Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAdopt Resolution No. 2017-14 concerning the status and updat Dept. ID PW 17-025 Page 1 of 2 Meeting Date:6/19/2017 CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH REQUEST FOR. CITY COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE: 6/19/2017 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. 2017-14 concerning the status and update of the City's Circulation Element, Local Signal Synchronization Plan (LSSP), and Mitigation Fee Program for the Measure M (M2) Program Statement of Issue: To be eligible for Measure M2 funding, the City is required to adopt a resolution informing the Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) that the City's Circulation Element is in the conformance with the Master Plan of Arterial Highways (MPAH), adopt the City's Local Signal Synchronization Plan (LSSP) and that it is in conformance with the Regional Traffic Signal Synchronization Master Plan (RTSSMP), and reaffirm concurrence with the existing City's Mitigation Fee Program. Financial Impact: No additional funding is required. Measure M2 funds of approximately $4 million have been authorized by OCTA and additional grant opportunities are anticipated with Measure M2. Recommended Action: Adopt Resolution No. 2017-14, "A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach Concerning the Status and Update of the Circulation Element, Local Signal Synchronization Plan, and Mitigation Fee Program, for the Measure M (M2) Program." Alternative Action(s): Do not adopt a resolution and forego the eligibility for Measure M2 funding. Analysis: The City is required to adopt a resolution biennially, informing OCTA that the City's Circulation Element is in conformance with the MPAH and whether any changes to any arterial highways of the Circulation Element have been adopted by the City. The City must update the LSSP every three years to be consistent with the RTSSMP. In addition, the City Council must reaffirm that the City concurs with the existing mitigation fee program. The following are descriptions of the resolution items: Circulation Element/MPAH Consistency A Circulation Element is one component of the City's General Plan that depicts a planned multimodal network and related policies. The City's Circulation Element defines the minimum planned lane configurations for major roads and shall be consistent with the OCTA MPAH, which Item 9. - 1 HB -102- Dept. ID PW 17-025 Page 2 of 2 Meeting Date: 6/19/2017 defines the minimum planed lane configurations for major regionally significant roads in Orange County. Local Signal Synchronization Plan (LSSP) The LSSP identifies traffic signal synchronization, street routes and traffic signals to be improved in the City. The LSSP will outline the costs with the identified improvements, funding and phasing of capital, and the operations and maintenance of the street routes and traffic signals. Inter- jurisdictional planning of traffic signal synchronization is also a component of the LSSP. The updated LSSP is provided as an attachment. Mitigation Fee Program The mitigation fee program is a locally established fee program, which assess fees used to mitigate effects of new development on transportation infrastructure. Appropriate mitigation measure, including payment of fees, construction of improvements or any combination thereof, will be determined through an established and documented process by the City. The City adopted Resolution No. 2012-23 establishing new and revised mitigation fees. Resolution No. 2017-14 allows the City to meet annual eligibility requirements to receive Measure M2 Net Revenues. Planned and existing projects that include Measure M2 funding include the following: 1. Adams Avenue Rehabilitation from Beach Boulevard to Newland Street 2. Atlanta Rehabilitation from Beach Boulevard to Newland Street 3. Atlanta Avenue Widening from Huntington Street to Delaware Street 4. Brookhurst and Adams Avenue Intersection Widening Design 5. Edinger Avenue Rehabilitation from Edwards Street to Springdale Street 6. Heil Avenue Rehabilitation from Springdale Street to Bolsa Chica Street 7. Indianapolis Avenue Rehabilitation from Newland Street to Beach Boulevard 8. Slater Avenue Rehabilitation from Goldenwest Street to Gothard Street 9. Springdale Street Rehabilitation from Warner Avenue to Slater Avenue 10. Utica Bicycle Boulevard from Main Street to Beach Boulevard Public Works Commission Action: Not applicable Environmental Status: Not applicable Strategic Plan Goal: Enhance and maintain infrastructure Attachment(s): 1. Resolution No. 2017-14 2. Huntington Beach Circulation Element 3. Local Signal Synchronization Plan 4. Resolution No. 2012-13 HB -103- Item 9. - 2 ATTAC H M E N T # 1 RESOLUTION NO. 2017-14 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH CONCERNING THE STATUS AND UPDATE OF THE CIRCULATION ELEMENT, LOCAL SIGNAL SYNCHRONIZATION PLAN, AND MITIGATION FEE PROGRAM, FOR THE MEASURE M (M2) PROGRAM WHEREAS, the City of Huntington Beach desires to maintain and improve the streets within its jurisdiction, including those arterials contained in the Master Plan of Arterial Highways (MPAH); and The City of Huntington Beach had endorsed a definition of and process for, determining consistency of the City's Traffic Circulation Plan with the MPAH; and The City has adopted a General Plan Circulation Element which does not preclude implementation of the MPAH within its jurisdiction; and The City is required to adopt a resolution biennially informing the Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) that the City's Circulation Element is in conformance with the MPAH and whether any changes to any arterial highways of said Circulation Element have been adopted by the City during Fiscal Year (FY) 2015-16 and FY 2016-17; and The City is required to send biennially to the OCTA all recommended changes to the City Circulation Element and the MPAH for the purposes of re-qualifying for participation in the Comprehensive Transportation Funding Programs; and The Orange County Transportation Authority has developed the Regional Traffic Signal Synchronization Master Plan to identify traffic signal synchronization street routes and traffic signals within and across jurisdictional boundaries, and defines the means of implementing the Regional Traffic Signal Synchronization Program; and The Regional Traffic Signal Synchronization Program requires that local agency's adopt a Local Signal Synchronization Plan consistent with the Regional Traffic Signal Synchronization Master Plan as a key component of local agencies' efforts to synchronizing traffic signals across local agencies' boundaries; and The Local Signal Synchronization Plan must be updated by June 30, 2017 to continue to be eligible to receive Net Revenues as part of Measure M2; The City is required to adopt a resolution biennially certifying that the City has an existing Mitigation Fee Program that assesses traffic impacts of new development and requires new development to pay a fair share of necessary transportation improvements attributable to the new development; and 17-5708/157692/RLS 5/2/17/MV 1 RESOLUTION NO. 2017-14 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City, does hereby inform OCTA that: a) The arterial highway portion of the City Circulation Element of the City is in conformance with the MPAH. b) The City attests that no unilateral reduction in through lanes has been made on any MPAH arterials during the FY 2015-16 and FY 2016-17. c) The City adopts and maintains a Local Signal Synchronization Plan which includes goals that are consistent with those outlined as part of the Regional Signal Synchronization Master Plan, including signal synchronization across jurisdictions. d) The Local Signal Synchronization Plan identifies traffic signal synchronization street routes, including all elements of the Regional Signal Synchronization Network located within the City. e) The Local Signal Synchronization Plan includes the traffic signal inventory for all traffic signal synchronization street routes. f) The Local Signal Synchronization Plan includes a three-year plan showing capital, operations, and maintenance of signal synchronization along the traffic signal synchronization street routes and traffic signals. g) The Local Signal Synchronization Plan includes an update on the status and performance of traffic signal synchronization activities. h) The Local Signal Synchronization Plan includes a discussion on the review and revision, as may be necessary, on the timing of traffic signals on the traffic signal synchronization street routes. i) The City reaffirms that Council concurs with the existing Mitigation Fee Program. 17-5708/157692/RLS 5/2/17/MV 2 RESOLUTION NO. 2017-14 PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City;of Huntington Beach at a regular meeting thereof hel&on the 19rh day of June , 2017. j. Mayor PlipREVIEWED ND APPROVED: APPROVED AS TO FORM: City an g /INtITIATED y Attorney „M,r AND APPROVED: Director of Public rks 17-5708/157692/RLS 5/2/17/MV 3 Res. No. 2017-14 STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss: CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH ) I, ROBIN ESTANISLAU 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 June 19, 2017 by the following vote: AYES: O'Connell, Semeta, Posey, Delgleize, Hardy, Brenden, Peterson NOES: None ABSENT: None RECUSE: None City Clerk and ex-officio Clerk of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach, California ATTACHMENT #2 �TRC�JLAT�{��T ELEEI'�T HB -107- Item 9. - 6 INFRASI-RUC'FURE AND CUMMUNI*FY SERVICES CHAP-1-ER Circulation Element INTRODUCTION Huntington Beach is an active, lively corrununit.y that recogn izes its circulation system is something more than just roads and the cars that drive on theta. Huntington Beach's multi-modal circulation system includes bikeways, equestrian trails, sidewalks and jogging paths, and waterways, as well as the public transit services that transport people within the City and to more distant destinations. The City is connected to the region by Interstate 405, running southeast to northwest along the City's northern boundary. and by transit services provided by the Orange County Transportation Authority(OCTA). The Circulation Element is the portion of the General Plan that describes and directs how people., goods, and services move within and through Huntington Beach. The Element describes various modes of transportation and the facilities they use. Through goals, policies, and implementation programs contained in this element. the City directs how the circulation system will be shaped to respond to the needs and desires of the community. These needs and desires include reducing and preventing traffic congestion, providing for pedestrian circulation, and planning for new transit opportunities. Huntington Beach is a dynamic city, and the Circulation Element provides the means for the circulation system to adapt to dynamic conditions. This element is structured so that the general population may comprehend the context and principles for the circulation plan. The element begins this discussion with a broad description of the legal requirements for a circulation element, which include the purpose and scope. Along with the legal basis, technical aspects are important. Following the section on the purpose and scope of the circulation element, the element describes the tools used to measure traffic flow. This information is meant to aid the reader to understand references to these technical terms found throughout the text. The legal and technical information is followed by paragraphs describing related plans and programs. Descriptions are included because these plans and progr ams both affect and are affected by Huntington Beach's circulation choices. Finally, the discussion proceeds to the heart of the element's purpose: the circulation plan. The goals, policies, and implementation programs contained in the circulation plan are the tools