HomeMy WebLinkAbout2019-07-01 Agenda PacketMEETING ASSISTANCE NOTICE: In accordance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, services are available to members of our
community who require special assistance to participate in public meetings. If you require special assistance, 48-hour prior notification will
enable the City to make reasonable arrangements for an assisted listening device (ALD) for the hearing impaired, American Sign
Language interpreters, a reader during the meeting and/or large print agendas. Please contact the City Clerk’s Office at (714) 536-5227 for
more information, or request assistance from the staff or Sergeant-at-Arms at the meeting.
PUBLIC COMMENTS: To address the legislative body on items of interest not scheduled for public hearing, Request to Speak forms will be
made available at the meeting and are collected by the staff or Sergeant at Arms. Some legislative bodies may provide different Request to
Speak forms for public hearing items.
AUDIO/VIDEO ACCESS TO BROADCASTED MEETINGS: City Council and Planning Commission meetings are televised live on HBTV-3
Channel 3, and can be viewed via live or archived website at https://huntingtonbeach.legistar.com.
AGENDA
CITY COUNCIL/PUBLIC FINANCING AUTHORITY
Monday, July 1, 2019
Council Chambers
2000 Main Street
Huntington Beach, CA 92648
Study Session - 4:00 PM / Closed Session - 5:00 PM
Regular Meeting - 6:00 PM
MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
ERIK PETERSON, Mayor
LYN SEMETA, Mayor Pro Tem
PATRICK BRENDEN, Councilmember
KIM CARR, Councilmember
BARBARA DELGLEIZE, Councilmember
JILL HARDY, Councilmember
MIKE POSEY, Councilmember
STAFF
DAVE KIFF, Interim City Manager
MICHAEL E. GATES, City Attorney
ROBIN ESTANISLAU, City Clerk
ALISA BACKSTROM, City Treasurer
1
City Council/Public Financing
Authority
AGENDA July 1, 2019
4:00 PM - COUNCIL CHAMBERS
CALL TO ORDER
ROLL CALL
Brenden, Carr, Semeta, Peterson, Posey, Delgleize, Hardy
ANNOUNCEMENT OF SUPPLEMENTAL COMMUNICATIONS (Received After Agenda
Distribution)
PUBLIC COMMENTS PERTAINING TO STUDY SESSION / CLOSED SESSION ITEMS (3 Minute
Time Limit)
STUDY SESSION
19-6781.Police Department Presentation
RECESS TO CLOSED SESSION
CLOSED SESSION ANNOUNCEMENT(S)
19-7512.Mayor Peterson to announce: Pursuant to Government Code §
54957.6, the City Council shall recess into Closed Session to meet
with its designated labor negotiator: David Kiff, Interim City
Manager; also in attendance: Robert Handy, Police Chief; Chuck
Adams, Interim Chief Financial Officer; and Michele Warren,
Director of Human Resources regarding the following: Police
Management Association (PMA).
CLOSED SESSION
19-7003.Pursuant to Government Code § 54956.9(d)(2), the City Council shall
recess into Closed Session to confer with the City Attorney
regarding potential litigation. Number of cases, two (2).
19-7334.Pursuant to Government Code § 54956.9(d)(1), the City Council shall
recess into Closed Session to confer with the City Attorney
regarding the following lawsuit: Moore (Neal), et al. v. City of
Huntington Beach, et al.; OCSC Case No.: 30-2019-01071686.
19-7345.Pursuant to Government Code § 54956.9(d)(1), the City Council shall
recess into Closed Session to confer with the City Attorney
Page 1 of 7
2
City Council/Public Financing
Authority
AGENDA July 1, 2019
regarding the following lawsuit: City of Huntington Beach v. The
Estate of Anne L. Hunt, Michael Melchiorre, et al.; OCSC Case No.
30-2019-01072448.
19-7356.Pursuant to Government Code § 54956.9(d)(1), the City Council shall
recess into Closed Session to confer with the City Attorney
regarding the following lawsuit: City of Huntington Beach v. City of
Fountain Valley, et al. (PCTA); OCSC Case No. 30-2019-01071652.
19-7367.Pursuant to Government Code § 54956.9(d)(1), the City Council shall
recess into Closed Session to confer with the City Attorney
regarding the following lawsuit: Kennedy Commission, et al. v.
City of Huntington Beach (Beach-Edinger Corridor); OCSC Case No
30-2015-00801675.
19-7378.Pursuant to Government Code § 54956.9(d)(1), the City Council shall
recess into Closed Session to confer with the City Attorney
regarding the following lawsuit: Tabares (Tiffany) v. City of
Huntington Beach and Eric Esparza; USDC Case No.: 8:18-cv-00821
JLS (JDEx).
19-7389.Pursuant to Government Code § 54956.9(d)(1), the City Council shall
recess into Closed Session to confer with the City Attorney
regarding the following lawsuit: Duran (Anthony) v. City of
Huntington Beach, et al.; USDC Case No.: 8:18-cv-00659 JVS
(DFMx).
19-73910.Pursuant to Government Code § 54956.9(d)(1), the City Council shall
recess into Closed Session to confer with the City Attorney
regarding the following lawsuit: Murnane (Richard) v. City of
Huntington Beach, et al.; Workers’ Compensation Claim No. COHB
15-0268.
19-74011.Pursuant to Government Code § 54956.9(d)(1), the City Council shall
recess into Closed Session to confer with the City Attorney
regarding the following lawsuit: Jackson (Ronald) v. City of
Huntington Beach, et al.; Workers’ Compensation Claim No. COHB
18-0059.
19-74812.Pursuant to Government Code § 54957.6, the City Council shall
recess into Closed Session to meet with its designated labor
Page 2 of 7
3
City Council/Public Financing
Authority
AGENDA July 1, 2019
negotiator: David Kiff, Interim City Manager; also in attendance:
Robert Handy, Police Chief; Chuck Adams, Interim Chief Financial
Officer; and Michele Warren, Director of Human Resources
regarding the following: Police Management Association (PMA).
19-74913.Pursuant to Government Code § 54956.9(d)(1), the City Council shall
recess into Closed Session to confer with the City Attorney
regarding the following lawsuit: AKM Consulting Engineers, Inc. v.
City of Huntington Beach; OCSC Case No.: 30-2017-00902740.
19-75414.Pursuant to Government Code § 54956.9(d)(1), the City Council shall
recess into Closed Session to confer with the City Attorney
regarding the following lawsuit: In Re: National Prescription Opiate
Litigation; USDC - Ohio Case No. 1:17-md-02804-DAP.
6:00 PM – COUNCIL CHAMBERS
RECONVENE CITY COUNCIL/PUBLIC FINANCING AUTHORITY MEETING
ROLL CALL
Brenden, Carr, Semeta, Peterson, Posey, Delgleize, Hardy
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
INVOCATION
In permitting a nonsectarian invocation, the City does not intend to proselytize or advance
any faith or belief. Neither the City nor the City Council endorses any particular religious
belief or form of invocation.
19-64015.Mark Currie of the Greater Huntington Beach Interfaith Council
CLOSED SESSION REPORT BY CITY ATTORNEY
AWARDS AND PRESENTATIONS
19-68916.Mayor Peterson to call on Retired Army General Larry Davis of
Huntington Beach and President of the Aerospace Education
Foundation of Huntington Beach for the presentation of three
scholarships to young people who will begin their STEM careers
this fall.
19-72117.Mayor Peterson to call on Mr. Lloyd Glick, who was part of the
Page 3 of 7
4
City Council/Public Financing
Authority
AGENDA July 1, 2019
American forces liberating Guam in World War 2, and will be a
guest of honor at the upcoming 75th Guam Liberation festivities.
ANNOUNCEMENT OF SUPPLEMENTAL COMMUNICATIONS (Received After Agenda
Distribution)
PUBLIC COMMENTS (3 Minute Time Limit)
COUNCIL COMMITTEE - APPOINTMENTS - LIAISON REPORTS, AB 1234 REPORTING, AND
OPENNESS IN NEGOTIATIONS DISCLOSURES
CITY MANAGER'S REPORT
CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORT
19-71618.City Attorney to announce filing of the following lawsuit:
City of Huntington Beach v. The Estate of Anne L. Hunt, Michael
Melchiorre, et al.; Superior Court Case No.:
30-2019-01072448-CU-OR-CJC; regarding the Property Address:
5892 Nugget Circle, Huntington Beach, California, 92647; for
Nuisance Per Se and Receivership Action Under Health & Safety
Code § 17980.7
CONSENT CALENDAR
19-72019.Receive and file City Clerk’s quarterly listing of professional
services contracts filed in the City Clerk’s office between October
1, 2018 and March 31, 2019
A) Receive and file the “List of Professional Services Contracts Approved by Department
Heads and Submitted to the Office of the City Clerk During the Period of October 1, 2018
through December 31, 2018;” and,
B) Receive and file the “List of Professional Services Contracts Approved by Department
Heads and Submitted to the Office of the City Clerk During the Period of January 1, 2019
through March 31, 2019.”
Recommended Action:
19-72220.Adopt Resolution No. 2019-45 designating the Interim Assistant City
Manager, the City Treasurer, the Finance Manager-Accounting
Services, the Finance Manager-Budget, and the Finance
Manager-Treasury as persons authorized to execute financial
transactions in the name of the City of Huntington Beach
Page 4 of 7
5
City Council/Public Financing
Authority
AGENDA July 1, 2019
Adopt Resolution No. 2019-45, “A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Huntington
Beach Authorizing the Manual and/or Facsimile Signatures of the Interim Assistant City
Manager, the City Treasurer, the Finance Manager-Budget, the Finance
Manager-Accounting Services, and the Finance Manager-Treasury as Persons Authorized
to Execute Financial Transactions in the Name of the City of Huntington Beach.”
Recommended Action:
19-61621.Approve Final Tract Map No. 18105 and Subdivision Agreement for
the Holly Townhomes Residential Subdivision by Meritage Homes
at 19200 Holly Lane
A) Approve Final Tract Map No. 18105 and accept the offer of easements pursuant to
findings and requirements (Attachment No. 1); and ,
B) Approve and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the “Subdivision
Agreement By and Between the City of Huntington Beach and Meritage Homes for Tract
No. 18105” (Attachment No. 6); and ,
C) Accept Faithful Performance Bond No. SU1148545, Labor and Material Bond No.
SU1148545 and Monument Bond No. SU1148546 as sureties for the installation of the
subdivision’s required public improvements and survey monumentation (Attachment No.
7); and,
D) Instruct the City Clerk to file the respective bonds with the City Treasurer and notify the
Surety, Arch Insurance Company of this action.
Recommended Action:
19-61822.Approve Final Tract Map No. 18106 and Subdivision Agreement for
the Gothard Townhomes Subdivision by Meritage Homes at 19100
Gothard Street
A) Approve Final Tract Map No. 18106 and accept the offer of easements pursuant to
findings and requirements (Attachment No. 1); and ,
B) Approve and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the “Subdivision
Agreement By and Between the City of Huntington Beach and Meritage Homes for Tract
No. 18106”(Attachment No. 6); and ,
C) Accept Faithful Performance Bond No. SU1148547, Labor and Material Bond No.
SU1148547 and Monument Bond No. SU1148548 as sureties for the installation of the
subdivision’s required public improvements and survey monumentation (Attachment No.
7); and,
Recommended Action:
Page 5 of 7
6
City Council/Public Financing
Authority
AGENDA July 1, 2019
D) Instruct the City Clerk to file the respective bonds with the City Treasurer and notify the
Surety, Arch Insurance Company of this action.
19-68023.Adopt a 7-year Capital Improvement Program for the fiscal years
2019/2020 through 2025/2026 for compliance with renewed Measure
M eligibility requirements
Adopt the 7-year Capital Improvement Program (FY 2019/2020 through 2025/2026)
included as Attachment #1 for compliance with renewed Measure M eligibility
requirements.
Recommended Action:
19-70324.Approve and authorize the Second Amendment to the Small Cell
License Agreement between the City and new Cingular Wireless
PCS, LLC, dba, AT&T Mobility on City-owned street lights; and,
authorize the City Manager to increase up to ten percent and
substitute pole locations on an as-needed basis
A) Approve the “Second Amendment to the Small Cell License Agreement” between the
City of Huntington Beach and new Cingular Wireless PCS, LLC, doing business as AT&T
Mobility; and,
B) Approve and authorize the City Manager to execute the Second Amendment on behalf
of the City; and,
C) Authorize City Manager to increase up to 10% and substitute pole locations on an as
needed basis.
Recommended Action:
19-70525.Approve and authorize execution of a Caltrans Maintenance
Agreement for Wayfinding Sign Installations on Pacific Coast
Highway and Beach Boulevard
Approve and authorize the Mayor and Interim City Manager to execute the “Project
Specific Maintenance Agreement for Wayfinding/Guide Signs in the City of Huntington
Beach” with Caltrans for wayfinding sign installations on Pacific Coast Highway and Beach
Boulevard.
Recommended Action:
ADMINISTRATIVE ITEMS
19-74426.Authorize the City Manager and the City Attorney to execute a
Page 6 of 7
7
City Council/Public Financing
Authority
AGENDA July 1, 2019
Professional Services Agreement for Services related to the
Development of a Glide Slope Analysis
Authorize the City Manager with approval as to form by the City Attorney to execute a
Professional Services Agreement for services related to the development of a glide slope
analysis.
Recommended Action:
COUNCILMEMBER ITEMS
19-75627.Submitted by Councilmember Posey - Request for Detailed Study
Session on the City’s Unfunded Capital Project List
Direct the City Manager via the Public Works Director and City Engineer to conduct an
in-depth Study Session within 90 days on the unfunded capital projects that have been
identified by the Public Works Department. This Study Session should include a
breakdown of the projects as identified through a comprehensive analysis by the Public
Works Department through Master Plans and other planning documents (e.g. Sewer
Master Plan, Water Master Plan, Facility Needs Assessment, etc.). This should include the
Police Department’s facility needs as well.
Recommended Action:
COUNCILMEMBER COMMENTS (Not Agendized)
ADJOURNMENT
The next regularly scheduled meeting of the Huntington Beach City Council/Public Financing Authority is
Monday, July 15, 2019, at 4:00 PM in the Civic Center Council Chambers, 2000 Main Street, Huntington
Beach, California.
INTERNET ACCESS TO CITY COUNCIL/PUBLIC FINANCING AUTHORITY AGENDA AND
STAFF REPORT MATERIAL IS AVAILABLE PRIOR TO CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS AT
http://www.huntingtonbeachca.gov
Page 7 of 7
8
City of Huntington Beach
File #:19-678 MEETING DATE:7/1/2019
Police Department Presentation
City of Huntington Beach Printed on 6/26/2019Page 1 of 1
powered by Legistar™9
City of Huntington Beach
File #:19-751 MEETING DATE:7/1/2019
Mayor Peterson to announce: Pursuant to Government Code § 54957.6, the City Council shall
recess into Closed Session to meet with its designated labor negotiator: David Kiff, Interim
City Manager; also in attendance: Robert Handy, Police Chief; Chuck Adams, Interim Chief
Financial Officer; and Michele Warren, Director of Human Resources regarding the following:
Police Management Association (PMA).
City of Huntington Beach Printed on 6/26/2019Page 1 of 1
powered by Legistar™10
City of Huntington Beach
File #:19-700 MEETING DATE:7/1/2019
Pursuant to Government Code § 54956.9(d)(2), the City Council shall recess into Closed
Session to confer with the City Attorney regarding potential litigation. Number of cases, two
(2).
City of Huntington Beach Printed on 6/26/2019Page 1 of 1
powered by Legistar™11
City of Huntington Beach
File #:19-733 MEETING DATE:7/1/2019
Pursuant to Government Code § 54956.9(d)(1), the City Council shall recess into Closed
Session to confer with the City Attorney regarding the following lawsuit: Moore (Neal), et al. v.
City of Huntington Beach, et al.; OCSC Case No.: 30-2019-01071686.
City of Huntington Beach Printed on 6/26/2019Page 1 of 1
powered by Legistar™12
City of Huntington Beach
File #:19-734 MEETING DATE:7/1/2019
Pursuant to Government Code § 54956.9(d)(1), the City Council shall recess into Closed
Session to confer with the City Attorney regarding the following lawsuit: City of Huntington
Beach v. The Estate of Anne L. Hunt, Michael Melchiorre, et al.; OCSC Case No. 30-2019-
01072448.
City of Huntington Beach Printed on 6/26/2019Page 1 of 1
powered by Legistar™13
City of Huntington Beach
File #:19-735 MEETING DATE:7/1/2019
Pursuant to Government Code § 54956.9(d)(1), the City Council shall recess into Closed
Session to confer with the City Attorney regarding the following lawsuit: City of Huntington
Beach v. City of Fountain Valley, et al. (PCTA); OCSC Case No. 30-2019-01071652.
City of Huntington Beach Printed on 6/26/2019Page 1 of 1
powered by Legistar™14
City of Huntington Beach
File #:19-736 MEETING DATE:7/1/2019
Pursuant to Government Code § 54956.9(d)(1), the City Council shall recess into Closed
Session to confer with the City Attorney regarding the following lawsuit: Kennedy
Commission, et al. v. City of Huntington Beach (Beach-Edinger Corridor); OCSC Case No 30-
2015-00801675.
City of Huntington Beach Printed on 6/26/2019Page 1 of 1
powered by Legistar™15
City of Huntington Beach
File #:19-737 MEETING DATE:7/1/2019
Pursuant to Government Code § 54956.9(d)(1), the City Council shall recess into Closed
Session to confer with the City Attorney regarding the following lawsuit: Tabares (Tiffany) v.
City of Huntington Beach and Eric Esparza; USDC Case No.: 8:18-cv-00821 JLS (JDEx).
City of Huntington Beach Printed on 6/26/2019Page 1 of 1
powered by Legistar™16
City of Huntington Beach
File #:19-738 MEETING DATE:7/1/2019
Pursuant to Government Code § 54956.9(d)(1), the City Council shall recess into Closed
Session to confer with the City Attorney regarding the following lawsuit: Duran (Anthony) v.
City of Huntington Beach, et al.; USDC Case No.: 8:18-cv-00659 JVS (DFMx).
City of Huntington Beach Printed on 6/26/2019Page 1 of 1
powered by Legistar™17
City of Huntington Beach
File #:19-739 MEETING DATE:7/1/2019
Pursuant to Government Code § 54956.9(d)(1), the City Council shall recess into Closed
Session to confer with the City Attorney regarding the following lawsuit: Murnane (Richard) v.
City of Huntington Beach, et al.; Workers’ Compensation Claim No. COHB 15-0268.
City of Huntington Beach Printed on 6/26/2019Page 1 of 1
powered by Legistar™18
City of Huntington Beach
File #:19-740 MEETING DATE:7/1/2019
Pursuant to Government Code § 54956.9(d)(1), the City Council shall recess into Closed
Session to confer with the City Attorney regarding the following lawsuit: Jackson (Ronald) v.
City of Huntington Beach, et al.; Workers’ Compensation Claim No. COHB 18-0059.
City of Huntington Beach Printed on 6/26/2019Page 1 of 1
powered by Legistar™19
City of Huntington Beach
File #:19-748 MEETING DATE:7/1/2019
Pursuant to Government Code § 54957.6, the City Council shall recess into Closed Session to
meet with its designated labor negotiator: David Kiff, Interim City Manager; also in
attendance: Robert Handy, Police Chief; Chuck Adams, Interim Chief Financial Officer; and
Michele Warren, Director of Human Resources regarding the following: Police Management
Association (PMA).
City of Huntington Beach Printed on 6/26/2019Page 1 of 1
powered by Legistar™20
City of Huntington Beach
File #:19-749 MEETING DATE:7/1/2019
Pursuant to Government Code § 54956.9(d)(1), the City Council shall recess into Closed
Session to confer with the City Attorney regarding the following lawsuit: AKM Consulting
Engineers, Inc. v. City of Huntington Beach; OCSC Case No.: 30-2017-00902740.
City of Huntington Beach Printed on 6/26/2019Page 1 of 1
powered by Legistar™21
City of Huntington Beach
File #:19-754 MEETING DATE:7/1/2019
Pursuant to Government Code § 54956.9(d)(1), the City Council shall recess into Closed
Session to confer with the City Attorney regarding the following lawsuit: In Re: National
Prescription Opiate Litigation; USDC - Ohio Case No. 1:17-md-02804-DAP.
City of Huntington Beach Printed on 6/26/2019Page 1 of 1
powered by Legistar™22
City of Huntington Beach
File #:19-640 MEETING DATE:7/1/2019
Mark Currie of the Greater Huntington Beach Interfaith Council
City of Huntington Beach Printed on 6/26/2019Page 1 of 1
powered by Legistar™23
City of Huntington Beach
File #:19-689 MEETING DATE:7/1/2019
Mayor Peterson to call on Retired Army General Larry Davis of Huntington Beach and
President of the Aerospace Education Foundation of Huntington Beach for the presentation of
three scholarships to young people who will begin their STEM careers this fall.
City of Huntington Beach Printed on 6/26/2019Page 1 of 1
powered by Legistar™24
City of Huntington Beach
File #:19-721 MEETING DATE:7/1/2019
Mayor Peterson to call on Mr. Lloyd Glick, who was part of the American forces liberating
Guam in World War 2, and will be a guest of honor at the upcoming 75 th Guam Liberation
festivities.
City of Huntington Beach Printed on 6/26/2019Page 1 of 1
powered by Legistar™25
City of Huntington Beach
File #:19-716 MEETING DATE:7/1/2019
City Attorney to announce filing of the following lawsuit:
City of Huntington Beach v. The Estate of Anne L. Hunt, Michael Melchiorre, et al .;
Superior Court Case No.: 30-2019-01072448-CU-OR-CJC; regarding the Property
Address: 5892 Nugget Circle, Huntington Beach, California, 92647; for Nuisance Per Se
and Receivership Action Under Health & Safety Code § 17980.7
City of Huntington Beach Printed on 6/26/2019Page 1 of 1
powered by Legistar™26
City of Huntington Beach
File #:19-720 MEETING DATE:7/1/2019
REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION
SUBMITTED TO:Honorable Mayor and City Council Members
SUBMITTED BY:Robin Estanislau, CMC, City Clerk
PREPARED BY:Robin Estanislau, CMC, City Clerk
Subject:
Receive and file City Clerk’s quarterly listing of professional services contracts filed in the
City Clerk’s office between October 1, 2018 and March 31, 2019
Statement of Issue:
The listed contracts are entered into by City Departments and consultant firms pursuant to the
Huntington Beach Municipal Code. Funds are in the City budget. These contracts have been
transmitted to the City Clerk for official filing for the public record.
Financial Impact:
No fiscal impact.
Recommended Action:
A) Receive and file the “List of Professional Services Contracts Approved by Department Heads and
Submitted to the Office of the City Clerk During the Period of October 1, 2018 through December 31,
2018;” and,
B) Receive and file the “List of Professional Services Contracts Approved by Department Heads and
Submitted to the Office of the City Clerk During the Period of January 1, 2019 through March 31,
2019.”
