The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutAdopt Resolution No. 2016-11 adopting a revised Capital Impr �&�F Dept ID PW 16-007 Page 1 of 2 Meeting Date 377/2016 CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE: 3/7/2016 SUBMITTED TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members SUBMITTED BY: Fred A Wilson, City Manager PREPARED BY: Travis K Hopkins, PE, Director of Public Works SUBJECT: Adopt Resolution No 2016-11 adopting a revised Capital Improvement Program (CIP)for the years 2015/2016 through 2021/2022 for compliance with renewed Measure M Eligibility Requirements Statement of Issue In compliance with Renewed Measure M (M2) funding eligibility, the City of Huntington Beach needs to amend an adopted Seven-Year Measure M2 Capital Improvement Program (CIP) With City Council approval, the City will update the CIP and adopt a resolution as an amendment to add additional projects Financial Impact No additional funding is required for this resolution Annual M2 local fair-share allocation is approximately$3 3 million for the City and several projects are allocated grants through competitive programs Recommended Action- Adopt Resolution No 2016-11, "A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach Adopting a Revised Capital Improvement Program for the Years 2015/2016 Through 2012/2022"for compliance with renewed Measure M eligibility requirements to amend the existing CIP for years 2015/16 Through 2021/2022 adding additional projects in compliance with M2 Eligibility Requirements Alternative Action(s) Do not adopt Resolution No 2016-11 and forego Measure M funding eligibility for projects not included in Resolution No 2015-40 Analysis Measure M2 is a 30-year, mufti-billion dollar program extension of the original Measure M (1991- 2011), in which funds are generated from retail transactions and use tax, plus an interest on earnings Net revenues are allocated to local jurisdictions for a variety of programs identified in Ordinance No 3 The Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) determines if a local jurisdiction is eligible to receive M2 Fair Share and competitive funds The City must satisfy certain requirements to maintain eligibility in order to receive funding from OCTA A key requirement is the adoption of a CIP The City CIP identifies all capital improvement projects funded by this program Resolution No ,2015-40, "A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach Adopting a Capital Improvement Program for the Years 2015/2016 1413 -85- Item 8. - 1 Dept ID PW 1 M07 Page 2 of 2 Meeting Date 3R/2016 through 2012/2022 for Compliance with Renewed Measure M Eligibility Requirements" was adopted on August 8, 2015 If M2 funding needed for a project is not reflected on the current CIP, an amendment should be provided to update and include all transportation related projects regardless of M2 funding participation The City will repeal Resolution No 2015-40 and adopt Resolution No 2016-11, °A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach Adopting a Revised Capital Improvement Program for the Years 2015/2016 through 2012/2022" for compliance with renewed Measure M eligibility requirements to provide additional projects to the CIP Public Works Commission Action Not required Environmental Status Not applicable for this action Projects are reviewed on an individual basis during design and prior to award Strategic Plan Goal Enhance and maintain infrastructure Attachments) 1 Resolution No 2016-11, "A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach Adopting a Revised Capital Improvement Program for the Years 2015/2016 Through 2012/2022" 2 Resolution No 2015-40, °A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach Adopting a Capital Improvement Program for the Years 2015/2016 Through 2012/2022 for Compliance With Renewed Measure M Eligibility Requirements" 3 Orange County Transportation Authority Ordinance No 3 dated 7/24/2006 Item 8. - 2 xs -86- TTACH i RESOLUTION NO. 2016-11 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH ADOPTING A REVISED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM FOR THE YEARS 2015/2016 THROUGH 2O21/2022 WHEREAS, on November 6, 1990, the Orange County voters approved Measure M, the revised Traffic Improvement and Growth Management Ordinance, for twenty years (1991-2011), and In 2011 the County enacted Ordinance No 3, renewed Measure M, a thirty year (2011- 2041), multi-billion dollar program extension of the original Measure M, and Ordinance No 3, Renewed Measure M Net Revenues are funded from the transactions and use tax plus any interest or other earnings-after allowable deductions, and Net Revenues may be allocated to local jurisdictions for a variety of programs identified in Ordinance No 3, Renewed Measure M, and Compliance with the eligibility requirements established in Ordinance No 3, Renewed Measure M must be established and maintained in order for local jurisdictions to receive Net Revenues, and One of the eligibility requirements for Ordinance No 3, Renewed Measure M is the adoption of a Capital Improvement Program for the years 2015/2016 through 2021/2022, On August 3, 2015, the City enacted Resolution 2015-40 in part adopting a Capital Improvement Program to participate in Ordinance No 3, Renewed Measure M Since adoption of Resolution 2015-40 the City has determined that additional projects need to be included in the Capital Improvement Program for funding Exhibit"A" includes additional projects for funding NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach does hereby resolve as follows That the Revised Capital Improvement Program for Ordinance No 3, Renewed Measure M, as set forth in the attached Exhibit "A" and incorporated by this reference is hereby adopted, and That Resolution 2015-40 is repealed PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach at a regular meeting thereof held on the 7th day of March , 2016 REVIE D APPROVED Mayor APPROVED O Yc4ty Manager City Attorney Nlx�U 3 �l(� ZITIATED AND APPROVED- Director ofoNblic Works 15-4799/131127 doc EXHIBIT "A" Item 8. - 4 xa .ea. 9/14/2015 Measure M 1 Seven Year Capital Improvement Program(Approved Projects Sorted by Project Name) Fiscal Years 2015/2016 through 2021/2022 Agency: Huntington Beach Project Name: Adams Avenue Traffic Signal Synchronization and Communication Equipment Upgrades FUND NAME PERCENT ESTIMATED COST PROJECTED COST NOTES Project Number: 13-OCTA-TSP-3663 M2 TSSP 79.52 $4,199 $4,199 OCTA anticipated expenditures Protect Limits: From Beach Blvd.to City Boundary(Multi AQMD 20.48 $1,081 $1,081 Jurisdictional) $5,280 $5,280 Type of Work: Traffic Signals Additional TOW: Interconnect traffic signals to improve coordination and communication Project Description: Provide operational and infrastructure improvements. Project Phase 6 10/17 17118 18/19 19120 20121 21122 Estimated Cost PrOi2m Cast E $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 R $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 rn $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 lM $2,640 $2,640 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $5,280 $5,280 $2,640 $2,640 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $5,280 $5,280 Agency: Huntington Beach Project Name: Arterial Rehab:Main(Garfield-Beach),Talbert (Gothard-Newland),Heil(Goldenwest-Edwards) FUND NAME PERCENT ESTIMATED COST PROJECTED COST NOTES Project Number: NIA General Fund 4T38 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 Project M2Fairshare 52.62 $1,110,543 $1,110,543 {s Main St.(Garfield to Beach),Talbert Ave.(Gothard to Newland),Heil Ave.(Goldenwest to Edwards) $2,110,543 $2,110,543 Type of Work: Road Maintenance Additional TOW: Rehabilitation of roadway Project De8cr1pt10n: Pavement rehabilitation for three arterial segments. Proled Phw 16/16 16/17 17/18 18119 19/20 20121 21/22 Eaft ated Cost PI Cast i E $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,110,543 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,110,543 $2,110,543 �. d $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 00 $2,110,543 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,110,543 $2,110,543 C,11 12015 Measure M 2 Seven Year Capital Improvement Program (Approved Projects Sorted by Project Name) 00 Fiscal Years 2015/2016 through 2021/2022 i cl\ Agency: Huntington Beach Project Name: Arterial Rehabilitation Adams Ave(Beach to Newland)and Atlanta Ave(Beach To Newland) FUND NAME PERCENT ESTIMATED COST: PROJECTED COST NOTES Project Number: N/A M2Fairshare 63.80 $881,374 $881,374 Project Limits: Adams Avenue(Beach to Newland)and Atlanta Other 36.20 $500,000 $500,000 Regional Surface Transportation Grant Avenue(Beach To Newland) (RSTP) $1,381,374 $1,381,374 Type of worn: Road Maintenance Addrdonal TOW: Rehabilitation of roadway Project Description: Pavement rehabilitation for two arterial segments. BMect Phase 15110 16117 17118 1 Ei119 19120 20121 21122 Estirneted Cost Pmouted Cost E $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 R $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 r n $1,381,374 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,381,374 $1,381,374 IM $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,381,374 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,381,374 $1,381,374 ' Agency: Huntington Beach Project Name: Arterial Rehabilitation:Edinger(Graham to Springdale)and Warner(Beach to Newland) FUND NAME PERCENT ESTIMATED COST PROJECTED COST: NOTES Project Number: N/A M2 Fairshere 70.73 $1,208,083 $1,208,083 Project Llmke: Other 2927 $500,000 $500,000 Regional Surface Transportation Grant t Edinger(Graham to Springdale)and Warner(Beach to Newland) (RSTP) $1,708,083 $1,708,083 Type of Wok: Road Maintenance Additional TOW: Rehabilitation of roadway Project Description: Pavement rehabilitation for two arterial segments. P>ojec Phi 16116 18/17 17/18 18119 19120 20/21 21122 Estimated Cost ErDlected gnat E; $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 R $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 C/I $1,708,083 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,708,083 $1,708,083 O&M $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,706,083 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,708,083 $1,708,083 9/14/2015 Measure M 3 Seven Year Capital Improvement Program(Approved Projects Sorted by Project Name) Fiscal Years 2015/2016 through 2021/2022 Agency: Huntington Beach Project Name: Atlanta Avenue Widening FUND NAME PERCENT E871MATED COST PROJECTED COST NOTES M2 ACE 75.00 $1,200,000 $1,200,000 Project Number: 15-HBCH-ACE-3770 Project Limits: General Fund 25.00 $400,000 $400,000 1 Atlanta Avenue(Huntington St.to Delaware St.) $1,600,000 $1,600,000 Type of work: Road Widening Additional Tow: Add 1 lane to existing roadway in project limits Project 0e3criPtlon: This project will widen the south side of Atlanta Avenue. Project Phase 15118 16111 , 17/18 18119 19120 20/21 21122 Estlineted Cost P_gjr ected Cost E $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 R $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 rn $1,600,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,600,000 $1,600,000 lM $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,600,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,600,000 $1,600,000 Agency: Huntington Beach Project Name: Beach Boulevard and Warner Avenue Intersection Improvement FUND NAME PERCENT ESTIMATED COST PROJECTED COST NOTES Project Number: 11-HBCH-ICE-3525(Engineering) M210E 0.00 $0 $0 11-HBCH-ICE-3525 Project Limits: Impact Fees 0.00 $0 $0 Traffic Impact Fee la Intersection of Beach Blvd.end Warner Ave. Unfunded 100.00 $378,266 $388,479 $378,266 $388,479 Type of Work: Intersection Additional TOW: Add right turn lane(s)to intersection Project Description: Install northbound and westbound right turn pockets to improve traffic flow and reduce congestion. Project Phase 1 16 1 II 17/18 18/19 19/20 20121 21/22 Estimated Cost PPected Cost E $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 t $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $378,266 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $378,266 $388,479 ' d $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 00 $0 $378,266 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $378,266 $388,479 J 12015 Measure M 4 Seven Year Capital Improvement Program (Approved Projects Sorted by Project Name) CIO Fiscal Years 2015/2016 through 2021/2022 I 00 Agency: Huntington Beach Project Name: Brookhurst Street and Adams Avenue Intersection Improvement FUND NAME PERCENT ESTIMATED COST PROJECTED COST NOTES Project Number: 11-HBCH-ICE-3526(Engineering) Gas Tax 1.19 $88,838 $93.935 Project M210E 3.57 $266,512 $261,804 11-HBCH-ICE-3526 k Intersection of Brookhurst Street end Adams Avenue Unfunded 95.23 $7,100,000 $7,507,379 $7,455,350 $7,883,118 Type of work: Intersection Additional TOW: Add through and right turn lanes to intersection Project Description: Add through lanes and right turn pockets to intersection to improve traffic flow and reduce congestion. ft[W Phase 15116 16/17 17L$ _7$/19 19120 20121 21/22 Eatknated Cost Projected Cast E $355,350 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $355,350 $355,350 R $0 $2,900,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,900,000 $2,978,300 $0 $0 $0 $4,200,000 $0 $0 $0 $4,200,000 $4,549,468 lM $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $355,350 $2,900,000 $0 $4,200,000 $0 $0 $0 $7,455,350 $7,883,118 N ' Agency: Huntington Beach Project Name: Bushard/Adams Water Quality Project FUND NAME PERCENT ESTIMATED COST PROJECTED COST NOTES Protect Number. 14-HBCH-ECP-3732 Gas Tax 35.28 $385,955 $385,955 Project Limits: General Fund 6.58 $72,000 $72,000 k Frontage median on Bushard and Adams M2 ECP Tier II 58.14 $635,955 $635,955 $1,093,910 $1,093,910 Type of work: Environmental Cleanup Additional TOW: Irrigation system retrofits to reduce runoff Project Description: Retrofit asphalt frontage medians on Bushard Street and Adams Avenue with bic retention swales for water quality. PProled Phase 15/16 16/1TT 17118 18/19 19/20 20121 21/22 Estirriated Cost PP[Wected Cost E $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 R $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 C11 $1,021,910 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,021,910 $1,021,910 O&M $0 $12,000 $12,000 $12,000 $12,000 $12,000 $12,000 $72,000 $72,000 $1,021,910 $12,000 $12,000 $12,000 $12,000 $12,000 $12,000 $1,093,910 $1,093,910 9/14/2015 Measure M 5 Seven Year Capital Improvement Program (Approved Projects Sorted by Project Name) Fiscal Years 2015/2016 through 2021/2022 Agency: Huntington Beach Project Name: Edinger Avenue Traffic Signal Synchronization FUND NAME PERCENT ESTIMATED COST PROJECTED COST NOTES Project Number: 12-OCTA-TSP-3625 M2 TSSP 77.94 $3,339 $3,339 OCTA anticipated expenditures Project Limits: Edinger Avenue From Bolsa Chica Street to State AQMD 22.06 $945 $945 AQMD Route-55 $4,284 $4,284 Type of work: Traffic Signals Additional TOW: Interconnect traffic signals to improve coordination and communication Project Description: Provide operational and infrastructure improvements (multijurisdictional project including Caltrans, Westminster,Fountain Valley,and Santa Ana) City work includes signal timing and traffic signal interconnect cable. fted Phase 5/16 17 17118 18119 19/20 20121 21/22 Estimated Cost Proiected Cost E $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 R $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 ra $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 w iM $2,142 $2,142 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $4,284 $4,284 $2,142 $2,142 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $4,284 $4,294 W ' Agency: Huntington Beach Project Name: First Street Diversion FUND NAME PERCENT ESTIMATED COST PROJECTED COST NOTES Project Number: 12-HBCH-ECP-3621 General Fund 100.00 $8,806 $8,806 Project Limits: First Street near Pacific Coast Highway $8,806 $8,606 Type of Worts: Environmental Cleanup Additional TOW: Runoff Diversion Project Description: Design and install a SCADA system and flow weir for the First Street Urban Runoff Discharge Permit with OCSD to protect water qualiity of City and Pacific Ocean. Protect Phase 16/16 16117 17118 18/19 10/20 20121 21/22 Estirrteted Cost ftected Cost E $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 1.- $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 CD $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 A $1,258 $1,258 $1,258 $1,258 $1,258 $1,258 $1,258 $8,806 $8,806 00 $1,258 $1,258 $1,258 $1,258 $1,258 $1,258 $1,258 $8,806 $8,806 12015 Measure M 6 Seven Year Capital Improvement Program(Approved Projects Sorted by Project Name) 00 Fiscal Years 2015/2016 through 2021/2022 1 Agency: Huntington Beach O Project Name: Goldenwest Street Traffic Signal Synchronization and Communication Equipment Upgrades FUND NAME PERCENT ESTIMATED COST PROJECTED COST NOTES Project Number: 11-OCTA-TSP-3554 M2 TSSP 78.02 $5,077 $5,077 Project AQMD 21.98 $1,431 $1,431 1• Goldenwest St.from State Route 22 to Pacific Coast Highway $6,508 $6,508 Type of Work: Traffic Signals Additional TOW: Coordinate signals within project limits Project Description: Provide operational and infrastructure upgrades including signal timing and installation of fiber optic cable along Goldenwest Street.Multijurisdictional project includes Caltrans and City of Westminster. Project Phase 1 1 10/17 17118 18119 19/20 20121 21/22 Estimated Cost PEjeded Cast E $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 R $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 r r� $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0 $3,254 $3,254 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $6,508 $6,508 $3,254 $3,254 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $6,508 $6,508 ' Agency: Huntington Beach Project Name: Huntington Beach Catch Basin Retrofit Project FUND NAME PERCENT ESTIMATED COST PROJECTED COST NOTES Project Number: 14-HBCH-ECP-3742 General Fund 100.00 $35,000 $35,000 Project Limits: City-wide $35,000 $35,000 Type of Work: Environmental Cleanup Additional TOW: Catchment Retrofit Project Description: Retrofit 84 existing catch basins with Bio Clean Round Curb Inlet Filters. Projed Phase 15/16 16t17 17/18 18/19 19/20 20121 21122 Estkneted Cast PrWected Cost E $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 R $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 C/I $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 O&M $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $35,000 $35,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $35,000 $35,000 9/14/2015 Measure M 7 Seven Year Capital Improvement Program(Approved Projects Sorted by Project Name) Fiscal Years 2015/2016 through 2021/2022 A4pncY: Huntington Beach Project Name: Huntington Beach Northwest Catch Basin Retrofit Project FUND NAME PERCENT ESTIMATED COST PROJECTED COST NOTES Project Number: 13-HBCH-ECP-3687 General Fund 100.00 $35,000 $35,000 Project Limits: City-wide in Northwest Part of City $35,000 $35,000 Type of Work: Environmental Cleanup Additional TOW: Catchment Retrofit Project Description: Retrofit 126 existing catch basins with Bio Clean Round Curb Inlet Filters and Skimmer Box. ftject Phase 15116 16/17 17118 18/19 19/20 20121 21/22 Esftated Cost Pl�acted Cost E $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 R $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 rn $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 a ;M $5.000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $35,000 $35,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $35,000 $35,000 r, ' Agency: Huntington Beach Project Name: Install Traffic Signal at Bolsa Chice St and Pearce Dr and Modify Signal at Main Str/Ulica FUND NAME PERCENT ESTIMATED COST PROJECTED COST NOTES Project Number: N/A Gas Tax 10.01 $72,500 $72,500 Project HSIP 89.99 $651,900 $651,900 !a Intersection of Boise Chica Street and Pearce Drive and Intersection of Main Street and Utica Avenue $724,400 $724,400 Type of Work: Traffic Signals Additional TOW: Install new traffic signal and equipment Project Description: Install and modify traffic signal. Proied Phase 15116 1 17 17118 18/19 19120 20121 21/22 F_stbeted Cost ErWacted Cast P $0 $0 $0 $0 $a $0 $0 $0 $o r_ $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $o $0 $724,400 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $724,400 $724,400 El A $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 00 $724,400 $0 $0 so $0 $0 $0 $724,400 $724,400 /2015 Measure M 8 Seven Year Capital Improvement Program (Approved Projects Sorted by Project Name) 00 Fiscal Years 2015/2016 through 2021/2022 I �--+ Agency: Huntington Beach N Project Name: McFadden/Edwards and Heil/Algonquin Catch Basin Retrofit Project FUND NAME PERCENT ESTIMATED COST PROJECTED COST NOTES' Project Number: 11-HBCH-ECP-3573 General Fund 100.00 $35,525 $35,525 Protect Limits: City-wide $35,525 $35,525 Type or work: Environmental Cleanup Additional TOW: Automatic Retractable Screen and other debris screens or inserts Project Description: Provide maintenance for catch basin screens. EWed Phase 15/16 16/17 7/18 119 19120 20121 21/22 Estirrreted Cost Prgjected Cost E $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 R $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 ',M $5,075 $5,075 $5,075 $5,075 $5,075 $5,075 $5,075 $35,525 $35,525 $5,075 $5,075 $5,075 $5,075 $5,075 $5,075 $5,075 $35,525 $35,525 i Agency: Huntington Beach Project Name: Signal Interconnect Conduit/Cable on Newland between Warner Avenue and Ellis Avenue FUND NAME PERCENT ESTIMATED COST PROJECTED COST NOTES Protect Number: N/A Gas Tax 10.03 $29,900 $29,900 Project HSIP 89.97 $268,200 $268,200 le between Warner Avenue end Ellis Avenue $298,100 $298,100 Type of Work: Traffic Signals Additional TOW: Interconnect traffic signals to improve coordination and communication Project Description: Install interconnect conduit and cable on Newland. erg Phase 15/16 116/17 17118 18119 19120 20/21 21122 _ Estimated Cast PB1J!