that the City will use to maintain its dynamic circulation system. PURPOSE OF THE CIRCULATION ELEMENT California Government Code Section 65302(b)requires a circulation element in all general plans, as follows: A circulation element consisting of the general location and extent of existing and proposed major thorougl1fares, transportation routes. terminals. and other local public utilities and -facilities, all correlated ivith the land use element qf the plan. The purpose of the Huntington Beach Circulation Element is to evaluate the long-term transportation needs of the City and present a comprehensive plan to accommodate those needs. The Circulation Element is the foundation for the Citys efforts to rnanag I ge and minimize traffic congestion, manage safety on roadways, and provide travel alternatives to the automobile, as well as better access to regional Travel routes. Accomplishing these objectives requires effective land use planning, roadway monitoring and improvement, transportation system and demand management, regional coordination, and commitment of significant personnel resources. The policies and programs in this Element emphasize a balanced, multi-modal transportation system that responds to the demands of current and planned land uses.,as set forth in the Land Use Element, THE CITY OF HUNT13INGTON, BEACH GENERAL PLAN 111-CE-1 Item 9. - 7 H13 -108- INFRASTRI';CTURE AND COMMUNITY SERVICES CHAPTER Circulation Element SCOPE AND CONTENT OF THE CIRCULATION ELEMENT The Circulation Element is a mandatory component of the General Plan. The City must address major thoroughfares, transportation routes and various means of travel, terminals, and other local public utilities and facilities, Huntington Beach has chosen to address utilities within the Public Facilities and Public Services and the Utilities Elements. All other circulation issues are addressed in this Element, including: ® Regional Mobility ® Roadway Circulation ® Neighborhood Traffic Manage ment M Public Transportation ® Transportation Demand Management and Air Quality M Parking ® Pedestrian,Bicycle, Equestrian, and Waterway Facilities © Scel-ft Corridors The Element addresses the physical circulation system consisting of streets, highways, bicycle routes, equestrian facilities, paths, and sidewalks., as well as available modes of transportation, including cars, buses, bicycles, and walking. How effectively goods and people move about in a community is one of the most pervasive issues a locality must address, as it affects land use, economic vitality, urban design, energy consumption, air quality, and ultimately, the City's infrastructure. Circulation decisions cannot be addressed solely at the local level. however-, they must be coordinated with regional, State, and federal agencies, as well as with neighboring communities. State planning law requires that the Circulation Element be consistent with other General Plan elements. As circulation affects such a wide range of issues. consistency with other elements is especially important. The elements most closely linked with the Circulation Element are Land Use and Noise. The development potential of Vacant or underutilized properties throughout the City identified in the Land Use Element is the major factor in developing, the future traffic volumes used to evaluate roadway adequacy in the Circulation Element. The transportation policies found in the Circulation Element are also directly linked to the programs and policies developed in the Noise Element. Transportation facilities are largely responsible for excessive noise levels in certain locations in the community. Projected noise distributions, depicted as noise contours in the Noise Element, are corollary to the Circulation Plan. Policies and plans contained in the Noise Element are lamely based on the Circulation Element and are aimed at minimizing the effects of transportation noise on current and planned land uses. Other elements, such as the Growth Management, Urban Design, and Air Quality Elements, are also related. The Growth Management Element takes into account the growth-inducing effects of roadway improvements, while the Urban Design Element works in tandem with the Circulation Element to shape how properties are developed within and near scenic corridors. The Air Quality Element presents policies and programs to reduce air pollution associated with vehicle trips. MEASUIUNG TRAFFIC FLOW Roadway networks must be regularly evaluated to ensure they are moving vehicles efficiently and maintaining f adequate capacity o support future o t� d t it t t __Towth. This element uses specific approaches to measure and describe traffic flow and roadway capacity. They involve a policy component with respect to desirable level of service(LOS)and a technical component that outlines the criteria involved. THE CITY OF HUINTINGTON BEACH GENERAL PLAN 111-CE-2 HB -109- Item 9. - 8 INFRASTRUCTURE AND CUNIMUNITY SERVICES CHAPTER Circulation Element VOLUME-TO-CAPACITY RATIO The volume-to-capacity (WC) measure consists of a ratio between how many vehicles travel on a roadway (volume) and the number of vehicles the roadway can carry (capacity). V/C ratios are calculated based on current or future traffic Volumes and capacity values for various types of roadway facilities. Volume is established either by a traffic count (in the case of current volumes) or by a forecast for a future condition. Capacity refers to the vehicle-carrying ability of a roadway and is a critical component of roadway design. The higher the V/C ratio (approaching or above 1.00), the more congested the roadway becomes. For example, a roadway that carries 1,000 vehicles per hour but has the capacity to accommodate 2,000 vehicles per hour at free flow speed has a V/C of 0.50, which drivers would experience as "free-flowing", with only minor delays. The V/C measure used for traffic performance is intersection capacity utilization (ICU). This measure is applied using peak-hour volumes and the geometric configuration of traffic signal controlled intersections. The ICU sums the V/C ratios for the critical movements of an intersection, and thus accounts for the overall performance of intersections, which are typically the most critical limitations—or the control valves—within a roadway system. LEVEL OF SERVICE Level of service (LOS) is a tool used to describe the operating,characteristics of the street system in terms of the level of congestion or delay experienced by Vehicles. Service levels range from A through F, with each level defined by a range of V/C ratios, as shown in Table CE-1. Levels of service A, 13, and C are considered good operating conditions, with only minor delays being experienced by motorists. Level of service D represents operating conditions where drivers occasionally have to wait through more than one signal cycle to proceed through the intersection. Level of service E is considered a near-capacity condition, and level of service F represents an oversaturated condition with long delays. The LOS designations are based upon ICU values calculated for intersections. TABLE CE-I Peak Hour Level of Service Descriptions for Intersections LOS Description V/C or ICU A Low volumes-,high speeds,speed not restricted by other vehicles;all signal cycles clear with 0.00-0.60 no vehicles waiting through more than one signal cycle. B Operating speeds beginning to be affected by other traffic-,between one and 10 percent of 0.61 —0.70 the signal cycles have one or more vehicles which Nvail through more than one signal cycle t� 4� during peak traffic periods. C Operating speeds and maneuverability closely controlled by other traffic; between I I and 30 0.71 —OM percent of the signal cycles have one or more vehicles which wait through more than one signal cycle during peak traffic periods; recommended ideal desig n standards. D Tolerable operating speeds:31 to 70 percent of the signal cycle have one or more vehicles 0.81 —0.90 which wait through more than one signal cycle during peak traffic periods; often used as design standard in urban areas. I THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH GENERAL PLAN III-CE-3 Item 9. - 9 HB -t 10- INFRASTRUCTURE AND COMMUNrr),SERVICES CHAPTER Circulation Element TABLE CE-1 Peak Hour Level of Service Descriptions for Intersections 110S Description V/C or ICU E Capacity; the maximum traffic volume an intersection can accommodate; restricted speeds. 0.91 — 1.00 71 to 100 percent of the signal cycles have one or more vehicles which Nvait through more than one signal cycle during peak traffic periods. F Long queues of traffic;unstable flow- stoppages of long duration: traffic volume and traffic Above 1.00 speed can drop to zero,-traffic volume Nvill be less than the volume which occurs at level of service Source:Highway Capacity Manual 2000.Transportation Research Board,National Research Council RELATED PRO"GRAMS AIN I D GO"VERNMENTAL ENTITIES Local circulation issues must be coordinated with regional, State, and federal agencies, as well as with neighboring communities.The City has identified the following agencies as important partners. Many of these agencies* plans and programs have similar goals or address the same facilities as this circulation element, STATE California Department of Transportation The California Department of Transportation(Caltrans) is responsible for design standards and all operations on State highways traversing Huntington Beach, including 1-405.Beach Boulevard(SR-39).and Pacific Coast Highway (SR-1). For each of these highways. Caltrans prepares a Transportution Concept Report(TCR)that identifies current and projected operating conditions on the facility, establishes a 20-year planning concept, identifies facility deficiencies in relation to the concept, and identifies broad and flexible options to achieve the 20-year concept. As part of the Scenic Corridor Plan, the City must coordinate with Caltrans for landscaping and maintenance of these roadways. multimodal Transportation System Policy In past few years, legislation has been introduced regarding Complete Streets. This requires local jurisdictions to plan for multimodal strategies in their circulation elements. The multimodal network must identify how all roadway users (motorists, pedestrians, bicyclists, and transit riders, of all ages and abilities) will be accommodated. The City has made multimodal transportation a priority in this Circulation Element, and addresses the needs of all users in the Circulation Plan. It has identified requirements for trip reductions, transit enhancements, pedestrian, bicycle and equestrian improvements, and impact and development fees. Implemented together, these will result in streets that serve all roadway users, and will thereby satisfy the legislative requirements regarding Complete Streets, THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH GENERAL PLAN' III-CE-4 HB -111- Item 9. - 10 INTR-ASTRUCTURE AND COMMUNITY SERVICES CHAPTER Circulation Element REGIONAL Southern California Association of Governments Regional Comprehensive Plan and Regional Transportation Plan In 1995, the Southern California Association of Governments (SLAG) prepared a Regional Comprehensive Plan (RCP) to address regional issues, goals, objectives, and policies for the Southern California region into the early part of the 21" century. The RCP was updated in 2008 based upon the SCAG's 2000 Compass Blueprint Growth Vision, which calls for calls for modest changes to current land use and transportation trends on only two percent of the land area of the region. A key component of the RCP is the Regional Transportation Plan (RTP). The RTP sets broad region oals for the ion and provides strategies to reduce 9 t� problems associated with congestion and mobility. In recognition of the close relationship between traffic and air quality issues, the assumptions, r goals, and programs contained in the RTP parallel those used to prepare the Air Quality Management Plan. The RTP was updated in 2012 to