Alternative Action(s):
Provide alternative direction to staff
Analysis:
On November 15, 2001, the City Council established a policy to follow the administration of all
contracts entered into between City Departments and consultant firms pursuant to Huntington Beach
Municipal Code Chapter 3.03. Accordingly, Administrative Regulation No. 228, effective as of August
4, 2008, prescribes the policy regarding professional service contracts. This policy ensures public
review of new contracts through identification on the Council agenda as required by section 6.4.1 of
the policy. Attachment #1 is a list of contracts entered into by City Departments and received in the
City Clerk’s office for the third quarter of 2018. Attachment #2 is a list of contracts entered into by
City of Huntington Beach Printed on 6/26/2019Page 1 of 2
powered by Legistar™27
File #:19-720 MEETING DATE:7/1/2019
City Departments and received in the City Clerk’s office for the first quarter of 2019.
Environmental Status:
Not applicable
Strategic Plan Goal:
Strengthen long-term financial and economic sustainability
Attachment(s):
1. “List of Professional Services Contracts Approved by Department Heads and Submitted to the
Office of the City Clerk During the Period October 1, 2018 through December 31, 2018.”
2. “List of Professional Services Contracts Approved by Department Heads and Submitted to the
Office of the City Clerk During the Period January 1, 2019 through March 31, 2019.”
City of Huntington Beach Printed on 6/26/2019Page 2 of 2
powered by Legistar™28
29
30
Page 1 of 1
*This list includes all contracts received which are public records
List of Professional Services Contracts Approved by Department Heads and Submitted to the Office of the City Clerk during
the period of January 1, 2019 and March 31, 2019
AGREEMENT
DATE
DEPARTMENT NAME OF CONTRACTOR AMOUNT PURPOSE EXPIRATION
01/11/2019 Police Winbourne Consulting, LLC $28,000 Consulting Services for CAD
Mobile Law RMS Replacement
Services
01/11/2022
01/16/2019 City Manager The Novak Consulting Group $48,800 Operational Performance
Review of the Human
Resources Department
01/16/2022
2/27/2019 Community
Development
Anderson Penna Partners, Inc. Adding
additional
compensation
of $10,000 for
a total contract
amount nte
$21,800
Amendment #1 to 12/10/2018
Contract for Evaluation of Code
Enforcement Division
12/10/2021
3/7/2019 Finance Davis Farr LLP $8200 Capital Asset Inventory Services
for Public Cable Television
Authority
03/07/2022
3/14/2019 City Manager Pun Group, LLP $22,500 Cash Balance Allocation
Services for the Public Cable
Television Authority
03/14/2022
3/22/2019 Community
Development
Willdan Engineering, Inc.Adding
additional
compensation
of $10,400 for
a total contract
amount nte
$59,092
Amendment #1 to 12/12/18
Contract for Code Enforcement
Services
12/12/2021
31
City of Huntington Beach
File #:19-722 MEETING DATE:7/1/2019
REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION
SUBMITTED TO:Honorable Mayor and City Council Members
SUBMITTED BY:Dave Kiff, Interim City Manager
PREPARED BY:Chuck Adams, Interim Chief Financial Officer
Subject:
Adopt Resolution No. 2019-45 designating the Interim Assistant City Manager, the City
Treasurer, the Finance Manager-Accounting Services, the Finance Manager-Budget, and the
Finance Manager-Treasury as persons authorized to execute financial transactions in the
name of the City of Huntington Beach
Statement of Issue:
Public law requires that the City Council designate the persons authorized to execute financial
transactions in the name of the City of Huntington Beach. City Council authorization is requested to
update the list and titles of persons designated to transact on the City’s behalf.
Financial Impact:
There is no fiscal impact associated with these changes.
Recommended Action:
Adopt Resolution No. 2019-45, “A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach
Authorizing the Manual and/or Facsimile Signatures of the Interim Assistant City Manager, the City
Treasurer, the Finance Manager-Budget, the Finance Manager-Accounting Services, and the
Finance Manager-Treasury as Persons Authorized to Execute Financial Transactions in the Name of
the City of Huntington Beach.”
Alternative Action(s):
Do not adopt the recommended action and direct staff accordingly.
Analysis:
Public law requires that the City Council designate the persons authorized to execute financial
transactions in the name of the City of Huntington Beach. City Council authorization is requested to
update the list and titles of persons designated to transact on the City’s behalf.
Currently, the Chief Finance Officer, City Treasurer, Finance Manager/Deputy City Treasurer and
Finance Manager/Accounting Services are authorized to execute financial transactions on the City’s
City of Huntington Beach Printed on 6/26/2019Page 1 of 2
powered by Legistar™32
File #:19-722 MEETING DATE:7/1/2019
behalf. Due to recent vacancies and title changes for staff, it is recommended the Resolution be
updated to amend signers to reflect these changes and recorded accordingly with the Office of the
City Clerk.
Environmental Status:
Not applicable.
Strategic Plan Goal:
Enhance and maintain infrastructure
Attachment(s):
1. Resolution No. 2019-45, “A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach
Authorizing the Manual and/or Facsimile Signatures of the Interim Assistant City Manager, the
City Treasurer, the Finance Manager-Budget, the Finance Manager-Accounting Services, and
the Finance Manager-Treasury as Persons Authorized to Execute Financial Transactions in
the Name of the City of Huntington Beach.”
City of Huntington Beach Printed on 6/26/2019Page 2 of 2
powered by Legistar™33
34
35
36
City of Huntington Beach
File #:19-616 MEETING DATE:7/1/2019
REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION
SUBMITTED TO:Honorable Mayor and City Council Members
SUBMITTED BY:Dave Kiff, Interim City Manager
PREPARED BY:Ursula Luna-Reynosa, Director of Community Development
Subject:
Approve Final Tract Map No. 18105 and Subdivision Agreement for the Holly Townhomes
Residential Subdivision by Meritage Homes at 19200 Holly Lane
Statement of Issue:
Transmitted for City Council consideration is Final Tract Map No. 18105 for the Holly Townhomes
Residential Subdivision by Meritage Homes at 19200 Holly Lane (east side of Holly Lane and north of
Clay Avenue). This map subdivides an approximately 1.93 acre parcel into 1 numbered lot for
condominium purposes.
Financial Impact:
Not applicable.
Recommended Action:
A) Approve Final Tract Map No. 18105 and accept the offer of easements pursuant to findings and
requirements (Attachment No. 1); and,
B) Approve and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the “Subdivision Agreement By and
Between the City of Huntington Beach and Meritage Homes for Tract No. 18105” (Attachment No. 6);
and,
C) Accept Faithful Performance Bond No. SU1148545, Labor and Material Bond No. SU1148545
and Monument Bond No. SU1148546 as sureties for the installation of the subdivision’s required
public improvements and survey monumentation (Attachment No. 7); and,
D) Instruct the City Clerk to file the respective bonds with the City Treasurer and notify the Surety,
Arch Insurance Company of this action.
Alternative Action(s):
The City Council may make the following alternative motion(s):
1. Deny Final Tract Map No. 18105 and the Subdivision Agreement/Bonds.
City of Huntington Beach Printed on 6/26/2019Page 1 of 3
powered by Legistar™37
File #:19-616 MEETING DATE:7/1/2019
2. Continue Final Tract Map No. 18105 and the Subdivision Agreement/Bonds and direct staff
accordingly.
Analysis:
A. PROJECT PROPOSAL:
Applicant/Property
Owner: Meritage Homes of California c/o Lester Tucker, 5 Peters Canyon Rd.,Suite 300 Irvine,
CA 92606
Surveyor: Joseph C. Yuhas, Pasco Laret Suiter and Associates, 27127 Calle Arroyo, Suite 1904,
San Juan Capistrano, CA 92675
Surety: Arch Insurance Company - Surety Division, 3 Parkway, Suite 1500,Philadelphia, PA
19102
Location: 19200 Holly Lane (east side of Holly Lane and north of Clay Avenue).
General Plan: RM - sp (Residential Medium Density - Specific Plan overlay)
Zone:SP9 (Holly Seacliff Specific Plan)
No. of Acres: 1.93 acres
No. of Numbered Lots: 1
No. of Lettered Lots:0
No. of Units:32
B. BACKGROUND:
On December 12, 2017, the Planning Commission approved Tentative Tract Map No. 18105 to
subdivide approximately 1.93 acres into 1 numbered lot condominium purposes. The Planning
Commission also approved Conditional Use Permit No. 17-011 as part of the proposed project.
The Planning Commission discussed issues related to parking and maintenance of the parkway.
A motion was made by Kalmick, seconded by Garcia, to approve Tentative Tract Map No. 18105 with
findings and modified conditions of approval, carried by the following vote:
AYES: Ray, Garcia, Crowe, Mandic, Kalmick, Scandura, Grant
City of Huntington Beach Printed on 6/26/2019Page 2 of 3
powered by Legistar™38
File #:19-616 MEETING DATE:7/1/2019
NOES: NONE
ABSTAIN: NONE
ABSENT: NONE
Motion Approved
C. RECOMMENDATION:
The final map has been examined and certified by the City Engineer as being in substantial
compliance with the conditions of approval of the tentative map, as approved by the Planning
Commission on December 12, 2017.
Additionally, presented for City Council approval and acceptance are the required Subdivision
Agreement (between the City and Meritage Homes) and Bonds pursuant to the City’s Zoning and
Subdivision Ordinance and the State’s Subdivision Map Act.
Environmental Status:
The actions to accept Final Tract Map No. 18105 and the respective Subdivision Agreement with
Bonds are exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act pursuant to
Section 15268(b).
Strategic Plan Goal:
Enhance and maintain infrastructure
Attachment(s):
1. Findings and Requirements for Acceptance of the Final Map
2. Vicinity Map
3. Final Map No. 18105
4. Planning Commission Notice of Action for Tentative Tract Map No. 18105 with Findings and
Conditions of Approval
5. Tentative Tract Map No. 18105
6. Subdivision Agreement
7. Bonds (Faithful Performance, Labor and Material, Monument)
City of Huntington Beach Printed on 6/26/2019Page 3 of 3
powered by Legistar™39
ATTACHMENT NO. 1
FINDINGS AND REQUIREMENTS FOR ACCEPTANCE OF FINAL MAP
Findings for Acceptance of Final Map:
1. Final Tract Map No. 18105 is in conformance with the California Subdivision Map Act,
the City of Huntington Beach Subdivision Ordinance and Tentative Tract Map No. 18105
conditions of approval, as approved by the Planning Commission.
Requirements:
1. Accept the easement dedication for Street and Public Utility purposes on Clay Avenue and
Holly Lane.
2. Accept the easement dedication for emergency and public service vehicle ingress and
egress purposes and for monitoring and inspecting pollutant removal devices over Lot 1.
3. Accept the easement dedication for water pipeline purposes over Lot 1.
4. The City Clerk shall affix her signature to the map and release it for recordation by the
County of Orange.
40
VICINITY MAP
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 18105/ CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 17-011
(HOLLY TOWNHOMES – 19200 HOLLY LANE)
Slater Avenue
City of Fountain Valley
Subject Site Newland StreetSubject Property
Subject Property
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
GENERAL NOTES:STATEMENT OF OWNERSHIPLEGAL DESCRIPTION:TITLE INFORMATION:1VICINITY MAPBENCHMARKBASIS OF BEARINGS:REFERENCES:SURVEY NOTES:1401 Dove Street, Suite 640, Newport Beach, California 92660FOR CONDOMINIUM PURPOSESCounty of Orange, City of Huntington Beach, State of CaliforniaSHEET OF 2TENTATIVE TRACT No. 18105PASCOLARET SUITER& ASSOCIATES27127 Calle Arroyo, Ste 1904, San Juan Capistrano, CA 92675ph 949.661.6695 | fx 949. 661.6674 | plsaengineering.comLAND AREA:55
CLAY AVENUEHOLLY LANE
ΔΔΔΔΔΔΔΔΔΔΔΔΔ1401 Dove Street, Suite 640, Newport Beach, California 92660FOR CONDOMINIUM PURPOSESCounty of Orange, City of Huntington Beach, State of CaliforniaSHEET OF 2TENTATIVE TRACT No. 18105PASCOLARET SUITER& ASSOCIATES27127 Calle Arroyo, Ste 1904, San Juan Capistrano, CA 92675ph 949.661.6695 | fx 949. 661.6674 | plsaengineering.comPROPOSED EASEMENTSNOTES:ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO.PROJECT ADDRESSPROPOSED DEDICATION2EXISTING EASEMENT NOTES:56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
City of Huntington Beach
File #:19-618 MEETING DATE:7/1/2019
REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION
SUBMITTED TO:Honorable Mayor and City Council Members
SUBMITTED BY:Dave Kiff, Interim City Manager
PREPARED BY:Ursula Luna-Reynosa, Director of Community Development
Subject:
Approve Final Tract Map No. 18106 and Subdivision Agreement for the Gothard Townhomes
Subdivision by Meritage Homes at 19100 Gothard Street
Statement of Issue:
Transmitted for City Council consideration is Final Tract Map No. 18106 for the Gothard Townhomes
Residential Subdivision by Meritage Homes at 19100 Gothard Street (east side of Gothard Street and
south of Garfield Avenue). This map subdivides an approximately 1.28 acre parcel into 1 numbered
lot for condominium purposes.
Financial Impact:
Not applicable.
Recommended Action:
A) Approve Final Tract Map No. 18106 and accept the offer of easements pursuant to findings and
requirements (Attachment No. 1); and,
B) Approve and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the “Subdivision Agreement By and
Between the City of Huntington Beach and Meritage Homes for Tract No. 18106”(Attachment No. 6);
and,
C) Accept Faithful Performance Bond No. SU1148547, Labor and Material Bond No. SU1148547
and Monument Bond No. SU1148548 as sureties for the installation of the subdivision’s required
public improvements and survey monumentation (Attachment No. 7); and,
D) Instruct the City Clerk to file the respective bonds with the City Treasurer and notify the Surety,
Arch Insurance Company of this action.
Alternative Action(s):
The City Council may make the following alternative motion(s):
1. Deny Final Tract Map No. 18106 and the Subdivision Agreement/Bonds.
City of Huntington Beach Printed on 6/26/2019Page 1 of 3
powered by Legistar™84
File #:19-618 MEETING DATE:7/1/2019
2. Continue Final Tract Map No. 18106 and the Subdivision Agreement/Bonds and direct staff
accordingly.
Analysis:
A. PROJECT PROPOSAL:
Applicant/Property
Owner: Meritage Homes of California c/o Lester Tucker, 5 Peters Canyon Rd., Suite 300 Irvine,
CA 92606
Surveyor: Joseph C. Yuhas, Pasco Laret Suiter and Associates, 27127 Calle Arroyo, Suite 1904,
San Juan Capistrano, Ca 92675
Surety: Arch Insurance Company - Surety Division, 3 Parkway, Suite 1500,Philadelphia, PA
19102
Location: 19100 Gothard Street (east side of Gothard Street and south of Garfield Avenue)
General Plan: RM - sp (Residential Medium Density - Specific Plan overlay)
Zone:SP9 (Holly Seacliff Specific Plan)
No. of Acres: 1.28 acres
No. of Numbered Lots: 1
No. of Lettered Lots:0
No. of Units:21
B. BACKGROUND:
On December 12, 2017, the Planning Commission approved Tentative Tract Map No. 18106 to
subdivide approximately 1.28 acres into 1 numbered lot condominium purposes. The Planning
Commission also approved Conditional Use Permit No. 17-010 as part of the proposed project.
The Planning Commission discussed issues related to a requested reduction of parking, the lack of
nearby street parking, the impacts to the nearby industrial uses, and the environmental cleanup of
the site.
A motion was made by Scandura, seconded by Mandic, to approve Tentative Tract Map No. 18106
with findings and modified conditions of approval, carried by the following vote:
City of Huntington Beach Printed on 6/26/2019Page 2 of 3
powered by Legistar™85
File #:19-618 MEETING DATE:7/1/2019
AYES: Ray, Garcia, Crowe, Mandic, Kalmick, Scandura, Grant
NOES: NONE
ABSTAIN: NONE
ABSENT: NONE
Motion Approved
C. RECOMMENDATION:
The final map has been examined and certified by the City Engineer as being in substantial
compliance with the conditions of approval of the tentative map, as approved by the Planning
Commission on December 12, 2017.
Additionally, presented for City Council approval and acceptance are the required Subdivision
Agreement (between the City and Meritage Homes) and Bonds pursuant to the City’s Zoning and
Subdivision Ordinance and the State’s Subdivision Map Act.
Environmental Status:
The actions to accept Final Tract Map No. 18106 and the respective Subdivision Agreement with
Bonds is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act pursuant to
Section 15268(b).
Strategic Plan Goal:
Enhance and maintain infrastructure
Attachment(s):
1. Findings and Requirements for Acceptance of the Final Map
2. Vicinity Map
3. Final Map No. 18106
4. Planning Commission Notice of Action for Tentative Tract Map No. 18106 with Findings and
Conditions of Approval
5. Tentative Tract Map No. 18106
6. Subdivision Agreement
7. Bonds (Faithful Performance, Labor and Material, Monument)
City of Huntington Beach Printed on 6/26/2019Page 3 of 3
powered by Legistar™86
ATTACHMENT NO. 1
FINDINGS AND REQUIREMENTS FOR ACCEPTANCE OF FINAL MAP
Findings for Acceptance of Final Map:
1. Final Tract Map No. 18106 is in conformance with the California Subdivision Map Act,
the City of Huntington Beach Subdivision Ordinance and Tentative Tract Map No. 18106
conditions of approval, as approved by the Planning Commission.
Requirements:
1. Accept the easement dedication for emergency and public service vehicle ingress and
egress purposes and for monitoring and inspecting pollutant removal devices over Lot 1.
2. Accept the easement dedication for water pipeline purposes over Lot 1.
3. The City Clerk shall affix her signature to the map and release it for recordation by the
County of Orange.
87
VICINITY MAP
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 18106/ CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 17-010/
(GOTHARD TOWNHOMES – 19100 GOTHARD STREET)
Slater Avenue
City of Fountain Valley
Subject Site Newland StreetSubject Property
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
1401 Dove Street, Suite 640, Newport Beach, California 92660FOR CONDOMINIUM PURPOSESCounty of Orange, City of Huntington Beach, State of CaliforniaSHEET OF 2TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 18106PASCOLARET SUITER& ASSOCIATES27127 Calle Arroyo, Ste 1904, San Juan Capistrano, CA 92675ph 949.661.6695 | fx 949. 661.6674 | plsaengineering.comGENERAL NOTES:STATEMENT OF OWNERSHIPBENCHMARKBASIS OF BEARINGS:LEGAL DESCRIPTION:TITLE INFORMATION:REFERENCES:SURVEY NOTES:1VICINITY MAPLAND AREA:102
GOTHARD STREET
ΔΔΔΔΔΔΔΔΔΔEASEMENT NOTES:1401 Dove Street, Suite 640, Newport Beach, California 92660FOR CONDOMINIUM PURPOSESCounty of Orange, City of Huntington Beach, State of CaliforniaSHEET OF 2TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 18106PASCOLARET SUITER& ASSOCIATES27127 Calle Arroyo, Ste 1904, San Juan Capistrano, CA 92675ph 949.661.6695 | fx 949. 661.6674 | plsaengineering.comPROPOSED EASEMENTSNOTES:GOTHARD STREET I. O. D.PROPOSED DEDICATION2ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO.PROJECT ADDRESS103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
City of Huntington Beach
File #:19-680 MEETING DATE:7/1/2019
REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION
SUBMITTED TO:Honorable Mayor and City Council Members
SUBMITTED BY:Dave Kiff, Interim City Manager
PREPARED BY:Travis K. Hopkins, Interim Assistant City Manager
Subject:
Adopt a 7-year Capital Improvement Program for the fiscal years 2019/2020 through 2025/2026
for compliance with renewed Measure M eligibility requirements
Statement of Issue:
In order to remain eligible to receive Measure M2 Program funding, the City must submit to the
Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) an adopted 7-year Capital Improvement Program
(CIP) in compliance with the renewed Measure M eligibility requirements.
Financial Impact:
No additional funding is required for this resolution. The City will receive Measure M2 funds of
approximately $3.5 million in Fiscal Year 2019/20.
Recommended Action:
Adopt the 7-year Capital Improvement Program (FY 2019/2020 through 2025/2026) included as
Attachment #1 for compliance with renewed Measure M eligibility requirements.
Alternative Action(s):
Do not adopt the attached 7-year CIP for Measure M eligibility and forego M2 funding eligibility. This
action would result in the loss of $3.5 million for the next fiscal year, and the loss of allocated and
potential grant funding for traffic and street improvement projects.
Analysis:
On November 6, 1990, the Orange County voters approved the original Measure M, the revised
Traffic Improvement and Growth Management Ordinance, for twenty years (1991-2011). On
November 7, 2006 the Orange County voters approved Renewed Measure M. Renewed Measure M
is a thirty year (2011-2041), multi-billion dollar program extension of the original Measure M.
Renewed Measure M net revenues are generated from the transactions and use tax plus any interest
or other earnings-after allowable deductions. Net revenues may be allocated to local jurisdictions for
a variety of programs identified in Ordinance No. 3. Compliance with the eligibility requirements
established in Ordinance No. 3 must be established and maintained in order for local jurisdictions to
City of Huntington Beach Printed on 6/26/2019Page 1 of 2
powered by Legistar™131
File #:19-680 MEETING DATE:7/1/2019
established in Ordinance No. 3 must be established and maintained in order for local jurisdictions to
receive Measure M net revenues.
The City must satisfy certain requirements to maintain eligibility in order to receive funding from
OCTA. A key requirement is that the City adopt a 7-year CIP for the fiscal years 2019/2020 through
2025/2026, in compliance with the renewed Measure M eligibility requirements. The 7-year CIP,
which is included as Attachment #1, identifies all projects currently and potentially funded by OCTA
Measure M2 funds.
The following projects are identified in Attachment #1:
1. Arterial Rehabilitation FY 19/20 (Slater, Atlanta, Newland, Graham, Garfield, Newland, Talbert,
Brookhurst)
2. Atlanta Avenue Widening from Huntington St. to Delaware St.
3. Brookhurst Street Synchronization
4. Citywide Concrete Replacements
5. Edinger Avenue Synchronization
6. General Street Maintenance for Public Works
7. Huntington Beach Catch Basin Retrofit Project
8. Huntington Beach Northwest Catch Basin Retrofit Project
9. Huntington Harbour Marina Trash Skimmers
10.Magnolia Street Synchronization
11.McFadden/Edwards and Heil/Algonquin Catch Basin Retrofit Project
12.Residential Curb Ramp Project
13.Citywide Residential Overlay
14.Talbert Avenue Synchronization
15.Utica Bicycle Boulevard from Main St. to Beach Blvd.
16.Warner Avenue Synchronization
Public Works Commission Action:
Not required for this action.
Environmental Status:
Not applicable for this action.