&ted Cost E $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 R $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Cn $298,100 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $298,100 $298,100 O&M $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $298,100 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $298,100 $298,100 9/14/2015 Measure M 9 Seven Year Capital Improvement Program(Approved Projects Sorted by Project Name) Fiscal Years 2015/2016 through 2021/2022 Agency: Huntington Beach Project Name: Signal Modification at Goldenwest Street and Heil Avenue FUND NAME PERCENT ESTIMATED COST PROJECTED COST NOTES Protect Number: N/A General Fund 10.03 $30,500 $30,500 Protect Llmlta: Intersection of Goldenwest Street and Heil Avenue HSIP 89.97 $273,600 $273,600 $304,100 $304,100 Type of work: Traffic Signals Additional TOW: Interconnect traffic signals to improve coordination and communication Project Description: Install left turn arrows at intersection including interconnect conduit and cable on Goldenwest from Heil Ave.to Warner Ave. ftjecFPhase 15/16 10117 17/18 18119 19120 20121 21/22 Estimated Cost PPrr iefiled Cost E $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 R $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 rn $304,100 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $304,100 $304,100 ',M $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $304,100 $0 $0 $0 so $0 $0 $304,100 $304,100 �-I 1 Agency: Huntington Beach Project Name: Signal Modification at Gothard St/Talbert Ave, Gothard SI/Heil Ave and Springdale St/McFadden FUND NAME PERCENT ESTIMATED COST PROJECTED COST NOTES Ave Gas Tax 10.04 $75,100 $75,100 Project Number: N/A Project Llmlte! Intersections of GotherdlTalbert,Gothard/Heil,and HSIP 89.96 $673,200 $673,200 Springdale/McFadden $748,300 $748,300 Type of Work: Traffic Signals Additional TOW: Interconnect traffic signals to improve coordination and communication Project Description: Add left turn signals and interconnect condiuti and cable. Proled Phase 15/16 16/17 17118 18119 19120 20/21 21/22 Estimated Cost ceded Cast F $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $748,300 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $748,300 $748,300 A $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 00 $748,300 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $748,300 $748,300 W 12015 Measure M 10 Seven Year Capital Improvement Program (Approved Projects Sorted by Project Name) 00 Fiscal Years 2015/2016 through 2021/2022 i �-+ A9ency: Huntington Beach Project Name: Signal Modification at Gothard Street and Center Avenue FUND NAME PERCENT E871MAT€D COST PROJECTED COST NOTES Project Number: N/A Gas Tax 10.02 $39,800 $39,800 Project Limits: Intersectoin of Gothard Avenue and Center Avenue HSIP 89.98 $357,500 $357,500 $397,300 $397,300 Type of work: Traffic Signals Additional TOW: Interconnect traffic signals to improve coordination and communication Project Description: Install north/south left turn arrows and installation Of interconnect conduit along Gothard between McFadden and Edinger. Emlect Phase 15116 7 17 1 18/19 19/20 2Q121 21/22 Estknated'COst Prrr Jeded Cast E $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 R $397,300 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $397,300 $397,300 rn $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 .M $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $397,300 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $397,300 $397,300 x Agency: Huntington Beach Project Name: Signal Modification at Gothard Street and Slater Avenue FUND NAME PERCENT ESTIMATED COST PROJECTED COST NOTES Protect Number: N/A Gas Tax 10.02 $31,000 $31,000 Project Limits: HSIP 89.98 $278,300 $278,300 k Intersection of Gothard Street end Slater Avenue $309,300 $309,300 Type of Work: Traffic Signals Additional TOW: Interconnect traffic signals to improve coordination and communication Project Description: Install left turn arrows and interconnect conduit and cable on Slater Ave,from Goldwenwest to Gothard. Project Phase 15/16 16117 17/18 18/19 19/20 2=1 21/22 Estknoted Cast Prplealed Cost E $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 R $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 CA $309,300 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $309,300 $309,300 O&M $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $309,300 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $309,300 $309,300 9/14M15 Measure M 11 Seven Year Capital Improvement Program(Approved Projects Sorted by Project Name) Fiscal Years 2015/2016 through 2021/2022 Agency: Huntington Beach Project Name: Signal Modification at Newland Street and Ellis Avenue FUND NAME PERCENT ESTIMATED COST PROJECTED COST NOTES Protect Number: N/A Gas Tax 10.02 $39,900 $39,900 Project Limits: Intersection of Newland Street and Ellis Avneue HSIP 89.98 $358,500 $358,500 $398,400 $398,400 Type of work: Traffic Signals Additional TOW: Interconnect traffic signals to improve coordination and communication Project Description: Install left turn arrows and interconnect conduit and cable. Pixijed Phase 15116 16117 17/18 18119 19/20 20121 21/22 Estimated Cost ProJected Cost E $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 R $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 rn $398,400 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $398,400 $398,400 lM $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 tz 1�1- $398,400 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $398,400 $398,400 i Agency: Huntington Beach Project Name: Signal Modification at Newland Street and Slater Avenue FUND NAME PERCENT ESTIMATED COST PROJECTED COST NOTES Project Number: N/A Gas Tax 10.00 $35,100 $35,100 Project Limits: Intersection of Newalnd Street HSIP 90.00 $315,900 $315,900 $351,000 $351,000 Type of Work: Traffic Signals Additional TOW: Interconnect traffic signals to improve coordination and communication Project Description: Install left turn arrows and traffic signal controller and service for pedestrian signal. PmkmA Phase 15116 16/17 17118 18/19 19120 20/21 21/22 Estimated Cost PrWeded Cost h-1 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $351,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $351,000 $351,000 00 d $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $351,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $351,000 $351,000 12015 Measure M 12 Seven Year Capital Improvement Program (Approved Projects Sorted by Project Name) 00 Fiscal Years 2015/2016 through 2021/2022 i �+ Agency: Huntington Beach 01 Project Name: Utica Bicycle Boulevard from Main Street to Beach Boulevard FUND NAME PERCENT ESTIMATED COST PROJECTED COST NOTES Project Number: N/A Prop 42 18.71 $157,000 $157,000 Project Limits: Utica Avenue from Main Street to Beach Boulevard BCIP 81.29 $682,260 $682,260 $839,260 $839,260 Type of Work: Bikeways Additional TOW: Widening of existing bike route Project Description: Construct improvements to create a"Bicycle Boulevard",where bicycling is empasized over motor vehicle use.Project includes a new traffic signal,curb bulb-outs,signing&striping improvements. Project Phase 15116 16117- 17/18 18119 19120 20121 2_123 Estimated Cost Projected Cast E $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 R $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $839,260 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $839,260 $839,260 W lM $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $839,260 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $839,260 $839,260 B Agency: Huntington Beach Project Name: Warner Avenue Traffic Signal Synchronization and Communication Equipment Upgrade FUND NAME PERCENT ESTIMATED COST PROJECTED COST NOTES Project Number: 11-OCTA-TSP-3558 M2 TSSP 79.17 $2,660 $2,660 OCTA anticipated expenditures Project Limits: blamer Avenue from Pacific Coast Hwy to Red Hill AQMD 20.83 $700 $700 Avenue $3,360 $3,360 Type of Work: Traffic Signals Additional TOW: Coordinate signals within project limits Project Description: Provide operational and infrastructure upgrades including signal timing and installation of fiber optic along WamerAvenue. Multijurisdictional project includes Caltrans and Cities of Fountain Valley, Santa Ana and Tustin. Prolact Phase W16 116117 1718 18119 19/20 20121 21/22 Estirnated Cost P[Jected Cost E $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 R $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 CA $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 O&M $1,680 $1,680 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $3,360 $3,360 $1,680 $1,680 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $3,360 $3,360 PROJECT TITLE: Arterial Rehabilitation PROJECT DESCRIPTION: This project will rehabilitate Gothard Street(Edinger to McFadden)and Center Gothard and Center Avenue (Gothard to RR-Tracks). Rehabilitation along the south and east sides will be funded by the adjacentd evelopments. PROJECT NEED: Required to meet the goals of the Pavement Management Plan FUNDING DEPARTMENT: Public Works DEPT. PROJECT MGR: SOURCE DOCUMENT: 2014 Pavement Management Plan Jim Wagner STRATEGIC PLAN GOAL: Enhance and maintain infrastructure SCHEDULE: PROJECT COSTS FY 15/16 FY 16117 FY 17/18 FY 18/19 FY 19/20 Design Complete: FY 2014/15 Design/Environmental Construction Complete: FY 2015/16 Construction $ 1,300,000 Project Management $ 60,000 Supplementals $ 40,000 Right of Way PROJECT LOCATION Other r TOTAL $ 1,400,000 FUNDING SOURCES FY 15/16 FY 16/17 FY 17/18 FY 18/19 FY 19120 Gas Tax 7 1,400,000 (I TOTAL $ 1,400,000 GT 'P °t—A— ' MAINTENANCE COST IMPACT: 11TOTAL PROJECT COST: $ 1,400,000 Edlnper av� - ' - -- Additional annual cost. None PROJECT TYPE: Rehabilitation CATEGORY: Streets COMMENTS ON GRANTS/OTHER FUNDS: CD 00 jstreets transportation Arterial Rehab Gothard &Center (D El 00 , CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH 00 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT INFORMATION(Continuing Project) PROJECT TITLE: Bridge Preventive PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Design and construction to provide preventative maintenance for City bridges. Maintenance Warner Bridge was completed in FY 14/15. Design for Magnolia and Brookhurst Bridges was completed in FY 14/15, with construction slated for FY 15/16. PROJECT NEED: Many of the City's bridges are aged and need maintenance and minor FUNDING DEPARTMENT: rehabilitation to extend their design life. Public Works DEPT. PROJECT MGR: SOURCE DOCUMENT: City-wide Bridge Study(2007) Jo Claudio STRATEGIC PLAN GOAL: Enhance and maintain infrastructure Approved Requested SCHEDULE: PROJECT COSTS Prior FY 15/16 FY 16/17 FY 17/18 FY 18/19 Design Complete: FY 2014/15 Design/Environmental $ 924,533 Construction Complete: FY 2015/16 Construction $ 2,556,000 Project Management $ 300,000 Supplementals $ 400,000 Right of Way PROJECT LOCATION Other TOTAL 4,180,533 FUNDING SOURCES Prior FY 15/16 FY 16/17 FY 17/18 FY 18/19 i Gas Tax(207) $ 708,329 Measure M(213) $ 45,000 WarnarAve Prop 42(219) $ 386,273 Water Fund(506) $ 3,040,931 TOTAL $ 4,180,533 m. MAINTENANCE COST IMPACT: OTAL PROJECT COST: $ 4,180,533 r Additional annual cost: None PROJECT TYPE: Rehabilitation CATEGORY: Streets COMMENTS ON GRANTS!OTHER FUNDS: streets transportation Bridge Preventive .......... PROJECT TITLE: Concrete Replacement PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Replace wom, damaged, lifted and broken sections of concrete sidewalk, curb and gutter, and ADA compliant curb ramps at various locations, in support of the zone maintenance program. PROJECT NEED: Identified concrete areas need replacement in order to provide safe pedestrian FUNDING DEPARTMENT: walkways and facilitate drainage. Public Works DEPT. PROJECT MGR: SOURCE DOCUMENT: Public Works Service Management System Database Denny Bacon STRATEGIC PLAN GOAL: Enhance and maintain infrastructure SCHEDULE: PROJECT COSTS FY 15/16 FY 16/17 FY 17/18 FY 18/19 FY 19/20 Design Complete: N/A Design/Environmental Construction Complete: FY 2015116 Construction $ 250,000 $ 250,000 $ 250,000 $ 250,000 $ 250,000 Project Management Supplementals Right of Way PROJECT LOCATION Other TOTAL $ 250,000J $ 250,000 $ 250,00fl $ 250,00071 $ 250,000 FUNDING SOURCES FY 15/16 FY 16117 FY 17/18 FY 18/19 FY 19/20 General Fund 100( ) $ 250,000 $ 250,000 $ 250,000 $ 250,000 $ 250,000 �\ W—M.. a TOTAL $ 250,000 $ 250,000 $ 250,000 $ 250,000 $ 250,000 MAINTENANCE COST IMPACT: 11TOTAL PROJECT COST: $ I,250,000 Additional annual cost: None PROJECT TYPE: Rehabilitation k CATEGORY: Neighborhood COMMENTS ON GRANTS l OTHER FUNDS: CD 00 `p Copy of neighborhood CIP Concrete Replacement CD 00 N O PROJECT TITLE: Edinger Widening PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Extend the right turn lane on the south side of Edinger Avenue from Beach Boulevard to Parkside Lane. PROJECT NEED: To improve operations by extending the existing right turn lane. FUNDING DEPARTMENT: Public Works DEPT. PROJECT MGR: SOURCE DOCUMENT: Beach Edinger Corridor Speck Plan Todd Broussard STRATEGIC PLAN GOAL: Enhance and maintain public safety SCHEDULE: PROJECT COSTS FY 15/16 FY 16/17 FY 17/18 FY 18/19 FY 19120 Design Complete: FY 2015/16 Design/Environmental $ 100,000 Construction Complete: FY 2015/16 Construction $ 300,000 Project Management $ 50,000 Supplementals $ 25,000 Right of Way $ 125,000 PROJECT LOCATION Other TOTAL S 600,000 FUNDING SOURCES FY 15/16 FY 16/17 FY 17/18 FY 18/19 FY 19/20 Traffic Impact Fee(206) $ 600,000 Edinger Ave. J y 03 TOTAL $ 600,000 L IL o m MAINTENANCE COST IMPACT: 11TOTAL PROJECT COST: $ 600,000 Additional annual cost: N/A PROJECT TYPE: New Construction CATEGORY: Streets COMMENTS ON GRANTS/OTHER FUNDS: streets transportation Edinger Widening PROJECT TITLE: General Street PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Replace damaged sections of concrete sidewalk, curb and gutter, repair to Maintenance potholes and failed AC at various localized areas, maintenance and operation of existing traffic signals and installation, removal and replacement of traffic striping and signage in support of the Public Works maintenance program including engineering and inspection as needed PROJECT NEED: Public works maintenance needs to provide safe pedestrian walkways,facilitate FUNDING DEPARTMENT: drainage, improve traffic congestion, and implementation of striping and signing Public Works standards DEPT. PROJECT MGR: SOURCE DOCUMENT: Public Works Service Management System Database Bob Stachelski/Denny Bacon STRATEGIC PLAN GOAL: Enhance and maintain infrastructure SCHEDULE: PROJECT COSTS FY 15/16 FY 16/17 FY 17/18 FY 18/19 FY 19/20 Design Complete: N/A Design/Environmental Construction Complete: FY 2015/16 Construction $ 1,400,000 $ 1,400,000 $ 1,400,000 $ 1,400,000 $ 1,400,000 Project Management Supplementals Right of Way PROJECT LOCATION Other f TOTAL $ 1,400,000J $ 1,400,000 $ 1,400,000 $ 1,400,000 $ 1,400,000 FUNDING SOURGE5 FY 15/16 FY 16/17 FY 17/18 FY 18/19 FY 19/20 Measure M 213 $ 1,400,000 $ 1,400,000 $ 1,400,000 $ 1,400,000 $ 1,400,000 i TOTAL $ 1,400,000 $ 1,400,00F"I $ 1,400,006'1 $ 1,400,006'1 $ 1,400,000 \ "" s MAINTENANCE COST IMPACT: OTAL PROJECT COST: $ 7,000,000 Additional annual cost: None ��• �, (t_.- PROJECT TYPE: Rehabilitation CATEGORY: Streets COMMENTS ON GRANTS/OTHER FUNDS: 00 Copy of neighborhood CIP Maintenance CD 00IN N N PROJECT TITLE: Nichols Street PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Rehabilitation of asphalt paving and miscellaneous sidewalk and curb and Rehabilitation gutter. PROJECT NEED: Nichols Street has reached its design life and is in need of rehabilitation. FUNDING DEPARTMENT: Public Works DEPT. PROJECT MGR: SOURCE DOCUMENT: 2014 Pavement Management Plan Joseph Fuentes STRATEGIC PLAN GOAL: Enhance and maintain infrastructure SCHEDULE: PROJECT COSTS FY 15/16 FY 16/17 FY 17/16 FY 18/19 FY 19/20 Design Complete: FY 2015/16 Design/Environmental Construction Complete: FY 2015/16 Construction $ 685,000 Project Management $ 25,000 Supplementals $ 25,000 Right of Way C, PROJECT LOCATION Other TOTAL $ 735,000 1 6 1 16 FY 18/19 FY 19/20 Gas Tax 7 735,000 Warner Av@nue � a s m 0coTOTAL $ 735.000 IL IL Z MAINTENANCE COST IMPACT: 1110TAL PROJECT COST: $ 735,000 Additional annual cost: None PROJECT TYPE: I CATEGORY: Neighborhood COMMENTS ON GRANTS 1 OTHER FUNDS: neighborhood (2) Nichols Rehab PROJECT TITLE: Residential Curb Ramp PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Installation of curb access ramps in conjunction with maintenance improvements Project within Zone 12. PROJECT NEED: Federal requirements mandate that curb access ramps be installed when FUNDING DEPARTMENT: adjacent streets are being overlaid or reconstructed Public Works DEPT. PROJECT MGR: SOURCE DOCUMENT: 2014 Pavement Management Plan Joseph Fuentes STRATEGIC PLAN GOAL: Enhance and maintain infrastructure SCHEDULE: PROJECT COSTS FY 15/16 FY 16/17 FY 17/18 FY 18119 FY 19120 Design Complete: FY 2015/16 Design/Environmental $ 5,000 $ 5,000 $ 5,000 $ 5,000 $ 5,000 Construction Complete: FY 2015/16 Construction $ 201,810 $ 265,000 $ 265,000 $ 265,000 $ 265,000 Project Management $ 5,000 $ 5,000 $ 5,000 $ 5,000 $ 5,000 Supplementals Right of Way PROJECT LOCATION Other TOTAL $ 211,810 $ 275,000 $ 275,000 $ 275,000 $ 275,000 FUNDING SOURCES FY 15/16 FY 16/17 FY 17/18 FY 18/19 FY 19/20 CDBG(1219) $ 134,324 $ 275,000 $ 275,000 $ 275,000 $ 275,000 CDBG(1209) $ 77,486 '. 6ohe Avc. __-- E I WFedd.n A— i TOTAL11 $ 211.810 $ 275,000 Ill $ 275,000 $ 275,000 I $ 275,000 Ne Aye MAINTENANCE COST IMPACT: HTOTAL PROJECT COST: $ 1,311,810 s Additional annual cost: None q PROJECT TYPE: Rehabilitation 8 CATEGORY: Neighborhood COMMENTS ON GRANTS 1 OTHER FUNDS: 00 i W neighborhood (2) Residential Curb Ramp Project CD 00 MEN PROJECT TITLE: Residential Tree Petition PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Rehabilitation of sidewalk, curb, gutter and roadway in conjunction with street tree removal and replacement. Streets are selected according to their rank on the Tree Petition List. This project will rehabilitate Kamuela Drive and the Brookhurst Frontage Road. PROJECT NEED: This project is necessary to provide safe, flat pedestrian walkways and eliminate FUNDING DEPARTMENT: standing water in residential neighborhoods. Public Works DEPT. PROJECT MGR: SOURCE DOCUMENT: Tree Petition List Joseph Fuentes STRATEGIC PLAN GOAL: Enhance and maintain infrastructure SCHEDULE: PROJECT COSTS FY 15/16 FY 16117 FY 17/18 FY 18/19 FY 19/20 Design Complete: FY 2015/16 Design/Environmental $ 25,000 $ 25,000 $ 25,000 $ 25,000 $ 25,000 Construction Complete: FY 2015/16 Construction $ 675,000 $ 375,000 $ 375,000 $ 375,000 $ 375,000 Project Management $ 25,000 $ 25,000 $ 25,000 $ 25,000 $ 25,000 Supplementals $ 25,000 $ 25,000 $ 25,000 $ 25,000 $ 25,000 Right of Way PROJECT LOCATION Other oc TOTAL $ 750,000 $ 450,00071 $ 450,000 $ 450,000:1 $ 450,000 FUNDING SOURCES FY 15/16 FY 16/17 FY 17/18 FY 18/19 FY 19120 rafWd Av., as Tax 7 750,000 450,000 450,000 450,557T 450,000 x � °J Ksmu la Df. i� TOTAL $ 750.000 $ 450,000 $ 450,000 $ 450,00F1 $ 450,000 YORktown Awe, MAINTENANCE COST IMPACT: OTAL PROJECT COST: $ 2,550,000 Additional annual cost: None PROJECT TYPE: Rehabilitation CATEGORY: Neighborhood COMMENTS ON GRANTS/OTHER FUNDS: neighborhood Residential Tree Petition ................. ............... ......... PROJECT TITLE: Residential Overlay Zone PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Rehabilitation of residential streets with asphalt overlay in maintenance Zone 12. 12 PROJECT NEED: Extend the useful life and improve the appearance and function of residential FUNDING DEPARTMENT: streets. Public Works DEPT. PROJECT MGR: SOURCE DOCUMENT: 2014 Pavement Management Plan Joseph Fuentes , STRATEGIC PLAN GOAL: Enhance and maintain infrastructure SCHEDULE: PROJECT COSTS FY 15/16 FY 16/17 FY 17/18 FY 18/19 FY 19120 Design Complete: FY 2015/16 Design/Environmental $ 10,000 $ 10,000 $ 10,000 $ 10,000 $ 10,000 Construction Complete: FY2015/16 Construction $ 1,980,000 $ 1,980,000 $ 1,980,000 $ 1,980,000 $ 1,980,000 Project Management $ 20,000 $ 20,000 $ 20,000 $ 20,000 $ 20,000 Supplementals $ 90,000 $ 90,000 $ 90,000 $ 90,000 $ 90,000 Right of Way PROJECT LOCATION Other TOTAL $ 2,100,000 $ 2,100,000 $ 2,100,000 $ 2,100,000 $ 2,100,000 _ FUNDING SOURCES FY 15/16 FY 16/17 FY 17/18 FY 16119 FY 19/20 Gas Tax 7 2,100,000 2,100,000 2,100,000 2,100,000 2,100,000 _.._. HJAv, McF.,M—A., TOTAL $ 2,100,000 $ 2,100,000 $ 2,100,000 $ 2,100,000 $ 2,100,000 MAINTENANCE COST IMPACT: OTAL PROJECT COST: $ 10,500,000 Neil 0.ve. Additional annual cost: ]None PROJECT TYPE: Rehabilitation � N CATEGORY: Neighborhood COMMENTS ON GRANTS/OTHER FUNDS: CD 00 tv neighborhood 2 c!� 9 � ) Residential Overlay Res. No. 2016-11 STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss: CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH ) I, JOAN L. FLYNN the duly elected, qualified City Clerk of the City of Huntington Beach, and ex-officio Clerk of the City Council of said City, do hereby certify that the whole number of members of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach is seven; that the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted by the affirmative vote of at least a majority of all the members of said City Council at a Regular meeting thereof held on March 7, 2016 by the following vote: AYES: Posey, O'Connell, Sullivan, Katapodis, Hardy, Delgleize, Peterson NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None v/ City ClVrk and ex-off icW Clerk of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach, California [7ATTAC H M E' N T #2 Dept. ID PW 15-042 Page 1 of 2 Meeting Date:8/3/2015 Approved 7-0 CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH ea gas^<• 4r REQUEST FOR. CITY COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE: 8/3/2015 SUBMITTED TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members SUBMITTED BY: Fred A. Wilson, City Manager PREPARED BY: Travis K. Hopkins, PE, Director of Public Works SUBJECT: Adopt Resolution No. 2015-40 authorizing the adoption of a Capital Improvement Program (CIP) to comply with Renewed Measure M (M2) Requirements in order to receive funding from Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) Statement of Issue: In compliance with Renewed Measure M (M2) funding eligibility, the City of Huntington Beach is required to adopt an annual resolution approving a Seven-Year Measure M2 Capital Improvement Program (CIP). Financial Impact: No additional funding is required for this resolution. Annual M2 local fair-share allocation is approximately$3.3 million for the City and several projects are allocated grants through competitive programs. Recommended Action: Adopt Resolution No. 2015-40, "A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach Adopting a Capital Improvement Program for the Years 2015/16 Through 2021/2022 for Compliance With Renewed Measure M Eligibility Requirements." Alternative Action(s): Do not adopt the resolution and forego Measure M funding eligibility. This action would result in the loss of $3.3 million for the next fiscal year, and the loss of allocated and potential grants for traffic and street improvements. Analysis: Measure M2 is a 30-year, multi-billion dollar program extension of the original Measure M (1991- 2011), in which funds are generated from retail transactions and use tax, plus an interest on earnings. Net revenues are allocated to local jurisdictions for a variety of programs indentified in Ordinance No. 3. The Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) determines if a local jurisdiction is eligible to receive M2 Fair Share and competitive funds. The City must satisfy certain requirements to maintain eligibility in order to receive funding from OCTA. A key requirement is the adoption of a Seven-Year CIP. The City's CIP identifies all capital projects funded by this program. Public Works Commission Action: Not Required Item 8. - 26 HB -1 1J- Dept. ID PW 15-042 Page 2 of 2 Meeting Date:8/3/2015 Environmental Status: Not applicable for this action. Projects are reviewed on an individual basis during design and prior to award. Strategic Plan Goal: Enhance and maintain infrastructure Attachment(s): 1. Resolution No. 2015-40, "A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach Adopting a Capital Improvement Program for the Years 2015/2016 Through 2021/2022 for Compliance With Renewed Measure M Eligibility Requirements." 2. Orange County Transportation Authority Ordinance No. 3. HB -11 I- Item 8. - 27 RESOLUTION NO. 2015-40 A RESOLUTION OF I IIF., CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH ADOPTING A CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM FOR "THE YEARS 2015/2016 THROUGH 2O21/2022 FOR COMPLIANCE WITH RFNFWF,D MEASURE M ELIGIRILITY REQUIREMENTS WHEREAS, on November 6, 1990, the Orange County voters approved the original Measure M, the revised Traffic Improvement and Growth Management Ordinance, for twenty years (1991-2011); and On November 7, 2006. the Orange County voters approved Renewed Measure M; and Renewed Measure lvl is a thirty year (2011-2041). multi-billion dollar program extension of the original Measure M; and Renewed Measure M Net Revenues are generated from the transactions and use fax plus any interest or other earnings-after allowable deductions; and Net Revenues may be allocated to local jurisdictions for a variety of programs identified in Ordinance No. 3; and Compliance with the eligibility requirements established in Ordinance No. 3 must be established and maintained in order for local jurisdictions to receive Net Revenues; and One of the eligibility requirements for Measure M is the adoption of a Capital Improvement Program for the years 2015/2016 through 2021/2022, NOW, TTlFREPORL', the City Council of the City of 1lunting(on Beach does hereby resolve as follows: That the Capital Improvement Program for Renewed Measure M, as set forth in the attached Exhibit "A" and incorporated by this reference is hereby adopted. ''z 1'199/122.529,doc Item 8. - 28 HB -112- Resolution No . 