H u w E u u m E E +G+ 00 C¢¢ v z w I o E n m m P S o W m u E o M LLCC1] Z> Z vui hi G W W n !6 Z w v 6 P W w Z w W w I F G q Fl Z M Vl f Z aZ F. O O U V CC u u O 5 Z V U Z U F n v 0 c> cFi _ 0 U K K o U z° E+ c " � c o G 0 o 0 0 m o u < 4 f V O _ - 0 G vui rVil run to y S T E u � m to to u a>. u .e fn 3 Y 5 u u w Y H •+�n F EC E� m c m U E orus m ti+v� oN 3 G W�n V 6v>S>w o. oo� fC+o\rnz u W mZ 0 W ova W F •� v m v m m m �� rl ti .a n .. .-1 O IUi N W u C C Off+ U U N N W G O N o T C _ _ F H m O U N U U 6 cc 6 T T rAi� m m U V U U U U U W � m u m m m m m 6 H :a s� T 'a w e+� • E O h o E G O w E � o n� � p � � o K .] y '� 6 W c m ¢ u u w •+ v 6 C a 4 � w C o 3 v o � m �" e a c op K u G n � 3 m G y S m O 0 0 {tyy u X U u a L 6 6 u X N C u 'SKY Tw v1 ovy C fi u x 9 m E .a a j� s •� ,r E M v� .� ti o. ~ .y ,c G Ga A Gm b n O� O 0w N� o.y' �N.TrO o 0 O; � m m+ L � P O m M rn y C O pp,�� wZ6 W {py� AM.i N M pp,� yy yy tY Zw W 6 �+Z6 W m6 W m6 ZwGlwvGi6 pP�� WyN ti � m m N n of w � 6� � h K N K H w �r H m K t¢rZ] € O O cFJ R] C 'CJ O U ^=i U H � i o i m ~ � n m z o � � � y K H � � 0 w o a H y T C_ u G � p U U p� U _ i v m _ _ i I i E Z � '� U Z G O O 6 T C � u G _ _ _ � U C F o a c c c c c , = c ti � � o = _ _ a _ _ - m N u�"i ti s O 6 F aG d 3a,m+ o 4�3 tV u �Q % vui j aY O 6 x a a o w M v v 3 K u m m u C m u C C a F m q m ti 2 m Z vmi fr Z Z m ..t m Z Z G Z C OQ 6 C d 6 6 w G ti T n> T N N G F C F C u u O O O O �_'. m m P. m m m Cwi U a U G. c~i U U F O l t I m o n m o ti o m o {Zy U F. H U m m 0 C O Fi ¢6 G 6 G G6w � T F O I m ZO o F n U U Uo U U U U ! U F vs �a `n to y U O O O O 6 m m C 6 6 G y T �! mmm mmmU U P. U L U U U � F P. a aw maw F.ma a Cm caw o m wa o m z a o u aZ m y ti m y O m m m m m m m m mm m m m m w Y O a 3 w w Y 9i' G d 3 ¢ m 3 m tY+ m C m mV C N om V > > om w 6 CO O w w w rG mXS d CHI u d C OU O u cOi u w Em00 m �Eb GjTc G y •-1 fim £en d nl C W¢nzoma¢vz Ic op ma ozfn oa3zc OU C] F N U 6 m .Hr O U ti cc G G m a O n O O U U U O U> j U O F W U O G C G G u G yH m ti U V U 5 U O u> U> U U F o p m ti .a O h N Z TU M a F Y U 0 G G T C N G ti C G 2� U V U U O C» U> U U y v. V 9 H L ¢] 41 m H H 5 �a v 2 U m N E u C 3 O z E E M u F 3 L > X w u 6 a � e m o w° o w° ., T .❑m m m m .❑o .m. � x w G h - aU9aUaa we .o X w m 0rn a E o E mti m o° E m m u u Y N N X Y m Y a u F a C y 0 ZK K `n K to ui � K FOi O U C O O O C O O T O O y T T W u u TC y ' J u V Ci V V V V U U U U U yl U C U O T T m y O O w T T c > � C C GV U❑ to U U \ H W N a 0 T O N � m O O O O O O U O v omU T y C o P m❑ N � j u u m C C U u ❑ P. 'AWL T m "�j3 o W w W W til W c. n Z 3 a \ & \za a \\\\ \\ \ \ \ \�� \\ \. \\\\ \\ \\\ j§ } \ \ \ \ ) ) 6 F 1 w E G u G C E w C d m n Om 6 Y u G a 3 P E o 3 U E u O Y > O u � K G tp N N £ a Y V E T ♦+ a 3 W a C 4 U' C C a G a > C T a m > 9 G W 6 N E \ C m y O m O w C G F O u E O O > O \ w w G - G % M e " o c a n o u u W T a .E Z Z z z Z z SANTIAGO CREEK SEGMENT PLANNED PROJECT PRIORITIES Proj ect Jurisdiction Number Description Priorit County of Orange Several Lower Santiago Creek Regional Group One Park SCO-605 Bicycle Trail ABS-7A 1976-77 SCO-647 Bicycle Trail ABS-8A - 1976-77 SCO-605 Bicycle Trail ABS-7B 1977-78 SCO-605 Bicycle Trail ABS-7C 1977-78 SCO-605 Bicycle Trail ABS-7D ASAP Note: Above priority. groups established in County's Master Plan of Regional Parks, Amendment No. 3, and bicycle trail project dates in County's Arterial Bikeway System Program published 3 June 1975, Santa Ana SSA-614 Rest Stop (Park & Concession Stand) 1 SSA-617 Park 7 Oran ee/ SCO-653 Park (68 acre) I Vi1Ta Park SCO-701 Nature Preserve 2 SOR,SCO- 604A Equestrian Trail 3 SOR-680 Equestrian Trail 3 SOR-683 Equestrian Trail 3 SOR-686 Equestrian Trail 3 SOR-692 Equestrian Trail 3 SCO-707 Equestrian Trail 3 SCO-710 Equestrian Trail 3 SOR,SCO- 605A Bicycle Trail/Lane 4 SVP-662 Bicycle Lane 4 SOR-626 Hart Park Expansion 5 SCO-713 Equestrian Trail 5 SOR-695 Trail Park and Ride 6 SOR-698 Bicycle Lane 6 SOR-704 Wilderness Area 7 SCO-644 Equestrian Trail 8 SCO-647 Bicycle Trail 8 SCO-604 Equestrian Trail (Garden Grove 9 Freeway to Southern Pacific Railroad) SOR-656F Equestrian Trail 10 SCO-674 Equestrian Trail 11 SOR-671 Bicycle Lane 12 SCO-604 Equestrian Trail (Southern Pacific 13 Railroad to Loma Street) APPENDIX T-1 Surisdiction Oran e/ 'VITIa Park (continue Project dumber Description SCO-650 Trail Park and Ride SCO-665 Trail Park and Ride SOR-668 Trail Park and Ride SOR-716 Bicycle Lane SOR-641 Open Space Priori 14 14 14 15 16 T-2 GUIDELINE FOR DEVELOPMENT DENSITIES The Greenbelt Commission has been chartered to optimize open space potential of the land within the Santa Ana River/Santiago Creek Corridor. The Greenbelt project has as its objective provision of an area of contrast and visual relief from urban development; a contrast which daily becomes more necessary as our cities and County move from a rural and suburban atmosphere to an increasingly urban life style. There is considerable development pressure in many portions of the Greenbelt, even though much of the adjacent land currently is in low density or undeveloped status. In these areas lie the best opportunities to set policies that will enhance the objectives and goals exemplified by the Greenbelt Commission. Higher population densities contribute substantially to air, noise and water quality problems. They also can detract aesthetically from a Greenbelt area. Runoff water from the higher density areas increases the need for more channelization and flood control structures in watercourses, thereby.eliminating the relatively scarce, natural riparian areas in the County. Density increases also require an attendant increase in the numbers and widths of roads and bridges. The Greenbelt Commission respectfully requests that each city having Greenbelt land within its jurisdiction carefully review its land use policies with respect to areas adjacent to or forming a backdrop for the Greenbelt and consider maintaining such land in as low a development density as possible. In addition to protecting an open space investment for future generations, such planning provides a wider choice of life style within each community and the opportunity for wide recognition as part of an outstanding example of coordinated inter -juris- dictional open space planning. APPENDIX U GUIDELIPdE FOR INTEGRATING DEVELOPMENT WITH THE GREENBELT CORRIDOR The Santa Ana River/Santiago Creek Greenbelt Plan in its section on General Policies and Design Guidelines states: "Site plans for all public works and private develop- ments in or near the River corridor or having visual or other impact on the River corridor should be carefully reviewed, with reference to appearance, access, relation to parks and open spaces along the Corridor and to linkage possibilities, multi -use possibilities." Zoning presently exists within the Greenbelt Corridor which would allow many land -uses which might, if not properly integrated into the Corridor system, have an adverse impact upon the Greenbelt environment. The existence of property zoned for industrial, commercial or multi -family residential uses in areas immediately adjacent to the River and Creek trails need not be considered a threat to the Greenbelt environment, nor should the existence of the Greenbelt constitute a threat to the right of a property owner to profit by developing his property. Careful site planning and landscaping can enhance a project's value, both to the property owner and to the Greenbelt Corridor. There are vacant parcels of land available which could be creatively developed into an infinite variety of commercial recreational uses. At the outset of what is purported to be a continuing shortage of gasoline for non -essential travel, there is an indication that Orange County residents will be seeking recreation opportunities close to home, thereby opening an entirely new market for commercial recreation projects. By integrating commercial recreation facilities into the Greenbelt Corridor, such facilities become accessible through a variety of transportation modes, which would tend to increase the usage of the Greenbelt trails system. perhaps with a concurrent decrease in private automobile usage. Recreational facilities could be located immediately adjacent to the River and Creek trails or at some distance, but tied into the trails system by linkages. One of the keys to encouraging trail access and usage is by the provision of bike racks and horse tie rails at convenient locations. INDUSTRIAL USES: The Greenbelt Corridor can be compatible with many types of industry, provided the particular project does not cause uncontrollable noise, air,water or visual pollution. Every effort should be made to retain green areas adjacent to the River and APPENDIX V-1 Creek. Landscape screening should be provided at a height and density sufficient to screen unsightly operations or storage areas from public view. Industries locating in or near the Greenbelt may avail themselves of the advantages offered by the alternative transportation mode provided by the bicycle trails. By integrating the Greenbelt trail system with their private circulation system, and by providing strategically placed bike racks, the industry may encourage the use of fewer automobiles by their employees, and may encourage the public to learn more about their product or method of operation. Ar. industry's greenspace may become a trail mini -rest stop, thereby providing an excellent public relations opportunity. A small information kiosk could be located in the greenspace, and in some kinds of industry „ tours of the facility could be offered. Public reception rooms, executive offices and employee lounge areas may be oriented to benefit from the views of the Creek or River and contiguous greenspace. COMMERCIAL USES: Some of the most unsightly areas in Southern California are in strip commercial developments. Conversely, some of the most outstanding examples of site planning can be found in commercial centers in Orange County. Greenbelts and commercial developments should be eminently compatible, since .each, by its nature, encourages pedestrian traffic. Trail users enjoy the