Strategic Plan Goal:
Enhance and maintain infrastructure
Attachment(s):
1. Measure M 7-year CIP (FY 2019/2020 through 2025/2026)
2. OCTA Ordinance No. 3
City of Huntington Beach Printed on 6/26/2019Page 2 of 2
powered by Legistar™132
Measure M
Seven Year Capital Improvement Program (Sorted by Project Name)
Fiscal Years 2019/2020 through 2025/2026
16/18/2019
Rehabilitate arterials including Slater
(Gothard-Beach), Atlanta (Bushard-Brookhurst),
Newland (Yorktown-Garfield), Graham
(Slater-Warner), Garfield (Main-Delaware), Talbert
(Springdale-Edwards), and Brookhurst
(Garfield-Yorktown) as budget allows.
Rehabilitation of roadway
Road Maintenance
Project Description:
TOW Description:
Type of Work (TOW):
Huntington BeachAgency:
Arterial Rehabilitation FY 19/20Project Name:
Slater, Atlanta, Newland, Graham, Atlanta, Garfield,
Newland, Talbert, Brookhurst as budget allows.
Project Limits:
Project Number:
25/2624/2523/2422/2321/2220/2119/20 Projected CostEstimated CostProject Phase
E $50,000 $50,000 $50,000 $50,000 $50,000 $50,000 $50,000 $350,000 $350,000
R $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
C/I $5,004,156 $4,850,000 $4,850,000 $4,850,000 $4,850,000 $4,850,000 $4,850,000 $34,104,156 $37,350,866
O&M $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
$5,054,156 $4,900,000 $4,900,000 $4,900,000 $4,900,000 $4,900,000 $4,900,000 $34,454,156 $ 37,700,866
PROJECTED COSTESTIMATED COSTPERCENTFUND NAME NOTES
$6,816,995 $7,459,379M2 LFS 19.79
$4,771,896 $5,221,565 Infrastructure FundOther 13.85
$22,865,265 $25,019,921 RMRALSR 66.36
$34,454,156 $37,700,866
This project will widen the south side of Atlanta
Avenue. This project is carryover from FY 18/19
CIP.
Add 1 lane to existing roadway in project limits
Road Widening
Project Description:
TOW Description:
Type of Work (TOW):
Huntington BeachAgency:
Atlanta Avenue WideningProject Name:
Atlanta Avenue (Huntington St. to Delaware St.)Project Limits:
15-HBCH-ACE-3770Project Number:
25/2624/2523/2422/2321/2220/2119/20 Projected CostEstimated CostProject Phase
E $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
R $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
C/I $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
O&M $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $ 0
PROJECTED COSTESTIMATED COSTPERCENTFUND NAME NOTES
$0 $0M2 ACE 75.00
$0 $0 25% Match to previously approved M2 ACEGeneral Fund 25.00
$0 $0
133
Measure M
Seven Year Capital Improvement Program (Sorted by Project Name)
Fiscal Years 2019/2020 through 2025/2026
26/18/2019
Provide operational and infrastructure improvements.
This is a corridor project managed by OCTA and
funding reflects planned improvements within
Huntington Beach only. Carry-over from FY 17/18
Interconnect traffic signals to improve coordination
and communication
Traffic Signals
Project Description:
TOW Description:
Type of Work (TOW):
Huntington BeachAgency:
Brookhurst Street SynchronizationProject Name:
Garfield Avenue to Pacific Coast HighwayProject Limits:
16-OCTA-TSP-3794Project Number:
25/2624/2523/2422/2321/2220/2119/20 Projected CostEstimated CostProject Phase
E $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
R $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
C/I $833,490 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $833,490 $833,490
O&M $0 $5,000 $5,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $10,000 $10,000
$833,490 $5,000 $5,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $843,490 $ 843,490
PROJECTED COSTESTIMATED COSTPERCENTFUND NAME NOTES
$10,000 $10,000General Fund 1.19
$618,757 $618,757M2 TSSP 73.36
$214,733 $214,733AQMD 25.46
$843,490 $843,490
Replace damaged concrete sidewalks or curb and
gutter throughout the City. This is annual program
with locations selected throughout Huntington Beach
at streets where an overlay is required by PMP.
Reconstruction or rehabilitation of sidewalk
Pedestrian
Project Description:
TOW Description:
Type of Work (TOW):
Huntington BeachAgency:
Concrete ReplacementsProject Name:
CitywideProject Limits:
Project Number:
25/2624/2523/2422/2321/2220/2119/20 Projected CostEstimated CostProject Phase
E $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
R $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
C/I $250,000 $250,000 $250,000 $250,000 $250,000 $250,000 $250,000 $1,750,000 $1,917,356
O&M $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
$250,000 $250,000 $250,000 $250,000 $250,000 $250,000 $250,000 $1,750,000 $ 1,917,356
PROJECTED COSTESTIMATED COSTPERCENTFUND NAME NOTES
$1,750,000 $1,917,356General Fund 100.00
$1,750,000 $1,917,356
134
Measure M
Seven Year Capital Improvement Program (Sorted by Project Name)
Fiscal Years 2019/2020 through 2025/2026
36/18/2019
OCTA leading joint project with Westminster,
Fountain Valley, and Santa Ana. OCTA applying for
SB-1 funding.
Interconnect traffic signals to improve coordination
and communication
Traffic Signals
Project Description:
TOW Description:
Type of Work (TOW):
Huntington BeachAgency:
Edinger Avenue SynchronizationProject Name:
From Bolsa Chica Street to Newland StreetProject Limits:
UnassignedProject Number:
25/2624/2523/2422/2321/2220/2119/20 Projected CostEstimated CostProject Phase
E $320,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $320,000 $320,000
R $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
C/I $1,705,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,705,000 $1,705,000
O&M $6,000 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $0 $0 $0 $36,000 $36,000
$2,031,000 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $0 $0 $0 $2,061,000 $ 2,061,000
PROJECTED COSTESTIMATED COSTPERCENTFUND NAME NOTES
$1,648,800 $1,648,800M2 TSSP 80.00
$412,200 $412,200AQMD 20.00
$2,061,000 $2,061,000
Annual maintenance work for concrete, potholes
and failed asphalt; O&M of traffic signals,
replacement of striping and signage, including
engineering and inspection as needed on an annual
basis.
Reconstruction or rehabilitation of sidewalk
Pedestrian
Project Description:
TOW Description:
Type of Work (TOW):
Huntington BeachAgency:
General Street Maintenance for Public WorksProject Name:
CitywideProject Limits:
Project Number:
25/2624/2523/2422/2321/2220/2119/20 Projected CostEstimated CostProject Phase
E $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
R $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
C/I $1,880,000 $1,880,000 $1,880,000 $1,880,000 $1,880,000 $1,880,000 $1,880,000 $13,160,000 $14,418,518
O&M $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
$1,880,000 $1,880,000 $1,880,000 $1,880,000 $1,880,000 $1,880,000 $1,880,000 $13,160,000 $ 14,418,518
PROJECTED COSTESTIMATED COSTPERCENTFUND NAME NOTES
$13,160,000 $14,418,518M2 LFS 100.00
$13,160,000 $14,418,518
135
Measure M
Seven Year Capital Improvement Program (Sorted by Project Name)
Fiscal Years 2019/2020 through 2025/2026
46/18/2019
Maintenance of 84 catch basins retrofitted with Bio
Clean Round Curb Inlet Filters.
Automatic Retractable Screen and other debris
screens or inserts
Environmental Cleanup
Project Description:
TOW Description:
Type of Work (TOW):
Huntington BeachAgency:
Huntington Beach Catch Basin Retrofit ProjectProject Name:
City-wideProject Limits:
14-HBCH-ECP-3742Project Number:
25/2624/2523/2422/2321/2220/2119/20 Projected CostEstimated CostProject Phase
E $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
R $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
C/I $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
O&M $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $35,000 $35,000
$5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $35,000 $ 35,000
PROJECTED COSTESTIMATED COSTPERCENTFUND NAME NOTES
$35,000 $35,000Developer 100.00
$35,000 $35,000
Maintenance of 126 catch basins retrofitted with Bio
Clean Round Curb Inlet Filters and Skimmer Box.
Catchment Retrofit
Environmental Cleanup
Project Description:
TOW Description:
Type of Work (TOW):
Huntington BeachAgency:
Huntington Beach Northwest Catch Basin Retrofit
Project
Project Name:
City-wide in Northwest Part of CityProject Limits:
13-HBCH-ECP-3687Project Number:
25/2624/2523/2422/2321/2220/2119/20 Projected CostEstimated CostProject Phase
E $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
R $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
C/I $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
O&M $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $0 $0 $25,000 $25,000
$5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $0 $0 $25,000 $ 25,000
PROJECTED COSTESTIMATED COSTPERCENTFUND NAME NOTES
$25,000 $25,000General Fund 100.00
$25,000 $25,000
136
Measure M
Seven Year Capital Improvement Program (Sorted by Project Name)
Fiscal Years 2019/2020 through 2025/2026
56/18/2019
Marian Trash Skimmers will be installed in various
locations. This is a carryover project for FY18/19
with funding reflected in prior years.
Marina Trash Skimmer
Environmental Cleanup
Project Description:
TOW Description:
Type of Work (TOW):
Huntington BeachAgency:
Huntington Harbour Marina Trash SkimmersProject Name:
Various Locations within Huntington HarbourProject Limits:
16-HBCH-ECP-3852Project Number:
25/2624/2523/2422/2321/2220/2119/20 Projected CostEstimated CostProject Phase
E $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
R $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
C/I $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
O&M $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $ 0
PROJECTED COSTESTIMATED COSTPERCENTFUND NAME NOTES
$0 $0M2 ECP-1 75.00
$0 $0General Fund 12.50
$0 $0 Donations CountyOther 12.50
$0 $0
Provide operational and infrastructure improvements;
carry-over from FY 17/18. OCTA leading joint project
with other cities along Magnolia Street. Funding only
reflects Huntington Beach work.
Interconnect traffic signals to improve coordination
and communication
Traffic Signals
Project Description:
TOW Description:
Type of Work (TOW):
Huntington BeachAgency:
Magnolia Street SynchronizationProject Name:
From Garfield Avenue to Pacific Coast HighwayProject Limits:
16-OCTA-TSP-3795Project Number:
25/2624/2523/2422/2321/2220/2119/20 Projected CostEstimated CostProject Phase
E $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
R $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
C/I $724,153 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $724,153 $724,153
O&M $0 $5,000 $5,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $10,000 $10,000
$724,153 $5,000 $5,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $734,153 $ 734,153
PROJECTED COSTESTIMATED COSTPERCENTFUND NAME NOTES
$10,000 $10,000General Fund 1.36
$524,364 $524,364M2 TSSP 71.42
$199,789 $199,789AQMD 27.21
$734,153 $734,153
137
Measure M
Seven Year Capital Improvement Program (Sorted by Project Name)
Fiscal Years 2019/2020 through 2025/2026
66/18/2019
Provide maintenance for catch basin screens.
Automatic Retractable Screen and other debris
screens or inserts
Environmental Cleanup
Project Description:
TOW Description:
Type of Work (TOW):
Huntington BeachAgency:
McFadden/Edwards and Heil/Algonquin Catch Basin
Retrofit Project
Project Name:
City-wideProject Limits:
11-HBCH-ECP-3573Project Number:
25/2624/2523/2422/2321/2220/2119/20 Projected CostEstimated CostProject Phase
E $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
R $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
C/I $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
O&M $5,075 $5,075 $5,075 $0 $0 $0 $0 $15,225 $15,225
$5,075 $5,075 $5,075 $0 $0 $0 $0 $15,225 $ 15,225
PROJECTED COSTESTIMATED COSTPERCENTFUND NAME NOTES
$15,225 $15,225General Fund 100.00
$15,225 $15,225
Install ADA Access Ramps . This is an annual
project that will install Ramps at locations where we
are providing an overlay to adjacent street.
Installation of ADA access ramps
Pedestrian
Project Description:
TOW Description:
Type of Work (TOW):
Huntington BeachAgency:
Residential Curb Ramp ProjectProject Name:
Ramps to be installed throughout CityProject Limits:
Project Number:
25/2624/2523/2422/2321/2220/2119/20 Projected CostEstimated CostProject Phase
E $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $35,000 $35,000
R $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
C/I $800,000 $800,000 $800,000 $800,000 $800,000 $800,000 $800,000 $5,600,000 $6,135,540
O&M $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
$805,000 $805,000 $805,000 $805,000 $805,000 $805,000 $805,000 $5,635,000 $ 6,170,540
PROJECTED COSTESTIMATED COSTPERCENTFUND NAME NOTES
$3,521,000 $3,855,629CDBG 62.48
$2,114,000 $2,314,911M2 LFS 37.52
$5,635,000 $6,170,540
138
Measure M
Seven Year Capital Improvement Program (Sorted by Project Name)
Fiscal Years 2019/2020 through 2025/2026
76/18/2019
Provide cold mill and overlay of various streets
throughout Huntington Beach. This annual project
will provide street overlay rehabilitation based on the
PMP ratings.
Rehabilitation of roadway
Road Maintenance
Project Description:
TOW Description:
Type of Work (TOW):
Huntington BeachAgency:
Residential OverlayProject Name:
CitywideProject Limits:
Project Number:
25/2624/2523/2422/2321/2220/2119/20 Projected CostEstimated CostProject Phase
E $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $70,000 $70,000
R $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
C/I $2,090,000 $2,090,000 $2,090,000 $2,090,000 $2,090,000 $2,090,000 $2,090,000 $14,630,000 $16,029,098
O&M $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
$2,100,000 $2,100,000 $2,100,000 $2,100,000 $2,100,000 $2,100,000 $2,100,000 $14,700,000 $ 16,099,098
PROJECTED COSTESTIMATED COSTPERCENTFUND NAME NOTES
$14,700,000 $16,099,098Gas Tax 100.00
$0 $0Other 0.00
$0 $0Other 0.00
$14,700,000 $16,099,098
Provide operational and infrastructure improvements.
OCTA leading joint project with Fountain Valley and
Santa Ana. OCTA applying for SB-1 funding.
Interconnect traffic signals to improve coordination
and communication
Traffic Signals
Project Description:
TOW Description:
Type of Work (TOW):
Huntington BeachAgency:
Talbert Avenue SynchronizationProject Name:
Beach Boulevard to Newland StreetProject Limits:
UnassignedProject Number:
25/2624/2523/2422/2321/2220/2119/20 Projected CostEstimated CostProject Phase
E $6,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $6,000 $6,000
R $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
C/I $40,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $40,000 $40,000
O&M $1,000 $1,000 $1,000 $1,000 $0 $0 $0 $4,000 $4,000
$47,000 $1,000 $1,000 $1,000 $0 $0 $0 $50,000 $ 50,000
PROJECTED COSTESTIMATED COSTPERCENTFUND NAME NOTES
$40,000 $40,000M2 TSSP 80.00
$10,000 $10,000AQMD 20.00
$50,000 $50,000
139
Measure M
Seven Year Capital Improvement Program (Sorted by Project Name)
Fiscal Years 2019/2020 through 2025/2026
86/18/2019
Construct a "Bicycle Boulevard", where bicycling is
emphasized over motor vehicle use. Project includes
a new traffic signal, curb bulb-outs, signing &
striping improvements. This project is a carryover
for FY18/19.
Widening of existing bike route
Bikeways
Project Description:
TOW Description:
Type of Work (TOW):
Huntington BeachAgency:
Utica Bicycle Boulevard from Main Street to Beach
Boulevard
Project Name:
Utica Avenue from Main Street to Beach BoulevardProject Limits:
Project Number:
25/2624/2523/2422/2321/2220/2119/20 Projected CostEstimated CostProject Phase
E $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
R $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
C/I $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
O&M $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $ 0
PROJECTED COSTESTIMATED COSTPERCENTFUND NAME NOTES
$0 $0Prop 42 0.00
$0 $0BCIP 100.00
$0 $0
Provide operational and infrastructure improvements.
OCTA leading joint project with Fountain Valley and
Santa Ana.
Interconnect traffic signals to improve coordination
and communication
Traffic Signals
Project Description:
TOW Description:
Type of Work (TOW):
Huntington BeachAgency:
Warner Avenue SynchronizationProject Name:
From Magnolia Street to Pacific Coast HighwayProject Limits:
UnassignedProject Number:
25/2624/2523/2422/2321/2220/2119/20 Projected CostEstimated CostProject Phase
E $290,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $290,000 $290,000
R $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
C/I $1,320,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,320,000 $1,320,000
O&M $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $0 $0 $0 $40,000 $40,000
$1,620,000 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $0 $0 $0 $1,650,000 $ 1,650,000
PROJECTED COSTESTIMATED COSTPERCENTFUND NAME NOTES
$1,320,000 $1,320,000M2 TSSP 80.00
$330,000 $330,000AQMD 20.00
$1,650,000 $1,650,000
140
213669.10
ORANGE COUNTY LOCAL TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY
ORDINANCE NO. 3
JULY 24, 2006
AMENDED:
November 9, 2012
November 25, 2013
December 14, 2015 (corrected March 14, 2016)
Orange County Local Transportation Authority
550 South Main Street
P.O. Box 14184
Orange, CA 92863-1584
Tel: (714) 560-6282
141
213669.10
Measure M2 Amendments
Transportation Investment Plan Amendments
1. November 9, 2012
• Reallocation of Funds within Freeway Program Between SR-91 and I-405
2. December 14, 2015 (corrected March 14, 2016)
• Closeout of Project T and Reallocation of Remaining Funds within Transit
Program between Metrolink Service Expansion (Project R) and Fare
Stabilization Program (Project U). Corrected amendment language was
presented to the Board on March 14, 2016.
Ordinance Amendment
1. November 25, 2013
• Strengthens the eligibility and selection process for TOC members to
prevent any person with a financial conflict of interest from serving as a
member. Also requires currently elected or appointed officers who are
applying to serve on the TOC to complete an “Intent to Resign” form.
2. December 14, 2015 (corrected March 14, 2016)
• Accounts for additional funding from Project T allocated to the Fare
Stabilization Program by changing Attachment B language to reflect a
1.47% delegation (rather than 1%) of Project U funding towards Fare
Stabilization. Corrected amendment language was presented to the Board
on March 14, 2016.
142
213669.10
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Ordinance No. 3 Page
Preamble ............................................................................................... 1
Section 1. Title ......................................................................................... 1
Section 2. Summary ................................................................................ 2
Section 3. Imposition of Retail Transactions and Use Tax ...................... 2
Section 4. Purposes ................................................................................ 2
Section 5. Bonding Authority ................................................................... 3
Section 6. Maintenance of Effort Requirements ...................................... 3
Section 7. Administration ......................................................................... 4
Section 8. Annual Appropriations Limit .................................................... 4
Section 9. Effective and Operative Dates ................................................ 5
Section 10. Safeguards of Use of Revenues ............................................. 5
Section 11. Ten-Year Comprehensive Program Review ........................... 6
Section 12. Amendments .......................................................................... 6
Section 13. Request for Election ............................................................... 7
Section 14. Effect on Ordinance No. 2 ...................................................... 8
Section 15. Severability ............................................................................. 8
ATTACHMENT A – Renewed Measure M
Transportation Investment Plan ................................... A-1
ATTACHMENT B - Allocation of Net Revenues
Section I. Definitions ............................................................................... B-1
143
213669.10
Section II. Requirements ......................................................................... B-4
Section III. Requirements for Eligible Jurisdictions ................................... B-7
Section IV. Allocation of Net Revenues; General Provisions .................... B-10
Section V. Allocation of Net Revenues; Streets and
Roads Programs/Projects ....................................................... B-12
Section VI. Allocation of Net Revenues; Transit Programs/
Projects .................................................................................. B-14
Section VII. Allocation of Net Revenues; Environmental Cleanup
Projects .................................................................................. B-17
ATTACHMENT C - Taxpayer Oversight Committee
Section I. Purpose and Organization ...................................................... C-1
Section II. Committee Membership ......................................................... C-1
Section III. Appointment of Members ....................................................... C-2
Section IV. Duties and Responsibilities .................................................... C-4
144
213671.11
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Ordinance No. 3
Renewed Measure M Transportation Ordinance and Investment Plan
PREAMBLE
A. Pursuant to California Public Utilities Code Section 180050, the Orange
County Transportation Authority (“Authority”) has been designated as the Orange County
Local Transportation Authority by the Orange County Board of Supervisors.
B. There has been adopted a countywide transportation expenditure plan,
referred to as the Orange County Transportation Investment Plan, dated July 24, 2006,
pursuant to California Public Utilities Code Section 180206 (“Plan”), which will be
administered by the Authority.
C. The Plan provides for needed countywide transportation facility and service
improvements which will be funded, in part, by a transactions and use tax of one-half of one
percent (1/2%).
D. Local Transportation Ordinance Number 2 (“Ordinance No. 2”) funds
transportation facility and service improvements through a transactions and use tax of one-
half of one percent (1/2%) that will be imposed through March 31, 2011.
E. Ordinance No. 3 (“Ordinance”) provides for the continuation of the existing
Ordinance No. 2 transactions and use tax of one-half of one percent (1/2%) for an
additional period of thirty (30) years to fund transportation facility and service
improvements.
SECTION 1. TITLE
The Ordinance shall be known and may be cited as the Renewed Measure M
Transportation Ordinance and Investment Plan. The word “Ordinance,” as used in the
Ordinance, shall mean and include Attachment A entitled “Renewed Measure M
Transportation Investment Plan,” Attachment B entitled “Allocation of Net Revenues,” and
Attachment C entitled “Taxpayer Oversight Committee,” which Attachments A, B and C are
attached hereto and incorporated by reference as if fully set forth herein.
145
2
213671.11
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
SECTION 2. SUMMARY
The Ordinance provides for the implementation of the Orange County Transportation
Investment Plan, which will result in countywide transportation improvements for freeways,
highways, local streets and roads, bus and rail transit, transportation-related water quality
(“Environmental Cleanup”), and transit services for seniors and disabled persons. These
needed improvements will be funded by the continuation of the one-half of one percent
(1/2%) transaction and use tax for a period of thirty years. The revenues shall be deposited
in a special fund and used solely for the identified improvements authorized by the
Ordinance.
SECTION 3. IMPOSITION OF RETAIL TRANSACTIONS AND USE TAX
Subject to approval by the electors, the Authority hereby imposes, in the
incorporated and unincorporated territories of Orange County (“County”), in accordance
with the provisions of Part 1.6 (commencing with Section 7251) of Division 2 of the
California Revenue and Taxation Code and Division 19 (commencing with Section 180000)
of the California Public Utilities Code, continuance of the existing retail transactions and
use tax at the rate of one-half of one percent (1/2%) commencing April 1, 2011, for a period
of thirty years. This tax shall be in addition to any other taxes authorized by law, including
any existing or future state or local sales tax or transactions and use tax. The imposition,
administration and collection of the tax shall be in accordance with all applicable statutes,
laws, rules and regulations prescribed and adopted by the State Board of Equalization.
SECTION 4. PURPOSES
All of the gross revenues generated from the transactions and use tax plus any
interest or other earnings thereon (collectively, “Revenues”), after the deduction for: (i)
amounts payable to the State Board of Equalization for the performance of functions
incidental to the administration and operation of the Ordinance, (ii) costs for the
administration of the Ordinance as provided herein, (iii) two percent (2%) of the Revenues
annually allocated for Environmental Cleanup and (iv) satisfaction of debt service
requirements of all bonds issued pursuant to the Ordinance that are not satisfied out of
146
3
213671.11
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
separate allocations, shall be defined as “Net Revenues” and shall be allocated solely for
the transportation purposes described in the Ordinance.
