Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAdopt Resolution No. 2023-22 Concerning the Local Signal Syn (2) 0A-uNGT , 2000 Main Street, �'��F •raeeue<r �8�> Huntington Beach, CA _� ' v ' 92648 City of Huntington Beach U ' 9}�- \<�OUNTV CP File #: 23-482 MEETING DATE: 6/20/2023 REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION SUBMITTED TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members SUBMITTED BY: Al Zelinka, City Manager VIA: Chau Vu, Acting Director of Public Works PREPARED BY: Jonathan Claudio, Senior Civil Engineer Subject: Adopt Resolution No. 2023-22 concerning the status and update of the Local Signal Synchronization Plan (LSSP) for the Measure M2 Program; adopt Resolution No. 2023-29 concerning the status and update of the Circulation Element and Mitigation Fee Program for the Measure M2 Program; and adopt a 7-Year Capital Improvement Program for the Fiscal Years 2023/24 through 2029/30 for compliance with the renewed Measure M eligibility requirements Statement of Issue: In order to remain eligible to receive Measure M2 Program funding, the City must adopt a resolution informing the Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) that the City's Local Signal Synchronization Plan (LSSP) update has been approved by the City; adopt a resolution informing OCTA that the City's Circulation Element is in conformance with the Master Plan of Arterial Highways (MPAH) and reaffirm concurrence with the City's existing Mitigation Fee Program; and submit to OCTA an adopted 7-year Capital Improvement Program in compliance with the renewed Measure M eligibility requirements. Financial Impact: No additional funding is required for this action. The annual Measure M2 local fair share allocation in Fiscal Year 2023/24 is approximately $4.2 million for the City. Recommended Action: A) Adopt Resolution No. 2023-22, "A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach Concerning the Update of the Local Signal Synchronization Plan for the Measure M (M2) Program"; B) Adopt Resolution No. 2023-29, "A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach Concerning the Status and Update of the Circulation Element, and Mitigation Fee Program for the Measure M (M2) Program"; and City of Huntington Beach Page 1 of 4 Printed on 6/15/2023 141,LegistarT" File #: 23-482 MEETING DATE: 6/20/2023 C) Adopt the 7-year Capital Improvement Program (Fiscal Years 2023/24 through 2029/30) included as Attachment#4 for compliance with the renewed Measure M eligibility requirements. Alternative Action(s): Do not adopt Resolution Nos. 2023-22 and 2023-29 and/or the attached 7-year Capital Improvement Program for Measure M eligibility, and provide staff with alternate direction. This action would result in the loss of$4.2 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 the Renewed Measure M. The 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 (Attachment#7). Compliance with the eligibility requirements established in Ordinance No. 3 must be established and maintained in order for local jurisdictions to receive Measure M net revenues. The City is required to adopt a resolution every three years to update the LSSP to maintain compliance with the requirements of Measure M. The City is also required to adopt a resolution biennially, informing OCTA that the City's Circulation Element is in conformance with the MPAH, and whether any changes to any arterial highways of the Circulation Element have been adopted by the City. The City must also reaffirm every two years that it concurs with the existing mitigation fee program. Additionally, the City must adopt a 7-year CIP for the Fiscal Years 2023/24 through 2029/30, in compliance with the Renewed Measure M eligibility requirements. The 7-year CIP (Attachment#4) identifies all projects currently and potentially funded by OCTA Measure M2 funds. These items are described in greater detail below. Local Signal Synchronization Plan (LSSP) The LSSP describes the traffic signal synchronization occurring within the City. This includes a description of current operations, improvements that have been implemented since the previous update in 2020, and the plans for improvements over the next three years. Inter-jurisdictional planning of traffic signal synchronization and communications is also a component of the LSSP. The attached Resolution No. 2023-22 (Attachment#1) confirms that the City's LSSP is consistent with the requirements of the OCTA Regional Traffic Signal Synchronization Master Plan as they apply to local agencies. Circulation Element/ MPAH Consistency The Circulation Element is one component of the City's General Plan that depicts a planned multi- modal network and related policies (Attachment#6). The City's Circulation Element defines the minimum planned lane configurations for major roads and shall be consistent with the OCTA MPAH, which defines the minimum planned lane configurations for major regionally significant roads in Orange County. City of Huntington Beach Page 2 of 4 Printed on 6/15/2023 powereW LegistarTM File #: 23-482 MEETING DATE: 6/20/2023 Mitigation Fee Program The Mitigation Fee Program is a locally established fee program which assess fees used to mitigate effects of new development on transportation infrastructure. Appropriate mitigation measures, including payment of fees, construction of improvements, or any combination thereof, will be determined through an established and documented process by the City. The City previously adopted Resolution No. 2012-23 establishing new and revised mitigation fees (Attachment#3). Additionally, Resolution No. 2023-29 allows the City to meet annual eligibility requirements to receive M2 Net Revenues (Attachment#2). 7-Year Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) For Measure M compliance, the City must adopt a 7-Year CIP for the Fiscal Years 2023/24 through 2029/30. The 7-Year CIP (Attachment#4) identifies all projects currently and potentially funded by OCTA Measure M2 funds. The following projects are identified in Attachment#4: 1. Arterial Rehabilitation FY 2023 (Magnolia, Hamilton, Orange, Talbert, Banning, Heil, Garfield, Edinger) 2. Bridge Preventive Maintenance 3. Bridge Rehabilitation Projects 4. City-Funded Bridge Maintenance Projects 5. Citywide Concrete Replacements 6. Edinger Avenue Synchronization 7. Fire Station Signal - Murdy Fire Station 8. General Street Maintenance for Public Works 9. Huntington Beach Catch Basin Retrofit Project 10.Huntington Beach Northwest Catch Basin Retrofit Project 11.Huntington Beach Trash Removal Project Phase II -Atlanta Pump Station Retrofit 12.Magnolia Street Synchronization 13.Residential Curb Ramp Project 14.Residential Overlay - Maintenance Zone 1 15.TS Synchronization - Bolsa 16.TS Synchronization - Bolsa Chica 17.Talbert Avenue Synchronization 18.Traffic Signal Modification - Main and Delaware 19.Traffic Signal Modification - Warner and Ash 20.Warner Avenue Synchronization Public Works Commission Action: Not required for this action. Environmental Status: Not applicable for this action. City of Huntington Beach Page 3 of 4 Printed on 6/15/2023 powere1441'LegistarTM File #: 23-482 MEETING DATE: 6/20/2023 Strategic Plan Goal: Infrastructure & Parks Attachment(s): 1. Resolution No. 2023-22 "A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach Concerning the Update of the Local Signal Synchronization Plan for the Measure M (M2) Program" 2. Resolution No. 2023-29 "A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach Concerning the Status and Update of the Circulation Element, and Mitigation Fee Program for the Measure M (M2) Program" 3. Resolution No. 2012-23 4. Measure M 7-year Capital Improvement Program (FY 2023/24 through 2029/30) 5. Local Signal Synchronization Plan 6. Huntington Beach Circulation Element 7. OCTA Ordinance No. 3 8. PowerPoint Presentation City of Huntington Beach Page 4 of 4 Printed on 6/15/2023 powereil.%LegistarM RESOLUTION NO. 2023-22 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH CONCERNING THE UPDATE OF THE LOCAL SIGNAL SYNCHRONIZATION PLAN FOR THE MEASURE M (M2)PROGRAM WHEREAS, the Orange County Transportation Authority has developed the Regional Traffic Signal Synchronization Master plan to identify traffic signal synchronization street routes and traffic signals within and across jurisdictional boundaries; and defines the meaning of implementing the Regional Traffic Signal Synchronization Program; and WHEREAS, the Regional Traffic Signal Synchronization Program requires that local agencies adopt a Local Signal Synchronization Plan consistent with the Regional Traffic Signal Synchronization Mater Plan as a key component of the local agencies' efforts to synchronize traffic signals across local agencies' boundaries; and WHEREAS, the Local Signal Synchronization Plan must be updated by June 30, 2023 to continue to be eligible to receive Net Revenues as part of Measure M2; and NOW THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach does hereby inform OCTA that: (a) The City adopts and maintains a Local Signal Synchronization Plan which includes goals that are consistent with those outlined as part of the Regional Signal Synchronization Master Plan, including signal synchronization across jurisdictions. (b) The Local Signal Synchronization Plan identifies traffic signal synchronization street routes, including all elements of the Regional Signal Synchronization Network located within the City. (c) The Local Signal Synchronization Plan includes the traffic signal inventory for all traffic signal synchronization street routes. (d) The Local Signal Synchronization Plan includes a three-year plan showing capital, operations, and maintenance of signal synchronization along the traffic signal synchronization street routes and traffic signals. (e) The Local Signal Synchronization Plan includes an update on the status and the performance of traffic signal synchronization activities. (f) The Local Signal Synchronization Plan includes a discussion on the review and revision, as may be necessary, on the timing of traffic signals on the traffic signal synchronization street routes. 20-8597/228530 1 Resolution No. 2023-22 PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach at a regular meeting thereof held on the 20th day of June , 2023. l :7 Mayor IEWED A►�D AP.'ROVED: APPROVED AST RM: 1111 ‘ City M. . City Attorney ITIATED AND APPROVED: Director o Public Works 23-12790/308255 2 Res. No. 2023-22 STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss: CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH ) I, ROBIN ESTANISLAU, the duly elected, qualified City Clerk of the City of Huntington Beach, and ex-officio Clerk of the City Council of said City, do hereby certify that the whole number of members of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach is seven; that the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted by the affirmative vote of at least a majority of all the members of said City Council at a Regular meeting thereof held on June 20, 2023 by the following vote: AYES: Kalmick, Moser, Van Der Mark, Strickland, McKeon, Bolton, Burns NOES: None ABSENT: None RECUSE: None 6(?trifnJ 9-4k14/4,14") City Clerk and ex-officio Clerk of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach, California RESOLUTION NO. 2023-29 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH CONCERNING THE STATUS AND UPDATE OF THE CIRCULATION ELEMENT, AND MITIGATION FEE PROGRAM FOR THE MEASURE M (M2) PROGRAM WHEREAS, the City of Huntington Beach desires to maintain and improve the streets within its jurisdiction, including those arterials contained in the Master Plan of Arterial Highways (MPAH); and The City of Huntington Beach has endorsed a definition of and process of, determining consistency of the City's Traffic Circulation Plan with the MPAH; and The City of Huntington Beach has adopted a General Plan Circulation Element which does not preclude implementation of the MPAH within its jurisdiction; and The City of Huntington Beach is required to adopt a Resolution biennially informing the Orange County Transportation Authority(OCTA)that the City's Circulation Element is in conformance with the MPAH and whether any changes to any arterial highways of said Circulation Element have been adopted by the City during Fiscal Years (FY) 2021-22 and FY 2022-23; and The City of Huntington Beach is required to send biennially to the OCTA all recommended changes to the City Circulation Element and the MPAH for the purposes of re- qualifying for participation in the Comprehensive Transportation Funding Programs; and The City of Huntington Beach is required to adopt a Resolution biennially certifying that the City has an existing Mitigation Fee Program that assesses traffic impacts of new development and requires new development to pay a fair share of necessary transportation improvements attributable to the new development; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach does hereby inform OCTA that: a) The arterial highway portion of the Circulation Element of the City is in conformance with the MPAH. b) The City attests that no unilateral reduction in through lanes has been made on any MPAH arterials during FY 2021-22 and FY 2022-23. c) The City affirms that it will bring forward requests to amend the MPAH, when necessary, in order to ensure that the MPAH and the General Plan Circulation Element remains consistent 23-12824/308766 1 _ Resolution No. 2023-29 d) The City reaffirms that the existing Mitigation Fee Program is in effect. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach at a regular meeting thereof held on the 20th day of June , 2023. Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: IEWED AND a. 'PRt VED: WA\ City Manager7q"PF Ci Attorney AO INITIATED AND APPROVED: Director of Public Works 20-8626/229493 2 Res. No. 2023-29 STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss: CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH ) I, ROBIN ESTANISLAU, the duly elected, qualified City Clerk of the City of Huntington Beach, and ex-officio Clerk of the City Council of said City, do hereby certify that the whole number of members of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach is seven; that the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted by the affirmative vote of at least a majority of all the members of said City Council at a Regular meeting thereof held on June 20, 2023 by the following vote: AYES: Kalmick, Moser, Van Der Mark, Strickland, McKeon, Bolton, Burns NOES: None ABSENT: None RECUSE: None qd$411 City Clerk'and ex-officio Clerk of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach, California RESOLUTION NO. 2012-23 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH ADOPTING THE DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE CALCULATION AND NEXUS REPORT FOR THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH,AND ESTABLISHING NEW AND REVISED DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES FOR ALL DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THE CITY WHEREAS, several policies within the City's General Plan require that new development mitigate its share of the impacts to the natural and built environments and be fiscally neutral so as to not result in a net economic loss for the City; and Such General Plan policies include the maintenance of existing quality of life, maintenance of existing service levels and funding of new facilities, the requirement of new development to mitigate a fair share of its impacts, and calling for the use of impact fees to fund needed improvements to serve new development, among other policies; and In accordance with these General PIan policies, the City Council has directed staff in the past to create development impact fees in accordance with State law. Said impact fees were codified in Chapter 17.65 and Chapter 17.66 of the Huntington Beach Municipal Code as well as Huntington Beach Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance Chapter 230.20. Pursuant to each ordinance set forth above, the amount of the development impact fee is to be set and/or updated F- by resolution of the City Council; and Subsequently,and periodically, staff has conducted comprehensive reviews of the City's development impact fees to determine whether those fees are adequate to defray the cost of public facilities related to new development;those fees are set forth in Resolutions 6164,2006- 23, 2000-97, 2004-88, 99-60 and 96-71; 2002-129, 2004-88 and The City contracted with Revenue & Cost Specialists, LLC to provide a updated comprehensive evaluation of the City's existing development impact fees; and Revenue & Cost Specialists, LLC prepared a report, entitled Development Impact Fee Calculation and Nexus Report for the City of Huntington Beach, dated October, 2011 as amended April 27, 2012 (the "Nexus Report"), that provides an evaluation of existing development impact fees, recommends an increase and change in methodology in certain development impact fees, the creation of new impact fees and establishes the nexus between the imposition of such impact fees and the estimated reasonable cost of providing the service for which the fees are charged; and The Nexus Report has been available for public review and comment; and The Nexus Report substantiates the need for a modification to existing fees to change certain methodology as well as creation of new impact fees; and 1 12-3209.006/79289 149 Resolution No.2012-23 The City has collected development impact fees to mitigate the impacts of new development, including fees for transportation, park land acquisition and development, library and other public facilities since the adoption of the respective ordinances and resolutions; and The City Council desires to repeal certain resolutions, create and update other development impact fee resolutions in accordance with the calculations and recommendations contained in the Nexus Report; and In compliance with the Mitigation Fee Act, California Government Code section 66000 et seg., the City Council held a noticed public hearing on the proposed increase in development impact fees at its regular meeting on June 18 , 2012, to solicit public input on the proposed increases to development impact fees, NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach does hereby resolve as follows: 1. Findings pursuant to Government Code section 66001. The City Council fmds and determines that the Nexus Report complies with California Government Code section 66001, and as to each of the proposed fees to be imposed on new development: (a) Identifies the purpose of the fee; (b) Identifies the use to which the fee will be put; (c) Shows a reasonable relationship between the use of the fee and the type of development project on which the fee is imposed; (d) Demonstrates a reasonable relationship between the need for the public facilities and the type of development projects on which the fee is imposed; and (e) Demonstrates a reasonable relationship between the amount of the fee and the cost of the public facilities or portion of the public facilities attributable to the development on which the fee is imposed. 2. Fees for Uses Consistent with the Nexus Report. The City Council hereby determines that the fees imposed, pursuant to this resolution shall be used solely to finance the public facilities and/or equipment and park land acquisition described or identified in the respective ordinances and Nexus Report. 3. Approval of Items in the Nexus Report. The City Council has considered the specific public facilities, equipment and park land acquisition cost estimates identified in the Nexus Report and each ordinance thereto and hereby approves such public facilities, equipment and park land acquisition cost and cost estimates and further fmds that the cost estimates serve as a reasonable basis for calculating and imposing the development impact fees as set forth in the Nexus Report. 2 12-3209.006/79289 150 Resolution No.2012-23 4. Consistency with General Plan. The City Council finds that the public facilities equipment and park land acquisition and fee methodology identified in the respective ordinances and Nexus Report are consistent with the City's General Plan and, in particular, those policies that require new development to mitigate its share of the impacts to City infrastructure and to be fiscally neutral. 5. Differentiation among Public Facilities. The City Council finds that the public facilities identified in the Nexus Report and funded through the collection of development impact fees recommended in the Nexus Report are separate and distinct from those public facilities funded through other fees presently imposed and collected by the City. To the extent that other fees imposed and collected by the City, including Specific Plan fees are'used to fund the construction of the same public facilities identified in the respective ordinances and Nexus Report, then such other fees shall be a credit against the applicable development impact fees. Notwithstanding the above provision,this resolution shall not be deemed to affect the imposition or collection of the water and sewer connection fees authorized by the Huntington Beach Municipal Code. 6. CEQA Finding. The adoption of the Nexus Report and the increase in development impact fees are not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act in that pursuant to CEQA Guidelines, section 15378(b) (4), the creation of government funding mechanisms which do not involve any commitment to any specific project which may cause a significant effect on the environment,is not defined as a"project"under CEQA. 7. Adoption of Report. The Nexus Report as amended April 27, 2012, including Appendices,is hereby adopted. 8. Fee Imposed. The new Development Impact Fees set by this resolution shall not apply to projects that have received discretionary project entitlement approval on or before June 5,2012 and the following milestones are met: 1. Project applicant has submitted an approved application for building permits within 180 days after the fee going into effect or no later than February 18,2013. 2. From the time of initial building permit application, the project makes continued progress toward satisfying plan check comments. 3. Building Permits are issued within 360 days after the fees go into effect. An exception to the above milestones is the involvement of an outside third party regulatory agency. In such cases the 180 days to make building permit application will begin when the developer receives clearance from that agency. The City Manager shall have the authority, in his/her sole discretion, to extend milestone dates for qualifying "grandfathered" projects. All other projects are subject to the fees then in effect. All existing Development Impact Fees remain in effect until final action is taken on this resolution and respective ordinances. In the event any portion of this resolution is held invalid, the previously approved development impact fee shall automatically apply. 9. Timing of Fee. The development impact fees imposed by this resolution shall be paid pursuant to the ordinances or resolution creating each separate fee. Until final action is 3 12-3209.006/79289 151 Resolution No.2012-23 taken by City Council adopting the ordinances or resolution referenced herein, resolutions 6164, 2006-23, 2000-97, 99-60,2004-88 and 96-71 shall remain in effect. 10. Amount of Fee. The City Council hereby approves and adopts the Development Impact Fees as set forth in Exhibit"A,"attached hereto and incorporated herein as well as Nexus Report Schedules 3.2, 4.3, 5.2, 6.2, 7.1, 8.1, and 8.4. Exhibit A and the Nexus Report sets forth the methodology and aggregate amount imposed as a development impact fee for both residential and nonresidential land uses and also sets forth the breakdown of each development impact fee by type of facility. The amount of the development impact fees excluding traffic impact fees shall be automatically modified annually pursuant to the the percentage of increase or decrease in the Los Angeles-Anaheim-Riverside All Urban Consumer Price Index (CPI) or any relevant successor for the Orange County area,from March to March of the preceding twelve (12)months. Traffic impact fees shall be increased using the Engineering News Record's construction cost index as reported for the twelve month period ending in March of each year. The escalator indices provided herein shall not take effect until March of 2016. 11. Use of fee. The development impact fees shall be solely used for the purposes described in the respective ordinances creating the fees and the Nexus Report. Fees collected pursuant to existing ordinances and resolutions shall be maintained and used exclusively for those purposes and accounts for these fees shall remain in effect and shall be maintained by the City Manager or his/her designee. Fees collected under any of the categories listed in the Nexus Report may be used to finance the construction or implementation of any public facility listed in those categories to the extent that use of the fees may not exceed the percentage allocated to new development of all of the public facilities listed in the category, or sub-category. 12. Fee Determination by Type of Use. A. Residential Development. Development impact fees for residential development shall be based upon the type of unit constructed. The development impact fee categories as shown in Exhibit A generally correspond to the City's land use designations in the land use element of the City's General Plan. B. Nonresidential Land Uses. Development impact fees for nonresidential land uses shall be based upon the square footage of the building or other measurement detailed in the respective development impact fee ordinances. The development impact fee categories as shown in Exhibit A generally correspond to the City's land use designations in the land use element of the City's General Plan. C. Uses Not Specified. In the event that there are land uses not specified in Exhibit A, the development impact fee for such use shall be determined by the City Manager or 4 12-3209.006/79289 152 Resolution No.2012-23 his/her designee who shall determine such fee based on an analysis of the impacts of the proposed use on public facilities,equipment and/or park land. 13. Prior Resolutions Superseded. As provided herein the development impact fees approved and adopted by this resolution shall supersede and repeal any previously adopted development impact fee resolutions concerning the same, including 6164, 96-71, 99-60, 2000-97, 2004-88 and 2006-23, 2002-129,2004-88. 