accessibility of restaurants, phone booths, restrooms and other conveniences offered by shopping centers. Site development should include provisions for low -profile signing, with a minimum of sign visibility from trails. Walkways and bike trails should integrate easily with Greenbelt trail systems to encourage mingling of trail users and shoppers, without diverting Greenbelt trails into the shopping centers. Bike racks, shaded horse tie -rails and small orientation signs could be strategically placed for the convenience of bikers, hikers and equestrians. Business catering to the particular needs and interests of Greenbelt trail users could be located at one end of a shopping center, adjacent to the trail access. Special interest or theme shopping centers, such as farmers' markets or craftsmen's centers would be especially desirable in or near the Corridor. RESIDENTIAL AREAS: In areas zoned for residential use, within or adjacent to Greenbelt Corridors, a policy of permitting the lowest possible density of development should prevail. V-2 In the more urbanized parts of the County, higher density residential zoning has been granted in or near the Greenbelt, so development standards should be instituted which will enable the projects to blend easily into the existing environment. Major concerns under consideration from the viewpoint of residential developers include ensuring both the visual privacy and protection from trespass. Multiple dwelling units and cluster -type developments should be buffered from surrounding land uses by landscaped strips, berms, and attractive fencing materials. The landscaped strips may be integrated into the trail system, providing an alternative mode of transportation for residents and minimizing the visual impact of urbanization upon the Greenbelt. Developers should endeavor to pull back from the trail systems and stay.out of the floodplains wherever possible. In some parts of. Orange County, entire cities are located within the Santa Ana River floodplain, but in many places, the floodplain zone is reasonably narrow so development within it in those areas can feasibly be avcided. While mitigating measures can escalate development costs, they can measurably enhance property values. The Greenbelt trail system is a valuable amenity which, when linked by linear park systems to residential developments, can become an additional selling point for a prospective buyer or renter. Lower density development creates less impact upon the ability of the environment to absorb the demands of urbanization than does high density development. However, generally speaking, lower density development means less land held in common or public ownership, so provision should be made for easements to allow interior circulations and linkages throughout the tract to separate horse and bicycle trails from automobile traffic. Easements become increasingly important when an area is being developed into half -acre or larger lots, since large -lot neighbor- hoods tend to be horse -oriented, providing urgent need for linkage capabilities between local and regional trail systems. A list of suggested recreational activities and projects is attached. Not all of the suggested projects would be compatible with the trail system if located in close proximity to the River or Creek, but, in properly buffered settings, even a use as noisy as a speedway could be considered as part of the overall trail system if it were tied in through a bike trail linkage. Many of the suggested uses could be provided by private investment; others are, by nature, traditionally provided by public agencies. Some facilities could be provided by a combination of public and private investment through lease -back or concession agreements. V-', SUGGESTED RECREATIONAL ACTIVITIES AND PROJECTS WITHIN THE GREENBELT CORRIDOR PARKS - Private or Public providing the following activities: 1. Archery 2. Baseball diamonds 3. Batting practice cages 4. Bicycle rentals 5. Botanical gardens 6. Campgrounds 7. Dog training areas (hunting and obedience) 8. Fishing ponds 9. Football field 10. Garden plots (rentals of space and tools) 11. Golf courses 12. Hang glider area (steep hillsides required) 13. Horse shoes 14. Hunting preserve 15. Lawn bowling 16. Model airplane and/or boat facilities l7. Mountaineering school (in rugged terrain --old sandpits?) 18. Paddle tennis courts 19. Picnic areas 20. Rest stops 21. Shooting range - target, skeet, trap 22. Shuffleboard courts 23. Ski hills (artificial snow) 24. Sliding hills (various natural and artificial surfaces) 25. Stables 26. Swimming and wading pools 27. Tennis courts 28. Tot lots (creative and traditional play equipment) 29. Trampolines 30. Water sports lagoons ATTACHMENT "A" to APPENDIX V NATURAL PRESERVES: 1. Aviaries 2. Bird sanctuaries 3. Ecologic preserves 4. Fish hatcheries 5e Marine preserves 6. Nature centers 7. Rock hound sites (mineralogists, geologists, paleontologists) MASOR PUBLIC ATTRACTIONS; 1. Arenas (indoor or outdoor) 2. Auditoriums 3. Band shells 4. Bowling alleys 5. Convention centers - Retreats 6. Country clubs 7. Dude ranches 8. Equestrian centers 9. Fairgrounds 1Oe Hansom cab rides through parks and trail system 11. Marinas 12. Motorcycle/recreational vehicle park 13. Restaurants 14. Skating rinks - roller (indoor or outdoor) or ice 15. Speedways 16. Stadiums 17. Theaters - open space or air 18. Theme amusement attractions (Knotts Berry Farm type) EDUCATIOD7AL FACILITIES: 1. Aquariums . 2. Craft centers (instructional and/or craft sales booths) 3. Exhibit centers at public facilities such as: a. Water factory tour b. MWD water quality education center C. Sewage disposal plant tour d. Factory information centers and tours 4. Historical monuments 5. Junior college or college campus 6. Library 7. Museum 8. Observatory 9. Planetarium 10. Schools - public, private, technical, etc. 11. School nature centers (experimental aril orientational) 12. Youth centerse a. Campgrounds b. Day camps c. Four-H/Future Farmers agricultural centers d. Scout houses "A"-3 GUIDELINES FOR TIM ESTABLISHMENT OF STANDARDS FOR CLEANLINESS AND APPEARANCE OF COMMERCIAL EQUESTRIAN STABLES LOCATED WITHIN THE GREENBELT CORRIDOR 1.0 Intent and Furpose It is the intent of these guidelines to provide standards for the maintenance of equestrian stables which will contri- bute to the health, well-being and safety of the community and encourage the establishment of a restful, rustic environment within the Greenbelt. Stables within the Greenbelt will be subject to inspection by an agency or agencies designated by the jurisdiction in which the stable is located, which may use the following guidelines: 2.0 Specific Development Standards 2.1 The maximum number of equines maintained in any one acre of land is not to exceed 25. 2.2 Each equine shall be provided with a minimum of 120 square feet of shelter. 2.3 Corral floors shall be graded to slope away from the center of the corral. 2.4 Each corral shall be provided with a combination manger and feeder and a permanently installed water system with auto- matic drinking controls. The watering cup or drinking device shall at all times be in a shaded area. 2.5 Aback -siphoning device shall be installed to protect the public water supply. An approved pressure vacuum breaker is recommended on the water line serving the corrals. The vacuum breaker should be at least 12 inches above the highest point of water usage or an approved double-check valve may be acceptable. 2.6 The valves in all troughs, bowls, cups and other water sources shall be'maintained properly to prevent leakage. 2.7 Automatic valves, or sanitary drains, if water flow is continuous, are necessary for large troughs or cups. 2.8 Paddocks and corrals should be properly graded and main- tained to suit the master drainage plan so that rain water and/or trough overflow do not form ponds. 2.9 A minimum of one wash rack shall be provided, and shall have a permanent watering system, a concrete slab floor and be connected to an approved sewerage system. 2.10 Perimeter trees and shrubs are required for screening and dust control purposes. APPELdDIX W-1 GUIDELINES FOR THE ESTABLISF_^IE:QT OF STANDARDS FOR C'.7,F.ANT.T?'i-';S A`71� a�PF'aR�•�r'r. O'r O"1�rnCrar -^OUESTRI?N S^TABLES 7,OCATEI� 4dTTHT�I 'T'TTF' CREEr�R�'rT CORRII7`)OR 2.11 Stallions shall be maintained in a safe manner in order to provide protection for other animals and people. 2.12 Public toilets for each sex shall be provided. 3.1 Standards for Cleanliness 3.1 Manure removal: All stalls shall be cleaned a minimum of five times per week, with daily:cleaning preferred. 3.2 Temporary placement of manure shall not exceed 48 hours, in an all concrete, 3-walled open storage bin, with removal to on or off -ranch use or approved method of destruction on a suitable schedule. Sizing of storage bins depend upon projected daily volume of wastes. 3.3 Feed mangers or boxes shall not beplaced near water sources, since, damp, spilled feed attracts flies and encourages breeding of same. 3.4 All dry grains shall be stored in rodent -proof metal containers and hay shall be stored in a covered structure on a cement slab or on a raised wooden platform that mair_- tains a minimum clearance of lf3 inches above the ground. 3.5 Proper weed control shall be maintained on the entire premises. 3.6 Continuous dust control shall be maintained on the en- tire premises, through light watering of arenas and exer- cise pens. 3.7 Trash containers shall be conveniently located near an all-weather access road. 4.0 Appearance Standards The intent of the Greenbelt Corridor Concept is to provide a relaxed, rustic environment within an increasingly urbanizing area. The following guidelines reflect that policy and are suggested as objectives. 4.1 Architectural Standards 4.1.a. All buildings and corrals will be maintained in safe, sanitary condition and in a good state of repair. 