SECTION 5. BONDING AUTHORITY
“Pay as you go” financing is the preferred method of financing transportation
improvements and operations under the Ordinance. However, the Authority may use bond
financing as an alternative method if the scope of planned expenditures makes “pay as you
go” financing unfeasible. Following approval by the electors of the ballot proposition
authorizing imposition of the transactions and use tax and authorizing issuance of bonds
payable from the proceeds of the tax, bonds may be issued by the Authority pursuant to
Division 19 of the Public Utilities Code, at any time before, on, or after the imposition of
taxes, and from time to time, payable from the proceeds of the tax and secured by a pledge
of revenues from the proceeds of the tax, in order to finance and refinance improvements
authorized by the Ordinance.
SECTION 6. MAINTENANCE OF EFFORT REQUIREMENTS
It is the intent of the Legislature and the Authority that the Net Revenues allocated to
a jurisdiction pursuant to the Ordinance for street and road projects shall be used to
supplement existing local discretionary funds being used for transportation improvements.
Each jurisdiction is hereby required to annually maintain as a minimum no less than the
maintenance of effort amount of local discretionary funds required to be expended by the
jurisdiction for local street and road purposes pursuant to the current Ordinance No. 2 for
Fiscal Year 2010-2011. The maintenance of effort level for each jurisdiction as determined
through this process shall be adjusted effective July 1, 2014 and every three fiscal years
thereafter in an amount equal to the percentage change for the Construction Cost Index
compiled by Caltrans for the immediately preceding three calendar years, providing that
any percentage increase in the maintenance of effort level based on this adjustment shall
not exceed the percentage increase in the growth rate in the jurisdiction’s general fund
revenues over the same time period. The Authority shall not allocate any Net Revenues to
any jurisdiction for any fiscal year until that jurisdiction has certified to the Authority that it
147
4
213671.11
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
has included in its budget for that fiscal year an amount of local discretionary funds for
streets and roads purposes at least equal to the level of its maintenance of effort
requirement. An annual independent audit may be conducted by the Authority to verify that
the maintenance of effort requirements are being met by the jurisdiction. Any Net
Revenues not allocated pursuant to the maintenance of effort requirement shall be
allocated to the remaining eligible jurisdictions according to the formula described in the
Ordinance.
SECTION 7. ADMINISTRATION
The Authority shall allocate Revenues to fund facilities, services and projects as
specified in the Ordinance, and shall administer the Ordinance consistent with the authority
cited. Revenues may be expended by the Authority for salaries, wages, benefits, and
overhead and for those services, including contractual services, necessary to carry out its
responsibilities pursuant to Division 19; however, in no case shall the Revenues expended
for salaries and benefits of Authority administrative staff exceed more than one percent
(1%) of the Revenues in any year. The Authority shall use, to the extent possible, existing
state, regional and local transportation planning and programming data and expertise, and
may, as the law permits, contract with any public agency or private firm for services
necessary to carry out the purposes of the Ordinance. Expenses incurred by the Authority
for administrative staff and for project implementation, including contracting with public
agencies and private firms, shall be identified in the annual report prepared pursuant to
Section 10, subpart 8, of the Ordinance.
SECTION 8. ANNUAL APPROPRIATIONS LIMIT
The annual appropriations limit established pursuant to Article XIII. B. of the
California Constitution and Section 180202 of the Public Utilities Code shall be established
as $1,123 million for the 2006-07 fiscal year. The appropriations limit shall be subject to
adjustment as provided by law. All expenditures of the Revenues are subject to the
appropriations limit of the Authority.
///
148
5
213671.11
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
SECTION 9. EFFECTIVE AND OPERATIVE DATES
The Ordinance shall be effective on November 8, 2006, if two thirds of the electors
vote on November 7, 2006, to approve the ballot measure authorizing the extension of the
imposition of the existing tax. The continuance of the imposition of the existing tax
authorized by Section 3 of the Ordinance shall be operative on April 1, 2011.
SECTION 10. SAFEGUARDS OF USE OF REVENUES
The following safeguards are hereby established to ensure strict adherence to the
limitations on the use of the Revenues:
1. A transportation special revenue fund (the “Local Transportation
Authority Special Revenue Fund”) shall be established to maintain all Revenues.
2. The County of Orange Auditor-Controller (“Auditor-Controller”), in the
capacity as Chair of the Taxpayer Oversight Committee, shall annually certify whether the
Revenues have been spent in compliance with the Ordinance.
3. Receipt, maintenance and expenditure of Net Revenues shall be
distinguishable in each jurisdiction’s accounting records from other funding sources, and
expenditures of Net Revenues shall be distinguishable by program or project. Interest
earned on Net Revenues allocated pursuant to the Ordinance shall be expended only for
those purposes for which the Net Revenues were allocated.
4. No Net Revenues shall be used by a jurisdiction for other than
transportation purposes authorized by the Ordinance. Any jurisdiction which violates this
provision must fully reimburse the Authority for the Net Revenues misspent and shall be
deemed ineligible to receive Net Revenues for a period of five (5) years.
5. A Taxpayer Oversight Committee (“Committee”) shall be established to
provide an enhanced level of accountability for expenditure of Revenues under the
Ordinance. The Committee will help to ensure that all voter mandates are carried out as
required. The roles and responsibilities of the Committee, the selection process for
Committee members and related administrative procedures shall be carried out as
described in Attachment C.
149
6
213671.11
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
6. A performance assessment shall be conducted at least once every
three years to evaluate the efficiency, effectiveness, economy and program results of the
Authority in satisfying the provisions and requirements of the Investment Summary of the
Plan, the Plan and the Ordinance. A copy of the performance assessment shall be
provided to the Committee.
7. Quarterly status reports regarding the major projects detailed in the
Plan shall be brought before the Authority in public meetings.
8. Annually the Authority shall publish a report on how all Revenues have
been spent and on progress in implementing projects in the Plan, and shall publicly report
on the findings.
SECTION 11. TEN-YEAR COMPREHENSIVE PROGRAM REVIEW
At least every ten years the Authority shall conduct a comprehensive review of all
projects and programs implemented under the Plan to evaluate the performance of the
overall program and may revise the Plan to improve its performance. The review shall
include consideration of changes to local, state and federal transportation plans and
policies; changes in land use, travel and growth projections; changes in project cost
estimates and revenue projections; right-of-way constraints and other project constraints;
level of public support for the Plan; and the progress of the Authority and jurisdictions in
implementing the Plan. The Authority may amend the Plan based on its comprehensive
review, subject to the requirements of Section 12.
SECTION 12. AMENDMENTS
The Authority may amend the Ordinance, including the Plan, to provide for the use
of additional federal, state and local funds, to account for unexpected revenues, or to take
into consideration unforeseen circumstances. The Authority shall notify the board of
supervisors and the city council of each city in the county and provide them with a copy of
the proposed amendments, and shall hold a public hearing on proposed amendments prior
to adoption, which shall require approval by a vote of not less than two thirds of the
Authority Board of Directors. Amendments shall become effective forty five days after
150
7
213671.11
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
adoption. No amendment to the Plan which eliminates a program or project specified on
Page 31 of the Plan shall be adopted unless the Authority Board of Directors adopts a
finding that the transportation purpose of the program or project to be eliminated will be
satisfied by a different program or project. No amendment to the Plan which changes the
funding categories, programs or projects identified on page 31 of the Plan shall be adopted
unless the amendment to the Plan is first approved by a vote of not less than two thirds of
the Committee. In addition, any proposed change in allocations among the four major
funding categories of freeway projects, street and road projects, transit projects and
Environmental Cleanup projects identified on page 31 of the Plan, or any proposed change
of the Net Revenues allocated pursuant to Section IV C 3 of Attachment B for the Local
Fair Share Program portion of the Streets and Roads Projects funding category, shall be
approved by a simple majority vote of the electors before going into effect.
SECTION 13. REQUEST FOR ELECTION
Pursuant to California Public Utilities Code Section 180201, the Authority hereby
requests that the County of Orange Board of Supervisors call a special election to be
conducted by the County of Orange on November 7, 2006, to place the Ordinance before
the electors. To avoid any misunderstanding or confusion by Orange County electors, the
Authority requests that the Ordinance be identified as “Measure M” on the ballot. The ballot
language for the measure shall contain a summary of the projects and programs in the Plan
and shall read substantially as follows:
“Measure “M,” Orange County Transportation Improvement Plan
Shall the ordinance continuing Measure M, Orange County’s half-cent sales tax for
transportation improvements, for an additional 30 years with limited bonding authority to
fund the following projects:
* relieve congestion on the I-5, I-405, 22, 55, 57 and 91 freeways;
* fix potholes and resurface streets;
* expand Metrolink rail and connect it to local communities;
* provide transit services, at reduced rates, for seniors and disabled persons;
151
8
213671.11
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
* synchronize traffic lights in every community;
* reduce air and water pollution, and protect local beaches by cleaning up oil runoff
from roadways;
and establish the following taxpayer protections to ensure the funds are spent as directed
by the voters:
* require an independent Taxpayer Oversight Committee to review yearly audits to
ensure that voter mandates are met;
* publish an annual report to the taxpayers on how all funds are spent; and
* update the transportation improvement plan every 10 years, with voter approval
required for major changes;
be adopted for the purpose of relieving traffic congestion in Orange County?”
SECTION 14. EFFECT ON ORDINANCE NO. 2
The Ordinance is not intended to modify, repeal or alter the provisions of Ordinance
No. 2, and shall not be read to supersede Ordinance No. 2. The provisions of the
Ordinance shall apply solely to the transactions and use tax adopted herein. If the
Ordinance is not approved by the electors of the County, the provisions of Ordinance No. 2
and all powers, duties, and actions taken thereunder shall remain in full force and effect.
SECTION 15. SEVERABILITY
If any section, subsection, part, clause or phrase of the Ordinance is for any reason
held invalid, unenforceable or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, that
holding shall not affect the validity or enforceability of the remaining funds or provisions of
the Ordinance, and the Authority declares that it would have passed each part of the
///
///
///
///
///
///
152
153
RENEWED MEASURE MRENEWED MEASURE M
Transportation Investment PlanTransportation Investment Plan
ORANGE COUNTY LOCAL TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY
550 South Main Street
P.O. Box 14184
Orange, CA 92863-1584
(714) 560-5066
www.octa.net
As amended on December 14, 2015
Approved by voters on November 7, 2006
Updated March 14, 2016
ATTACHMENT A
154
155
Table of Contents
Introduction ............................................................................................2
Overview ................................................................................................3
Freeway Projects
Overview ..................................................................................................................5
Orange County Freeway Projects Map ...............................................................6
I-5 Santa Ana Freeway Interchange Improvements ...........................7
I-5 Santa Ana/San Diego Freeway Improvements .............................8
SR-22 Garden Grove Freeway Access Improvements .............................9
SR-55 Costa Mesa Freeway Improvements ...............................................9
SR-57 Orange Freeway Improvements .....................................................10
SR-91 Riverside Freeway Improvements ..................................................11
I-405 San Diego Freeway Improvements .................................................13
I-605 Freeway Access Improvements ........................................................15
All Freeway Service Patrol .....................................................................15
Streets & Roads Projects
Overview ................................................................................................................16
Orange County Streets and Roads Projects Map ...........................................17
Regional Capacity Program ...............................................................................18
Regional Traffic Signal Synchronization Program ..........................................19
Local Fair Share Program ...................................................................................20
Transit Projects
Overview ................................................................................................................21
Orange County Transit Projects Map ................................................................22
High Frequency Metrolink Service ....................................................................23
Transit Extensions to Metrolink ...........................................................................23
Metrolink Gateways ..............................................................................................24
Expand Mobility Choices for Seniors and Persons with Disabilities............24
Community Based Transit/Circulators ...............................................................25
Safe Transit Stops .................................................................................................25
Environmental Cleanup
Overview ................................................................................................................26
Project Description ...............................................................................................27
Taxpayer Safeguards and Audits
Overview ................................................................................................................28
Description ..............................................................................................................29
Measure M Investment Summary ........................................................31
1
156
RENEW E D
Measure M Promises Fulfilled
On November 6, 1990, Orange County voters
approved Measure M, a half-cent local transportation
sales tax for twenty years. All of the major projects
promised to and approved by the voters are
underway or complete. Funds that go to cities and
the County of Orange to maintain and improve
local street and roads, along with transit fare
reductions for seniors and persons with disabilities,
will continue until Measure M ends in 2011. The
promises made in Measure M have been fulfilled.
Continued Investment Needed
Orange County continues to grow. By the year 2030,
Orange County’s population will increase by 24
percent from 2.9 million in 2000 to 3.6 million in
2030; jobs will increase by 27 percent; and travel
on our roads and highways by 39 percent. Without
continued investment average morning rush hour
speeds on Orange County freeways will fall by
31 percent and on major streets by 32 percent.
Responding to this continued growth and broad
support for investment in Orange County’s
transportation system, the Orange County
Transportation Authority considered the
transportation projects and programs that would be
possible if Measure M were renewed. The Authority,
together with the 34 cities of Orange County, the
Orange County Board of Supervisors and thousands
of Orange County citizens, participated during the
last eighteen months in developing a Transportation
Investment Plan for consideration by the voters.
A Plan for New Transportation Investments
The Plan that follows is a result of those efforts. It
reflects the varied interests and priorities inherent
in the diverse communities of Orange County. It
includes continued investment to expand and
improve Orange County’s freeway system;
commitment to maintaining and improving the
network of streets and roads in every community;
an expansion of Metrolink rail service through the
core of Orange County with future extensions to
connect with nearby communities and regional
rail systems; more transit service for seniors and
disabled persons; and funds to clean up runoff
from roads that leads to beach closures.
Strong Safeguards
These commitments are underscored by a set of
strong taxpayer safeguards to ensure that promises
made in the Plan are kept. They include an annual
independent audit and report to the taxpayers;
ongoing monitoring and review of spending by
an independent Taxpayer Oversight Committee;
requirement for full public review and update of
the Plan every ten years; voter approval for any
major changes to the Plan; strong penalties for
any misuse of funds and a strict limit of no more
than one percent for administrative expenses.
No Increase in Taxes
The traffic improvements detailed in this plan do
not require an increase in taxes. Renewal of the
existing Measure M one-half cent transportation
sales tax will enable all of the projects and
programs to be implemented. And by using good
planning and sensible financing, projects that
are ready to go could begin as early as 2007.
Renewing Measure M
The projects and programs that follow constitute
the Transportation Investment Plan for the
renewal of the Measure M transportation sales tax
approved by Orange County voters in November
of 1990. These improvements are necessary to
address current and future transportation needs
in Orange County and reflect the best efforts
to achieve consensus among varied interests
and communities throughout the County.
Introduction
2
RENEW E D
157
RENEW E D
The Renewed Measure M Transportation Investment
Plan is a 30-year, $11.8 billion program designed to
reduce traffic congestion, strengthen our economy
and improve our quality of life by upgrading
key freeways, fixing major freeway interchanges,
maintaining streets and roads, synchronizing traffic
signals countywide, building a visionary rail transit
system, and protecting our environment from the oily
street runoff that pollutes Orange County beaches.
The Transportation Investment Plan is focused solely
on improving the transportation system and includes
tough taxpayer safeguards, including a Taxpayer
Oversight Committee, required annual audits,
and regular, public reports on project progress.
The Renewed Measure M Transportation Investment
Plan must be reviewed annually, in public session,
and every ten years a detailed review of the Plan
must take place. If changing circumstances require
the voter-approved plan to be changed, those
changes must be taken to the voters for approval.
Freeways
Relieving congestion on the Riverside/Artesia
Freeway (SR-91) is the centerpiece of the freeway
program, and will include new lanes, new
interchanges, and new bridges. Other major projects
will make substantial improvements on Interstate
5 (I-5) in southern Orange County and the San
Diego Freeway (I-405) in western Orange County.
The notorious Orange Crush — the intersection of
the I-5, the Garden Grove Freeway (SR-22) and the
Orange Freeway (SR-57) near Angel Stadium — will
be improved and upgraded. Under the Plan, major
traffic chokepoints on almost every Orange County
freeway will be remedied. Improving Orange
County freeways will be the greatest investment
in the Renewed Measure M program: Forty-
three percent of net revenues, or $4.871 billion,
will be invested in new freeway construction.
Streets and Roads
More than 6,500 lane miles of aging streets and roads
will need repair, rejuvenation and improvement.
City streets and county roads need to be maintained
regularly and potholes have to be filled quickly.
Thirty-two percent of net revenue from the Renewed
Measure M Transportation Investment Plan, or
$3.625 billion, will be devoted to fixing potholes,
improving intersections, synchronizing traffic signals
countywide, and making the existing countywide
network of streets and roads safer and more efficient.
Overview
RENEW E D
2 3
158
RENEW E D
Public Transit
As Orange County continues to grow, building a
visionary rail transportation system that is safe,
clean and convenient, uses and preserves existing
rights-of-way, and, over time, provides high-speed
connections both inside and outside of Orange
County, is a long term goal. Twenty-five percent
of the net revenue from Renewed Measure M, or
$2.83 billion, will be dedicated to transit programs
countywide. About twenty percent, or $2.24 billion,
will be dedicated to creating a new countywide
high capacity transit system anchored on the
existing, successful Metrolink and Amtrak rail line,
and about five percent, or $591 million, will be
used to enhance senior transportation programs
and provide targeted, safe localized bus service.
Environmental Cleanup
Every day, more than 70 million gallons of oily
pollution, litter, and dirty contaminants wash off
streets, roads, and freeways and pour onto Orange
County waterways and beaches. When it rains, the
transportation-generated beach and ocean pollution
increases tenfold. Under the plan, two percent
of the gross Renewed Measure M Transportation
Investment Plan, or $237 million, will be dedicated
to protecting Orange County beaches from this
transportation-generated pollution (sometimes called
“urban runoff”) while improving ocean water quality.
Taxpayer Safeguards and Audits
When new transportation dollars are approved,
they should go for transportation and transportation
purposes alone. No bait-and-switch. No using
transportation dollars for other purposes. The
original Measure M went solely for transportation
purposes. The Renewed Measure M must be just
as airtight. One percent of the gross Measure M
program, or $118.6 million over 30 years, will
pay for annual, independent audits, taxpayer
safeguards, an independent Taxpayer Oversight
Committee assigned to watchdog government
spending, and a full, public disclosure of all Renewed
Measure M expenditures. A detailed review of the
program must be conducted every ten years and,
if needed, major changes in the investment plan
must be brought before Orange County voters for
approval. Taxpayers will receive an annual report
detailing the Renewed Measure M expenditures.
Additionally, as required by law, an estimated one
and a half percent of the sales taxes generated, or
$178 million over 30 years, must be paid to the
California State Board of Equalization for collecting
the one-half cent sales tax that funds the Renewed
Measure M Transportation Investment Plan.
In this pamphlet, every specific project, program,
and safeguard included in the Renewed Measure
M Transportation Investment Plan is explained.
Similar details will be provided to every Orange
County voter if the measure is placed on the ballot.RENEW E D
4
159
RENEW E D
Every day, traffic backs up somewhere on the
Orange County freeway system. And, every day,
freeway traffic seems to get a little worse.
In the past decade, Orange County has made major
strides in re-building our aging freeway system.
But there is still an enormous amount of work
that needs to be done to make the freeway system
work well. You see the need for improvement every
time you drive on an Orange County freeway.
Forty-three percent of net revenues from the
Renewed Measure M Transportation Investment Plan
is dedicated to improving Orange County freeways,
the largest portion of the 30-year transportation plan.
SR-91 is the Centerpiece
Making the troubled Riverside/Artesia Freeway
(SR-91) work again is the centerpiece of the
Renewed Measure M Freeway program. The fix
on the SR-91 will require new lanes, new bridges,
new overpasses, and, in the Santa Ana Canyon
portion of the freeway, a diversion of drivers to the
Foothill Corridor (SR-241) so the rest of the Orange
County freeway system can work more effectively.
And there’s more to the freeway program than the
fix of SR-91 — much more. More than $1 billion
is earmarked for Interstate 5 in South County.
More than $800 million is slated to upgrade the
San Diego Freeway (I-405) between Irvine and
the Los Angeles County line. Another significant
investment is planned on the congested Costa
Mesa Freeway (SR-55). And needed projects
designed to relieve traffic chokepoints are planned
for almost every Orange County freeway.
To make any freeway system work, bottlenecks at
interchanges also have to be fixed. The notorious
Orange Crush Interchange — where the Santa Ana
Freeway (I-5) meets the Orange Freeway (SR-57) and
the Garden Grove Freeway (SR-22) in a traffic tangle
near Angel Stadium — is in need of a major face lift.
And the intersection of Interstate 5 and the Costa
Mesa Freeway (SR-55) is also slated for major repair.
Pays Big Dividends
Local investment in freeways also pays big dividends
in the search for other needed freeway dollars.
Because of state and federal matching rules, Orange
County’s local investment in freeway projects acts
as a magnet for state and federal transportation
dollars — pulling more freeway construction
dollars into the county and allowing more traffic-
reducing freeway projects to be built sooner.
Innovative Environmental Mitigation
A minimum of $243.5 million will be available,
subject to a Master Agreement, to provide for
comprehensive, rather than piecemeal, mitigation of
the environmental impacts of freeway improvements.
Using a proactive, innovative approach, the
Master Agreement negotiated between the Orange
County Local Transportation Authority and
state and federal resource agencies will provide
higher-value environmental benefits such as
habitat protection, wildlife corridors and resource
preservation in exchange for streamlined project
approvals for the freeway program as a whole.
Freeway projects will also be planned, designed
and constructed with consideration for their
aesthetic, historic and environmental impacts
on nearby properties and communities using
such elements as parkway style designs, locally
native landscaping, sound reduction and aesthetic
treatments that complement the surroundings.
Freeway Projects Overview
RENEW E D
4 5
160
A
B
C
F
G
H I
J
K
L
Orange County Freeway Projects
Santa Ana Freeway (I-5) page 7
Santa Ana Freeway/San Diego Freeway (I-5) page 8
Santa Ana Freeway/San Diego Freeway (I-5) page 8
Garden Grove Freeway (SR-22) page 9
Costa Mesa Freeway (SR-55) page 9
Orange Freeway (SR-57) page 10
Riverside Freeway (SR-91) page 11
Riverside Freeway (SR-91) page 12
San Diego Freeway (I-405) page 13-14
Freeway Access Improvements (I-605) page 15
(not mapped)
Freeway Service Patrol (not mapped) page 15
A B
D
C
E
F
NG
M
K L
J
H I
C
6
E
M
D
161
Freeway Projects
Santa Ana Freeway (I-5)
Interchange Improvements
A B
RENEW E D
6 7
Project
Santa Ana Freeway (I-5) Improvements
between Costa Mesa Freeway (SR-55)
and “Orange Crush” Area (SR-57)
Description:
Reduce freeway congestion through improvements
at the SR-55/I-5 interchange area between the Fourth
Street and Newport Boulevard ramps on I-5, and
between Fourth Street and Edinger Avenue on
SR-55. Also, add capacity on I-5 between SR-55 and
SR-57 to relieve congestion at the “Orange Crush”.