14. Severability. If any action, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this resolution, the Nexus Report, or other attachments thereto, shall be held invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this resolution the Nexus Report, or other attachments thereto or fees levied by this resolution that can be given effect without the invalid provisions or application of fees. In the event any section of this resolution is held invalid the previously adopted affected fees shall be automatically reinstate as if never repealed or modified herein. 15. Effective Date. Consistent with California Government Code section 66017(a), the fees as identified in attached Exhibit "A" adopted by this resolution shall take effect sixty (60) days following fmal action taken on the respective ordinances or amendments thereto by the City Council. 16. Appeals. Appeals of any fees, including methodology, use, land valuation etc. created pursuant to this resolution shall be conducted as set forth in Huntington Beach Municipal Code Chapter 17.73. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach at a regular meeting thereof held on the 18 day of June ":"_.2 Mayor REV ND APPROVED: INIT - air OVED: 411107:41.111%1 gob Ci a er Deputy City anager APPROVED AS TO FORM: City Attorney ..5,a3 (I 5 12-3209.006/79289 153 Exhibit A Exhibit A-3 Aternative Fee Schedule No. 3 Development Impact Fees (Effective 9/2/2012) 30% Circulation Park Land/ System Open Space Law Fire (Streets, & Facilities Enforcement Suppression Signals, Public Library (No Tract Land Use Facilities Facilities Bridges) Facilities Map) Detached Dwelling Units(per Unit) $119 $277 $1,800 $1,091 $6,802 Attached Dwelling Units(per Unit) $245 $115 $1,238 $519 $4,632 Mobile Home Dwelling Units (per Unit) $111 $475 $940 $479 $3,351 Hotel/Motel Lodging Units(per Unit) No Fee No Fee $172/trip $0.04/SF $0.23/SF Resort Lodging Units(per Unit) No Fee No Fee $172/trip $0.04/SF $0.23/SF Commercial/Office Uses(per sq.ft.) $0.312 $0.099 $4.175 No Fee $0.447 Industrial/Manufacturing Uses (per sq,ft.) $0.133 $0.009 $1.279 No Fee $0.393 Development Impact Fees (Effective 9/2/2013) 60% , Circulation Park Land/ System Open Space Law Fire (Streets, & Facilities Enforcement Suppression Signals, Public Library (No Tract Land Use Facilities Facilities Bridges) Facilities Map) Detached Dwelling Units (per Unit) $238 $553 $2,092 $1,126 $11,540 Attached Dwelling Units(per Unit) $489 $229 $1,417 $686 $8,576 Mobile Home Dwelling Units(per Unit) $221 $950 $1,094 $588 $6,701 Hotel/Motel Lodging Units(per Unit) No Fee No Fee $172/trip $0.04/SF $0.23/SF Resort Lodging Units(per Unit) No Fee No Fee $172/trip $0.04/SF $0.23/SF Commercial/Office Uses(per sq.ft.) $0.625 $0.197 $4.175 No Fee $0.664 Industrial/Manufacturing Uses(per sq.ft.) $0.266 $0.018 $1.498 No Fee $0.555 Development Impact Fees (Effective 9/2/2014) 90% Circulation Park Land/ System Open Space Law Fire (Streets, & Facilities Enforcement Suppression Signals, Public Library (No Tract Land Use Facilities Facilities Bridges) Facilities Map) i Detached Dwelling Units(per Unit) $356 $830 $2,385 $1,160 $16,278 Attached Dwelling Units(per Unit) $734 $344 $1,597 $852 $12,520 Mobile Home Dwelling Units (per Unit) $332 $1,425 $1,248 $697 $10,052 ' Hotel/Motel Lodging Units(per Unit) No Fee No Fee $172/trip $0.04/SF $0.23/SF Resort Lodging Units (per Unit) No Fee No Fee $172/trip $0.04/SF $0.23/SF • Commercial/Office Uses (per sq.ft.) $0.937 $0.296 $4.175 No Fee $0.882 Industrial/Manufacturing Uses(per sq.ft.) $0.399 $0.027 $1.716 No Fee $0.718 Date Printed:5/24/2012,June 4 Resolution 30 60 90 155 Page 1 Exhibit A-3 Aternative Fee Schedule No. 3 Schedule of Rates for Traffic Impact Fees (Effective 9/2/2012) Recommended Cost per 30%Increase 1000 sq.ft,dwelling unit Scenario Cost per Adjusted Average Trip-end Additional Cost per or other unit(90%of 1000 sq.ft,dwelling Land Use Trip Ends Distance to Trip Trip Miles Trip Mile original) unit or other unit 1701122ANTIAL.LAND.USES:(pei )nlit).' ._ -_ = =. _ =_ , -,_._. . _ .; . Detached Dwelling Unit 8.76 7.9 0.5 34.6 $ 50.22 $ 1,737.61 /Unit $ 1)722.55 /Unit Apartment 6.16 7.9 0.5 24.3 $ 50.22 $ 1,220.35 /Unit S. 1,209.50 /Unit Condominium/Townhouse 6,36 7.9 0.5 21.2 $ 50.22 $ 1,064.66 /Unit $ 1,06445 /Unit Mobile Home Dwelling 4.57 7.9 0.5 18.1 $ 60.22 $ 908.98 /Unit $ .:.$99.59_1 /Unit RESORT/TOURIST er UnitorEnt oor; : ' -- ' • - Hotel 6.29 7.6 0.5 23.9 $ 64.34 $ 1,537.73 /Room :$ 1;218,63' /Room All Suites Hotel 3.77 7.6 0.5 14.3 $ 64.34 $ 920.06 /Room $ 729.93 /Room Motel 4.34 7.6 0.5 16.5 $ 64.34 $ 1,061.61 /Room $ 841.02 /Room INDUSTRIALeM000 SF. �.�- • - - = = - General Light Industrial 6.17 9.0 0.5 27.8 $ 64.34 $ 1,788.65 /1,000 sf $ 1,279:A6 /;,000 Heavy industrial 5.97 9.0 0.5 26.9 $ 64.34 $ 1,730.75 /1,000 sf $ 1,23$:Q1' /1,000 Manufacturing 2.73 9.0 0.5 12.3 $ 64.34 $ 791.38 /1,000 sf $ 566.11 /1,000 of Warehousing 4,39 9.0 0.5 19.8 $ 64.34 $ 1,273.93 /1,000 sf $ 910,74 /1,000 of COMIII) RCIAL(per 1,000 F) . ..:.- - i - •.' - - . Office Park 7.42 8.8 0.6 32.6 $ 64.34 $ 2,097.48 /1,000 sf .$ 1,522:61 f,000 Research Park 6.01 8.8 0.5 22.0 $ 64.34 $ 1,415.48 /1,000 sf $ 1,027.86•sf,000 Business Park 9.34 8.8 0.5 41.1 $ 64.34 $ 2,644.37 /1,000 sf $ 1,91 ..80 f,000 Bldg.Materials/Lumber ,29.35 4.3 0.5 63.1 $ 64.34 $ 4,059.85 /1,000 sf $ 4,059.85 /1,000 Store sf Garden Center 23.45 4.3 0.5 50.4 $ 64.34 $ 3,242.74 /1,000 sf $ 3,242.74 f,000 Movie Theater 2.47 4.3 0.5 5.3 $ 64.34 $ 341.00 /1,000 sf $ 341.00 f.000 Church 5.92 4.3 0.5 12.7 $ 64.34 $ 817.12 /1,000 sf $ 817.12 sf,OaO Medical-Dental Office 22.21 8.8 0.5 97.7 $ 64.34 $ 6,286.02 /1,000 sf $ 4,559.89 f,000 General Office Building 7.16 8.8 0.5 31.5 $ 64.34 $ 2,026.71 /1,000 sf $ 1,470.08 f,000 Shopping Center 30.2 4.3 0.5 64.9 $ 64.34 $ 4,175.67 /1,000 sf $ 4,175.67 f,000 Hospital 11.42 4.3 0.5 24.6 $ 64.34 $ 1,582.76 /1,000 sf $ 1,582.76 sf,000 Discount Center 62.93 4,3 0,5 135.3 $ 64.34 $ 8,705.20 /1,000 sf $ 8,705.20 f,000 High-Turnover Restaurant 8.9 4.3 0.5 19.1 $ 64.34 $ 1,228.89 /1,000 sf $ 1,228.89 f,000 Convenience Market 43,57 4.3 0.5 93.7 $ 64,34 $ 6,028.66 /1,000 sf $ 6,028,66 f,000 i Office Park 13.97 4.3 0.6 30.0 $ 64.34 $ 1,930.20 /1,000 sf $ 1,930.20 sf,000 OTHi~R'`as note Cemetery 3.07 4.3 0.5 6.6 $ 64.34 $ 424.64 /Acre $ 424.64 /Acre Service Station/Market 107.69 4.3 0.5 231.5 $ 64.34 $ 14,894.71 /Fuel $14,894.71 /Fuel (avg) Position Position Service Station w/Car 99.35 4.3 0.5 213.6 $ 64.34 $ 13,743.02 /Fuel $13,743.02 /Fuel Wash Position Position 156 Page 2 Exhibit A-3 Aternative Fee Schedule No.3 Schedule of Rates for Traffic Impact Fees (Effective 9/2/2013) Recommended Cost per 60%increase Scenario 1000 sq.ft,dwelling unit Cost per 1000 sq.ft, Adjusted Average Trip-end Additional Cost per or other unit(90%of dwelling unit or other Land Use Trip Ends Distance to Trip Trip Miles Trip Mile original) unit , RESIDENTIAL LAND USES(per Unit) ' -'`: . - _ Detached Dwelling Unit 8.76 7.9 0.5 34.6 $ 57,39 $ 1,985.69 /Unit $ 1,938.39 /Unit Apartment 6.15 7.9 0.5 24.3 $ 57.39 $ 1,394.58 /Unit $ 1,361.20 /Unit Condominium/Townho 5.36 7.9 0.5 21.2 $ 57.39 $ 1,216.67 /Unit $ 1,187.17 /Unit use Mobile Home Dwelling 4.57 7.9 0.5 18.1 $ 57.39 $ 1,038.76 /Unit $ .1,013.15 /Unit RESORT/TO,,URiST'(per unit(*Enftyr=Daor)" . •: � =-',.:-: Hotel 6.29 7.6 0.5 23.9 $ 64.34 $ 1,537.73 /Room $ 1,355.39. /Room All Suites Hotel 3.77 7.6 0.5 14.3 $ 64.34 $ 920.06 /Room $ 811.41 /Room Motel 4.34 7.6 0.5 16.5 $ 64.34 $ 1,061.61 /Room $ 935.56 /Room MIJUSTRIAi(`per•1 000.SF) ' General Light Industrial 6.17 9.0 0.5 27.8 $ 64.34 $ 1,788.65 /1,000 sf $ 1,497.69 /1,000 sf Heavy Industrial 5.97 9.0 0.5 26.9 $ 64.34 $ 1,730.75 /1,000 sf $ 1,449.18 /1,000 sf_ Manufacturing 2.73 9.0 0.5 12.3 $ 64.34 $ 791.38 /1,000 sf $ 662.65 /1,000 sf Warehousing 4.39 9.0 0.5 19.8 $ 64.34 $ 1,273.93 /1,000 sf $ 1,066.39 /1,000 sf COMMERCIAL _... _ N1NjE6tC1AL(per 1,000 S )....: Office Park 7.42 8.8 0.5 32.6 $ 64.34 $ 2,097.48 /1,000 sf $ 1,768.99 /1,000 sf Research Park 5.01 8,8 0.5 22.0 $ 64.34 $ 1,415.48 /1,000 sf $ 1,193.98 /1,000 sf Business Park 9.34 8.8 0.5 41.1 $ 64.34 $ 2,644.37 /1,000 sf $ 2,229.22 /1,000 sf Bldg.Materials/Lumber 29.35 4.3 0.5 63.1 $ 64.34 $ 4,059.85 /1,000 sf $ 4,059.85 /1,000 sf Store Garden Center 23.45 4.3 0.5 60.4 $ 64.34 $ 3,242.74 /1,000 sf $ 3,242.74 /1,000 sf Movie Theater 2.47 4.3 0.5 5.3 $ 64.34 $ 341.00 /1,000 sf $ 341.00 /1,000 sf Church 5.92 4.3 0.5 12.7 $ 64,34 $ 817.12 /1,000 sf $ 817.12 /1,000 sf Medical-Dental Office 22.21 8.8 0.5 97.7 $ 64.34 $ 6,286.02 /1,000 sf $ 5,299.66 /1,000 sf General Office Building 7.16 8.8 0.5 31.5 $ 64.34 $ 2,026.71 /1,000 sf $ 1,708.63 /1,000 sf Shopping Center 30.2 4.3 0.5 64.9 $ 64.34 $ 4,175.67 /1,000 sf $ 4,175.67 /1,000 sf Hospital 11.42 4.3 0.5 24.6 $ 64.34 $ 1,582.76 /1,000 sf $ 1,582.76 /1,000 sf Discount Center 62.93 4,3 0.5 135.3 $ 64.34 $ 8,705.20 /1,000 sf $ 8,705.20 /1,000 sf High-Turnover 8.9 4,3 0.5 19.1 $ 64.34 $ 1,228.89 /1,000 sf $ 1,228.89 /1,000 sf Restaurant Convenience Market' 43.57 4.3 0.5 93.7 $ 64.34 $ 6,028.66 /1,000 sf $ 6,028.66 /1,000 sf Office Park 13.97 4.3 0.5 30.0 $ 64.34 $ 1,930.20 /1,000 sf $ 1,930.20 /1,000 sf OTHER:(as noted)-. _ . Cemetery 3.07 4.3 0.5 6.6 $ 64.34 $ 424.64 /Acre $ 424.64 /Acre • Service Station/Market 107.69 4.3 0.5 231.5 $ 64.34 $ 14,894.71 /Fuel $ 14,894.71 /Fuel (avg) Position Position • Service Station w/Car 99.35 4.3 0.5 213.6 $ 64.34 $ 13,743.02 /Fuel $ 13,743.02 /Fuel Wash Position Position Page 3 157 Exhibit A-3 Aternative Fee Schedule No. 3 Schedule of Rates for Traffic Impact Fees (Effective 9/2/2014) . Recommended Cost per Adjusted Average Trip-end to Additional Cost per 1000 sq.ft,dwelling unit or Land Use Trip Ends Distance Trip Trip Miles Trip Mile other unit(90% of original) RESIOENTI4..4ND- 1 S`(per Unit) . -- - _ Detached Dwelling Unit 8.76 7.9 0.6 34.6 $ 64.34 $ 2,226.16 /Unit Apartment 6.15 7.9 0.5 24.3 $ 64.34 $ 1,563.46 /Unit Condominium/Townhou 5.36 7.9 0.5 21.2 $ 64.34 $ 1,364.01 /Unit se Mobile Home Dwelling 4.57 7.9 0.5 18.1 $ 64.34 $ 1,164.55 /Unit RESORTITOURIST:(per Unit or Entry0oor) .. .- -- -. e. Hotel 6.29 7.6 0.5 23.9 $ 64.34 $ 1,537.73 /Room All Suites Hotel 3.77 7,6 0.5 14.3 $ 64.34 $ 920.06 /Room Motel 4.34 7.6 0.5 16.5 $ 64.34 $ 1,061.61 /Room •I IDUSTRIAL:(per-1,006.SF) • General Light Industrial 6.17 9.0 0.5 27.8 $ 64.34 $ 1,788.65 /1,000 sf Heavy Industrial 5.97 9.0 0.5 26.9 $ 64.34 $ 1,730.75 /1,000 sf Manufacturing 2.73 9.0 0.5 12.3 $ 64.34 $ 791.38 /1,000 sf Warehousing 4.39 9.0 0.5 19.8 $ 64.34 $ 1,273.93 /1,000 sf COMMERCIAL.(per 1;000.SF) Office Park 7.42 8.8 0.5 32.6 $ 64.34 $ 2,097.48 /1,000 sf Research Park 5.01 8,8 0.5 22.0 $ 64.34 $ 1,415.48 /1,000 sf Business Park 9.34 8.8 0.5 41.1 $ 64.34 $ 2,644.37 /1,000 sf Bldg. Materials/Lumber 29.35 4.3 0.5 63.1 $ 64.34 $ 4,059.85 /1,000 sf Store Garden Center 23.45 4.3 0.5 50.4 $ 64.34 $ 3,242.74 /1,000 sf Movie Theater 2.47 4.3 0.5 5.3 $ 64.34 $ 341.00 /1,000 sf Church 5.92 4.3 0.5 12.7 $ 64.34 $ 817.12 /1,000 sf Medical-Dental Office 22.21 8.8 0.5 97.7 $ 64.34 $ 6,286.02 /1,000 sf General Office Building 7.16 8.8 0.5 31.5 $ 64.34 $ 2,026.71 /1,000 sf Shopping Center 30.2 4.3 0.5 64.9 $ 64.34 $ 4,175.67 /1,000 sf Hospital 11.42 4.3 0.5 24.6 $ 64.34 $ . 1,582.76 /1,000 sf Discount Center 62.93 4.3 0.5 135.3 $ 64.34 $ 8,705.20 /1,000 sf High-Turnover 8.9 4.3 0.5 19.1 $ 64.34 $ 1,228.89 /1,000 sf Restaurant Convenience Market 43.57 4.3 0.5 93.7 $ 64.34 $ 6,028.66 /1,000 sf Office Park 13.97 4.3 0.5 30.0 $ 64.34 $ 1,930.20 /1,000 sf •• OTHER(astoted) .- .- . _ i Cemetery 3.07 4.3 0.5 6.6 $ 64.34 $ 424.64 /Acre Service Station/Market 107.69 4,3 0.5 231,5 $ 64.34 $ 14,894.71 /Fuel (avg) Position Service Station w/Car 99.35 4.3 0.5 213.6 $ 64.34 $ 13,743.02 /Fuel Wash Position 1Egge4 Res. No. 2012-23 STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss: CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH ) I, JOAN L. FLYNN the duly elected, qualified City Clerk of the City of Huntington Beach, and ex-officio Clerk of the City Council of said City, do hereby certify that the whole number of members of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach is seven; that the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted by the affirmative vote of at least a majority of all the members of said City Council at a regular meeting thereof held on June 18, 2012 by the following vote: AYES: Shaw, Carchio, Bohr, Boardman NOES: Harper, Dwyer, Hansen ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None Ocdf60) Ci y Clerk and ex-officio Clerk of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach, California • 159 6/13/23,1:50 PM ocfundtracker.octa.net/CIP/report_project_listing Orange County Transportation Authority FY 2023/24-FY 2029/30 Capital Improvement Program TIP ID CP-10389 IMPLEMENTING AGENCY Huntington Beach, City of Local Project Number: Project Title Additional Project IDs: Arterial Rehabilitation FY 2023 Type of Work: Road Maintenance Project Description Work Description: Road Maintenance- Rehabilitate arterials including Magnolia(Atlanta-Indianapolis),Hamilton(Magnolia-Bushard),Orange Type Type oftation of roadway (Goldenwest-17th),Talbert(Edwards-End),Banning(Magnolia-Brookhurst),Heil(Saybrook-Bolsa RehabiliChica),Garfield(Brookhurst-East City Limit),Edinger Limits FISCAL TOTAL FUND TYPE ENG ROW CON/IMP O&M TOTAL Magnolia,Hamilton,Orange,Heil,Garfield, YEAR ESCALATED Talbert,Edinger,Banning 2024 Measure M2 Local $0 $0 $1,000,000 $0 $1,000,000 $1,030,000 Project Notes Fairshare 2024 Local Streets and Roads $0 $0 $4,600,000 $0 ,$4,600,000 $4,738,000 apportionments 2025 Local Streets and Roads $0 $0 $4,600,000 $0 $4,600,000 $4,880,140 apportionments 2025 Measure M2 Local $0 $0 $1,000,000 $0 $1,000,000 $1,060,900 Fairshare 2026 Local Streets and Roads $0 $0 $4,600,000 $0 $4,600,000 $5,026,544 apportionments 2026 Measure M2 Local $0 $0 $1,000,000 $0 $1,000,000 $1,092,727 Fairshare 2027 Local Streets and Roads $0 $0 $4,600,000 $0 $4,600,000 $5,177,341 apportionments 2027 Measure M2 Local $0 $0 $1,000,000 $0 $1,000,000 $1,125,509 Fairshare 2028 Local Streets and Roads $0 $0 $4,600,000 $0 $4,600,000 $5,332,661 apportionments 2028 Measure M2 Local $0 $0 $1,000,000 $0 $1,000,000 $1,159,274 Fairshare 2029 Measure M2 Local $0 $0 $1,000,000 $0 $1,000,000 $1,194,052 Fairshare 2029 Local Streets and Roads $0 $0 $4,600,000 $0 $4,600,000 $5,492,641 apportionments 2030 Local Streets and Roads $0 $0 $4,600,000 $0 $4,600,000 $5,657,420 apportionments 2030 Measure M2 Local $0 $0 $1,000,000 $0 $1,000,000 $1,229,874 Fairshare Totals: $0 $0 $39,200,000$0 $39,200,000$44,197,083 Last Revised:23-00-In Progress Total Programmed:$39,200,000 TIP ID CP-11286 IMPLEMENTING AGENCY Huntington Beach,City of Local Project Number: Project Title Additional Project IDs: Bridge Preventive Maintenance Type of Work: Bridge Project Description Type of Work Description: Bridge- Removal and replacement of unsound concrete,bearings;clean and paint structural steel Rehabilitation of existing pavement/structure Limits FISCAL YEAR FUND TYPE ENG ROW CON/IMP O&M TOTAL TOTAL ESCALATED Davenport Dr.Bridge(over Weatherly Channel) 2024 Other $0 $0 $2,403,000 $0 $2,403,000 $2,475,090 Project Notes Project added in the event that M2 local fair share Totals: $0 $0 $2,403,000 $0 $2,403,000 $2,475,090 funds are used to pay for costs that are not reimbursed through HBP grant funding.Davenport bridge may be upgraded to a bridge rehabilitation project if funding is approved. Last Revised:23-00-In Progress Total Programmed:$2,403,000 160 https://ocfundtracker.octa.net/CIP/report_project_listing 1/8 6/13/23, 1:50 PM ocfundtracker.octa.net/CIP/report_project_listing TIP ID CP-11279 IMPLEMENTING AGENCY Huntington Beach, City of Local Project Number: Project Title Additional Project IDs: Bridge Rehabilitation Projects Type of Work: Bridge Project Description Type of Work Description: Bridge- Design and rehabilitation of City bridges.Admiralty and Humboldt bridges are planned for construction Rehabilitation of existing pavement/structure in FY 23/24 and FY 24/25,respectively. Limits FISCAL YEAR FUND TYPE ENG ROW CON/IMP O&M TOTAL TOTAL ESCALATED Admiralty Dr.Bridge(over Queen Elizabeth 2024 Other $0 $0 $3,780,000 $0 $3,780,000 $3,893,400 Passage)and Humboldt Dr.Bridge(over Short 2025 Other $0 $0 $3,314,000 $0 $3,314,000 $3,515,823 Channel) Project Notes Project added in the event that M2 local fair share Totals: $0 $0 $7,094,000 $0 $7,094,000 $7,409,223 funds are used to pay for costs that are not reimbursed through HBP grant funding.Davenport bridge BPMP may be upgraded to a bridge rehabilitation project if funding is approved. Last Revised:23-00-In Progress Total Programmed:$7,094,000 TIP ID CP-11826 IMPLEMENTING AGENCY Huntington Beach, City of Local Project Number: Project Title Additional Project IDs: City-Funded Bridge Maintenance Projects Type of Work: Bridge Project Description Type of Work Description: Bridge- Program will correct minor structural defects,repair deficiencies,and extend the service life of existing Rehabilitation of existing pavement/structure bridges. Limits FISCAL YEAR FUND TYPE ENG ROW CON/IMP O&M TOTAL TOTAL ESCALATED Citywide 2024 Other $250,000 $0 $750,000 $0 $1,000,000 $1,022,500 Project Notes 2025 Other $250,000 $0 $750,000 $0 $1,000,000 $1,045,675 Other indicates Traffic Congestion Relief(Prop 42) 2026 Other $250,000 $0 $750,000 $0 $1,000,000 $1,069,545 2027 Other $250,000 $0 $750,000 $0 $1,000,000 $1,094,132 2028 Other $250,000 $0 $750,000 $0 $1,000,000 $1,119,456 2029 Other $250,000 $0 $750,000 $0 $1,000,000 $1,145,539 2030 Other $250,000 $0 $750,000 $0 $1,000,000 $1,172,405 Totals: $1,750,000 $0 $5,250,000 $0 $7,000,000 $7,669,252 Last Revised:23-00-In Progress Total Programmed:$7,000,000 TIP ID CP-10391 IMPLEMENTING AGENCY Huntington Beach, City of Local Project Number: Project Title Additional Project IDs: Concrete Replacements Type of Work: Pedestrian Project Description Type of Work Description: Pedestrian- Replace worn,damaged,lifted,and broken sections of concrete sidewalk,curb and gutter,and curb Reconstruction or rehabilitation of sidewalk ramps in support of the zone maintenance program and in various locations city-wide. Limits FISCAL FUND TYPE TOTAL ENG ROW CON/IMP O&M TOTAL Citywide YEAR ESCALATED Project Notes 2024 Measure M2 Local $0 $0 $500,000 $0 $500,000 $515,000 Fairshare 2025 Measure M2 Local $0 $0 $500,000 $0 $500,000 $530,450 Fairshare 2026 Measure M2 Local $0 $0 $500,000 $0 $500,000 $546,364 Fairshare 2027 Measure M2 Local $0 $0 $500,000 $0 $500,000 $562,754 Fairshare 2028 Measure M2 Local $0 $0 $500,000 $0 $500,000 $579,637 Fairshare 2029 Measure M2 Local $0 $0 $500,000 $0 $500,000 $597,026 Fairshare 2030 Measure M2 Local $0 $0 $500,000 $0 $500,000 $614,937 Fairshare Totals: $0 $0 $3,500,000 $0 $3,500,000$3,946,168 Last Revised:23-00-In Progress Total Programmed:$3,500,000 161 https://ocfundtracker.octa.net/CIP/report_project_listing 2/8 6/13/23, 1:50 PM ocfundtracker.octa.net/CIP/report_project_listing TIP ID CP-10392 IMPLEMENTING AGENCY Huntington Beach, City of Local Project Number:12-OCTA-TSP-3625 Project Title Additional Project IDs: Edinger Avenue Synchronization Type of Work: Traffic Signals Project Description Type of Work Description: Traffic Signals OCTA leading joint project with Westminster,Fountain Valley,and Santa Ana.OCTA applying for SB-1 Interconnect traffic signals to improve coordination funding. and communications Limits FISCAL YEAR FUND TYPE ENG ROW CON/IMP O&M TOTAL TOTAL ESCALATED From Bolsa Chica Street to Newland Street 2024 Other $15,000 $0 $80,000 $0 $95,000 $97,400 Project Notes Other:Funding from FY 20/21 carried over through FY 23/24.Other indicates Traffic Congestion Relief Totals: $15,000 $0 $80,000 $0 $95,000 $97,400 (Prop 42). Last Revised:23-00-In Progress Total Programmed:$95,000 TIP ID CP-12141 IMPLEMENTING AGENCY Huntington Beach, City of Local Project Number: Project Title Additional Project IDs: Fire Station Signal-Murdy Fire Station Type of Work: Traffic Signals Project Description Type of Work Description: Traffic Signals-Install Improve safety by installing a fire signal which will enable the Fire Department to stop traffic on new traffic signals and equipment Gothard Street while egressing the fire station. Limits FISCAL YEAR FUND TYPE ENG ROW CON/IMP O&M TOTAL TOTAL ESCALATED Murdy Fire Station on Gothard Street between 2024 Traffic Impact Fees $0 $0 $345,000 $0 $345,000 $355,350 Edinger Avenue and Heil Avenue Project Notes Totals: $0 $0 $345,000 $0 $345,000 $355,350 Last Revised:23-00-In Progress Total Programmed:$345,000 TIP ID CP-10393 IMPLEMENTING AGENCY Huntington Beach, City of Local Project Number: Project Title Additional Project IDs: General Street Maintenance for Public Works Type of Work: Pedestrian Project Description Type of Work Description: Pedestrian- Annual maintenance work for concrete,slurry seal,potholes and failed asphalt;O&M of traffic signals, Reconstruction or rehabilitation of sidewalk replacement of striping and signage,including engineering and inspection as needed on an annual basis. Limits FISCAL FUND TYPE TOTAL ENG ROW CON/IMP O&M TOTAL Citywide YEAR ESCALATED Project Notes 2024 Measure M2 Local $0 $0 $2,000,000 $0 $2,000,000 $2,060,000 Fairshare 2025 Measure M2 Local $0 $0 $2,000,000 $0 $2,000,000 $2,121,800 Fairshare 2026 Measure M2 Local $0 $0 $2,000,000 $0 $2,000,000 $2,185,454 Fairshare 2027 Measure M2 Local $0 $0 $2,000,000 $0 $2,000,000 $2,251,018 Fairshare 2028 Measure M2 Local $0 $0 $2,000,000 $0 $2,000,000 $2,318,548 Fairshare 2029 Measure M2 Local $0 $0 $2,000,000 $0 $2,000,000 $2,388,105 Fairshare 2030 Measure M2 Local $0 $0 $2,000,000 $0 $2,000,000 $2,459,748 Fairshare Totals: $0 $0 $14,000,000$0 $14,000,000$15,784,673 Last Revised:23-00-In Progress Total Programmed:$14,000,000 162 https://ocfundtracker.octa.net/CIP/report_project_listing 3/8 6/13/23, 1:50 PM ocfundtracker.octa.net/CIP/report_project_listing TIP ID CP-10394 IMPLEMENTING AGENCY Huntington Beach,City of Local Project Number:14-HBCH-ECP-3742 Project Title Additional Project IDs: Huntington Beach Catch Basin Retrofit Project Type of Work: Environmental Cleanup Project Description Type of Work Description: Environmental Cleanup-Automatic Retractable Screen and other Maintenance of 111 catch basins retrofitted with Bio Clean Round Curb Inlet Filters. debris screens or inserts Limits FISCAL YEAR FUND TYPE ENG ROW CON/IMP O&M TOTAL TOTAL ESCALATED Citywide 2024 Developer $0 $0 $0 $14,429 $14,429 $14,429 Project Notes 2025 Developer $0 $0 $0 $14,429 $14,429 $14,429 Totals: $0 $0 $0 $28,858 $28,858 $28,858 Last Revised:23-00-In Progress Total Programmed:$28,858 TIP ID CP-10395 IMPLEMENTING AGENCY Huntington Beach, City of Local Project Number:13-HBCH-ECP-3687 Project Title Additional Project IDs: Huntington Beach Northwest Catch Basin Retrofit Project Type of Work: Environmental Cleanup Project Description Type of Work Description: Environmental Maintenance of 102 catch basins retrofitted with Bio Clean Round Curb Inlet Filters and Skimmer Box. Cleanup-Catchment Retrofit Limits FISCAL YEAR FUND TYPE ENG ROW CON/IMP O&M TOTAL TOTAL ESCALATED Citywide in Northwest Part of City 2024 General Fund $0 $0 $0 $13,583 $13,583 $13,583 Project Notes Totals: $0 $0 $0 $13,583 $13,583 $13,583 Last Revised:23-00-In Progress Total Programmed:$13,583 TIP ID CP-12140 IMPLEMENTING AGENCY Huntington Beach, City of Local Project Number:22-HBCH-ECP-4036 Project Title Additional Project IDs: Huntington Beach Trash Removal Project Phase II-Atlanta Pump Station Retrofit Project Type of Work: Environmental Cleanup Project Description Type of Work Description: Environmental Construction and installation of an in-line trash removal device(TrashTrap)at the Atlanta Pump Cleanup-Other Station(8151 Atlanta Avenue).The device is an extra large fixed basket designed to remove trash/debris larger than 5mm in size. Limits FISCAL YEAR FUND TYPE ENG ROW CON/IMP O&M TOTAL TOTAL ESCALATED Atlanta Pump Station-8151 Atlanta Avenue 2024 Other $30,000 $0 $854,000 $0 $884,000 $909,620 Project Notes Other indicates Infrastructure Fund and OCTA New Fund Totals: $30,000 $0 $854,000 $0 $884,000 $909,620 Last Revised:23-00-In Progress Total Programmed:$884,000 TIP ID CP-10396 IMPLEMENTING AGENCY Huntington Beach, City of Local Project Number:16-OCTA-TSP-3795 Project Title Additional Project IDs: Magnolia Street Synchronization Type of Work: Traffic Signals Project Description Type of Work Description: Traffic Signals Provide operational and infrastructure improvements;carry-over from FY 17/18.OCTA leading joint Interconnect traffic signals to improve coordination project with other cities along Magnolia Street.Funding only reflects Huntington Beach work. and communications Limits FISCAL YEAR FUND TYPE ENG ROW CON/IMP O&M TOTAL TOTAL ESCALATED From Garfield Avenue to Pacific Coast Highway 2024 Other $5,000 $0 $189,789 $5,000 $199,789 $205,483 Project Notes Other indicates Traffic Congestion Relief(Prop 42). Totals: $5,000 $0 $189,789 $5,000 $199,789 $205,483 Last Revised:23-00-In Progress Total Programmed:$199,789 163 https://ocfundtracker.octa.net/CIP/report_project_listing 4/8 6/13/23, 1:50 PM ocfundtrackerocta.net/CIP/report_project_listing TIP ID CP-10399 IMPLEMENTING AGENCY Huntington Beach, City of Local Project Number: Project Title Additional Project IDs: Residential Curb Ramp Project Type of Work: Pedestrian Project Description Type of Work Description: Pedestrian- Install ADAAccess Ramps.This is an annual project that will install Ramps at locations where Installation of ADA access ramps adjacent streets are altered or rehabilitated. Limits FISCAL TOTAL FUND TYPE ENG ROW CON/IMP O&M TOTAL Citywide-Maintenance Zone 1 YEAR ESCALATED Project Notes 2024 Other $0 $0 $72,502 $0 $72,502 $74,677 Other indicates Infrastructure Fund. 2024 Measure M2 Local $0 $0 $500,000 $0 $500,000 $515,000 Fairshare 2024 Community Development $0 $0 $127,498 $0 $127,498 $131,323 Block Grant 2025 Other $0 $0 $200,000 $0 $200,000 $212,180 2025 Measure M2 Local $0 $0 $500,000 $0 $500,000 $530,450 Fairshare 2026 Other $0 $0 $200,000 $0 $200,000 $218,545 2026 Measure M2 Local $0 $0 $500,000 $0 $500,000 $546,364 Fairshare 2027 Measure M2 Local $0 $0 $500,000 $0 $500,000 $562,754 Fairshare 2027 Other $0 $0 $200,000 $0 $200,000 $225,102 2028 Measure M2 Local $0 $0 $500,000 $0 $500,000 $579,637 Fairshare 2028 Other $0 $0 $200,000 $0 $200,000 $231,855 2029 Other $0 $0 $200,000 $0 $200,000 $238,810 2029 Measure M2 Local $0 $0 $500,000 $0 $500,000 $597,026 Fairshare 2030 Measure M2 Local $0 $0 $500,000 $0 $500,000 $614,937 Fairshare 2030 Other $0 $0 $200,000 $0 $200,000 $245,975 Totals: $0 $0 $4,900,000 $0 $4,900,000 $5,524,635 Last Revised:23-00-In Progress Total Programmed:$4,900,000 TIP ID CP-10400 IMPLEMENTING AGENCY Huntington Beach, City of Local Project Number: Project Title Additional Project IDs: Residential Overlay-Maintenance Zone 1 Type of Work: Road Maintenance Project Description Type of Work Description: Road Maintenance- Rehabilitation of residential streets with asphalt overlay within Maintenance Zone 1.This annual Rehabilitation of roadway project will provide street overlay rehabilitation based on the PMP ratings Limits FISCAL YEAR FUND TYPE ENG ROW CON/IMP O&M TOTAL TOTAL ESCALATED Citywide-Maintenance Zone 1 2024 Gas Tax $0 $0 $2,000,000 $0 $2,000,000 $2,060,000 Project Notes 2024 Other $0 $0 $4,700,000 $0 $4,700,000 $4,841,000 Other indicates Sewer Service Fund,Water Fund, 2025 Other $0 $0 $5,000,000 $0 $5,000,000 $5,304,500 and Infrastructure Fund. 2025 Gas Tax $0 $0 $2,000,000 $0 $2,000,000 $2,121,800 2026 Other $0 $0 $5,000,000 $0 $5,000,000 $5,463,635 2026 Gas Tax $0 $0 $2,000,000 $0 $2,000,000 $2,185,454 2027 Gas Tax $0 $0 $2,000,000 $0 $2,000,000 $2,251,018 2027 Other $0 $0 $5,000,000 $0 $5,000,000 $5,627,544 2028 Other $0 $0 $5,000,000 $0 $5,000,000 $5,796,370 2028 Gas Tax $0 $0 $2,000,000 $0 $2,000,000 $2,318,548 2029 Gas Tax $0 $0 $2,000,000 $0 $2,000,000 $2,388,105 2029 Other $0 $0 $5,000,000 $0 $5,000,000 $5,970,261 2030 Other $0 $0 $5,000,000 $0 $5,000,000 $6,149,369 2030 Gas Tax $0 $0 $2,000,000 $0 $2,000,000 $2,459,748 Totals: $0 $0 $48,700,000 $0 $48,700,000 $54,937,352 Last Revised:23-00-In Progress Total Programmed:$48,700,000 164 https://ocfundtracker.octa.net/CIP/report_project_listing 5/8 6/13/23, 1:50 PM ocfundtrackenocta.net/CIP/report_project_listing TIP ID CP-11542 IMPLEMENTING AGENCY Huntington Beach, City of 165 https://ocfundtrackenocta.net/CIP/report_project_listing 6/8 6/13/23, 1:50 PM ocfundtracker.octa.net/CIP/report_project_listing Local Project Number:21-OCTA-TSP-4002 Project Title Additional Project IDs: TS Synchronization-Bolsa Type of Work: Traffic Signals Project Description Type of Work Description: Traffic Signals- Provide operational&infrastructure improvements along Bolsa Ave from Bolsa Chica to Edwards.This Interconnect traffic signals to improve coordination is a multijurisdictional project w/Caltrans,Westminster,Santa Ana,&Tustin.Work within HB incl and communications signal timing,new controllers,&battery back-up Limits FISCAL YEAR FUND TYPE ENG ROW CON/IMP O&M TOTAL TOTAL ESCALATED Bolsa Avenue from Bolsa Chica Street to Edwards 2024 Other $5,000 $0 $60,000 $5,000 $70,000 $71,800 Street Project Notes This is an OCTA grant.OCTA will manage the Totals: $5,000 $0 $60,000 $5,000 $70,000 $71,800 project and is contributing$173,000(HB segment only).Other indicates Traffic Congestion Relief fund.Other indicates Traffic Congestion Relief Fund. Last Revised:23-00-In Progress Total Programmed:$70,000 TIP ID CP-11847 IMPLEMENTING AGENCY Huntington Beach, City of Local Project Number:20-HBCH-TSP-3973 Project Title Additional Project IDs: TS Synchronization-Bolsa Chica Type of Work: Traffic Signals Project Description Type of Work Description: Traffic Signals- Provide operational and infrastructure improvements along Bolsa Chica St.This is a multijurisdictional Replace and upgrade traffic signals and equipment Project including Caltrans and the Cities of Westminister and Garden Grove.Work within HB includes signal timing,CCTV,and fiber optics. Limits FISCAL FUND TOTAL ENG ROW CON/IMP O&M TOTAL Bolsa Chica Street from Warner Avenue to Rancho YEAR TYPE ESCALATED Road 2024 Other $342,800$0 $1,940,300$0 $2,283,100 $2,341,309 Project Notes 2025 Other $0 $0 $0 $30,400 $30,400 $30,400 Other indicates Infrastructure Fund and OCTA CIP 2026 Other $0 $0 $0 $30,400 $30,400 $30,400 Grant. Totals: $342,800$0 $1,940,300$60,800$2,343,900 $2,402,109 Last Revised:23-00-In Progress Total Programmed:$2,343,900 TIP ID CP-10401 IMPLEMENTING AGENCY Huntington Beach, City of Local Project Number: Project Title Additional Project IDs: Talbert Avenue Synchronization Type of Work: Traffic Signals Project Description Type of Work Description: Traffic Signals- Provide operational and infrastructure improvements.OCTA leading joint project with Fountain Valley Interconnect traffic signals to improve coordination and Santa Ana.OCTA applying for SB-1 funding. and communications Limits FISCAL TOTAL FUND TYPE ENG ROW CON/IMP O&M TOTAL Beach Boulevard to Newland Street YEAR ESCALATED Project Notes 2024 Air Quality Management $0 $0 $6,000 $0 $6,000 $6,180 District Other:Funding from FY 20/21 carried over through FY 23/24. Totals: $0 $0 $6,000 $0 $6,000 $6,180 Last Revised:23-00-In Progress Total Programmed:$6,000 TIP ID CP-11540 IMPLEMENTING AGENCY Huntington Beach, City of Local Project Number: Project Title Additional Project IDs: Traffic Signal Modification Main and Delaware Type of Work: Traffic Signals Project Description Type of Work Description: Traffic Signals- Install left-turn arrows at the intersection of Main St and Delaware St.Main St.will have left-turn Replace and upgrade traffic signals and equipment arrows installed. Limits FISCAL YEAR FUND TYPE ENG ROW CON/IMP O&M TOTAL TOTAL ESCALATED Main Street at Delaware Street 2024 Traffic Impact Fees $50,000 $0 $365,000 $0 $415,000 $425,950 Project Notes Totals: $50,000 $0 $365,000 $0 $415,000 $425,950 Last Revised:23-00-In Progress Total Programmed:$415,000 166 https://ocfundtracker.octa.net/CIP/report_project_listing 7/8 6/13/23,1:50 PM ocfundtracker.octa.net/CIP/report_project_listing TIP ID CP-11541 IMPLEMENTING AGENCY Huntington Beach, City of Local Project Number: Project Title Additional Project IDs: Traffic Signal Modification Warner and Ash Type of Work: Traffic Signals Project Description Type of Work Description: Traffic Signals- Install left-turn arrows at the intersection of Warner Ave and Ash Ln.WamerAve will have left-turn Replace and upgrade traffic signals and equipment arrows installed. Limits FISCAL YEAR FUND TYPE ENG ROW CON/IMP O&M TOTAL TOTAL ESCALATED Warner Avenue at Ash Street 2024 Traffic Impact Fees $40,000 $0 $410,000 $0 $450,000 $462,300 Project Notes Totals: $40,000 $0 $410,000 $0 $450,000 $462,300 Last Revised:23-00-In Progress Total Programmed:$450,000 TIP ID CP-10402 IMPLEMENTING AGENCY Huntington Beach, City of Local Project Number: Project Title Additional Project IDs: Warner Avenue Synchronization Type of Work: Traffic Signals Project Description Type of Work Description: Traffic Signals Provide operational and infrastructure improvements.OCTA leading joint project with Fountain Valley Interconnect traffic signals to improve coordination and Santa Ana. and communications Limits FISCAL YEAR FUND TYPE ENG ROW CON/IMP O&M TOTAL TOTAL ESCALATED From Magnolia Street to Pacific Coast Highway 2024 Other $0 $0 $80,000 $0 $80,000 $82,400 Project Notes Other:Funding from FY 20/21 carried over through FY 23/24. Totals: $0 $0 $80,000 $0 $80,000 $82,400 Last Revised:23-00-In Progress Total Programmed:$80,000 167 https://ocfundtracker.octa.net/CIP/report_project_listing 8/8 CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH LOCAL SIGNAL SYNCHRONIZATION PLAN t 4,18,„:. ' •,-,” .., :',.',:,,,,,;.::::;-;,. - .:-,--21,. i , < � \ � �' ' rye 4 ii it t¢< _ ..d., T m, dw '" s x . ,, ,y, i 9 '��M :+. "'�sSa' S; L' }' "4..E ,€ �.,. .✓, b .r, n,yt,�.. � ' , �� _ '' ; 0 / kgt HUNTINGTON BEACH 110 May 22, 2023 168 „,.�- CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH _ Public Works Department of - .. f¢ % Z- FC NT t Ctiau Vu Acting Director of Public Works May 22, 2023 ` Ms. Alicia Yang Orange County Transportation.Authority Regional Modeling and Traffic Operations Planning Division P.O. Box 14184 Orange, CA 92863-1584 Subject: Local Signal Synchronization Plan Submittal as Part of the Measure M2 Eligibility Process Dear Ms. Yang: The City of Huntington Beach is pleased to submit its Local Signal Synchronization Plan as part of the Measure M2 eligibility process.The submittal includes the following components: 1. A completed "Local Signal Synchronization Plan Consistency Review Checklist” form establishing consistency between the Local Signal Synchronization Plan and the Regional Traffic Signal Synchronization Master Plan. 2. An updated Local Signal Synchronization Plan for Fiscal Years 2023/2024 to 2025/2026 including all required elements as identified in the Guidelines for the Preparation of Local Signal Synchronization Plans. The City looks forward to continuing the implementation of the beneficial programs and construction projects made possible by Measure M2. If you have any questions, please contact me at (714) 374-1628. Sincerely, :VP-C-e-?,--4—, ,Z:)--,..-----..-- William F. Janusz, P.E., PTOE Principal Civil Engineer Enclosures 2000 Main Street, California 92648• Phone 714-536-5431 • www.huntingtonbeachca.gov 169 CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH LOCAL SIGNAL SYNCHRONIZATION PLAN zczz=_AA Al s czzzrxzzz Y I HUNTINGTON BEACH City of Huntington Beach 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Prepared by: William F. Janusz, P.E., PTOE Principal Civil Engineer (714) 374-1628 May 22, 2023 170 LOCAL SIGNAL SYNCHRONIZATION PLAN CONSISTENCY REVIEW CHECKLIST The Local Agency Name: City of Huntington Beach: Plan Date: 5/22/23 Local agencies must submit a copy of the Local Signal Synchronization Plan, a completed consistency review checklist, and any supporting documentation. Complete the table below. :;;::..:::::.:::::........... ....::.:..:.:>. ::::: .•.:.g. ... :...::::•:.:.:: •::...rovided..:.;:-:::,....:::. ::::::; ::;�:;:::::::�:�:::;�::::Loca1.:A enc .:Stateinvent::.:::,:�::..:.::::�::......:.:.::::::::..::::...::.., :....:..:�.:, :::::::.::::... Providea:or.Nrq.. 1,2,17,18 Yes 1. Signal synchronization goals of the agency are consistent with those outlined as part of the Regional Traffic Signal Synchronization Master Plan. 3-4 Yes 2. Traffic signal synchronization street routes are identified, including all corridors along the regional signal synchronization network located within the local agency. 5-8 Yes 3. Traffic signal inventory for all traffic signal synchronization street routes. 4. Three-year plan separately showing costs, available 9-12 Yes funding, and phasing for capital, operations, and maintenance of signal synchronization along the traffic signal synchronization street routes and traffic signals which may include unconstrained and build-out scenarios. 5. Signal synchronization review, revision, and assessment of 14-17 Yes synchronization activities along the traffic signal synchronization street routes and traffic signals. I certify that the above statements are true to the best of my knowledge. S/2ZiZ3 Signature Date William F. Janusz, P.E., PTOE Principal Civil Engineer Printed Name, Title 171 TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION 1 Traffic Signal Synchronization Goals, Policies and Objectives 1 SECTION 2 Traffic Signal Synchronization Street Routes 3 SECTION 3 Traffic Signal Inventory 5 SECTION 4 Traffic Signal Synchronization System and Three Year Plan 9 SECTION 5 Traffic Signal Synchronization Assessment Review and revise, as may be Necessary,the Timing of Traffic Signals 14 172 'LIST OF FIGURES FIGURE 1 Signal Synchronization Routes 4 FIGURE 2 Corridor Synchronization Performance Index (CSPI) 21 173 LIST OF TABLES TABLE 1 Traffic Synchronization Inventory 6 TABLE 2 3-Year Outlook Traffic Signal Synchronization (Constrained) 11 TABLE 3 3-Year Outlook Traffic Signal Synchronization (Unconstrained) 12 TABLE 4 LSSP Implementation—Candidate Signal Synchronization Projects With Estimated Costs 13 TABLE 5 Traffic Signal Synchronization Assessment, Review and Revision 19 TABLE 6 Signal Timing Revisions 20 174 'SECTION ONE TRAFFIC SIGNAL SYNCHRONIZATION GOALS, POLICIES AND OBJECTIVES Eligibility requirements included in the Renewed Measure M specify that each local jurisdiction must adopt a Local Signal Synchronization Plan (LSSP) and renew it on a three- year cycle. The initial LSSP was adopted by the City of Huntington Beach City Council on December 20, 2010, and was subsequently updated in 2014, 2017 and 2020. This document is the City of Huntington Beach's three-year update of the LSSP which is due to the Orange County Transportation Authority by June 30, 2023. This plan includes the following: • Traffic signal synchronization street routes; • Traffic signal inventory; • Three-year plan showing costs, available funding and phasing for capital, operations, and maintenance of traffic signal synchronization street routes and traffic signals; • Information on local signal synchronization policies, including how street routes and traffic signals may be synchronized with traffic signals on street routes in adjoining jurisdictions. It is the City of Huntington Beach's goal to have in-place traffic signal coordination on all major arterial roadways and to have the communication and monitoring capabilities to remotely control the traffic signals from the City's Traffic Management Center(TMC) located at City Hall. Expanding on these primary goals is the objective to establish inter-agency communication with the traffic signal systems maintained by Caltrans and the adjacent local agencies. Working toward these goals, the City maintains its coordinated traffic signal operations and continually monitors the operation for areas where operational improvements may be warranted. Over the past three years, the City has installed over three miles of new conduit with fiber optic cable. In addition, the city upgraded approximately one mile of its existing network of copper interconnect cable to fiber optic cable with another 3 and one-half miles currently scheduled for construction this year. The upgrade to fiber optic cable increases monitoring and communication capabilities and provides the infrastructure for the City to install closed circuit television cameras as funding opportunities arise in order to monitor traffic from the TMC. The City is constantly looking for opportunities to further expand and upgrade its traffic signal system such as pursuing grant funds to achieve this objective. 1 175 Ultimately, the City strives for a completely interconnected system of traffic signals, which can be remotely monitored and maintained, with a reasonable level of Public Works staff supervision. While several arterials are coordinated across city boundaries, no actual inter- agency real time communication exists. Ultimately, such communication is a goal of the City of Huntington Beach. This document also acknowledges that the City of Huntington Beach supports a multi- agency, corridor-based approach that optimizes traffic signals based on existing traffic patterns. The City supports local agency responsibility for signal timing and working with neighboring agencies to develop synchronization timing. This plan will require periodic updating on a three-year cycle throughout the duration of Renewed Measure M. The next update will be due to OCTA by June 30, 2026. 2 176 SECTION TWO TRAFFIC SIGNAL SYNCHRONIZATION STREET ROUTES (EXISTING AND PLANNED) Figure 1 illustrates the Traffic Signal Synchronization Street Routes within the City of Huntington Beach. These include the routes contained in OCTA's Regional Traffic Signal Synchronization Master Plan. As indicated on the Traffic Synchronization List, Table 1, and the Map of Signal Synchronization Routes, Figure 1, not all intersections on these routes currently operate under coordination. The primary factor for not operating the traffic signals under coordination is low traffic volumes. While most of the arterial streets are under coordination continuously from approximately 6:30 a.m. until approximately 7:00 p.m., there are several segments where, due to low off-peak traffic volumes, the signals operate free in the midmorning and mid-afternoon periods. There are also some segments, primarily on the far south and west sides of the City where traffic volumes approaching the ocean are so low (less than 20,000 vehicles per day), that cross street delay does not warrant operating the signals under coordination at any time of the day. 3 177 KtVIJtU U4/L6/Zi cO. .�•0 S G 1 WESTMINSTER �O MAINTAINED N I_ FO c~n BOLSA AVE. , WESTMINSTER ❑❑❑❑1 ❑❑❑ p000uv� a MAINTAINED � N ' N Q Mc FADDEN L4VE. 0 N.T.S. 2 0 EDINGER z J , c~n AVE. . -.< , "\,�. ANDERSON YLZ < , 0 N I— 0 >' '�Gyo0 m ¢ HEIL- ( W_Q AVE. ml a z 6 w ¢ z H , FOUNTAIN VALLEY >- 0o c j N o w 0 , ` MAINTAINED Q WARNER w o ° AVE. 0 `Ivri4rinn Ti `V9 SLATER 0; AVE. .05<,\ WI 405 \/0 TALBERT AVE.; BOLSA PACIFIC CHICA ELLIS AVE. ``,,0 GAR"77> 1 AVE. .L5) 2, . . I (I) U (n rx i-- \ \ ''.. YORKTOWN AVE. I ,,, �A ADAMS AVE. I- , .. .N • ,,'i I s'p9 , INDIANAPOLIS� AVE. a o OCEAN <,`��� ATLANTA Q o z =Q AVE. m sel„ =I §I o;, 0; w <II m w I z HA ii TON AVE. °°„[ . II , II ',/7)4 BANNING AVE. ,,'' ., ,` ,, )0000 = LOCAL SIGNAL SYNCHRONIZATION ROUTES (IN ADDITION TO OCTA REGIONAL PROGRAM). 3❑❑❑❑ = REGIONAL SIGNAL SYNCHRONIZATION ROUTES CURRENTLY RUNNING FREE. i . = REGIONAL SIGNAL SYNCHRONIZATION ROUTES CURRENTLY UNDER COORDINATION (CONSISTENT WITH OCTA). - - - = REGIONAL SIGNAL SYNCHRONIZATION ROUTES (CALTRANS ROUTE CONSISTENT WITH OCTA). OCTA Coordination Vicmap.dw CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH * PUBLIC WORKS * TRAFFIC ENGINEERING �J inFIGURE .,o, P SIGNAL SYNCHRONIZATION ROUTES SECTION THREE TRAFFIC SIGNAL INVENTORY Table 1 lists the corridors and intersections within the City that are included in the Local Signal Synchronization Plan and the present coordination status of each of these intersections. 5 179 • C d a0.1 CUa a d d r C « C a a a a a a a a d t.9 N N N N R N N N •� •- _ .� ._ _ O 0 in 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Z N v, v, Z m 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O O AAAA n c c c c c c u u c c c •c a n n c n n n a0. 666 c c n n G a6 a6 a6 n G G G G n 0. m 2 2 2 2C C C C C 2 2 c c 2 2 2 H f f 1= F- 1= F- 'it it 'it 1- 1- et 1- F r O yE �.. an . a N + c aaa na aa aannna a a n on aa n nc nnna nnoa 2 V it' U U U V V U U U U U U U V V V V U V V U U U V V V U U U V V U U ad d 0 3 m o " m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m z m z m m m m m m m m m z m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m at a a a a a a a \5 ¢ a a a a a E zzuzzuzzuzzzzzzzuzzuuzzzuzzzz zzzzzzzzzzzz mo c 0 w Y Si « - - - - y y y y y o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 '^ '^ '" '^ '" '^ y 3 2 13 ^ '^ '^ '^ > r r i > r r r r r z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z i i i- i� i i r r r i i i i > c 0 o a a 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 s 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 m m m m m m m m N m ry ry m m m m m m m cj N N N N N N N 0 0 0 0 N 0 0 O O• O O O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N c N fig fig N N N C C C H f F- H H f F- F- 1- U V U U U V U V U U U U U U U U U V f 1- F- F- F- F- F- F- H H H f m m u m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m P P P P K.' P P P t3. m m m m m m m m m m m m 0 O O 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 n n n n n n N N n n n n n n n n n •~ •� •� •� •� ~ O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O \ •y •~ \ . rl . . . . . Oei Oei O O0 0 0 0 8 P. N 8 n n n n n n n n n n n P. P. nOO ei Oei O N a 3 N N N N N N N N N L L N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N m m m m m m m m m m O O m m m mi m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m � L c _ y c 0 G N •10 �0 a �+ c a H c s C0 c o n a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a d a a a a d a _ {Nd 0 a n i N N > N n N N n n N N N N N N N N n '" N N N N N N N N N N N N N N '" N n N N s E E EE € E € E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E € E E E E EE E m a i n i n d i i 0. i i i i i a d a n n i 0. n n a d n i n n LL 0. a i i i i i i F a v a a a v a w w d a w u v w w v a v w w 'd a u w w d a a 'w T_ 'u a w w 'w a w w .- E a o 0 0 0 0 0 0 o O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 E o 0 0 o a o 0 0 0 0 0 o. aC .411A111111 LL L LLLL L t t t t t L t t L t L mmmmm m ma m m m m m m a m m c c m n m o c m m m c c c c c c c c c c m m on _0m 0 0 0m 0 0 0 " . - . - - - - - E co c0 0 c0 mc 0c 0c 0c mc c0c mc mc 0 u33u33 8333 uuuuuu _ _ 2 .2 _ .E _ _ .2 _ _ 2 a c c c c c c ccgccccccc 00000 , 2 2 2 2 S 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 x 2 x 2 x 2 2 2 z3 e LLu LLa Oom m m m m m .0. r2 LL N F . . ., E o o E R R F e 'y, a a a a e a a F. F. Er. e F. v n F a F a a 6 n r �-1 F. ei 'I ei ei rl ei F. M ei eel ei eel eel rl '1 '1 LL LL LL LL rl rl rl '1 rl F. O t m m 0 m O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 m m m 0v0l Fm 0 0 0 0 0 f0i1 F 0 F. d 0 d d d a N N N E, 0 0 0 rt01 �� � e. N 'i '1 '1 '1 r1 '1 •i LL ti LL LL LL LL H '1 rl e. rl rl O O O O O m 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O a a a O O O O O O O 0 N m m V O O Q R R F R O F N N F N O N F F R O Q m m e1 rl M M �m-1 ei rl ei N rl N 'i 'i •i ei �N-I eY '1 LL LL LL LL rl 'I M `a r c d ° 3 a u 2 29 c > tu N ' 0 E 0 >2252 ac ¢ c c Nn c N m m C in . c Q 9 d >. % • aN ` 'a 9 ¢ > " w d ' —u a a voJaa > OQ ¢ Q9 Q > wE v Nv o `d > O c fe ` a m o ¢ " Ew x NE d N E a) .0 22 - a .-' mLLd a3 m u 22 m m u w s � 3 � z � W � r° � a _ annma � � m a P 0 > 9 W O �p r 9 C > > N s > v Q E r g 9 0 O O Q m m m 180 I.FI. 3 c e. m 0 'o T C u o � w a m o » m » 2 D Gf O m a ^3 G�mf Niio \Jn »G —10 a< c_oCC a10 Sd 0 0� 0 m DD� 3O C gw 3 gx D ;7. d sn I SDD ; oEn0a3 — g x2fD a) A S N T o G = »ei S la F o a = 2 d A A A A A N A A A A d A A A A A A A A A L A a a a a A G O A 1'rya A A A A A A A jp Ip O O O O O O O ry ry 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O O O O O 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 '^ o m o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 F+ g '& F+ H F" F+ F+ g g, F+ V F+ N 1+ F+ F+ 78 H 9 a) �p N A L A A A A N O A A A A A a A A A A A A A A A A A A A A a 0 A A A A A A A A al O O O O O O O ry Ip 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O ry N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ry ry 0 0 0 0 0 0 jp jp A O O O O tit; O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O N O O Ip ry 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Z 0 S S S 2 S S 2 2 S S S S S S 2 2 C C G C C S S 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 E 2 2 2 S C S C C C J J > > > > > J J J J J J a a'a aq oa aa o'a w w' o'o °n—' w' w' a'o w' w' u'o A A o'a A a'a o'o i w a'o w m w' any, a� a'o o'o w' w' w' a'o a'o w w' w' w' w' ao' a'a A a'a a'a , m 0 0 0 o o > > � > > > > > > > > > > o 2 0 0 0 0 g 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 a o 0 0 0 S o > J J J J J 0' J J J J J N J J J J J J J J J J N J J J J J m e N Fa m m m m m m m m m m m m m m N N N a w E. a a a w w u w oi ofDi w w a w w m a F. w w a `D a m w ,� T a J- s T 5 5 5 s s s z 9. s 9- s s s 2- 2- 2- J- J- J- J- J- J- J- J- >• J- s 2- J- z T $ m' c v v v c c v y 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O O O O y 0 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O n n n n V A N O a) n n n n n n n n n 3 n n n n t2i 1 n n a a n n a a a a a a n a a n a a a a n n n a a n a v v v v 3 v v v v v v v v v v v v v v v v v m' 7 m m m' 3 m' io ;LT 3 3 m' m' 3 3 m' 3 c v v v v 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 g g g 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3, w m m m m m < m m m m m : < m m m m m < < m < - 2. . ; < :' m m m 2. A m m m m io io m io m m m m Io m m ry m A m m io io 0 O w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w N N N N N N N N it!. N N N id N N N N N id 'id 'id id 'id N id id id id id N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N y V O V V V V V J J V V V J V V V J V " V t V V V V V 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O V O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O V - - - - 0 0 0 0 0 0 V V V V V V 1 O J H F+ F+ H N J F+ O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 t 0 0 V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V 0 0 0 0 V V J A IOiI r9 m m m 2 2 T m m 2 m m m m m 2 2 2 2 m T T l2i1 m m m m m 2 .9 ROI rY, ROI m 0 m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m 2 m m m m m m m m m m n 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O O O O O O N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N al W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 < < < < < 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o O O or o 0 0 or o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ' o a n n a a o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 � o 0 0 90 0 0 0 0 ,00 0 0 0 0 v P., F. N N . a F. N o 0 0 0 o a N N a N v u, N N a v a o N N N N o N N a a v N N N N a a a 0 K K K N N h N A - N- A v- - m Nm m K - uK K m if m - - z - m - - - �- - v,- v- K z K �K m m K K v, N H O ^ m a , o z z z o z z z \\ z z z z z z z z z z . . . .. . . .z z z z z z z z z z z \ zzz-z-z_o -z-z c- 0 > > > > > D D D D D D ➢ > > > > > D D > > > > D > > >> > > > > > > f'1 mmm z m m m m m m m m m m m mm m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m !G] N > N N Im/1 Uf In �n Vmi Vmi Vmi go,' IIm1 N Imn Imn In to V� Vmi Vmi N N El' Imll IIm1 Im/1 N ImA Imn In Imn Imn tI� N N Vmi go,' IIm1 IIm1 IIm1 ImI1 Imn Vmi Imn el m : C 9 n n n g r T r r r „ n n n n n n n n n n n n n n ±+ v c c c v v c - o 0 o c c v v - Q Q Q Q Q o o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q v c v v LI » 2 2 q n TA m m m m v v v m 2» 2 2 2 2 2 2 o a s m ' m m m m ro m 3 N 3 O y iuiiiii iiiiiiiiiiiiuii uiiiiiiu ourvu 3 w O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 Doc 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 e o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 J � J J J J J J J J J J J J J rt m m m m m m 'm m m m m m 'n m 'm 'm m m m m m m m Z8I 3 111 a D d O 0 0 n a • O R a x O O '^ 1 A 0 a O 3 y R n o n N ^ z o m � o 0 o a t 51 -2 o > Pi° z a m Q1 3 z m F x - 3 in z m o m c � 6 0 A E S S O PA. N d 7 8- 8 y O N ^ N N . O y 8- 5 .-. N O N m O N W . 3. N ? 