4.1.b. Architectural treatment and color schemes of exterior portions of all structures should be compatible with the rustic atmosphere of the Greenbelt trails. W-2 PLANNING SPECIAL DEVELOPMENTS S. 9380 PERMANENT COMMERCIAL HORSE FACILITIES STANDARDS (2039-3/76) S. 9380 PURPOSE. The purpose of this article is to establish standards for the keeping of horses in a permanent manner which will not endanger the health, welfare, and safety of the community and which will assure that horses are kept in a clean and sanitary condition and not subject to cruelty or abuse. Further, it is the intention of this article to assure that good stable management is a con- tinuing practice. S. 9381 USES PERMITTED. Horse facilities of a permanent nature are permitted by the Planning Commission in the ROS or on publicly -owned property subject to approval of a conditional use permit. Horse related facilities may include such uses as: commercial horse stables, rental stables, riding academies, etc. Horse shows and rodeos may be permitted when approved as part of a special event permit by the Board of Zoning Adjustments. S. 9382 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS. MINIMUM BUILDING SITE. Permanent commercial horse facilities shah nave a minimum building site of five (5) acres. S. 9382.1 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS. MINIMUM RIDING AREA. There shall be provided minimum riding areas based on one of the following alternatives: (a) One (1) acre of riding area for every fifteen (15) horses; or (b) A minimum of five thousand (5000) square feet of fenced riding arena area for every fifteen (15) horses up to one hundred (100). For those facilities providing for a density to exceed one hundred (100) horses, the minimum riding area)shall include at least two (2) separate arenas. (c) Any combination of Sections 9382.1(a) and 9282.1(b) may be utilized to satisty the minimum riding area requirements. S. 9382.2 DEVELOPMENT -STANDARDS. MINIMUM FRONTAGE. Where a horse stable abuts a public street or highway the minimum frontage shall be not less than one hundred (100) feet. S. 9382.3 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS. MAXIMUM BUILDING HEIGHT. The maximum building height shall be thirty-five (35) feet. S. 9382.4 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS. LANDSCAPING AND IRRIGATION. All required land- scaping and permanent irrigation systems shall be subject to approval by the Department of Building and Community Development. Mandatory landscaped areas shall include: (a) A ten (10) foot planter along the front and exterior side property lines. (b) A ten (10) foot planter with perimeter trees and shrubs shall be provided along the side and rear property lines. S. 9382.5 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS. FENCING REQUIREMENTS. The entire site, other than riding areas, shall be fenced with a type of fencing designed to confine horses within the site in order to protect the mandatory landscaped areas from horse or pedestrian damage. ATTACHMENT "A" to APPENDIX W 4/1/76 S. 9362.6 SPECIAL DEVELOPMENTS PLANNING S. 9382.6 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS. PARKING. The minimum development standards for all vehicle parking shall conform to Article 979. S. 9382.7 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS. YARD REQUIREMENTS. All structures including but not limited to stalls, corrals, barns, and maintenance enclosures except fences for pastures, grazing areas, riding arenas 'And watchman's quarters, shall main- tain a minimum distance of three hundred (300) feet from any property that is zoned and master planned for residential use. S. 9382.8 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS. YARD SETBACK REQUIREMENTS. The following general yard setback requirements shall apply: (a) FRONT AND EXTERIOR SIDE YARD: The front and exterior side yard setback shall be a minimum of fifty (50) feet. (b) INTERIOR SIDE AND REAR: The interior side and rear yard setback shall be a minimum of twenty-five (25) feet. S. 9382.9 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS. CORRAL, RACKS AND STALLS. All corrals, racks and stalls shall be of consistent design and materials and shall be of noncombustible construction provided that the Fire Chief may modify these requirements where practical difficulties exist r, ing as she alternatives comply with the intent of the code. S. 9383 HORSE CORRAL. Corrals designed for one horse shall meet the following requirements: (a) The minimum size corral shall be 288 square feet with a minimum dimension of twelve (12) feet and shall have a minimum five (5) foot high fence. (b) Each corral shall be provided with a permanently installed water system with automatic drinking controls. (c) A minimum of ninety-six (96) square feet of shelter covering with a minimum dimen- sion of eight (8) feet shall be provided. Shelters shall be sloped away from corral centers, or rain gutters which lead to the outside of the corrals shall be in- stalled. (d) Corral floors shall be graded to prevent ponding within the confines of the corral. corrals may be designed for more than one horse provided that the dimensions and other requirements set out in this section shall be increased to accommodate the number of horses to be confined in such corrals at any one time. S. 9383.1 BOX STALL. Box stalls are optional and may be provided in lieu of horse corrals. Box stalls shall be a minimum size of 144 square feet and shall maintain a minimum dimension of twelve (12) feet. S. 9383.2 WASH RACK. There shall be one (1) wash rack provided for every thirty- five (35) horses but in no case shall there be less than one (1) wash rack. Each wash rack shall meet the following requirements: (a) The minimum size wash rack area shall be six (6) feet wide and eight (8) feet long. (b) Each wash rack shall be provided with a permanent watering system. (c) Each wash rack shall be constructed with a concrete slab flooring. "A"-2 PLANNING SPECIAL DEVELOPMENTS S. 9383.2(d) (d) Each wash rack shall be connected to an approved sewage facility and shall be provided with a back siphon device on the water source. (e) Wash racks may be designed for more than one horse provided that the dimensions and other requirements set out in this section shall be increased to accommodate the number of horses to be washed at any one time. S. 9364 GENERAL OPERATING REQUIREMENTS. The following requirements shall govern the operation of permanent commercial horse facilities: (a) The land surface of horse enclosures shall be graded above the surrounding land surface. A grading plan shall be submitted as a part of the conditional use permit. (b) Exercise rings shall maintain a minimum dimension of thirty (30) feet. (c) Arenas shall maintain a minimum of ten thousand (10,000) square feet with a minimum dimension of eighty (80) feet. (d) The maximum number of horses shall be twenty-five (25) horses per acre. (e) Storage and tack areas si:all be provided and designated on the plot plan. (f) Trash solid waste disposal areas, and dumpsters shall be designated and conven- iently located with an all-weather road access provided. (g) Continuous dust control of the entire premises shall be maintained and be subject to the regulations contained in Chapter 8.24 of the Huntington Beach Municipal Code. A method of water sprinkling for arenas and exercise pens shall be provided and shall be indicated on the site plan. (h) A permanent single family residential unit shall be provided on the site and shall be subject to approval by the Planning Commission as a part of the conditional use permit. A watchman shall be on duty twenty-four (24) hours a day. (i) A back -siphoning device shall be installed to protect the public water supply. An approved pressure vacuum breaker is recommended on the water line serving the corrals. The vacuum breaker shall be at least twelve (12) inches above the highest point of water usage or an approved double-check valve may be acceptable. (j) Security lighting shall be provided and all utilities shall be installed under- ground. (k) A log containing the name of every horse, its location in the facility, the owner's nacre and address, and the names and addresses of persons to be notified in case of emergency shall be kept in the watchman's quarters and readily available when needed. (1) All fire protection appliances, appurtenances, emergency access, and any other applicable requirements, pursuant to Chapter 17.56 of the Huntington Beach Munic- ipal Code, shall meet the standard plans and specifications on file in the Fire Department, S. 9385 FLY AND INSECT CONTROL. Fly and insect control shall be subject to all city and county regulations. "A"-3 4/1/76 s. 9385(a) SPECIAL DEVELOPMENTS PLANNING (a) Method of disposal of stable wastes shall be indicated as a part of the conditional use permitandshall be subject to approval by the Planning Commission. (b) Feed mangers or boxes shall not be placed near water sources. S. 9385.1 RODENT CONTROL. All dry grains shaj.1 be stored in rodent -proof metal containers, and hay storage shall be covered. Bulk or commercial amounts of grain or hay shall be located no closer than fifty (50) feet to any enclosure or building where horses are quartered. S. 9387 WATER MANAGEMENT. For effective control of fly -production sources, the following shall be provided: (a) A nonleak valve for all troughs, bowls, cups, and other water sources. (b) Automatic valves or sanitary drains, if water flow is continuous, shall be provided for large troughs or cups. (c) In paddock and corrals, the developer shall properly grade the earth surface to suit the master drainage plan so that rain water trough overflow does not form ponds. S. 9388 DUST CONTROL. Contii;uu%..7 dust control of the entire premises shall be maintained and subject to the regulations contained in Chapter 8.24 of the Huntington Beach Municipal Code. S. 9389 STABLE MANAGEMENT. The management of commercial horse stables shall meet the requirements of the responsible county agency. 5. 