The project will generally be constructed within the
existing right-of-way. Specific improvements will be
subject to approved plans developed in cooperation
with local jurisdictions and affected communities.
The project will increase freeway capacity and reduce
congestion. The current daily traffic volume on this
segment of the I-5 between SR-55 and SR-57 is about
389,000. The demand is expected to grow by more
than 19 percent by 2030, bringing the daily usage to
464,000 vehicles per day. Regional plans also include
additional improvements on I-5 from the “Orange
Crush” to SR-91 using federal and state funds.
Cost:
The estimated cost to improve this
section of the I-5 is $470.0 million.
Project
Santa Ana Freeway (I-5) Improvements from the
Costa Mesa Freeway (SR-55) to El Toro “Y” Area
Description:
Build new lanes and improve the interchanges
in the area between SR-55 and the SR-133 (near
the El Toro “Y”). This segment of I-5 is the major
route serving activity areas in the cities of Irvine,
Tustin, Santa Ana and north Orange County. The
project will also make improvements at local
interchanges, such as Jamboree Road. The project
will generally be constructed within the existing
right-of-way. Specific improvements will be subject
to approved plans developed in cooperation with
local jurisdictions and affected communities.
The project will increase freeway capacity and
reduce congestion. The current traffic volume
on this segment of I-5 is about 356,000 vehicles
per day and is expected to increase by nearly 24
percent, bringing it up to 440,000 vehicles per
day. In addition to the projects described above,
regional plans include additional improvements
to this freeway at local interchanges, such as
Culver Drive, using federal and state funds.
Cost:
The estimated cost to improve this
section of I-5 is $300.2 million.
162
Project
San Diego Freeway (I-5) Improvements
South of the El Toro “Y”
Description:
Add new lanes to I-5 from the vicinity of the El Toro
Interchange in Lake Forest to the vicinity of SR-73
in Mission Viejo. Also add new lanes on I-5 between
Coast Highway and Avenida Pico interchanges to
reduce freeway congestion in San Clemente. The
project will also make major improvements at local
interchanges as listed in Project D. The project
will generally be constructed within the existing
right-of-way. Specific improvements will be subject
to approved plans developed in cooperation with
local jurisdictions and affected communities.
The project will increase freeway capacity and
reduce congestion. Current traffic volume on I-5
near the El Toro “Y” is about 342,000 vehicles per
day. This volume will increase in the future by 35
percent, bringing it up to 460,000 vehicles per
day. Regional plans also include construction of a
new freeway access point between Crown Valley
Parkway and Avery Parkway as well as new off ramps
at Stonehill Drive using federal and state funds.
Cost:
The estimated cost to improve these
segments of I-5 is $627.0 million.
Project
Santa Ana Freeway / San Diego Freeway (I-5)
Local Interchange Upgrades
Description:
Update and improve key I-5 interchanges such
as Avenida Pico, Ortega Highway, Avery Parkway,
La Paz Road, El Toro Road, and others to relieve
street congestion around older interchanges and
on ramps. Specific improvements will be subject
to approved plans developed in cooperation with
local jurisdictions and affected communities.
In addition to the project described above,
regional plans also include improvements to
the local interchanges at Camino Capistrano,
Oso Parkway, Alicia Parkway and Barranca
Parkway using federal and state funds.
Cost:
The estimated cost for the I-5 local
interchange upgrades is $258.0 million.
Mission
Viejo
Laguna
Niguel
San Juan
Capistrano
Dana Point
San Clemente
Mission
Viejo
Laguna
Niguel
San Juan
Capistrano
Dana Point
San Clemente
Santa Ana Freeway/San Diego Freeway (I-5)
C
Freeway Projects
D
RENEW E D
8
163
Project
Garden Grove Freeway (SR-22)
Access Improvements
Description:
Construct interchange improvements at Euclid
Street, Brookhurst Street and Harbor Boulevard
to reduce freeway and street congestion near these
interchanges. Specific improvements will be subject
to approved plans developed in cooperation with
local jurisdictions and affected communities.
Regional plans also include the construction of
new freeway-to-freeway carpool ramps to the
SR-22/I-405 interchange, and improvements to
the local interchange at Magnolia Avenue using
federal and state funds.
Cost:
The estimated cost to improve the
SR-22 interchanges is $120.0 million.
Project
Costa Mesa Freeway (SR-55) Improvements
Description:
Add new lanes to SR-55 between Garden Grove
Freeway (SR-22) and the San Diego Freeway
(I-405), generally within existing right-of-way,
including merging lanes between interchanges to
smooth traffic flow. This project also provides for
freeway operational improvements for the portion
of SR-55 between SR-91 and SR-22. The project
will generally be constructed within the existing
right-of-way. Specific improvements will be subject
to approved plans developed in cooperation with
local jurisdictions and affected communities.
The project will increase freeway capacity and reduce
congestion. This freeway carries about 295,000
vehicles on a daily basis. This volume is expected
to increase by nearly 13 percent, bringing it up to
332,000 vehicles per day in the future. In addition
to the projects described above, regional plans also
include a new street overcrossing and carpool ramps
at Alton Avenue using federal and state funds.
Cost:
The estimated cost for these SR-55
improvements is $366.0 million.
Garden Grove Freeway (SR-22)
Costa Mesa Freeway (SR-55)
Garden Grove
Stanton
Westminster
Santa Ana
Tustin
Orange
Anaheim
Buena Park
Fullerton
Costa
Mesa
Irvine
Westminster
Fountain Valley
Huntington Beach
Garden Grove
Los Alamitos
Seal Beach
Cypress
Stanton
Freeway Projects
E F
8 9
164
Project
Orange Freeway (SR-57) Improvements
Description:
Build a new northbound lane between Orangewood
Avenue and Lambert Road. Other projects include
improvements to the Lambert interchange and
the addition of a northbound truck climbing
lane between Lambert and Tonner Canyon
Road. The improvements will be designed and
coordinated specifically to reduce congestion at
SR-57/SR-91 interchange. These improvements
will be made generally within existing right-of-
way. Specific improvements will be subject to
approved plans developed in cooperation with
local jurisdictions and affected communities.
The project will increase freeway capacity and reduce
congestion. The daily traffic volume on this freeway
is about 315,000 vehicles. By 2030, this volume will
increase by 15 percent, bringing it up to 363,000
vehicles per day. In addition to the project described
above, regional plans include new carpool ramps
at Cerritos Avenue using federal and state funds.
Cost:
The estimated cost to implement
SR-57 improvements is $258.7 million.
Orange Freeway (SR-57)
Freeway Projects
G
RENEW E D
10
165
Project
Riverside Freeway (SR-91) Improvements
from the Santa Ana Freeway (I-5) to
the Orange Freeway (SR-57)
Description:
Add capacity in the westbound direction and provide
operational improvements at on and off ramps to
the SR-91 between I-5 and the Orange Freeway
(SR-57), generally within existing right-of-way, to
smooth traffic flow and relieve the SR-57/SR-91
interchange. Specific improvements will be subject
to approved plans developed in cooperation with
local jurisdictions and affected communities.
The current daily freeway volume along this
segment of SR-91 is about 256,000. By 2030,
this volume is expected to increase by nearly 13
percent, bringing it up to 289,900 vehicles per day.
Cost:
The estimated cost for improvements in this
segment of SR-91 is $140.0 million.
Project
Riverside Freeway (SR-91) Improvements
from Orange Freeway (SR-57) to the Costa
Mesa Freeway (SR-55) Interchange Area
Description:
Improve the SR-91/SR-55 to SR-91/SR-57
interchange complex, including nearby local
interchanges such as Tustin Avenue and Lakeview,
as well as adding freeway capacity between
SR-55 and SR-57. The project will generally
be constructed within the existing right-of-
way. Specific improvements will be subject to
approved plans developed in cooperation with
local jurisdictions and affected communities.
Current freeway volume on this segment
of the SR-91 is about 245,000 vehicles per
day. This vehicular demand is expected to
increase by 22 percent, bringing it up to
300,000 vehicles per day in the future.
Cost:
The estimated cost for these improvements
to the SR-91 is $416.5 million.
Riverside Freeway (SR-91)
Santa Ana
Tustin
Orange
Anaheim
Buena Park
Fullerton
Costa Mesa
Westminster
Fountain Valley
Huntington Beach
Garden Grove
Los Alamitos
Seal Beach
Cypress
Stanton
Placentia
Villa
Park
Anaheim
Freeway Projects
H I
RENEW E D
10 11
166
Project
Riverside Freeway (SR-91) Improvements
from Costa Mesa Freeway (SR-55) to
the Orange/ Riverside County Line
Description:
This project adds capacity on SR-91 beginning at
SR-55 and extending to I-15 in Riverside County.
The first priority will be to improve the segment
of SR-91 east of SR-241. The goal is to provide
up to four new lanes of capacity between SR-241
and Riverside County Line by making best use
of available freeway property, adding reversible
lanes, building elevated sections and improving
connections to SR-241. These projects would be
constructed in conjunction with similar coordinated
improvements in Riverside County extending to
I-15 and provide a continuous set of improvements
between SR-241 and I-15. The portion of
improvements in Riverside County will be paid for
from other sources. Specific improvements will be
subject to approved plans developed in cooperation
with local jurisdictions and affected communities.
This project also includes improvements to the
segment of SR-91 between SR-241 and SR-55.
The concept is to generally add one new lane in
each direction and improve the interchanges.
Today, this freeway carries about 314,000 vehicles
every day. This volume is expected to increase by 36
percent, bringing it up to 426,000 vehicles by 2030.
Cost:
The estimated cost for these improvements
to the SR-91 is $352.0 million.
Placentia
Yorba Linda
Villa
Park
Anaheim
Riverside Freeway (SR-91)
J
Freeway Projects
RENEW E D
12
Project cost estimate amended on November 9, 2012.167
Project
San Diego Freeway (I-405) Improvements
between the I-605 Freeway in Los Alamitos
area and Costa Mesa Freeway (SR-55)
Description:
Add new lanes to the San Diego Freeway between
I-605 and SR-55, generally within the existing right-
of-way. The project will make best use of available
freeway property, update interchanges and widen
all local overcrossings according to city and regional
master plans. The improvements will be coordinated
with other planned I-405 improvements in the
I-405/SR-22/I-605 interchange area to the north
and I-405/SR-73 improvements to the south. The
improvements will adhere to recommendations of
the Interstate 405 Major Investment Study
(as adopted by the Orange County Transportation
Authority Board of Directors on October 14,
2005) and will be developed in cooperation with
local jurisdictions and affected communities.
Today, I-405 carries about 430,000 vehicles daily.
The volume is expected to increase by nearly 23
percent, bringing it up to 528,000 vehicles daily
by 2030. The project will increase freeway capacity
and reduce congestion. Near-term regional plans
also include the improvements to the I-405/SR-73
interchange as well as a new carpool interchange
at Bear Street using federal and state funds.
Cost:
The estimated cost for these improvements
to the I-405 is $1,072.8 million.
San Diego Freeway (I-405)
Santa Ana
Tustin
Orange
Anaheim
Buena Park
Fullerton
Costa Mesa
Westminster
Fountain Valley
Huntington Beach
Garden Grove
Los Alamitos
Seal Beach
Cypress
Stanton
Freeway Projects
K
RENEW E D
12 13
Project cost estimate amended on November 9, 2012.168
Project
San Diego Freeway (I-405) Improvements
between Costa Mesa Freeway
(SR-55) and Santa Ana Freeway (I-5)
Description:
Add new lanes to the freeway from SR-55 to the
I-5. The project will also improve chokepoints
at interchanges and add merging lanes near on/
off ramps such as Lake Forest Drive, Irvine Center
Drive and SR-133 to improve the overall freeway
operations in the I-405/I-5 El Toro “Y” area. The
projects will generally be constructed within the
existing right-of-way. Specific improvements will be
subject to approved plans developed in cooperation
with local jurisdictions and affected communities.
This segment of the freeway carries 354,000
vehicles a day. This number will increase by
nearly 13 percent, bringing it up to 401,000
vehicles per day by 2030. The project will increase
freeway capacity and reduce congestion. In
addition to the projects described above, regional
plans include a new carpool interchange at Von
Karman Avenue using federal and state funds.
Cost:
The estimated cost for these improvements
to the I-405 is $319.7 million.
San Diego Freeway (I-405)
Freeway Projects
L
RENEW E D
14
169
Project
I-605 Freeway Access Improvements
Description:
Improve freeway access and arterial connection
to I-605 serving the communities of Los Alamitos
and Cypress. The project will be coordinated with
other planned improvements along SR-22 and
I-405. Specific improvements will be subject to
approved plans developed in cooperation with
local jurisdictions and affected communities.
Regional plans also include the addition of new
freeway-to-freeway carpool ramps to the I-405/
I-605 interchange using federal and state funds.
This improvement will connect to interchange
improvements at I-405 and SR-22 as well as
new freeway lanes between I-405 and I-605.
Cost:
The estimated cost to make these I-605 interchange
improvements is $20.0 million.
Project
Freeway Service Patrol
Description:
The Freeway Service Patrol (FSP) provides
competitively bid, privately contracted tow
truck service for motorists with disabled vehicles
on the freeway system. This service helps
stranded motorists and quickly clears disabled
vehicles out of the freeway lanes to minimize
congestion caused by vehicles blocking traffic
and passing motorists rubbernecking.
Currently Freeway Service Patrol is available on
Orange County freeways Monday through Friday
during peak commuting hours. This project
would assure that this basic level of service
could be continued through 2041. As demand
and congestion levels increase, this project
would also permit service hours to be extended
throughout the day and into the weekend.
Cost:
The estimated cost to support the Freeway
Service Patrol Program for thirty years
beyond 2011 is $150.0 million.
I-605 Freeway Access Improvements
Freeway Service Patrol
Freeways Projects
M N
RENEW E D
14 15
170
RENEW E D
Orange County has more than 6,500 lane miles
of aging streets and roads, many of which are in
need of repair, rejuvenation and improvement.
Intersections need to be widened, traffic lights
need to be synchronized, and potholes need to
be filled. And, in many cases, to make Orange
County’s transportation system work smoothly, we
need to add additional lanes to existing streets.
Thirty-two percent of net revenues from the
Renewed Measure M Transportation Investment
Plan is dedicated to maintaining streets,
fixing potholes, improving intersections and
widening city streets and county roads.
Making the System Work
Making the existing system of streets and roads
work better — by identifying spot intersection
improvements, filling potholes, repaving worn-
out streets — is the basis of making a countywide
transportation system work. That basis has to be the
first priority. But to operate a successful, countywide
system of streets and roads, we need more:
street widenings and traffic signals synchronized
countywide. And there’s more. Pedestrian safety
near local schools needs to be improved. Traffic flow
must be smoothed. Street repairs must be made
sooner. And, perhaps most importantly, cities and the
county must work together — collaboratively — to
find simple, low-cost traffic solutions.
Renewed Measure M provides financial incentives
for traffic improvements that cross city and
county lines, providing a seamless, county-
wide transportation system that’s friendly to
regional commuters and fair to local residents.
Better Cooperation
To place a higher priority on cooperative,
collaborative regional decision-making, Renewed
Measure M creates incentives that encourage traffic
lights to be coordinated across jurisdictional lines,
major street improvements to be better coordinated
on a regional basis, and street repair programs to be
a high priority countywide. To receive Measure M
funding, cities and the county have to cooperate.
The Streets and Roads program in Renewed
Measure M involves shared responsibilities — local
cities and the county set their local priorities
within a competitive, regional framework that
rewards cooperation, honors best practices, and
encourages government agencies to work together.
Streets and Roads
Projects Overview RENEW E D
16
171
Signal
Synchronization
Network
Orange County Streets and Roads Projects
Regional Capacity Program page 18
(not mapped)
Nearly 1,000 miles of new lanes
Regional Traffic Signal Synchronization Program page 19
(see grid above)
Over 750 miles of roadway
Over 2,000 coordinated signals
Local Fair Share Program page 20
(not mapped)
Street maintenance and improvements
O
P
Q
16 17
172
Streets and Roads Projects
OProject
Regional Capacity Program
Description:
This program, in combination with local matching
funds, provides a funding source to complete the
Orange County Master Plan of Arterial Highways
(MPAH). The program also provides for intersection
improvements and other projects to help improve
street operations and reduce congestion. The
program allocates funds through a competitive
process and targets projects that help traffic the most
by considering factors such as degree of congestion
relief, cost effectiveness, project readiness, etc.
Local jurisdictions must provide a dollar-for-dollar
match to qualify for funding, but can be rewarded
with lower match requirements if they give
priority to other key objectives, such as better road
maintenance and regional signal synchronization.
Roughly 1,000 miles of new street lanes remain
to be completed, mostly in the form of widening
existing streets to their ultimate planned width.
Completion of the system will result in a more
even traffic flow and efficient system.
Another element of this program is funding for
construction of railroad over or underpass grade
separations where high volume streets are impacted
by freight trains along the Burlington Northern
Santa Fe railroad in northern Orange County.
Cost:
The estimated cost for these street
improvement projects is $1,132.8 million.
Regional Capacity Program
RENEW E D
18
173
RENEW E D
Project
Regional Traffic Signal Synchronization Program
Description:
This program targets over 2,000 signalized
intersections across the County for coordinated
operation. The goal is to improve the flow
of traffic by developing and implementing
regional signal coordination programs
that cross jurisdictional boundaries.
Most traffic signal synchronization programs today
are limited to segments of roads or individual cities
and agencies. For example, signals at intersections
of freeways with arterial streets are controlled
by Caltrans, while nearby signals at local street
intersections are under the control of cities. This
results in the street system operating at less than
maximum efficiency. When completed, this project
can increase the capacity of the street grid and
reduce the delay by over six million hours annually.
To ensure that this program is successful, cities, the
County of Orange and Caltrans will be required
to work together and prepare a common traffic
signal synchronization plan and the necessary
governance and legal arrangements before receiving
funds. In addition, cities will be required to
provide 20 percent of the costs. Once in place,
the program will provide funding for ongoing
maintenance and operation of the synchronization
plan. Local jurisdictions will be required to
publicly report on the performance of their signal
synchronization efforts at least every three years.
Signal equipment to give emergency vehicles
priority at intersections will be an eligible expense
for projects implemented as part of this program.
Cost:
The estimated cost of developing and maintaining
a regional traffic signal synchronization program
for Orange County is $453.1 million.
Streets and Roads Projects
P
Regional Traffic Signal
Synchronization Program
18 19
174
Streets and Roads Projects
QProject
Local Fair Share Program
Description:
This element of the program will provide flexible
funding to help cities and the County of Orange keep
up with the rising cost of repairing the aging street
system. In addition, cities can use these funds for
other local transportation needs such as residential
street projects, traffic and pedestrian safety near
schools, signal priority for emergency vehicles, etc.
This program is intended to augment, rather than
replace, existing transportation expenditures
and therefore cities must meet the following
requirements to receive the funds.
1. Continue to invest General Fund monies
(or other local discretionary monies) for
transportation and annually increase this
commitment to keep pace with inflation.
2. Agree to use Measure M funds for
transportation purposes only, subject
to full repayment and a loss of funding
eligibility for five years for any misuse.
3. Agree to separate accounting for Measure
M funds and annual reporting on
actual Measure M expenditures.
4. Develop and maintain a Pavement
Management Program to ensure timely
street maintenance and submit regular
public reports on the condition of streets.
5. Annually submit a six-year Capital Improvement
Program and commit to spend Measure
M funds within three years of receipt.
6. Agree to assess traffic impacts of new
development and require that new
development pay a fair share of any
necessary transportation improvements.
7. Agree to plan, build and operate major
streets consistent with the countywide
Master Plan of Arterial Highways to ensure
efficient traffic flow across city boundaries.
8. Participate in Traffic Forums with neighboring
jurisdictions to facilitate the implementation and
maintenance of traffic signal synchronization
programs and projects. This requires cities to
balance local traffic policies with neighboring
cities — for selected streets — to promote
more efficient traffic circulation overall.
9. Agree to consider land use planning
strategies that are transit-friendly,
support alternative transportation modes
including bike and pedestrian access and
reduce reliance on the automobile.
The funds under this program are distributed to
cities and the County of Orange by formula once
the cities have fulfilled the above requirements. The
formula will account for population, street mileage
and amount of sales tax collected in each jurisdiction.
Cost:
The estimated cost for this program for
thirty years is $2,039.1 million.
Local Fair Share Program
RENEW E D
20
175
RENEW E D RENEW E DTransit Overview
Building streets, roads and freeways helps fix
today’s traffic problems. Building a visionary transit
system that is safe, clean and convenient focuses
on Orange County’s transportation future.
Twenty-five percent of net revenues from the
Renewed Measure M Transportation Investment
Plan is allocated towards building and improving
rail and bus transportation in Orange County.
Approximately twenty percent of the Renewed
Measure M funds is allocated to developing a creative
countywide transit program and five percent of
the revenues will be used to enhance programs for
senior citizens and for targeted, localized bus service.
All transit expenditures must be consistent with
the safeguards and audit provisions of the Plan.
A New Transit Vision
The key element of the Renewed Measure M transit
program is improving the 100-year old Santa Fe
rail line, known today as the Los Angeles/San
Diego (LOSSAN) rail corridor, through the heart
of the county. Then, by using this well-established,
operational commuter rail system as a platform for
future growth, existing rail stations will be developed
into regional transportation hubs that can serve as
regional transportation gateways or the centerpiece
of local transportation services. A series of new, well-
coordinated, flexible transportation systems, each
one customized to the unique transportation vision
the station serves, will be developed. Creativity
and good financial sense will be encouraged.
Partnerships will be promoted. Transportation
solutions for each transportation hub can range
from monorails to local mini-bus systems to new
technologies. Fresh thinking will be rewarded.
The new, localized transit programs will bring
competition to local transportation planning,
creating a marketplace of transportation ideas where
the best ideas emerge and compete for funding. The
plan is to encourage civic entrepreneurship and
stimulate private involvement and investment.
Transit Investment Criteria
The guiding principles for all transit investments
are value, safety, convenience and reliability. Each
local transit vision will be evaluated against clear
criteria, such as congestion relief, cost-effectiveness,
readiness, connectivity, and a sound operating plan.
In terms of bus services, more specialized transit
services, including improved van services and
reduced fares for senior citizens and people with
disabilities, will be provided. Safety at key bus stops
will be improved. And a network of community-
based, mini-bus services will be developed in
areas outside of the central county rail corridor.
20 21
176
Pacific Electric right-of-way Laguna Niguel
Mission Viejo Station
San Juan Capistrano
Station
San Clemente Station
Irvine Transportation
Center
Tustin Station
Santa Ana Depot
Orange Station
Anaheim Canyon Station
Anaheim Station
Buena Park Station
Fullerton Station
Orange County Transit Projects
High Frequency Metrolink Service ( = existing rail line/stations) page 23
Transit Extensions to Metrolink page 23
Metrolink Gateways (not mapped) page 24
Expand Mobility Choices for Seniors and Persons with Disabilities (countywide; not mapped) page 24
Community Based Transit/Circulators (countywide; not mapped) page 25
Safe Transit Stops (countywide; not mapped) page 25W
V
U
T
S
R
22
177
Transit Projects
Project
High Frequency Metrolink Service
Description:
This project will increase rail services within the
county and provide frequent Metrolink service north
of Fullerton to Los Angeles. The project will provide
for track improvements, more trains, and other
related needs to accommodate the expanded service.