3 8 E. n o » a my - m 3 9 c d n a '4 o d. - o o ao' q q m g 9 n E $ n 'o I. .o. m n ,�., H• .o. d x ^ m w a M o N u^Ji w m u� x ra � cfm < o E m A 0 a o � ^9 O C w N � UIf+ t+ f+ t+ f+ t+ f+ F+ f+ f+ f+ f+ t. `+ F+ f, f+ �+ F+ F+ �+ +, f+ F+ F+ T D A A A A A A A A A A A A A < A N g d N N N N N ja ry N N N N ... ... .. w " w � w ... .. w ... w .. c .� ... .- , 3 10 oa' 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 = 0 0 0 0 C 0 C m m io io io rt m rt io io m 0 0 m m A 0 0 0 c - - 2 a A A A A A A A > A a A d A A <• O 0 0 A 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o p A a 0 A A A 0 2 3 >• 3 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 = $ 2 A o m N 2 2 2 N N N 2 N of N N 2 m m m 2 m m o • . m o x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x ='m5 5 � ' ' ' ' ' 'ao ao aoo coo 000 oo ao ao d b' �' b' Si mn �' �' �' �i w E' an �' 6' �' v o a > > > > 8 > S 5 9 S > 8 , > " > ; a a 5 8 N m m m m m m m m m m mmm 4 m m vi N N In 41 v. I4 A 011 s 9- 9- 9- z 9- 9- 9- 9- T s 90 0 0 9 9 90 S 9 9 9 9 S V 9 S 9 y �a 5 5 a P.'c m�0 n m R i - 2 2A o N(D of m 8 - 0 m m m ro m' m' m m' m m m m 3 3 3 g 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 ] g 3 0 3 g 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 ] 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 v 8 m 8 m m m m 8 m H i 5 _ < < 8' < < 8 m 8 m 9 m 8 8 . Z m m m m m o = m m m m m m A m m m 3 m m m m O a as W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W g O N N N N N W W W W N N W W N W W W N N N N N N d N N N N W N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 J 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 V V V V V V V V V V V V V V O 0 V V V V V V V V V V V V V O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 � 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00MM @ Opp O O o o m o g 33 + + + y y + m m 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 y 3 3 3 nn ne n� n� n� no n n n n nn n n n n n tn 5 y o O O N N N ai W W 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O 0 0 0 0 a0 O O O O 6 a0 aO O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O N N N 9 9 N N N N a a N 0 9 9 N O in �n a a v a v a H N N 'N 'N N N N N N N u v N 2 O < NK N - < < - - . 5 . . K Z Z Z T Z Z Z Z Z C O 9 O a A G m � C 3 ZZZZZCOZ z z z CO CO m z m m z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z ZZZ N o 0 o N N o D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D n >• s T T A T 9- T m CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO m m m m CO CO CO Z m CO CO CO CO CO CO m m m m CO m 02 CO m m CO m m CO m to m Imn 8 84 N N N N N N 8 Imn Imn 8 8 Vmi Umf D 2: tmn 84 8 8 N 8 8 8; Imn tmn In to N Vmi 8 FA 2: 8, 8 2: y c E v n m m n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n �+ m m n m m m m m ' m P m m o Q Q o 0 o O o 0 0 0 o a o 0 0 0 o O o 0 0 0 o Q n ro v m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m 3 3 0 a s of s of . ' a ' y y y y 2222 @ a v a a a a v c a a a a a v a 3 O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O �' �^ an to �+ �+ p O a^i > > > 3 w _ C d a d d S'i d d w w w C C C C oa 3 H f'D fD O A N 'a N N of N N N N ' N g 5- rt. of co A ro A a) a) co co N N co m a) a) al co al A- N SECTION FOUR TRAFFIC SIGNAL SYNCHRONIZATION SYSTEM AND THREE YEAR PLAN The City of Huntington Beach utilizes in-house staff for the maintenance and operations of the traffic signal system. The traffic signal system maintenance and operations are only one of numerous duties that these staff members perform, so there is no exact dollar amount that is dedicated to traffic signal synchronization. The City of Huntington Beach has several traffic signal communication construction projects that have either been completed within the past three years or are currently underway. Four current projects are under the Orange County Transportation Authority's Regional Traffic Signal Synchronization Program (RTSSP). These projects include conduit and fiber optic installation along segments of Warner Avenue, Edinger Avenue and Talbert Avenue. The fiber optic cable installation is complete along Talbert Avenue and Warner Avenue and is scheduled to begin this summer on Edinger Avenue. A fourth RTSSP project along Bolsa Avenue will maintain the existing twisted copper interconnect cable for communication and will include controller and detection upgrades. All four of these RTSSP projects will include the installation of updated coordinated traffic signal timing. The projects along Edinger Avenue, Warner Avenue and Talbert Avenue will include the installation of new closed circuit television cameras. City funded projects completed within the past three years include installation of fiber optic cable and conduit along Lake Street and the replacement of existing twisted copper interconnect cable along Garfield Avenue and Main Street as part of the buildout of the City's fiber optic backbone. The City of Huntington Beach has one project pending under the Orange County Transportation Authority's Regional Traffic Signal Synchronization Program (RTSSP). This project, in conjunction with the Cities of Garden Grove and Westminster, will provide improvements along Bolsa Chica Street within the City of Huntington Beach from Rancho Road to Warner Avenue. This project includes the change out of approximately one and one-half miles of twisted pair copper interconnect cable to fiber optic cable. Also included is the change out of four existing type 170 controllers to 2070 ATC controllers and the installation of three CCTV cameras. 9 183 The Traffic Signal Synchronization Reporting Forms as provided in the guidelines are included as Tables 2 and 3. Only the projects located on the Regional Traffic Signal Synchronization Master Plan roadway network are shown. Table 4 lists candidate signal synchronization projects. These projects, while not funded at this time, have been identified in the City's Traffic Signal System Master Plan. For purposes of the unconstrained three year outlook of Table 3, two projects from Table 4 have been identified as candidate projects; the North Fiber Backbone Completion and the Goldenwest Street Fiber Optic installation. Actual project selection will be based on funding opportunities and restrictions. 10 184 Table 2 3-YEAR OUTLOOK TRAFFIC SIGNAL SYNCHRONIZATION Funding Needs for Synchronized Operation (Constrained) Reporting Jurisdiction Expenditures: City of Huntington Beach Type of Traffic Signal Synchronization Expenditures in Year of Expenditure Dollars MAINTENANCE PROJECT FY 23/24 FY 24/25 FY 25/26 TOTAL Communication and Software Maintenance 20,000 20,000 20,000 60,000 Subtotal Maintenance 20,000 20,000 20,000 60,000 CONSTRUCTION PROJECT FY 23/24 FY 24/25 FY 25/26 TOTAL Bolsa Chica Street TSSP (OCTA) 760,000 760,000 Subtotal Construction 760,000 760,000 OPERATIONS PROJECT FY 23/24 FY 24/25 FY 25/26 TOTAL Citywide Signal Timing Maintenance 10,000 10,000 10,000 30,000 Subtotal Operations 10,000 10,000 10,000 30,000 790,000 30,000 30,000 850,000 11 185 Table 3 3-YEAR OUTLOOK TRAFFIC SIGNAL SYNCHRONIZATION Funding Needs for Synchronized Operation (Unconstrained) Reporting Jurisdiction Expenditures: City of Huntington Beach Type of Traffic Signal Synchronization Expenditures in Year of Expenditure Dollars MAINTENANCE PROJECT FY 23/24 FY 24/25 FY 25/26 TOTAL Communication and Software Maintenance 80,000 80,000 80,000 240,000 Subtotal Maintenance 80,000 80,000 80,000 240,000 CONSTRUCTION PROJECT FY 23/24 FY 24/25 FY 25/26 TOTAL Citywide Signal Synchronization (a) DESIGN 25,000 50,000 75,000 CONSTRUCTION 800,000 900,000 1,700,000 Carryover from table 2 760,000 760,000 Subtotal Construction 760,000 825,000 950,000 2,535,000 OPERATIONS PROJECT FY 22/24 FY 24/25 FY 25/26 TOTAL Citywide Signal Timing Maintenance 90,000 90,000 90,000 270,000 Consultant Services—Signal Timing 150,000 150,000 300,000 Subtotal Operations 90,000 240,000 240,000 570,000 930,000 1,145,000 1,270,000 3,345,000 (a) For illustrative purposes, projects include the North Backbone Fiber Completion project and the Goldenwest Street Fiber Optic Installation (as shown in table 4). Actual candidate projects are contained in Table 4 and project selection will depend upon funding opportunities and restrictions. 12 186 Table,4 LSSP IMPLEMENTATION - CANDIDATE SIGNAL SYNCHORNIZATION PROJECTS WITH ESTIMATED COSTS Reporting Jurisdiction Expenditures: City of Huntington Beach The following projects, while not funded at this time, have been identified in the City's Traffic Signal System Master Plan. These projects will be considered as funding opportunities are identified. CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT SUMMARY ESTIMATED COST Install interconnect conduit and fiber optic Magnolia Street cable from Hamilton Avenue to Pacific Coast $650,000 Highway. Install interconnect conduit and fiber optic cable from Bolsa Avenue to Heil Avenue. Goldenwest Street Install fiber optic cable in existing conduit $950,000 from Yorktown Avenue to Pacific Coast Highway North Backbone Install interconnect conduit and fiber optic Completion cable on Gothard Street from Edinger $825,000 Avenue to Warner Avenue. Install interconnect conduit and fiber optic cable on Main Street from Utica Avenue to Orange Avenue/Atlanta Avenue, along South Backbone Orange Avenue/Atlanta Avenue to Newland Completion Street, along Newland Street from Atlanta $3,000,000 Avenue to Hamilton Avenue and along Hamilton Avenue from Newland Street to Brookhurst Street. Install 1.5 miles of fiber in existing conduit. Citywide Change out of existing 170 controllers to new $775,000 2070 ATC controllers Total Estimated Cost $6,200,000 13 187 SECTION FIVE TRAFFIC SIGNAL SYNCHRONIZATION ASSESSMENT REVIEW AND REVISE, AS MAY BE NECESSARY, THE TIMING OF TRAFFIC SIGNALS Significant timing plan updates and projects completed FY 2020/2021 through 2022/2023 Over the past three years, the City of Huntington Beach has undertaken traffic signal retiming efforts on five of the routes within the City that are included in OCTA's Regional Traffic Signal Synchronization Master Plan. These projects along Magnolia Street, Edinger Avenue, Warner Avenue, Talbert Avenue and Bolsa Avenue were undertaken as part of OCTA's Regional Traffic Signal Synchronization Program (RTSSP). Smaller scale retiming efforts were undertaken at various locations as changing traffic patterns or opportunities for improvement were identified. Figure 2 is the Corridor Synchronization Performance Index (CSPI) map for the City of Huntington Beach. The CSPI is a performance measure utilized by OCTA that factors the average speed, greens per red and the number of stops per mile. It is a 100 point scale with any score over 80 considered to be "very good progression" and a score under 60 being classified as `limited progression". Adams Avenue The timings on Adams Avenue were updated in 2016 as part of the Adams Avenue RTSSP project and have not been significantly revised since that time. Adams Avenue operates at a cycle length of 130 seconds in the morning, 130 seconds in the midday and 140 seconds in the evening. This provides for continuous coordination in the midday and evening from Beach Boulevard to Ranger Lane. Since Caltrans runs a 120 second cycle in the morning, there is still a break point between Coldwater Lane and Newland Street during this period, although the traffic signals from Lake Street to Coldwater Lane are coordinated with respect to Beach Boulevard. Beach Boulevard Beach Boulevard is a state highway, operated and maintained by Caltrans. The state indicates that there are no immediate plans for retiming. Bolsa Avenue The City of Huntington Beach maintains only five traffic signals at the far westerly end of Bolsa Avenue. With traffic volumes ranging from 15,000 to 19,000 vehicles 14 188 per day, the negative impacts to cross street traffic will outweigh any benefit of traffic signal coordination on Bolsa Avenue. Currently, an RTSSP project is underway along Bolsa Avenue. This project will develop traffic signal timing recommendations along Bolsa Avenue. At that time, a determination will be made regarding whether to implement the recommended coordination timing and significantly impact cross street delay or to leave the traffic signals running free as they currently operate. Bolsa Chica Street The City maintains coordinated traffic signal timings on Bolsa Chica Street from Bolsa Avenue to Warner Avenue. From Robinwood Drive to Warner Avenue there is a 140 second cycle length in the morning and afternoon and 130 seconds in the midday period. From McFadden Avenue to the north, Bolsa Chica Street has a 120 second cycle length throughout the day. There is currently an OCTA Regional Traffic Signal Synchronization Program (RTSSP) project commencing along Bolsa Chica Street. This project is envisioned to bring the entire segment of Bolsa Chica Street within the City of Huntington Beach to operate under a consistent cycle length. Brookhurst Street The current traffic signal timing was implemented in 2020 as part of an OCTA Regional Traffic Signal Synchronization Program (RTSSP). The existing cycle lengths are 130 seconds in the morning and midday and 140 seconds in the afternoon. Edinger Avenue The timings on Edinger Avenue were updated in 2014 as part of the Edinger Avenue RTSSP project. Currently the Edinger Avenue signals operate on cycle lengths of 140 seconds in the morning, 130 seconds in the midday and 140 seconds in the evening for the segment from Bolsa Chica Street to Beach Boulevard. This provides for continuous coordination with the Caltrans-operated Beach Boulevard and Edinger Avenue intersection. Edinger Avenue from Newland Street eastward into Westminster runs at a cycle length of 130 seconds during peak periods with a free operation during the mid- morning and mid-afternoon periods. Edinger Avenue is being retimed as part of a current OCTA RTSSP project. It is anticipated that the new optimized timings will be installed by summer 2023 and will retain the existing cycle lengths. This project includes the replacement of the 15 189 existing twister pair copper interconnect cable with fiber optic cable. New 2070 ATC controllers will be installed along with seven new CCTV cameras. Goldenwest Street The timings on Goldenwest Street were last updated in 2016 as part of the Goldenwest Street RTSSP project. The current cycle lengths are 140 seconds in the morning, 130 seconds in the midday and 140 seconds in the evening. As part of a federal Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) project, new interconnect conduit with fiber optic cable was installed along Goldenwest Street from Heil Avenue to Warner Avenue, a distance of approximately one-half mile. This brought two additional signalized intersections into communication with the City's TMC utilizing fiber optic cable and eliminating the need for a wireless link. Magnolia Street Revised traffic signal timing was implemented in 2020 as part of an OCTA Regional Traffic Signal Synchronization Program (RTSSP) project. This project included the change out of approximately one mile of existing twisted pair interconnect cable with fiber optic cable. In addition, approximately one and one-half mile of new conduit and fiber optic cable was installed, eliminating the need for a wireless link to four signalized intersections. The cycle lengths are 130 seconds in the morning and midday and 140 seconds in the afternoon, maintaining crossing arterial coordination with Adams Avenue. Pacific Coast Highway Pacific Coast Highway is a state highway, operated and maintained by Caltrans. The state indicates that there are no immediate plans for retiming. Talbert Avenue Revised traffic signal timing was implemented in 2023 as part of an OCTA Regional Traffic Signal Synchronization Program (RTSSP) project. The current cycle lengths are 140 seconds in the morning, 130 seconds in the midday and 140 seconds in the evening. As part of the RTSSP project, new fiber optic cable and conduit was installed along with CCTV cameras. Warner Avenue Warner Avenue from Algonquin Street to Newland Street was retimed in 2023 as part of an RTSSP project. Coordinated traffic signal timings operate at a cycle lengths of 140 seconds in the morning, 130 seconds in the midday and 140 seconds in the evening. This provides for continuous coordination with the Caltrans-operated Beach Boulevard and Warner Avenue intersection. 16 190 Included with the 2023 RTSSP project is the change out of the existing 170 controllers to 2070 ATC controllers and the installation of seven CCTV cameras. As the new timing has been recently implemented, the after-analysis is not complete and it can be anticipated that there may be fine tuning adjustments. General Signal Timing Practice It is typically the City's practice to coordinate its major arterials at 140 seconds in the morning and afternoon periods and at 130 seconds in the midday to ensure consistency with Caltrans at Beach Boulevard. The exception to this practice is along Adams Avenue, Brookhurst Street and Magnolia Street, which run at a cycle length of 130 seconds during the morning period. Caltrans morning cycle length south of Ellis Avenue is 120 seconds, which cannot be accommodated along Adams Avenue, Magnolia Street and Brookhurst while maintaining an acceptable operation including accommodation of proper clearance intervals. Coordination Equipment In 2011, the city completed a Traffic Signal System Master Plan (TSSMP) which planned out a communication system for the City. Principal elements in this plan include establishing hardwire communications to almost all signalized intersections and creating a fiber optic backbone for system reliability and redundancy. The RTSSP projects on Goldenwest Street, Edinger Avenue, Warner Avenue, Magnolia Street, Brookhurst Street, Adams Avenue and Talbert Avenue placed fiber optic cable and conduit along most of the City's major arterials, connecting with the City's traffic management center located in City Hall. The TSSMP identified two fiber optic backbones and additional conduit and cable links to ensure a comprehensive traffic signal system operation. Over the past three years, the City has upgraded approximately three miles of its existing network of copper interconnect cable to fiber optic cable. In addition, approximately four and one-half miles of new communication conduit and fiber optic cable has been installed along with approximately one mile of new conduit with twisted pair copper interconnect cable, which can be upgraded to fiber optic cable in the future. A component of the Traffic Signal System Master Plan is to identify opportunities to communicate with the traffic signal systems in the adjacent cities and with Caltrans. Although no formal projects have been programmed, intertie opportunities have been identified with Westminster at the intersection of Bolsa Chica Street and Rancho Road, Fountain Valley at the intersection of Warner Avenue and Magnolia Street and with Costa Mesa at the intersection of Adams Avenue and Shantar Drive. 17 191 Currently approved OCTA RTSSP projects will install approximately one and one- half mile of additional conduit and approximately six miles of fiber optic cable, toward a goal of interconnecting virtually every City traffic signal and providing the gateway for interagency communication. 18 192 Table 5 TRAFFIC SIGNAL SYNCHRONIZATION ASSESSMENT, REVIEW, AND REVISION LOCAL AGENCY TIMING DID TIMING TIMING UPDATE RESULTS (if available) CORRIDOR ° REVIEWED ' , REQUIRE Speed; Travel Stops;per'mile:, Greens per red CSPI Score* x (Past 3 Years).',;:AN UPDATE? After f - Before' . Before After a r, Before After Before ,; , After, Adams Avenue No (c) No Significant Timing Modifications Beach Boulevard (CALTRANS) (b) (c) Studies not available. Bolsa Avenue Yes (a) Current TSSP Corridor—Timing Study Underway Bolsa Chica Street No (d) Current TSSP Corridor—Project Commences Fall 2023 Brookhurst Street Yes Winter 2020 No Significant Timing Modifications Edinger Avenue Yes (a) Current TSSP Corridor—Timing Study Underway Goldenwest Street No (c) No Significant Timing Modifications Magnolia Street Yes Summer 2020 (b) 26.4 (b) 1.4 (b) 1.9 (b) 66.0 Pacific Coast Hwy. (CALTRANS) (b) (c) Studies not available. Talbert Avenue Yes (a) Current TSSP Corridor—Timing Study Underway Warner Avenue Yes (a) Current TSSP Corridor—Timing Study Underway *Optional (a)- Current TSSP corridor. New timing planned 2023 (b)- Information not available (c)- No significant modifications (Cycles and offsets unchanged) (d)- Current TSSP corridor 8 co 19 Table 6 SIGNAL TIMING REVISIONS PROJECT CORRIDOR CROSS STREET CYCLE LENGTH (sec)(a) Magnolia Street Garfield Avenue 130/130/140 Hamilton Avenue Warner Avenue Algonquin Street Newland Street 140/130/140 (b) (a) Indicates AM/MIDDAY/PM (b) Fine tuning / modifications still in progress 20 2Q23 Corridor Operationa Performance M , Huntin•ton_Beac OCTA SANTA1 vt4 i_.__ I i I ANA C.) ;r 0 I I j HAZARD - /1") COLLEGE ,�4, t CIVIC CENTER BOLSA F� I WESIIINS ' { i ri W f{ I: 4TH SANTAA'JA Y''� ti SEAL BEACH I } L BOLSA I _ . ! ASIAN zaw,o [ 1ST ROnA'PLAZA j �r`i;7 ¢ir, : RGosv __._ , �) WESTMINS�fER �LLACE ^ „�� . _ [I _M FADDEN I I 1 O 9 ....„ ,,,,„, ,.,, , .. co l �.0 C. o GOLD,�IWEST I p m ��!�) ',2,_' „, DINGER�m _ COL EGE IBELLA I t �� . �\ �1 '' PAVILIO�S'PL"ACE} c , C"sir: ..;,•= S HEIL SHI &CENTER =_ 7 H IL_JH0PPji wR _ 71 a ¢ re 0¢ ¢ \ FOUNTAIN VAL.I7L ATE �_co j/L p f I-• 1 MACARTHUR ' CC *°O� HUNTINGTON �� i i ° rf =\ S FLOWER: .11 ., i v�`oQ BEACH S PO1NJ ELLIS < ELLIS , Pi ZA OCC c Sil UTH COAST \`, SOUT \ GA FIELD I GISLER p•0�� i� ��'~,. j PLAZA / ' � �� �}YO KTOWN. I ,���, r BAKER `q ADAMS Li Corridor Synchronization /" g oI,` ORANG Performance Index �� O a ,COLLEGE ARLINGTON Tier V Less than 50 ^ �1G� ItIDIA APOLIS' !t COSTA �6 A FAIR Q�P \`;\ t. MESA Tier IV 50 to 60 I • l • 11 = w I Tier III 60.01 to 70 \ � 1— II TNT1 ; \Tier II 70.01 to 80 io § ,�J? WILSON � �'•. ice, I VICTORIA f Tier I More than 80 ,, �� H MILTON ,` ¢1 o� Eligible Corridor P n i f i c Ocean \ kiq I w 2� yS * ~\ h�' BANNING : . - al 19TH sq'1'�- 7 — Currently Funded Corridorr-- l - /V„ t i TRr GL 9 rn Source:OCTA;Data current as of September 2022. ^�� / I SQ ARE fO ' r' Please check with OCTA prior to CTFP Call for Projects • Eligible for funding upon completion per CTFP Guidelines \ • 17TH i / j 0 0.5 1 7 Q- r ,�' , i i� �t! oj • NEUVIRORT `7. i IQ� } BEACIi Miles �,!/( .:0 I � > I r\ \11 `•-T `� WES ,tIF. O \ J .tti I f PLAT ,?L' 3/22/2023 W:\Requests\PDCS\SP\PA\SignalCoordinationMxd\CSPI_2023_CityMaps\HuntingtonBeachCSPI_Projects_2023-0322.mxd , IN }t� l III. Circulation . 'n M • -�i r - am de y} { kf dT e ` 4i, ti.iq� . l a;' • 4 )E''.3 . ` $ ar ?1 ilt...,..!: q S , b 6 E A R J i - B yx ;: ( aP ( ' 9 r _t i p r tC '®° r *' "— {—:-.4A Ilt'. 7M.1 '''' ''''li!:;5'$1.jil ' E tic r; 'r " tl' — — . t IT] tt•tt- 1 !°re.. mrt v ■ ]'v" ^flit f -.� J i,, s. .. 11:i c •• " yr r x y f . n L/ �k�A a Introduction and Purpose Ty :iC I:lftlil,' Huntington Beach is an active, lively community that recognizes its circulation system is ,, something more than just roads and the cars that drive on them. The city's multimodal 1 system includes bikeways,equestrian trails, sidewalks and jogging paths, and waterways. ��l. a Public transit services transport people within the planning area and to more distant g ._ destinations, using regional services provided by the Orange County Transportation ,, Authority (OCTA). -$ - S4 13 Ensuring that mobility options in Huntington Beach remain diverse and efficient is both a °S' i fundamental goal and a necessity as concerns about air quality, greenhouse gas emissions,and the accessibility of transportation options to all members of the community �� , `_ grow. The Circulation Element describes and directs how people, goods, and services .:. move within and through Huntington Beach. Through goals and policies contained in this .14 i'. element, the Cityguides how the circulation system be shaped to respond to the needs 0 `. Y P P 1x .1 and desires of the community. These needs and desires include reducing and preventing i , traffic congestion, providing for safe active transportation, and planning for new transit ' �rk ,: opportunities. Huntington Beach is a dynamic city, and the Circulation Element provides ,t the means for the circulation system to adapt to dynamic conditions. '' f ` x City of Huntington Beach General Plan (Adopted October 2, 2017) 1, 3-1 196 S. ._• Accomplishing these objectives requires effective land use planning, roadway monitoring Q and improvement, transportation system and demand management, regional coordination, and commitment of significant personnel resources. The policies and programs in this element emphasize a balanced, multimodal transportation system that ag responds to the demands of current and planned land uses identified in the Land Use swag �� - Element. Scope and Content The Circulation Element is a mandatory component of the General Plan. Pursuant to California Government Code Section 65302(b), the City must address major thoroughfares, transportation routes and various means of travel, terminals, and other ` local public utilities and facilities, all correlated with the Land Use Element. Huntington Beach has chosen to address utilities within the Public Services and Infrastructure Element. In addition, Assembly Bill (AB) 1358, the Complete Streets Act of 2008, requires that cities ` and counties identify how they will provide for the routine accommodation of all users of roadways,including motorists, pedestrians,bicyclists,individuals with disabilities, seniors, and users of public transportation. Planning and building Complete Streets is one way cities and counties can meet this requirement. A complete street is a transportation facility ,� that is planned, designed, operated, and maintained to enable access for all roadway users. YP, } The Circulation Element consists of this Introduction and Purpose identifying the intent of the element, how it relates to other documents, and metrics commonly used to measure traffic flow; a Circulation Plan designating locations and standards for roadways and non- motorized circulation facilities, and stating the community's desired level of transportation service; and Issues, Goals, and Policies, which provide strategies to maintain and enhance Huntington Beach's dynamic circulation system. The element addresses the physical circulation system consisting of streets, highways, bicycle routes, equestrian facilities, paths, and sidewalks,as well as available modes of transportation, including cars, buses, bicycles, and walking. How efficiently goods and people move about in a community is one of the most imperative issues a locality must address, as it affects land use, economic vitality, urban design, energy consumption, air quality, and ultimately, the city's infrastructure.Circulation decisions cannot be addressed solely at the local level, however; they must be coordinated with regional, state, and : , 1/4 ;- federal agencies, as well as with neighboring communities. �z ,i_,,,, ,.,,., ,__....