9389.1 ENFORCEMENT. The responsible county agency, as designated in Chapters 8.12 and 8.24 of the Huntington Beach Municipal Code, and Article 902 of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code, is hereby vested with the duty and authority to inspect regularly all commercial horse stables within the city. Report and recommendation by such agency shall be forwarded to the Director of Building and Community Development. PROPOSED FOR ADOPTION By BOARD RESOLUTION EQUINE STANDARDS FOR COMMERCIAL STABLES The intent ofi this proposed Resolution is to establish standards for the keeping of equines in a manner which will not endanger the health, peace, or safety of the community and which will assure that equines are kept in a clean and.sanitary environment and are not subjected to suffering, cruelty, or abuse. It is further the intention of the County to provide for routine inspections of commercial stables to assure that the regulations set forth by this article are being vigorously maintained. Section 1;.00 Definitions. The definitions contained in Article 1 of Division T, of Title 4, and article 1 of Division 1, of Title 5, of the Codified Ordinance shall apply to this Resolution unless it is apparent from the context hereof that some other meaning is intended. Ih addition, the following definitions shall apply: Section 1.01 Licensee. The legal owner or person in actual control of any activity involving animals. Section 1.02 Owner. Actual owner of animal, legal ownership is established by a person being registered as the owner on a license or other legal document. Section 1.03 Primary enclosures. Means any structure used to immediately restrict an animal or animals to a limited amount of space. Section 2.00 Administration. Section 2.01 Type and number of animals. Applicant, when applying for a license, shall furnish the Director with a list of the type(s) of animals proposed to be kept or used for any purpose, together with the estimated maximum number thereof. The Director shall establish the kind and maximum number of animals authorized to be maintained on the premises. Section 2.02 Regulations to be issued. A copy of these regulations shall be issued to each applicant for a license; the applicant shall acknowledge receipt of such standards and shall agree to comply with same by signing a form provided for the purpose by the Director. Such form shall be filed with the application for license. Section 2.03 Zoning. The applicant shall demonstrate that the proposed use of the property complies with the zoning regulations of Orange County. ATTACHMENT "B" to APPENDIX W EQUINE STANDARDS FOR COMMERCIAL STABLES October 4, 1976 Page 2 Section 2.04 Fee. A nonrefundable application fee of $25.00 shall be charged for processing an application for any commercial stable license. The application fee shall be credited to the license fee if the license is issued. Section 2.05 Changes to be reported. Licensee shall report in writing any changes in address, ownership, or management to the Director at least fifteen (15) days prior to such change. (Zoning applies to the property and licensing applies to the licensee or applicant, regardless of the ownership of the property.) Section 2.06 Records to be kept. Licensee shall maintain a register of the names and addresses of persons from whom animals have been received from and to whom animals have been rented or leased. This information shall be available to the Director upon demand. Section 2.07. License to be displayed. Each licensee shall display the license issued by the Director in the office, reception room, or other area accessible for inspection. Section 2.08. License expiration. Each license shall automatically termi- nate on the expiration date shown thereon unless, on or before such date, application for renewal has been submitted and approved as herein provided. Section 2.09 Inspections. All licensees, upon being granted any animal facility license, do thereby consent and agree to the entry upon the premises described in the license or application by the Director or his authorized deputy for the purpose of conducting such inspections as he may deem required. Section 3.00 Equine facility operating standards. Section 3.01 Construction and maintenance. Housing facilities for commercial stables must be constructed, equipped, and maintained so as to continuously provide a healthful and sanitary environment, as approved by the Director, for the animals kept or to be kept therein. Section 3.02 Manure management. Licensee shall initiate and maintain a program of proper manure management. Licensee shall provide for the daily collection of manure from in and around corrals and access areas. Manure shall be stored in covered containers. Containers utilized for manure storage shall be cleaned and emptied as required. However, in no case shall manure be permitted to remain in any container for a period exceeding seven (7) days. NOTE: Thin layer spreading of manure on corrals and riding arenas shall be subject to the approval of the Director. Section 3.03 Premises to be kept clean and sanitary. Licensee shall remove extraneous debris and rubbish from facility grounds; trash solid waste disposal areas, and dumpsters are to be designated and conveniently located with an all-weather road access provided. EOUINE STANDARDS FOR COMMERCIAL STABLES October 4, 197E Page 3 Section 3.04 Food and storage. Licensee shall be responsible for the daily care and maintenance of all equines maintained exclusively on the premises for which a license or permit has been issued, including but not limited to the adequate supply of food and water. All dry grains and pellets shall be stored in rodent -proof containers. Hay shall be stored on a raised platform that maintains a minimum six (6) inch clearance above the surrounding area. Hay shall be kept covered as to protect it from the elements. Section 3.05 Dust control. A program of continuous dust control of the entire premises shall be provided. A method for light watering of arenas, and exercise areas shall be maintained. In lieu of watering, chemical control of dust may be permitted. Section 3.06 Vector control. There must be adequate and effective means of control of insects and rodents and such control must be vigorously maintained at all times. Section 3.07 Combustible materials. Combustible materials and or solutions shall be maintained a minimum of twenty-five (25) feet from all primary enclosures. Section 3.08 No smokinq areas. A minimum of two (2) "No Smoking" signs shall be posted on the facility grounds prohibiting smoking in the following areas: a. Within all stalls. b. Within 10 feet of manure or trash dumpsters. c. Within 25 feet of hay or tack areas. Section 3.09 Weed control. Weeds shall be removed from in and around corrals and access areas. Section 4.00 Equine facility construction standards. Section 4.01 Construction and maintenance. Housing facilities for commercial stables must be constructed and maintained so as to continuously provide a healthful and sanitary environment as approved by the Director for the animals to be kept or to be kept therein. Section 4.02 Equine corrals shall conform to the following minimum standards: There shall be one corral provided for each equine, except that a mare and foal may be corralled and maintained together for a period not to exceed twelve (12) months. Section 4.03. Corral area. The corral shall have a minimum area of two hundred and sixteen 216 square feet with a minimum dimension of twelve (12) feet, and shall have a fence with a minimum height of five (5) feet. Each corral shall be provided with a feeder and a permanently installed water system with automatic drinking controls. In lieu of the automatic water system described above, water containers with a minimum capacity of twenty (20) gallons may be utilized. Water containers shall be cleaned as often as required. A clean fresh supply of water shall be available to the animals at all times. NOTE: Containers are to be"completely emptied, cleaned, and refilled on a weekly basis during the summer months of June through September. EQUINE STANDARDS FOR COMMERCIAL STABLES October 4, 1976 Page 4 Section 4.04 Shelter. Each corral shall be provided with a minimum of ninety-six (96 square feet of shelter, with a minimum dimension of eight (8) feet. Shelters shall be sloped away from corral centers, or rain gutters which lead to the outside of the corral shall be installed. Corrals and related facilities shall be kept in good repair in order to protect the animals from injury and to facilitate the prescribed animal husbandry practices set forth. Corral surfaces shall be graded and sloped to allow for proper drainage. Section 4.05 Box stalls. Box stalls are optional and may be provided in lieu of equine corrals. Box stalls shall have a minimum area of one hundred and forty (140) square feet, with a minimum dimension of ten (10) feet. Bedding material such as shavings, sand, sawdust, etc. should be changed as regularly as necessary to facilitate the prescribed animal husbandry practices set forth. Section 4.06 Pastures and paddock areas. In lieu of providing equines with a limited amount of space as outlined in the preceeding subsections dealing with equine corrals and box stalls, equines may, with the approval of the Director, be boarded in pasture or paddock areas. If one or both of these alternative methods is provided, it shall be fenced in compliance with both State and County codes pertaining to livestock fencing. Feed bins and water troughs shall be provided. Natural shelter, such as coni- ferous evergreens, may be considered adequate shelter for the purpose of this section. Section 5.00 Humane treatment of animals. Section 5.01 Good Citizenship. Licensee shall allow no animal to consti- tute or cause a hazard, or to be a menace to the health, safety, or peace of the community. Licensee shall keep all animals in such manner as may be prescribed to protect the animals from the public and the public from the animals. Section 5.02 Cruelty. The licensee shall take every reasonable precaution to insure that animals are not teased, abused, mistreated, annoyed, tormented, or in any manner made to suffer by any person or means. Section 5.03 Escaped animals. Licensee shall make every reasonable effort to recapture every animal that escapes. Escapes of animals wherein the recapture of the animal cannot