2015-40 PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the Cit}l of I funtington Beach at a regular meeting thereof hel d on the he 3 r d day of August , 2015. REVIEW ) APPROVED: APPROVED A � FORM: c Manager City Attorney INITIATED AID D APPROVED: �— Director of`hublic Works t 5-4799/122529.doc HB -113- Item 8. - 29 EXHIBIT "A" Item 8. - 30 HB -114- 6/22/2015 9easure M 1 Seven Year Capital Improvement Program (Sorted by Project Name) Fiscal Years 2015/2016 through 2021/2022 Agency: Huntington Beach y Project Name: Adams Ave.Traffic Signal Synchronization and FUND NAME PERCENT ESTIMATED COST PROJECTED COST NOTES Communication Equipment Upgrades AQMD 20.48 $1,081 $1,081 Project Limits: From Beach Blvd.to City Boundary(Multi M2 TSSP 79,52 $4,199 $4,199 OCTA anticipated expenditures Jurisdictional) Project Number: 13-OCTA-TSP-3663 $5,280 $5,280 Type of Work: Traffic Signals Additional TOW: Interconnect traffic signals to improve coordination and communication Project Description: Provide operational and infrastructure improvements Project Phase 15/16 16/17 17/18 18/19 19/20 20121 21/22 Estimated Cost Projected Cost E $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 . R $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 -11 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 :M $2,640 $2,640 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $5,280 $5,280 $2,640 $2,640 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $5,280 $5,280 t.Ae Agency: Huntington Beach 7. Project Name: Arterial Rehab:Main(Garfield-Beach),Talbert FUND NAME PERCENT' ESTIMATED COST PROJECTED COST NOTES (Gothard-Newland), Heil(Goldenwest-Edwards) M2 Fairshare 52.62 $1.110,543 $1,110,543 Project Limits: Main St.(Garfield to Beach),Talbert Ave. General Fund 47.38 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 (Gothard to Newland), Heil Ave.(Goldenwest to Project Number: Edwards) $2,110,543 $2,110,543 Type of Work: Road Maintenance Additional TOW: Rehabilitation of roadway Project Description: Pavement rehabilitation for three arterial segments Proiect Phase 15/16 16/17 17118 18/19 19/20 20/21 21I22 Estimated Cost Projected Cost E $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 H $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 `-+ $2,110.543 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,110,543 $2,110.543 CD 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 00 $2,110,543 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,110,543 $2,110,543 W z-015 leasure M 2 Seven Year Capital Imprc,.cment Program (Sorted by Project Name) Oe Fiscal Years 2015/2016 through 2021/2022 i NAgency: Huntington Beach Project Name: Arterial Rehabilitation: Adams Ave(Beach to FUND NAME - PERCENT ESTIMATED COST PROJECTED COST NOTES'' Newland)and Atlanta Ave(Beach To Newland) Other 36.20 $500.000 $500,000 Regional Surface Transportation Grant Project Limits: Adams Ave(Beach to Newland)and Atlanta Project Number: (RSTP) Ave(Beach To Newland) M2 Fairshare 63.80 $881,374 $881,374 Type of work: Road Maintenance $1,381,374 $1,381,374 Additional Tow: Rehabilitation of roadway Project Description: Pavement rehabilitation for two arterial segments Project Phase 15/16 16117 - 17118 18/19 19/20 20121 21/22 Estimated Cost Projected Cost E $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 _ $0 $0 R $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 `'1] $1,381,374 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,381,374 $1,381,374 iM $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,381,374 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,381,374 $1.381,374 r Agency: Huntington Beach Project Name: Arterial Rehabilitation: Edinger(Graham to FUND NAME - PERCENT ESTIMATED COST PROJECTED COST NOTES Springdale)and Warner(Beach to Newland) Other 29.27 $500,000 $500,000 Regional Surface Transportation Grant Project Limits: Edinger(Graham to Springdale)and Warner Project Number: (RSTP) (Beach to Newland) M2 Fairshare 70.73 $1,208,083 $1,208,083 Type of work: Road Maintenance $1,708,083 $1,708,083 Additional TOW: Rehabilitation of roadway Project Description: Pavement rehabilitation for two arterial segments Proiect Phase 15116 16117 17118 18119 19/20 20121 21122 Estimated Cost Projected Cost E $0 $0 $0. $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 R $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 C/I $1,708.083 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,708,083 $1,708.083 O&M $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,708,083 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,708,083 $1,708,083 6/22/2015 leaSUre M 3 Seven Year Capital Improvement Program (Sorted by Project Name) Fiscal Years 2015/2016 through 2021/2022 Agency: Huntington Beach Project Name: Atlanta Avenue Widening FUND NAME PERCENT ESTIMATED COST PROJECTED COST NOTES - M2ACE 7500 $1,200,000 $1,200,000 Project Limits: Atlanta Avenue(Huntington St.to Delaware St.) General Fund 25.00 $400,000 $400,000 Project Number: $1,600,000 $1,600,000 Type of work: Road Widening Additional Tow: Add 1 lane to existing roadway in project limits Project Description: This project will widen the south side of Atlanta Avenue Project Phase 15/16 16117 17118 18119 19/20 20121 21122 Estimated Cost Projected Cast E. . SO $O $O S0 ? $0 $o $0 s0 $0 R s0 s0 $0 so $0 $0 so $0 $0 �11 $1,600,000 so $0 s0 $0 $0 $0 $1,600,000 $1,600,000 j 'M $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 s0 $0 $1,600,000 $0 $0 So $0 $0 $0 $1,600,000 $1,600,000 1 Agency: Huntington Beach Project Name: Beach Boulevard and Warner Avenue FUND NAME PERCENT ESTIMATED COST PROJECTED COST., ;NOTES Intersection Improvement Impact Fees 0.00 so $0 Traffic Impact Fee Project Limits: Intersection of Beach Blvd.and Warner Ave. M210E 0.00 so $0 11-HBCH-ICE-3525 Project Number: 11-HBCH-ICE-3525 Unfunded 100.00 S378,266 $388,479 Type of work: Intersection $378,266 $388,479 Additional TOW: Add right turn lane(s)to intersection Project Description: Install northbound and westbound right turn pockets to improve traffic flow and reduce congestion Protect Phase 15/16 16/17 17118 18119 19120 20121 2122 Estimated Cost Projected Cost E $0 $0 $0 so $0 $0 So $0 $0 e~ $0 $0 SO $0 so $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $378,266 so s0 s0 $0 $0 $378,266 $388,479 A $0 s0 so $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 00 so $378,266 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $378,266 $388,479 W W ?015 1easure M 4 Seven Year Capital Improvement Program (Sorted by Project Name) 00 Fiscal Years 2015/2016 through 2021/2022 W Agency: Huntington Beach -P - Project Narne: Brookhurst Street and Adams Avenue FUND NAME PERCENT ESTIMATED COST PROJECTED COST NOTES Intersection Improvement Gas Tax 14.23 $38,284 $39,264 Project Limits: Intersection of Brookhurst St.and Adams Ave. M2 ICE 42.68 $114,850 $117,792 11-HBCH-ICE-3526 Project Number: 11-HBCH-ICE-3526 Unfunded 43.09 $115,966 $118,936 Type of work: Intersection $269,100 $275,993 Additional TOW: Add through and right turn lanes to intersection Project Description: Add through lanes and right turn pockets to intersection to improve traffic flow and reduce congestion. Proiect Phase 15/18 16l17 17118 18119 19/20 20/21 21/22 Estimated Cast Proiected Cost E $0. s0 so _ so $0 $0 s0 so $10 R $13,800 s0 s0 s0 s0 so $0 $13,800 $13,800 /1 $0 $255.300 $0 s0 so so so $2.55,300 $262,193 :M $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 s0 $0 $0 $0 1 $13,800 $255,300 so so $0 $0 s0 $269,100 $275,993 r Agency: Huntington Beach Project Name: Bushard/Adams Water Quality Project FUND NAME PERCENT ESTIMATED COST PROJECTED COST NOTES Gas Tax 35.28 S385,955 S385,955 Project Limits: Frontage median on Bushard and Adams M2 ECP Tier 11 58.14 $635,955 $635,955 Project Number: 14-HBCH-ECP-3732 Unfunded 6.58 $72,000 $72,000 Type of work: Environmental Cleanup $1,093,910 $1,093,910 Additional TOW: Irrigation system retrofits to reduce runoff Project Description: Retrofit asphalt frontage medians on Bushard Street and Adams Avenue with bio-retention swales for water quality Pr iect Phase 15/�B_ 16117 17/18 18/19 19/20 0z !zt 21/22 Estimated Cost Proiected Cost E s0 so s0 so $0 so so $0 $o R $0 so $0 so $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 C/I $1.021,910 $0 s0 So $0 $0 $0 $1,021,910 $1,021.910 O&M $0 $12,000 $12,000 $12,000 $12,000 $12,000 $12,000 $72,000 $72,000 S1,021,910 $12,000 $12,000 S12,000 $12,000 $12,000 $12,000 $1,093,910 S 1,093,910 6/22/2015 leasure M 5 Seven Year Capital Improvement Program (Sorted by Project Name) Fiscal Years 2015/2016 through 2021/2022 Agency: Huntington Beach Project Name: Edinger Avenue Traffic Signal Synchronization FUND NAME PERCENT ESTIMATED COST PROJECTED COST NOTES AQMD 22.06 $945 $945 AQMD Project Limits: Edinger Ave.from Bolsa Chica St.to State M2 TSSP 77.94 $3,339 $3,339 OCTA anticipated expenditures Route-55 Project Number: 12-OCTA-TSP-3625 $4,284 $4,284 Type of work: Traffic Signals Additional TOW: Interconnect traffic signals to improve coordination and communication Project Description: Provide operational and infrastructure improvements(multijurisdictional project including Caltrans.Westminster, Fountain Valley,and Santa Ana) City work includes signal timing and traffic signal interconnect cable. Proiect Phase 15/16 i6H7 17/18 18119 19120 20/21 21122 Estimated Cost Proiecled Cost E So $0 _ so $0 So so` so s0 $0 R so s0 s0 so $0 $0 s0 so so /1 $0 $0 So $0 $0 $0 So so $0 M $2,142 $2,142 50 so so so so $4,284 $4.284 r $2,142 $2,142 $0 $0 S0 $0 $0 $4,284 $4,284 IF 1 Agency: Huntington Beach Project Name: First Street Diversion FUND NAME PERCENT ESTIMATED COST PROJECTED COST NOTES General Fund 100.00 S8,806 $8,806 Project Limits: First St.near Pacific Coast Highway $8,806 $8,806 Project Number: 12-HBCH-ECP-3621 Type of Work: Environmental Cleanup Additional Tow: Runoff Diversion Project Description: Design and install a SCADA system and flow weir for the First Street Urban Runoff Discharge Permit with OCSD to protect water qualiity of City and Pacific Ocean Pro ieCt Phase i5/16 16117 17/18 18119 19/20 20121 21/22 Estimated cost - Protected Cost E so _ so $0 $0 so so so so So F--� so $0 $0 s0 so $0 $0 $0 $0 so so $o $0 so $0 $o $o $o V1 $1,258 $1,258 $1,258 $1,258 S1,258 $1,258 $1,258 58.806 $8,806 DO $1,258 $1,258 $1,258 $1,258 $1,258 $1,258 $1,258 $8,806 $8,806 W C.h 2015 9easure MCD 6 El Seven Year Capital Improvement Program (Sorted by Project Name) 00 Fiscal Years 2015/2016 through 2021/2022 t Agency: Huntington Beach Project Name: Goldenwest Street Traffic Signal Synchronization FUND NAME PERCENT ESTIMATED COST PROJECTED COST NOTES and Communication Equipment Upgrades AQMD 21-98 $1,431 $1,431 Project Limits: Goldenwest St_from State Route 22 to Pacific M2 TSSP 78.02 $5,077 $5,077 Coast Highway Project Number: 11-OCTA-TSP-3554 $6,508 $6,508 Type of Work: Traffic Signals Additional TOW: Coordinate signals within project limits Project Description: Provide operational and infrastructure upgrades including signal timing and installation of fiber optic cable along Goldenwest Street. Multijurisdictional project includes Calstrans and City of Westminster Pro iect Phase 15/16 17118 18/19 19/20 20121 21/22 Estimated Cost. Prtiiected Cost E $0 s0 $0 so $0 s0 $0 so $0 R $0 s0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 /I so $0 s0 s0 so s0 so s0 $0 *M $3,254 $3,254 s0 $0 $0 $0 s0 $6,508 $6,508 $3,254 $3,254 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $6,508 $6,508 tom:) G r Agency: Huntington Beach Project Name: Huntington Beach Catch Basin Retrofit Project FUND NAME PERCENT ESTIMATED COST PROJECTED COST NOTES General Fund 100.00 $35,000 $35,000 Project Limits: City-wide $35,000 $35,000 Project Number: 14-HBCH-ECP-3742 Type of work: Environmental Cleanup Additional TOW: Catchment Retrofit Project Description: Retrofit 84 existing catch basins with Bio Clean Round Curb Inlet Filters _. ProjectPhase 15J16 - 16117 17118. 18/19 19120 20/21 21/22 Estimated Cost Projected Cost E $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 s0 s0 $0 R $0 so $0 s0 so $0 so so so C/I $0 $0 $0 s0 $0 $0 so s0 $0 O&M $5,000 $5,000 s5,000 $5,000 s5,000 $5.000 $5,000 $35,000 $35,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $35,000 $35,000 6/22/2015 leasure M 7 Seven Year Capital Improvement Program (Sorted by Project Name) Fiscal Years 2015/2016 through 2021/2022 Agency: Huntington Beach Project Name: Huntington Beach Northwest Catch Basin Retrofit FUND NAME PERCENT ESTIMATED COST PROJECTED COST ,NOTES, Project General Fund 100.00 $35.000 S35,000 Project Limits: City-wide in Northwest Part of City $35,000 $35,000 Project Number: 13-HBCH-ECP-3687 Type of work: Environmental Cleanup Additional Tow: Catchment Retrofit Project Description: Retrofit 126 existing catch basins with Bic Clean Round Curb Inlet Filters and Skimmer Box Protect Phase 15/16 16117 17/18 18/19 19120 20/21 21/22 Estimated Cost 'Pro' iected Cost E $0 SO so s0 so So $0 so s0 R s0 s0 so s0 $0 $0 $0 $o $0 /1 $0 $0 $0 s0 $0 s0 $0 $0 $0 — =M S5,000 $5,000 S5.000 $5,000 $5,000 S5.000 $5,000 $35,000 S35,000 w $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $35,000 $35,000 IJ i Agency: Huntington Beach Project Name: Install Traffic Signal at Boise Chica St and Pearce FUND NAME. PERCENT ESTIMATED COST PROJECTED COST NOTES Dr and Modify Signal at Main Str/Utica HSIP 89.99 S651,900 $651,900 Project Limits: Intersection of Bolsa Chica Street and Pearce Gas Tax 10.01 $72,500 $72,500 Drive and Intersection of Main Street and Utica Project Number. Avenue $724,400 $724,400 Type of work: Traffic Signals Additional TOW: Install new traffic signal and equipment Project Description: Install and Modify Taffic Signal Proiect Phase 15/16 17118 18/19 , _ 19/20 20/21 21/22 :Estimated Cost Proiected Cost E $o s0 so S0 so s0 so s0 $o -- so $0 $0 so s0 $0 s0 s0 $0 $724.400 s0 s0 so s0 so so s724,400 S724,400 CD VI $0 s0 so so so $0 s0 s0 $0 Op $724,400 $0 $0 $0 SO $0 $0 $724,400 $724,400 W J -015 leasure M e El Seven Year Capital Improvement Program (Sorted by Project Name) pp Fiscal Years 2015/2016 through 2021/2022 i W Agency: Huntington Beach _ 00 Project Name: McFadden/Edwards and Heil/Algonquin Catch FUND NAME PERCENT ESTIMATED COST PROJECTED COST NOTES Basin Retrofit Project General Fund 100.00 $35,525 $35,525 Project Limits: City-wide $35,525 $35,525 Project Number. 11-HBCH-ECP-3573 Type of Work: Environmental Cleanup Additional TOW: Automatic Retractable Screen and other debris screens or inserts Project Description: Provide maintenance for catch basin screens Proiect Phase 15116 16117 17118- 18119 19/20 20/21 21/22 Estimated Cost Protected Cost E - $p $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0. $0 $0 R $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 ^/l $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 j 'M $5,075 $5,075 $5,075 $5,075 $5,075 $5,075 $5,075 $35,525 $35,525 v.� $5,075 $5,075 $5,075 $5,075 $5,075 $5,075 $5,075 $35,525 $35,525 � N tv i Agency: Huntington Beach Project Name: Signal Interconnect Conduit/Cable on Newland FUND NAME PERCENT ESTIMATED COST PROJECTED COST ,':;;NOTES between Warner Avenue and Ellis Avenue HSIP 89.97 $268,200 $268,200 Project Limits: between Warner Avenue and Ellis Avenue Gas Tax 10.03 $29,900 $29.900 Project Number: $298,100 $298,100 Type of Work: Traffic Signals Additional TOW: Interconnect traffic signals to improve coordination and communication Project Description: Install interconnect conduit and cable on Newland ProiectPhase. 15/i6' 16117 17118 18/19 19120 20121 21/22 Estimated Cost Protected Gast E $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 R $0 s0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 CA $298,100 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $298,100 $298,100 O&M $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $298,100 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $298,100 $298,100 6122/2015 leasure M 9 Seven Year Capital Improvement Program (Sorted by Project Name) Fiscal Years 2015/2016 through 2021/2022 Agency: Huntington Beach Project Name: Signal Modification at Goldenwest Street and Heil FUND NAME PERCENT ESTIMATED COST PROJECTED COST NOTES Avenue HSIP 89,97 S273,600 $273,600 Project Limits: Intersection of Goldenwest St.and Heil Ave. General Fund 10.03 $30,500 $30,500 Project Number: $304,100 $304,100 Type of work: Traffic Signals Additional TOW: Interconnect traffic signals to improve coordination and communication Project Description: Install left turn arrows at intersection including interconnect conduit and cable on Goldenwest from Heil Ave.to Warner Ave. Protect Phase 15/16 16117 17118 18/19 19/20 20/21 21122 Estimated Cost Projected Cost E so $0 $o $O $O $O $0 SO $0 R $0 s0 so s0 s0 so $0 SO SO '/1 $304,100 so so s0 s0 so s0 S304,100 $304,100 j `M $0 so s0 $0 $0 $0 so s0 $0 $304,100 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $304,100 $304,100 tJ L.a Agency: Huntington Beach Project Name: Signal Modification at Gothard St/Talbert Ave, FUND NAME PERCENT ESTIMATED COST PROJECTED COST, NOTES', Gpothard SUHeil Ave and Springdale SUMcFadden HSIP 89.96 $673,200 S673,200 trl Project Limits: grsections of Gothard/Talbert,Gothard/Heil, Gas Tax 10.04 $75,100 and Springdale/McFadden 275,100 Project Number: $748,300 $748,300 Type of work: Traffic Signals Additional Tow: Interconnect traffic signals to improve coordination and communication Project Description: add left turn signals and interconnect condiuti and cable ProiectI Phase 15/16 16/17 17118 18119 19/20 20121 21/22 Estimated C 11 ost Projected Cost E s0 s0 s0 so So, s0 So $0 $0: $0 $O SO $O $o $0 so $0 $0 S748,300 so so s0 (� SO SO SO $748,300 $748,300 3 s0 SO so s0 s0 SO SO $0 so 00 $748,300 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $748,300 $748,300 W 0-1 z015 leasure M 10 Seven Year Capital Improvement Program (Sorted by Project Name) Op Fiscal Years 2015/2016 through 2021/2022 t OAgency: Huntington Beach Project Name: Signal Modification at Gothard Street and Center FUND NAME PERCENT ESTIMATED COST PROJECTED COST NOTES Avenue HSIP 89.98 $357,500 $357,500 Project Limits: Intersectoin of Gothard Avenue and Center Gas Tax 10.02 $39,800 $39,800 Avenue Project Number: $397,300 $397,300 Type of work: Traffic Signals Additional Tow: Interconnect traffic signals to improve coordination and communication Project Description: Install north/south left turn arrows and installation of interconnect conduit along Gothard between McFadden and Edinger Pro'epj Phase 15/1'6 16117 17/18 18/19 19/20 20121 21122 Estimated Cost Projected Cost E $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 R $397,300 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $397.300 $397,300 ll $0 $0 so $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 aiM so $0 s0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $397,300 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $397,300 $397,300 PJ Agency: Huntington Beach Project Name: Signal Modification at Gothard Street and Slater FUND NAME PERCENT ESTIMATED COST,--, PROJECTED COST NOTES Avenue HSIP 89.98 $278,300 $278.300 Project Limits: Intersection of Gothard Street and Slater Avenue Gas Tax 10.02 $31,000 $31.000 Project Number: $309,300 $309,300 Type of work: Traffic Signals Additional TOW: Interconnect traffic signals to improve coordination and Communication Project Description: Install left turn arrows and interconnect conduit and cable on Slater Ave,from Goldwenwest to Gothard Project Phase 15/16 16117 17/18 18/19 19120 M121 21122 Estimated Cost'' Projected Cost E $0., $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 R $0 $0 s0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 C/I $309,300 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $309,300 $309,300 O&M $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $309,300 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $309,300 $309,300 6/22/2015 Leasure M 11 Seven Year Capital Improvement Program (Sorted by Project Name) Fiscal Years 2015/2016 through 2021/2022 Agency: Huntington Beach Project Name: Signal Modification at Newland Street and Ellis FUND NAME PERCENT ESTIMATED COST PROJECTED COST NOTES Avenue HSIP 89.98 $358,500 $358,500 Project Limits: Intersection of Newland Street and Ellis Avneue Gas Tax 10.02 $39,900 $39.900 Project Number: $398,400 $398,400 Type of work: Traffic Signals Additional Tow: Interconnect traffic signals to improve coordination and communication Project Description: Install left turn arrows and interconnect conduit and cable Project Phase 15/16 16/17 17118 18/19 19/20 20/21 21/22 Estimated Cost Proi%Aed Cost E $p $0 $0 $0 so $0 $0 $0 $p R $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 "/1 $398,400 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $398,400 $398.400 M $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 UZI $398,400 $0 $0 $0 s0 $0 $0 $398,400 $398,400 t� tl� Agency: Huntington Beach Project Name: Signal Modification at Newland Street and Slater FUND NAME PERCENT ESTIMATED COST ' PROJECTED COST NOTES Avenue Gas Tax 10.00 $35,100 $35.100 Project Limits: Intersection of Newalnd Street HSIP 90.00 $315,900 $315.900 Project Number: $351,000 $351,000 Type of work: Traffic Signals Additional TOW: Interconnect traffic signals to improve coordination and communication Project Description: Install left turn arrows and traffic signal controller and service for pedestrian signal Protect Phase 15/16 16/17 17118 18/19 19/20 20/21 21/22 Estimated Cost Projected Cost E $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 s0 $0 t--r $351,000 $0 $0 $0 s0 $0 $0 $351,000 $351,000 CD 5 N $0 $0 s0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 00 $351,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $351,000 $351,000 2015 Leasure M 12 El Seven Year Capital Improvement Program (Sorted by Project Name) 00 Fiscal Years 2015/2016 through 2021/2022 t NAgency: Huntington Beach Project Name: Utica Bicycle Boulevard from Main Street to FUND NAME PERCENT ESTIMATED COST PROJECTED COST NOTES Beach Boulevard Prop 42 1871 $157,000 $157.000 Project Limits: Utica Avenue from Main Street to Beach BCIP 81.29 $682.260 $682,260 Boulevard Project Number: $839,260 $839,260 Type of work: Bikeways Additional TOW: Widening of existing bike route Project Description: Construct improvements to create a"Bicycle Boulevard",where bicycling is empasized over motor vehicle use. Project includes a new traffic signal,curb bulb-outs,signing&striping improvements. Proieet Phase 15116 16117 17/18 18119 19120 20/21 21/22 Estimated Cost Projected Cost E $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 _< $0 $0 $0 $0 R $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 A $839.260 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $839,260 $839,260 ;M $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $839,260 $0 $0 $0 S0 s0 $0 $839,260 $839,260 t� r Agency: Huntington Beach Project Name: Warner Avenue Traffic Signal Synchronization FUND NAME PERCENT ESTIMATED COST PROJECTED COST NOTES and Communication Equipment Upgrade AQMD 20.83 $700 $700 Project Limits: Wamer Ave.from Pacific Coast Hwy to Red Hill M2 TSSP 79.17 $2,660 $2,660 OCTA anticipated expenditures Ave. Project Number: 11-OCTA-TSP-3558 $3,360 $3,360 Type of Work: Traffic Signals Additional TOW: Coordinate signals within project limits Project Description: Proivde operational and infrastructure upgrades including signal timing and installation of fiber optic along Warner Avenue. Multijurisdictional project includes Caltrans and Cities of Fountain Valley,Santa Ana and Tustin Proiect Phase 15/16 16117 17/18 18/19 19120 20/21 2122 Estimated Cost Protected Cost E $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $p R $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 C/I $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 O&M $1,680 $1,680 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $3,360 $3,360 $1,680 $1,680 $0 $0 $0 $0 s0 $3,360 $3,360 Res. No. 2015-40 STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss: CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH ) I, JOAN L FLYNN the duly elected, qualified City Clerk of the City of Huntington Beach, and ex-officio Clerk of the City Council of said City, do hereby certify that the whole number of members of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach is seven; that the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted by the affirmative vote of at least a majority of all the members of said City Council at a Regular meeting thereof held on August 3, 2015 by the following vote AYES: Posey, O'Connell, Katapodis, Hardy, Sullivan, Delgleize, Peterson NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None City Clork and ex-officio rk of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach, California HB -127- Item 8. - 43 T T #3 ORANGE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY ORDINANCE NO. 3 July 24, 2006 AMENDED: November 9, 2012 November 25, 2013 Orange County Local Transportation Authority 550 South Main Street Item 8. - 44 xs -128- P.O. Box 14184 Orange, CA 92863-1584 Tel: (714) 560-6282 Measure M2 Amendments Transportation Investment Plan Amendments 1. November 9, 2012 • Reallocation of Funds within Freeway Program Between SR-91 and I- 405 Ordinance Amendment 1. November 25, 2013 • Strengthens the eligibility and selection process for TOC members to prevent any person with a financial conflict of interest from serving as a member Also requires currently elected or appointed officers who are applying to serve on the TOC to complete an "Intent to Resign" form HB -129- Item 8. - 45 TABLE OF CONTENTS Ordinance No. 3 Page Preamble .... ................... . ......... ...... . ..... 