This project is designed to build on the successes
of Metrolink and complement service expansion
made possible by the current Measure M. The
service will include upgraded stations and
added parking capacity; safety improvements
and quiet zones along the tracks; and frequent
shuttle service and other means, to move
arriving passengers to nearby destinations.
The project also includes funding for
improving grade crossings and constructing
over or underpasses at high volume arterial
streets that cross the Metrolink tracks.
Cost:
The estimated cost of capital and
operations is $1,129.8 million.
Project
Transit Extensions to Metrolink
Description:
Frequent service in the Metrolink corridor provides
a high capacity transit system linking communities
within the central core of Orange County. This
project will establish a competitive program for local
jurisdictions to broaden the reach of the rail system
to other activity centers and communities. Proposals
for extensions must be developed and supported
by local jurisdictions and will be evaluated against
well-defined and well-known criteria as follows:
• Traffic congestion relief
• Project readiness, with priority given
to projects that can be implemented
within the first five years of the Plan
• Local funding commitments and
the availability of right-of-way
• Proven ability to attract other financial
partners, both public and private
• Cost-effectiveness
• Proximity to jobs and population centers
• Regional as well as local benefits
• Ease and simplicity of connections
• Compatible, approved land uses
• Safe and modern technology
• A sound, long-term operating plan
This project shall not be used to fund transit
routes that are not directly connected to or that
would be redundant to the core rail service on
the Metrolink corridor. The emphasis shall be
on expanding access to the core rail system and
on establishing connections to communities and
major activity centers that are not immediately
adjacent to the Metrolink corridor. It is intended
that multiple transit projects be funded through
High Frequency Metrolink Service
Transit Extensions to Metrolink
R S
RENEW E D
22 23
Project R cost estimate amended on December 14, 2015.178
a competitive process and no single project may
be awarded all of the funds under this program.
These connections may include a variety of
transit technologies such as conventional bus,
bus rapid transit or high capacity rail transit
systems as long as they can be fully integrated
and provide seamless transition for the users.
Cost:
The estimated cost to implement this program
over thirty years is $1,000.0 million.
Project
Convert Metrolink Station(s) to Regional
Gateways that Connect Orange County
with High-Speed Rail Systems
Description:
This program will provide the local improvements
that are necessary to connect planned
future high-speed rail systems to stations
on the Orange County Metrolink route.
The State of California is currently planning a
high-speed rail system linking northern and
southern California. One line is planned to
terminate in Orange County. In addition, several
magnetic levitation (MAGLEV) systems that
would connect Orange County to Los Angeles
and San Bernardino Counties, including a link
from Anaheim to Ontario airport, are also being
planned or proposed by other agencies.
Cost:
The estimated Measure M share of the cost for these
regional centers and connections is $57.9 million.
Project
Expand Mobility Choices for Seniors
and Persons with Disabilities
Description:
This project will provide services and programs
to meet the growing transportation needs of
seniors and persons with disabilities as follows:
• One and forty-seven hundredths percent
(1.47%) of net revenues will stabilize
fares and provide fare discounts for
bus services, specialized ACCESS
services and future rail services
• One percent of net revenues will be
available to continue and expand local
community van service for seniors through
the existing Senior Mobility Program
• One percent will supplement existing
countywide senior non-emergency
medical transportation services
Over the next 30 years, the population age 65
and over is projected to increase by 93 percent.
Demand for transit and specialized transportation
services for seniors and persons with disabilities
is expected to increase proportionately.
Cost:
The estimated cost to provide these programs
over 30 years is $392.8 million.
Transit Projects
T
Metrolink Gateways
Expand Mobility Choices for Seniors
and Persons with Disabilities
U
RENEW E D
24
Project T and U cost estimates amended on December 14, 2015.179
RENEW E D
Transit Projects
V
Community Based Transit/Circulators
Safe Transit Stops
WProject
Community Based Transit/Circulators
Description:
This project will establish a competitive program
for local jurisdictions to develop local bus transit
services such as community based circulators,
shuttles and bus trolleys that complement regional
bus and rail services, and meet needs in areas not
adequately served by regional transit. Projects will
need to meet performance criteria for ridership,
connection to bus and rail services, and financial
viability to be considered for funding. All projects
must be competitively bid, and they cannot
duplicate or compete with existing transit services.
Cost:
The estimated cost of this project is $226.5 million.
Project
Safe Transit Stops
Description:
This project provides for passenger amenities at
100 busiest transit stops across the County. The
stops will be designed to ease transfer between
bus lines and provide passenger amenities
such as improved shelters, lighting, current
information on bus and train timetables and arrival
times, and transit ticket vending machines.
Cost:
The estimated cost of this project is $25.0 million.
24 25
180
Every day, more than 70 million gallons of oily
pollution, litter, and dirty contamination washes
off streets, roads and freeways and pours onto
Orange County waterways and beaches. When
it rains, the transportation-generated pollution
increases tenfold, contributing to the increasing
number of beach closures and environmental
hazards along the Orange County coast.
Prior to allocation of funds for freeway, street and
transit projects, two percent of gross revenues
from the Renewed Measure M Transportation
Investment Plan is set aside to protect Orange
County beaches from transportation-generated
pollution (sometimes called “urban runoff”)
and improving ocean water quality.
Countywide Competitive Program
Measure M Environmental Cleanup funds will
be used on a countywide, competitive basis
to meet federal Clean Water Act standards for
controlling transportation-generated pollution by
funding nationally recognized Best Management
Practices, such as catch basins with state-of-
the-art biofiltration systems; or special roadside
landscaping systems called bioswales that filter
oil runoff from streets, roads and freeways.
The environmental cleanup program is designed to
supplement, not supplant, existing transportation-
related water quality programs. This clean-up
program must improve, and not replace, existing
pollution reduction efforts by cities, the county,
and special districts. Funds will be awarded
to the highest priority programs that improve
water quality, keep our beaches and streets clean,
and reduce transportation-generated pollution
along Orange County’s scenic coastline.
Environmental
Cleanup Overview
RENEW E D
26
181
XProject
Environmental Cleanup
Description:
Implement street and highway related water
quality improvement programs and projects that
will assist Orange County cities, the County
of Orange and special districts to meet federal
Clean Water Act standards for urban runoff.
The Environmental Cleanup monies may be used for
water quality improvements related to both existing
and new transportation infrastructure, including
capital and operations improvements such as:
• Catch basin screens, filters and inserts
• Roadside bioswales and biofiltration channels
• Wetlands protection and restoration
• Continuous Deflective Separation (CDS) units
• Maintenance of catch basins and bioswales
• Other street-related “Best Management Practices”
for capturing and treating urban runoff
This program is intended to augment, not replace
existing transportation related water quality
expenditures and to emphasize high-impact
capital improvements over local operations and
maintenance costs. In addition, all new freeway,
street and transit capital projects will include water
quality mitigation as part of project scope and cost.
The Environmental Cleanup program is
subject to the following requirements:
• Development of a comprehensive countywide
capital improvement program for transportation
related water quality improvements
• A competitive grant process to award funds to
the highest priority, most cost-effective projects
• A matching requirement to leverage
other federal, state and local funds
for water quality improvements
• A maintenance of effort requirement to
ensure that funds augment, not replace
existing water quality programs
• Annual reporting on actual expenditures and an
assessment of the water quality benefits provided
• A strict limit on administrative costs
and a requirement to spend funds
within three years of receipt
• Penalties for misuse of any of the
Environmental Cleanup funds
Cost:
The estimated cost for the Environmental Cleanup
program is $237.2 million. In addition it is
estimated that new freeway, road and transit projects
funded by the Renewed Measure M Transportation
Investment Plan will include more than $165
million for mitigating water quality impacts.RENEW E D
26 27
Environmental Cleanup
182
RENEW E D
When new transportation dollars are approved,
they should go for transportation and transportation
alone. No bait-and-switch. No using transportation
dollars for other purposes. The original
Measure M went solely for transportation. The
Renewed Measure M will be just as airtight.
And there will be no hidden costs in the program.
Prior to allocation of funds for freeway, street and
transit projects, one percent of gross revenues from
the Renewed Measure M Transportation Investment
Plans is set aside for audits, safeguards, and taxpayer
protection. By state law, one and one half percent of
the gross sales taxes generated by Measure M must be
paid to the California State Board of Equalization for
collecting the countywide one-half percent sales tax
that funds the Transportation Investment Program.
Special Trust Fund
To guarantee transportation dollars are used for
transportation purposes, all funds must be kept in
a special trust fund. An independent, outside audit
of this fund will protect against cheaters who try to
use the transportation funds for purposes other than
specified transportation uses. A severe punishment
will disqualify any agency that cheats from
receiving Measure M funds for a five-year period.
The annual audits, and annual reports detailing
project progress, will be sent to Orange County
taxpayers every year and will be reviewed in
public session by a special Taxpayer Oversight
Committee that can raise fiscal issues, ask
tough questions, and must independently
certify, on an annual basis, that transportation
dollars have been spent strictly according to
the Renewed Measure M Investment Plan.
Back to the Voters
Of course, over the next 30 years, things will change.
Minor adjustments can be made by a 2/3 vote of the
Taxpayer Oversight Committee and a 2/3 vote of
the Orange County Local Transportation Authority
Board of Directors. Major changes must be taken
back to voters for authorization. And, every ten
years, and more frequently if necessary, the Orange
County Local Transportation Authority must
conduct a thorough examination of the Renewed
Measure M Investment Plan and determine if
major changes should be submitted to the voters.
There are other important taxpayer safeguards,
all designed to insure the integrity of the voter-
authorized plans. But each is focused on one
goal: guaranteeing that new transportation
dollars are devoted to solving Orange County’s
traffic problems and that no transportation
dollars are diverted to anything else.
Taxpayer Safeguards
and Audits Overview
RENEW E D
28
183
Taxpayer Safeguards and Audits
Description:
Implement and maintain strict taxpayer
safeguards to ensure that the Renewed Measure
M Transportation Investment Plan is delivered
as promised. Restrict administrative costs to
one percent (1%) of total tax revenues and state
collection of the tax as prescribed in state law
[currently one-and-one-half (1.5%) percent].
Administration of the Transportation Investment
Plan and all spending is subject to the following
specific safeguards and requirements:
Oversight
• All spending is subject to an
annual independent audit
• Spending decisions must be annually
reviewed and certified by an independent
Taxpayer Oversight Committee
• An annual report on spending and
progress in implementing the Plan
must be submitted to taxpayers
Integrity of the Plan
• No changes to the Plan can be made
without review and approval by 2/3 vote
of the Taxpayer Oversight Committee
• Major changes to the Plan such as deleting
a project or shifting projects among major
spending categories (Freeways, Streets &
Roads, Transit, Environmental Cleanup)
must be ratified by a majority of voters
• The Plan must be subject at least every ten
years to public review and assessment of
progress in delivery, public support and
changed circumstances. Any significant
proposed changes to the Plan must be approved
by the Taxpayer Oversight Committee
and ratified by a majority of voters.
Fund Accounting
• All tax revenues and interest earned must be
deposited and maintained in a separate trust
fund. Local jurisdictions that receive allocations
must also maintain them in a separate fund.
• All entities receiving tax funds must
report annually on expenditures and
progress in implementing projects
• At any time, at its discretion, the Taxpayer
Oversight Committee may conduct independent
reviews or audits of the spending of tax funds
• The elected Auditor/Controller of Orange
County must annually certify that spending
is in accordance with the Plan
Spending Requirements
• Local jurisdictions receiving funds must
abide by specific eligibility and spending
requirements detailed in the Streets & Roads and
Environmental Cleanup components of the Plan
• Funds must be used only for transportation
purposes described in the Plan. The penalty
for misspending is full repayment and loss of
funding eligibility for a period of five years.
• No funds may be used to replace
private developer funding committed
to any project or improvement
• Funds shall augment, not replace existing funds
• Every effort shall be made to maximize matching
state and federal transportation dollars
RENEW E D
28 29
Taxpayer Safeguards and Audits
184
RENEW E D
Taxpayer Oversight Committee
• The committee shall consist of eleven
members — two members from each of the five
Board of Supervisor’s districts, who shall not be
elected or appointed officials — along with the
elected Auditor/Controller of Orange County
• Members shall be recruited and screened for
expertise and experience by the Orange County
Grand Jurors Association. Members shall be
selected from the qualified pool by lottery.
• The committee shall be provided with
sufficient resources to conduct independent
reviews and audits of spending and
implementation of the Plan
Collecting the Tax
• The State Board of Equalization shall be paid
one-and-one-half (1.5) percent of gross revenues
each fiscal year for its services in collecting
sales tax revenue as prescribed in Section 7273
of the State’s Revenue and Taxation Code
Cost:
The estimated cost for Safeguards and Audits
over thirty years is $296.6 million.
30
Taxpayer Safeguards and Audits
185
RENEW E D
I-5 Santa Ana Freeway Interchange Improvements $470.0
I-5 Santa Ana/San Diego Freeway Improvements 1,185.2
SR-22 Garden Grove Freeway Access Improvements 120.0
SR-55 Costa Mesa Freeway Improvements 366.0
SR-57 Orange Freeway Improvements 258.7
SR-91 Riverside Freeway Improvements 908.7*
I-405 San Diego Freeway Improvements 1,392.5*
I-605 Freeway Access Improvements 20.0
All Freeway Service Patrol 150.0
Regional Capacity Program $1,132.8
Regional Traffic Signal Synchronization Program 453.1
Local Fair Share Program 2,039.1
High Frequency Metrolink Service $1,129.8*
Transit Extensions to Metrolink 1,000.0
Metrolink Gateways 57.9*
Expand Mobility Choices for Seniors and Persons with Disabilities 392.8*
Community Based Transit/Circulators 226.5
Safe Transit Stops 25.0
Clean Up Highway and Street Runoff that Pollutes Beaches $237.2
Collect Sales Taxes (State charges required by law) $178.0
Oversight and Annual Audits 118.6
Measure M
Investment Summary
Streets & Roads Projects (in millions) $3,625.0
Environmental Cleanup (in millions) $237.2
Transit Projects (in millions) $2,832.0
Taxpayer Safeguards and Audits (in millions) $296.6
A
E
F
G
H I J
K L
M
N
O
P
Q
X
S
T
U
V
W
Total (2005 dollars in millions) $11,861.9
2005 estimatesin millions
Freeway Projects (in millions) $4,871.1
COSTSPROJECTSLOCATION
R
B C D
30 31
*Asterisk notes project estimates that have been amended since 2006.186
187
214007.11
B-1
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
ATT ACHMENT B
ALLOCATION OF NET REVENUES
I. DEFINITIONS.
For purposes of the Ordinance the following words shall mean as stated.
A. “Capital Improvement Program”: a multi-year-year funding plan to
implement capital transportation projects and/or programs, including but not limited to
capacity, safety, operations, maintenance, and rehabilitation projects.
B. “Circulation Element”: an element of an Eligible Jurisdiction’s General
Plan depicting planned roadways and related policies, including consistency with the
MPAH.
C. “Congestion Management Program”: a program established in 1990
(California Government Code 65089), for effective use of transportation funds to alleviate
traffic congestion and related impacts through a balanced transportation and land use
planning process.
D. “Eligible Jurisdiction”: a city in Orange County or the County of
Orange, which satisfies the requirements of Section III A.
E. “Encumbrance”: the execution of a contract or other action to be
funded by Net Revenues.
F. “Environmental Cleanup”: street, highway, freeway and transit related
water quality improvement programs and projects as described in the Plan.
G. “Environmental Cleanup Revenues”: Two percent (2%) of the
Revenues allocated annually plus interest and other earnings on the allocated revenues,
which shall be maintained in a separate account.
H. “Expenditure Report”: a detailed financial report to account for receipt,
interest earned and use of Measure M and other funds consistent with requirements of the
Ordinance.
I. “Freeway Project”: the planning, design, construction, improvement,
188
214007.11
B-2
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
operation or maintenance necessary for, incidental to, or convenient for a state or interstate
freeway.
J “Local Fair Share Program”: a formula-based allocation to Eligible
Jurisdictions for Street and Road Projects as described in the Plan.
K. “Local Traffic Signal Synchronization Plan”: identification of traffic
signal synchronization street routes and traffic signals within a jurisdiction.
L. “Master Plan of Arterial Highways (MPAH)”: a countywide
transportation plan administered by the Authority defining the ultimate number of through
lanes for arterial streets, and designating the traffic signal synchronization street routes in
Orange County.
M. “Net Revenues”: The remaining Revenues after the deduction for: (i)
amounts payable to the State Board of Equalization for the performance of functions
incidental to the administration and operation of the Ordinance, (ii) costs for the
administration of the Ordinance, (iii) two percent (2%) of the Revenues annually allocated
for Environmental Cleanup, and (iv) satisfaction of debt service requirements of all bonds
issued pursuant to the Ordinance that are not satisfied out of separate allocations.
N. “Pavement Management Plan”: a plan to manage the preservation,
rehabilitation, and maintenance of paved roads by analyzing pavement life cycles,
assessing overall system performance and costs, and determining alternative strategies
and costs necessary to improve paved roads.
O. “Permit Streamlining”: commitments by state and federal agencies to
reduce project delays associated with permitting of freeway projects through development
of a comprehensive conservation strategy early in the planning process and the permitting
of multiple projects with a single comprehensive conservation strategy.
P. “Programmatic Mitigation”: permanent protection of areas of high
ecological value, and associated restoration, management and monitoring, to
comprehensively compensate for numerous, smaller impacts associated with individual
transportation projects. Continued function of existing mitigation features, such as wildlife
189
214007.11
B-3
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
passages, is not included.
Q. “Project Final Report”: certification of completion of a project funded
with Net Revenues, description of work performed, and accounting of Net Revenues
expended and interest earned on Net Revenues allocated for the project.
R. “Regional Capacity Program”: capital improvement projects to
increase roadway capacity and improve roadway operation as described in the Plan.
S. “Regional Traffic Signal Synchronization Program”: competitive capital
and operations funding for the coordination of traffic signals across jurisdictional boundaries
as included in the Traffic Signal Synchronization Master Plan and as described in the Plan.
T. “Revenues”: All gross revenues generated from the transactions and
use tax of one-half of one percent (1/2%) plus any interest or other earnings thereon.
U. “State Board of Equalization”: agency of the State of California
responsible for the administration of sales and use taxes.
V. “Street and Road Project”: the planning, design, construction,
improvement, operation or maintenance necessary for, incidental to, or convenient for a
street or road, or for any transportation purpose, including, but not limited to, purposes
authorized by Article XIX of the California Constitution.
W. “Traffic Forums”: a group of Eligible Jurisdictions working together to
facilitate the planning of traffic signal synchronization among the respective jurisdictions.
X. “Traffic Signal Synchronization Master Plan”: an element of the
MPAH to promote smooth traffic flow through synchronization of traffic signals along
designated street routes in the County.
Y. “Transit”: the transportation of passengers by bus, rail, fixed guideway
or other vehicle.
Z. “Transit Project”: the planning, design, construction, improvement,
equipment, operation or maintenance necessary for, or incidental to, or convenient for
transit facilities or transit services.
AA. “Watershed Management Areas”: areas to be established by the
190
214007.11
B-4
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
County of Orange, in cooperation with local jurisdictions, or by another public entity with
appropriate legal authority, for the management of water run-off related to existing or new
transportation projects.
II. REQUIREMENTS.
The Authority may allocate Net Revenues to the State of California, an Eligible
Jurisdiction, or the Authority for any project, program or purpose as authorized by the
Ordinance, and the allocation of Net Revenues by the Authority shall be subject to the
following requirements:
A. Freeway Projects
1. The Authority shall make every effort to maximize state and
federal funding for Freeway Projects. No Net Revenues shall be allocated in any year to
any Freeway Project if the Authority has made findings at a public meeting that the state or
the federal government has reduced any allocations of state funds or federal funds to the
Authority as the result of the addition of any Net Revenues.
2. All Freeway Projects funded with Net Revenues, including
project development and overall project management, shall be a joint responsibility of
Caltrans, the Authority, and the affected jurisdiction(s). All major approval actions,
including the project concept, the project location, and any subsequent change in project
scope shall be jointly agreed upon by Caltrans, the Authority, and the project sponsors, and
where appropriate, by the Federal Highway Administration and/or the California
Transportation Commission.
3. Prior to the allocation of Net Revenues for a Freeway Project,
the Authority shall obtain written assurances from the appropriate state agency that after
the Freeway Project is constructed to at least minimum acceptable state standards, the
state shall be responsible for the maintenance and operation of such Freeway Project.
4. Freeway Projects will be built largely within existing rights of
way using the latest highway design and safety requirements. However, to the greatest
extent possible within the available budget, Freeway Projects shall be implemented using
191
214007.11
B-5
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Context Sensitive Design, as described in the nationally recognized Federal Highway
Administration (FHWA) Principles of Context Sensitive Design Standards. Freeway
Projects will be planned, designed and constructed using a flexible community-responsive
and collaborative approach to balance aesthetic, historic and environmental values with
transportation safety, mobility, maintenance and performance goals. Context Sensitive
Design features include: parkway-style designs; environmentally friendly, locally native
landscaping; sound reduction; improved wildlife passage and aesthetic treatments, designs
and themes that are in harmony with the surrounding communities.
5. At least five percent (5%) of the Net Revenues allocated for
Freeway Projects shall fund Programmatic Mitigation for Freeway Projects. These funds
shall be derived by pooling funds from the mitigation budgets of individual Freeway
Projects, and shall only be allocated subject to the following:
a. Development of a Master Environmental Mitigation and
Resource Protection Plan and Agreement (Master Agreement) between the Authority and
state and federal resource agencies that includes:
(i) commitments by the Authority to provide for
programmatic environmental mitigation of the Freeway Projects,
(ii) commitments by state and federal resource
agencies to reduce project delays associated with permitting and streamline the permit
process for Freeway Projects,
(iii) an accounting process for mitigation obligations
and credits that will document net environmental benefit from regional, programmatic
mitigation in exchange for net benefit in the delivery of transportation improvements
through streamlined and timely approvals and permitting, and
(iv) a description of the specific mitigation actions and
expenditures to be undertaken and a phasing, implementation and maintenance plan.
(v) appointment by the Authority of a Mitigation and
Resource Protection Program Oversight Committee (“Environmental Oversight
192
214007.11
B-6
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Committee”) to make recommendations to the Authority on the allocation of the Net
Revenues for programmatic mitigation, and to monitor implementation of the Master
Agreement. The Environmental Oversight Committee shall consist of no more than twelve
members and be comprised of representatives of the Authority, Caltrans, state and federal
resource agencies, non-governmental environmental organizations, the public and the
Taxpayers Oversight Committee.
b. A Master Agreement shall be developed as soon as
practicable following the approval of the ballot proposition by the electors. It is the intent of
the Authority and state and federal resource agencies to develop a Master Agreement prior
to the implementation of Freeway Projects.
c. Expenditures of Net Revenues made subject to a Master
Agreement shall be considered a Freeway Project and may be funded from the proceeds of
bonds issued subject to Section 5 of the Ordinance.