be immediately accomplished shall be reported to the Director. Section 5.04 Owner notification. Licensee shall immediately notify the owner of any animal boarded or held on consignment should the animal refuse to eat or drink beyond a twelve hour period, is injured, becomes sick, or dies. ��B��_4 STANDARDS AND CRITERIA FOR BICYCLE TRAILS The following is a summary of the STANDARDS and CRITERIA for bicycle trails as published in 1972 in "A Feasibility Study of a Countywide Bicycle System in Orange County." (Note: The concepts presented are considered as potentials and it is recognized that more detailed and specific standards are necessary and will be developed as additional experience permits). Grade: A grade of 6 percent is considered the maximum for bicycle facilities, with level spots for rest areas provided at the top of any grade. In addition to these areas, level areas along the route are suggested if long grades of 4 to 6 percent are unavoidable. Length: The average cyclist can sustain speeds of approximately 10 miles per hour, varying with the type of bicycle being used. A short path, 2 to 5 miles in length can, therefore, be traversed in less than 30 minutes. Interest in short routes will generally decrease after the second or third use. Longer paths utilizing diverse riding conditions and providing a variety of panoramas are very desirable, since they will generally have more repeated use. Both long and short trails should be included in any system to provide the greatest variation of situations possible. Traffic Direction: Facilities should accommodate two-way bicycle traffic where - ever it can be safely separated from vehicular traffic. According to the Vehicle Code, bicycles must travel in the same direction as vehicular traffic within the roadway. Use of two-way facilities would be more economical than two one-way facilities since both to and from traffic could be provided by the same facility allowing bicyclists to return to their point of origin from a location on the route, rather than having to complete a "loop" circuit. Width: The optimum widths for both trails and ways are eight feet for two-way traffic and four feet for one-way traffic. Larger than optimum widths may be utilized to provide passing zones or rest areas or may be implemented in areas where heavy uses are anticipated. The fact that paths which are eight or more feet wide will accommodate maintenance vehicles should be considered prior to facility construction. Surfaces: The surface should be constructed to comforably support the weight of the cyclist and any vehicles (maintenance) which will be using the trail or way. Safety: Safety is of the utmost importance in considering bicycle facilities. Although bicycle trails are preferable to bicycle ways (since they would be safer than a mix of bicycles with vehicular traffic), an entire system in Orange County cannot be all trails, and safety factors pertaining to roadways must be of primary concern. Traffic separation is the principle factor to be considered in roadway safety. Noted below are some safety concepts suggested for various street types. The extent to which these concepts are applied is dependent upon the volumes and speeds of vehicular traffic and bicycle traffic. 1. Residential Streets Speeds and volumes on residential streets are normally not high enough to require traffic separation. Signing of the route should be sufficient to APPENDIX X-1 '.esignate the street as an established bicycle route thereby informing motorists :hat bicycles will be using the same facility. It is assumed that motorists will then extend the proper courtesy and use good driving habits to insure the safety of both themselves and the bicyclists. 2. Arterial Highways Commuter or feeder streets and arterial highways will require separation ietween vehicular and bicycle traffic in addition to route signing. The bicycle facility should be located well outside the traveled way and where possible it ;hould be incorporated in the parkway behind the curb line. On the basis of accident experience, the Road Department has emphasized rhat bicycles and motor vehicles should not be mixed and that use of painted lines ind signs do not provide adequate or positive protection for bicyclists against drunken drivers, out-of-town drivers who are not familiar with bicycle signing, inattentive drivers, and careless speeders. Further, while automobiles on arterial highways travel at speeds of 35 to 55 mph, most bicyclists travel at not more than 10 mph. With this speed iifferential, there is a strong chance of serious, if not fatal, injury to the )icyclist who accidentally swerves into the traffic (most common among children or teenagers through poor judgment or horseplay). For this reason, the Road Department recommends that, on arterial highways, bicycles be separated as far is possible from motor vehicle traffic. This may mean paving the entire eight foot parkway to provide both a four foot sidewalk and a four foot bicycle trail. In some cases this would eliminate landscaping in the parkway and would not be aesthetically desirable. However, aesthetics have to be weighed against the safety of children and adult bicyclists. Where possible, the solution is to provide more right-of-way so that landscapin.g can also be provided. 3. Trails Safety aspects regarding trails are.few, and not primarily related to the facility but rather to its uses and users. Once established, the trails must remain solely for bicycles (pedestrian uses may be included), with minibikes, motorcycles, etc., which would create extremely unsafe conditions, completely excluded. Also, equestrian uses should not be permitted within 20 feet of the bicycle facility since compatibility between horses and bicycles is questionable. 4. Bicycle Safety Education Safety is a major factor not only in consideration of the facilities themselves, but also of the users of the system. Knowledge of bicycle regulatious by the general public appears to be very minimal although safety education for school children is a significant element of both school curricula and police department activities. Education, however, is dependent upon local agencies and has not as yet been a coordinated operation. With the establishment of a countywide system, education of both safety and bicycle regulations will be necessary on a much greater scale than that which presently exists. Education of adults as well as children must be accomplished to insure safe and proper use of the system. A concentrated effort throughout the County, combining the resources of local agencies, schools, civic organizations and the communications media should be developed. X-2 Accessibility: One of the key factors in establishment of any recreation system is its availability to the population. In determination of any proposed bicycle route the accessibility to it must be considered and should be established so that optimum participation by the residents is provided. The nature of bicycle trails and ways are such that accessibility should not be a significant problem if existing or proposed recreation facilities and roadways are utilized as focal points in the system. Linkage: Although bicycle routes will provide recreation potential in themselves, use of the routes as linkages between different recreation areas, neighboring communities, significant points of interest, or between communities and recreation areas should be considered. Analysis of proposed routes from this perspective would allow multiple use of the route serving transportation as well as recreation purposes. Trail Attraction: Trail attraction will have perhaps more effect upon repeated use of the,proposec route than any other single factor. It encompasses many of the criteria previously presented and is in general a statement regarding the physical characteristics of the trail itself. Included in this criterion is consideration of the comfort, rideability, safety and uniqueness of the trail or path. Surface smoothness (material) and general condition (absence of potholes, cracks in the surface, etc.) are the primary aspects of comfort. Rideability covers topography (grades), ease in handling (width) and layout (bends, turning radii). Safety includes intersection systems, traffic separation, and condition of riding corridors (zone in which bicyclist operates). Variation in grade and surface structure and layout, including weaves and bends, separation of two-way traffic by natural means (trees, rocks, etc.), breaks in path or trail continuity, etc., are elements to be considered under uniqueness. Aesthetics: Perhaps the most difficult and by far the most subjective criterion is that of the aesthetic value of a route. It differs from trail attraction in that aesthetics relate to the area within which the route is placed, and should be of primary importance when priorities of bicycle ways and trails are established. Because aesthetic values vary with each individual, a particular checklist cannot be presentee. In general, however, trails and ways should be established in areas where visual amenities and scenic vistas predominate providing a pleasing and satisfying environment. Although wooded regions, lazy country roads and beaches are generally thought of as amenity areas, urban regions encompassing unique forms of architecture, or cultural and historical significance should also be considered from the aesthetic viewpoint. The last few criteria noted above are most applicable to recreation oriented routes. However, where possible and practical these criteria should be considered when evaluating routes emphasizing transportation, so as to enhance the quality of the bicycle trail or way. Similar emphasis is now being placed on the planning and development of scenic highways, where analysis of the adjacent environment and visual amenities as well as safety, convenience, cost and direct route determination are included. X-3 STANDARDS FOR EQUESTRIAN TRAILS The following is a summary of standards for the development of equestrian trails, as provided in the Orange County 1974 publication "Trails for the Orange Park Acres, Cowan Heights-, E1 Modena Area." Trail Easement Widths: A 10-ft. graded trail in a 15-ft.