1 Section 1. Title .... ....... .......... .......... . ...... .... . ... 1 Section 2. Summary... .................. . . ........... ....... ........... ..2 Section 3 Imposition of Retail Transactions and Use Tax . ........... 2 Section 4 Purposes..... ....................... ............. ..... ............ ......... 2 Section 5 Bonding Authority................................ . ............... ....... 3 Section 6 Maintenance of Effort Requirements...... .......... ....... 3 Section 7 Administration ..... . . ................. .......... ......... . ....4 Section 8 Annual Appropriations Limit.... ... ......... ........ .. .....4 Section 9 Effective and Operative Dates .. ........ ... .. ... 5 Section 10. Safeguards of Use of Revenues ..... ........ .......... . .. 5 Section 11. Ten-Year Comprehensive Program Review.. ..6 Section 12 Amendments ......................... ............ ....... ... .......... 6 Section 13 Request for Election............................ ... ........ .......... .....7 Section 14. Effect on Ordinance No. 2...... ............ . ........ .......... . 8 Section 15. Severability... ... ................ ........... ........ . .......... 8 ATTACHMENT A— Renewed Measure M Transportation Investment Plan ........ ................... A-1 ATTACHMENT B -Allocation of Net Revenues Section I Definitions..... .............................................. ........ B-1 21366910 Item 8. - 46 HB -130- Section 11. Requirements................... . . .... ........ ... .. ....... B-4 Section III. Requirements for Eligible Jurisdictions........ ....... ...... B-7 Section IV. Allocation of Net Revenues; General Provisions . .... B-10 Section V. Allocation of Net Revenues; Streets and Roads Programs/Projects. .......... ........ .......................... B-12 Section VI. Allocation of Net Revenues; Transit Programs/ Projects ...... ............ ... ... .. ..... ... B-14 Section VI I. Allocation of Net Revenues; Environmental Cleanup Projects ................. . . .. ....... ........ ... ..... B-17 ATTACHMENT C - Taxpayer Oversight Committee Section I. Purpose and Organization .... .... ........ .. ....... .......C-1 Section II Committee Membership ........ . . .... .. . ...C-1 Section III. Appointment of Members ...... ... ......... ............... ....... C-2 Section IV. Duties and Responsibilities .. ....... ......... ....... ................C-4 213669 10 HB -131- Item 8. - 47 1 Ordinance NoA 2 Renewed Measure M Transportation Ordinance and Investment Plan 3 4 PREAMBLE 5 A. Pursuant to California Public Utilities Code Section 180050, the Orange 6 County Transportation Authority ("Authority') has been designated as the Orange County 7 Local Transportation Authority by the Orange County Board of Supervisors. 8 B There has been adopted a countywide transportation expenditure plan, 9 referred to as the Orange County Transportation Investment Plan, dated July 24, 2006, 10 pursuant to California Public Utilities Code Section 180206 ("Plan"), which will be 11 administered by the Authority. 12 C The Plan provides for needed countywide transportation facility and service 13 improvements which will be funded, in part, by a transactions and use tax of one-half of one 14 percent (1/2%). 15 D. Local Transportation Ordinance Number 2 ("Ordinance No. 2") funds 16 transportation facility and service improvements through a transactions and use tax of one- 17 half of one percent (1/2%)that will be imposed through March 31, 2011. 18 E. Ordinance No. 3 ("Ordinance") provides for the continuation of the existing 19 Ordinance No 2 transactions and use tax of one-half of one percent (1/2%) for an 20 additional period of thirty (30) years to fund transportation facility and service 21 improvements 22 SECTION 1. TITLE 23 The Ordinance shall be known and may be cited as the Renewed Measure M 24 Transportation Ordinance and Investment Plan The word "Ordinance," as used in the 25 Ordinance, shall mean and include Attachment A entitled "Renewed Measure M 26 Transportation Investment Plan," Attachment B entitled "Allocation of Net Revenues," and 27 Attachment C entitled "Taxpayer Oversight Committee," which Attachments A, B and C are 28 attached hereto and incorporated by reference as if fully set forth herein 113671 11 Item 8. - 48 HB -132- 11 1 SECTION 2. SUMMARY 2 The Ordinance provides for the implementation of the Orange County Transportation 3 Investment Plan, which will result in countywide transportation improvements for freeways, 4 highways, local streets and roads, bus and rail transit, transportation-related water quality 5 ("Environmental Cleanup"), and transit services for seniors and disabled persons These 6 needed improvements will be funded by the continuation of the one-half of one percent 7 (1/2%) transaction and use tax for a period of thirty years. The revenues shall be deposited 8 in a special fund and used solely for the identified improvements authorized by the 9 Ordinance. 10 SECTION 3. IMPOSITION OF RETAIL TRANSACTIONS AND USE TAX 11 Subject to approval by the electors, the Authority hereby imposes, in the 12 incorporated and unincorporated territories of Orange County ("County"), in accordance 13 with the provisions of Part 1.6 (commencing with Section 7251) of Division 2 of the 14 California Revenue and Taxation Code and Division 19 (commencing with Section 180000) 15 of the California Public Utilities Code, continuance of the existing retail transactions and 16 use tax at the rate of one-half of one percent (1/2%) commencing April 1, 2011, for a period 17 of thirty years. This tax shall be in addition to any other taxes authorized by law, including 18 any existing or future state or local sales tax or transactions and use tax The imposition, 19 administration and collection of the tax shall be in accordance with all applicable statutes, 20 laws, rules and regulations prescribed and adopted by the State Board of Equalization. 21 SECTION 4. PURPOSES 22 All of the gross revenues generated from the transactions and use tax plus any 23 interest or other earnings thereon (collectively, "Revenues"), after the deduction for: (i) 24 amounts payable to the State Board of Equalization for the performance of functions 25 incidental to the administration and operation of the Ordinance, (11) costs for the 26 administration of the Ordinance as provided herein, (iii) two percent (2%) of the Revenues 27 annually allocated for Environmental Cleanup and (iv) satisfaction of debt service 28 requirements of all bonds issued pursuant to the Ordinance that are not satisfied out of 2 21367111 HB -133- Item 8. - 49 I 1 separate allocations, shall be defined as "Net Revenues" and shall be allocated solely for 2 the transportation purposes described in the Ordinance. 3 SECTION 5. BONDING AUTHORITY 4 "Pay as you go" financing is the preferred method of financing transportation 5 improvements and operations under the Ordinance. However, the Authority may use bond 6 financing as an alternative method if the scope of planned expenditures makes "pay as you 7 go" financing unfeasible Following approval by the electors of the ballot proposition 8 authorizing imposition of the transactions and use tax and authorizing issuance of bonds 9 payable from the proceeds of the tax, bonds may be issued by the Authority pursuant to 10 Division 19 of the Public Utilities Code, at any time before, on, or after the imposition of 11 taxes, and from time to time, payable from the proceeds of the tax and secured by a pledge 12 of revenues from the proceeds of the tax, in order to finance and refinance improvements 13 authorized by the Ordinance. 14 SECTION 6. MAINTENANCE OF EFFORT REQUIREMENTS 15 It is the intent of the Legislature and the Authority that the Net Revenues allocated to 16 a jurisdiction pursuant to the Ordinance for street and road projects shall be used to 17 supplement existing local discretionary funds being used for transportation improvements 18 Each jurisdiction is hereby required to annually maintain as a minimum no less than the 19 maintenance of effort amount of local discretionary funds required to be expended by the 20 jurisdiction for local street and road purposes pursuant to the current Ordinance No. 2 for 21 Fiscal Year 2010-2011. The maintenance of effort level for each jurisdiction as determined 22 through this process shall be adjusted effective July 1, 2014 and every three fiscal years 23 thereafter in an amount equal to the percentage change for the Construction Cost Index 24 compiled by Caltrans for the immediately preceding three calendar years, providing that 25 any percentage increase in the maintenance of effort level based on this adjustment shall 26 not exceed the percentage increase in the growth rate in the jurisdiction's general fund 27 revenues over the same time period The Authority shall not allocate any Net Revenues to 28 any jurisdiction for any fiscal year until that jurisdiction has certified to the Authority that it 3 11367111 Item 8. - 50 RB -134- 11 1 has included in its budget for that fiscal year an-amount of local discretionary funds for 2 streets and roads purposes at least equal to the level of its maintenance of effort 3 requirement. An annual independent audit may be conducted by the Authority to verify that 4 the maintenance of effort requirements are being met by the jurisdiction. Any Net 5 Revenues not allocated pursuant to the maintenance of effort requirement shall be 6 allocated to the remaining eligible jurisdictions according to the formula described in the 7 Ordinance 8 SECTION 7. ADMINISTRATION 9 The Authority shall allocate Revenues to fund facilities, services and projects as 10 specified in the Ordinance, and shall administer the Ordinance consistent with the authority 11 cited Revenues may be expended by the Authority for salaries, wages, benefits, and 12 overhead and for those services, including contractual services, necessary to carry out its 13 responsibilities pursuant to Division 19; however, in no case shall the Revenues expended 14 for salaries and benefits of Authority administrative staff exceed more than one percent 15 (1%) of the Revenues in any year The Authority shall use, to the extent possible, existing 16 state, regional and local transportation planning and programming data and expertise, and 17 may, as the law permits, contract with any public agency or private firm for services 18 necessary to carry out the purposes of the Ordinance. Expenses incurred by the Authority 19 for administrative staff and for project implementation, including contracting with public 20 agencies and private firms, shall be identified in the annual report prepared pursuant to 21 Section 10, subpart 8, of the Ordinance. 22 SECTION 8 ANNUAL APPROPRIATIONS LIMIT 23 The annual appropriations limit established pursuant to Article XIII B of the 24 California Constitution and Section 180202 of the Public Utilities Code shall be established 25 as $1,123 million for the 2006-07 fiscal year. The appropriations limit shall be subject to 26 adjustment as provided by law. All expenditures of the Revenues are subject to the 27 appropriations limit of the Authority. 28 W 4 21367111 HB -135- Item 8. - 51 I 1 SECTION 9.. EFFECTIVE AND OPERATIVE DATES 2 The Ordinance shall be effective on November 8, 2006, if two thirds of the electors 3 vote on November 7, 2006, to approve the ballot measure authorizing the extension of the 4 imposition of the existing tax The continuance of the imposition of the existing tax 5 authorized by Section 3 of the Ordinance shall be operative on April 1, 2011. 6 SECTION 10. SAFEGUARDS OF USE OF REVENUES 7 The following safeguards are hereby established to ensure strict adherence to the 8 limitations on the use of the Revenues- 9 1. A transportation special revenue fund (the "Local Transportation 10 Authority Special Revenue Fund") shall be established to maintain all Revenues 11 2 The County of Orange Auditor-Controller ("Auditor-Controller"), in the 12 capacity as Chair of the Taxpayer Oversight Committee, shall annually certify whether the 13 Revenues have been spent in compliance with the Ordinance 14 3. Receipt, maintenance and expenditure of Net Revenues shall be 15 distinguishable in each jurisdiction's accounting records from other funding sources, and 16 expenditures of Net Revenues shall be distinguishable by program or project. Interest 17 earned on Net Revenues allocated pursuant to the Ordinance shall be expended only for 18 those purposes for which the Net Revenues were allocated. 19 4. No Net Revenues shall be used by a jurisdiction for other than 20 transportation purposes authorized by the Ordinance. Any jurisdiction which violates this 21 provision must fully reimburse the Authority for the Net Revenues misspent and shall be 22 deemed ineligible to receive Net Revenues for a period of five (5) years. 23 5 A Taxpayer Oversight Committee ("Committee") shall be established to 24 provide an enhanced level of accountability for expenditure of Revenues under the 25 Ordinance. The Committee will help to ensure that all voter mandates are carried out as 26 required The roles and responsibilities of the Committee, the selection process for 27 Committee members and related administrative procedures shall be carried out as 28 described in Attachment C 11 5 �13671 11 Item 8. - 52 HB -136- 11 1 6. . -A-performance assessment shall be conducted at least once every 2 three years to evaluate the efficiency, effectiveness, economy and program results of the 3 Authority in satisfying the provisions and requirements of the Investment Summary of the 4 Plan, the Plan and the Ordinance A copy of the performance assessment shall be 5 provided to the Committee. 6 7. Quarterly status reports regarding the major projects detailed in the 7 Plan shall be brought before the Authority in public meetings 8 8. Annually the Authority shall publish a report on how all Revenues have 9 been spent and on progress in implementing projects in the Plan, and shall publicly report 10 on the findings 11 SECTION 11 TEN-YEAR COMPREHENSIVE PROGRAM REVIEW 12 At least every ten years the Authority shall conduct a comprehensive review of all 13 projects and programs implemented under the Plan to evaluate the performance of the 14 overall program and may revise the Plan to improve its performance The review shall 15 include consideration of changes to local, state and federal transportation plans and 16 policies; changes in land use, travel and growth projections, changes in project cost 17 estimates and revenue projections; right-of-way constraints and other project constraints; 18 level of public support for the Plan; and the progress of the Authority and jurisdictions in 19 implementing the Plan. The Authority may amend the Plan based on its comprehensive 20 review, subject to the requirements of Section 12. 21 SECTION 12. AMENDMENTS 22 The Authority may amend the Ordinance, including the Plan, to provide for the use 23 of additional federal, state and local funds, to account for unexpected revenues, or to take 24 into consideration unforeseen circumstances. The Authority shall notify the board of 25 supervisors and the city council of each city in the county and provide them with a copy of 26 the proposed amendments, and shall hold a public hearing on proposed amendments prior 27 to adoption, which shall require approval by a vote of not less than two thirds of the 28 Authority Board of Directors. Amendments shall become effective forty five days after 6 21367111 HB -137- Item 8. - 53 1 adoption. No amendment to the Plan which eliminates a program or project specified on 2 Page 31 of the Plan shall be adopted unless the Authority Board of Directors adopts a 3 finding that the transportation purpose of the program or project to be eliminated will be 4 satisfied by a different program or project. No amendment to the Plan which changes the 5 funding categories, programs or projects identified on page 31 of the Plan shall be adopted 6 unless the amendment to the Plan is first approved by a vote of not less than two thirds of 7 the Committee In addition, any proposed change in allocations among the four major 8 funding categories of freeway projects, street and road projects, transit projects and 9 Environmental Cleanup projects identified on page 31 of the Plan, or any proposed change 10 of the Net Revenues allocated pursuant to Section IV C 3 of Attachment B for the Local 11 Fair Share Program portion of the Streets and Roads Projects funding category, shall be 12 approved by a simple majority vote of the electors before going into effect. 13 SECTION 13. REQUEST FOR ELECTION 14 Pursuant to California Public Utilities Code Section 180201, the Authority hereby 15 requests that the County of Orange Board of Supervisors call a special election to be 16 conducted by the County of Orange on November 7, 2006, to place the Ordinance before 17 the electors To avoid any misunderstanding or confusion by Orange County electors, the 18 Authority requests that the Ordinance be identified as "Measure M" on the ballot. The ballot 19 language for the measure shall contain a summary of the projects and programs in the Plan 20 and shall read substantially as follows: 21 "Measure "M," Orange County Transportation Improvement Plan 22 Shall the ordinance continuing Measure M, Orange County's half-cent sales tax for 23 transportation improvements, for an additional 30 years with limited bonding authority to fund the following projects: 24 *25 relieve congestion on the 1-5, 1-405, 22, 55, 57 and 91 freeways; 26 * fix potholes and resurface streets, 27 * expand Metrolink rail and connect it to local communities; 28 provide transit services, at reduced rates, for seniors and disabled persons; ,13671 11 Item 8. - 54 HB -138- 11 . 1 synchronize traffic lights in every community; 2 reduce ,air and water pollution, and protect local beaches by cleaning up oil runoff 3 from roadways, 4 and establish the following taxpayer protections to ensure the funds are spent as directed 5 by the voters: 6 require an independent Taxpayer Oversight Committee to review yearly audits to ensure that voter mandates are met; 7 publish an annual report to the taxpayers on how all funds are spent, and 8 9 update the transportation improvement plan every 10 years, with voter approval required for major changes; 10 be adopted for the purpose of relieving traffic congestion in Orange County?" 11 12 SECTION 14 EFFECT ON ORDINANCE NO. 2 13 The Ordinance is not intended to modify, repeal or alter the provisions of Ordinance 14 No. 2, and shall not be read to supersede Ordinance No. 2. The provisions of the 15 Ordinance shall apply solely to the transactions and use tax adopted herein If the 16 Ordinance is not approved by the electors of the County, the provisions of Ordinance No. 2 17 and all powers, duties, and actions taken thereunder shall remain in full force and effect. 18 SECTION 15. SEVERABILITY 19 If any section, subsection, part, clause or phrase of the Ordinance is for any reason 20 held invalid, unenforceable or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, that 21 holding shall not affect the validity or enforceability of the remaining funds or provisions of 22 the Ordinance, and the Authority declares that it would have passed each part of the 23 24 25 26 27 28 s 213671 11 HB -139- Item 8. - 55 I I Ordinance irrespective of the validity of any other part. 2 APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the Orange County Local Transportation Authority I 3 on the f day of �, 2006 4 r 5 Arthur C. Brown, Chairman 6 Orange County Local Transportation Authority 7 ATTEST: 9 By: '/'J' -6t0y&"'/ Wendy Kn les, Clerk of the Board 10 Orange County Local Transportation Authority 11 9 12 13 i 14 ` rr i J 16 17 18 19 20 21 ' i 22 1 a 23 24 25 26 t 27 28 4 Item 8. - 56 xB -140- LL ATTACHMENT A 3p wl i { is r, "x ORANGE COUNTY LOCAL TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY 550 South Main Street P.O. Box 14184 Orange, CA 92863-1584taT (714) 560-5066 , 3 www.octa.net xS � to�� Item . — 57 Table of Contents Introduction...........................................................................................2 Overview........ ................NN...►1..NN.M...............................................3 Freeway Projects Overview ................................... ....................... ....... . ..................................5 Orange County Freeway Projects Map......... ......... .......................................6 1-5 Santa Ana Freeway Interchange Improvements ...........................7 -5 Santa Ana/Son Diego Freeway Improvements.. ..........................8 SR 22 Garden Grave'Freeway Access Improvements .............................9 SR-55 Costa Mesa Freeway Improvements .... . ........ .......... ...............9 SR 57 Orange Freeway Improvements . ........ ......... .......I. .............10 SR-91 Riverside Freeway'Improvements ....................................,......11 1-405 Son Diego Freeway Improvements ................................. ..............13 1-605 Freeway Access Improvements......................................... .............15 All Freeway Service Patrol ..................... .................... .............15 Streets&Roads Projects Overview ........ ......... . .. .... ..... ........ .....16 Orange County Streets and Roads Projects Map.... ......... ........ ..............17 Regional Capacity Program ...............................................................................18 Regional Traffic Signal Synchronization Program ...:.......................................19 Local Fair Share Program ,.�. .., .................. ..20 Transit Projects Overview ......... ................. .................. ................... .......... ..........21 Orange County Transit Projects Map............. ..... .............._....... ............22 High Frequency Metrolink Service. ...........................23 Transit Extensions to Metrolink ......... ......... ......... ........., ..,........23 Metrolink Gateways.,... ..24 Expand Mobility Choices for Seniors and Persons with Disabilities ............24 Community Based Transit/Circulators . ....... ......... ............w..............,.....25 Safe Transit Stops.................. .......... ........ ............... ............. ...........25 Environmental Cleanup Overview .................................... .......... ............................................................16 Project Description ................... ......... ...............................,..................27 Taxpayer Safeguards and Audits Overview ..........................................................._.........._......