B. Transit Projects
1. The Authority shall make every effort to maximize state and
federal funding for Transit Projects. No Net Revenues shall be allocated in any year for
any Transit Project if the Authority has made findings at a public meeting that the state or
the federal government has reduced any allocations of state funds or federal funds to the
Authority as the result of the addition of any Revenues.
2. Prior to the allocation of Net Revenues for a Transit Project, the
Authority shall obtain a written agreement from the appropriate jurisdiction that the Transit
Project will be constructed, operated and maintained to minimum standards acceptable to
the Authority.
C. Street and Road Projects
Prior to the allocation of Net Revenues for any Street and Road
Project, the Authority, in cooperation with affected agencies, shall determine the entity(ies)
to be responsible for the maintenance and operation thereof.
///
193
214007.11
B-7
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
III. REQUIREMENTS FOR ELIGIBLE JURISDICTIONS.
A. In order to be eligible to receive Net Revenues, a jurisdiction shall
satisfy and continue to satisfy the following requirements.
1. Congestion Management Program. Comply with the conditions
and requirements of the Orange County Congestion Management Program (CMP)
pursuant to the provisions of Government Code Section 65089.
2. Mitigation Fee Program. Assess traffic impacts of new
development and require new development to pay a fair share of necessary transportation
improvements attributable to the new development.
3. Circulation Element. Adopt and maintain a Circulation Element
of the jurisdiction’s General Plan consistent with the MPAH.
4. Capital Improvement Program. Adopt and update biennially a
six-year Capital Improvement Program (CIP). The CIP shall include all capital
transportation projects, including projects funded by Net Revenues, and shall include
transportation projects required to demonstrate compliance with signal synchronization and
pavement management requirements.
5. Traffic Forums.
Participate in Traffic Forums to facilitate the planning of traffic
signal synchronization programs and projects. Eligible Jurisdictions and Caltrans, in
participation with the County of Orange and the Orange County Division of League of
Cities, will establish the boundaries for Traffic Forums. The following will be considered
when establishing boundaries:
a. Regional traffic routes and traffic patterns;
b. Inter-jurisdictional coordination efforts; and
c. Total number of Traffic Forums.
6. Local Traffic Signal Synchronization Plan. Adopt and maintain a
Local Traffic Signal Synchronization Plan which shall identify traffic signal synchronization
street routes and traffic signals; include a three-year plan showing costs, available funding
194
214007.11
B-8
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
and phasing of capital, operations and maintenance of the street routes and traffic signals;
and include information on how the street routes and traffic signals may be synchronized
with traffic signals on the street routes in adjoining jurisdictions. The Local Traffic Signal
Synchronization Plan shall be consistent with the Traffic Signal Synchronization Master
Plan.
7. Pavement Management Plan. Adopt and update biennially a
Pavement Management Plan, and issue, using a common format approved by the
Authority, a report every two years regarding the status of road pavement conditions and
implementation of the Pavement Management Plan.
a. Authority, in consultation with the Eligible Jurisdictions,
shall define a countywide management method to inventory, analyze and evaluate road
pavement conditions, and a common method to measure improvement of road pavement
conditions.
b. The Pavement Management Plan shall be based on:
either the Authority’s countywide pavement management method or a comparable
management method approved by the Authority, and the Authority’s method to measure
improvement of road pavement conditions.
c. The Pavement Management Plan shall include:
(i) Current status of pavement on roads;
(ii) A six-year plan for road maintenance and
rehabilitation, including projects and funding;
(iii) The projected road pavement conditions resulting
from the maintenance and rehabilitation plan; and
(iv) Alternative strategies and costs necessary to
improve road pavement conditions.
8. Expenditure Report. Adopt an annual Expenditure Report to
account for Net Revenues, developer/traffic impact fees, and funds expended by the
Eligible Jurisdiction which satisfy the Maintenance of Effort requirements. The Expenditure
195
214007.11
B-9
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Report shall be submitted by the end of six (6) months following the end of the jurisdiction’s
fiscal year and include the following:
a. All Net Revenue fund balances and interest earned.
b. Expenditures identified by type (i.e., capital, operations,
administration, etc.), and program or project .
9. Project Final Report. Provide Authority with a Project Final
Report within six months following completion of a project funded with Net Revenues.
10. Time Limits for Use of Net Revenues.
a. Agree that Net Revenues for Regional Capacity Program
projects and Regional Traffic Signal Synchronization Program projects shall be expended
or encumbered no later than the end of the fiscal year for which the Net Revenues are
programmed. A request for extension of the encumbrance deadline for no more than
twenty-four months may be submitted to the Authority no less than ninety days prior to the
deadline. The Authority may approve one or more requests for extension of the
encumbrance deadline.
b. Agree that Net Revenues allocated for any program or
project, other than a Regional Capacity Program project or a Regional Traffic Signal
Synchronization Program project, shall be expended or encumbered within three years of
receipt. The Authority may grant an extension to the three-year limit, but extensions shall
not be granted beyond a total of five years from the date of the initial funding allocation.
c. In the event the time limits for use of Net Revenues are
not satisfied then any retained Net Revenues that were allocated to an Eligible Jurisdiction
and interest earned thereon shall be returned to the Authority and these Net Revenues and
interest earned thereon shall be available for allocation to any project within the same
source program.
11. Maintenance of Effort. Annual certification that the Maintenance
of Effort requirements of Section 6 of the Ordinance have been satisfied.
12. No Supplanting of Funds. Agree that Net Revenues shall not be
196
214007.11
B-10
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
used to supplant developer funding which has been or will be committed for any
transportation project.
13. Consider, as part of the Eligible Jurisdiction’s General Plan, land
use planning strategies that accommodate transit and non-motorized transportation.
B. Determination of Non-Eligibility
A determination of non-eligibility of a jurisdiction shall be made only
after a hearing has been conducted and a determination has been made by the Authority’s
Board of Directors that the jurisdiction is not an Eligible Jurisdiction as provided
hereinabove.
IV. ALLOCATION OF NET REVENUES; GENERAL PROVISIONS.
A. Subject to the provisions of the Ordinance, including Section II above,
use of the Revenues shall be as follows:
1. First, the Authority shall pay the State Board of Equalization for
the services and functions;
2. Second, the Authority shall pay the administration expenses of
the Authority;
3. Third, the Authority shall satisfy the annual allocation
requirement of two percent (2%) of Revenues for Environmental Cleanup; and
4. Fourth, the Authority shall satisfy the debt service requirements
of all bonds issued pursuant to the Ordinance that are not satisfied out of separate
allocations.
B. After providing for the use of Revenues described in Section A above,
and subject to the averaging provisions of Section D below, the Authority shall allocate the
Net Revenues as follows:
1. Forty-three percent (43%) for Freeway Projects;
2. Thirty-two percent (32%) for Street and Road Projects; and
3. Twenty-five percent (25%) for Transit Projects.
C. The allocation of thirty-two percent (32%) of the Net Revenues for
197
214007.11
B-11
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Street and Road Projects pursuant to Section B 2 above shall be made as follows:
1. Ten percent (10%) of the Net Revenues shall be allocated for
Regional Capacity Program projects;
2. Four percent (4%) of the Net Revenues shall be allocated for
Regional Traffic Signal Synchronization Program projects; and
3. Eighteen percent (18%) of the Net Revenues shall be allocated
for Local Fair Share Program projects.
D. In any given year, except for the allocations for Local Fair Share
Program projects, the Authority may allocate Net Revenues on a different percentage basis
than required by Sections B and C above in order to meet short-term needs and to
maximize efforts to capture state, federal, or private transportation dollars, provided the
percentage allocations set forth in Sections B and C above shall be achieved during the
duration of the Ordinance.
E. The Authority shall allocate Net Revenues for programs and projects
as necessary to meet contractual, program or project obligations, and the Authority may
withhold allocations until needed to meet contractual, program or project obligations, except
that Net Revenues allocated for the Local Fair Share Program pursuant to Section C above
shall be paid to Eligible Jurisdictions within sixty days of receipt by the Authority.
F. The Authority may exchange Net Revenues from a Plan funding
category for federal, state or other local funds allocated to any public agency within or
outside the area of jurisdiction to maximize the effectiveness of the Plan. The Authority and
the exchanging public agency must use the exchanged funds for the same program or
project authorized for the use of the funds prior to the exchange. Such federal, state or
local funds received by the Authority shall be allocated by the Authority to the same Plan
funding category that was the source of the exchanged Net Revenues, provided, however,
in no event shall an exchange reduce the Net Revenues allocated for Programmatic
Mitigation of Freeway Projects.
G. If additional funds become available for a specific project or program
198
214007.11
B-12
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
described in the Plan, the Authority may allocate the Net Revenues replaced by the receipt
of those additional funds, in the following order of priority: first, to Plan projects and
programs which provide congestion relief in the geographic region which received the
additional funds; second, to other projects and programs within the affected geographic
region which may be placed in the Plan through an amendment to the Ordinance; and third,
to all other Plan projects and programs.
H. Upon review and acceptance of the Project Final Report, the Authority
shall allocate the balance of Net Revenues for the project, less the interest earned on the
Net Revenues allocated for the project.
V. ALLOCATION OF NET REVENUES; STREETS AND ROADS PROGRAMS/
PROJECTS
A. Regional Capacity Program.
1. Matching Funds. An Eligible Jurisdiction shall contribute local
matching funds equal to fifty percent (50%) of the project or program cost. This local match
requirement may be reduced as follows:
a. A local match reduction of ten percent (10%) of the
eligible cost if the Eligible Jurisdiction implements, maintains and operates in conformance
with the Traffic Signal Synchronization Master Plan.
b. A local match reduction of ten percent (10%) of the
eligible cost if the Eligible Jurisdiction either:
(i) has measurable improvement of paved road
conditions during the previous reporting period as determined pursuant to the Authority’s
method of measuring improvement of road pavement conditions, or
(ii) has road pavement conditions during the previous
reporting period which are within the highest twenty percent of the scale for road pavement
conditions as determined pursuant to the Authority’s method of measuring improvement of
road pavement conditions.
c. A local match reduction of five percent (5%) of the
199
214007.11
B-13
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
eligible cost if the Eligible Jurisdiction does not use any Net Revenues as part of the funds
for the local match.
2. Allocations shall be determined pursuant to a countywide
competitive procedure adopted by the Authority. Eligible Jurisdictions shall be consulted by
the Authority in establishing criteria for determining priority for allocations.
B. Regional Traffic Signal Synchronization Program.
1. Traffic Signal Synchronization Master Plan.
The Authority shall adopt and maintain a Traffic Signal
Synchronization Master Plan, which shall be a part of the Master Plan of Arterial Highways.
The Traffic Signal Synchronization Master Plan shall include traffic signal synchronization
street routes and traffic signals within and across jurisdictional boundaries, and the means
of implementing, operating and maintaining the programs and projects, including necessary
governance and legal arrangements.
2. Allocations.
a. Allocations shall be determined pursuant to a countywide
competitive procedure adopted by the Authority. Eligible Jurisdictions shall be consulted by
the Authority in establishing criteria for determining priority for allocations.
b. The Authority shall give priority to programs and projects
which include two or more jurisdictions.
c. The Authority shall encourage the State to participate in
the Regional Traffic Signal Synchronization Program and Authority shall give priority to use
of transportation funds as match for the State’s discretionary funds used for implementing
the Regional Traffic Signal Synchronization Program.
3. An Eligible Jurisdiction shall contribute matching local funds
equal to twenty percent (20%) of the project or program cost. The requirement for
matching local funds may be satisfied all or in part with in-kind services provided by the
Eligible Jurisdiction for the program or project, including salaries and benefits for
employees of the Eligible Jurisdiction who perform work on the project or programs.
200
214007.11
B-14
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
4. An Eligible Jurisdiction shall issue a report once every three
years regarding the status and performance of its traffic signal synchronization activities.
5. Not less than once every three years an Eligible Jurisdiction
shall review and revise, as may be necessary, the timing of traffic signals included as part
of the Traffic Signal Synchronization Master Plan.
6. An Eligible Jurisdiction withdrawing from a signal
synchronization project shall be required to return Net Revenues allocated for the project.
C. Local Fair Share Program.
The allocation of eighteen percent (18%) of the Net Revenues for
Local Fair Share Program projects shall be made to Eligible Jurisdictions in amounts
determined as follows:
1. Fifty percent (50%) divided between Eligible Jurisdictions based
on the ratio of each Eligible Jurisdiction’s population for the immediately preceding calendar
year to the total County population (including incorporated and unincorporated areas) for
the immediately preceding calendar year, both as determined by the State Department of
Finance;
2. Twenty-five percent (25%) divided between Eligible Jurisdictions
based on the ratio of each Eligible Jurisdiction’s existing Master Plan of Arterial Highways
(“MPAH”) centerline miles to the total existing MPAH centerline miles within the County as
determined annually by the Authority; and
3. Twenty-five percent (25%) divided between Eligible Jurisdictions
based on the ratio of each Eligible Jurisdiction’s total taxable sales to the total taxable sales
of the County for the immediately preceding calendar year as determined by the State
Board of Equalization.
VI. ALLOCATION OF NET REVENUES; TRANSIT PROGRAMS/PROJECTS.
A. Transit Extensions to Metrolink.
1. The Authority may provide technical assistance, transportation
planning and engineering resources for an Eligible Jurisdiction to assist in designing Transit
201
214007.11
B-15
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Extensions to Metrolink projects to provide effective and user-friendly connections to
Metrolink services and bus transit systems.
2. To be eligible to receive Net Revenues for Transit Extension to
Metrolink projects, an Eligible Jurisdiction must execute a written agreement with the
Authority regarding the respective roles and responsibilities pertaining to construction,
ownership, operation and maintenance of the Transit Extension to Metrolink project.
3. Allocations of Net Revenues shall be determined pursuant to a
countywide competitive procedure adopted by the Authority. This procedure shall include
an evaluation process and methodology applied equally to all candidate Transit Extension
to Metrolink projects. Eligible Jurisdictions shall be consulted by the Authority in the
development of the evaluation process and methodology.
B. Metrolink Gateways.
1. The Authority may provide technical assistance, transportation
planning and engineering resources for an Eligible Jurisdiction to assist in designing
Regional Transit Gateway facilities to provide for effective and user-friendly connections to
the Metrolink system and other transit services.
2. To be eligible to receive Net Revenues for Regional Gateway
projects, an Eligible Jurisdiction must execute a written agreement with the Authority
regarding the respective roles and responsibilities pertaining to construction, ownership,
operation and maintenance of the Regional Gateway facility.
3. Allocations of Net Revenues shall be determined pursuant to a
countywide competitive procedure adopted by the Authority. This procedure shall include
an evaluation process and methodology applied equally to all candidate Regional Gateway
projects. Eligible Jurisdictions shall be consulted by the Authority in the development of the
evaluation process and methodology.
C. Mobility Choices for Seniors and Persons with Disabilities.
1. An Eligible Jurisdiction may contract with another entity to
perform all or part of a Mobility Choices for Seniors and Persons with Disabilities project.
202
214007.11
B-16
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2. A senior is a person age sixty years or older.
3. Allocations.
a. One percent (1%) of the Net Revenues shall be allocated
to the County to augment existing senior non-emergency medical transportation services
funded with Tobacco Settlement funds as of the effective date of the Ordinance. The
County shall continue to fund these services in an annual amount equal to the same
percentage of the total annual Tobacco Settlement funds received by the County. The Net
Revenues shall be annually allocated to the County in an amount no less than the Tobacco
Settlement funds annually expended by the County for these services and no greater than
one percent of net revenues plus any accrued interest.
b. One percent (1%) of the Net Revenues shall be allocated
to continue and expand the existing Senior Mobility Program provided by the Authority.
The allocations shall be determined pursuant to criteria and requirements for the Senior
Mobility Program adopted by the Authority.
c. One and forty-seven hundredths percent (1.47%) of the
Net Revenues shall be allocated to partially fund bus and ACCESS fares for seniors and
persons with disabilities in an amount equal to the percentage of partial funding of fares for
seniors and persons with disabilities as of the effective date of the Ordinance, and to
partially fund train and other transit service fares for seniors and persons with disabilities in
amounts as determined by the Authority.
d. In the event any Net Revenues to be allocated for seniors
and persons with disabilities pursuant to the requirements of subsections a, b and c above
remain after the requirements are satisfied then the remaining Net Revenues shall be
allocated for other transit programs or projects for seniors and persons with disabilities as
determined by the Authority.
D. Community Based Transit/Circulators.
1. The Authority may provide technical assistance, transportation
planning, procurement and operations resources for an Eligible Jurisdiction to assist in
203
214007.11
B-17
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
designing Community Based Transit/Circulators projects to provide effective and user-
friendly transit connections to countywide bus transit and Metrolink services.
2. To be eligible to receive Net Revenues for Community Based
Transit/Circulators projects, an Eligible Jurisdiction must execute a written agreement with
the Authority regarding the respective roles and responsibilities pertaining to construction,
ownership, operation and maintenance of the Community Based Transit/Circulators project.
3. Allocations of Net Revenues shall be determined pursuant to a
countywide competitive procedure adopted by the Authority. This procedure shall include
an evaluation process and methodology applied equally to all candidate Community Based
Transit/Circulator projects. Eligible Jurisdictions shall be consulted by the Authority in the
development of the evaluation process and methodology.
4. An Eligible Jurisdiction may contract with another entity to
perform all or part of a Community Based Transit/Circulators project.
VII. ALLOCATION OF NET REVENUES; ENVIRONMENTAL CLEANUP
PROGRAMS/PROJECTS.
A. An Eligible Jurisdiction may contract with any other public entity to
perform all or any part of an Environmental Cleanup project.
B. Allocation Committee.
1. The Allocation Committee shall not include any elected public
officer and shall include the following twelve (12) voting members:
(i) one (1) representative of the County of Orange;
(ii) five (5) representatives of cities, subject to the
requirement for one (1) representative for the cities in each supervisorial district;
(iii) one (1) representative of the California Department of
Transportation;
(iv) two (2) representatives of water or wastewater public
entities;
(v) one (1) representative of the development industry;
204
214007.11
B-18
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
(vi) one (1) representative of the scientific or academic
community;
(vii) one (1) representative of private or non-profit
organizations involved in environmental and water quality protection/enforcement matters;
In addition, one (1) representative of the Santa Ana Regional Water
Quality Control Board and one (1) representative of the San Diego Regional Water Quality
Control Board shall be non-voting members of the Allocation Committee.
2. The Allocation Committee shall recommend to the Authority for
adoption by the Authority the following:
a. A competitive grant process for the allocation of
Environmental Cleanup Revenues, including the highest priority to capital improvement
projects included in a Watershed Management Area. The process shall give priority to
cost-effective projects and programs that offer opportunities to leverage other funds for
maximum benefit.
b. A process requiring that Environmental Cleanup
Revenues allocated for projects and programs shall supplement and not supplant funding
from other sources for transportation related water quality projects and programs.
c. Allocation of Environmental Cleanup Revenues for
proposed projects and programs.
d. An annual reporting procedure and a method to assess
the water quality benefits provided by completed projects and programs.
205
C-1
507779.8
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
WOODRUFF, SPRADLIN & SMART ATTORNEYS AT LAW ORANGE ATTACHMENT C
TAXPAYER OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE
I. PURPOSE AND ORGANIZATION. A Taxpayer Oversight Committee
(“Committee”) is hereby established for the purpose of overseeing compliance with the
Ordinance as specified in Section IV hereof. The Committee shall be organized and
convened before any Revenues are collected or spent pursuant to the Ordinance.
II. COMMITTEE MEMBERSHIP. The Committee shall be governed by eleven
members (“Member”). The composition of the Committee membership shall be subject to
the following provisions.
A. Geographic Balance. The membership of the Committee shall be
geographically balanced at all times as follows:
1. There shall be two Members appointed from each of the
County’s supervisorial districts (individually, “District”); and
2. The Auditor-Controller shall be a Member and chairman
(“Chair”) of the Committee.
B. Member Term. Each Member, except the Auditor-Controller and
as provided in Section III B 2 below, shall be appointed for a term of three years; provided,
however, that any Member appointed to replace a Member who has resigned or been
removed shall serve only the balance of such Member’s unexpired term, and no person
shall serve as a Member for a period in excess of six consecutive years.
C. Resignation. Any Member may, at any time, resign from the
Committee upon written notice delivered to the Auditor-Controller. Acceptance of any
public office, the filing of an intent to seek public office, including a filing under California
Government Code Section 85200, or change of residence to outside the District shall
constitute a Member’s automatic resignation.
D. Removal. Any Member who has three consecutive unexcused
absences from meetings of the Committee shall be removed as a Member. An absence
206
C-2
507779.8
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
WOODRUFF, SPRADLIN & SMART ATTORNEYS AT LAW ORANGE from a Committee meeting shall be considered unexcused unless, prior to or after such
absence (i) the Member submits to each of the other Members a written request to excuse
such absence, which request shall state the reason for such absence and any special
circumstances existing with respect to such absence; and (ii) a majority of the other
Members agree to excuse such absence.
E. Reappointment. Any former Member may be reappointed .
III. APPOINTMENT OF MEMBERS.
A. Membership Recommendation Panel.
1. The Authority shall contract with the Orange County Grand
Jurors’ Association for the formation of a committee membership recommendation panel
(“Panel”) to perform the duties set forth in this subsection III A. If the Orange County Grand
Jurors’ Association refuses or fails to act in such capacity, the Authority shall contract with
another independent organization selected by the Authority for the formation of the Panel.
2. The Panel shall have five members who shall screen and
recommend potential candidates for Committee membership.
3. The Panel shall solicit, collect and review applications from
potential candidates for membership on the Committee. No currently elected or appointed
officer of any public entity (“Public Officer”) will be eligible to serve as a Member, except the
Auditor-Controller, and a Public Officer shall complete an Intent to Resign form, which shall
be provided as part of the application and submitted as part of the initial application
process. Failure to submit an Intent to Resign form will deem such Public Officer ineligible
for consideration to serve as a Member. In addition, a person who has a financial conflict
of interest with regard to the allocation of Revenues will be deemed ineligible for
consideration to serve as a Member. A Member shall reside within the District the Member
is appointed to represent. Subject to the foregoing restrictions, the Panel shall evaluate
each potential candidate on the basis of the following criteria:
a. Commitment and ability to participate in Committee
meetings;
207
C-3
507779.8
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
WOODRUFF, SPRADLIN & SMART ATTORNEYS AT LAW ORANGE b. Demonstrated interest and history of participation in
community activities, with special emphasis on transportation-related activities; and
c. Lack of conflicts of interest with respect to the allocation
of Revenues.
4. For initial membership on the Committee, the Panel shall
recommend to the Authority at least five candidates from each of the two Districts that are
represented by one member on the Ordinance No. 2, Citizens Oversight Committee
(“COC”) as of the date the Authority appoints the initial Members. Thereafter, the Panel
shall recommend to the Authority at least five candidates for filing each vacancy on the
Committee.
B. Initial Members.
1. The COC members, as of the date the Authority appoints the
initial Members of the Committee, shall be appointed as initial Members of the Committee.