-wide easement shall be the standard width. In cases of steep transverse side slopes, wider easements may be required. The 10-ft. graded width should accommodate vehicles used for emergency and maintenance purposes. Trail Construction: 1. Trails not adjacent to public streets• a. Clearance. The trail shall be free from overhead obstructions from ground level to a height of 10 ft. b. Grade. The trail need not be graded level in the direction of the trail. A rolling and wandering path is generally preferable to a straight and level condition. While rolling terrain is desirable, trail grade of over 20% is not acceptable except in extreme cases. Grades of 15% shall be limited to 500 ft. in any one reach. The maximum grade allowed for distances greater than 500 ft. shall be 10%. c. Cross slope. The trail shall be constructed to provide good drainage. A cross slope shall be maintained, not to exceed 1 inch in 18 inches. Berms and ditches shall be utilized. to prevent washouts of fills and cuts. d. Slope cuts. Cut slopes shall not be steeper than 2:1. e. Fill cuts. Fill slopes shall be at least 2:1. f. Fencing. In proposed tract developments, fencing shall be installed of a type proposed by the developer subject to approval of the planning commission. g. Surfacing. In general, in undeveloped areas native soil shall be acceptable. Trails within proposed tract developments will require surface treatment such as decomposed granite, eucalyptus and/or bean pod mulch to minimize dust. 2. Trails adjacent to public streets: a. Trails adjacent to public roadway shall be constructed in accordance with plans and specifications approved by the Road Commissioner of the County of Orange and meeting the standards of this section as closely as practicable. b. Additional rights -of -way (15 ft. minimum) will be required from developers or County, as applicable, for trail purposes on arterial highways. c. On arterial highways not presently constructed to ultimate standards, a graded 15-ft. shoulder adjacent to the roadway is recommended on an interim basis. d. On local streets and fully improved arterial highways, it is recommended that the parking lane be signed and striped for an equestrian trail, with parking prohibited. X-4 3. Signs: The proposed local riding and hiking trail system shall include the following types of signs: a. Trail Signs shall display the symbol of a horse. The metal sign shall be fastened with brackets to a metal post set in concrete. Metal posts are recommended because much of the trail area is subject to fire hazard. Recommended spacing 1,000-ft, intervals along the trail. b. Trail Entrance Signs shall be posted at trail entrances, probably at street crossings. These signs shall consist of redwood posts set in concrete with lettering burned on redwood boards. All signs shall state "Riding/Hiking Trail." One post could support several signs where multiple crossings occur. C. Crossing Signs warning motorists of crossings, probably set 300 ft. before the crossing, shall be posted. The signs shall follow the International Code by showing a horseman on a horse with the words "Equestrian Crossing" below, and they shall otherwise conform to the Uniform Traffic Manual. The signs shall be installed by the Road Department. d. Prohibition of Motor Vehicle Signs shall be installed at trail entrances. e. Cost. Signs shall be purchased by the County and furnished to the developer for installation. GENERAL CRITERIA FOR TRAIL REST STOPS The Santa Ana River/Santiago Creek Greenbelt Plan calls for the creation of a trail/open space/recreation system along the 37 miles of the River and Creek. The trail system will require a series of rest stops spaced at approximate points along the River and Creek. As a minimum, each rest stop should provide water for trail users, trash containers, restroem facilities, bicycle racks, and shaded rest areas. For equestrian use, hitching posts and a means for providing water for horses should be included. Other facilities such as parking areas for trail access, and picnic areas with benches and tables, may be provided where funds are available and/or wherever feasible. In determining the need and location of trail rest stops, various factors have to be considered. An area of major concern is cost of establishing a rest stop, and every effort should be made to select sites where the lowest possible costs may be realized. These cost factors include: site acquisition, design of the facility, development or construction, and operation and maintenance. 1. Site acquisition. Costs for site acquisition may be eliminated by using existing or planner the Santa Ana River/Santiago and park sites are incorporated into a facilities, which are adjacent to or Creek trail system. Where rest not available, sites on publicly owned plan. in close proximity, to stops are needed, land should be 2. Design. Rest stops should be of a design that blends in with the existing environment and yet is low in cost. Design plans originated or contributed to by X-5 volunteer action should be encouraged. Designing of rest stops should also allow facilities to be easily viewed by adjacent roads or streets which are patrolled. This will decrease the possibility of vandalism, 3. Development. The use of existing parks will not require additional development costs except possibly for trail linkages. Planned parks will not require any additional funds above those projected for the facility development. Any rest stops that require new construction should incorporate building materials that blend with a natural environment, have a low maintenance cost and are less susceptible to vandalism. 4. Operation and maintenance. Restroom facilities located in planned or existing parks will have the lowest operation and maintenance costs due to the availability of committed maintenance personnel. A rest stop that is independent of a park would constitute a higher maintenance cost than a rest stop located in a park facility. Also, rest stops that are located outside parks could have a higher rate of vandalism, due to less patrolling and fewer people to witness any vandalism. In the development of a Commission policy establishing criteria for rest stops, every effort should be made to select sites within planned or existing park facilities, or if this is not feasible, on publicly owned land. In the trail system, rest stop facilities should be established at intervals of approximately 5 miles. X-6 GREENBELT COMMISSION 625 North Ross Street, Suite B129 Santa Ana, California 92701 The Honorable Board of Supervisors County Administration Building 515 North Sycamore Street Santa Ana, California 92701 Subject: Maintenance and patrolling of throughout the Santa Ana River Greenbelt Corridor* 4 April 1974 the trails system and Santiago Creek Synopsis: Maintaining and patrolling the trails system throughout the Santa Ana River and Santiago Creek Greenbelt Corri- dor, may well be accomplished with greater efficiency and lower costs under a single agency management pro- gram than by several separate jurisdictions. Gentlemen: Within the Santa Ana River and Santiago Creek Greenbelt Plan, which was adopted by your Board on 23 June 1971, as a component of the Orange County Master Plan of Land Use, it is emphasized that bicy- cle, equestrian and walking trails along the river and creek are the backbone of the entire greenway and recreation system. When current plans become a reality, the trails system will extend the length of the river, from its mouth to the County line, and along the creek from its confluence with the river on up to the Villa Park Dam. The principals involved in the planning and construction of the trails include tine Orange County Flood Control District (OCFCD)I Harbors, Beaches and Parks District (HB&PD), and the orange County Water District (OCWD). To date, bicycle and equestrian trails have been completed from the rivermouth to Katella Avenue, under the direction of the OCFCD. The OCFCD and OCWD are jointly planning the construction of river trail segments from Tustin Avenue to Imperial Highway and Katella Avenue to Tustin Avenue, with esti- mated completion dates being the summer of 1974 and spring of 1975, respectively. The remaining portion of the river trails sys- tem, i.e., from Imperial Highway to the County line, is being planned by HB&PD. Detailed planning and construction of the trails along the Santiago Creek will be another multi -jurisdictional effort. Time schedules have not yet been determined for the latter two por- tions of the trails system. When completed, the trails system will be an extraordinary and unique recreational facility, as well as a means of access to ATTACHMENT "A" to APPENDIX X The Honorable Board of Supervisors 4aintenance and patrolling of the trail system 4 April 1974 )they facilities located within or linked to the 36 miles of green- belt corridor. The extent, however, to which this system will be used, and enjoyed, will be directly related to how well it is main- tained. It was toward this end that -the Greenbelt Commission di- rected its staff to inquire into the actual and planned maintenance of the trails system. Jn 21 March 1974, the Greenbelt Coordinator met with representatives of the OCFCD, HB&PD, OCWD, County Planning Department, County Road )epartment and the cities of Orange and Santa Ana. The purpose of the meeting was to discuss the size of the present and planned trails system, current maintenance problems and procedures, and the relative merits of a single agency versus a multi -jurisdictional maintenance program. A summary of the experience gained to date and problems to be considered in a maintenance program is as follows: a. Bicycle trails must be swept as often as necessary to keep clear of loose sand and dirt. b. Dust control must be maintained, especially in areas where equestrian trails are on high ground (levees) overlooking private homes and swimming pools. c. Equestrian trails require blading to maintain proper grading and leveling of irregular surfaces. d. Trail sign maintenance includes repairs as well as replacement of damaged or missing signs. e. Graffiti on signs or other surfaces along the trails must be removed or obscured. f. Fencing and barricades must be maintained by repairs or replacement. g. Landscape maintenance requirements include replacement of bushes which have been run over or pulled out, and trimming of bushes and low tree limbs to maintain a safe clearance for riders. h_ Trail striping must be maintained. i. The grading of shoulders of trails and access links must bey maintained. j. Trail maintenance must be subordinate in priority to operational requirements, e.g., personnel, equipment and time on site needed for maintenance of a flood control facility would ordinarily receive priority scheduling over trail maintenance. The FIonorable Board of Supervisors Maintenance and patrolling of the trail system 9 April 1974 k. Patrolling of the trail system is required to ensure proper use. Unauthorized vehicles must be denied access, bicycles and equestrians limited to their respective trails, and general protection of the public and facilities must be provided. 