__V, .\:,. : ff 3-2 i City of Huntington Beach General Plan (Adopted October 2, 2017) 197 .t Relationship to Other General Plan Elements , � State planning law requires that the Circulation Element be consistent with other General Plan elements. As circulation affects such a wide range of issues,consistency with other elements is especially important. The elements most closely linked with the Circulation . , Element are Land Use and Noise. The Land Use Element identifies the development potential of vacant or underutilized properties throughout the city, which is a major factor in developing future traffic volume estimates that are used to evaluate roadway adequacy 9 in the Circulation Element. The transportation policies found in the Circulation Element are also directly linked to the programs and policies in the Noise Element, since transportation r AA facilities users are largely responsible for excessive noise levels in certain locations in the ',rtR . community. Projected noise distributions, depicted as noise contours in the Noise Element, are in turn related to the Circulation Element. Policies and plans contained in the h Noise Element are largely based on the Circulation Element and are aimed at minimizing -,,, the effects of transportation noise on current and planned land uses. The Natural Resources and Conservation Element is also related to this element, as it addresses air quality and greenhouse gas emissions. izt..„23. Circulation Plan Huntington Beach's circulation network consists of roadways, transit services, multiuse trails, waterways, bikeways, and air traffic from the various heliports in the city. Other facilities such as park-and-ride lots, transit shelters, bicycle racks and lockers,and public and private parking facilities support these methods of travel. Similarly, the overall circulation system supports the movement of goods and services via the various components of that system. Measuring Traffic Flow iftita Roadway networks must be regularly evaluated to ensure they are moving vehicles efficiently and maintaining adequate capacity to support future growth. This element uses specific approaches to measure and describe traffic flow and roadway capacity. They involve a policy component with respect to desirable level of service(LOS)and vehicle miles traveled(VMT),and a technical component that outlines the criteria involved. Volume-to-Capacity Ratio )1,400,41 The volume-to-capacity (V/C) ratio indicates how many vehicles travel on a roadway (volume) and the number of vehicles the roadway can carry (capacity). V/C ratios are 3 g,. calculated based on current or future traffic volumes and capacity values for various types t of roadway facilities.Volume is established either by a traffic count(in the case of current k,i volumes)or by a forecast for a future condition. Capacity is a critical component of roadway tH3 design. The higher the V/C ratio (approaching or above 1.00), the more congested the `' City of Huntington Beach General Plan (Adopted October 2, 2017) d- 3-3 198 roadway becomes.For example,a roadway that carries 1,000 vehicles per hour but has the ° capacity to accommodate 2,000 vehicles per hour at free flow speed has a V/C of 0.50, g . !i which drivers would experience as"free-flowing,"with only minor delays. The V/C ratio is used to reflect intersection performance through the intersection capacity ;... utilization (ICU). This measure is applied using peak-hour volumes and the geometric • ' • configuration of traffic signal controlled intersections.The ICU sums the V/C ratios for the critical movements of an intersection, and thus accounts for the overall performance of intersections, which is typically the portion of the system that most influences the overall operations within a roadway system. 't,° Level of Service LOS is a tool used to describe the operating characteristics of the street system in terms of the level of congestion or delay experienced by vehicles. Service levels range from A through F, with each level defined by a range of V/C ratios, as shown in Table CIRC-1. LOS A, B, and C are considered good operating conditions,with only minor delays being experienced by motorists. LOS D represents operating conditions where drivers occasionally have to wait through more than one signal cycle to proceed through the • intersection. LOS E is considered a near-capacity condition, and LOS F represents an oversaturated condition with long delays. The LOS designations are based upon ICU values calculated for intersections. Table CIRC-1 _r h Peak Hour Level of Service Descriptions for Intersections LOS • Description V/C or ICU' Low volumes; high speeds,speed not restricted by other vehicles; all signal A cycles clear with no vehicles waiting through more than one signal cycle. 0.00-0.60 Operating speeds beginning to be affected by other traffic; between one and B 10 percent of the signal cycles have one or more vehicles which wait through 0.61-0.70 more than one signal cycle during peak traffic periods. Operating speeds and maneuverability closely controlled by other traffic; ° between 11 and 30 percent of the signal cycles have one or more vehicles which wait through more than one signal cycle during peak traffic periods; 0.71-0.80 recommended ideal design standards. Tolerable operating speeds;31 to 70 percent of the signal cycle have one or D more vehicles which wait through more than one signal cycle during peak 0.81-0.90 traffic periods;often used as design standard in urban areas. Capacity;the maximum traffic volume an intersection can accommodate; restricted speeds;71 to 100 percent of the signal cycles have one or more E vehicles which wait through more than one signal cycle during peak traffic 0.91-1.00 �• periods. Long queues of traffic; unstable flow; stoppages of long duration;traffic F volume and traffic speed can drop to zero;traffic volume will be less than the Above 1.00 volume which occurs at level of service E. Source:Highway Capacity Manual 2000,Transportation Research Board,National Research Council 3-4 City of Huntington Beach General Plan (Adopted October 2, 2017) 199 Vehicle Miles Traveled SB 743 was passed by the state legislature in 2013. Among other topics, it discusses how transportation impacts are addressed under the California Environmental Quality Act :.;4:-.1 (CEQA). Currently, an environmental impact report addresses impacts "to traffic 115' congestion and delays. SB 743 requires the Office of Planning and Research to update C; the State CEQA Guidelines so that impacts are instead measured by the predicted change in VMT rather than the change in LOS. This method allows for better calculation of the greenhouse gas and energy impacts. Local jurisdictions may still use LOS in making � : planning decisions,but it cannot be included as part of the CEQA process.This may result t in significant changes to the way transportation systems are designed and operated in { cities. The City of Huntington Beach will utilize VMT or a similar metric as a CEQA threshold of significance,while still maintaining the best possible traffic flow by assessing ". proposed development or reuse project impacts to LOS as a part of determining a project's consistency with the General Plan. Providing additional transportation mode options could improve LOS for vehicle travel, while also decreasing VMT for single-occupant vehicles. -04 The benefits of having a variety of travel options are numerous. Having access to public transit, cycling,and walking options increases the opportunity for residents to navigate the community and fulfill the necessary aspects of everyday life, regardless of age, ability, or economic status. Multiple options also provide individuals with greater choice and control * over their mobility, and support a physically and socially active lifestyle. In addition, increased travel options have the potential to reduce automobile traffic, reduce greenhouse gas emissions,and minimize the need for large, multilane roadways and busy neighborhood streets. Land Use Plan and Forecasts The Circulation Element is designed to meet transportation needs based on assumptions ,.. about the intensity and location of development from the Land Use Plan. In turn, the Land Use Plan was developed through an iterative process with the Circulation Plan to ensure that the transportation network can meet the needs of proposed land uses. Anticipated future development consistent with General Plan land use designations is presented in the Land Use Element. With implementation of the General Plan, up to 7,228 additional dwelling units and approximately 5.4 million additional nonresidential square feet could be constructed in the planning area. This additional development would result in the addition of approximately 148,000 average daily vehicle trips to roadways within the planning area. City of Huntington Beach General Plan (Adopted October 2, 2017) i 3-5 200 Regional Mobility �ti--1-:*'!-..,-..'.,- Jam` �. e;= AitA Orange County has seen rapid growth �-` , �� - since the 1990s, and is projected to °4. �' have continued growth well into the -°:� ',- .2 7 - �4 "` 21st century. Regional transportation . eaT -:,:'^i,, strategies are needed to successfully L'' i° ,``.'-` _ implement City and County plans ,t' . ' '*".=:, hiiiiVAM accommodating future growth. These , strategies must link Huntington Beach 11,641.4 to other regional employment and - rill\.1 4044 commercial centers,as well as airports and transportation hubs, and should prominently Oiali feature alternative modes of travel to the automobile. Currently, regional and interregional roadway access is provided by a system of freeways and arterials. The San Diego Freeway(1-405) is the major north-south freeway,traversing rovitAi the northeastern portion of the planning area. Pacific Coast Highway (SR 1) extends r41$411; parallel to the coast on the western portion of the planning area. Pacific Coast Highway provides regional access to the City of Newport Beach to the south and the City of Seal Beach to the north, as well as points beyond. OCTA provides local transit service and regional transit connections between the city and other areas of the county and region. OCTA provides a variety of transit services including bus service, passenger rail, and mobility services for those with special needs. OCTA tirtiift continues to develop new transit alternatives to improve regional mobility. Regional transportation plans and programs address regional and local transit, bicycle routes, and improved accessibility for Huntington Beach to and from points east of the Santa Ana River. Resolving these regional issues will require coordination between Huntington Beach, the County, and neighboring jurisdictions. Complete Streets s Complete Streets are streets that accommodate all modes of travel in a convenient . manner for all users. Pedestrians, bicyclists, motorists, and transit riders of all ages and abilities must be able to move along and across a complete street in a relatively safe manner. Complete Streets help facilitate a variety of important community benefits, ,�-, including the following: • Complete Streets provide travel choices and give people the option to use alternative modes of transportation. �� '', • Complete Streets encourage healthy physical activity. Public health experts promote . walkingand bicycling to combat obese especially in children. � Y 9 obesity, P Y 3-6 � :g' City of Huntington Beach General Plan (Adopted October 2, 2017) 201 al ram• • Complete Streets can lead to economic revitalization by reducing transportation costs and travel time while increasing property values and job growth in communities. , ri .. • Thoughtful design and accommodations for bicyclists and pedestrians reduces the =' incidence of crashes and improves safety for all transportation users. = , • Complete Streets foster strong communities where all people feel welcome on the 'O."'3 road and where walking and bicycling are an important part of improving public q,▪a, transportation and creating friendly, walkable neighborhoods. Making a street more complete could include installing or improving sidewalks, adding .t, t„ bike or dedicated bus lanes, or maintaining frequent and visible crosswalks, roundabouts, try or any number of other design features that suit the location and maintain or improve tr overall transportation flow. The City of Huntington Beach has built the vast majority of +- . ,- streets utilizing the Complete Streets approach, and expanding the Complete Streets `' ";' efforts would require retrofit or redesign of existing streets. R In addition to providing ways to travel, and creating places for people, Huntington Beach's 4,,' .1 streets also provide access to private property and public sewer, water, electrical, and ;4 storm drain utilities. l▪ - The Local Road System • $x Roadways in Huntington Beach are generally �` a k 1 . ' w laid out on a north-south, east-west trending ,. : . , � h' grid system.The grid system becomes slightly �, "�` ' "1 ' .,. a modified in the Downtown area, where .,...: ; ' 10 ire. t a roadways trend northeast-southwest, and in `. i. A. a, the Huntington Harbour and Sunset Beach .p/ ' ' +�,�.,�, areas. As shown later in the Arterial Highway ,\ , '• R'-- .-. rc , r , / ` ter.. 1 Plan, the local roadway system is organized in .� I p ,,. ,1 4 a hierarchical fashion, based on the grid + �` : : ` f system. However, due to natural barriers such r _. -; _ 1 r 1 1 7::14:1!!::; 1:' as the Bolsa Chica Wetlands, the Santa Ana 4,;: . . 4 - r River, the Pacific Ocean, and the Seal Beach `1 ,1 Ii,; * ' Naval Weapons Station, the grid system ' - - °• ^-1_ - .. -. ...!I!' - �4 becomes discontinuous. This results in ..-T' " ;; , circuitous and somewhat limited access to - certain locations, such as access to Pacific r Coast Highway from north-central Huntington Beach, or access across the Santa Ana ,. River from the southeast. i + ' . , 71 .-L'it;...- 41- City of Huntington Beach General Plan (Adopted October 2, 2017) ,' 3-7 202 Pi:44101*il, Roadways are not equal in function or in their service of different travel modes. Major and primary arterials, like Warner Avenue or Goldenwest Street, must effectively balance the "" needs of both automobiles and mass transit vehicles in order to keep drivers from using adjacent neighborhood streets to avoid traffic. Secondary arterials like Newland Street or c, w Slater Avenue still accommodate significant automobile traffic while also balancing the film*4 , needs of more direct local access,on-street parking, and increased nonmotorized modes fa. t. of transportation. Collector streets like Delaware Street or Orange Avenue are more Wawa supportive of other modes and uses, such as bicycles. Finally, local streets are mixed environments where all users interact, and the parkways and sidewalk areas can be used 19.4;1441 for recreation or gathering. Roadway Types The local street system is composed of various-sized roadways that allow for mobility from point-to-point and access to properties. Roads generally emphasize either mobility or access. In Huntington Beach, roadways are classified as follows: ritttt • Freeway • Primary Arterial Wrifi • Smart Street Arterial • Secondary Arterial • Principal Arterial • Collector Arterial • Major Arterial • Local Street ttizgrAi Some roadway types have a standard cross section for use in selected areas. The standard roadway classifications and key mobility and access characteristics of each are described in the following paragraphs. Typical non-intersection cross sections are illustrated in Figure CIRC-1.Additional rights-of-way(beyond the standard width) may be required at higher volume intersections and to accommodate turning movements. fOttlA Freeways iltAin ftltiPA Freeways are limited access,high- speed, divided travelways of six lanes or more. Access is provided at strategically spaced, grade- - € , -, separated on- and off-ramps. 1-405 3" .�, ..;;� -.i. ;� provides regional freeway access -tx �- " "" . " '., at a number of interchanges in or } - ° `x• - ~ m �� r "' OA adjacent to the city. Freeway r�4 z..e'b/0-.1`....4.: 'i `�=� - , design standards are dictated by Caltrans, District 12, and the _ • ' , y\ Federal Highway Administration. - 1 `.. ;, j Any interchange improvements x,� must be coordinated with and approved by Caltrans. 3-8 City of Huntington Beach General Plan (Adopted October 2, 2017) 203 • Ili rr,E. RAW 07Z' ate, 4.11 I bb' ,,,S•EC,_ tN tE WEIJS E WC! .M) LAM _ V4 6�3YF _r� ,SINIMig 1 IMM!,%. 1 =.PN)�N SMART STREET ARTERIAL PPN t 2Iy •_ C 9 WI ME ME VaNt IBC ' a I m I s I ` 14 I Q I t - �- LE,M c �., R111`11ED hap&kN MAJOR ARTERIAL ' at . �.! U+hE vo C1TL , wL 4a .M I31 .0 PRIMARY ARTERIAL(DIVIDED) • wAv Sr VW ar F 4Ghi£ LANFe_F EAd _ ."0N= 111 4 14 $ i 4 a a . SECONDARY ARTERIAL(UNDIVIDED) w^�v • . v ..1 4C'u:4 It.NF 4 I/4,E CS i A.„,., 'COLLECTOR STREET(UNDIVIDED) Source.Cry of HunhrOon 8eaeh(2014). II'S I 1 glen t •. -- 'ffi Typical oadway Cross Sections Figure CIRC-1 'I.Iy '.1 r . ,. . . C. .of.Huntin o ton Beach General Plan I City of Huntington Beach General Plan (Adopted October 2, 2017) � , 3-9 204 w Smart Street Arterials ,' f .. Smart street arterials are six-to eight-lane roadways with .` ; enhanced capacity compared to a standard arterial tvimmilow ' street. Smart streets are designated by OCTA as important regional routes and improved with Measure M � ' ;, funds to increase traffic capacity and flow through using ,�---` ' techniques such as signal synchronization,bus turnouts, ` . , intersection improvements, driveway consolidation, and • prohibition of on-street parking. 1 a;;' Traffic-carrying capacities of smart streets can range ., . 1--rf z: from 60,000 to 79,000 vehicles per day,depending on the .1 number of lanes, degree of access control, peak-period � loading, and configurations of major intersections. Beach Boulevard is designated as a smart street arterial by OCTA. Beach Boulevard 14< (SR 39) and Pacific Coast Highway(SR 1) are under Caltrans's jurisdiction. q.F;w al Principal Arterials : . ,. Principal arterials act as main thoroughfares and provide access to major activity centers 4.4 i and the regional freeway system. Principal arterials are typically eight-lane roadways � :R ' F featuring raised or striped medians. Desirable minimum spacing for street intersections • ti', along a principal arterial is approximately one-quarter mile. Unsignalized minor street and e driveway access may be allowed, but signalized access is preferred and left-turn restrictions are typically planned at unsignalized access locations. c' Curbside parking is prohibited. Traffic-carrying capacities of±65,000 vehicles per day can be achieved depending on the degree of access control, peak-period loadings, and lane � , configurations at major intersections. While the City does not currently have any principal arterials, this classification is part of the County Master Plan of Arterial Highways,and could be used for later reclassifications ' ;, if appropriate. Principal arterials can be designated as smart streets with the appropriate r `-�'� capacity enhancements, as the two classifications are not mutuallyexclusive. ���'' P tY Major Arterials `,w:* `' Major arterials are high-capacity six-lane roadways with painted or raised landscaped � medians. Left-turn restrictions at minor unsignalized driveways enhance vehicle flow. Curbside parkingis usuallynot appropriate some of the more heavilytraveled major � �� along 1 {{ ,, arterial street segments in the city. Maximum service volumes of±50,000 vehicles per day •.,.z `V can be achieved, depending on the degree of access control,intersection operations, and qti loadings. . peak-period 9 3-10 City of Huntington Beach General Plan (Adopted October 2, 2017) 205 Major arterials can be designated as smart streets with the appropriate capacity enhancements, and so these two classifications are not mutually exclusive. :o ' • t rat' Primary Arterials E Primary arterials are four-lane divided roadways carrying local and regional commute fo' traffic. Unsignalized minor street and driveway access may be allowed, but signalized access ispreferred and left-turn restrictions are typicallyplanned at unsignalized access } 9 �X locations. z Curbside parking is generally prohibited. Maximum service volumes of±35,000 vehicles per daycan be achieved depending on the degree of access control, peak-period P 9 9P P loadings, and lane configurations at the major intersections. Secondary Arterialsa Secondary arterials are four-lane roadways without medians. Direct access from private residential properties to secondary arterials should be avoided where possible unless medians can be provided at such access points. ; While secondary arterials have curbside parking, localized circumstances could warrant parking restrictions, such as prohibiting parking near intersections where left-turn lane • striping is provided. In some locations, secondary arterials may include a limited median or be restriped to provide a left-turn pocket.Maximum service volumes of±25,000 vehicles per day can be achieved depending on the degree of access allowed, intersection fr operations, and peak-period traffic loadings. Collector Arterials Collector arterials provide access to local streets from the arterial roadway network. Collectors are typically two-lane roadways that sometimes feature painted medians for left-turn movements. • Collectors allow curbside parking. Parking should be restricted near intersection ti approaches where a separate right-turn lane is provided. Maximum service volumes of ±12,500 vehicles per day can be achieved depending on the degree of access control and peak-period traffic loadings. Augmented Roadways The augmented designation for arterial street classifications provides flexibility for customizing sections of roadway while retaining the basic qualities of the classification such as the minimum number of lanes. Whether for aesthetic or capacity reasons, the 77) intent is to allow these arterials to be compatible with their localized settings, providing a context-sensitive approach to the actual designparameters. Examples include the PP 9 P type 101 and size of medians, the size and use of parkways,and in some cases,auxiliary lanes to h • facilitate local access. City of Huntington Beach General Plan (Adopted October 2, 2017) 3-11 206 sal Local Streets = H Local streets are two-lane roadways without medians. Centerline striping is typically not �C! provided, and curbside parking is generally allowed. Traffic-carrying capacity is physically . = similar to a collector; however, the qualitative limit of acceptable traffic volumes in a residential environment is lower(less than 5,000 vehicles per day). Local streets are not i..� shown on the Arterial Highway Plan. Table CIRC-2 summarizes the function, typical width, access constraints,and maximum volumes for each roadway type. Table CIRC-2 Roadway Characteristics by Type Maximum' Standard • , Minimum Two Way Typical`Number Roadway° Mobile gnd Access Characteristics width;(ROW1' Daily Traffic, - ,,°, --.. 7 !".., -of'Lanes - ° Class ,; • �, ` Pavement)� � Volume ti- . (at LOS E) High-capacity arterial roadways 6 to 8 lanes featuring enhanced traffic signal with raised or Smart synchronization, bus bays, Variable painted median • Street intersection improvements, and ROW and additional 79,000 Arterial additional travel lanes. Direct access (120'-144') turn lanes at to adjacent properties is discouraged, intersections except at signalized intersections. Main thoroughfares providing access 8 lanes with to major activity centers and the raised or . Principal regional freeway system. Direct painted median Arterial access to adjacent properties is 120'/104' and additional 65,000 discouraged,except at signalized turn lanes at • intersections. intersections Major arterials complement the 6 lanes with principal system by providing a raised or Major medium-capacity backbone system. 120'/104' painted median• 50,000 Arterial Only limited access is provided, and additional typically to commercial properties turn lanes at and not to residential properties. intersections Roadways intended to carry traffic between local streets and principal or 4 lanes divided, . Primary major arterials.They are similar to 100'/84' with turn lanes 35,000 Arterial major arterials,with only limited as needed access to adjacent properties. Roadways intended to carry traffic 4 lanes between local streets and principal or • Secondary major arterials.They are similar to 80'/64' undivided,with 25,000 Arterial major arterials,with only limited turn lanes as access to adjacent properties. needed Ill 4 Arterial undivided Roadways providing property access Collector 2 lanes and linking properties to secondary, Varies 12,500 1 major,and principal arterials. 