implement transportation provisions of the RCP with a strong commitment to reduce emissions to comply with SB 375. South Coast Air Quality Management DistrietAir Qualioy Management Plan Hunting ton Beach is located in the South Coast Air Basin, which is a non-attainment area with regard to air quality(a geographic area that does not meet State or federal standards for a given air pollutant). The federal Clean Air Act requires the preparation of plans to improve air quality in non-attainment areas. Implementing the Clean Air Act, the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) has developed an Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP), which mandates a variety of measures to reduce traffic congestion and improve air quality. SCAQMD is also working with local jurisdictions to develop measures to reduce greenhouse gas emissions associated with climate change. COUNTY Orange County, Transportation Authority Long Range Transportation Plan The Long Range Transportation Plan (LRTP) was adopted in 2010 as a blueprint for Orange County`s transportation future through 2035 for all transportation modes, including freeways, roadways, buses, and rail transit. The LRTP is the vehicle by which the OCTA plans for the County's transportation, in response to changing trends in Population and workforce, where residents live, how they commute, the dollars available to carry out transportation solutions, environmental priorities, and the policies and programs that foster mobility. The LRTP incorporates Measure M, the Orange County Master Plan of Arterial Highways (MPAH), Orange Count); Congestion Management Program (CMP), and the Orange County Commuter Bikeways Strategic Plan. Measure M In 1990, Orange County voters approved Measure M. authorizing a half-cent retail sales tax increase for a period of 20 years effective April 1, 1991. A portion of revenue generated by Measure M is returned to local jurisdictions for use on local and regional transportation improvements and maintenance projects. To qualify for this revenue, each jurisdiction must comply with the County-wide Traffic Improvement and Growth Management Program. Specifically, to receive an allocation of Measure M funds, Huntington Beach must submit a statement of compliance with the growth management components of the program. Requirements include the adoption of a traffic circulation plan consistent with the County Master Plan of Arterial Highways (MPAH), adoption of a Growth Management Element within the General Plan, adoption and adequate THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH GENERAL PLAN Ill-CE-5 Item 9. - 11 HB -112- INFRASTRUCTURE AND COTAIMUNITY SERVICES C14APTER Circulation Element funding of a local transportation fee program, and adoption of a seven-year capital ml])FOVernent program that includes all transportation projects funded either partially or fully by Measure M funds. The current Measure M expired in 2011. and a November 2006 ballot measure renewed the program (noNv known as M2) through 2041. M2 extends the requirements of Measure M, without increasing sales taxes. to fund freeway, street, transit, and environmental projects identified in a Transportation Investment Plan considered by voters in tandem with the renewal measure. The M2 renewal does not specify compliance with or adoption of a Grovvili Management Plan. Key M2 projects benefiting Huntington Beach include widening of freeway lanes and improvements to interchanges and overcrossings of 1-405, transit extensions to Metrolink,and numerous roadway and intersection improvements. Orange County Master Plan of Arterial Highways The MPAH identifies the intended future roadway system for the County and is administered by the OCTA. Huntington Beach's Circulation Element must be consistent with the MPAH in order to participate in any County roadway funding programs, such as Measure M. Orange County Congestion Management Program Z� - In June 1990, passage of the Proposition I I I gas tax increase required urbanized areas such as Orange County to adopt a Congestion Management Program (CMP), with the goal of reducing traffic congestion and facilitating coordination of local land use planning and regional transportation improvement decisions. The Orange County CMP is a composite of data collected by local jurisdictions according to guidelines established by OCTA. The data are compiled by OCTA and submitted to SCAG to determine regional consistency. Through the CMP, eligible transportation projects may be proposed to compete for State gas tax funds. Orange County Commuter Bikeways Strategic Plan The Commuter Bikeways Strategic Plan, administered by OCTA, is a regional planning document that identifies existing and proposed bikeways in Orange County. This comprehensive inventory of County bikeways was achieved through the cooperation of cities and the County to identify priority corridors for new bikeways. OCTA's bikeway classification system is employed by Huntington Beach. The City's bikeway plan is linked to regional County bikeways. Z7 CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH Five-Year Capital Improvement Program The City's Capital Improvement P I - Iitarog Program (CIP) is the main planning tool used by the City to coordinate financing and scheduling for major projects, including transportation improvements, to be undertaken by the City. Not all projects included in the 5-year CIP have budget approval. However, the City has an annual CIP that is funded. The CIP is developed to address elements contained in the City's General Plan,as well as City Council adopted planning documents and master plans. Projects within the CIP correspond to the goals of the City's Strategic Plan in the areas of Public Safety. Infrastructure and Transportation, Community Livability. and Environment and Natural Resources. The CIP is prepared in conjunction with the budget process and is revised annually to meet changing needs, priorities, and financial conditions. THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON 13EACH GENERAL PLAN 111-CE-6 HB -11 3_ Item 9. - 12 INFRASTRUCTURE AND commuNrry SERVICES CHAPTER Circulation Element Transportation Demand Management Ordinance The City's Transportation Demand Management(TDM)Ordinance was established to help mitigate potential impacts of development projects on mobility, congestion, and air quality, as well as to promote TDM strategies. The City uses the TDM ordinance to encourage changes in individual travel behavior. Certain TDM activities are made mandatory by the ordinance. In particular, employers with 100 or more employees are required to support alternative forms of transportation by providing appropriate facilities, including showers and lockers,parking for vanpools,bicycle parking,and passenger loading areas. Arterial Street Landscape Development and Maintenance Status Report(1989) This report is the guiding document for medians and street landscaping in Huntington Beach.It contains plans for median and roadside landscape development, maintenance., and cost reports. The plan contains maps of landscaped arterials and irrigation status. The City uses policy in the Circulation Element to reinforce the importance of landscaping and maintenance along scenic and landscape corridors. Circulation Element Technical Administrative Reports The Circulation Element Technical Administrative Reports (TARs) address a variety of circulation- and traffic-related topics, providing information such as traffic counts and forecasts for roadway links and intersections. Information included in the TARs will change as part of regular updates so that various standards including emergency response times or LOS for The Arterial Street Landscape Development and Maintenance Status intersections — remain in compliance Report contains maps showing where new median landscaping will with this Element. be placed. THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH GENERAL PLAN 111-CE-7 Item 9. - 13 HB -114- ATTACHMENT #3 CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH LOCAL SIGNAL SYNCHRONIZATION PLAN e r i d a. d 01. HUNT"INGTON BEACH June 1, 2017 HB -1 t s- Item 9. - 14 'it- , of Huntington Beach y 2000 Main Street o PO Box 190 0 CA 92648 Pl Travis K. Hopkins, PE Department of Public Works Director (714) 536-5431 June 1, 2017 Mr. Anup Kulkarni Orange County Transportation Authority Regional Modeling and Traffic Operations Planning Division P.O. Box 14184 Orange, CA 92863-1584 Subject: Local Signal Synchronization Plan Submittal as Part of the Measure M2 Eligibility Process Dear Mr. Kulkarni: The City of Huntington Beach is pleased to submit its Local Signal Synchronization Plan as part of the Measure M2 eligibility process. The submittal includes the following components: 1. A completed "Local Signal Synchronization Plan Consistency Review Checklist" form establishing consistency between the Local Signal Synchronization Plan and the Regional Traffic Signal Synchronization Master Plan, 2. An updated Local Signal Synchronization Plan for Fiscal Years 2017/2018 to 2019/2020 including and all required elements as identified in the Guidelines for the Preparation of Local Signal Synchronization Plans. The City looks forward to continuing the implementation of the beneficial programs and construction projects required and made possible by Measure M2. If you have any questions, please call me at (714) 536-5431. Sincerely, William F. Janusz, P.E., PTOE Principal Civil Engineer WFJ Enclosures Item 9. - 15 HB -116- LOCAL SIGNAL SYNCHRONIZATION PLAN CONSISTENCY REVIEW CHECKLIST The Local Agency Name: City of Huntington Beach Plan Date: 6/01/17 Local agencies must submit a copy of the Local Signal Synchronization Plan, a completed consistency review checklist, and any supporting documentation. Complete the table below. Complete the table below: Local Agency Statement Page#s in Provided or N/A LSSP 1) Signal synchronization goals of the agency are consistent with 1,2,19 Yes those outlined as part of the Regional Traffic Signal Synchronization Master Plan. Include information on how the traffic signal synchronization street routes and traffic signals may be coordinated with traffic signals on the street routes in adjoining jurisdictions. 2) Traffic signal synchronization street routes are identified, including 3,4 Yes all corridors along the regional signal synchronization network located within the local agency. 3) Traffic signal inventory for all traffic signal synchronization street 5-9 Yes routes. 