1. Equipment must be provided, and maintained, that is suit- able for trail maintenance. Improper equipment, e.g., a sweeper too large for a bicycle trail, can damage the trail edges and accelerate wear and the need for repairs. m. Personnel must be trained in trail maintenance and now often perform such functions as additional duties or as extra -help. n. Trails which are established by a painted line on a paved road system can be maintained by a jurisdiction's normal road maintenance department or contractor. o. Certain areas may require a higher or more costly level of maintenance than others, thus the cost of maintenance for like -size areas may vary. It was generally agreed that an off -road trails system, which passes through several jurisdictions, could be maintained more efficiently by a single agency than by the individual efforts of the several jurisdictions. A single agency program would enhance the likelihood of a consistently higher level of maintenance, throughout the trails system, with an overall reduction of cost. A single agency program could be established by participating juris- dictions entering into a joint powers agreement. The agreement would provide for the preparation of specifications describing the type, quality and extent.of work to be performed; the awarding of a contract for accomplishment of work; the designation of a County department or district to manage the contract, and the funding method which would most likely be on a pro rata basis. The agreement could provide for expansion of the area covered and work to be done, and for the admission of new participants. This latter provision may be especially advantageous in view of the Master Plan of County -wide Bikeways, which plans for over 500 miles of bike trails in unincor- porated areas. Various cities may also desire to join in the program as they develop bike trails but do not have the in-house maintenance capability. The need for a well managed, high quality, and timely -responsive maintenance program may be supported by the likelihood of successful law suits filed by citizens who sustain personal injuries from acci- dents attributable to improper maintenance of the trails system. The "A"-3 ' ie Honorable Board of Supervisors sintenance and patrolling of the trail system u April 1974 Dntract could include a provision for the contractor to carry liability insurance for accidents caused by improper maintenance. >sponsibility for managing the maintenance program could well be assigned to a County organization such as the currently considered "Environmental Management Agency (EMA)." The time required, however, Dr the establishment and operational effectiveness of the EMA, or some other yet to be established agency, may not be compatible with `he need for a well managed and effective trails maintenance program. Tt is tine opinion of the Greenbelt Commission that responsibility for managing a trails maintenance program should be assigned at the earli- at to an existing County department or district, The program could then expand and develop along with the expansion and development of `he trails system. Then, when an EMA, or equivalent organization is atablished, the program could be reassigned to or absorbed by that agency. i ;COMMENDATIONS: 1. Authorize the County Counsel to prepare an agreement between the County, the OCFCD, HB&PD, OCWD, and any other jurisdic- tions that may desire to participate, for the establishment and operation of a single agency managed trails system maintenance program, 2. Assign responsibility to the County district or department with the most relevant experience, to develop the specifi- cations for an expanding trails system maintenance contract. 3. Designate a specific County district or department to budget for and manage 'the trails system maintenance program in FY 1974-75e Respectfully submitted, DONALD D. SHIPLEY Chairman, Greenbelt Commission �TaS :ESB:ee METHODS FOR ACQUIRING USE OF LAND FOR THE GREENBELT There are several methods for acquiring land, or its use, for greenbelt purposes. One method is the acquisition of the full title of the land, which allows for the most complete control of its use, however, the cost is often prohibitive. The right of use of land, with some likely limitations, may be obtained at less cost. A description of the variations of these methods is as follows: 1. Acquisition in Fee. This method involves the purchase of the full title of the land, and allows control over its present and future development or nondevelopment. In addition to outright purchase, acquisition may be accomplished by: a. Purchase Through Eminent Domain. This provides a means whereby the land may be purchased for public use and benefit, provided the owner receives reasonable compensation. This condemnation procedure has been used for acquisition of park lands, and pending legislation may allow its use for open space. b. Purchase - Saleback. The land is purchased and then resold with certain covenants or restricted rights. This allows the protection of the land from undesirable uses, and facilitates its development and maintenance for desirable uses, such as: golf courses, riding stables, agriculture, etc. c. Purchase - Leaseback. After purchase the land is then leased to a private individual or organization to develop, operate and maintain for various greenbelt oriented recreational uses. Taxes may or may not be a responsibility of the long-term lessee, based on the possessory interest. d. Lease - Leaseback. After land is purchased the jurisdiction leases it to private enterprise for development of a greenbelt oriented recreational facility, which is,then leased back to the jurisdiction for operation. e. Installment or Negotiated Purchase. The land and certain rights to its use are acquired in segments at its current value without the need for a one-time expenditure equal to the total value. f. Life Estate. This purchase with the return of life interest allows the seller to retain and use the property during his lifetime. This type of acquisition allows ownership and control of the property until a future date when funds may be more available for greenbelt development. g. Land Exchange. This method does not require funding, howe•>er, there may be difficulty in finding properties of like value for the exchange. APPENDIX Y-1 h. Purchase of Surplus State or Federal Land. When surplus government land is purchased by a local public agency for parks or recreation, a discount of 50 percent of the market value is often allowed. i. Tax Foreclosure. Land acquired as a result of tax delinquency may be used for greenbelt purposes. j. Dedication .Requirements. Jurisdictions may require developers to dedicate land for park (greenbelt) uses as a condition of approval for development of a new tract. k. Gifts. Individuals may give or sell land at reduced or nominal costs to jurisdictions. The public receives the land for park purposes at little or no cost and the donor receives a tax benefit. 1. Land Trusts or Stewardships. Non-profit organizations, like the Nature Conservancy, maintain revolving funds for this purpose. 2. Acquisition in Less Than Fee. Rather than purchase the entire fee simple interest in a parcel of land, the jurisdiction may acquire a single or any combination of rights. These may include: a. Development Rights. This allows retention of an area in an undeveloped or non -urban use such as agriculture or watershed. A jurisdiction may acquire the development rights from the owner so that the owner is limited to non -development uses and is taxed accordingly. b. Easements. An easement represents an interest in land of another person that entitles the owner of such interest to a limited use or enjoyment of the land. Such easements may be secured by outright purchase, installment purchase, gifts, or as a condition of approval for development. The land will generally continue to be maintained by the owner and remain on the tax rolls, but will receive property tax consideration in relation to the effect of the easement on the market value of the land. Types of easements include: trails, conservation, recreation, wildlife preserve, and access. c. Leases. A jurisdiction may lease land with recreational or open space value. Options may be obtained for future purchase as part of the lease, with interim operation of recreational facilities. d. Combined Uses Among Public Agencies. Permission is granted by license from various utility companies for open space uses on utility rights -of -way and/or properties. Other sources of open space lands for joint public use are school districts, county road departments and flood control districts. Y-2 3. Incentive Programs. These methods allow a local jurisdiction to control land use without acquiring title to any of the rights of the land. a. California Land Conservation Act (Williamson). This act provides a property tax benefit for agricultural lands where the owner agrees to keep the land in agricultural use for a contracted period of time. The act is also usable for recreation, open space, scenic corridors, wildlife habitats, and wetlands. b. Density Benefits for Open Space. Increase in density may be granted in trade for the extension of various open space lands to areas otherwise suited for development. 