3-12 '.:1', City of Huntington Beach General Plan (Adopted October 2, 2017) 207 Beach and Edinger Corridors Specific Plan The sections of Beach Boulevard and Edinger Avenue that fall within the Beach and Edinger Corridors Specific Plan area have cross sections that are unique to the Specific E Plan (for example, different lane configurations and median landscaping) and which allow for deviation from the standard cross sections described in Table CIRC-2. Arterial Highway Plan Circulation Element goals, policies, and implementation programs emphasize the need to fi provide a circulation system capable of serving current and future local and regional traffic. � � The planning horizon for the roadway system is 2040. The City's Arterial Highway Plan is illustrated in Figure CIRC-2 and has been developed to accommodate anticipated k; volumes in 2040. Relationship to County Master Plan of Arterial Highways (MPAH) The plan depicted in Figure CIRC-2 is the required initial plan that must be consistentwith the current OCTA MPAH. Several amendments to the MPAH and, subsequently, the Arterial Highway Plan are recommended to be pursued. The recommended amendments to the current MPAH are depicted in Figure CIRC-3. Coordination with OCTA to pursue the MPAH amendments is required before any changes can be made to the City's adopted plan. Each amendment will be evaluated in cooperation with OCTA and other affected agencies prior to a final decision regarding amendment of the MPAH. As MPAH amendments are approved by OCTA,administrative amendments to the Arterial Highway Plan will be made when consistent with the recommendations identified in Figure CIRC-3. � # Principal and Secondary Intersections As a result of the way Huntington Beach's road network has been developed, many trips #ti, funnel through a few key intersections. If these intersections fail to operate at adopted R 5n performance standards,this failure seriously impacts the overall effectiveness of the entire roadway system. Such locations are defined as "principal intersections" and secondary intersections." Principal intersections have been designated as such because they are considered to have strategic importance within the overall Arterial Highway Plan. Principal and secondary intersections are critical to the function of the entire network and are regularly monitored and given priority for roadway improvements. Principal and secondary intersections will be identified in the Technical Administrative • Report and will be amended based on annual review and reporting of conditions. Action w "" involved in changing intersection designations (principal to secondary or secondary to principal) involves administrative review and approval by the Planning Commission. A General Plan Amendment is not required for such changes. r _r�1 e , ' City of Huntington Beach General Plan (Adopted October 2, 2017) :,;' 3-13 208 o.MI � _ , w m , .2' , - co\: tY city of %., W City of "'a Seal Beach ° f Westminster i 6 8 3 Boise Ave g MaFaddenf & I C9 *qJ co i__ _ Heil Ave ." s4, a ,�" -�-�- City of ab a rn, d Valley Fountain Lx -... 'a o tr • Vltarn rAve e /�J t� _�_. ( O .s t, � � "'��� i i �- SlaterAve Fc ..< - Talb ert,4_ rAve ..'-:,,, , .., litt" TalbertA C4i a :j I Ellis §. Ave z •. x' co a 4,4 Garfield Ave 1 Q �5�° •a� Yorktown Ave .Q `c 9te ? Q� Adam`sAve t< ' a r � 'eQ Indianapolis Ave Atlanta Ave LEGEND 4? . . • i ; k Existing Circulation ^5 g i �,'., r• ' C 5� �e 1lamilton Ave e, �' � ', �Major(61ene divided) � �, ®®Primary(4lane divided) a-P a -` Augmented Primary(added capacity) � 0� O 6' 5�. -- • Banning Ave • p •` Secondary(4 lane undivided) Oa i Collector(2 lane undivided) C, �e1a ``a' City of e Augmented Collector(added capacity) o ��•Proposed Primary LD a� ti., Costa Mesa a' ®Reserved Right of Way e 1 State Facility op`fr "t,, t. `"" ®Planning Area f, 4� 7 7 Nrn-Incorporated Land r�J Within Planning Area ��\\ "0 0 t•5 1 N .t ' "`. '" ,Data'Souise(Data compiled by PMC(2014) ` Base Map Source City of Huntington Beach(2014) t Huntington Beach`‘,..,-7 Arterial Highway Pan :'s4• 1t Y6ge�re �C �-2 . `;.; ' yi , °m 'C' ottiiu tine. %rr-Beaoi edema Plan 3-14 Cityof Huntington Beach General Plan (Adopted October 2 1 9 P 2017) 209 Eli r ` .105 to m ril.«- M M•� ti to {.. City of i �' to m City of ••• �••- . Westminster Seal Beath a' Boise Ave _). .:ci— a J • , to I0i o McFadden E Ave 0 c coT Ea ; t r fn ;J Z "�,T �� -- Edinger Ave ,, Honfington — ,...... \• Harbour j I '; Iea*S...'"! rn Heil Ave F its,:: o .s City of '� 1 � �P, rT 7j Fountain Valley a. .• • — cy*•••. : ri ( .; ., "1",0 4r4.4 41.n''' ,- 1ISrAVTS �, a O n \ \ lab er I e Talbert Ave 4' a 6 r axe zx '�., Bdko Chico Ni. _ ` 4 Wetlands , ,�•�r fn. to �; A & Sri Ellis m m 4�c rr 4ve o s in @� s t`'o f 5` m o � �9sy •• �d•c g co m % ' ` w Garfield Ave 4 r.. N. 3 �Yc,. •` .' to Yorktown Ave .� • J Adams Ave y � '.Oq„ , Na ,""''r �_Indianapolis AveN�, . Atlanta Ave by A 'o ,J yip ` `_ 5�.. as a Hamilton Ave s , o �a'•• LEGEND �r0 5�� I,pr. =arming A"ve _ Downgrade to Primary +0 a NS.` :q',;.! Downgrade to Collector on MPAH, �� •. Cityof i {` �, Augmented Facility on Arterial Hwy Plan 5 `�•4) I Costa Mesa t k - ®I� Delete from MPAH �y,. •� ', . Major City Streets 4s & k. �••�• City Limits f N. 11 W 6t}E CI) A.5 I �`„ de I r I r I S MILES Data Source:Data eompll;d 6y Stanreo x"_, Base Map Source:City of Huntington Beach(2Q74) 77 a (J . _ . Huntington Bead', BPro Proposed MPAH Amendments Figure CRC 3 `i rf 1 gg taFZ>i; b }i ; '� p , 1 t sd nit ltil 6h� � f' ��h y� _,1)*:::i f;, A/ City of Huntington Beach General Plan (Adopted October 2, 2017) i 3-15 210 -. $t ` ' The standard right-of-way and roadway widths specified in Table CIRC-2 will vary on approaches to intersections to accommodate intersection improvements, such as auxiliary turn lanes and/or dual-left turn lanes. Parking will typically be restricted on the approaches to principal and secondary intersections to ensure adequate space to develop such 4 K improvements. Critical Intersections One further intersection definition is "critical intersection," which is recommended for isolated cases where the long-range LOS is projected to be worse than the desired threshold and no feasible improvements are identified (see discussion on LOS below). The intent is that such locations be monitored over time. Performance Criteria Performance standards for intersections involve a policy component, the desired LOS, and a technical component that involves the assumptions and procedures used to determine the LOS. The LOS standards are set by the City of Huntington Beach (Policy k. ` CIRC 1.B),except in the case of Orange County Congestion Management Program(CMP) intersections. The lowest acceptable performance standard for CMP intersections is b s.. LOS E. Seven CMP intersections are located in Huntington Beach: • Beach Boulevard at Adams Avenue • Bolsa Chica Street at Bolsa Avenue • Beach Boulevard at Edinger Avenue • Bolsa Chica Street at Warner Avenue • Beach Boulevard at Pacific Coast • Pacific Coast Highway at Warner Highway Avenue • Beach Boulevard at Warner Avenue Evaluation of volumes, capacities, and levels of service on the City street system are based on peak-hour intersection data since intersections are the primary limiting factor affecting traffic flow on city streets.The LOS standards as established by Policy CIRC-1.B are as follows: Critical Intersections LOS E Principal Intersections LOS D Secondary Intersections LOS C Included in the principal intersections are the CMP intersections listed above; hence City d policy is to achieve LOS D for these CMP intersections, a higher standard than the CMP { '� ` LOS E requirement. 3-16 City of Huntington Beach General Plan (Adopted October 2, 2017) 211 The technical procedures used to determine LOS are based on the ICU methodology -' described earlier. Parameters and criteria used in such calculations will be defined in the Technical Administrative Report, which will be prepared following the adoption of this • Circulation Element. r• r. Future roadway improvements needed to fully implement the Arterial Highway Plan have been determined through use of a citywide traffic forecasting model maintained by the City. The Technical Administrative Report will list the intersection and roadway '' improvements required to transition to full implementation of the Arterial Highway Plan. The City will continue to use the five-year CIP process to prioritize, fund, and build these improvements, updating both the CIP and the Technical Administrative Report on an annual basis to reflect current needs, priorities, and financial conditions. New development y project mitigation will also be used to address necessary improvements. P 4. Relationship to Land Use "�. l• , Planned land uses within Huntington Beach through the year 2040 influence future traffic volumes and highway capacity needs. Baseline(year 2014) daily trip generation within the planning area was around 1,618,820 trips per day, and 148,000 additional trips are -Z; C ,2 anticipated by 2040 (an increase of about 9 percent). The Arterial Highway Plan is designed to accommodate this increase, but will require improvements including new roadway construction, improved transit service, and enforcement of the transportation ,) demand management program. :1 Neighborhood Traffic Management ::::: As vehicle traffic in Huntington Beach and the region increases, commuters and locals :bµ may look for less-crowded streets for quicker drive times. Drivers may choose to leave • A congested arterials in favor of local streets, impacting generally quiet residential neighborhoods. In busy commercial areas, employees and visitors may find it easier or "' less expensive to park in an adjoining neighborhood. Resulting increases in traffic, speeding on local streets, and inadequate parking can disrupt residential neighborhood activities. t Preserving the character and safety of neighborhoods is important to the City. Policies aimed at protecting neighborhoods from the negative effects of cut-through traffic and inappropriate parking include residential parking permits, site planning, and traffic-calming measures. Traffic-calming techniques are used to direct traffic elsewhere and slow traffic within neighborhoods. Specific traffic-calming measures will be identified in the . neighborhood Technical Administrative Report prepared following adoption of this ia Circulation Element, and will be updated on an ongoing basis. ' / / a City of Huntington Beach General Plan (Adopted October 2, 2017) "' 3-17 212 o� 6, Public Transportation Ow "�. ,`iviii fi Most regional connections from Huntington Beach to locations outside the city are made ' by personal automobiles. However, there are also many riders who use the public transportation system. -iuriii ,_',c.c..,p 6 Fixed-route and demand-responsive services meet these needs. Fixed-route services are transit lines that operate on regular schedules along a set route. Demand-responsive AA-tt services have defined service areas but do not operate on fixed routes or schedules. Iwo-A *. , .`- ', ? r In 2014, OCTA operated 16 routes through ;t the city(see Figure CIRC-4).The number 0(1, 17,PA 1 .., .„?. pli GOLDEN WEST TRANSPORTATION ;� ' 7 �° = of lines and routes are adjusted as needed A. 04 ocra, `CENTER 1` `t : in response to ridership patterns. OCTA .• - -° - �` 1. 5' and the City both operate demand- s � , �. , ' ��- . `: '° ` ` T. response services. OCTA operates the \�12- '4144 i ._ _ —-- ,�,,,-, 11,P ACCESS program. The City,with the aid of ?. ., ! . '`f OCTA, operates the Senior Services r. x - f 4 .4 4..L*. '" Mobility Program. Two park-and-ride facilities allow commuters to park their personal vehicles at one location and utilize carpools, vanpools, rv....--„...4 or commuter bus service.The park-and-ride facilities are the Golden West Transportation 10444 Center at Gothard Street and Center Avenue, and a large lot at the Boeing Corporation campus at Bolsa Avenue and Bolsa Chica Street. r Future Plans PreiNAN The Union Pacific Railroad right-of-way runs east of Gothard Street and extends from the northern city limits to its endpoint just north of Garfield Avenue. Approximately three trains per week use the active portion of the rail line north of Ellis Avenue. The City has designated the abandoned portion of the rail corridor south of Ellis Avenue for a future transportation corridor use. Future development of all or portions of the corridor, including the existing active rail section, for transportation purposes may be pursued by the City in the future. Potential uses include development of a bicycle or multipurpose trail or to function as an exclusive transit corridor. These options may be limited in some areas where portions of the corridor are no longer available for public use. N \...C. f 2 x��s VP 3-18 \' City of Huntington Beach General Plan (Adopted October 2, 2017) 213 .' to , ,us "•0f tr c? ' n ° Ire, •-•" MIh17TER:,''t\ City Of .t , UNITED.STATES NAVAL° _ WEAPONS'STATION % 0 = City of m,• E MAI L L.. ♦ Westminster Seal Beach I $ �, ! C-0LDEN r nt 5• WEST Boise Ave' ® ` -� - GOLDEN WEST I ��?.7, TRANSPORTATION c' CENTER WITH * Y •McFadden: ' 66 i .'-'66 • PARK-AND-RIDE ' ri. 2 Ave 64 �L/ 6, m gN V },� . w• mg er ea m m , 7,c� ems ., ua ra -�. Edinger Ave H n6ngtdn SIN c TO CO rn A S icRBERA LA!`L t S. • :', ce 1?0 - e c v . r t Heil Ave .s'77 " •g g la w o 't7 m 44: City of �, .` ' 1 e 72 co T2 d m 72 Fountain Valley ' • ___ ®c\ VI Fr,"1-2,ft 21 c VVaroerAve 76 v *. x . \ . �, ' '—.,' • it SlaterAve as ' \.. Se)b err , 1 I 'S•, . , -"—. ji -.'Talbert Ave O �� BOLSA cH1cA, • 76 Q% ��� GCOLt ICALRESERVE ��. ��� (n Xi, to ? ' '" a Ellis,. �. 65 0 ��. , , V. Ave ��, m $ h. ♦. V €`' a � HUNTINGTO' a �' °il E �� i ,, CE 4TRAL PARK 4r.. t� �\C^ m' mQ rli . " Garfield Ave_ r e`. ® W it �/ Y a c`�` ��":g Yorktown Ave v � e �' � . ���,, �1• 1s ra®v a c 1m7 0. a©� © Adams Ave 4�, , • tee. C IndianapoliaAve . LEGEND °` ' ' ,,1.1 w 6,7/Atlanta " — Major City Streets HUN7INGTON`'• AtlantaAve BEACH.PIER/ i r' ''•— City Limits y5 0��. - Hamilton Ave y�c Bus Route ...- a� ino•Route 1 Route 66 -c 0.0 ..V / > 4 5�•?„; 4 Banning Ave I = e®e Route 21 a�a Route 70 a �, , - 'I ®Route 25 Route 72 �e�\�c \``'`"-'�,. '• City of S ®Route 29 •••d Route 76 0° Costa Mesa �. Route 33 s®o Route 178 ''' �5��•'�, .` -Route 35 •in e Route 211 °�r� -,,6 - o..'Route 64 ®Route 701 0`0 0 1 ``� � ` 1 1 0.5 1 , I a a -".. s 1vllLE5 Data Source:Data compiled by Stanteo Base Map Source:City of Huntington Beach(2014) .. Itnglnrt®nBeen r--- Bus Route Map Figure C RC-4 ;..1: ViR t . , .'R, '. ,C u , . _ t .. 7707 -.dfilittitfii atoirbbalshjaGeneral,PJai ; 1i ' City of Huntington Beach General Plan (Adopted October 2, 2017) 3-19 214 e an tFAZ Helistops and Heliports Nrat It4=eits, Local heliports are used primarily for air ambulance, business, emergency, and police uses. Heliports are located at the Boeing Corporation (Bolsa Chica Street at Bolsa Ifi 41 _� Avenue), Guardian Center (Beach Boulevard at Warner Avenue), Huntington Beach „rat Police Station (Gothard Street and Talbert Avenue), Cal Resources at Pacific Coast Highway(between Seapoint Street and Warner Avenue), and the Huntington Beach Civic Center(Main Street at Yorktown Avenue). City policy regarding heliports is to ensure that their development and operation are coordinated with the Airport Land Use Commission " (ALUC) and to comply with conditions mandated by the Federal Aviation Administration, the ALUC, and Caltrans. Transportation Demand Management and Air Quality voiti Huntington Beach is located within the South Coast Air Basin, which is a nonattainment area with regard to meeting state and federal air quality standards. The City has , `, established a Transportation Demand Management (TDM) ordinance to mitigate potential it?iiimpacts of development projects on mobility, congestion, and air quality. The City uses ordinance requirements and policies in this element to encourage individuals and employers to change their travel behavior. Fewer vehicle trips and miles translate to •: reduced pollutant emissions. Policies and implementation measures include requiring employers and new developments to provide appropriate transit and pedestrian facilities, encouraging current businesses and new development projects to submit TDM plans, and .• encouraging the creation of Guaranteed Ride Home and carpool programs: .)44 The City also encourages the use of .4 t1 =` .If-I;. low- or no-emission vehiclesT , " ,_ v, ,� ° ,, including hybrids, electric vehicles, or �= �:' .n j� - : 1, � � other emerging technologies. One ' --=1-� �r. .. v -°-- • ,_'� .p X` example is low-speed, zero-emission - _t r,A,. ' , v ". neighborhood electric vehiclestrik _ - (NEVs). These vehicles are usually 1 l p , - restricted to roads with speeds of 35 "3. �L, �, / ` j,- — .M mph or less and must be charged :" approximately every 30 miles. For '\. !;. ,i , . these reasons, the City encourages m- � "` businesses to provide charging J _�4zF stations and is investigating alternative roadway systems for NEVs. 1,s\ iii ::::,i,),'-:::::::4.1\ B\iv:41 il-::,-.4:::„:-..: ,,,.. 3-20 City of Huntington Beach General Plan (Adopted October 2, 2017) 215 Parking tr„valti Huntington Beach is a popular destination for beachgoers and shoppers. Great demand for limited parking in Downtown, at the beach, and at parks, sports fields, high schools, glit=liV,I= 111 churches,and industrial locations has been a continuing issue for many years. Excessive =, numbers of vehicles parked on city streets can potentially impede vehicle circulation, O reducing the effective capacity of roadways and causing traffic congestion. Residential neighborhoods also experience heavy parking demand when large numbers of visitors :114 .: use on-street parking, especially during special events. Pursuant to Coastal Act :. requirements, parking must be maintained within the coastal zone that allows visitors to access the beach and coastal resources. iPAA ° The City operates parking lots and garages in Downtown and near the beach. To reduce associated impacts on adjacent residential neighborhoods, the City is committed to developing new parking facilities and programs and continuing to regulate neighborhood parking through residential permit programs. At the same time, the City will explore ways to reduce overall parking requirements when appropriate, in order to minimize the amount : of land used for parking and encourage alternative forms of transportation. Pedestrian, Bicycle, and Equestrian Paths and Waterways Accomodating Pedestrians -./� t , 7 ;£ '# .' _ k Sidewalks and walking paths allow '�; � :12 = a -- ,'. ; people to walk easily around most ,j�t{}r II. ', , _ { ` ..fxY' '. .+lli.wr tyE 1 A.� ""'�'i parts of Huntington Beach, - a ' . ` ,„iti particularly in areas such asx = .9' k` V Downtown, adjacent to the beach, g�a y ' '''" �. • tilom., ::4,vivit and along portions of Beach `� 11�`� ` e � :1.- fr - Boulevard. Within master-planned - __ _ f neighborhoods, pedestrian paths link homes to recreation facilities. In many other .,PM neighborhoods, sidewalks allow children to walk to schools and parks and surrounding uses. PIA 01 The City seeks to improve the pedestrian experience and enhance pedestrian safety. Areas eligible for improvements will be designated as pedestrian enhancement zones (PEZs). PEZ improvements may include widened sidewalks, crosswalks, trees, , , pedestrian-scale lighting, and traffic-calming measures. The City will establish a ,k.. ` 03, designation process for PEZs, coordinating with County and regional transportation t agencies to assess the need for improved facilities and balance the demand for improved ^ , pedestrian facilities with the need to maintain adequate vehicular traffic flows. j M i City of Huntington Beach General Plan (Adopted October 2, 2017) 3-21 216 0 Routes for Bicyclists rir d< Huntington Beach's mild climate - �.,r� : permits bicycle riding year-round, and ! ., ° ;a - „ri iii j the growing popularity of bicycling has mot°ai Nxig = drawn enthusiasts onto the streets 7 . . , ql.�a� �� < and bike trails near the beach and � = $ � ` .f.� �_ ,,a � throughout the planning area. The ° , , �. -=. `. �.. ` � bikeway plan shown in Figure CIRC-5 4 identifies the planned system of 4 4 bikeways to accommodate growing demand and provide a real alternative to the car for *lit! local trips. The plan establishes three classes of bicycle routes: R.-- • Class I Bike Paths — Off-road routes located along designated multiuse trails or r vacated rail lines separated from streets. ''','"''Fr,.'''',,`,. • Class II Bike Lanes — On-road routes delineated by painted stripes and other 4* At t. i7<k identifying features. 4.. *- • Class III Bike Routes—On-road routes sharing use with pedestrians or motor vehicle �� s`' traffic that are signed but not striped. r �q , Cross sections for each type of route are shown on Figure CIRC-6.Class II and III routes " ', along the north-south and east-west arterials connect to pedestrian trails and Class I 4 routes. Given the built out nature of the city,creating new Class I routes is difficult. Thus, where bicyclists and pedestrians share the road with automobiles, the City will work to t �' meet appropriate traffic safety standards. Equestrian Facilities =g' . "; - *4 Huntington Beach, despite its generally suburban p '1, character, has managed to retain a few residential tIun Cat al :} neighborhoods near Central Park where the � tact J. :' 'N C.P.E.0 1.;h O[ft.& a keeping of horses is permitted. To support .,. But E.enstaldc$ 1€,- equestrian activities, the City has required the t I , Bnbexaan o " development of horse trails around and through •- a t� s I j Le Gddffi ScaWc? these neighborhoods with a planned route west to . _,' a t fz-„ Pacific Coast Highway.Visitors and others also use J �,\ 4 '. x kiig, j the trails for rented horses available at the "'�' " 1 °''- n'° O Huntington Central Park Equestrian Center. The 6 �.: center and equestrian trails provide welcome "" ~ 1, recreation options for residents and others, and the City will retain these facilities as community resources. 1 r 3-22 City of Huntington Beach General Plan (Adopted October 2, 2017) 217 .7. m E. N ,,. Cityof, myi' w City of . Seal Beach �� , .Westminster s ° . , 0 0i Y Botsa Ave, �. m o x McFadden( 3 ! cn• s Ave �m 3. •� NugUngton $11 Edi ngelAve, ; I\";„ �s Harbour' .:� 4' Ave ' c _. : - Wa city Of Fountain Valley rn - - m r-Ave. •\V N. i `, :•�..� SlaterAve .6', '.%•. 'Seib ` BoboCh)cci `' Talbert Ave' Wetlands �.e / s _ 405' A �, o in �, 9d i- ," d Elks 1 �t ,' ,# f ${ Ave •., �_'o t 6 T" \ f. �1l iL iiiii .feld Ave f7? 0 t */, t own Ave o�c` ` .1:�e � LEGEND Go. ��••�` �� •.t.. ,�(Adams Ave' 0 Santa Ana River Trail Access •�,, �� '' l I —Major City Streets •V ' �,, ndianapolisAve — Horse Trails \ •��\ %` -+++ Railroads ' " ' • 1 ° ,6—.._ City Limns ��: � ' _ . � Atlanta Ave , Bike Lane 6s,/.y��, t sil -Bike Lane on One Side Ny g�� 111 k" Hamilton Ave'-Bike Lane/Bike Route a§e •'Ci`^ �. ^ Ym�a� �a▪ Bike Route p 0 • `'r 5`•�. 1 Banning Ave Multi-Use Pathway tea' ca '•.. I ,a. -Proposed Bike Blvd `\'`•-•v. ti City of ▪ Proposed Bike Lane .1) ....�`` �� Costa Mesa • Proposed Bike Route J4, •.,�j Proposed Multi-Use c�o,Fr ♦`,, -• -Wide Walkway v \ - W p•,s 0 0.5 1 t ' l t t s MILES Data Source:Data compiled'by S(anteo Base Map Source:City of Huntington Beach(2Qt4) 7 11111118gIOD /7 Be th - I 41 Bikeway Ran Figure C1RC-5f 11P-9 her: Gi is Huntira I ton Reath;General=Plan City of Huntington Beach General Plan (Adopted October 2, 2017) �% 3-23 218 .Q. °•',. .:',V.I.• .. „.., . . Class1 MuItt,Use Bike Path Protrldes cptitpidtely epa'rated rightpf-: •:?''.:iiiimi'..:-..t , __ ., . _.. way exclusive use Of,b1CyCle's arid- Ic:•:%, ,,.;:tt. . . ._ 't;'..1:,•,CMI.i4 ..T.-W„rtil-;-i .1,_,..., .'--'7SP-•'4, '77,;;371::',17;Air," -;', tigilestriansWIth,Cross,flow by..motottsis ;:•..-";;')*-_ ,,, or4ii t:`,:t .. -, •• . -. ,r4 t.:-/4f.,4, ,i, ,, . . _ '''''..1-- ,.•.,A',`,..; -,--"-:- . ,- .. minimized. l'ii1=P3.1 ' • :- 1-t:1°.....1 ''' ' ...;. Description:Right-ofway separated frorn,rnotorvehicie !':•;"".X1111V. '.!,;, 41'-'17*-7§..,fifi,T,'4'.1.5'1.'X'-.1.4:'-',/,'?4,-**4 ''''''t, ''''''''''.,..,°-:::`-11,411- ;,,1"1°- `',,':- v9tufn-'.6f..-.. ..f6iii,t*11.19.1ifEir"saks,hari,''ci t.i?.e.,-' '-'I*°'tis'ed. ' ,e,c..,,, .. ...1..w.L4,,,,!,,,,g,, ,",1"rt',,,,,,,,,,,,,,,y.1.•,,,,,,. ,,A 4 .,,r--, ,••::, for.cionnectronS throynti open Spa5e areas and parks,bi -;:.'il.,"'...,--",`,,..-.,.-, .tr"..M., :1,',.%.:211,,,',,".,„2.k. :72.*;',VA:ii. ° 1 • Niiftere,no otherfacrlitytipe isfeastble: 1; 1 45 r tr,='.1z pan , Es3.,:\ ,,.,,: Dosinit Guidolirto . :... ' ,.,,i ' .., ,,,Buht fOotp-aved Wittitivorfooturadeded0 inininini•,-",,,,',',.".Nr',;',,-,' "-=`;-?----''"--""'":`",,,--.''.-47, width for two-way use.cresater viridth IS recommended for hint'use toiridoiS. .. MMI Nv-- 114.6. . ,„,-., 'Bik!Pathidiater4 to a hi9htirificii5s6;thail fl'fe ket from 4-.,,t5vSe.--- 1".,. ' , '', -II -Ill i' '.. , ttie edde of the shoulCler.shall inCluCle a phYsical birder ' '' ;''',.-','''''......;;.•,:".- *,:; . )"' "' ''" ' ' ' ''' ''''' fr'' ,'-',4' 0 1. .- .." ciense h b tre •,, ,, 4. , ....„ 1 t, —ZS Val 3,- 3 RI s or es. '4' $t":'.;'ri:.:SZ.,:"!-- ',,, ' '," lieferencev p. ',,....„.:: ,:i .'. , - .'. _5, ^`^' calirait Highway Design Manual Chapter Itlpfl , - Class.2 Bike-Labe •pioVidis a sirliled lane ffir orie-waybike . — . .. ..4e-,•,•;,'';:f:"4t; - ...' '' travel tin a itreet hr highway. ,r . _ ...,e. , ....... . .,,,,,„,. i •.. ,,...,, ., I DeldintiOn::Providesa striped lane fotbne-way,,bilce „:a trawl.on a street&highway.Installeclalong streets in "'-'-'' "i.i'' '"--"--' — ' `...--- -,;1114‘.....7 ' :corridors Where there issionificantbicyde demand,and -1•.!,.,:.;,:."..,.:;..,-k.." ''' ''-' ";",?-t'''', eT',:. "';',i'-;:, `: .....," , ,., ',, where there are disdiKt.needs that,can be ervet by them, In'greal with on parking,loil,.e lanes are located betwert::ti*Fiailciiin.mi*and thetraffic lanes', °°.'"''• - ri,j----,',-lese tam;,;,..=zEP-T-gtarte .,,,.:nii.•..i.=,,, un ,, ' Posign:Guideli,ne* . 8. ..., ,,,,I 7. •FRE foot'minimum width for bike lanes lotated betWeen . ithci-traffic lanes.... _ ...,„.., I'fOot iliininiutn width if no outtercir parking corists. ',:",-,',7.'7;.::A ,,,‘"#';'-1 —" ' ''','; ''.;'''''' .. '...---'''''' ,.'7::', ,,-. • —citlisliall lie' -'feet.' ' g ' . ' ' ',, ic:'---- --# , \i;•••A. ', ,.47± • •, - . , i.r, It- !; Elk LANE ,, ....,:•`:--tlitc., .."Y,I. - , . ',*.- c", . i r• , ,,,', ' - 4 • - t„ , ,,,,„,„_„,...... ,,t,i,Referencec, eirIgifiart.ittans ilighii,raipOlign Manual Chapter lopot ROO Bik- C 044rOgifc0' q r5fflurn '.t, •••:,! :,:.;„';'i..,, e :ii,, ...,:::,,,,,,,,ii,..,t,,,, ,L...c....v..6, t:.4..,,,.::,,,,..:ir,,,,ilii.:,,,.1,,,,„ :,,,,,,,., Design :110 tripil t gnidiei u0S::dri 00w iii:h el:ehredicliu:rpr:::".th:1:ew:addeliWnely fed. Class 3 BikeTtoute .., , . ,__ , . with inotorVehicie traffic. 1. . _ . , _ ... ... ,- ,;, ., .. . , .. .. . .. ...- ,...,,,..., e ,,'.,. , g.1.0 '.-' ..,-,.. .. ,...,.,. •,.,',,,, %-, i by clirecnonaksinnage.lised where rcedwayspeeds ilk, '-'-'*,... '.i. --_ ,".frii: 47-2.-:?,.`..'..kl-i,:-,-t,i-, ,, and traffiCydlumeare fairly low andihoulder orcwides .''2"""`c,-) 4 LI%._)0,mt, : •?._33,...710,A,,,, adequate room illie ficrutes incficateto cyclists that tap-':—7*_:.Al ' r ''''::4.21, , there are particular adiantaOestnusinn these routes ?' I 1,.. . ,,*,..,--4-r- ....4, compared to ternatwe routes. ,. ,,,, ... ',," '\ i,' ,, kj....,:-.,,'',,.''' '•.,A.:N.t 1.