_................................78 Description...................... ....... ...........................,.. ' ......... .............29 Measure M Investment Summary... ..................................................31 s • • s ggrv� i �a Measure M Promises Fulfilled improve Orange County's freeway system; On November 6, 1990, Orange County voters commitment to maintaining and improving the approved Measure M, a half-cent local transportation network of streets and roads in every community; sales tax for twenty years. All of the major projects an expansion of Metrolink rail service through the promised to and approved by the voters are core of Orange County with future extensions to underway or complete. Funds that go to cities and connect with nearby communities and regional the County of Orange to maintain and improve rail systems; more transit service for seniors and local street and roads,along with transit fare disabled persons-, and funds to clean up runoff reductions for seniors and persons with disabilities, from roads that leads to beach closures. will continue until Measure M ends in 2011. The promises made in Measure M have been fulfilled. Strong Safeguards These commitments are underscored by a set of Continued Investment Needed strong taxpayer safeguards to ensure that promises Orange County continues to grow. By the year 2030, made in the Plan are kept. They include an annual Orange County's population will increase by 24 independent audit and report to the taxpayers; percent from 2.9 million in 2000 to 3.6 million in ongoing monitoring and review of spending by 2030;jobs will increase by 27 percent; and travel an independent Taxpayer Oversight Committee; on our roads and highways by 39 percent. Without requirement for full public review and update of continued investment average morning rush hour the Plan every ten years; voter approval for any speeds on Orange County freeways will fall by major changes to the Plan; strong penalties for 31 percent and on major streets by 32 percent. any misuse of funds and a strict limit of no more than one percent for administrative expenses. Responding to this continued growth and broad support for investment in Orange County's No Increase in Taxes transportation system, the Orange County The traffic improvements detailed in this plan do Transportation Authority considered the not require an increase in taxes. Renewal of the transportation projects and programs that would be existing Measure M one-half cent transportation possible if Measure M were renewed. The Authority, sales tax will enable all of the projects and together with the 34 cities of Orange County, the programs to be implemented. And by using good Orange County Board of Supervisors and thousands planning and sensible financing,projects that of Orange County citizens, participated during the are ready to go could begin as early as 2007. last eighteen months in developing a Transportation Investment Plan for consideration by the voters. Renewing Measure M The projects and programs that follow constitute A Plan for New Transportation Investments the Transportation investment Plan for the The Plan that follows is a result of those efforts. It renewal of the Measure M transportation sales tax reflects the varied interests and priorities inherent approved by Orange County voters in November in the diverse communities of Orange County. It of 1990. These improvements are necessary to includes continued investment to expand and address current and future transportation needs in Orange County and reflect the best efforts to achieve consensus among varied interests and communities throughout the County. HB -143- Item 8. - 59 3 w CLO a The Renewed Measure M Transportation Investment Freeways p y Plan is a 30-year, $11.8 billion program designed to Relieving congestion on the Riverside/Artesia reduce traffic congestion, strengthen our economy Freeway (SR-91) is the centerpiece of the freeway and improve our quality of life by upgrading program, and will include new lanes, new key freeways, fixing major freeway interchanges, interchanges, and new bridges. Other major projects maintaining streets and roads, synchronizing traffic will make substantial improvements on Interstate signals countywide, building a visionary rail transit 5 (I-5) in southern Orange County and the San system, and protecting our environment from the oily Diego Freeway (I-405) in western Orange County street runoff that pollutes Orange County beaches. The notorious Orange Crush—the intersection of The Transportation Investment Plan is focused solely the I-5, the Garden Grove Freeway(SR-22) and the on improving the transportation system and includes „ Orange Freeway(SR-57)near Angel Stadium—will tough taxpayer safeguards, including a Taxpayer be improved and upgraded. Under the Plan, major Oversight Committee,required annual audits, traffic chokepoints on almost every Orange County and regular, public reports on project progress. freeway will be remedied. Improving Orange County freeways will be the greatest investment The Renewed Measure M Transportation Investment in the Renewed Measure M program: Forty- Plan must be reviewed annually, in public session, three percent of net revenues, or $4.871 billion, and every ten years a detailed review of the Plan will be invested in new freeway construction. must take place. If changing circumstances require the voter-approved plan to be changed, those Streets and Roads changes must be taken to the voters for approval. More than 6,500 lane miles of aging streets and roads will need repair, rejuvenation and improvement. City streets and county roads need to be maintained regularly and potholes have to be filled quickly. Thirty-two percent of net revenue from the Renewed i Measure M Transportation Investment Plan, or $3.625 billion, will be devoted to fixing potholes, improving intersections, synchronizing traffic signals countywide, and making the existing countywide network of streets and roads safer and more efficient. i Item 8. - 60 HB -144— 4 Public Transit program, or $118.6 million over 30 years, will As Orange County continues to grow,building a pay for annual, independent audits, taxpayer visionary rail transportation system that is safe, ( safeguards,an independent Taxpayer Oversight clean and convenient,uses and preserves existing Committee assigned to watchdog government rights-of-way, and, over time, provides high-speed spending, and a full, public disclosure of all Renewed connections both inside and outside of Orange Measure M expenditures. A detailed review of the County, is a long term goal. Twenty-five percent program must be conducted every ten years and, of the net revenue from Renewed Measure M, or if needed, major changes in the investment plan $2.83 billion,will be dedicated to transit programs must be brought before Orange County voters for countywide. About twenty percent, or$2.24 billion, approval. Taxpayers will receive an annual report will be dedicated to creating a new countywide detailing the Renewed Measure M expenditures. high capacity transit system anchored on the Additionally, as required by law, an estimated one existing, successful Metrolink and Amtrak rail line, and a half percent of the sales taxes generated, or and about five percent, or $591 million,will be $178 million over 30 years, must be paid to the used to enhance senior transportation programs California State Board of Equalization for collecting and provide targeted, safe localized bus service. the one-half cent sales tax that funds the Renewed Measure M Transportation Investment Plan. Environmental Cleanup Every day, more than 70 million gallons of oily In this pamphlet, every specific project, program, pollution, litter, and dirty contaminants wash off and safeguard included in the Renewed Measure streets, roads, and freeways and pour onto Orange M Transportation Investment Plan is explained. County waterways and beaches. When it rains, the Similar details will be provided to every Orange- transportation-generated beach and ocean pollution County voter if the measure is placed on the ballot. increases tenfold. Under the plan, two percent of the gross Renewed Measure M Transportation Investment Plan, or $237 million, will be dedicated to protecting Orange County beaches from this transportation-generated pollution(sometimes called "urban runoff')while improving ocean water quality. Taxpayer Safeguards and Audits When new transportation dollars are approved, they should go for transportation and transportation purposes alone. No bait-and-switch. No using transportation dollars for other purposes. The original Measure M went solely for transportation purposes. The Renewed Measure M must be just as airtight. One percent of the gross Measure M HB -145- Item S. - 61 t S I y I Every day, traffic backs up somewhere on the the Garden Grove Freeway(SR-22)in a traffic tangle Orange County freeway system. And, every day, near Angel Stadium—is in need of a major face lift. freeway traffic seems to get a little worse. And the intersection of Interstate 5 and the Costa Mesa Freeway (SR-55) is also slated for major repair. In the past decade, Orange County has made major strides in re-building our aging freeway system. Pays Big Dividends But there is still an enormous amount of work Local investment in freeways also pays big dividends that needs to be done to make the freeway system in the search for other needed freeway dollars. work well. You see the need for improvement every Because of state and federal matching rules, Orange time you drive on an Orange County freeway. County's local investment in freeway projects acts as a magnet for state and federal transportation Forty-three percent of net revenues from the dollars—pulling more freeway construction Renewed Measure M.Transportation Investment Plan dollars into the county and allowing more traffic- is dedicated to improving Orange County freeways, reducing freeway projects to be built sooner. the largest portion of the 30-year transportation plan. Innovative Environmental Mitigation SR-91 is the Centerpiece A minimum of$243.5 million will be available, Making the troubled Riverside/Artesia Freeway subject to a Master Agreement,to provide for (SR-91)work again is the centerpiece of the comprehensive, rather than piecemeal, mitigation of Renewed Measure M Freeway program. The fix the environmental impacts of freeway improvements. on the SR-91 will require new lanes, new bridges, Using a proactive, innovative approach, the new overpasses, and, in the Santa Ana Canyon Master Agreement negotiated between the Orange portion of the freeway, a diversion of drivers to the County Local Transportation Authority and Foothill Corridor(SR-241) so the rest of the Orange state and federal resource agencies will provide County freeway system can work more effectively higher-value environmental benefits such as habitat protection, wildlife corridors and resource And there's more to the freeway program than the preservation in exchange for streamlined project fix of SR-91—much more. More than $1 billion approvals for the freeway program as a whole. is earmarked for Interstate 5 in South County. More than $800 million is slated to upgrade the Freeway projects will also be planned, designed San Diego Freeway(1-405) between Irvine and and constructed with consideration for their the Los Angeles County line. Another significant aesthetic, historic and environmental impacts investment is planned on the congested Costa on nearby properties and communities using Mesa Freeway(SR-55). And needed projects such elements as parkway style designs, locally designed to relieve traffic chokepoints are planned native landscaping, sound reduction and aesthetic for almost every Orange County freeway treatments that complement the surroundings. To make any freeway system work, bottlenecks at interchanges also have to be fixed. The notorious Orange Crush Interchange—where the Santa Ana Freeway1-5 meets the Orange Freeway SR-57 and C ) g y( ) _ Item 8. - 62 1- B -146- 6 1 V 3 o r a 3 v ;t� HB -147- Item 8. - 63 7 r s, oilf • 10 Try I � Project Project0 Santa Ana Freeway(1-5) Improvements Santa Ana Freeway(1-6) Improvements from the between Costa Mesa Freeway(SR-55) Costa Mesa Freeway(SR-65)to El Toro "Y"Area and "Orange Crush"Area (SR-57) Description: Description: Build new lanes and improve the interchanges Reduce freeway congestion through improvements in the area between SR-55 and the SR-133 (near at the SR-55/1-5 interchange area between the Fourth the El Toro "Y"). This segment of 1-5 is the major Street and Newport Boulevard ramps on I-5, and route serving activity areas in the cities of Irvine, between Fourth Street and Edinger Avenue on Tustin, Santa Ana and north Orange County. The SR-55. Also,add capacity on I-5 between SR-55 and project will also make improvements at local SR-57 to relieve congestion at the "Orange Crush". interchanges, such as Jamboree Road. The project The project will generally be constructed within the will generally be constructed within the existing existing right-of-way. Specific improvements will be right-of-way. Specific improvements will be subject subject to approved plans developed in cooperation to approved plans developed in cooperation with with local jurisdictions and affected communities. local jurisdictions and affected communities. The project will increase freeway capacity and reduce The project will increase freeway capacity and congestion. The current daily traffic volume on this reduce congestion. The current traffic volume segment of the I-5 between SR-55 and SR-57 is about on this segment of 1-5 is about 356,000 vehicles 389,000. The demand is expected to grow by more per day and is expected to increase by nearly 24 than 19 percent by 2030, bringing the daily usage to percent,bringing it up to 440,000 vehicles per 464,000 vehicles per day. Regional plans also include day. In addition to the projects described above, additional improvements on I-5 from the "Orange regional plans include additional improvements Crush" to SR-91 using federal and state funds. to this freeway at local interchanges,such as Culver Drive, using federal and state funds. Cost: The estimated cost to improve this Cost section of the I-5 is $470.0 million. The estimated cost to improve this section of I-5 is $300.2 million. y 3 ® t k n:t b i W T*% 1r� Item 8. - 64 1B -148- 8 z , i Project Project San Diego Freeway(1-5) Improvements Santa Ana Freeway/San Diego Freeway South of the EI Toro "Y" Local Interchange Upgrades Description: Description: Add new lanes to 1-5 from the vicinity of the El Toro Update and improve key I-5 interchanges such Interchange in Lake Forest to the vicinity of SR-73 as Avenida Pico, Ortega Highway,Avery Parkway, in Mission Viejo.Also add new lanes on 1-5 between La Paz Road, El Toro Road, and others to relieve Coast Highway and Avenida Pico interchanges to street congestion around older interchanges and reduce freeway congestion in San Clemente. The on ramps. Specific improvements will be subject project will also make major improvements at local to approved plans developed in cooperation with interchanges as listed in Project D. The project local jurisdictions and affected communities. will generally be constructed within the existing right-of-way. Specific improvements will be subject In addition to the project described above, to approved plans developed in cooperation with regional plans also include improvements to local jurisdictions and affected communities. the local interchanges at Camino Capistrano, Oso Parkway,Alicia Parkway and Barranca j The project will increase freeway capacity and Parkway using federal and state funds. reduce congestion. Current traffic volume on I-5 near the El Toro "Y"is about 342,000 vehicles per Cost: day. This volume will increase in the future by 35 The estimated cost for the 1-5 local percent, bringing it up to 460,000 vehicles per interchange upgrades is $258.0 million. day Regional plans also include construction of a new freeway access point between Crown Valley Parkway and Avery Parkway as well as new off ramps y at Stonehill Drive using federal and state funds. : i M � Cost: The estimated cost to improve these ' segments of 1-5 is $627 0 million. a , 1 ' � 1 I HB -149- Item 8. - 65 k f 4" i Project Project0 Garden Grove Freeway(SR-22) Costa Mesa Freeway(SR-5S) Improvements i Access Improvements i Description: Description: Add new lanes to SR-55 between Garden Grove Construct interchange improvements at Euclid Freeway(SR-22) and the San Diego Freeway Street, Brookhurst Street and Harbor Boulevard (I-405), generally within existing right-of-way, to reduce freeway and street congestion near these including merging lanes between interchanges to interchanges. Specific improvements will be subject smooth traffic flow. This project also provides for to approved plans developed in cooperation with j freeway operational improvements for the portion local jurisdictions and affected communities. of SR-55 between SR-91 and SR-22. The project will generally be constructed within the existing Regional plans also include the construction of right-of-way. Specific improvements will be subject new freeway-to-freeway carpool ramps to the to approved plans developed in cooperation with SR-22/1-405 interchange, and improvements to local jurisdictions and affected communities. the local interchange at Magnolia Avenue using federal and state funds. The project will increase freeway capacity and reduce congestion. This freeway carries about 295,000 Cost: vehicles on a daily basis. This volume is expected The estimated cost to improve the to increase by nearly 13 percent, bringing it up to SR-22 interchanges is $120.0 million. 332,000 vehicles per day in the future. In addition to the projects described above, regional plans also include a new street overcrossing and carpool ramps at Alton Avenue using federal and state funds. Cost: The estimated cost for these SR-55 improvements is $366.0 million. E i r EE Item 8. - 66 HB -150- 10 as Ankh Project Orange Freeway(SR-57) Improvements Description: Build a new northbound lane between Orangewood Avenue and Lambert Road. Other projects include improvements to the Lambert interchange and the addition of a northbound truck climbing b � lane between Lambert and Tonner Canyon Road. The improvements will be designed and coordinated specifically to reduce congestion at .. , , SR-57/SR-91 interchange. These improvements0 will be made generally within existing right-of- way. Specific imp rovementsrovernents will be subject to �.: approved plans developed in cooperation with a I local jurisdictions and affected communities. The project will increase freeway capacity and reduce congestion. The daily traffic volume on this freeway is about 315,000 vehicles. By 2030, this volume will increase by 15 percent, bringing it up to 363,000 vehicles per day. In addition to the project described i above, regional plans include new carpool ramps r. at Cerritos Avenue using federal and state funds. Cost: i The estimated cost to implement SR-57 improvements is $258.7 million. `, I s a;, o xs -151- Item 8. - 67 11 e r V Project Project0 Riverside Freeway(SR-91) Improvements Riverside Freeway(SR-91) Improvements from the Santa Ana Freeway(1-5) to from Orange Freeway(SR-57) to the Costa the Orange Freeway(SR-57) Mesa Freeway(SR-55) Interchange Area Description: Description: Add capacity in the westbound direction and provide i Improve the SR-91/SR-55 to SR-91/SR-57 operational improvements at on and off ramps to i interchange complex, including nearby local the SR-91 between I-5 and the Orange Freeway interchanges such as Tustin Avenue and Lakeview, (SR-57), generally within existing right-of-way, to as well as adding freeway capacity between smooth traffic flow and relieve the SR-57/SR-91 SR-55 and.SR-57. The project will generally interchange. Specific improvements will be subject be constructed within the existing right-of- to approved plans developed in cooperation with way. Specific improvements will be subject to local jurisdictions and affected communities. approved plans developed in cooperation with local jurisdictions and affected communities. The current daily freeway volume along this segment of SR-91 is about 256,000. By 2030, Current freeway volume on this segment this volume is expected to increase by nearly 13 of the SR-91 is about 245,000 vehicles per percent, bringing it up to 289,900 vehicles per d.ay. day. This vehicular demand is expected to increase by 22 percent,bringing it up to Cost: 300,000 vehicles per day in the future. The estimated cost for improvements in this segment of SR-91 is$140.0 million. Cost: The estimated cost for these improvements i to the SR-91 is $416.5 million. , s AY S g i w Yf > y x g g� r y ); Item 8. - 68 HB -152- 12 IVA Project This project also includes improvements to the segment of SR-91 between SR-241 and SR-55. Riverside Freeway(SR-91) Improvements The concept is to generally add one new lane in from Costa Mesa Freeway(SR-55)to each direction and improve the interchanges. the Orange/ Riverside County Line Today, this freeway carries about 314,000 vehicles Description: every day. This volume is expected to increase by 36 This project adds capacity on SR-91 beginning at percent,bringing it up to 426,000 vehicles by 2030. SR-55 and extending to I-1.5 in Riverside County. Cost: The first priority will be to improve the segment The estimated cost for these improvements of SR-91 east of SR-241. The goal is to provide to the SR-91 is $352.2 million. up to four new lanes of capacity between SR-241 and Riverside County Line by making best use of available freeway property, adding reversible lanes, building elevated sections and improving connections to SR-241. These projects would be constructed in conjunction with similar coordinated improvements in Riverside County extending to 1-1.5 and provide a continuous set of improvements between SR-241 and I-15. The portion of improvements in Riverside County will be paid for from other sources. Specific improvements will be subject to approved plans developed in cooperation with local jurisdictions and affected communities. 