4. Zoning and Land Use Controls. Subdivision and zoning ordinances, enacted and administered by a jurisdiction, can assist in establishing and preserving land for open space and greenbelt purposes without a requirement for public ownership. Y-3 SOURCES OF FUNDING FOR GREENBELT PROJECTS 1. FEDERAL a. Land and Water Conservation Fund. This fund is administered by the Bureau of Outdoor Recreation under the Department of the Interior. It is the primary source of funds available to state and local governments for the acquisition of outdoor recreation areas, and the development of recreational facilities, with an emphasis on water -oriented projects. Bicycle trails deemed to be of regional significance and/or serving recreational facilities are eligible for funding. Projects are funded at 50 percent of total cost with a local match required. Applications for funds are to be submitted by 1 September of each year to the State Department of Parks and Recreation. b. Code 710 Recreational Program. This program was established by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers for development of recreational facilities on existing Corps projects. Projects, including bicycle trails, are eligible for 50% funding matched by 50% local funding. The Los Angeles District Office of the Corps of Engineers can provide current information on the status of funds available. 2. STATE a. SB 36 - Nonmotorized Facilities Program, Street and Highways Code, Section 157.4. This section requires that a minimum of $360,000 annually be appropriated from State Highway Funds for development of nonmotorized facilities that: (1) provide continuity for existing bicycle routes severed by highway construction, or (2) are parallel to state highways and provide additional safety or capacity for the state highway facility. Administered by the California Department of Transportation (CALTRANS). b. SB 36 - Bicycle Lane Account. This provides funding of $360,000 per year for development of local bicycle lane projects. Funding is allocated on a 90% State, 10% local matching basis. The account is administered by CALTRANS. c. SB 283. This bill provides a total of $4,940,000 of State highway funds for improvements to the Pacific Coast Bicentennial Bike Route, and development by CALTRANS of a commuter bicycle trail system. This fund is administered by CALTRANS and is available from FY 1976-77 through 1978-79. d. SB 821. This program authorizes 2% of each county's Local Transportation Fund, derived from the sales tax on gasoline, for the exclusive use of bicycle and pedestrian improvement projects which serve a transportation purpose. It is administered by the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG). APPENDIX Z-1 e. SB 420. This bill authorizes the State Department of Parks and Recreation to provide a series of hostel facilities in state parks and to develop a system of recreational trails to and from these facilities. Within this bill, recreational trails are defined as pathways constructed so as'to provide "safe and convenient means for persons, including bicyclists, hikers, and horsemen to travel to and between State park system units other than by motor vehicle." The bill was passed in 1974, and a total of $2,150,000 was made available for its execution. f. The 1974 Recreation Bond Act. The act provides $90,000,000 for acquisition and development of recreational land and facilities. The total is divided between state and local jurisdictions with $45,000,000 going to each. Of the state's share, $1,500,000 will be provided for motorized off -road vehicles, and $3,500,000 is for the development of recreational trails for users of non -motorized modes of travel including bicyclists, equestrians and pedestrians. Allocation of the local portion of the fund is on a population basis. g. SB 1321. State, Urban, and Coastal Park Bond Act of 1976. This act provides for a bond issue of $280,000,000 to be used to meet the recreational requirements of the people of the State of California by acquiring, developing, and restoring real property for state and local park, beach, recreational, and historical resources preservation purposes. 3. LOCAL a. Highway Users Tax Fund. These funds are allocated to cities and counties for roadway expenditures by the state from the 7 cent per gallon tax on the sale of gasoline. Section 951 of the Streets and Highways Code specifies that these funds may be used on bikeways in the unincorporated area for development within the road right- of-way. b. Dana Point Tidelands Fund. This fund is derived from concessionaire and other such revenue from the operation of Dana Point Harbor. The fund may be used for the development of recreational facilities, including parks and trails. c. Revenue Sharing Funds. The State and Local Fiscal Assistance Act of 1972 provides for the allocation of funds from the federal government to local government jurisdictions. The Board of Supervisors by Resolution No. 73-272, and Minute Order of 17 December 1974, approved the use of these funds for bikeway development. d. Harbors, Beaches and Parks District Funds (HB&PD). This fund is derived from an ad valorum tax on real and personal property, and may be used for projects that have a recreational value which attracts use by county residents from communities beyond the immediate locale of the project. Z-2 e. Santa Ana River Environmental Enhancement Fund. This fund was established by an agreement between the Orange County Water District (OCWD) and the Orange County Flood Control District (OCFCD). The fund is financed by revenue derived from the sale of sand sediment from the river between Katella Avenue and Imperial Highway. Expenditures from the fund may be used for trail develop- ment in that reach of the river. f. In Lieu Park Fee. This fee is provided by land developers in lieu of dedicated acreage required by the Local Park Code. It is used to provide for the acquisition and development of local parks to serve the future owners or residents from which the fees were derived. g. Service Area, This is a taxing jurisdiction of the county which encompasses a defined area of unincorporated territory, and typically provides for local park acquisition, development and maintenance; road related landscape maintenance and summer recreational programs. h. County and City General Funds. These funds may be used for greenbelt projects in accordance with the discretion of the governing body of the jurisdiction concerned. Z-3 VII. BIBLIOGRAPHY Annual Report, Orange County Water District, 1975. Arterial Bikewa S stem, Financin and Implementation P1 Detailed Fiscal Year 975-76 Program, prepared by the Environmental Management Agency, County of Orange, 1975, Pit Water Conservation Facili prepar Conservation and Open Space Plan, Association ol Governments, 1976. ineerin and Economic Feasib st Bank of Santa Ana River, port Beach and Costa Mesa by Long Beach, 1974, Final Environmental Water District. 1976. Southern California red for The Oitles of at & Nichol, Engineers, Environmental Enhancement Plan, Middle Santa Ana River Greenbelt, prepared Lor Orange County Water District by Harvey 0, Banks, Consulting Engineer, Inc., 1971. Flood Plain Information, Lower Santiago Creek, Orange County, prepare or Orange County F ood Control District by Corps of Engineers, U.S. Army, Los Angeles District, 1973, Flood Plain information, Santa Ana River (Imperial Highway to County Flood Control District by Prado Dam prepared or Orange Corps of Engineers, U.S. Army, Los Angeles District, 1971. Huntin ton Beach General Plan, prepared by the Plan Development Section o the Huntington Beach Planning and Environmental Resources Department, 1976. ure, Alternative Proposals for Flood Control es, Santa Ana River Basin, prepared by ict, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 1974. Inventory of Public Lands, Santa Ana River -Santiago Creek Greenbelt Corridors, prepared for the Board of Supervisors by Title Section, Acquisition Division, Department of Real Property Services, 1972. Master Plan of Local Parks, Recreation Element of Orange Count General Plan, 1976, Master Plan of Parks, Recreation, and Cultural Arts Facilitie City o Orange, prepared for the City o Orange by POD, Inc., Master Plan of Re Tonal Parks for Orange County, as amended, prepareT-T3'rtlie Regionai Parks Advisory Team by the Orange County Phanning Department, 1976. Plants and Animals of the Santa Ana River in Oran e Count , prepare or the Orange County Flood District by Gordon A. Marsh and Kenneth D. Abbott, 1972, am of Plannin Ri ht-of-W. he Arteria Bikeway System y Environmental Agency, 19 Real Property Inventory for ces, uisition and Construction a1 Year 197 -77, Orange of Orange, prepared by Real s Agency, 1976. Recreation and Open Space Element Newport Beach General Plan, 1973. Review Re ort on the Santa Ana River Main Stem - includin Santiago Cree an Oa Street Drain, or Mod Control an Allied Purposes, prepare y� y U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Los Angeles District, 1975, Santa Ana River/Santia o Creek Greenbelt Plan, prepared for t e County o Orange y Ec o, Dean, Austin & Williams, Landscape Architecture, Urban Design, Environmental Planning, Newport Beach, 1971, Santiago Creek Study, prepared for Orange County Flood Control District, Orange County Water District, Irvine Ranch Water District by Lowry and Associates, Santa Ana, 1972. Trails for the Orange Park Acres Cowan Heights E1 Modena Area, prepared by Orange County Road Department, Orange County Planning Department, Orange .County Flood Control District, Orange County Harbors, Beaches and Parks District, Santa Ana River/ Santiago Creek Greenbelt Commission, 1974. Water for the Santa Ana River Greenbelt, prepared by Advance P anning Division, Orange County Flood Control District, 1973. Zoning Code, County of Orange, 1975.