-. . -..----ir - ... ._::.,.....:' Y" ',,, i:,;:',.!.-:, :.Wider thart standard outside lane reconirnerlded, '',''':'::,.".;.--;,:"?;; •i, ".r-,--------: --------;-,,,..::-.,--=-- --'''-'' -.liecause cyclists are permitted oh all iOaciwaySlexcept,. . ., prohilaited freeways):bicycle routes should offer a .. '' (SCI18 :: higber'degree**vice tharfothetstieets, I ct, : , 1.1 ,/A 9,7 . . ...„ , . MAY USE , fiKE ,' .,. • —. , , , O D& , ., ' FULL LANE :' Reference t &trans HighWaiDesipri Manual Chapgr 1000. atigirnia MUTCD;201I -WOW/4' -" '.,tiiierR'447',7---- . - •:" .!ii . . , . . . .„.- . . 1. .,.., Huntington .. . ,. -..' a...a Bikeway Cross Sections Figure CRC-6 ,• .':7 =1.0'''-- . ' ti .oi 714.-..nfefan't'Sbacfiree-nirai'l5tii 3-24 \' City of Huntington Beach General Plan (Adopted October 2, 2017) 21 9 Iii Boating oft Given the city's coastal location, Huntington Beach residents take advantage of its localet waterways largely for recreation from Huntington Harbour, Sunset Channel, and the Orange County Sunset Aquatic Marina. Additional future uses could include ferries to *�.' employment centers or water taxis. The City supports and encourages private Q� development of such waterborne transportation options. Scenic Corridors The practice of identifying scenic corridors and routes was introduced by the state of California in the 1960s as a way to protect the aesthetic value of lands adjacent to highways. In Huntington Beach, this practice has been extended to cover corridors that the City has determined to have notable aesthetic appeal for the community. Caltrans defines scenic corridors as lands generally adjacent to and visible from the highway, using a motorist's line of vision. Scenic corridors in Huntington Beach consist of roads that offer motorists, cyclists,and pedestrians attractive vistas and pleasing street scenes. Though not officially designated by the state, Pacific Coast Highway in Sunset Beach is an informal "Scenic Highway,"which is effectively the equivalent of a major urban scenic corridor. The City has established policies regarding treatment of scenic corridor rights-of-way, selection criteria for appropriate surrounding land uses, and rigorous development review procedures to protect the aesthetic appeal of these corridors. (/' ':17 4 ' e ea. r v ,,r "8' ,, " ' u, 'a 'as j e+rr�Y �JP =,F:r...--, „.. t" 1 �� �r w'''` a n '�_ ar I, "rC '' ' , *Iv. t l- * :._. W ?.$ ( t cal ( . — , } ,:.t14 om. 14'"_'^.. yi =--,-- 1 `� '�3� , IF �K" ` g . 4Lf, ' as r. 4(, 1 y, 1 Vz •� t "h ,:9 ''qp 1� � 'a P/ j - .6 a�la 8i , rk E 'i 7`y ,;C- '''''.:7;;: :4114::,,L4-T,,,..ill: -1.0 ilf,!),,,„ r.... r. . ,---i..4---1.,„- .--iq :-.1.„,...q4 i--.' .-1 4 I,Ingi mi.lzrei.,.,:f7i--..-3,‘'if,- 7,71'.1 -",.. r - -.--- — --',"."-- L ' -.,--7-'- �.._ . 9 z. .. • °„ ,� .Fir City of Huntington Beach General Plan (Adopted October 2, 2017) ° 3-25 220 -I♦ The City defines three types of scenic corridors: ,,,` • Major Urban Scenic Corridors— Major corridors offering views of either natural or i CZ` built environments. Development may be regulated to preserve views within the coastal zone, and landscaping and detailing are required to reinforce the aesthetic '' beauty of the surrounding area. Major urban scenic corridors are prominent, signature �� boulevards conveying arrival and identity, and in many cases will connect with adjacent cities. • Minor Urban Scenic Corridors—Minor corridors terminate within the city boundaries � and typically carry less traffic than major corridors. Development may be regulated to preserve views within the coastal zone, and landscaping and detailing are required to reinforce the aesthetic beauty of the surrounding area. • Landscape Corridors — Corridors requiring specific treatment of signage, landscaping, or other details to reinforce the design continuity of the area. Scenic corridors are regulated by design standards summarized in Table CIRC-3. Table CIRC-3 Summary of Scenic Corridor Development Requirements Scenic xu : Corridor ., Development'Requirements Type av • Utilities to consist of underground facilities Urban • Prohibit off-site signs and billboards Scenic • Require open space easements for natural areas adjacent to corridor Corridors • Require adjacent developments to incorporate compatible landscaping (Major and • Other design requirements as specified in the Land Use Element Minor) • Utilize the City's Design Review Board to evaluate developments within designated scenic corridors Landscape • Prohibit off-site signs and billboards Corridors •• Require adjacent developments to incorporate compatible/increased landscaping • Other design requirements as specified in the Land Use Element There are several intersections along the edges of Huntington Beach that serve as entry points to the various scenic corridors in the community. These intersections, known as 4 entry nodes, are key locations that help to demarcate the corridor and set it apart from the surrounding areas. There are 11 primary entry nodes and 5 secondary entry nodes in t Huntington Beach. The locations of the scenic corridors and entry nodes are shown in Figure CIRC-7. '' fe-\ , . , (-- ,,,\ J .' ' I-43 , , , , ,........„.„,..k\, , 3-26 City of Huntington Beach General Plan (Adopted October 2, 2017) 221 Transportation and Urban Runoff The quality and quantity of stormwater runoff flowing into the Santa Ana River and Pacific Ocean are regulated by the State of California. Urban environments such as Huntington '= '" Beach contain expanses of impervious surfaces that prevent stormwater from percolatingWrio.p into the ground; instead, runoff drains lead directly to the river or ocean. The circulation system—comprising sidewalks,roads, and parking lots—makes up a large proportion of the impervious surface acreage in the planning area and resulting pollution. Many of the .k pollutants entering the stormwater system are byproducts of motor vehicles, including gas and oil. To responsibly address the water quality impacts of urban runoff, and to meet Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System N (N PDES)permit requirements,the City will continue to require mitigation of potential impacts of transportation-related sources of water pollution, particularly in urban runoff. •�. a yy a v Kr F i 8b o .tf P n1 'gr 6 n A f City of Huntington Beach General Plan (Adopted October 2, 2017) , .r 3-27 222 -In • O o I y' , , t• , Cityo,, ,,m / m. • w. 3 . _ Cityof ,, , • �g L•' `' Westminster .°c ? *. Seal Beach I. La � "YY�� -a Seise Ave .• m . ' ��: r r�•t m . •o McFadden (7 W c - Ave s, _t Edinger Ave " � Huntington', _ � "n • � , . .`4 Harbour rn Heil Ave \ City Of .- ••- -- Fountain Valley `>i P _ ;% . C I WamerAve g `, i O N.......•-:;. 'Slater Ave %o - F '•`•. galb`-r sorsaChico ` , :�1e ..Talbert`Ave We Ito nds "A- 1, e _ ;,!r. Ellis m .g Ave , -1 .. . A c L ° 'E tiQ 1 . .. '-` lir _ Garfield Ave r••-asI� Jl ,.. ( Yorktown Ave -c 9`e 1 I. // 4 :, 0 O Adams Ave 1 ' / t LianapolisAve a _p is �t� El 5.. i Atlanta Ave Y` MIR - °co *% . th LEGEND ���`•ti � _� j _�Ham➢tonAve s — Major City Streets 0 x a%. l --•— CityLimitsce` ��� ���s. " Ii Ba'nningAve Major Urban Scenic Corridor 0 4' a sw p 4`^`=:. 1111 I Minor Urban Scenic.Corridor (O el' •ae N. .v City of ■■■ Landscape Corridor �,�� Costa Mesa (Q Primary Entry Node ���5� tis0 Q Secondary Entry Node <1 ~,''-: N w• rs 0 r 0.5 t � � S MILES nt Data Source:Bats complied by Staee Base Map Somme:City of Huntnptes Beach(2Q/4). . r ' : Huntington 3 Bean li Scenic Highway Plan Figure CIRC-7 ' L:,% 1 '' .'1 L ,i;iht);' . a ;Ci: off Hain �n.®to.n Beach General, 3-28 City of Huntington Beach General Plan (Adopted October 2, 2017) 223 Issues, Goals, and Policies sThe circulation issues addressed in this element include: • Maintaining adequate level of service • Providing adequate Downtown and beach parking • Enhancing regional transit • Increasing local transit options • Ensuring mobility options for all users • Enhancing bicycle,pedestrian, equestrian, and waterway options 5 { • Protecting and developing scenic corridors k, • Providing for alternative fuel vehicles and infrastructure • Ensuring access for emergency vehicles Maintaining Adequate uate Level of Service While the City has generally maintained adequate levels of service over time, congestion occurs at some key intersections and on several arterial roadways during commute hours, on the weekends, and during the tourist season. The City does not control operations on •some roadways,such as Beach Boulevard and Pacific Coast Highway, as they are under • Caltrans jurisdiction. Maintaining adequate levels of service enhances quality of life for Huntington Beach residents, promotes traffic safety, and improves the ability of emergency service providers to respond to emergency situations. Goal CIRC-la. The circulation system supports existing, approved, and planned • • land uses while maintaining a desired level of service and capacity on streets and , at critical intersections. Goal C/RC-1b. The implementation of citywide systems and driver applications. such as vehicle detection. traffic signal coordination, collision avoidance systems. traffic calming measures, and emergency or traffic notification systems, creates a quality circulation system. Goal CIRC-1c. Through ongoing evaluation of jurisdiction, efficient transportation management provides the highest level of safety, service, and resources. Policies A. Develop and maintain the city street network and pursue completion of missing roadway l.� a links identified on the Arterial Highway Plan (Figure CIRC-2) and standard roadway cross City of Huntington Beach General Plan (Adopted October 2, 2017) 3-29 224 o- sections (Figure CIRC-1), including appropriate roadway widths, medians, and bicycle War' lanes. - time B. Maintain the following adopted performance standards for citywide level of service for traffic-signal-controlled intersections during peak hours. ::i a. Locations with specific characteristics identified as critical intersections: LOS E • (ICU to not exceed 1.00) b. Principal Intersections: LOS D (0.81-0.90 ICU) c. Secondary Intersections: LOS C(0.71-0.80 ICU) C. Monitor the capacity of principal intersections. When principal intersections approach or rx= � have reached unacceptable levels of service, consider elevating the priority of Capital Improvement Program (CIP) projects that reduce traffic congestion at these intersections. D. Require additional right-of-way and restrict parking on segments adjacent to principal intersections to allow for future intersection improvements and turning movements as ^' needed to satisfy performance standards. E. Maintain compliance with the OCTA Congestion Management Program or any subsequent x " replacement program. F. Require development projects to provide circulation improvements to achieve stated City goals and to mitigate to the maximum extent feasible traffic impacts to adjacent land uses and neighborhoods as well as vehicular conflicts related to the project. G. Limit driveway access points, require driveways to be wide enough to accommodate traffic flow from and to arterial roadways, and establish mechanisms to consolidate driveways where feasible and necessary to minimize impacts to the smooth, efficient,and controlled flow of vehicles, bicycles,and pedestrians. H. Protect residential neighborhoods from adverse conditions associated with cut-through and nonresidential traffic. I. Pursue technological innovations to ensure Huntington Beach has the best available traffic management systems. J. Investigate current jurisdictional control of roadways and determine where adjustments may be made in the future. tt Providing Adequate Downtown and Beach Parking Parking can be a challenge in Downtown throughout the year, but especially during the high tourist season and special events. Street parking and Downtown parking structures are the current primary parking options. While drivers circulate looking for available parking spaces, congestion increases. This congestion may diminish the visitor °•\ r experience. 3-30 `ht City of Huntington Beach General Plan (Adopted October 2, 2017) 225 Goal C/RC-2.Parking is easy for both residents and visitors to locate, and provided in sufficient quantity to handle peak parking times such as tourist season and special events. Policies r;�a . A. Provide enhanced wayfinding signs to direct users toward existing parking areas. { B. Evaluate options for increased parking in Downtown and beach areas and determine the best method to accommodate future parking demand. Off-site parking locations in tandem with parking shuttles should be investigated as part of this strategy. C. Establish a parking management program and require that new development projects 'E supply parking that supports anticipated demands. D. Allow for shared parking and other creative parking arrangements that optimize available parking areas, and support and collaborate with property owners to manage the available parking supply. Identify rideshare service opportunities that could reduce parking demand, '641 where feasible. Enhancing Regional Transit Enhancing regional transit connections would improve access and mobility for residents and visitors and could reduce vehicle miles traveled, traffic congestion, and parkingf;t limitations in the community. I� Goal CIRC-3a. Convenient and efficient connections between regional transit and areas of employment shopping,recreation,and housing will increase ridership and active mobility, with a focus on first/last mile solutions. .- Goal CIRC-3b. The City is positioned to expand transit, through a long-range 4 & Ak strategythat allows the Cityto carryout transportationgoals as fundingand P „ infrastructure are feasible. 4�2 Policies . A. Pursue an urban transit system that serves Huntington Beach, and evaluate local and �� regional transit service to identifyareas of opportunity for existingregional transit linkages. 9 PP Y 9 9 �• _ B. Ensure that local transit is reliable and safe,and provides high-quality service to and from regional transit and destination areas. C. Use the best available transit technology to streamline and link destinations and improve rider convenience and safety. D. Require new projects to contribute to the transit and/or active transportation network in ' CJ, proportion to their expected traffic generation. i,.,7r41.4 City of Huntington Beach General Plan (Adopted October 2, 2017) ,1� 3-31 226 rE E. Include or promote multimodal transit centers and stops that allow for seamless . }' connections between regional and local transit systems, pedestrian and bicycle networks, " � and commercial and employment centers. F. Explore the possibility of locating a transportation center in or near Downtown. sue Increasing Local Transit Options Existing local bus service has been characterized as limited and slow. A negative perception of the transit system dissuades ridership, and current ridership levels do not warrant expanded routes or frequencies. Because driving remains the preferred travel mode for most residents and visitors, creating a successful local transit system will be challenging. Still, Huntington Beach can take steps to improve local transit conditions over the long term by incorporating transit amenities within local roadway improvements, preserving existing rail rights-of-way for future rail or trail use, and dedicating additional rail rights-of-way to form connections to the regional transit system. Goal C/RC-4. A balanced and integrated multimodal transportation system that , 9 P Y a s increases mass transit opportunities for Huntington Beach residents.Policies is A. Continue to reserve abandoned rail rights-of-way for future transportation uses such as transit and bicycle facilities. B. Increase bus lines and services along commute routes and connecting to regional transit such as ARTIC, in partnership with OCTA and LA Metro. $ C. Use roadway improvement projects as an opportunity to enhance transit amenities and options. D. Maintain a system of transit and paratransit services that assist seniors and persons with x disabilities. E. Provide alternative transportation options for residents and visitors to travel to Downtown. F. Increase ridership by providing attractive, comfortable, and convenient options for local transit. G. Ensure that construction and operation of heliports and helistops and construction or alteration of structures more than 200 feet above ground level fully comply with provisions of federal and state law, and with referral requirements of the Airport Land Use Commission. t . 3-32 `" City of Huntington Beach General Plan (Adopted October 2, 2017) 227 Ensuring Mobility Options for All Users Traditional circulation planning tends to focus on travel by cars,many times at the expense of other modes of transportation, such as walking, biking,train, and transit.The Circulation =64 PS Plan is intended to accommodate and encourage these other modes of travel. In addition to carrying traffic between destinations, streets are integral to neighborhoods and provide places for people to gather and recreate. The City's objective is to balance the many competing roles that streets play in the lives of residents, businesses,and visitors. Goal CIRC-5. The City's active transportation system integrates seamlessly with transit and vehicle circulation as part of a Complete Streets system. mar Policies b: A. Maximize use of transportation demand management strategies to reduce total vehicle ;: miles traveled and improve regional air quality. fry; B. Develop Complete Streets that create functional places meeting the needs of pedestrians, bicyclists, transit riders, wheelchair users, and motorists. Provide safe, accessible, and -� connected multimodal routes, especially along popular and arterial routes. C. Coordinate with neighboring jurisdictions to ensure that bicycle routes connect to and are consistent with routes in adjacent jurisdictions. D. Maintain and repair bicycle lanes and sidewalks as necessary to expand use and safety. E. Improve citywide awareness of pedestrian and bicycle safety. F. Include low-impact stormwater system design techniques in Complete Streets designs (i.e., natural stormwater retention basins, curb cuts to planter areas for stormwater management). G. Support alternative fuel vehicles where feasible. ;y Enhancing Bicycle, Pedestrian, Equestrian, and Waterway p . O tions The existing development pattern in Huntington Beach limits the ability in some areas of the city to commute via bicycle or by walking, and could result in limiting access to goods, services, schools, and parks and recreation resources. It is generally considered challenging and unpleasant to cross or travel along major roadways as a bicyclist or pedestrian. Enhancements to the roadway system through Complete Streets serve the needs of all users equally and can increase the viability of bicycling and walking for both commute and local service trips. At the same time, some portions of Huntington Beach (e.g., Downtown/Main Street) are dominated by pedestrians during the peak tourist jihS season and would benefit from improvements that balance the needs of other users. r City of Huntington Beach General Plan (Adopted October 2, 2017) 3-33 228 MI- Equestrians and boaters are also important circulation system users requiring access to CD facilities. Goal CIRC-6 Connected well-maintained and well-designed sidewalks, bike lanes. 1, equestrian paths, and waterways allow for both leisurely use and day-to-day required activities in a safe and efficient manner for all ages and abilities. Policies A. Provide pedestrian and bicycle routes that integrate with local and regional transit, connect destinations, and provide end-of-trip facilities. } B. Designate and improve pedestrian enhancement zones (PEZs)at appropriate locations. C. Require new commercial and residential projects to integrate with pedestrian and bicycle networks, and that necessary land area is provided for the infrastructure. D. Implement and operate appropriate traffic control devices to reduce conflicts between pedestrians, bicycles,and motor vehicles. A` • E. Ensure that bicycle and pedestrian facilities comply with accessibility provisions of the Americans with Disabilities Act. F. Increase bicycle parking in or near Downtown, near the beach, and throughout the planning area. Identify opportunities for a pilot bikesharing program in Downtown. G. Encourage the use of easements and/or rights-of-way along flood control channels, public `' utilities, railroads, and streets, for use by bicyclists and/or pedestrians, where safe and appropriate. H. Maintain an equestrian trail network that supports horse properties and local stables, and link trails to regional facilities that can be combined with hiking trails. I. Maintain navigable waterways in Huntington Harbour and Sunset Channel for both recreational and commuter use. Protecting Scenic Corridors Scenic corridors enhance the visibility and attractiveness of the community, and in some cases, provide visual access to the beach and ocean. Protecting the aesthetic appeal of these areas is an ongoing City priority. , . ..r3/4„ „, , ,,,,, r\s„ ,. m4 . ._. .-., \ 3-34 q', City of Huntington Beach General Plan (Adopted October 2, 2017) 229 Goal CIRC-7. Designated scenic corridors protect and enhance visual quality and . scenic views, + Policies1EI A. Establish and implement landscape and urban streetscape design themes for landscape corridors, minor urban scenic corridors, and major urban scenic corridors that create a distinct character for each, enhancing each corridor's surrounding land uses. B. Require that any bridges, culverts, drainage ditches, retaining walls, and other ancillary scenic and landscape corridor elements be compatible and architecturally consistent with � r surrounding development and established design guidelines, to the greatest extent , practicable. C. Require that slopes and earthen berms along scenic corridors be landscaped consistent with design objectives and standards. D. Provide landscaped medians and sidewalk treatments in accordance with City standards within major and primary arterial streets designated as landscape corridors, and continue to require the construction of landscaped medians and sidewalk treatments in new developments. E. Require that development projects adjacent to a designated scenic corridor include open spaces, plazas, gardens, and/or landscaping that enhance the corridor and create a buffer between the building site and the roadway. F. Continue to locate new and relocated utilities underground within scenic corridors to the greatest extent possible. All other utility features shall be placed and screened to minimize rp'' visibility. Providing for Alternative Fuel Vehicles and n rastructure Increasing the use of alternative fuels (e.g., natural gas, hydrogen, fuel cells)in traditional vehicles and increasing the use of electric vehicles represent important strategies to maintain mobility while reducing air pollution and greenhouse gas emissions. Goal CIRC-8. Planning and infrastructure support electric and alternative fuel vehicles through power or fueling stations and other means. Policies k'g A. Encourage inclusion of power stations and alternative fuels at traditional gas stations. <, B. Plan for conversion of all government fleet vehicles to alternative fuel or electricity. 7LL: City of Huntington Beach General Plan (Adopted October 2, 2017) L�. 3-35 230 Ensuring Access for Emergency Vehicles Ensuring the ability of the City's emergency services to respond to emergency situations 5 is crucial to the community's public safety.Congestion may impede the ability of the City's emergency services to respond in a timely manner. It is important to implement new devices and programs to improve the ability of emergency personnel and vehicles to respond to calls for assistance and direct residents during emergencies. Goal CIRC-9. The circulation system is prepared for emergency vehicle response by reducing congestion or other roadway- and traffic-related impediments which , can slow response times. - Policies A. Provide a circulation system that helps to meet emergency response time goals and incorporates technology infrastructure to clear intersections during emergency response events. B. Complete transportation improvements that assist in meeting the response goals for emergency services. C. Provide a system of primary, major, and secondary arterials that can be used for evacuating persons during emergencies or for ingress when emergency response units are needed. 6,. . ,k , 1131 4 ,J '4 kI 3-36 ' :'ri City of Huntington Beach General Plan (Adopted October 2, 2017) 231 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) June 22, 2020 May 24, 2021 Orange County Local Transportation Authority 550 South Main Street P.O. Box 14184 Orange, CA 92863-1584 Tel: (714) 560-6282 213669.10 232 Measure M2 Amendments 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. 3. June 22, 2020 • Temporarily changes the maintenance of effort requirements for fiscal year 2019-20 and fiscal year 2020-21 to assist local jurisdictions through the unprecedented period of uncertainty due to the economic impacts of the coronavirus pandemic. 4. May 24, 2021 • Extends temporary changes for maintenance of effort requirements for fiscal year 2020-21 into fiscal year 2021-22 to continue assisting local jurisdictions during the coronavirus pandemic. Transportation Investment Plan Amendments 1. November 9, 2012 • Reallocation of Funds within Freeway Program Between SR-91 and 1-405 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. 213669.10 233 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 5 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 7 Section 13. Request for Election 7 Section 14. Effect on Ordinance No. 2 8 Section 15. Severability 9 ATTACHMENT A— Renewed Measure M Transportation Investment Plan A-1 ATTACHMENT B - Allocation of Net Revenues Section I. Definitions B-1 213669.10 234 Section II. Requirements B-4 Section III. Requirements for Eligible Jurisdictions B-7 Section IV. Allocation of Net Revenues; General Provisions B-1 0 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 213669.10 235 1 Ordinance No. 3 2 Renewed Measure M Transportation Ordinance and Investment Plan 3 4 PREAMBLE 5 A. Pursuant to California Public Utilities Code Section 180050, the Orange 6 County Transportation Authority ("Authority") has been designated as the Orange County 7 Local Transportation Authority by the Orange County Board of Supervisors. 