4) Three-year plan separately showing costs, available funding, and 12-15 Yes phasing for capital, operations, and maintenance of signal synchronization along the traffic signal synchronization street routes and traffic signals. Include a separate planning level estimate of complete system implementation cost. 5) Signal synchronization review, revision, and assessment of 15-19 Yes synchronization activities along the traffic signal synchronization street routes and traffic signals. I certify that the above statements are true to the best of my knowledge. ��✓ o � t Signature Date Willaim F. Janusz, P.E., PTOE Principal Civil Engineer Printed Name, Title HF3 -117 Item 9. - 16 CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH LOCAL SIGNAL SYNCHRONIZATION PLAN HUNTINGTON BEACH City of Huntington Beach 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Prepared under the supervision of: William F. Janusz, P.E., PTOE Principal Civil Engineer (714) 536-5431 June 1, 2017 Item 9. - 17 HB -1 1S- TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION 1 Traffic Signal Synchronization Goals, Policies and Objectives 1 SECTION 2 Traffic Signal Synchronization Street Routes 3 SECTION 3 Traffic Signal Inventory 5 SECTION 4 Traffic Signal Synchronization System and Three Year Plan 10 SECTION 5 Traffic Signal Synchronization Assessment Review and revise, as may be Necessary, the Timing of Traffic Signals 15 HB -1 19- Item 9. - 18 LIST OF FIGURES FIGURE 1 Signal Synchronization Routes 4 FIGURE 2 Corridor Synchronization Performance Index (CSPI) 22 I Item 9. - 19 HB -1 20_ LIST OF TABLES TABLE 1 Traffic Synchronization List 6 TABLE 2 3-Year Outlook Traffic Signal Synchronization (Constrained) 12 TABLE 3 3-Year Outlook Traffic Signal Synchronization (Unconstrained) 13 TABLE 4 LSSP Implementation —Candidate Signal Synchronization Projects With Estimated Costs 14 TABLE 5 Traffic Signal Synchronization Assessment, Review and Revision 20 TABLE 6 Signal Timing Revisions 21 1-113 -121- Item 9. - 20 SECTION ONE TRAFFIC SIGNAL SYNCHRONIZATION GOALS, POLICIES AND OBJECTIVES Eligibility requirements included in the Renewed Measure M specify that each local jurisdiction must adopt a Local Signal Synchronization Plan (LSSP) and renew it on a three year cycle. The initial LSSP was adopted by the City of Huntington Beach City Council on December 20, 2010, and was subsequently updated in 2014. This document is the City of Huntington Beach's three year update of the LSSP which is due to the Orange County Transportation Authority by June 30, 2017. This plan includes the following: • Traffic signal synchronization street routes; • Traffic signal inventory; • Three year plan showing costs, available funding and phasing for capital, operations, and maintenance of traffic signal synchronization street routes and traffic signals; • Information on local signal synchronization policies, including how street routes and traffic signals may be synchronized with traffic signals on street routes in adjoining jurisdictions. It is the City of Huntington Beach's goal to have in-place traffic signal coordination on all major arterial roadways and to have the communication and monitoring capabilities to remotely control the traffic signals from the City's Traffic Management Center (TMC) located at City Hall. Expanding on these primary goals is the objective to establish inter- agency communication with the traffic signal systems maintained by Caltrans and the adjacent local agencies. Working toward these goals, the City maintains its coordinated traffic signal operations and continually monitors the operation for areas where operational improvements may be warranted. Over the past three years, the City has upgraded approximately nine miles of its existing network of copper interconnect cable to fiber optic cable. In addition approximately two and one-half miles of new communication conduit and cable has been installed. The upgrade to fiber optic cable increases monitoring and communication capabilities and has allowed the City to install three new closed circuit television cameras in order to monitor traffic from the TMC. The City is constantly looking for opportunities to further expand and upgrade its traffic signal system such as pursuing grant funds to 1 Item 9. - 21 HB -122- achieve this objective. Ultimately the City strives for a completely interconnected system of traffic signals which can be remotely monitored and maintained with a reasonable level of Public Works staff supervision. While several arterials are coordinated across city boundaries, no actual inter-agency real time communication exists. Ultimately, such communication is a goal of the City of Huntington Beach. This document also acknowledges that the City of Huntington Beach supports a multi- agency, corridor based approach that optimizes traffic signals based on existing traffic patterns. The City supports local agency responsibility for signal timing and working with neighboring agencies to develop synchronization timing. This plan will require periodic updating on a three-year cycle throughout the duration of Renewed Measure M. The next update will be due to OCTA by June 30, 2020. 2 HB Item 9. - 22 SECTION TWO TRAFFIC SIGNAL SYNCHRONIZATION STREET ROUTES (EXISTING AND PLANNED) Figure 1 illustrates the Traffic Signal Synchronization Street Routes within the City of Huntington Beach. These include the routes contained in OCTA's Regional Traffic Signal Synchronization Master Plan. As indicated on the Traffic Synchronization List, Table 1, and the Map of Signal Synchronization Routes, Figure 1, not all intersections on these routes currently operate under coordination. The primary factor for not operating the traffic signals under coordination is low traffic volumes. While most of the arterial streets are under coordination continuously from approximately 6:30 a.m. until approximately 7:00 p.m., there are several segments where, due to low off-peak traffic volumes, the signals operate free in the midmorning and mid-afternoon periods. There are also some segments, primarily on the far south and west sides of the City where traffic volumes approaching the ocean are so low (less than 20,000 vehicles per day), that cross street delay does not warrant operating the signals under coordination at any time of the day. 3 Item 9. - 23 HB -1 24- REVISED 5/02/17 G 4AVE. WESTMINSTERMAINTAINED v~i BOLSA 00 WESIININSTER eeBMAINTAINED vMc FADDEE. N.T.s. U EDINGER z v~i '- AVE. �<AINDERSON Y z cf) a >' fly o m QHEIL� Of w QAVE. m `� FOUNTAIN VALLEY Z x d Z = M O0 � p W ~o MAINTAINED cn Q WARNER w AVE. , SLATER Q, AVE. C) m; 405 TA BERT AVE. BOLSA , PACIFIC CHICA ELLIS AVE. � 0 GARFIELD M, AVE. U) YORKTOWN AVE. , ADAMS AVE. INDI�ANAPOLIS AVE. Y OCEAN 1 `��� Q 0 ATLANTA a - = AVE. m 0 v w Q m : z HA TON AVE. m� yl1iy BANNING AVE. 00000 = LOCAL SIGNAL SYNCHRONIZATION ROUTES (IN ADDITION TO OCTA REGIONAL PROGRAM). 00000 = LOCAL SIGNAL SYNCHRONIZATION ROUTES CURRENTLY RUNNING FREE = LOCAL SIGNAL SYNCHRONIZATION ROUTES CURRENTLY UNDER COORDINATION (CONSISTENT WITH OCTA). — - — = LOCAL SIGNAL SYNCHRONIZATION ROUTES (CALTRANS ROUTE CONSISTENT WITH OCTA). OCTA Coordination Vicmap.dwg CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH * PUBLIC WORKS * TRAFFIC ENGINEERING ®�J FIGURE SIGNAL SYNCHRONIZATION ROUTES 1 HB -125- Item 9. - 24 SECTION THREE TRAFFIC SIGNAL INVENTORY Table 1 lists the corridors and intersections within the City that are included in the Local Signal Synchronization Plan and the present coordination status of each of these intersections. 5 Item 9. - 25 HB -126- Table 1 TRAFFIC SYNCHRONIZATION LIST Corridor Cross-street Cycle Length Controller Maintenance Intersection Type Responsibility AM MD PM WKND Adams Avenue Lake Street 80 65 70 65 170 City of Huntington Beach Delaware Street 80 65 70 65 170 City of Huntington Beach Beach Boulevard 120 130 140 130 2070 Caltrans Coldwater Lane 120 130 140 (f) 170 City of Huntington Beach Newland Street 130 130 140 (f) 170 City of Huntington Beach Magnolia Street 130 130 140 130 170 City of Huntington Beach Newland Street 130 130 140 130 170 City of Huntington Beach Bushard Street 130 130 140 130 170 City of Huntington Beach Target Driveway 130 130 140 130 170 City of Huntington Beach Brookhurst Street 130 130 140 130 170 City of Huntington Beach Ranger Lane 130 130 140 130 170 City of Huntington Beach Beach Boulevard Center Avenue 140 130 140 130 2070 Caltrans Edinger Avenue 140 130 140 130 2070 Caltrans Stark Avenue 140 130 140 130 2070 Caltrans MacDonald 140 130 140 130 2070 Caltrans Avenue Heil Avenue 140 130 140 130 2070 Caltrans Terry Drive 140 130 140 130 2070 Caltrans Warner Avenue 140 130 140 130 2070 Caltrans Slater Avenue 140 130 140 130 2070 Caltrans Newman Avenue 140 130 140 130 2070 Caltrans Talbert Avenue 140 130 140 130 2070 Caltrans Ellis Avenue 140 130 140 130 2070 Caltrans Garfield Avenue 120 130 140 130 2070 Caltrans Yorktown Avenue 120 130 140 130 2070 Caltrans Utica Avenue 120 130 140 130 2070 Caltrans Adams Avenue 120 130 140 130 2070 Caltrans Indianapolis 120 130 140 130 2070 Caltrans Avenue Atlanta Avenue 120 130 140 130 2070 Caltrans Pacific View Drive 120 130 140 130 2070 Caltrans Pacific Coast 120 (f} 120 M 2070 Caltrans Highway Bolsa Avenue Bolsa Chica Street 120 120 120 120 170 City of Huntington Beach Boeing Driveway M M (f} M 170 City of Huntington Beach Graham Street M M M M 170 City of Huntington Beach 6 11B -127- Item 9. - 26 TRAFFIC SYNCHRONIZATION LIST Cross-street Cycle Length Controller Maintenance Corridor Intersection Type Responsibility AM MD PM WKND Able Lane/Dan Lane M M M M 170 City of Huntington Beach Springdale Street (f) (f) (f) (f) 170 City of Huntington Beach Bolsa Chica Street Bolsa Street 120 120 120 120 170 City of Huntington Beach Argosy Avenue 120 120 120 120 170 City of Huntington Beach McFadden Avenue 120 120 120 120 170 City of Huntington Beach Robinwood Drive 140 130 140 130 170 City of Huntington Beach Edinger Avenue 140 130 140 130 170 City of Huntington Beach Heil Avenue 140 130 140 130 170 City of Huntington Beach Warner Avenue 140 130 140 130 170 City of Huntington Beach Brookhurst Street Garfield Avenue 140 130 140 130 170 City of Huntington Beach Yorktown Avenue 140 130 140 130 170 City of Huntington Beach Beachmont Plaza 140 130 140 130 170 City of Huntington Beach Adams Avenue 140 130 140 130 170 City of Huntington Beach Indianapolis 140 130 140 130 170 City of Huntington Beach Avenue Atlanta Avenue 140 130 140 130 170 City of Huntington Beach Hamilton Avenue 140 130 140 130 170 City of Huntington Beach Banning Avenue M (f) (f) (f) 170 City of Huntington Beach Bushard Street (f) (f) (f) (f) 170 City of Huntington Beach Pacific Coast 120 (f) 120 (f) 170 Caltrans Highway Edinger Avenue Bolsa Chica Street 140 130 140 130 170 City of Huntington Beach Graham Street 70 65 70 65 170 City of Huntington Beach Springdale Street 140 130 140 130 170 City of Huntington Beach Edwards Street 140 130 140 130 170 City of Huntington Beach Goldenwest Street 140 130 140 130 170 City of Huntington Beach Golden West 140 130 140 130 170 City of Huntington Beach College Gothard Street 140 130 140 120 170 City of Huntington Beach Fortuna Lane 140 130 140 130 170 City of Huntington Beach Sher Lane 140 130 140 130 170 City of Huntington Beach Parkside Lane 140 130 140 130 170 City of Huntington Beach Beach Boulevard 140 130 140 130 2070 Caltrans Newland Street 130 130 130 130 170 City of Huntington Beach Goldenwest Street McFadden Avenue 140 130 140 130 170 City of Huntington Beach Rustler(Golden 140 130 140 130 170 City of Huntington Beach West College) Edinger Avenue 140 130 140 130 170 City of Huntington Beach Heil Avenue 140 130 140 130 170 City of Huntington Beach 7 Item 9. - 27 HB -128- TRAFFIC SYNCHRONIZATION LIST Cross-street Cycle Length Controller Maintenance Corridor Intersection Type Responsibility AM MD PM WKND Norma Drive/Lydia 140 130 140 130 170 City of Huntington Beach Drive Warner Avenue 140 130 140 130 170 City of Huntington Beach Rio Vista Drive 140 130 140 130 170 City of Huntington Beach Talbert Avenue 140 130 140 130 170 City of Huntington Beach Ellis Avenue 140 130 140 130 170 City of Huntington Beach Garfield Avenue 140 130 140 130 170 City of Huntington Beach Summit Drive 140 130 140 130 170 City of Huntington Beach Yorktown Avenue 140 130 140 130 170 City of Huntington Beach Palm Avenue (f) (f) (f) (f) 170 City of Huntington Beach Orange Avenue (f) (f) (f) (f) 170 City of Huntington Beach Pacific Coast 120 (f) 120 (f) 170 Caltrans Highway Magnolia Street Garfield Avenue 140 130 140 130 170 City of Huntington Beach Home Depot 140 130 140 130 170 City of Huntington Beach Yorktown Avenue 140 130 140 130 170 City of Huntington Beach Adams Avenue 140 130 140 130 170 City of Huntington Beach Indianapolis Avenue (f) (f) m m 170 City of Huntington Beach Atlanta Avenue (f) (f) (f) (f) 170 City of Huntington Beach Edison H.S. (f) (f) (f) (f) 170 City of Huntington Beach Hamilton Avenue (f) (f) (f) (f) 170 City of Huntington Beach Banning Avenue (f) (f) (f) (f) 170 City of Huntington Beach Pacific Coast 120 (f) 120 (f) 170 Caltrans Highway Pacific Coast Anderson Street 120 (f) 100 (f) 170 Caltrans Highway Admiralty Lane/19 120 (f) 100 (f) 170 Caltrans Street Broadway 120 (f) 100 (f) 170 Caltrans Coral Cay Lane/5 n 120 (f) 100 (f) 170 Caltrans Street Warner Avenue 130 (f) 140 (f) 170 Caltrans Bolsa Chica State (f) ((f) ((f) ((f)Beach ( 170 Caltrans Seapoint Avenue (f) (f) (f) (f) 170 Caltrans Goldenwest Street 120 (f) 120 (f) 170 Caltrans Seventeenth Street 120 (f) 120 (f) 170 Caltrans Ninth Street 120 (f) 120 (f) 170 Caltrans Sixth Street 120 (f) 120 (f) 170 Caltrans Main Street 120 (f) 120 (f) 170 Caltrans First Street 120 (f) 120 (f) 170 Caltrans 8 HB -129- Item 9. - 28 TRAFFIC SYNCHRONIZATION LIST Cross-street Cycle Length Controller Maintenance Corridor Intersection Type Responsibility AM MD PM WKND Huntington Street 120 (f) 120 (f) 170 Caltrans Twin Dolphin Drive 120 (f) 120 (f) 170 Caltrans Beach Boulevard 120 (f) 120 (f) 170 Caltrans Newland Street 120 (f) 120 (f) 170 Caltrans Magnolia Street 120 (f) 120 (f) 170 Caltrans Brookhurst Street 120 (f) 120 (f) 170 Caltrans Talbert Avenue Beach Boulevard 140 130 140 130 2070 Caltrans Walmart Driveway (f) 120 120 (f) 170 City of Huntington Beach Newland Street 120 120 120 (f) 170 City of Huntington Beach Warner Avenue Pacific Coast 120 100 100 100 170 Caltrans Highway Fire Signal/Warner Dock (y) (y) (y) (y) 170 City of Huntington Beach Algonquin Street 140 130 140 130 170 City of Huntington Beach Bolsa Chica Street 140 130 140 130 170 City of Huntington Beach Greentree 140 130 140 130 170 City of Huntington Beach Lane/Plaza Lane Graham Street 140 130 140 130 170 City of Huntington Beach Springdale Street 140 130 140 130 170 City of Huntington Beach Edwards Street 140 130 140 130 170 City of Huntington Beach Goldenwest Street 140 130 140 130 170 City of Huntington Beach Home Depot 140 130 140 130 170 City of Huntington Beach Gothard Street 140 130 140 130 170 City of Huntington Beach Nichols Street 140 130 140 130 170 City of Huntington Beach Ash Street 140 130 140 130 170 City of Huntington Beach Beach Boulevard 140 130 140 130 170 Caltrans Rotterdam Lane 140 130 140 130 170 City of Huntington Beach Newland Street 140 130 140 130 170 City of Huntington Beach Central System (Indicate if multiple systems in use): Bi-Tran QuicNet Pro Controller Operating System: 170 Controller with Bi-Tran 232 program (f) — Indicates that intersection operates free (y) — Indicates that intersection receives an end of yellow sync pulse from adjacent intersection 9 Item 9. - 29 HB -130- i SECTION FOUR TRAFFIC SIGNAL SYNCHRONIZATION SYSTEM AND THREE YEAR PLAN The City of Huntington Beach utilizes in-house staff for the maintenance and operations of the traffic signal system. The traffic signal system maintenance and operations are only one of numerous duties that these staff members perform, so there is no exact dollar amount which is dedicated to traffic signal synchronization. The City of Huntington Beach has completed construction and retiming under the Orange County Transportation Authority's Regional Traffic Signal Synchronization Project (TSSP) program. These projects include fiber optic installation on Goldenwest Street and Warner Avenue, conduit and fiber optic installation on Adams Avenue, conduit repairs in Edinger Avenue and radio upgrades on Talbert Avenue. All of these projects included updating the coordination timing along these corridors. Through the federal Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP), the city received grant funding to install additional interconnect conduit and cable. Recently completed segments include Adams Avenue from Magnolia Street to the driveway at Target (west of Brookhurst Street) and Magnolia Street from the driveway at Home Depot (south of Garfield Avenue) to Adams Avenue. Projects approved for funding include Goldenwest Street from Heil Avenue to Warner Avenue, Newland Street from Warner Avenue to Garfield Avenue, Gothard Street from Center Avenue to Edinger Avenue, and along Slater Avenue from Goldenwest Street to Gothard Street. The Traffic Signal Synchronization Reporting Forms as provided in the guidelines are included as Tables 2 and 3. Only the projects located on the Regional Traffic Signal Synchronization Master Plan roadway network are shown. Newland Street, while not on the Regional Traffic Signal Synchronization Master Plan, forms a portion of the city's future fiber backbone, as identified in the City's Traffic Signal System Master Plan and is therefore included on these forms. Table 4 lists candidate signal synchronization projects. These projects, while not funded at this time, have been identified in the City's Traffic Signal System Master Plan. For purposes of the unconstrained three year outlook of Table 3, three projects from Table 4 have been identified as candidate projects; the North Fiber Backbone Completion, the Traffic Management Center Upgrades and the Citywide Changeout to ATC Controllers. Actual project selection will be based on funding opportunities and restrictions. The candidate synchronization projects listed in Table 4 are likely projects to consider. 10 HB -13 1- Item 9. - 30 Table 4 also contains a line item for the upgrade of the City's existing 170 controllers to new controllers conforming to the latest Advanced Transportation Controller (ATC) standards. Currently the city is evaluating its options between changing out to 2070 controllers or another type of ATC controller. The figure contained in Table 4 is strictly for planning purposes and is likely subject to revision as the exact type of controller change out is determined. 11 Item 9. - 31 HB _ ;�_ Table 2 3-YEAR OUTLOOK TRAFFIC SIGNAL SYNCHRONIZATION Funding Needs for Synchronized Operation (Constrained) Reporting Jurisdiction Expenditures: City of Huntington Beach Type of Traffic Signal Synchronization Expenditures in Year of Expenditure Dollars MAINTENANCE PROJECT FY17118 FY18/19 FY19/20 TOTAL Communication and Software Maintenance 30,000 15,000 15,000 60,000 Subtotal Maintenance 30,000 15,000 15,000 60,000 CONSTRUCTION PROJECT FY17/18 FY18/19 FY19/20 TOTAL Brookhurst Street TSSP (OCTA) 833,490 833,490 Magnolia Street TSSP (OCTA) 725,465 725,465 Goldenwest IC — Heil to Warner (HSIP) 184,680 184,680 Newland Street IC—Warner to Ellis (HSIP) 310,100 310,100 Newland Street IC — Ellis to Garfield (HSIP) 184,680 184,680 Subtotal Construction 2,238,415 2,238,415 OPERATIONS PROJECT FY17/18 FY18/19 FY19/20 TOTAL Citywide Signal Timing Maintenance 10,000 10,000 10,000 30,000 Subtotal Operations 10,000 10,000 10,000 30,000 2,278,415 25,000 25,000 2,328,415 12 FIB -133- Item 9. - 32 Table 3 3-YEAR OUTLOOK TRAFFIC SIGNAL SYNCHRONIZATION Funding Needs for Synchronized Operation (Unconstrained) Reporting Jurisdiction Expenditures: City of Huntington Beach Type of Traffic Signal Synchronization Expenditures in Year of Expenditure Dollars MAINTENANCE PROJECT FY17/18 FY18/19 FY19/20 TOTAL Communication and Software Maintenance 80,000 80,000 80,000 240,000 Subtotal Maintenancel 80,000 80,000 80,000 240,000 CONSTRUCTION PROJECT FY17/18 FY18/19 FY19/20 TOTAL Citywide Signal Synchronization (a) DESIGN 160,000 30,000 190,000 CONSTRUCTION 1,000,000 1,050,000 2,050,000 Carryover from table 2 2,238,415 2,238,415 Subtotal Construction 2,238,415 1,160,000 1 1,080,000 1 4,478,415 OPERATIONS PROJECT FY17/18 FY18/19 FY19/20 TOTAL Citywide Signal Timing Maintenance 90,000 90,000 90,000 270,000 Consultant Services — Signal Timing 150,000 150,000 300,000 Subtotal Operations 90,000 240,000 240,000 570,000 2,408,415 1,420,000 1,420,000 5,248,415 (a) For illustrative purposes projects include the North Fiber Backbone Completion, TMC updates and Changeout to ATC Controllers (as shown in table 4). Actual candidate projects are contained in Table 4 and project selection will depend upon funding opportunities and restrictions. 13 Item 9. - 33 HB -134- Table 4 LSSP IMPLEMENTATION — CANDIDATE SIGNAL SYNCHORNIZATION PROJECTS WITH ESTIMATED COSTS Reporting Jurisdiction Expenditures: City of Huntington Beach The following projects, while not funded at this time, have been identified in the City's Traffic Signal System Master Plan. These projects will be considered as funding opportunities are identified. CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT SUMMARY ESTIMATED COST Install interconnect conduit and fiber optic Magnolia Street cable from Hamilton Avenue to Pacific Coast $200,000 Highway. Install interconnect conduit and fiber optic cable from Bolsa Avenue to Heil Avenue. Goldenwest Street Install fiber optic cable in existing conduit from $800,000 Heil Avenue to Warner Avenue and from Yorktown Avenue to Pacific Coast Highway Install interconnect conduit and fiber optic North Backbone cable on Gothard Street from Edinger Avenue Completion to Warner Avenue, Garfield Avenue from $870,000 Florida Street to Newland Street. Install 5.5 miles of fiber optic cable in existing conduit Install interconnect conduit and fiber optic cable on Main Street from Yorktown Avenue to Orange Avenue/Atlanta Avenue, along Orange South Backbone Avenue/Atlanta Avenue to Newland Street, $1,150,000 Completion along Newland street from Atlanta to Hamilton and along Hamilton from Newland Street to Brookhurst. Install 1.5 miles of fiber in existing conduit. Traffic Management Video wall, Workstations for video wall control, $220,000 Center Upgrades new equipment racks Citywide Change out of existing 170 controllers to new $885,000 controllers based on ATC Standards Bolsa Chica Street Install fiber optic cable in existing conduit from $600,000 Rancho Road to Warner Avenue. Edinger Avenue Install fiber optic cable in existing conduit from $200,000 Gothard Street to Beach Boulevard Total Estimated Cost $4,925,000 14 HB _1j5_ Item 9. - 34 SECTION FIVE TRAFFIC SIGNAL SYNCHRONIZATION ASSESSMENT REVIEW AND REVISE, AS MAY BE NECESSARY, THE TIMING OF TRAFFIC SIGNALS Significant tinning plan updates and projects completed FY 2013/2014 through 2016/2017 Over the past three years, the City of Huntington Beach has undertaken traffic signal retiming efforts on several of the routes within the City contained in OCTA's Regional Traffic Signal Synchronization Master Plan. Three of these arterial roadways were undertaken as part of OCTA's Regional Traffic Signal Synchronization Project (RTSSP) program. Smaller scale retiming efforts were undertaken as a result of timing and cycle length changes on a crossing arterial roadway. A brief summary is included for each of the routes within the City contained in OCTA's Regional Traffic Signal Synchronization Master Plan. The before and after performance results are presented in Table 5 and an overall summary of the cycle length adjustments over the past three years is included as Table 6. Figure 2 is the Corridor Synchronization Performance Index (CSPI) map for the City of Huntington Beach. The CSPI is a performance measure utilized by OCTA that factors the average speed, greens per red and the number of stops per mile. It is a 100 point scale with any score over 80 considered to be "very good progression" and a score under 60 being classified as `limited progression". The Adams Avenue corridor showed the greatest improvement, reflecting not only the implementation of coordinated traffic signal timing, but also the benefits of upgrading the communications from predominantly radio based, which has significant operational deficiencies, to predominately fiber optic cable and twisted pair cable. Warner Avenue and Edinger Avenue showed a smaller improvement, but it must be noted that these corridors were previously operating under coordination, so the opportunities for significant improvement were limited. Goldenwest Street showed a slight decrease in CSPI score. This is attributed to the fact that along with there being previous coordination in place prior to the retiming, the previously coordinated crossing arterials of Edinger Avenue and Warner Avenue presented fixed timing points, which limited the timing options for Goldenwest Street. The Talbert Avenue segment within Huntington Beach contains only two signalized intersections, so it is difficult to comment on the CSPI score form the City of Huntington Beach perspective. 