4 jyy,4 R z« .: An Project cost estimate amended on Noverr' xB -1 53_ Item S. - 69 13 Project (as adopted by the Orange County Transportation i Authority Board of Directors on October 14, San Diego Freeway(1-405) Improvements 2005) and will be developed in cooperation with between the 1-605 Freeway in Los Alamitos local jurisdictions and affected communities. area and Costa Mesa Freeway (SR-55) Today, I-405 carries about 430,000 vehicles daily. Description: The volume is expected to increase by nearly 23 Add new lanes to the San Diego Freeway between percent,bringing it up to 528,000 vehicles daily 1-605 and SR-55, generally within the existing right- by 2030. The project will increase freeway capacity of-way. The project will make best use of available and reduce congestion. Near-term regional plans freeway property, update interchanges and widen also include the improvements to the I-405/SR-73 all local overcrossings according to city and regional interchange as well as a new carpool interchange master plans. The improvements will be coordinated at Bear Street using federal and state funds. with other planned I-405 improvements in the I-405/SR-22/1-605 interchange area to the north Cost: and I-405/SR-73 improvements to the south. The The estimated cost for these improvements improvements will adhere to recommendations of to the I-405 is $1,072.8 million. the Interstate 405 Major Investment Study 104 i it Project cost estimate amended on November 9, 2012. Item 8. - 70 HB -154- 14 ON Project subject to approved plans developed in cooperation with local jurisdictions and affected communities. San Diego Freeway(1405) Improvements between Costa Mesa Freeway This segment of the freeway carries 354,000 (SR-55)and Santa Ana Freeway(1-5) vehicles a day. This number will increase by nearly 13 percent,bringing it up to 401,000 Description: vehicles per day by 2030. The project will increase Add new lanes to the freeway from SR-55 to the freeway capacity and reduce congestion. In I-5. The project will also improve chokepoints at addition to the projects described above, regional interchanges and add merging lanes near on/off plans include a new carpool interchange at Von ramps such as Lake Forest Drive, Irvine Center Karman Avenue using federal and state funds. Drive and SR-133 to improve the overall freeway operations in the I-405/1-5 El Toro "Y" area. The Cost: projects will generally be constructed within the The estimated cost for these improvements existing right-of-way. Specific improvements will be to the I-405 is $319.7 million. x i A Iz OdA vWR .. «. �. ' OR & Y 3 qq 4 p, HB -155- Item 8. - 71 15 BL2{. � y Project Project 1-605 Freeway Access Improvements Freeway Service Patrol Description: Description: Improve freeway access and arterial connection The Freeway Service Patrol (FSP) provides to 1-605 serving the communities of Los Alamitos competitively bid,privately contracted tow and Cypress. The project will be coordinated with truck service for motorists with disabled vehicles other planned improvements along SR-22 and j on the freeway system. This service helps I-405. Specific improvements will be subject to stranded motorists and quickly clears disabled approved plans developed in cooperation with vehicles out of the freeway lanes to minimize local jurisdictions and affected communities. i congestion caused by vehicles blocking traffic and passing motorists rubbernecking. Regional plans also include the addition of new freeway-to-freeway carpool ramps to the I-405/ Currently Freeway Service Patrol is available on 1-605 interchange using federal and state funds. Orange County freeways Monday through Friday This improvement will connect to interchange during peak commuting hours. This project improvements at 1-405 and SR-22 as well as would assure that this basic level of service new freeway lanes between I-405 and I-605. could be continued through 2041. As demand and congestion levels increase,this project Cost: would also permit service hours to be extended The estimated cost to make these I-605 interchange throughout the day and into the weekend_ improvements is $20.0 million. Cost: The estimated cost to support the Freeway Service Patrol Program for thirty years beyond 2011 is $150.0 million. I i I Item 8. - 72 HB -156- MIT,� � ��w'W. �� 16 RSA$ C r d I.., I Orange County has more than 6,500 lane miles Renewed Measure M provides financial incentives of aging streets and roads, many of which are in for traffic improvements that cross city and need of repair, rejuvenation and improvement. county lines, providing a seamless, county- Intersections need to be widened, traffic lights wide transportation system that's friendly to need to be synchronized, and potholes need to regional commuters and fair to local residents. be filled. And, in many cases, to make Orange County's transportation system work smoothly, we Better Cooperation need to add additional lanes to existing streets. To place a higher priority on cooperative, collaborative regional decision-making, Renewed Thirty-two percent of net revenues from the Measure M creates incentives that encourage traffic Renewed Measure M Transportation Investment lights to be coordinated across jurisdictional lines, Plan is dedicated to maintaining streets, major street improvements to be better coordinated fixing potholes, improving intersections and on a regional basis, and street repair programs to be widening city streets and county roads. a high priority countywide. To receive Measure M funding, cities and the county have to cooperate. Making the System Work Making the existing system of streets and roads The Streets and Roads program in Renewed work better—by identifying spot intersection Measure M involves shared responsibilities—local j improvements, filling potholes, repaving worn- cities and the county set their local priorities out streets—is the basis of making a countywide within a competitive, regional framework that transportation system work. That basis has to be the 1 rewards cooperation, honors best practices, and first priority. But to operate a successful, countywide encourages government agencies to work together. system of streets and roads, we need more: street widenings and traffic signals synchronized countywide. And there's more. Pedestrian safety near local schools needs to be improved. Traffic flow must be smoothed. Street repairs must be made sooner. And, perhaps most importantly, cities and the county must work together—collaboratively—to find simple, low-cost traffic solutions. tow 1113 -157- Item 8. - 73 17 FE� 77 I $ r E v SIX u i a � Signal Synchronization Network ! �.!lit �♦ t•1:! O f! Item S. - 74 HB _15$_ ' 18 r p, -gym.-, • � � E ♦ t � • Project • Roughly 1,000 miles of new street lanes remain to be completed, mostly in the form of widening Regional Capacity Program existing streets to their ultimate planned width. Completion of the system will result in a more Description: even traffic flow and efficient system, This program,in combination with local matching funds, provides a funding source to complete the Another element of this program is funding for Orange County Master Plan of Arterial Highways construction of railroad over or underpass grade (MPAH). The program also provides for intersection separations where high volume streets are impacted improvements and other projects to help improve by freight trains along the Burlington Northern street operations and reduce congestion. The Santa Fe railroad in northern Orange County. program allocates funds through a competitive process and targets projects that help traffic the most Cost: by considering factors such as degree of congestion i The estimated cost for these street relief, cost effectiveness, project readiness, etc. improvement projects is $1,132.8 million. Local jurisdictions must provide a dollar-for-dollar j match to qualify for funding, but can be rewarded with lower match requirements if they give priority to other key objectives, such as better road i maintenance and regional signal synchronization. I I i i HB -1 59- Item 8. - 75 19 v` is Project To ensure that this program is successful, cities, the County of Orange and Caltrans will be required Regional Traffic Signal Synchronization Program to work together and prepare a common traffic signal synchronization plan and the necessary Description: governance and legal arrangements before receiving This program targets over 2,000 signalized ifunds. 1n addition, cities will be required to intersections across the County for coordinated provide 20 percent of the costs. Once in place, operation. The goal is to improve the flow the program will provide funding for ongoing Of traffic by developing and implementing maintenance and operation of the synchronization regional signal coordination programs plan. Local jurisdictions will be required to that cross jurisdictional boundaries. publicly report on the performance of their signal synchronization efforts at least every three years. Most traffic signal synchronization programs today Signal equipment to give emergency vehicles are limited to segments of roads or individual cities priority at intersections will be an eligible expense and agencies. For example, signals at intersections for projects implemented as part of this program. of freeways with arterial streets are controlled by Caltrans, while nearby signals at local street II Cost: intersections are under the control of cities. This The estimated cost of developing and maintaining results in the street system operating at less than a regional traffic signal synchronization program maximum efficiency. When completed, this project for Orange County is $453.1 million. can increase the capacity of the street grid and reduce the delay by over six million hours annually. I i I I I I I i Item 8. - 76 HB -160- zo -d wm`2�E I Project * 5. Annually submit a six-year Capital Improvement I Program and commit to spend Measure Local Fair Share Program M funds within three years of receipt. b. Agree to assess traffic impacts of new Description: development and require that new This element of the program will provide flexible development pay a fair share of any funding to help cities and the County of Orange keep necessary transportation improvements. up with the rising cost of repairing the aging street 7. Agree to plan,build and operate major system. In addition, cities can use these funds for streets consistent with the countywide other local transportation needs such as residential Master Plan of Arterial Highways to ensure street projects, traffic and pedestrian safety near efficient traffic flow across city boundaries. schools, signal priority for emergency vehicles, etc. $. Participate in Traffic Forums with neighboring jurisdictions to facilitate the implementation and This program is intended to augment, rather than maintenance of traffic signal.synchronization replace, existing transportation expenditures programs and projects. This requires cities to and therefore cities must meet the following balance local traffic policies with neighboring requirements to receive the funds. cities—for selected streets—to promote more efficient traffic circulation overall. 1. Continue to invest General Fund monies 9. Agree to consider land use planning (or other local discretionary monies) for strategies that are transit-friendly, transportation and annually increase this support alternative transportation modes commitment to keep pace with inflation. including bike and pedestrian access and 2. Agree to use Measure M funds for reduce reliance on the automobile. transportation purposes only, subject to full repayment and a loss of funding The funds under this program are distributed to eligibility for five years for any misuse. cities and the County of Orange by formula once 3. Agree to separate accounting for Measure the cities have fulfilled the above requirements. The M funds and annual reporting on formula will account for population, street mileage actual Measure M expenditures. ! and amount of sales tax collected in each jurisdiction. 4. Develop and maintain a Pavement Management Program to ensure timely Cost: street maintenance and submit regular The estimated cost for this program for public reports on the condition of streets. thirty years is $2,039.1 million. 100 I 1-lB -161- Item 8. - 77 l 2 21 Building streets, roads and freeways helps fix The new, localized transit programs will bring today's traffic problems. Building a visionary transit competition to local transportation planning, system that is safe, clean and convenient focuses creating a marketplace of transportation ideas where on Orange County's transportation future. the best ideas emerge and compete for funding. The plan is to encourage civic entrepreneurship and Twenty-five percent of net revenues from the stimulate private involvement and investment. Renewed Measure M Transportation Investment Plan is allocated towards building and improving Transit Investment Criteria rail and bus transportation in Orange County. The guiding principles for all transit investments Approximately twenty percent of the Renewed are value, safety, convenience and reliability. Each Measure M funds is allocated to developing a creative local transit vision will be evaluated against clear countywide transit program and five percent of criteria, such as congestion relief, cost-effectiveness, the revenues will be used to enhance programs for readiness, connectivity, and a sound operating plan. senior citizens and for targeted, localized bus service. All transit expenditures must be consistent with In terms of bus services, more specialized transit the safeguards and audit provisions of the Plan. services, including improved van services and reduced fares for senior citizens and people with A New Transit Vision disabilities,will be provided. Safety at key bus stops The key element of the Renewed Measure M transit will be improved. And a network of community- program is improving the 100-year old Santa Fe based,mini-bus services will be developed in rail line, known today as the Los Angeles/San areas outside of the central county rail corridor. Diego (LOSSAN) rail corridor, through the heart of the county. Then,by using this well-established, operational commuter rail system as a platform for future growth, existing rail stations will be developed into regional transportation hubs that can serve as regional transportation gateways or the centerpiece of local transportation services. A series of new,well- coordinated, flexible transportation systems, each one customized to the unique transportation vision the station serves,will be developed. Creativity and good financial sense will be encouraged. Partnerships will be promoted. Transportation solutions for each transportation hub can range from monorails to local mini-bus systems to new technologies. Fresh thinking will be rewarded. Item 8. 78 HB -162- 22 I IN L;0111,kill x s +ms. a t s^$Cla 'Tad I P a ce C HB -163- Item 8. - 79 23 hd "h. z J Project Project0High Frequency Metrolink Service Transit Extensions to Metrolink Description: Description: This project will increase rail services within the Frequent service in the Metrolink corridor provides county and provide frequent Metrolink service north a high capacity transit system linking communities of Fullerton to Los Angeles. The project will provide within the central core of Orange County. This for track improvements, more trains, and other project will establish a competitive program for local related needs to accommodate the expanded service. jurisdictions to broaden the reach of the rail system to other activity centers and communities. Proposals This project is designed to build on the successes for extensions must be developed and supported of Metrolink and complement service expansion by local jurisdictions and will be evaluated against made possible by the current Measure M. The well-defined and well-known criteria as follows: service will include upgraded stations and added parking capacity; safety improvements Traffic congestion relief and quiet zones along the tracks; and frequent Project readiness,with priority given shuttle service and other means, to move to projects that can be implemented arriving passengers to nearby destinations. within the first five years of the Plan • Local funding commitments and The project also includes funding for the availability of right-of-way improving grade crossings and constructing Proven ability to attract other financial over or underpasses at high volume arterial partners, both public and private streets that cross the Metrolink tracks. Cost-effectiveness • Proximity to jobs and population centers Cost: • Regional as well as local benefits The estimated cost of capital and 0 Ease and simplicity of connections operations is $1,014.1 million. 0 Compatible, approved land uses • Safe and modern technology • A sound, long-term operating plan This project shall not be used to fund transit routes that are not directly connected to or that would be redundant to the core rail service on the Metrolink corridor. The emphasis shall be on expanding access to the core rail system and on establishing connections to communities and major activity centers that are not immediately adjacent to the Metrolink corridor. It is intended that multiple transit projects be funded through <a.J i Item 8. - 80 BB -164- 24 IDS � t �{Y I a competitive process and no single project may Project be awarded all of the funds under this program. Expand Mobility Choices for Seniors These connections may include a variety of and Persons with Disabilities transit technologies such as conventional bus, bus rapid transit or high capacity rail transit Description: systems as long as they can be fully integrated This project will provide services and programs and provide seamless transition for the users. to meet the growing transportation needs of seniors and persons with disabilities as follows: Cost: The estimated cost to implement this program One percent of net revenues will over thirty years is $1,000.0 million. stabilize fares and provide fare discounts j for bus services, specialized ACCESS I I services and future rail services Project One percent of net revenues will be available to continue and expand local Convert Metrolink Station(s)to Regional community van service for seniors through Gateways that Conned Orange County the existing Senior Mobility Program with Highspeed Rail Systems One percent will supplement existing countywide senior non-emergency Description: medical transportation services This program will provide the local improvements that are necessary to connect planned Over the next 30 years, the population age 65 future high-speed rail systems to stations and over is projected to increase by 93 percent. on the Orange County Metrolink route. Demand for transit and specialized transportation services for seniors and persons with disabilities The State of California is currently planning a is expected to increase proportionately high-speed rail system linking northern and southern California. One line is planned to Cost: terminate in Orange County. In addition, several The estimated cost to provide these programs magnetic levitation(MAGLEV) systems that over 30 years is $339.8 million. would connect Orange County to Los Angeles and San Bernardino Counties, including a link from Anaheim to Ontario airport, are also being planned or proposed by other agencies. Cost: The estimated Measure M share of the cost for these regional centers and connections is $226.6 million. xB -165- Item 8. - 81 26 ios 1 '' 4 Project Project0 Community Based Transit/Circulators Safe Transit Stops I Description: Description: This project will establish a competitive program This project provides for passenger amenities at for local jurisdictions to develop local bus transit 100 busiest transit stops across the County. The services such as community based circulators, stops will be designed to ease transfer between shuttles and bus trolleys that complement regional bus lines and provide passenger amenities bus and rail services, and meet needs in areas not such as improved shelters, lighting, current adequately served by regional transit. Projects will information on bus and train timetables and arrival need to meet performance criteria for ridership, times, and transit ticket vending machines. connection to bus and rail services, and financial viability to be considered for funding. Alt projects Cost: must be competitively bid, and they cannot The estimated cost of this project is $25.0 million. duplicate or compete with existing transit services. Cost: The estimated cost of this project is $226.5 million. I I i i i i Item S. - 82 lB -166- 26 r; IVA I i0l 3 L w IN i Every day, more than 70 million gallons of oily The environmental cleanup program is designed to pollution, litter, and dirty contamination washes supplement, not supplant, existing transportation- off streets, roads and freeways and pours onto related water quality programs. This clean-up Orange County waterways and beaches. When program must improve, and not replace, existing it rains, the transportation-generated pollution pollution reduction efforts by cities, the county, increases tenfold, contributing to the increasing and special districts. Funds will be awarded number of beach closures and environmental to the highest priority programs that improve hazards along the Orange County coast. water quality,keep our beaches and streets clean, and reduce transportation-generated pollution Prior to allocation of funds for freeway, street and along Orange County's scenic coastline. transit projects, two percent of gross revenues from the Renewed Measure M Transportation Investment Plan is set aside to protect Orange County beaches from transportation-generated pollution (sometimes called "urban runoff") and improving ocean water quality. Countywide Competitive Program Measure M Environmental Cleanup funds will be used on a countywide, competitive basis to meet federal Clean Water Act standards for controlling transportation-generated pollution by funding nationally recognized Best Management Practices, such as catch basins with state-of- the-art biofiltration systems; or special roadside landscaping systems called bioswales that filter oil runoff from streets, roads and freeways_ i rw xB -167- Item 8. - 83 27 Project The Environmental Cleanup program is subject to the following requirements: Environmental Cleanup • Development of a comprehensive countywide Description: capital improvement program for transportation Implement street and highway related water related water quality improvements quality improvement programs and projects that A competitive grant process to award funds to will assist Orange County cities, the County the highest priority,most cost-effective projects of Orange and special districts to meet.federal A matching requirement to leverage Clean Water Act standards for urban runoff. other federal, state and local funds for water quality improvements The Environmental Cleanup monies may be used for A maintenance of effort requirement to water quality improvements related to both existing ensure that funds augment, not replace and new transportation infrastructure, including existing water quality programs capital and operations improvements such as: Annual reporting on actual expenditures and an assessment of the water quality benefits provided • Catch basin screens, filters and inserts A strict limit on administrative costs • Roadside bioswales and biofiltration channels and a requirement to spend funds • Wetlands protection and restoration within three years of receipt • Continuous Deflective Separation(CDS)units Penalties for misuse of any of the • Maintenance of catch basins and bioswales Environmental Cleanup funds • Other street-related `Best Management Practices" for capturing and treating urban runoff Cast: The estimated cost for the Environmental Cleanup This program is intended to augment, not replace program is $237.2 million. In addition it is existing transportation related water quality estimated that new freeway, road and transit projects expenditures and to emphasize high-impact funded by the Renewed Measure M Transportation capital improvements over local operations and Investment Plan will include more than $165 maintenance costs. In addition, all new freeway, million for mitigating water quality impacts. street and transit capital projects will include water quality mitigation as part of project scope and cost. I i i Item 8. - 84 HB -168- 28 When new transportation dollars area roved Back to the Voters P PP they should go for transportation and transportation Of course, over the next 30 years, things will change. alone. No bait-and-switch. No using transportation Minor adjustments can be made by a 2/3 vote of the dollars for other purposes. The original Taxpayer Oversight Committee and a 2/3 vote of Measure M went solely for transportation. The the Orange County Local Transportation Authority Renewed Measure M will be just as airtight. Board of Directors. Major changes must be taken back to voters for authorization. And, every ten And there will be no hidden costs in the program. years, and more frequently if necessary, the Orange County Local Transportation Authority must Prior to allocation of funds for freeway, street and conduct a thorough examination of the Renewed transit projects, one percent of gross revenues from Measure M Investment Plan and determine if the Renewed Measure M Transportation Investment major changes should be submitted to the voters. Plans is set aside for audits, safeguards, and taxpayer protection. By state law, one and one half percent of There are other important taxpayer safeguards, the gross sales taxes generated by Measure M must be all designed to insure the integrity of the voter- paid to the California State Board of Equalization for authorized plans. But each is focused on one collecting the countywide one-half percent sales tax goal: guaranteeing that new transportation that funds the Transportation Investment Program. dollars are devoted to solving Orange County's traffic problems and that no transportation Special Trust Fund dollars are diverted to anything else. To guarantee transportation dollars are used for transportation purposes, all funds must be kept in a special trust fund. An independent, outside audit of this fund will protect against cheaters who try to use the transportation funds for purposes other than specified transportation uses. A severe punishment will disqualify any agency that cheats from receiving Measure M funds for a five-year period. j The annual audits, and annual reports detailing project progress,will be sent to Orange County taxpayers every year and will be reviewed in public session by a special Taxpayer Oversight Committee that can raise fiscal issues, ask tough questions, and must independently certify, on an annual basis, that transportation dollars have been spent strictly according to the Renewed Measure M Investment Plan. r �BL � � I i HB -169- Item 8. - 85 29 s i Taxpayer Safeguards and Audits Fed Accounting • All tax revenues and interest earned must be Description: deposited and maintained in a separate trust Implement and maintain strict taxpayer fund. Local jurisdictions that receive allocations safeguards to ensure that the Renewed Measure must also maintain them in a separate fund. M Transportation Investment Plan is delivered ! All entities receiving tax funds must as promised. Restrict administrative costs to report annually on expenditures and one percent (1%) of total tax revenues and state progress in implementing projects collection of the tax as prescribed in state law i At any time, at its discretion, the Taxpayer [currently one-and-one-half(1.5%)percent]. Oversight Committee may conduct independent reviews or audits of the spending of tax funds j Administration of the Transportation Investment The elected Auditor/Controller of Orange Plan and all spending is subject to the following County must annually certify that spending specific safeguards and requirements: is in accordance with the Plan ! Oversight Spending Requirements • All spending is subject to an Local jurisdictions receiving funds must annual independent audit abide by specific eligibility and spending • Spending decisions must be annually requirements detailed in the Streets &Roads and reviewed and certified by an independent Environmental Cleanup components of the Plan Taxpayer Oversight Committee Funds must be used only for transportation • An annual report on spending and purposes described in the Plan. The penalty progress in implementing the Plan for misspending is full repayment and loss of must be submitted to taxpayers funding eligibility for a period of five years. • No funds may be used to replace Integrity of the Plan private developer funding committed • No changes to the Plan can be made to any project or improvement without review and approval by 2/3 vote Funds shall augment, not replace existing funds of the Taxpayer Oversight Committee Every effort shall be made to maximize matching • Major changes to the Plan such as deleting state and federal transportation dollars a project or shifting projects among major spending categories (Freeways, Streets& Roads, Transit, Environmental Cleanup) must be ratified by a majority of voters • The Plan must be subject at least every ten years to public review and assessment of progress in delivery public support and changed circumstances. Any significant proposed changes to the Plan must be approved by the Taxpayer Oversight Committee and ratified by a majority of voters. i Item 8. - 86 HB -170- 30 y I I Taxpayer Oversight Committee • The committee shall consist of eleven members—two members from each of the five Board of Supervisor's districts, who shall not be elected or appointed officials—along with the I elected Auditor/Controller of Orange County • Members shall be recruited and screened for expertise and experience by the Orange County Grand Jurors Association. Members shall be selected from the qualified pool by lottery. • The committee shall be provided with j sufficient resources to conduct independent reviews and audits of spending and implementation of the Plan Collecting the Tax • The State Board of Equalization shall be paid one-and-one-half(1.5) percent of gross revenues each fiscal year for its services in collecting sales tax revenue as prescribed in Section 7273 of the State's Revenue and Taxation Code Cost: The estimated cost for Safeguards and Audits over thirty years is $296.6 million. i I I I � I I i lB -171- Item 8. - 87 31 I-5 Santa Ana Freeway Interchange Improvements $470.0 I-5 Santa Ana/San Diego Freeway Improvements Gee 1,185.2 SR-22 Garden Grove Freeway Access Improvements 0 120.0 SR-55 Costa Mesa Freeway Improvements 366.0 SR-57 Orange Freeway Improvements G 258.7 SR-91 Riverside Freeway Improvements 01 0 0 908.7 I-405 San Diego Freeway Improvements UT 1,392.5 1-605 Freeway Access Improvements 20.0 Aft All Freeway Service Patrol 150.0 Streets& Roads Projects(in mmions) $3,625.0 Regional Capacity Program ' $1,132.8 Regional Traffic Signal Synchronization Program 453.1 Local Fair Share Program 2,039.1 Transit Projects(in millions) $2,832.0 High Frequency Metrolink Service G $1,014.1 Transit Extensions to Metrolink 0 1,000.0 Metrolink Gateways 0 226.6 AVL Expand Mobility Choices for Seniors and Persons with Disabilities 339.8 Community Based Transit/Circulators 226.5 Safe Transit Stops 25.0 Environmental Cleanup(in millions) $237.2 Clean Up Highway and Street Runoff that Pollutes Beaches $237.2 Taxpayer . . . and Audits Collect Sales Taxes (State charges required by law) $178.0 Oversight and Annual Audits 118.6 ,1 ►Prniert] and K cost estimates amended on November 9, 2012. Item 8. - 88 HB -172- 1 - ATTACHMENT B 2 ALLOCATION OF NET REVENUES 3 4 1 DEFINITIONS 5 For purposes of the Ordinance the following words shall mean as stated 6 A. "Capital Improvement Program": a multi-year-year funding plan to 7 implement capital transportation projects and/or programs, including but not limited to 8 capacity, safety, operations, maintenance, and rehabilitation projects. 9 B. "Circulation Element": an element of an Eligible Jurisdiction's General 10 Plan depicting planned roadways and related policies, including consistency with the 11 MPAH 12 C. "Congestion Management Program": a program established in 1990 13 (California Government Code 65089), for effective use of transportation funds to alleviate 14 traffic congestion and related impacts through a balanced transportation and land use 15 planning process 16 D. "Eligible Jurisdiction": a city in Orange County or the County of 17 Orange, which satisfies the requirements of Section III A 18 E. "Encumbrance": the execution of a contract or other action to be 19 funded by Net Revenues. 20 F. "Environmental Cleanup" street, highway, freeway and transit related 21 water quality improvement programs and projects as described in the Plan. 22 G "Environmental Cleanup Revenues": Two percent (2%) of the 23 Revenues allocated annually plus interest and other earnings on the allocated revenues, 24 which shall be maintained in a separate account 25 H "Expenditure Report"- a detailed financial report to account for receipt, 26 interest earned and use of Measure M and other funds consistent with requirements of the 27 Ordinance. 28 I. "Freeway Project"- the planning, design, construction, improvement, B-1 21400711 HB -1 73- Item 8. - 89 1 operation or maintenance necessary for, incidental to, or convenient for a state or interstate 2 freeway. 3 J "Local Fair Share Program": a formula-based allocation to Eligible 4 Jurisdictions for Street and Road Projects as described in the Plan 5 K. "Local Traffic Signal Synchronization Plan"• identification of traffic 6 signal synchronization street routes and traffic signals within a jurisdiction. 7 L "Master Plan of Arterial Highways (MPAH)"- a countywide 8 transportation plan administered by the Authority defining the ultimate number of through 9 lanes for arterial streets, and designating the traffic signal synchronization street routes in 10 Orange County. 11 M. "Net Revenues": The remaining Revenues after the deduction for. (i) 12 amounts payable to the State Board of Equalization for the performance of functions 13 incidental to the administration and operation of the Ordinance, (ii) costs for the 14 administration of the Ordinance, (iii) two percent (2%) of the Revenues annually allocated 15 for Environmental Cleanup, and (iv) satisfaction of debt service requirements of all bonds 16 issued pursuant to the Ordinance that are not satisfied out of separate allocations 17 N "Pavement Management Plan": a plan to manage the preservation, 18 rehabilitation, and maintenance of paved roads by analyzing pavement life cycles, 19 assessing overall system performance and costs, and determining alternative strategies 20 and costs necessary to improve paved roads. 21 O "Permit Streamlining": commitments by state and federal agencies to 22 reduce project delays associated with permitting of freeway projects through development 23 of a comprehensive conservation strategy early in the planning process and the permitting 24 of multiple projects with a single comprehensive conservation strategy. 25 P. "Programmatic Mitigation": permanent protection of areas of high 26 ecological value, and associated restoration, management and monitoring, to 27 comprehensively compensate for numerous, smaller impacts associated with individual 28 transportation projects Continued function of existing mitigation features, such as wildlife B-2 91400711 Item 8. - 90 HB -174- 11 1 passages, is not included. 2 Q. "Project Final Report" certification of completion of a project funded 3 with Net Revenues, description of work performed, and accounting of Net Revenues 4 expended and interest earned on Net Revenues allocated for the project 5 R. "Regional Capacity Program", capital improvement projects to 6 increase roadway capacity and improve roadway operation as described in the Plan. 7 S. "Regional Traffic Signal Synchronization Program": competitive capital 8 and operations funding for the coordination of traffic signals across jurisdictional boundaries 9 as included in the Traffic Signal Synchronization Master Plan and as described in the Plan. 10 T. "Revenues": All gross revenues generated from the transactions and 11 use tax of one-half of one percent (1/2%) plus any interest or other earnings thereon 12 U. "State Board of Equalization": agency of the State of California 13 responsible for the administration of sales and use taxes 14 V. "Street and Road Protect": the planning, design, construction, 15 improvement, operation or maintenance necessary for, incidental to, or convenient for a 16 street or road, or for any transportation purpose, including, but not limited to, purposes 17 authorized by Article XIX of the California Constitution 18 W. "Traffic Forums": a group of Eligible Jurisdictions working together to 19 facilitate the planning of traffic signal synchronization among the respective jurisdictions 20 X. "Traffic Signal Synchronization Master Plan": an element of the 21 MPAH to promote smooth traffic flow through synchronization of traffic signals along 22 designated street routes in the County 23 Y. "Transit" the transportation of passengers by bus, rail, fixed guideway 24 or other vehicle. 25 Z. "Transit Project"- the planning, design, construction, improvement, 26 equipment, operation or maintenance necessary for, or incidental to, or convenient for 27 transit facilities or transit services 28 AA "Watershed Management Areas" areas to be established by the B-3 21400711 xB -175- Item 8. - 91 I .1- County of Orange, in cooperation with local jurisdictions, or by another public entity with 2 appropriate legal authority, for the management of water run-off related to existing or new 3 transportation projects. 4 II REQUIREMENTS 5 The Authority may allocate Net Revenues to the State of California, an Eligible 6 Jurisdiction, or the Authority for any project, program or purpose as authorized by the 7 Ordinance, and the allocation of Net Revenues by the Authority shall be subject to the 8 following requirements: 9 A. Freeway Projects 10 1 The Authority shall make every effort to maximize state and 11 federal funding for Freeway Projects. No Net Revenues shall be allocated in any year to 12 any Freeway Project if the Authority has made findings at a public meeting that the state or 13 the federal government has reduced any allocations of state funds or federal funds to the 14 Authority as the result of the addition of any Net Revenues 15 2. All Freeway Projects funded with Net Revenues, including 16 project development and overall project management, shall be a joint responsibility of 17 Caltrans, the Authority, and the affected jurisdiction(s). All major approval actions, 18 including the project concept, the project location, and any subsequent change in project 19 scope shall be jointly agreed upon by Caltrans, the Authority, and the project sponsors, and 20 where appropriate, by the Federal Highway Administration and/or the California 21 Transportation Commission. 22 3. Prior to the allocation of Net Revenues for a Freeway Project, 23 the Authority shall obtain written assurances from the appropriate state agency that after 24 the Freeway Project is constructed to at least minimum acceptable state standards, the 25 state shall be responsible for the maintenance and operation of such Freeway Project 26 4. Freeway Projects will be built largely within existing rights of 27 way using the latest highway design and safety requirements. However, to the greatest 28 extent possible within the available budget, Freeway Projects shall be implemented using B-4 �1400711 Item 8. - 92 HB -176- I I 1 Context Sensitive Design, as described in the nationally recognized Federal Highway 2 Administration (FHWA) Principles of Context Sensitive Design Standards Freeway 3 Projects will be planned, designed and constructed using a flexible community-responsive 4 and collaborative approach to balance aesthetic, historic and environmental values with 5 transportation safety, mobility, maintenance and performance goals Context Sensitive 6 Design features include: parkway-style designs, environmentally friendly, locally native 7 landscaping; sound reduction; improved wildlife passage and aesthetic treatments, designs 8 and themes that are in harmony with the surrounding communities. 9 5. At least five percent (5%) of the Net Revenues allocated for 10 Freeway Projects shall fund Programmatic Mitigation for Freeway Projects. These funds 11 shall be derived by pooling funds from the mitigation budgets of individual Freeway 12 Projects, and shall only be allocated subject to the following 13 a. Development of a Master Environmental Mitigation and 14 Resource Protection Plan and Agreement (Master Agreement) between the Authority and 15 state and federal resource agencies that includes- 16 (1) commitments by the Authority to provide for 17 programmatic environmental mitigation of the Freeway Projects, 18 (11) commitments by state and federal resource 19 agencies to reduce project delays associated with permitting and streamline the permit 20 process for Freeway Projects, 21 (111) an accounting process for mitigation obligations 22 and credits that will document net environmental benefit from regional, programmatic 23 mitigation in exchange for net benefit in the delivery of transportation improvements 24 through streamlined and timely approvals and permitting, and 25 (iv) a description of the specific mitigation actions and 26 expenditures to be undertaken and a phasing, implementation and maintenance plan 27 (v) appointment by the Authority of a Mitigation and 28 Resource Protection Program Oversight Committee ("Environmental Oversight B-5 21400711 xB -177- Item 8. - 93 1 Committee") to make recommendations to the Authority on the allocation of the Net 2 Revenues for programmatic mitigation, and to monitor implementation of the Master 3 Agreement The Environmental Oversight Committee shall consist of no more than twelve 4 members and be comprised of representatives of the Authority, Caltrans, state and federal 5 resource agencies, non-governmental environmental organizations, the public and the 6 Taxpayers Oversight Committee 7 b. A Master Agreement shall be developed as soon as 8 practicable following the approval of the ballot proposition by the electors It is the intent of 9 the Authority and state and federal resource agencies to develop a Master Agreement pnor 10 to the implementation of Freeway Projects. 11 C. Expenditures of Net Revenues made subject to a Master 12 Agreement shall be considered a Freeway Project and may be funded from the proceeds of 13 bonds issued subject to Section 5 of the Ordinance. 14 B. Transit Protects 15 1. The Authority shall make every effort to maximize state and 16 federal funding for Transit Projects. No Net Revenues shall be allocated in any year for 17 any Transit Project if the Authority has made findings at a public meeting that the state or 18 the federal government has reduced any allocations of state funds or federal funds to the 19 Authority as the result of the addition of any Revenues. 20 2. Prior to the allocation of Net Revenues for a Transit Project, the 21 Authority shall obtain a written agreement from the appropriate jurisdiction that the Transit 22 Project will be constructed, operated and maintained to minimum standards acceptable to 23 the Authority. 24 C. Street and Road Projects 25 Prior to the allocation of Net Revenues for any Street and Road 26 Project, the Authority, in cooperation with affected agencies, shall determine the entity(ies) 27 to be responsible for the maintenance and operation thereof. 28 /// B-s 91400711 Item 8. - 94 RB -178- I I 1 III. REQUIREMENTS FOR ELIGIBLE JURISDICTIONS. 2 A. In order to be eligible to receive Net Revenues, a jurisdiction shall 3 satisfy and continue to satisfy the following requirements. 4 1 Congestion Management Program. Comply with the conditions 5 and requirements of the Orange County Congestion Management Program (CMP) 6 pursuant to the provisions of Government Code Section 65089. 7 2. Mitigation Fee Program. Assess traffic impacts of new 8 development and require new development to pay a fair share of necessary transportation 9 improvements attributable to the new development 10 3. Circulation Element Adopt and maintain a Circulation Element 11 of the jurisdiction's General Plan consistent with�the MPAH. 12 4. Capital Improvement Program. Adopt and update biennially a 13 six-year Capital Improvement Program (CIP). The CIP shall include all capital 14 transportation projects, including projects funded by Net Revenues, and shall include 15 transportation projects required to demonstrate compliance with signal synchronization and 16 pavement management requirements 17 5 Traffic Forums 18 Participate in Traffic Forums to facilitate the planning of traffic 19 signal synchronization programs and projects. Eligible Jurisdictions and Caltrans, in 20 participation with the County of Orange and the Orange County Division of League of 21 Cities, will establish the boundaries for Traffic Forums. The following will be considered 22 when establishing boundaries: 23 a. Regional traffic routes and traffic patterns; 24 b. Inter jurisdictional coordination efforts; and 25 C. Total number of Traffic Forums. 26 6. Local Traffic Signal Synchronization Plan Adopt and maintain a 27 Local Traffic Signal Synchronization Plan which shall identify traffic signal synchronization 28 street routes and traffic signals; include a three-year plan showing costs, available funding B-7 21400711 RB _I79_ Item 8. - 95 1 and phasing of capital, operations and maintenance of the street routes and traffic signals, 2 and include information on how the street routes and traffic signals may be synchronized 3 with traffic signals on the street routes in adjoining jurisdictions The Local Traffic Signal 4 Synchronization Plan shall be consistent with the Traffic Signal Synchronization Master 5 Plan 6 7. Pavement Management Plan. Adopt and update biennially a 7 Pavement Management Plan, and issue, using a common format approved by the 8 Authority, a report every two years regarding the status of road pavement conditions and 9 implementation of the Pavement Management Plan 10 a. Authority, in consultation with the Eligible Jurisdictions, 11 shall define a countywide management method to inventory, analyze and evaluate road 12 pavement conditions, and a common method to measure improvement of road pavement 13 conditions. 14 b. The Pavement Management Plan shall be based on: 15 either the Authority's countywide pavement management method or a comparable 16 management method approved by the Authority, and the Authority's method to measure 17 improvement of road pavement conditions. 18 c The Pavement Management Plan shall include: 19 (1) Current status of pavement on roads; 20 (11) A six-year plan for road maintenance and 21 rehabilitation, including projects and funding, 22 (iii) The projected road pavement conditions resulting 23 from the maintenance and rehabilitation plan; and 24 (iv) Alternative strategies and costs necessary to 25- improve road pavement conditions 26 8 Expenditure Report. Adopt an annual Expenditure Report to 27 account for Net Revenues, developer/traffic impact fees, and funds expended by the 28 Eligible Jurisdiction which satisfy the Maintenance of Effort requirements. The Expenditure B-8 91400711 Item 8. - 96 xB -180- 1 1 Report shall be submitted by the end of six (6) months-following the end of the jurisdiction's 2 fiscal year and include the following: 3 a. All Net Revenue fund balances and interest earned. 4 b. Expenditures identified by type (i e , capital, operations, 5 administration, etc.), and program or project 6 9. Project Final Report. Provide Authority with a Project Final 7 Report within six months following completion of a project funded with Net Revenues 8 10 Time Limits for Use of Net Revenues. 9 a Agree that Net Revenues for Regional Capacity Program 10 projects and Regional Traffic Signal Synchronization Program projects shall be expended 11 or encumbered no later than the end of the fiscal year for which the Net Revenues are 12 programmed A request for extension of the encumbrance deadline for no more than 13 twenty-four months may be submitted to the Authority no less than ninety days prior to the 14 deadline. The Authority may approve one or more requests for extension of the 15 encumbrance deadline. 16 b. Agree that Net Revenues allocated for any program or 17 project, other than a Regional Capacity Program project or a Regional Traffic Signal 18 Synchronization Program project, shall be expended or encumbered within three years of 19 receipt. The Authority may grant an extension to the three-year limit, but extensions shall 20 not be granted beyond a total of five years from the date of the initial funding allocation. 21 c In the event the time limits for use of Net Revenues are 22 not satisfied then any retained Net Revenues that were allocated to an Eligible Jurisdiction 23 and interest earned thereon shall be returned to the Authority and these Net Revenues and 24 interest earned thereon shall be available for allocation to any project within the same 25 source program. 26 11 Maintenance of Effort. Annual certification that the Maintenance 27 of Effort requirements of Section 6 of the Ordinance have been satisfied. 28 12 No Supplanting of Funds Agree that Net Revenues shall not be B-9 214007 11 xs -181- Item 8. - 97 I 1 used to supplant developer funding which has been or will be committed for any 2 transportation project 3 13 Consider, as part of the Eligible Jurisdiction's General Plan, land 4 use planning strategies that accommodate transit and non-motonzed transportation. 5 B Determination of Non-Eligibility 6 A determination of non-eligibility of a jurisdiction shall be made only 7 after a hearing has been conducted and a determination has been made by the Authority's 8 Board of Directors that the jurisdiction is not an Eligible Jurisdiction as provided 9 hereinabove 10 IV ALLOCATION OF NET REVENUES, GENERAL PROVISIONS. 11 A Subject to the provisions of the Ordinance, including Section II above, 12 use of the Revenues shall be as follows 13 1. First, the Authority shall pay the State Board of Equalization for 14 the services and functions; 15 2. Second, the Authority shall pay the administration expenses of 16 the Authority; 17 3. Third, the Authority shall satisfy the annual allocation 18 requirement of two percent (2%)of Revenues for Environmental Cleanup, and 19 4. Fourth, the Authority shall satisfy the debt service requirements 20 of all bonds issued pursuant to the Ordinance that are not satisfied out of separate 21 allocations. 22 B After providing for the use of Revenues described in Section A above, 23 and subject to the averaging provisions of Section D below, the Authority shall allocate the 24 Net Revenues as follows 25 1. Forty-three percent (43%) for Freeway Projects, 26 2 Thirty-two percent (32%) for Street and Road Projects; and 27 3. Twenty-five percent (25%)for Transit Projects. 