These Members shall each serve until each of their respective terms as a member of the
COC expires.
2. Two additional initial Members shall be appointed. The
Authority shall place the names of the candidates recommended by the Panel on equally-
sized cards which shall be deposited randomly in a container. In public session, the
Chairman of the Authority will draw a sufficient number of names from said container to
allocate Committee membership in accordance with the membership requirements and
restrictions set forth in Section II hereof. The first person whose name is drawn shall be
appointed to serve a term of three years. Thereafter, the person whose name is drawn
who is not from the same District as the first person whose name is drawn shall be
appointed to serve a term of two years.
C. Member Vacancy. A member vacancy, however caused, shall be
filled by the Authority. A Member shall be appointed on or about July 1 to replace a
Member whose term has expired. A Member may be appointed at any time as necessary
to replace a Member who has resigned or been removed. The Authority shall place the
208
C-4
507779.8
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
WOODRUFF, SPRADLIN & SMART ATTORNEYS AT LAW ORANGE names of the candidates recommended by the Panel for the appointment on equally-sized
cards which shall be deposited randomly in a container. In a public session, the Chairman
of the Authority will draw one name from said container for each vacancy on the
Committee. The person whose name is so drawn shall be appointed by the Authority to fill
the vacancy.
IV. DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES. The Committee is hereby charged
with the following duties and responsibilities:
A. The initial Members shall convene to adopt such procedural rules and
regulations as are necessary to govern the conduct of Committee meetings, including, but
not limited to, those governing the calling, noticing and location of Committee meetings, as
well as Committee quorum requirements and voting procedures. The Committee may
select its own officers, including, but not limited to, a Committee co-chair who will be the
primary spokesperson for the Committee.
B. The Committee shall approve, by a vote of not less than two thirds of
all Committee members, any amendment to the Plan proposed by the Authority which
changes the funding categories, programs or projects identified on page 31 of the Plan.
C. The Committee shall receive and review the following documents
submitted by each Eligible Jurisdiction:
1. Congestion Management Program;
2. Mitigation Fee Program;
3. Expenditure Report;
4. Local Traffic Signal Synchronization Plan; and
5. Pavement Management Plan.
D. The Committee shall review yearly audits and hold an annual public
hearing to determine whether the Authority is proceeding in accordance with the Plan. The
Chair shall annually certify whether the Revenues have been spent in compliance with the
Plan. In addition, the Committee may issue reports, from time to time, on the progress of
the transportation projects described in the Plan.
209
C-5
507779.8
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
WOODRUFF, SPRADLIN & SMART ATTORNEYS AT LAW ORANGE E. The Committee shall receive and review the performance assessment
conducted by the Authority at least once every three years to review the performance of the
Authority in carrying out the purposes of the Ordinance.
F. Except as otherwise provided by the Ordinance, the Committee may
contract, through the Authority, for independent analysis or examination of issues within the
Committee’s purview or for other assistance as it determines to be necessary.
G. The Committee may submit a written request to the Authority to explain
any perceived deviations from the Plan. The Authority’s Chair must respond to such
request, in writing, within sixty days after receipt of the same.
210
Measure M2 Amendments &
Staff Reports
September 24, 2012 Measure M2 Transportation Investment Plan Amendment
November 9, 2012 Public Hearing on Amendment of the Measure M2 Freeway
Category: State Route 91 (Project J), Interstate 405 (Project K)
October 11, 2013 Proposal to Amend Orange County Local Transportation
Authority Ordinance No. 3 to Modify Taxpayer Oversight
Committee Membership Eligibility
November 25, 2013 Public Hearing to Amend Orange County Local Transportation
Authority Ordinance No. 3 to Modify Taxpayer Oversight
Committee Membership Eligibility
October 26, 2015 Proposed Amendment to the Measure M2 Transportation
Investment Plan
December 14, 2015 Public Hearing to Amend the Renewed Measure M Local
Transportation Authority Ordinance No. 3 and Transportation
Investment Plan for the Transit Program
March 14, 2016 Renewed Measure M Local Transportation Authority Ordinance
No. 3 and Transportation Investment Plan Amendment Update
211
City of Huntington Beach
File #:19-703 MEETING DATE:7/1/2019
REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION
SUBMITTED TO:Honorable Mayor and City Council Members
SUBMITTED BY:Dave Kiff, Interim City Manager
PREPARED BY:Kellee Fritzal, Deputy Director of Economic Development
Subject:
Approve and authorize the Second Amendment to the Small Cell License Agreement between
the City and new Cingular Wireless PCS, LLC, dba, AT&T Mobility on City-owned street lights;
and, authorize the City Manager to increase up to ten percent and substitute pole locations on
an as-needed basis
Statement of Issue:
The City Council is asked to approve and authorize the execution of the Second Amendment to Small
Cell License Agreement (“Agreement”) between the City of Huntington Beach and New Cingular
Wireless PCS, LLC doing business as AT&T Mobility (“AT&T”) to allow the installation of an additional
thirteen (13) wireless attachments on City-owned street lights.
Financial Impact:
The total revenue generated by the Agreement and Amendments will be approximately $68,000
annually upon full deployment. Revenues will be placed into the General Fund. Full deployment is
contingent upon all issuance of City permits and power design approval by Southern California
Edison (SCE).
Recommended Action:
A) Approve the “Second Amendment to the Small Cell License Agreement” between the City of
Huntington Beach and new Cingular Wireless PCS, LLC, doing business as AT&T Mobility; and,
B) Approve and authorize the City Manager to execute the Second Amendment on behalf of the City;
and,
C) Authorize City Manager to increase up to 10% and substitute pole locations on an as needed
basis.
Alternative Action(s):
Do not approve Second Amendment to the Agreement and direct staff accordingly.
City of Huntington Beach Printed on 6/26/2019Page 1 of 3
powered by Legistar™212
File #:19-703 MEETING DATE:7/1/2019
Analysis:
On August 7, 2017, the City Council adopted Zoning Text Amendment (ZTA) No. 17-003 to amend
the Huntington Beach Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance (HBZSO) Section 230.69 which revised the
review process in which pole mounted small cell sites are reviewed in accordance with City design
standards and approved with the issuance of a Site Permit.
The City finalized its acquisition of the nearly 11,000 street lights from Southern California Edison,
upon which carriers will mount their small cell sites. The ZTA streamlined the process in which small
cell sites are deployed on non-City owned utility poles and City-owned street light poles. The ZTA
requires that any wireless carrier interested in mounting a small cell facility on a City-owned street
light must enter into a separate Small Cell License Agreement with the City.
AT&T
On April 16, 2018, the City Council approved an Agreement with AT&T to allow the installation of up
to 16 small cell wireless attachments on City-owned street lights, in accordance with the City’s
Wireless Ordinance. On October 15, 2018 the First Amendment to the Agreement was approved and
executed, which allowed an additional five (5) street light locations to be added to the Agreement in
order to address gaps in wireless coverage within the City.
AT&T is requesting an additional thirteen (13) street light locations to be added in the proposed
second amendment, for a total of 34 street light locations.
The terms of the Agreement and Amendments are summarized below:
·Base Monthly Rent: $2,000/pole/year
·Increases: 3% annually
·Term: Initial Term of ten (10) years with one (1) additional five (5) year period.
September 2018 FCC Action
In late September 2018, the FCC (Federal Communications Commission) acted to (among other
things) speed up local government approvals for small cell and related infrastructure, as well as to
limit what local governments could charge for pole rentals. For example, in regards to fees, the
September 2019 regulations:
·Reaffirm that federal codes limit state and local governments to “charging fees that are no
greater than a reasonable approximation of objectively reasonable costs for processing
applications and for managing deployments in the rights-of-way”; and
·Identifies specific fee levels for small wireless facility deployments that presumably comply
with the relevant standards (generally, these fees are capped at $274/year per pole, plus a $100
one-time application fee);
Additionally, two new “shot clocks” were announced:
City of Huntington Beach Printed on 6/26/2019Page 2 of 3
powered by Legistar™213
File #:19-703 MEETING DATE:7/1/2019
·Local governments must review and approve permits for small cell placement within 60 days
for a collocated site; and
·Local governments must review and approve permits for small cell placement within 90 days
for “new builds”
While the City maintains a higher rental amount in this second amendment to the agreement with
AT&T, the City believes that its good faith negotiations with AT&T in this matter, as well as the high
data use in our urbanized area, warrant the $2,000/year charges.
Environmental Status:
Not Applicable
Strategic Plan Goal:
Strengthen long-term financial and economic sustainability
Attachment(s):
1. Small Cell License Agreement between the City of Huntington Beach and AT&T
2. First Amendment to Small Cell License Agreement with AT&T
3. Second Amendment to Small Cell License Agreement with AT&T
City of Huntington Beach Printed on 6/26/2019Page 3 of 3
powered by Legistar™214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
252
253
254
255
256
257
City of Huntington Beach
File #:19-705 MEETING DATE:7/1/2019
REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION
SUBMITTED TO:Honorable Mayor and City Council Members
SUBMITTED BY:Dave Kiff, Interim City Manager
PREPARED BY:Travis K. Hopkins, Interim Assistant City Manager
Subject:
Approve and authorize execution of a Caltrans Maintenance Agreement for Wayfinding Sign
Installations on Pacific Coast Highway and Beach Boulevard
Statement of Issue:
The California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) requires that the City enter into a
maintenance agreement for the installation and maintenance of Visit Huntington Beach (Visit HB)
Wayfinding sign installations within Pacific Coast Highway and Beach Boulevard.
Financial Impact:
None. The City has a current agreement with Visit HB for the installation and on-going maintenance
of the new wayfinding signs throughout the City. All costs for fabrication, installation and
maintenance, and liability are transferred to Visit HB through the agreement.
Recommended Action:
Approve and authorize the Mayor and Interim City Manager to execute the “Project Specific
Maintenance Agreement for Wayfinding/Guide Signs in the City of Huntington Beach” with Caltrans
for wayfinding sign installations on Pacific Coast Highway and Beach Boulevard.
Alternative Action(s):
Do not authorize execution of the agreement and forego any wayfinding sign installations along
Beach Boulevard and Pacific Coast Highway under the Visit HB Wayfinding project.
Analysis:
The City of Huntington Beach and Visit Huntington Beach (Visit HB) have been working in
cooperation on the development and implementation of a citywide wayfinding sign program for the
past 2 years. The two parties entered into an agreement in September 2017 to formalize the working
relationship that the program will follow and essentially assigns the responsibility for all work
pertaining to the design, installation and on-going maintenance, as well as liability, for a 10 year
period to Visit HB.
City of Huntington Beach Printed on 6/26/2019Page 1 of 2
powered by Legistar™258
File #:19-705 MEETING DATE:7/1/2019
The program has been proceeding forward and many sign installations have occurred throughout the
City with several more elements still to be installed. One of the more challenging elements of the
project has been the process of obtaining the appropriate clearance and permits from Caltrans for
new installations within the State rights-of-way on both Beach Boulevard and Pacific Coast Highway.
A key element in the completion of this process is the finalization of a maintenance agreement
between the City and Caltrans that details the terms of the installation, maintenance and liability
coverage of the signs. Caltrans will only enter into a maintenance agreement with the local agency
and not with Visit HB or their contractor directly. They do allow the local agency to enter into
assignment agreements with third parties.
The maintenance agreement has been developed in consultation with legal and technical staff from
both Caltrans and the City and has been deemed acceptable by both parties. Authorization to
execute the agreement will allow the City to obtain the necessary permits that will then allow Visit
HB’s contractor to obtain their second level of permitting from Caltrans. These steps are necessary
to complete the full citywide installation as planned.
Environmental Status:
Exempt.
Strategic Plan Goal:
Enhance and maintain infrastructure
Attachment(s):
1. Project Specific Maintenance Agreement for Wayfinding/Guide Signs in the City of Huntington
Beach
City of Huntington Beach Printed on 6/26/2019Page 2 of 2
powered by Legistar™259
260
261
262
263
264
265
266
City of Huntington Beach
File #:19-744 MEETING DATE:7/1/2019
REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION
SUBMITTED TO:Honorable Mayor and City Council Members
SUBMITTED BY:Dave Kiff, Interim City Manager
PREPARED BY:Antonia Graham, Assistant to the City Manager
Subject:
Authorize the City Manager and the City Attorney to execute a Professional Services
Agreement for Services related to the Development of a Glide Slope Analysis
Statement of Issue:
This is a request for Council Action to authorize the City Manager with approval as to form by the City
Attorney to execute a Professional Services Agreement with Landrum & Brown, Incorporated to
assist the City with conducting a glide slope and noise analysis related to jet noise issues for
potential submission to the Federal Aviation Administration.
Financial Impact:
Funds are available in the FY 2019/20 Budget in account 10030101.69365. The six month contract
is $48,370.
Recommended Action:
Authorize the City Manager with approval as to form by the City Attorney to execute a Professional
Services Agreement for services related to the development of a glide slope analysis.
Alternative Action(s):
Do not approve and direct staff accordingly.
Analysis:
Residents of Huntington Beach have experienced increases in commercial jet noise due to the
Federal Aviation (FAA) modernization program referred to as “Next Gen.” This is not a unique
situation to the City and is actually a nationwide problem, with municipalities across the nation taking
action against the FAA. To date, the FAA has been reluctant to address noise issues anywhere in the
country.
The City’s response was to form an Air Traffic Noise Working Group (ATNWG) which was formally
created by City Council on January 8, 2018. This group held regular monthly meetings, convened
meetings with the Long Beach Airport, and held a successful Town Hall Meeting with over 200
attendees. The key objectives of the working group were as follows: 1) define and prioritize
City of Huntington Beach Printed on 6/26/2019Page 1 of 3
powered by Legistar™267
File #:19-744 MEETING DATE:7/1/2019
attendees. The key objectives of the working group were as follows: 1) define and prioritize
remedies/identify where authority/control resides; 2) acquire technical information and flight data that
supports the case; 3) establish a working dialogue with the Federal Aviation Administration, the
airlines, Long Beach Airport, and other parties who can help to effect changed; 4) if necessary
activate a letter writing/email campaign to enlist community involvement; 5) if necessary, assess the
feasibility of legal action; 6) conduct a community meeting within 90 days; and 7) provide the
community with ongoing updates via the City’s website. Through its meetings, the ATNWG
concluded that there is a significant increase in commercial jet noise over Huntington Beach and it
negatively impacts the quality of life of residents, especially those most directly under the new and
concentrated air traffic routes.
The consensus of the ATNWG was that the City needed a long-term commitment to continue the fight
to reduce jet noise over the City. To that end, the City Council voted to create the Jet Noise
Commission on November 19, 2019. The Commission began meeting in February 2019 and is an
advisory body to the City Council on matters pertaining to jet noise from commercial aviation traffic
over the City of Huntington Beach. In addition to the work the Commission has been doing with
regard to commercial aviation traffic, City staff,along with Council Members Brenden and Delgleize,
began meeting with the Long Beach Airport Director and their staff to work on a collaborative solution
that worked for both the City and Airport. Long Beach Airport staff began coordinating meetings with
the Chief of Pilots for both Southwest Airlines and Jet Blue Airlines, and began ongoing
conversations with the FAA regarding the arrival patterns into the Long Beach Airport. In order for
changes to be made to the arrival patterns, the City needs to conduct a Glide Slope Analysis to
submit to the FAA.
Generally, aircraft arrive into airports using a flight path that is on a three-degree glide slope while
applying minimal power to the engines. However, aircraft may fly below that intended path and apply
more power to the engines to remain aloft, which generally increases noise and use of fuel. The City
contends that the aircraft arriving into Long Beach Airport remain on a three-degree glide slope,
which would maintain aircraft at higher altitudes over the City, and possibly reduce aircraft noise by
perceivable levels.
The City solicited written proposals from Landrum & Brown, HMMH, and Veneklasen. Landrum &
Brown,acknowledged as the global leader in aviation planning, development, and environmental
management,was among the highly qualified respondents, as well as being recommended to the
City by officials at the Long Beach Airport. They have an existing relationship with the Long Beach
Noise Office and appear to be uniquely positioned to assist the City with obtaining accurate noise
data and preparing a glide slope analysis for submission to the FAA.
Environmental Status:
Not Applicable.
Strategic Plan Goal:
Enhance and maintain high quality City services
Attachment(s):
City of Huntington Beach Printed on 6/26/2019Page 2 of 3
powered by Legistar™268
File #:19-744 MEETING DATE:7/1/2019
1. Proposal from Landrum & Brown, Incorporated
City of Huntington Beach Printed on 6/26/2019Page 3 of 3
powered by Legistar™269
Landrum & Brown
19700 Fairchild Rd.
Suite 230
Irvine, CA 92612
April 2019 Proposal
Aircraft Glide Slope Analysis
270
Landrum & Brown, Incorporated
19700 Fairchild Rd., Suite 230
Irvine, CA 92612
949-349-0671
April 29, 2019
Antonia Graham
Assistant to the City Manager
Office of the City Manager
City of Huntington Beach
2000 Main Street
Huntington Beach, CA 92648
RE: Glide Slope Analysis Proposal
Landrum & Brown, Incorporated (L&B) is pleased to submit this proposal to assist the City of Huntington Beach
with an Aircraft Glide Slope Analysis. This submission provides the information requested at the April 16, 2019
meeting with Christian Valdes (L&B).
Founded in 1949, Landrum & Brown, Incorporated (L&B) is acknowledged as the global leader in Aviation Planning &
Development and Environmental Management. We are also recognized globally for industry leadership, innovation,
technical excellence, and client responsiveness. Airports around the globe have turned to L&B to lead their efforts for
nearly 70 years because we are the premier firm in the aviation consulting industry, and responding to the needs of
airport clients is our firm’s sole focus.
Our clients have access to L&B’s multidisciplinary team with over 200 personnel and 28 offices in 12 countries
worldwide. We provide ample technical breadth, depth, and capacity to address every facet of aviation consulting,
including addressing noise and environmental issues.
Relative to community outreach and development of aircraft noise abatement procedures, L&B has supported
various airports with analyzing and implementing solutions to decrease aircraft noise impacts on communities.
For example, L&B supports the O’Hare International Airport noise abatement program and the O’Hare Noise
Compatibility Commission where we provide the coordination, analysis, monitoring and reporting on procedures
including preferential runway use plans and preferred flight paths.
Locally, our knowledge of the Southern California airspace and relationship with Long Beach Airport staff puts
L&B in a great position to assist you with your flight analysis needs. We look forward to providing you with the
analysis necessary to quantify the benefits of the proposed Long Beach Airport glide slope change.
Sincerely,
Rob Adams
Officer-in-Charge
cc: Christian Valdes (L&B)
271
Aircraft Glide Slope Analysis Table of Contents | i
Table of Contents
1. Introduction 1
2. Scope of Work 1
3. Cost Summary 2
272
Aircraft Glide Slope Analysis Table of Contents | 1
1. Introduction
Generally, aircraft arrive into airports using a flight path that is on a 3-degree glide slope while applying minimal
power to the engines. However, aircraft may fly below that intended path and apply more power to the engines to
remain aloft, which generally increases noise and the use of fuel. The City of Huntington Beach proposes that
aircraft arriving into Long Beach Airport remain on a 3-degree glide slope, which would maintain aircraft at higher
altitudes over Huntington Beach communities, and possibly reduce aircraft noise by perceivable levels. The
scope of work below describes the tasks to deliver the aircraft glide slope analysis and noise monitoring.
2. Scope of Work
Task 1 – Project Management
Provide project management and coordination between various stakeholders associated with this project.
Task 2 – Glide Slope Analysis
To perform the glide slope analysis, L&B will gather the necessary flight data to document the existing and
proposed altitudes at various points along the flight path of aircraft arriving into Long Beach Airport. These points
will be located within the Huntington Beach city boundaries. Then, a comparison will be made between the
existing and proposed scenarios to quantify the differences.
Task 3 – Noise Monitoring
L&B will coordinate with Long Beach Airport staff to perform noise monitoring at locations selected by the City of
Huntington Beach to measure the noise levels of existing aircraft operations. Once the proposed 3-degree glide
slope is implemented, L&B will coordinate additional noise monitoring at the same locations to quantify the
changes in aircraft noise. The data collected will include: Date/Time, Lmax, SEL, duration, lateral and slant range
distance, altitude at Point of Closest Approach (PCA), and ground speed at two (2) to four (4) monitoring
locations.
Task 4 – Report
L&B will prepare a draft report describing the glide slope analysis and noise monitoring. L&B will provide a draft
report to the City of Huntington Beach for comments, then finalize the report.
273
Aircraft Glide Slope Analysis Table of Contents | 2
3. Cost Summary
Below is a breakdown of the cost to perform the tasks described in Section 2.
Task Number Task Name Cost
1.0 Project Management 6,340$
2.0 Glide Slope Analysis
2.1 Data Gathering 4,520$
2.2 Existing Scenario 3,860$
2.3 Proposed Scenario 3,860$
2.4 Scenario Comparison 2,290$
3.0 Noise Monitoring
3.1 Site Selection 3,680$
3.2 Existing Scenario Monitoring 2,680$
3.3 New Glide Slope Monitoring 2,680$
3.4 Monitoring Analysis 5,360$
4.0 Report
4.1 Draft Report 7,970$
4.2 Final Report 5,130$
Total 48,370$
274
City of Huntington Beach
File #:19-756 MEETING DATE:7/1/2019
Submitted by Councilmember Posey - Request for Detailed Study Session on the City’s
Unfunded Capital Project List
STATEMENT OF ISSUE:
The City Council recently adopted the Fiscal Year 2019/20 Annual Budget along with the 2019/20
Capital Improvement Program; which identified $50 million in new projects. A Strategic Plan Goal of
the Huntington Beach City Council is to enhance and maintain infrastructure. Additionally, the
Charter specifies that 15% annually be spent on capital projects. The 2019/20 projects will be funded
through a variety of sources: the City’s General Fund, Enterprise Funds, Special Revenue Funds,
Grants, and Bonds.
The Public Works Department has communicated to City Council that there are currently $140 million
in deferred projects. I believe that it would be prudent for the City Council to have the opportunity to
have a deeper look into all of the capital projects on Public Works’ list that are needed to enhance
and maintain the City’s infrastructure; specifically in light of the Police Department’s request for a
rehabilitated Police facility. I am not opposed to the PD rehabilitation effort at all - but I would like us
to be able to put it in the larger context of all of our unfunded capital needs so that we can proceed
with that knowledge. As we all know, a well-maintained City is one of the best economic
development tools - well-kept infrastructure (e.g. streets, distribution and collection, systems, parks,
etc.) attract businesses and reduce crime.
Direct the City Manager via the Public Works Director and City Engineer to conduct an in-depth
Study Session within 90 days on the unfunded capital projects that have been identified by the Public
Works Department. This Study Session should include a breakdown of the projects as identified
through a comprehensive analysis by the Public Works Department through Master Plans and other
planning documents (e.g. Sewer Master Plan, Water Master Plan, Facility Needs Assessment, etc.).
This should include the Police Department’s facility needs as well.
City of Huntington Beach Printed on 6/26/2019Page 1 of 1
powered by Legistar™275
276