15 Item 9. - 35 HB -136- Adams Avenue The timings on Adams Avenue were updated in 2016 as part of the Adams Avenue RTSSP project. The retiming effort expanded the limits of the coordinated timings approximately one-half mile westward to incorporate the intersections at Lake Street and at Delaware Street. Coordinated traffic signal timings were developed at cycle lengths of 130 seconds in the morning, 130 seconds in the midday and 140 seconds in the evening. This provides for continuous coordination in the midday and evening from Beach Boulevard to Ranger Lane. Since Caltrans runs a 120 second cycle in the morning, there is still a break point between Coldwater Lane and Newland Street during this period, although the traffic signals from Lake Street to Coldwater Lane are coordinated with respect to Beach Boulevard. Prior to the RTSSP project, Adams Avenue was dependent on radios for coordination which presented maintenance challenges. The RTSSP project installed conduit and fiber optic cable from the Traffic Management Center (TMC) in City Hall to the intersection of Adams Avenue and Magnolia Street. A federal Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) project provided new conduit and twisted copper interconnect cable from Magnolia Street to the Target driveway (approximately 700 feet west of Brookhurst Street), thus providing a complete hardwired interconnect system along Adams Avenue from Beach Boulevard to Ranger Lane. The RTSSP project also included the installation of three closed circuit television cameras along Adams Avenue. These images can now be viewed in the TMC. Beach Boulevard Beach Boulevard is a state highway, operated and maintained by Caltrans. The state indicates that there are no immediate plans for retiming. Bolsa Avenue The City of Huntington Beach maintains only five traffic signals at the far westerly end of Bolsa Avenue. With traffic volumes ranging from 15,000 to 19,000 vehicles per day, the negative impacts to cross street traffic will outweigh any benefit of traffic signal coordination on Bolsa Avenue. Bolsa Chica Street The City maintains coordinated traffic signal timings on Bolsa Chica Street from Bolsa Avenue to Warner Avenue. Prior to the retiming of Edinger Avenue in 2014, the cycle length was 120 seconds throughout the day (excluding the Warner Avenue intersection, which was previously retimed with different cycle lengths). With the retiming of both Warner Avenue and Edinger Avenue to a 140 second cycle length in the morning and afternoon and 130 seconds in the midday, gaps 16 FIB -137- Item 9. - 36 were created in the Bolsa Chica Street coordination timing. City staff developed new timings for the intersections at Heil Avenue and at Robinwood Lane to be compatible with the Edinger Avenue and Warner Avenue intersections. With this timing effort, there remains a single timing break along Bolsa Chica Street, between McFadden Avenue and Robinwood Lane. It is planned to retime Bolsa Chica Street from McFadden Avenue to the north to be compatible with the segment to the south as staff resources permit. Brookhurst Street Revised traffic signal timing was implemented in 2012 as part of an OCTA Traffic Light Synchronizatioh Project (TLSP). This project has been selected for retiming under the RTSSP program, scheduled to begin in 2017 or 2018. This project will also include the changeout of the existing twisted pair interconnect cable with fiber optic cable. Edinger Avenue The timings on Edinger Avenue were updated in 2014 as part of the Edinger Avenue RTSSP project. Coordinated traffic signal timings were developed at cycle lengths of 140 seconds in the morning, 130 seconds in the midday and 140 seconds in the evening for the segment from Bolsa Chica Street to Beach Boulevard. This provides for continuous coordination with the Caltrans-operated Beach Boulevard and Edinger Avenue intersection. Edinger Avenue from Newland Street eastward into Westminster, runs at a cycle length of 130 seconds during peak periods with a free operation during the mid-morning and mid-afternoon periods. The RTSSP project also repaired a broken and inoperative interconnect link between Beach Boulevard and Newland Street. This issue had precluded the City being able to communicate with or coordinate the Newland Street intersection. With the link restored, full communication is now operable. Goldenwest Street The timings on Goldenwest Street were updated in 2016 as part of the Goldenwest Street RTSSP project. Coordinated traffic signal timings were developed at cycle lengths of 140 seconds in the morning, 130 seconds in the midday and 140 seconds in the evening. This retiming also eliminated gaps in the system caused by the prior RTSSP timing projects along Edinger Avenue and Warner Avenue. This RTSSP project also replaced existing twisted copper interconnect cable with fiber optic cable from City Hall near Yorktown Avenue to Warner Avenue. Magnolia Street Magnolia Street operates at cycle lengths of 130 seconds in the morning and midday periods and 140 seconds in the evening period. This is consistent with Adams Avenue. A federal Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) grant 17 Item 9. - 37 HB -1318- installed interconnect conduit and cable from the Home Depot driveway (approximately 500 feet south of Garfield Avenue) to Adams Avenue, thus eliminating the need for radio communication north of Adams Avenue. Radio communication is still in use for the intersections south of Adams Avenue and has historically had maintenance concerns. The city has been approved for a RTSSP project along Magnolia Street to start in late 2017 or 2018 which will install new conduit from Adams Avenue to Hamilton Street and fiber optic cable from Garfield Avenue to Hamilton Avenue. This should improve reliability of the system and allow for faster responsiveness for monitoring and timing adjustments. Pacific Coast Highway Pacific Coast Highway is a state highway, operated and maintained by Caltrans. The state indicates that there are no immediate plans for retiming. Talbert Avenue Talbert Avenue was running free until new timing was installed as part of a RTSSP project in conjunction with the Cities of Fountain Valley and Santa Ana. A cycle length of 120 seconds operates in the midday and afternoon periods. The corridor is dependent on radios for communications which have historically been maintenance concerns for the City. Warner Avenue Warner Avenue from Algonquin Street to Newland Street was retimed in 2015 as part of an RTSSP project. Coordinated traffic signal timings were developed at cycle lengths of 140 seconds in the morning, 130 seconds in the midday and 140 seconds in the evening. This provides for continuous coordination with the Caltrans-operated Beach Boulevard and Warner Avenue intersection. This RTSSP project also replaced existing twisted copper interconnect cable with fiber optic cable from Algonquin Street to Newland Street. General Signal Timing Practice It is typically the City's practice to coordinate its major arterials at 140 seconds in the morning and afternoon periods and at 130 seconds in the midday to ensure consistency with Caltrans at Beach Boulevard. The exception to this practice is along Adams Avenue, Brookhurst Street and Magnolia Street which run at a cycle length of 130 seconds during the morning period. Caltrans morning cycle length south of Ellis Avenue is 120 seconds which cannot be accommodated along Adams Avenue, Magnolia Street and Brookhurst while maintaining an acceptable operation including accommodation of proper clearance intervals. 18 11B _f 39- Item 9. - 38 Coordination Equipment In 2011, the city completed a Traffic Signal System Master Plan (TSSMP) which planned out a communication system for the City. Principal elements in this plan include establishing hardwire communications to almost all signalized intersections and creating a fiber optic backbone for system reliability and redundancy. The RTSSP projects on Goldenwest Street, Warner Avenue and Adams Avenue provided for the initial fiber optic segments running from the City's traffic management center in City Hall into the field. The TSSMP identified two fiber optic backbones and additional conduit and cable links to ensure a comprehensive traffic signal system operation. Over the past three years, the City has upgraded approximately eight miles of its existing network of copper interconnect cable to fiber optic cable. In addition approximately one mile of new conduit and fiber cable has been installed along with approximately one and one-half miles of new communication conduit and cable. Currently many of the City's intersections utilize radios for communication which have presented maintenance concerns over the years. The City is continually investigating opportunities to install as much conduit as possible in order to replace these radio links. The RTTSP project on Adams Avenue enabled the removal of two radios on Magnolia Street and a third radio serving a field master on Brookhurst Street. A component of the recently completed Traffic Signal System Master Plan is to identify opportunities to communicate with the traffic signal systems in the adjacent cities and with Caltrans. Although no formal projects have been programmed, intertie opportunities have been identified with Westminster at the intersection of Bolsa Chica Street and Rancho Road, Fountain Valley at the intersection of Warner Avenue and Magnolia Street and with Costa Mesa at the intersection of Adams Avenue and Shantar Drive. Possible intertie locations with Caltrans will be discussed as part of the Interstate 405 widening efforts. Currently approved OCTA RTSSP and federal HSIP grants will install approximately five miles of additional conduit, toward a goal of interconnecting virtually every City traffic signal and providing the gateway for interagency communication. 19 Item 9. - 39 HB -140- CD L.() (Y) 00 �D . 4) �D CO CD L-() CD 0 U z 0 co co a) �D �D 0') Cf) m L-() m > wd (1) CD N N< M Q. 70 70 70 70 MW — w -- W -O —— (D z cy) 70 70 (13 70 70 a- a CY) N (13 Lo c) > LO - *�a Q- C)- > —, D D > M o O —0 U) 0) w E CD .(a) (Y) C:) CY) -0- 4) .2 LU U)Lij CL CO V) Ea) CL Lo (Y) N LLJ 0 < U) co z 0 w iL O co co 4.-> Lo 2 < NN N N N 0 L. Cf) z I--- Cf) w O 70 CL N CD (Y) LO Cf)Cf M CO a) N N N N N a) ) E < C) C%. z 0 LLJ LLJ cD z < CD 0 N N C:) CN Ch (13 (a) Lu -0 -- - _ - N Z 0 R R (3 () vo < L(L,) �E (0) o iii 0 co 0 CD 0 LLJ (a 70 70 z 3: >,,) (1) 0 > CL CL C: (a) U) CO U) M Of Of z z P o Cf) 0, E > 0 0 z (a) 0 N — i;- 0 z z < z o CL < 0 V F-- J 0 CO E -j < -j (f) Lu 0 < U F-- > 0 0 > L) (a) (a) ai CL 0) LL w (a) (13 CO >> > 75 a) > a to �o 0 a) < a) 0 > 0 < > < E Tz- < -FD a) C: 1. - '-E 0 �5 M o g 0 M M M,Z3 =2 CL �E5 0 M U) -0 a) 0 M M o —1 —1 -0—1 —1 , < M co M Lu CL >i> M _0 o a) CZ, HB -141- Item 9. - 40 O O i U O N O O m co co Q' � O U (SS O ~O O J U 3 U N V C) � W U) � ctS w m0 LLLL m0 � � L~L N Q O (SS Q N 0 O 025 Nm � O O N N CO N 0 N N o ` � v- Z O N O -O O (7 O N r j C 6 0 N Z CO r` r (I1 Co CO r O O L N O70 � — 0co N co Z mod-- r LU w r w w -C) w UOw O OM W r E O�(Dw LL o w W 0 mLLi w M < m M < coz m Z O U) m M Z N H —� LU a� Q LU a� Z O > N V C/ C 7O N ¢ Q o > U to J o Q 7O a� c CD E 70 a� co 70 o Y E -Q L it Y U (o 0 °m z � 0 CL Q r) O � Q U) a) N � U � � c LU Q a� c� n. Q Item 9. - 41 KB -142- W w N �4 s 10151E+6 f 1' h obd, _ r. tZwi m t " 9 osy4 T'. h c> sr 1LMa 5g - Z O4i p- ti (; ~ z �. €€ 1 Rj rn a� \ �\ rn aOSkiVH E FiN iAH If 1a—`� O U ,�^ '/ 0O w 3 > �Or�� V , p a U Ob`� ` U VI1N33YId s z LLJ oavrn r� aavrn ",_ m b, p LsanHxooa6 cr 0 0 a Q a a co z�avHsn6 r/ h o a a = z � o _ _ z _ Z w w Q L � x r. 7 f j• 3 VnONO" ME o m ONVI 3NLL— f LLJ s S 3aVMV130 \.G N3AOOH 3NY1 CD a O Oyy ~ LU w+ S Dr [WVtIVZiJ AL 0 / U _ < ,- •/ Z q .�k e4 1 1 NtnoNOEJ7 -- e,r.a.