28 C. The allocation of thirty-two percent (32%) of the Net Revenues for B-10 91400711 Item 8. - 98 xB -182- 11 1 Street and Road Projects pursuant to Section B 2 above shall be made as follows- 2 1. Ten percent (10%) of the Net Revenues shall be allocated for 3 Regional Capacity Program projects; 4 2. Four percent (4%) of the Net Revenues shall be allocated for 5 Regional Traffic Signal Synchronization Program projects; and 6 3. Eighteen percent (18%) of the Net Revenues shall be allocated 7 for Local Fair Share Program projects. 8 D. In any given year, except for the allocations for Local Fair Share 9 Program projects, the Authority may allocate Net Revenues on a different percentage basis 10 than required by Sections B and C above in order to meet short-term needs and to 11 maximize efforts to capture state, federal, or private transportation dollars, provided the 12 percentage allocations set forth in Sections B and C above shall be achieved during the 13 duration of the Ordinance 14 E. The Authority shall allocate Net Revenues for programs and projects 15 as necessary to meet contractual, program or project obligations, and the Authority may 16 withhold allocations until needed to meet contractual, program or project obligations, except 17 that Net Revenues allocated for the Local Fair Share Program pursuant to Section C above 18 shall be paid to Eligible Jurisdictions within sixty days of receipt by the Authority 19 F. The Authority may exchange Net Revenues from a Plan funding 20 category for federal, state or other local funds allocated to any public agency within or 21 outside the area of jurisdiction to maximize the effectiveness of the Plan. The Authority and 22 the exchanging public agency must use the exchanged funds for the same program or 23 project authorized for the use of the funds prior to the exchange. Such federal, state or 24 local funds received by the Authority shall be allocated by the Authority to the same Plan 25 funding category that was the source of the exchanged Net Revenues, provided, however, 26 in no event shall an exchange reduce the Net Revenues allocated for Programmatic 27 Mitigation of Freeway Projects. 28 G. If additional funds become available for a specific project or program B-11 21400711 HB -183- Item 8. - 99 1 described in.the Plan, the Authority may allocate the Net Revenues replaced by the receipt 2 of those additional funds, in the following order of priority: first, to Plan projects and 3 programs which provide congestion relief in the geographic region which received the 4 additional funds, second, to other projects and programs within the affected geographic 5 region which may be placed in the Plan through an amendment to the Ordinance; and third, 6 to all other Plan projects and programs. 7 H. Upon review and acceptance of the Project Final Report, the Authority 8 shall allocate the balance of Net Revenues for the project, less the interest earned on the 9 Net Revenues allocated for the project 10 V ALLOCATION OF NET REVENUES; STREETS AND ROADS PROGRAMS/ 11 PROJECTS 12 A Regional Capacity Program. 13 1. Matching Funds. An Eligible Jurisdiction shall contribute local 14 matching funds equal to fifty percent (50%) of the project or program cost This local match 15 requirement may be reduced as follows: 16 a. A local match reduction of ten percent (10%) of the 17 eligible cost if the Eligible Jurisdiction implements, maintains and operates in conformance 18 with the Traffic Signal Synchronization Master Plan. A 19 b. A local match reduction of ten percent (10%) of the 20 eligible cost if the Eligible Jurisdiction either: 21 (1) has measurable improvement of paved road 22 conditions during the previous reporting period as determined pursuant to the Authority's 23 method of measuring improvement of road pavement conditions, or 24 (ii) has road pavement conditions during the previous 25 reporting period which are within the highest twenty percent of the scale for road pavement 26 conditions as determined pursuant to the Authority's method of measuring improvement of 27 road pavement conditions 28 c A local match reduction of five percent (5%) of the B-12 , �14007 11 Item 8. - 100 HB -184- 11 1 ehgible cost if the Eligible Jurisdiction does not use any Net Revenues as part of the funds 2 for the local match. 3 2 Allocations shall be determined pursuant to a countywide 4 competitive procedure adopted by the Authority. Eligible Jurisdictions shall be consulted by 5 the Authority in establishing criteria for determining priority for allocations 6 B. Regional Traffic Signal Synchronization Program. 7 1. Traffic Signal Synchronization Master Plan. 8 The Authority shall adopt and maintain a Traffic Signal 9 Synchronization Master Plan, which shall be a part of the Master Plan of Arterial Highways. 10 The Traffic Signal Synchronization Master Plan shall include traffic signal synchronization 11 street routes and traffic signals within and across jurisdictional boundaries, and the means 12 of implementing, operating and maintaining the programs and projects, including necessary 13 governance and legal arrangements. 14 2 Allocations. 15 a. Allocations shall be determined pursuant to a countywide 16 competitive procedure adopted by the Authority. Eligible Jurisdictions shall be consulted by 17 the Authority in establishing criteria for determining priority for allocations 18 b. The Authority shall give priority to programs and projects 19 which include two or more jurisdictions. 20 C. The Authority shall encourage the State to participate in 21 the Regional Traffic Signal Synchronization Program and Authority shall give priority to use 22 of transportation funds as match for the State's discretionary funds used for implementing 23 the Regional Traffic Signal Synchronization Program. 24 3 An Eligible Jurisdiction shall contribute matching local funds 25 equal to twenty percent (20%) of the project or program cost The requirement for 26 matching local funds may be satisfied all or in part with in-kind services provided by the 27 Eligible Jurisdiction for the program or project, including salaries and benefits for 28 employees of the Eligible Jurisdiction who perform work on the project or programs B-13 21400711 xB -1 8s- Item 8. - 101 1 4. An Eligible Jurisdiction shall issue a report once every three 2 years regarding the status and performance of its traffic signal synchronization activities. 3 5. Not less than once every three years an Eligible Jurisdiction 4 shall review and revise, as may be necessary, the timing of traffic signals included as part 5 of the Traffic Signal Synchronization Master Plan 6 6. An Eligible Jurisdiction withdrawing from a signal 7 synchronization project shall be required to return Net Revenues allocated for the project 8 C Local Fair Share Program 9 The allocation of eighteen percent (18%) of the Net Revenues for 10 Local Fair Share Program projects shall be made to Eligible Jurisdictions in amounts 11 determined as follows• 12 1. Fifty percent (50%) divided between Eligible Jurisdictions based 13 on the ratio of each Eligible Jurisdiction's population for the immediately preceding calendar 14 year to the total County population (including incorporated and unincorporated areas) for 15 the immediately preceding calendar year, both as determined by the State Department of 16 Finance; 17 2. Twenty-five percent (25%) divided between Eligible Jurisdictions 18 based on the ratio of each Eligible Jurisdiction's existing Master Plan of Arterial Highways 19 ("MPAH") centerline miles to the total existing MPAH centerline miles within the County as 20 determined annually by the Authority; and 21 3 Twenty-five percent (25%) divided between Eligible Jurisdictions 22 based on the ratio of each Eligible Jurisdiction's total taxable sales to the total taxable sales 23 of the County for the immediately preceding calendar year as determined by the State 24 Board of Equalization 25 VI. ALLOCATION OF NET REVENUES; TRANSIT PROGRAMS/PROJECTS 26 A. Transit Extensions to Metrolink. 27 1. The Authority may provide technical assistance, transportation 28 planning and engineering resources for an Eligible Jurisdiction to assist in designing Transit B-14 �1400711 Item 8. - 102 RB -186- 11 1 Extensions to Metrolink projects to provide effective and user-friendly connections to 2 Metrolink services and bus transit systems 3 2 To be eligible to receive Net Revenues for Transit Extension to 4 Metrolink projects, an Eligible Jurisdiction must execute a written agreement with the 5 Authority regarding the respective roles and responsibilities pertaining to construction, 6 ownership, operation and maintenance of the Transit Extension to Metrolink project 7 3. Allocations of Net Revenues shall be determined pursuant to a 8 countywide competitive procedure adopted by the Authority. This procedure shall include 9 an evaluation process and methodology applied equally to all candidate Transit Extension 10 to Metrolink projects. Eligible Jurisdictions shall be consulted by the Authority in the 11 development of the evaluation process and methodology. 12 B. Metrolink Gateways 13 1. The Authority may provide technical assistance, transportation 14 planning and engineering resources for an Eligible Jurisdiction to assist in designing 15 Regional Transit Gateway facilities to provide for effective and user-friendly connections to 16 the Metrolink system and other transit services. 17 2. To be eligible to receive Net Revenues for Regional Gateway 18 projects, an Eligible Jurisdiction, must execute a written agreement with the Authority 19 regarding the respective roles and responsibilities pertaining to construction, ownership, 20 operation and maintenance of the Regional Gateway facility 21 3 Allocations of Net Revenues shall be determined pursuant to a 22 countywide competitive procedure adopted by the Authority This procedure shall include 23 an evaluation process and methodology applied equally to all candidate Regional Gateway 24 projects Eligible Jurisdictions shall be consulted by the Authority in the development of the 25 evaluation process and methodology. 26 C. Mobility Choices for Seniors and Persons with Disabilities 27 1. An Eligible Jurisdiction may contract with another entity to 28 perform all or part of a Mobility Choices for Seniors and Persons with Disabilities project B-15 21400711 -1 87- Item 8. - 103 1 2 A senior is a person age sixty years or older. _ m_ 2 3. Allocations 3 a One percent (1%) of the Net Revenues shall be allocated 4 to the County to augment existing senior non-emergency medical transportation services 5 funded with Tobacco Settlement funds as of the effective date of the Ordinance The 6 County shall continue to fund these services in an annual amount equal to the same 7 percentage of the total annual Tobacco Settlement funds received by the County The Net 8 Revenues shall be annually allocated to the County in an amount no less than the Tobacco 9 Settlement funds annually expended by the County for these services and no greater than 10 one percent of net revenues plus any accrued interest. 11 b. One percent (1%) of the Net Revenues shall be allocated 12 to continue and expand the existing Senior Mobility Program provided by the Authority. 13 The allocations shall be determined pursuant to criteria and requirements for the Senior 14 Mobility Program adopted by the Authority 15 C. One percent (1%) of the Net Revenues shall be allocated 16 to partially fund bus and ACCESS fares for seniors and persons with disabilities in an 17 amount equal to the percentage of partial funding of fares for seniors and persons with 18 disabilities as of the effective date of the Ordinance, and to partially fund train and other 19 transit service fares for seniors and persons with disabilities in amounts as determined by 20 the Authority. 21 d In the event any Net Revenues to be allocated for seniors 22 and persons with disabilities pursuant to the requirements of subsections a, b and c above 23 remain after the requirements are satisfied then the remaining Net Revenues shall be 24 allocated for other transit programs or projects for seniors and persons with disabilities as 25 determined by the Authority. 26 D Community Based Transit/Circulators. 27 1. The Authority may provide technical assistance, transportation 28 planning, procurement and operations resources for an Eligible Jurisdiction to assist in B-16 91400711 Item 8. - 104 HB -188- 11 1 designing Community Based Transit/Circulators projects to provide-effective and user- 2 friendly transit connections to countywide bus transit and Metrolink services. 3 2. To be eligible to receive Net Revenues for Community Based 4 Transit/Circulators projects, an Eligible Jurisdiction must execute a written agreement with 5 the Authority regarding the respective roles and responsibilities pertaining to construction, 6 ownership, operation and maintenance of the Community Based Transit/Circulators project. 7 3. Allocations of Net Revenues shall be determined pursuant to a 8 countywide competitive procedure adopted by the Authority. This procedure shall include 9 an evaluation process and methodology applied equally to all candidate Community Based 10 Transit/Circulator projects. Eligible Jurisdictions shall be consulted by the Authority in the 11 development of the evaluation process and methodology. 12 4. An Eligible Jurisdiction may contract with another entity to 13 perform all or part of a Community Based Transit/Circulators project. 14 VII. ALLOCATION OF NET REVENUES: ENVIRONMENTAL CLEANUP 15 PROGRAMS/PROJECTS 16 A An Eligible Jurisdiction may contract with any other public entity to 17 perform all or any part of an Environmental Cleanup project. 18 B. Allocation Committee. 19 1. The Allocation Committee shall not include any elected public 20 officer and shall include the following twelve (12) voting members: 21 (1) one (1) representative of the County of Orange; 22 (11) five (5) representatives of cities, subject to the 23 requirement for one (1) representative for the cities in each supervisorial district, 24 (111) one (1) representative of the California Department of 25 Transportation; _ 26 (iv) two (2) representatives of water or wastewater public 27 entities; 28 (v) one (1) representative of the development industry; B-17 21400711 -189- Item 8. - 105 1 (vi) one (1) representative .of the scientific or academic 2 community; 3 (vii) one (1) representative of private or non-profit 4 organizations involved in environmental and water quality protection/enforcement matters; 5 In addition, one (1) representative of the Santa Ana Regional Water 6 Quality Control Board and one (1) representative of the San Diego Regional Water Quality 7 Control Board shall be non-voting members of the Allocation Committee. 8 2. The Allocation Committee shall recommend to the Authority for 9 adoption by the Authority the following: 10 a A competitive grant process for the allocation of 11 Environmental Cleanup Revenues, including the highest priority to capital improvement 12 projects included in a Watershed Management Area The process shall give priority to 13 cost-effective projects and programs that offer opportunities to leverage other funds for 14 maximum benefit. 15 b. A process requiring that Environmental Cleanup 16 Revenues allocated for projects and programs shall supplement and not supplant funding 17 from other sources for transportation related water quality projects and programs. 18 C. Allocation of Environmental Cleanup Revenues for 19 proposed projects and programs 20 d. An annual reporting procedure and a method to assess 21 the water quality benefits provided by completed projects and programs. 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 B-18 91400711 Item 8. - 106 HB _190_ 11 1 ATTACHMENT C 2 TAXPAYER OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE 3 4 I. PURPOSE AND ORGANIZATION A Taxpayer Oversight Committee 5 ("Committee") is hereby established for the purpose of overseeing compliance with the 6 Ordinance as specified in Section IV hereof. The Committee shall be organized and 7 convened before any Revenues are collected or spent pursuant to the Ordinance 8 II. COMMITTEE MEMBERSHIP. The Committee shall be governed by eleven 9 members ("Member'). The composition of the Committee membership shall be subject to 10 the following provisions. 11 A Geographic Balance The membership of the Committee shall be 12 geographically balanced at all times as follows: 13 1. There shall be two Members appointed from each of the 14 County's supervisonal districts (individually, "District"); and 15 2. The Auditor-Controller shall be a Member and chairman 16 ("Chair') of the Committee. 17 ' B Member Term. Each Member, except the Auditor-Controller and 18 as provided in Section III B 2 below, shall be appointed for a term of three years; provided, 19 however, that any Member appointed to replace a Member who has resigned or been 20 removed shall serve only the balance of such Member's unexpired term, and no person 21 shall serve as a Member for a period in excess of six consecutive years 22 C. Resignation. Any Member may, at any time, resign from the 23 Committee upon written notice delivered to the Auditor-Controller Acceptance of any 24 public office, the filing of an intent to seek public office, including a filing under California 25 Government Code Section 85200, or change of residence to outside the District shall 26 constitute a Member's automatic resignation. 27 D. Removal. Any Member who has three consecutive unexcused 28 absences from meetings of the Committee shall be removed as a Member. An absence 5017798 -191 "� Item 8. - 107 1 from a Committee meeting shall be considered unexcused unless, prior to or after such 2 absence (i) the Member submits to each of the other Members a written request to excuse 3 such absence, which request shall state the reason for such absence and any special 4 circumstances existing with respect to such absence; and (ii) a majority of the other 5 Members agree to excuse such absence 6 E. Reappointment. Any former Member may be reappointed. 7 III APPOINTMENT OF MEMBERS. 8 A. Membership Recommendation Panel. 9 1. The Authority shall contract with the Orange County Grand 10 Jurors' Association for the formation of a committee membership recommendation panel 11 ("Panel") to perform the duties set forth in this subsection III A If the Orange County Grand 12 Jurors' Association refuses or fails to act in such capacity, the Authority shall contract with 13 another independent organization selected by the Authority for the formation of the Panel. 14 2. The Panel shall have five members who shall screen and 15 recommend potential candidates for Committee membership. 16 3. The Panel shall solicit, collect and review applications from 17 potential candidates for membership on the Committee. No currently elected or appointed 18 officer of any public entity ("Public Officer') will be eligible to serve as a Member, except the 19 Auditor-Controller, and a Public Officer shall complete an Intent to Resign form, which shall 20 be provided as part of the application and submitted as part of the initial application 21 process. Failure to submit an Intent to Resign form will deem such Public Officer ineligible 22 for consideration to serve as a Member In addition, a person who has a financial conflict 23 of interest with regard to the allocation of Revenues will be deemed ineligible for 24 consideration to serve as a Member. A Member shall reside within the District the Member 25 is appointed to represent. Subject to the foregoing restrictions, the Panel shall evaluate 26 each potential candidate on the basis of the following criteria. 27 a. Commitment and ability to participate in Committee 28 meetings; Item 8. - 108,798 HB _192- 11 1 _ _ b Demonstrated interest and history of participation in 2 community activities, with special emphasis on transportation-related activities; and 3 C. Lack of conflicts of interest with respect to the allocation 4 of Revenues. 5 4. For initial membership on the Committee, the Panel shall 6 recommend to the Authority at least five candidates from each of the two Districts that are 7 represented by one member on the Ordinance No. 2, Citizens Oversight Committee 8 ("COC") as of the date the Authority appoints the initial Members Thereafter, the Panel 9 shall recommend to the Authority at least five candidates for filing each vacancy on the 10 Committee. 11 B. Initial Members. 12 1. The COC members, as of the date the Authority appoints the 13 initial Members of the Committee, shall be appointed as initial Members of the Committee. 14 These Members shall each serve until each of their respective terms as a member of the 15 COC expires 16 2. Two additional initial Members shall be appointed The 17 Authority shall place the names of the candidates recommended by the Panel on equally- 18 sized cards which shall be deposited randomly in a container. In public session, the 19 Chairman of the Authority will draw a sufficient number of names from said container to 20 allocate Committee membership in accordance with the membership requirements and 21 restrictions set forth in Section II hereof. The first person whose name is drawn shall be 22 appointed to serve a term of three years Thereafter, the person whose name is drawn 23 who is not from the same District as the first person whose name is drawn shall be 24 appointed to serve a term of two years. 25 C. Member Vacancy. A member vacancy, however caused, shall be 26 filled by the Authority. A Member shall be appointed on or about July 1 to replace a 27 Member whose term has expired. A Member may be appointed at any time as necessary 28 to replace a Member who has resigned or been removed. The Authority shall place the 5077798 HB "193^"3 Item 8. - 109 1 1 names of the candidates recommended by the Panel for the appointment on equally-sized 2 cards which shall be deposited randomly in a container. In a public session, the Chairman 3 of the Authority will draw one name from said container for each vacancy on the 4 Committee The person whose name is so drawn shall be appointed by the Authority to fill 5 the vacancy 6 IV DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES. The Committee is hereby charged 7 with the following duties and responsibilities- 8 A. The initial Members shall convene to adopt such procedural rules and 9 regulations as are necessary to govern the conduct of Committee meetings, including, but 10 not limited to, those governing the calling, noticing and location of Committee meetings, as 11 well as Committee quorum requirements and voting procedures. The Committee may 12 select its own officers, including, but not limited to, a Committee co-chair who will be the 13 primary spokesperson for the Committee. 14 B The Committee shall approve, by a vote of not less than two thirds of 15 all Committee members, any amendment to the Plan proposed by the Authority which 16 changes the funding categories, programs or projects identified on page 31 of the Plan 17 C. The Committee shall receive and review the following documents 18 submitted by each Eligible Jurisdiction, 19 1. Congestion Management Program; 20 2. Mitigation Fee Program; 21 3. Expenditure Report; 22 4 Local Traffic Signal Synchronization Plan; and 23 5 Pavement Management Plan 24 D. The Committee shall review yearly audits and hold an annual public 25 hearing to determine whether the Authority is proceeding in accordance with the Plan. The 26 Chair shall annually certify whether the Revenues have been spent in compliance with the 27 Plan. In addition, the Committee may issue reports, from time to time, on the progress of 28 the transportation projects described in the Plan Item 8. - 1101798 HB -194- - 11 1 E. The Committee shall receive and review the performance assessment 2 conducted by the Authority at least once every three years to review the performance of the 3 Authority in carrying out the purposes of the Ordinance. 4 F Except as otherwise provided by the Ordinance, the Committee may 5 contract, through the Authority, for independent analysis or examination of issues within the 6 Committee's purview or for other assistance as it determines to be necessary. 7 G. The Committee may submit a written request to the Authority to explain 8 any perceived deviations from the Plan. The Authonty's Chair must respond to such 9 request, in writing, within sixty days after receipt of the same 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 5077798 HB -195- Item 8. - 111 I