�[ U C) w o rn m c o co m rnuj m m o v �i LLi c oo 2 o U c 8 t c i � o t U >' ' o _ E Eo > > {-' P ~ w a i m 1 X•Y HB -143- Item 9. - 42 ATTACHMENT #4 ---------- RESOLUTION NO. 2012-23 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH ADOPTING THE DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE CAL CULA TION AND NEXUS REPORT FOR THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH, AND ESTABLISHING NEW AND REVISED DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES FOR ALL DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THE CITY WHEREAS, several policies within the City's General Plan require that new development mitigate its share of the impacts to the natural and built environments and be fiscally neutral so as to not result in a net economic loss for the City; and Such General Plan policies include the maintenance of existing quality of life, maintenance of existing service levels and funding of new facilities, the requirement of new development to mitigate a fair share of its impacts, and calling for the use of impact fees to fund needed improvements to serve new development, among other policies; and In accordance with these General Plan policies, the City Council has directed staff in the past to create development impact fees in accordance with State law. Said impact fees were codified in Chapter 17.65 and Chapter 17.66 of the Huntington Beach Municipal Code as well as Huntington Beach Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance Chapter 230.20. Pursuant to each ordinance set forth above, the amount of the development impact fee is to be set and/or updated by resolution of the City Council; and Subsequently, and periodically, staff has conducted comprehensive reviews of the City's development impact fees to determine whether those fees are adequate to defray the cost of public facilities related to new development; those fees are set forth in Resolutions 6164,2006- 23, 2000-97, 2004-88, 99-60 and 96-71; 2002-129, 2004-88 and The City contracted with Revenue & Cost Specialists, LLC to provide a updated comprehensive evaluation of the City's existing development impact fees; and Revenue & Cost Specialists, LLC prepared a report, entitled Development Impact Fee Calculation and Nexus Report for the City of Huntington Beach, dated October, 2011 as amended April 27, 2012 (the "Nexus Report"), that provides an evaluation of existing development impact fees, recommends an increase and change in methodology in certain development impact fees, the creation of new impact fees and establishes the nexus between the imposition of such impact fees and the estimated reasonable cost of providing the service for which the fees are charged; and The Nexus Report has been available for public review and comment; and The Nexus Report substantiates the need for a modification to existing fees to change certain methodology as well as creation of new impact fees; and 1 006/79289 Item 9. - 43 H g _1 ,14- Resolution No.2012-23 The City has collected development impact fees to mitigate the impacts of new development, including fees for transportation, park land acquisition and development, library and other public facilities since the adoption of the respective ordinances and resolutions; and The City Council desires to repeal certain resolutions, create and update other development impact fee resolutions in accordance with the calculations and recommendations contained in the Nexus Report; and In compliance with the Mitigation Fee Act, California Government Code section 66000 et seq., the City Council held a noticed public hearing on the proposed increase in development impact fees at its regular meeting on June 18 , 2012, to solicit public input on the proposed increases to development impact fees, NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach does hereby resolve as follows: 1. Findings pursuant to Government Code section 66001. The City Council finds and determines that the Nexus Report complies with California Government Code section 66001, and as to each of the proposed fees to be imposed on new development: (a) Identifies the purpose of the fee; (b) Identifies the use to which the fee will be put; (c) Shows a reasonable relationship between the use of the fee and the type of development project on which the fee is imposed; (d) Demonstrates a reasonable relationship between the need for the public facilities and the type of development projects on which the fee is imposed; and (e) Demonstrates a reasonable relationship between the amount of the fee and the cost of the public facilities or portion of the public facilities attributable to the development on which the fee is imposed. 2. Fees for Uses Consistent with the Nexus Report. The City Council hereby determines that the fees imposed, pursuant to this resolution shall be used solely to finance the public facilities and/or equipment and park land acquisition described or identified in the respective ordinances and Nexus Report. 3. Approval of Items in the Nexus Report. The City Council has considered the specific public facilities, equipment and park land acquisition cost estimates identified in the Nexus Report and each ordinance thereto and hereby approves such public facilities, equipment and park land acquisition cost and cost estimates and further finds that the cost estimates serve as a reasonable basis for calculating and imposing the development impact fees as set forth in the Nexus Report. 2 12-3209.006/79289 RB -145- Item 9. - 44 Resolution No. 2012-23 4. Consistency with General Plan. The City Council finds that the public facilities equipment and park land acquisition and fee methodology identified in the respective ordinances and Nexus Report are consistent with the City's General Plan and, in particular, those policies that require new development to mitigate its share of the impacts to City infrastructure and to be fiscally neutral. 5. Differentiation among Public Facilities. The City Council finds that the public facilities identified in the Nexus Report and funded through the collection of development impact fees recommended in the Nexus Report are separate and distinct from those public facilities funded through other fees presently imposed and collected by the City. To the extent that other fees imposed and collected by the City, including Specific Plan fees are used to fund the construction of the same public facilities identified in the respective ordinances and Nexus Report, then such other fees shall be a credit against the applicable development impact fees. Notwithstanding the above provision, this resolution shall not be deemed to affect the imposition or collection of the water and sewer connection fees authorized by the Huntington Beach Municipal Code. 6. CEQA Finding. The adoption of the Nexus Report and the increase in development impact fees are not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act in that pursuant to CEQA Guidelines, section 15378(b) (4), the creation of government funding mechanisms which do not involve any commitment to any specific project which may cause a significant effect on the environment, is not defined as a "project" under CEQA. 7. Adoption of Report. The Nexus Report as amended April 27, 2012, including Appendices, is hereby adopted. 8. Fee Imposed. The new Development Impact Fees set by this resolution shall not apply to projects that have received discretionary project entitlement approval on or before June 5, 2012 and the following milestones are met: 1. Project applicant has submitted an approved application for building permits within 180 days after the fee going into effect or no later than February 18, 2013. 2. From the time of initial building permit application, the project makes continued progress toward satisfying plan check comments. 3. Building Permits are issued within 360 days after the fees go into effect. An exception to the above milestones is the involvement of an outside third party regulatory agency. In such cases the 180 days to make building permit application will begin when the developer receives clearance from that agency. The City Manager shall have the authority, in his/her sole discretion, to extend milestone dates for qualifying "grandfathered" projects. All other projects are subject to the fees then in effect. All existing Development Impact Fees remain in effect until final action is taken on this resolution and respective ordinances. In the event any portion of this resolution is held invalid, the previously approved development impact fee shall automatically apply. 9. Timingo . The development impact fees imposed by this resolution shall be paid pursuant to the ordinances or resolution creating each separate fee. Until final action is 3 906/79289 Item 9. - 45 HB -146- Resolution No, 2012-23 taken by City Council adopting the ordinances or resolution referenced herein, resolutions 6164, 2006-23, 2000-97, 99-60, 2004-88 and 96-71 shall remain in effect. 10. Amount of Fee. The City Council hereby approves and adopts the Development Impact Fees as set forth in Exhibit "A," attached hereto and incorporated herein as well as Nexus Report Schedules 3.2, 4.3, 5.2, 6.2, 7.1, 8.1, and 8.4. Exhibit A and the Nexus Report sets forth the methodology and aggregate amount imposed as a development impact fee for both residential and nonresidential land uses and also sets forth the breakdown of each development impact fee by type of facility. The amount of the development impact fees excluding traffic impact fees shall be automatically modified annually pursuant to the the percentage of increase or decrease in the Los Angeles-Anaheim-Riverside All Urban Consumer Price Index (CPI) or any relevant successor for the Orange County area, from March to March of the preceding twelve (12)months. Traffic impact fees shall be increased using the Engineering News Record's construction cost index as reported for the twelve month period ending in March of each year. The escalator indices provided herein shall not take effect until March of 2016, 11. Use of fee. The development impact fees shall be solely used for the purposes described in the respective ordinances creating the fees and the Nexus Report. Fees collected pursuant to existing ordinances and resolutions shall be maintained and used exclusively for those purposes and accounts for these fees shall remain in effect and shall be maintained by the City Manager or his/her designee. Fees collected under any of the categories listed in the Nexus Report may be used to finance the construction or implementation of any public facility listed in those categories to the extent that use of the fees may not exceed the percentage allocated to new development of all of the public facilities listed in the category, or sub-category. 12. Fee Determination by of Use. A. Residential Development. Development impact fees for residential development shall be based upon the type of unit constructed. The development impact fee categories as shown in Exhibit A generally correspond to the City's land use designations in the land use element of the City's General Plan. B. Nonresidential Land Uses. Development impact fees for nonresidential land uses shall be based upon the square footage of the building or other measurement detailed in the respective development impact fee ordinances. The development impact fee categories as shown in Exhibit A generally correspond to the City's land use designations in the land use element of the City's General Plan. C. Uses Not Specified. In the event that there are land uses not specified in Exhibit A, the development impact fee for such use shall be determined by the City Manager or 4 12-3209.006/79289 HB -147- Item 9. - 46 Resolution No. 2012-23 his/her designee who shall determine such fee based on an analysis of the impacts of the proposed use on public facilities, equipment and/or park land. 13. Prior Resolutions Superseded. As provided herein the development impact fees approved and adopted by this resolution shall supersede and repeal any previously adopted development impact fee resolutions concerning the same, including 6164, 96-71, 99-60, 2000-97, 2004-88 and 2006-23, 2002-129, 2004-88. 14. Severability. If any action, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this resolution, the Nexus Report, or other attachments thereto, shall be held invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this resolution the Nexus Report, or other attachments thereto or fees levied by this resolution that can be given effect without the invalid provisions or application of fees. In the event any section of this resolution is held invalid the previously adopted affected fees shall be automatically reinstate as if never repealed or modified herein. 15. Effective Date. Consistent with California Government Code section 66017(a), the fees as identified in attached Exhibit "A" adopted by this resolution shall take effect sixty (60) days following final action taken on the respective ordinances or amendments thereto by the City Council. 16. Appeals. Appeals of any fees, including methodology, use, land valuation etc. created pursuant to this resolution shall be conducted as set forth in Huntington Beach Municipal Code Chapter 17.73. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach at a regular meeting thereof held on the 18 day of June 0 12 01 Mayor 7Ci Oa ND APPROVED: INITI A OVED: er Deputy City anager APPROVED AS TO FORM: �a ^ City Attorney 5 i""Q A06/79289 Item 9. - 47 HB -148- Exhibit A Exhibit A-3 Aternative Fee Schedule No. 3 Development Impact Fees (Effective 9/2/2012) 30% Circulation Park Land/ System Open Space Law Fire (Streets, & Facilities Enforcement Suppression Signals, Public Library (No Tract Land Use Facilities Facilities Bridges) Facilities Map) Detached Dwelling Units (per Unit) $119 $277 $1,800 $1,091 $6,802 Attached Dwelling Units (per Unit) $245 $115 $1,238 $519 $4,632 Moblle Home Dwelling Units (per Unit) $111 $475 $940 $479 $3,351 Hotel/Motel Lodging Units (per Unit) No Fee No Fee $172/trip $0.04/SF $0.23/SF Resort Lodging Units (per Unit) No Fee No Fee $172/trip $0.04/SF $0.23/SF Commercial/Office Uses(per sq. ft.) $0.312 $0.099 $4.175 No Fee $0.447 Industrial/Manufacturing Uses (per sq. ft.) $0.133 $0.009 $1,279 No Fee $0.393 Development Impact Fees (Effective 9/2/2013) 60% Circulation Park Land/ System Open Space Law Fire (Streets, & Facilities Enforcement Suppression Signals, Public Library (No Tract Land Use Facilities Facilities Bridges) Facilities Map) Detached Dwelling Units (per Unit) $238 $553 $2,092 $1,126 $11,540 Attached Dwelling Units (per Unit) $489 $229 $1,417 $686 $8,576 Mobile Home Dwelling Units (per Unit) $221 $950 $1,094 $588 $6,701 Hotel/Motel Lodging Units (per Unit) No Fee No Fee $172/trip $0.04/SF $0.23/SF Resort Lodging Units (per Unit) No Fee No Fee $172/trip $0.04/SF $0.23/SF Commercial/Office Uses (per sq. ft.) $0.625 $0.197 $4.175 No Fee $0.664 Industrial/Manufacturing Uses (per sq. ft.) $0.266 $0.018 $1.498 No Fee $0.555 Development Impact Fees (Effective 9/2/2014) 90% Circulation Park Land/ System Open Space Law Fire (Streets, & Facilities Enforcement Suppression Signals, Public Library (No Tract Land Use Facilities Facilities Bridges) Facilities Map) i Detached Dwelling Units (per Unit) $356 $830 $2,385 $1,160 $16,278 Attached Dwelling Units (per Unit) $734 $344 $1,597 $852 $12,520 Mobile Home Dwelling Units (per Unit) $332 $1,425 $1,248 $697 $10,052 Hotel/Motel Lodging Units (per Unit) No Fee No Fee $172/trip $0.04/SF $0.23/SF Resort Lodging Units (per Unit) No Fee No Fee $172/trip $0.04/SF $0.23/SF Commercial/Office Uses (per sq. ft.) $0.937 $0.296 $4.175 No Fee $0.882 Industrial/Manufacturing Uses (per sq. ft.) $0.399 $0.027 $1.716 No Fee $0.718 Date Printed:5/24/2012,June 4 Resolutlon 30_60_90 Item 9. - 49 HB -150- Page 1 Exhibit A-3 Aternative Fee Schedule No. 3 Schedule of Rates for Traffic Impact Fees (Effective 9/2/2012) Recommended Cost per 30%Increase 1000 sq.ft,dwelling unit Scenario Cost per Adjusted Average Trip-end Additional Cost per or other unit(90%of 1000 sq.ft,dwelling Land Use Trip Ends Distance to Trip Trip Miles Trip Mile original) unit or other unit RESIDENTIAL LAND USES. per-Ural' Detached Dwelling Unit 8.76 7.9 0.5 34.6 $ 50.22 $ 1,737.61 /Unit $ 1,722.55 /Unit Apartment 6.15 7.9 0.5 24.3 $ 50.22 $ 1,220.35 /Unit $ 1,209,60 /Unit Condominlum/Townhouse 5.36 7.9 0.5 21.2 $ 50.22 $ 1,064.66 /Unit $ 1,054.55 /Unit Mobile Home Dwelling 4.57 7.9 0.5 18.1 $ 50.22 $ 908.98 /Unit $ 8.09.59_ /Unit RESORTITOURIS'll(pe.r Unit or Entry.Qoor) _ - Hotel 6.291 7.61 0.51 23.9 $ 64.34 $ 1,537.73 /Room $ 1;218.63 /Room All Suites Hotel 3.771 7.61 0.51 14.3 $ 64.34 $ 920.06 /Room $ 726.93 /Room Motel 4.341 7.61 0.51 16.5 $ 64.34 $ 1,061.61 /Room $ 841.02 /Room INIOUSTRIAL_(-per'1;000 SF) - - - General Light Industrial 6.17 9.0 0.5 27.8 $ 64.34 $ 1,788.65 /1,000 sf $ 11279.46 /1,000 Heavy Industrial 5.97 9.0 0.5 26.9 $ 64.34 $ 1,730.75 11,000 sf $ 1,238.01 /1,000 Manufacturing 2.73 9.0 0.5 12.3 $ 64.34 $ 791.38 /1,000 sf $ 566.11 /1,000 Warehousing 4.391 9.01 0.51 19.8 $ 64.34 1 $ 1,273.93 1/1,000 sf 1 $ 910.74 /1,000 COMMERCIAL(per 1,000 SF) - Office Park 7.42 8.8 0.5 32.6 $ 64.34 $ 2,097.48 /1,000 sf $ 1,52Z61 f,000 Research Park 5.01 8.8 0.5 22.0 $ 64.34 $ 1,415.48 /1,000 sf $ 1,027.85 of,000 Business Park 9.34 8.8 0.5 41.1 $ 64.34 $ 2,644.37 /1,000 sf $ 1,917.85 f,000 Bldg.Materials/Lumber 29.35 4.3 0.5 63.1 $ 64.34 $ 4,059.85 /1,000 sf $ 4,059.85 /1,000 Store sf Garden Center 23.45 4.3 0.5 50.4 $ 64.34 $ 3,242.74 11,000 sf $ 3,242.74 sf,000 Movie Theater 2.47 4.3 0.5 5.3 $ 64.34 $ 341.00 /1,000 sf $ 341.00 f,000 Church 5.92 4.3 0.5 12.7 $ 64.34 $ 817.12 /1,000 sf $ 817.12 sf,000 Medical-Dental Office 22.21 8.8 0.5 97.7 $ 64.34 $ 6,286.02 11,000 sf $ 4,559,89 f 1000 General Office Building 7.16 8.8 0.5 31.5 $ 64.34 $ 2,026.71 /1,000 sf $ 1,470.08 sf'000 Shopping in Center 30.2 4.3 0.5 64.9 $ 64.34 $ 4,175.67 11,000 sf $ 4,175.67 sf,000 Hospital 11.42 4.3 0.5 24.6 $ 64.34 $ 1,582.76 /1,000 sf $ 1,582.76 sf,000 Discount Center 62.93 4.3 0.5 135.3 $ 64.34 $ 8,706.20 /1,000 sf $ 8,705.20 f'00D High-Turnover Restaurant 8.9 4.3 0.5 19.1 $ 64.34 $ 1,228.89 /1,000 sf $ 1,228.89 sf,000 Convenience Market 43.57 4.3 0.5 93.7 $ 64.34 $ 6,028.66 /1,000 sf $ 6,028.66 f,000 Office Park 13.97 4.3 0.5 30.0 $ 64.34 $ 1.930.20 /1,000 sf $ 1,930.20 sf,000 i OTHER(as noted) ` Cemetery 3.07 4.3 0.5 6.6 $ 64.34 $ 424.64 /Acre $ 424.64 /Acre Service Station/Market 107.69 4.3 0.5 231.5 $ 64.34 $ 14,894.71 /Fuel $ 14,894.71 /Fuel av Positlon Position Service Station wlCar 99.35 4.3 0.5 213.6 $ 64.34 $ 13,743.02 /Fuel $ 13,743.02 /Fuel Wash Position Position HR -151- Item 9. - 50 Exhibit A-3 Aternative Fee Schedule No. 3 Schedule of Rates for Traffic Impact Fees (Effective 9/2/2013) Recommended Cost per 60%Increase Scenario 1000 sq.ft, dwelling unit Cost per 1000 sq.ft, Adjusted Average Trip-end Additional Cost per or other unit(90%of dwelling unit or other Land Use Trip Ends Distance to Trip Trip Miles Trip Mile original) unit RESIDENTIAL,LAND USES(per Unit) - Detached Dwelling Unit 8.76 7.9 0.5 34.6 $ 57.39 $ 1,985.69 /Unit $ 1,938.39 /Unit Apartment 6.15 7.9 0.5 24.3 $ 57.39 $ 1,394.58 /Unit $ 1,361.20 /Unit Condominium/Townho 5.36 7.9 0.5 21.2 $ 57.39 $ 1,216.67 /Unit $ 1,187.17 /Unit use Mobile Home Dwelling 4.57 7.9 0.5 18.1 $ 57.39 $ 1,038.76 /Unit $ 1,013.15 /Unit RESORT/TOURIST-(per Unit or:Entry-Door) Hotel 6.291 7,61 0.51 23.9 $ 64.34 1$ 1,537.73 1/Room 1$ 1,355.39 1 /Room All Suites Hotel 3.77 7.6 0.5 14.3 $ 64.34 1 $ 920,06 1/Room $ 811.41 /Room Motel 4.341 7.61 0.51. 16.5 $ 64.34 1 $ 1,061.61 1/Room $ 936.66 /Room INDUSTRIAL,(per 1,000 SF) General Light Industrial 6.17 9.0 0.5 27.8 $ 64.34 $ 1,788.65 /1,000 sf $ 1,497.69 /1,000 sf Heavy Industrial 5.97 9.0 0.5 26.9 $ 64.34 $ 1,730.75 /1,000 sf $ 1,449.18 /1,000 sf Manufacturing 2.73 9.0 0.5 12.3 $ 64.34 $ 791.38 /1,000 sf $ 662.65 /1,000 sf Warehousing 4.39 9.0 0.5 19.8 $ 64.34 $ 1,273.93 /1,000 sf $ 1,066.39 /1,000 sf COMAQERCIAL{per 1,000 SF) Office Park 7.42 8.8 0.5 32.6 $ 64.34 $ 2,097.48 /1,000 sf $ 1,768.99 /1,000 sf Research Park 5.01 8.8 0.5 22.0 $ 64.34 $ 1,415.48 /1,000 sf $ 1.193.98 /1,000 sf Business Park 9.34 8.8 0.5 41.1 $ 64.34 $ 2,644.37 /1,000 sf $ 2,229.22 /1,000 sf Bldg. Materlals/Lumber 29.35 4.3 0.5 63.1 $ 64.34 $ 4,059.85 /1,000 sf $ 4,059.85 /1,000 sf Store Garden Center 23.45 4.3 0.5 5o.4 $ 64.34 $ 3,242.74 /1,000 sf $ 3,242.74 /1,000 sf Movie Theater 2.47 4.3 0.5 5.3 $ 64.34 $ 341.00 /1,000 sf $ 341.00 /1,000 sf Church 5.92 4.3 o,5 12.7 $ 64.34 $ 817.12 /1,000 sf $ 817.12 /1,000 sf Medical-Dental Office 22.21 8.8 0.5 97.7 $ 64.34 $ 6,286.02 /1,000 sf $ 5,299.66 /1,000 sf General Office Building 7.16 8.8 0.5 31.5 $ 64.34 $ 2,026.71 /1,000 sf $ 1,708.63 /1,000 sf Shopping Center 3o.2 4.3 0.5 64.9 $ 64.34 $ 4,175.67 /1,000 sf $ 4,175.67 /1,000 sf Hospital 11.42 4.3 0.5 24.6 $ 64.34 $ 1,582.76 /1,000 sf $ 1,582.76 /1,000 sf Discount Center 62.93 4.3 0.5 135.3 $ 64.34 $ 8,705.20 /1,000 sf $ 8,705.20 /1,000 sf Hlgh-Turnover 8.9 4.3 0.5 19.1 $ 64.34 $ 1,228.89 /1,000 sf $ 1,228.89 /1,000 sf Restaurant Convenience Market 43.57 4.31 0.51 93.7 $ 64.34 $ 6,028.66 /1,000 sf $ 6,028.66 /1,000 sf Office Park 13.971 4.31 0.51 30.0 $ 64.34 $ 1,930.20 /1,000 sf 1 $ 1,930.20 /1,000 sf OTHER(a noted)- Cemetery 3.07 4,3 0.5 6.6 $ 64.34 $ 424.64 /Acre $ 424.64 /Acre Service Station/Market 107.69 4.3 0.5 231.5 $ 64.34 $ 14,894.71 /Fuel $ 14,894.71 /Fuel av Position Position Service Stationw/Car g9.35 4,3 0.5 213,E $ 64,34 $ 13,743.02 /Fuel $ 13,743.02 /Fuel Wash Position Position Page 3 Item 9. - 51 HB -152- Exhibit A-3 Aternative Fee Schedule No. 3 Schedule of Rates for Traffic Impact Fees (Effective 9/2/2014) Recommended Cost per Adjusted Average Trip-end to Additional Cost per 1000 sq.ft, dwelling unit or Land Use Trip Ends Distance Trip Trip Miles Trip Mile other unit(90% of original) RESIDENTIAL LAND`USES (per Unit) Detached Dwelling Unit 8.76 7.9 0.5 34.6 $ 64.34 $ 2,226.16 /Unit Apartment 6.15 T9 0.5 24.3 $ 64.34 $ 1,563.46 /Unit Condom Inlum/Townhou 5.36 7.9 0.5 21.2 $ 64.34 $ 1,364.01 /Unit se Mobile Home Dwelling 4.57 7.9 0.5 18.1 $ 64.34 $ 1,164.55 /Unit RES6R0T0URIST.(per Unit or.Entryboor) - :_ - Hotel 6.29 7.61 0.5 23.9 $ 64.34 $ 1,537.73 /Room All Suites Hotel 3.771 7.61 0.5 14.3 $ 64.34 $ 920.06 /Room Motel 4.341 7.61 0.5 16.5 $ 64.34 $ 1.061.61 /Room ItMUSTRIAL( per,-1,000.SF) General Light Industrial 6.17 9.0 0.5 27.8 $ 64.34 $ 1,788.65 /1,000 sf Heavy Industrial 5.97 9.0 0.5 26.9 $ 64.34 $ 1,730.75 /1,000 sf Manufacturing 2.73 9.0 0.5 12.3 $ 64.34 $ 791.38 /1,000 sf Warehousing 4.391 9.01 0.51 19.8 $ 64.34 $ 1,273.93 1 /1,000 sf COMMERCIAL(per T,000 SF) Office Park 7.42 8.8 0.5 32.6 $ 64.34 $ 2,097.48 /1,000 sf Research Park 5.01 8.8 0.5 22.0 $ 64.34 $ 1,415.48 /1,000 sf Business Park 9.34 8.8 0.5 41.1 $ 64.34 $ 2,644.37 /1,000 sf Bldg. Materials/Lumber 29.35 4.3 0.5 63.1 $ 64.34 $ 4,059.85 /1,000 sf Store Garden Center 23.45 4.3 0.5 50.4 $ 64.34 $ 3,242.74 /1,000 sf Movie Theater 2.47 4.3 0.5 5.3 $ 64.34 $ 341.00 /1,000 sf Church 5.92 4.3 0.5 12.7 $ 64.34 $ 817.12 /1,000 sf Medical-Dental Office 22.21 8.8 0.5 97.7 $ 64.34 $ 6,286.02 /1,000 sf General Office Building 7.16 8.8 0.5 31.5 $ 64.34 $ 2,026.71 /1,000 sf Shopping Center 30.2 4.3 0.5 64.9 $ 64.34 $ 4,175.67 /1,000 sf Hospital 11.42 4.3 0.5 24.6 $ 64.34 $ . 1,582.76 /1,000 sf Discount Center 62.93 4.3 0.5 135.3 $ 64.34 $ 8,705.20 /1,000 sf High-Turnover 8.9 4.3 0.5 19.1 $ 64.34 $ 1,228.89 /1,000 sf Restaurant Convenience Market 43.57 4.3 0.5 93.7 $ 64.34 $ 6,028.66 /1,000 sf Office Park 13.97 4.3 0.5 30.0 $ 64.34 $ 1,930.20 /1,000 sf OTHER(as-noted) Cemetery 3.07 4.3 0.5 6.6 $ 64.34 $ 424.64 /Acre Service Station/Market 107.69 4.3 0.5 231.5 $ 64.34 $ 14,894.71 /Fuel av Position Service Station w/Car 99.35 4.3 0.5 213.6 $ 64.34 $ 13,743.02 /Fuel Wash Position HB -153- Item 9. - 52 Res. No. 2012-23 STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF ORANGE j ss: CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH j 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 June 18, 2012 by the following vote: AYES: Shaw, Carchio, Bohr, Boardman NOES: Harper, Dwyer, Hansen ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None 9?") 0�- Jill xw) Ci y Clerk and ex-officio Clerk of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach, California Item 9. - 53 HB -154-