8 B. There has been adopted a countywide transportation expenditure plan, 9 referred to as the Orange County Transportation Investment Plan, dated July 24, 2006, 10 pursuant to California Public Utilities Code Section 180206 ("Plan"), which will be 11 administered by the Authority. 12 C. The Plan provides for needed countywide transportation facility and service 13 improvements which will be funded, in part, by a transactions and use tax of one-half of one 14 percent (1/2%). 15 D. Local Transportation Ordinance Number 2 ("Ordinance No. 2") funds 16 transportation facility and service improvements through a transactions and use tax of one- 17 half of one percent (1/2%) that will be imposed through March 31, 2011. 18 E. Ordinance No. 3 ("Ordinance") provides for the continuation of the existing 19 Ordinance No. 2 transactions and use tax of one-half of one percent (1/2%) for an 20 additional period of thirty (30) years to fund transportation facility and service 21 improvements. 22 SECTION 1. TITLE 23 The Ordinance shall be known and may be cited as the Renewed Measure M 24 Transportation Ordinance and Investment Plan. The word "Ordinance," as used in the 25 Ordinance, shall mean and include Attachment A entitled "Renewed Measure M 26 Transportation Investment Plan," Attachment B entitled "Allocation of Net Revenues," and 27 Attachment C entitled "Taxpayer Oversight Committee," which Attachments A, B and C are 28 attached hereto and incorporated by reference as if fully set forth herein. 213671.11 236 1 SECTION 2. SUMMARY 2 The Ordinance provides for the implementation of the Orange County Transportation 3 Investment Plan, which will result in countywide transportation improvements for freeways, 4 highways, local streets and roads, bus and rail transit, transportation-related water quality 5 ("Environmental Cleanup"), and transit services for seniors and disabled persons. These 6 needed improvements will be funded by the continuation of the one-half of one percent 7 (1/2%) transaction and use tax for a period of thirty years. The revenues shall be deposited 8 in a special fund and used solely for the identified improvements authorized by the 9 Ordinance. 10 SECTION 3. IMPOSITION OF RETAIL TRANSACTIONS AND USE TAX 11 Subject to approval by the electors, the Authority hereby imposes, in the 12 incorporated and unincorporated territories of Orange County ("County"), in accordance 13 with the provisions of Part 1.6 (commencing with Section 7251) of Division 2 of the 14 California Revenue and Taxation Code and Division 19 (commencing with Section 180000) 15 of the California Public Utilities Code, continuance of the existing retail transactions and 16 use tax at the rate of one-half of one percent (1/2%) commencing April 1, 2011, for a period 17 of thirty years. This tax shall be in addition to any other taxes authorized by law, including 18 any existing or future state or local sales tax or transactions and use tax. The imposition, 19 administration and collection of the tax shall be in accordance with all applicable statutes, 20 laws, rules and regulations prescribed and adopted by the State Board of Equalization. 21 SECTION 4. PURPOSES 22 All of the gross revenues generated from the transactions and use tax plus any 23 interest or other earnings thereon (collectively, "Revenues"), after the deduction for: (i) 24 amounts payable to the State Board of Equalization for the performance of functions 25 incidental to the administration and operation of the Ordinance, (ii) costs for the 26 administration of the Ordinance as provided herein, (iii) two percent (2%) of the Revenues 27 annually allocated for Environmental Cleanup and (iv) satisfaction of debt service 28 requirements of all bonds issued pursuant to the Ordinance that are not satisfied out of 2 213671.11 237 1 separate allocations, shall be defined as "Net Revenues" and shall be allocated solely for 2 the transportation purposes described in the Ordinance. 3 SECTION 5. BONDING AUTHORITY 4 "Pay as you go" financing is the preferred method of financing transportation 5 improvements and operations under the Ordinance. However, the Authority may use bond 6 financing as an alternative method if the scope of planned expenditures makes "pay as you 7 go" financing unfeasible. Following approval by the electors of the ballot proposition 8 authorizing imposition of the transactions and use tax and authorizing issuance of bonds 9 payable from the proceeds of the tax, bonds may be issued by the Authority pursuant to 10 Division 19 of the Public Utilities Code, at any time before, on, or after the imposition of 11 taxes, and from time to time, payable from the proceeds of the tax and secured by a pledge 12 of revenues from the proceeds of the tax, in order to finance and refinance improvements 13 authorized by the Ordinance. 14 SECTION 6. MAINTENANCE OF EFFORT REQUIREMENTS 15 It is the intent of the Legislature and the Authority that the Net Revenues allocated to 16 a jurisdiction pursuant to the Ordinance for street and road projects shall be used to 17 supplement existing local discretionary funds being used for transportation improvements. 18 Each jurisdiction is hereby required to annually maintain as a minimum no less than the 19 maintenance of effort amount of local discretionary funds required to be expended by the 20 jurisdiction for local street and road purposes pursuant to the current Ordinance No. 2 for 21 Fiscal Year 2010-2011. The maintenance of effort level for each jurisdiction as determined 22 through this process shall be adjusted effective July 1, 2014 and every three fiscal years 23 thereafter in an amount equal to the percentage change for the Construction Cost Index 24 compiled by Caltrans for the immediately preceding three calendar years, providing that 25 any percentage increase in the maintenance of effort level based on this adjustment shall 26 not exceed the percentage increase in the growth rate in the jurisdiction's general fund 27 revenues over the same time period. The Authority shall not allocate any Net Revenues to 28 any jurisdiction for any fiscal year until that jurisdiction has certified to the Authority that it 3 213671.11 238 1 has included in its budget for that fiscal year an amount of local discretionary funds for 2 streets and roads purposes at least equal to the level of its maintenance of effort 3 requirement. An annual independent audit may be conducted by the Authority to verify that 4 the maintenance of effort requirements are being met by the jurisdiction. Any Net 5 Revenues not allocated pursuant to the maintenance of effort requirement shall be 6 allocated to the remaining eligible jurisdictions according to the formula described in the 7 Ordinance. 8 In order to address the impacts of the novel coronavirus pandemic (commonly 9 referred to as COVID-19), for fiscal year (FY) 2019-20, jurisdictions shall comply with all 10 submittal requirements under the ordinance, including, but not limited to, those 11 requirements under Attachment B (III) - Requirements for Eligible Jurisdictions, but will not 12 be required to meet the required maintenance of effort (MOE) amount for that particular 13 jurisdiction for the FY 2019-20. For FY 2020-21 and FY 2021-22, jurisdictions shall be 14 required to comply with all submittal requirements under the ordinance, including, but not 15 limited to, those requirements under Attachment B (III) - Requirements for Eligible 16 Jurisdictions, but shall only be required to meet the MOE amount for that particular 17 jurisdiction for the FY at the same proportional share of streets and roads discretionary 18 expenditures to general fund revenues based upon the proportion of the FY 2020-21 MOE 19 benchmark to general fund revenues that were reported in their respective Comprehensive 20 Annual Financial Report for FY 2018-19. Jurisdictions are encouraged to use their best 21 efforts during FY 2019-20, FY 2020-21, and FY 2021-22 to meet original MOE levels. 22 SECTION 7. ADMINISTRATION 23 The Authority shall allocate Revenues to fund facilities, services and projects as 24 specified in the Ordinance, and shall administer the Ordinance consistent with the authority 25 cited. Revenues may be expended by the Authority for salaries, wages, benefits, and 26 overhead and for those services, including contractual services, necessary to carry out its 27 responsibilities pursuant to Division 19; however, in no case shall the Revenues expended 28 for salaries and benefits of Authority administrative staff exceed more than one percent 4 213671.11 239 1 (1%) of the Revenues in any year. The Authority shall use, to the extent possible, existing 2 state, regional and local transportation planning and programming data and expertise, and 3 may, as the law permits, contract with any public agency or private firm for services 4 necessary to carry out the purposes of the Ordinance. Expenses incurred by the Authority 5 for administrative staff and for project implementation, including contracting with public 6 agencies and private firms, shall be identified in the annual report prepared pursuant to 7 Section 10, subpart 8, of the Ordinance. 8 SECTION 8. ANNUAL APPROPRIATIONS LIMIT 9 The annual appropriations limit established pursuant to Article XIII. B. of the 10 California Constitution and Section 180202 of the Public Utilities Code shall be established 11 as $1,123 million for the 2006-07 fiscal year. The appropriations limit shall be subject to 12 adjustment as provided by law. All expenditures of the Revenues are subject to the 13 appropriations limit of the Authority. 14 SECTION 9. EFFECTIVE AND OPERATIVE DATES 15 The Ordinance shall be effective on November 8, 2006, if two thirds of the electors 16 vote on November 7, 2006, to approve the ballot measure authorizing the extension of the 17 imposition of the existing tax. The continuance of the imposition of the existing tax 18 authorized by Section 3 of the Ordinance shall be operative on April 1, 2011. 19 SECTION 10. SAFEGUARDS OF USE OF REVENUES 20 The following safeguards are hereby established to ensure strict adherence to the 21 limitations on the use of the Revenues: 22 1. A transportation special revenue fund (the "Local Transportation 23 Authority Special Revenue Fund") shall be established to maintain all Revenues. 24 2. The County of Orange Auditor-Controller ("Auditor-Controller"), in the 25 capacity as Chair of the Taxpayer Oversight Committee, shall annually certify whether the 26 Revenues have been spent in compliance with the Ordinance. 27 3. Receipt, maintenance and expenditure of Net Revenues shall be 28 distinguishable in each jurisdiction's accounting records from other funding sources, and 5 213671.11 240 1 expenditures of Net Revenues shall be distinguishable by program or project. Interest 2 earned on Net Revenues allocated pursuant to the Ordinance shall be expended only for 3 those purposes for which the Net Revenues were allocated. 4 4. No Net Revenues shall be used by a jurisdiction for other than 5 transportation purposes authorized by the Ordinance. Any jurisdiction which violates this 6 provision must fully reimburse the Authority for the Net Revenues misspent and shall be 7 deemed ineligible to receive Net Revenues for a period of five (5) years. 8 5. A Taxpayer Oversight Committee ("Committee") shall be established to 9 provide an enhanced level of accountability for expenditure of Revenues under the 10 Ordinance. The Committee will help to ensure that all voter mandates are carried out as 11 required. The roles and responsibilities of the Committee, the selection process for 12 Committee members and related administrative procedures shall be carried out as 13 described in Attachment C. 14 6. A performance assessment shall be conducted at least once every 15 three years to evaluate the efficiency, effectiveness, economy and program results of the 16 Authority in satisfying the provisions and requirements of the Investment Summary of the 17 Plan, the Plan and the Ordinance. A copy of the performance assessment shall be 18 provided to the Committee. 19 7. Quarterly status reports regarding the major projects detailed in the 20 Plan shall be brought before the Authority in public meetings. 21 8. Annually the Authority shall publish a report on how all Revenues have 22 been spent and on progress in implementing projects in the Plan, and shall publicly report 23 on the findings. 24 SECTION 11. TEN-YEAR COMPREHENSIVE PROGRAM REVIEW 25 At least every ten years the Authority shall conduct a comprehensive review of all 26 projects and programs implemented under the Plan to evaluate the performance of the 27 overall program and may revise the Plan to improve its performance. The review shall 28 include consideration of changes to local, state and federal transportation plans and 6 213671.11 241 1 policies; changes in land use, travel and growth projections; changes in project cost 2 estimates and revenue projections; right-of-way constraints and other project constraints; 3 level of public support for the Plan; and the progress of the Authority and jurisdictions in 4 implementing the Plan. The Authority may amend the Plan based on its comprehensive 5 review, subject to the requirements of Section 12. 6 SECTION 12. AMENDMENTS 7 The Authority may amend the Ordinance, including the Plan, to provide for the use 8 of additional federal, state and local funds, to account for unexpected revenues, or to take 9 into consideration unforeseen circumstances. The Authority shall notify the board of 10 supervisors and the city council of each city in the county and provide them with a copy of 11 the proposed amendments, and shall hold a public hearing on proposed amendments prior 12 to adoption, which shall require approval by a vote of not less than two thirds of the 13 Authority Board of Directors. Amendments shall become effective forty five days after 14 adoption. No amendment to the Plan which eliminates a program or project specified on 15 Page 31 of the Plan shall be adopted unless the Authority Board of Directors adopts a 16 finding that the transportation purpose of the program or project to be eliminated will be 17 satisfied by a different program or project. No amendment to the Plan which changes the 18 funding categories, programs or projects identified on page 31 of the Plan shall be adopted 19 unless the amendment to the Plan is first approved by a vote of not less than two thirds of 20 the Committee. In addition, any proposed change in allocations among the four major 21 funding categories of freeway projects, street and road projects, transit projects and 22 Environmental Cleanup projects identified on page 31 of the Plan, or any proposed change 23 of the Net Revenues allocated pursuant to Section IV C 3 of Attachment B for the Local 24 Fair Share Program portion of the Streets and Roads Projects funding category, shall be 25 approved by a simple majority vote of the electors before going into effect. 26 SECTION 13. REQUEST FOR ELECTION 27 Pursuant to California Public Utilities Code Section 180201, the Authority hereby 28 requests that the County of Orange Board of Supervisors call a special election to be 7 213671.11 242 1 conducted by the County of Orange on November 7, 2006, to place the Ordinance before 2 the electors. To avoid any misunderstanding or confusion by Orange County electors, the 3 Authority requests that the Ordinance be identified as "Measure M" on the ballot. The ballot 4 language for the measure shall contain a summary of the projects and programs in the Plan 5 and shall read substantially as follows: 6 "Measure "M," Orange County Transportation Improvement Plan 7 Shall the ordinance continuing Measure M, Orange County's half-cent sales tax for 8 transportation improvements, for an additional 30 years with limited bonding authority to fund the following projects: 9 * relieve congestion on the 1-5, 1-405, 22, 55, 57 and 91 freeways; 10 11 * fix potholes and resurface streets; 12 * expand Metrolink rail and connect it to local communities; 13 * provide transit services, at reduced rates, for seniors and disabled persons; 14 * synchronize traffic lights in every community; 15 * reduce air and water pollution, and protect local beaches by cleaning up oil runoff from roadways; 16 and establish the following taxpayer protections to ensure the funds are spent as directed 17 by the voters: 18 * require an independent Taxpayer Oversight Committee to review yearly audits to 19 ensure that voter mandates are met; 20 * publish an annual report to the taxpayers on how all funds are spent; and 21 * update the transportation improvement plan every 10 years; with voter approval 22 required for major changes; 23 be adopted for the purpose of relieving traffic congestion in Orange County?" 24 SECTION 14. EFFECT ON ORDINANCE NO. 2 25 The Ordinance is not intended to modify, repeal or alter the provisions of Ordinance 26 No. 2, and shall not be read to supersede Ordinance No. 2. The provisions of the 27 Ordinance shall apply solely to the transactions and use tax adopted herein. If the 28 Ordinance is not approved by the electors of the County, the provisions of Ordinance No. 2 8 213671.11 243 1 and all powers, duties, and actions taken thereunder shall remain in full force and effect. 2 SECTION 15. SEVERABILITY 3 If any section, subsection, part, clause or phrase of the Ordinance is for any reason 4. held invalid, unenforceable or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, that 5 holding shall not affect the validity or enforceability of the remaining funds or provisions of 6 the Ordinance, and the Authority declares that it would have passed each part of the 7 /// 8 /// 9 /// 10 /// 11 /// 12 /// 13 /// 14 /// 15 /// 16 /// 17 /// 18 /// 19 /// 20 /// 21 /// 22 /// 23 /// 24 /// 25 /// 26 /// 27 /// 28 /// 9 213671.11 244 1 Ordinance irrespective of the validity of any other part. 2 APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the Orange County Local Transportation Authority 3 on the f-f day of ( )4/, .,�, _. , 2006. 4 0 5 By: Arthur C. Brown, Chairman 6 Orange County Local Transportation Authority 7 ATTEST: 8 .)11-Lif endy Kno les, Clerk of the Board 10 Orange County Local Transportation Authority • 11 12 13 . . 14 15 16 17 18 • 19 20 21 22 • 23 24 25 26 • 27 28 • 10 213671.11 245 4 i If lgi LEI ATTACHMENT A R! N! WED M! ASURE Tr 11; ns C1' ortation Inv A __,,turihenti Plan Approved by voters on November 7, 2006 /10;• , , : „.1,..", .\\:„.„.....„...„..,.„,°,... 4 . a � ;fit ern. :'. t As amended on December 14, 2015 ORANGE COUNTY LOCAL TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY 550 South Main Street P.O. Box 14184 Orange, CA 92863-1584 (714) 560-5066 www.octa.net El _ 246 ,{!, °1 Table of Contents Introduction 2 Overview 3 Freeway Projects Overview 5 Orange County Freeway Projects Map 6 1-5 Santa Ana Freeway Interchange Improvements 7 1-5 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 1-405 San Diego Freeway Improvements 13 1-605 Freeway Access Improvements 15 All Freeway Service Patrol 15 Streets & Roads Projects Overview 16 Orange County Streets and Roads Projects Map 17 Regional Capacity Program 18 Regional Traffic Signal Synchronization Program ,..........................._..._........._.19 Local Fair Share Program ......................__.........._..._.._......._....._............_..,.._........20 Transit Projects Overview ......................................................................................................................21 Orange County Transit Projects Map....._...... ....................................................22 High Frequency Metrolink Service 23 Transit Extensions to Metrolink 23 Metrolink Gateways 24 Expand Mobility Choices for Seniors and Persons with Disabilities............24 Community Based Transit/Circulators 25 Safe Transit Stops 25 Environmental Cleanup Overview 26 ProjectDescription _..................._................................................................:...........27 Taxpayer Safeguards and Audits Overview ............................_...................................................................................28 Description 29 Measure M Investment Summary 31 248 . a a Introduction 4 , ,,,,,,.,--::::?,;‘3,,,,:i Measure M Promises Fulfilled improve Orange County's freeway system; On November 6, 1990, Orange County voters commitment to maintaining and improving the approved Measure M, a half-cent local transportation network of streets and roads in every community; sales tax for twenty years.All of the major projects an expansion of Metrolink rail service through the promised to and approved by the voters are core of Orange County with future extensions to underway or complete. Funds that go to cities and connect with nearby communities and regional the County of Orange to maintain and improve rail systems;more transit service for seniors and local street and roads, along with transit fare disabled persons; and funds to clean up runoff reductions for seniors and persons with disabilities, from roads that leads to beach closures. will continue until Measure M ends in 2011. The promises made in Measure M have been fulfilled. Strong Safeguards These commitments are underscored by a set of Continued Investment Needed strong taxpayer safeguards to ensure that promises Orange County continues to grow By the year 2030, made in the Plan are kept. They include an annual Orange County's population will increase by 24 independent audit and report to the taxpayers; percent from 2.9 million in 2000 to 3.6 million in ongoing monitoring and review of spending by 2030;jobs will increase by 27 percent; and travel an independent Taxpayer Oversight Committee; on our roads and highways by 39 percent.Without requirement for full public review and update of continued investment average morning rush hour the Plan every ten years;voter approval for any speeds on Orange County freeways will fall by major changes to the Plan; strong penalties for 31 percent and on major streets by 32 percent. • any misuse of funds and a strict limit of no more than one percent for administrative expenses. Responding to this continued growth and broad support for investment in Orange County's No Increase in Taxes transportation system, the Orange County The traffic improvements detailed in this plan do Transportation Authority considered the not require an increase in taxes. Renewal of the transportation projects and programs that would be existing Measure M one-half cent transportation possible if Measure M were renewed. The Authority, sales tax will enable all of the projects and together with the 34 cities of Orange County, the programs to be implemented.And by using good Orange County Board of Supervisors and thousands planning and sensible financing, projects that of Orange County citizens,participated during the are ready to go could begin as early as 2007. last eighteen months in developing a Transportation Investment Plan for consideration by the voters. Renewing Measure M The projects and programs that follow constitute A Plan for New Transportation Investments the Transportation Investment Plan for the The Plan that follows is a result of those efforts. It renewal of the Measure M transportation sales tax reflects the varied interests and priorities inherent approved by Orange County voters in November in the diverse communities of Orange County. It of 1990. These improvements are necessary to includes continued investment to expand and address current and future transportation needs in Orange County and reflect the best efforts to achieve consensus among varied interests ,�4EO and communities throughout the County. 249 7;:.iiZtlr--::;it't'-'7r'T.F:';.::N°Y-Zr4 I) ' 4.?..7",1 '° Overview '''.--,P,.:::,:,.'t;7!':<:1*:';:: 4 =5' "r A','''S%-:,!..'111, ‘,.. , 1 m5 ' g +'F ", yy�, s The Renewed Measure M Transportation Investment Freeways Plan is a 30-year, $11.8 billion program designed to Relieving congestion on the Riverside/Artesia reduce traffic congestion,strengthen our economy Freeway(SR-91) is the centerpiece of the freeway and improve our quality of life by upgrading program, and will include new lanes,new key freeways, fixing major freeway interchanges, interchanges, and new bridges. Other major projects maintaining streets and roads,synchronizing traffic will make substantial improvements on Interstate signals countywide,building a visionary rail transit 5 (I-5)in southern Orange County and the San system, and protecting our environment from the oily Diego Freeway(I-405) in western Orange County. street runoff that pollutes Orange County beaches. The notorious Orange Crush—the intersection of The Transportation Investment Plan is focused solely the I-5, the Garden Grove Freeway(SR-22) and the on improving the transportation system and includes Orange Freeway(SR-57)near Angel Stadium—will tough taxpayer safeguards,including a Taxpayer be improved and upgraded. Under the Plan,major Oversight Committee,required annual audits, traffic chokepoints on almost every Orange County and regular, public reports on project progress. freeway will be remedied. Improving Orange County freeways will be the greatest investment The Renewed Measure M Transportation Investment in the Renewed Measure M program: Forty- Plan must be reviewed annually,in public session, three percent of net revenues, or$4.871 billion, and every ten years a detailed review of the Plan will be invested in new freeway construction. must take place. If changing circumstances require the voter-approved plan to be changed, those Streets and Roads changes must be taken to the voters for approval. More than 6,500 lane miles of aging streets and roads will need repair, rejuvenation and improvement. City streets and county roads need to be maintained regularly and potholes have to be filled quickly. Thirty-two percent of net revenue from the Renewed 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. OD 250 4 D ,,.:1!,;..„ .„1, ,, , , ,,: AlKtk:;-: , ,. 4,,ffi:, p. � S Y 1M A �ii'. w'f t ,g__ r r b3 t '' l R` Public Transit program, or$118.6 million over 30 years,will As Orange County continues to grow,building a pay for annual,independent audits, taxpayer visionary rail transportation system that is safe, safeguards, an independent Taxpayer Oversight clean and convenient,uses and preserves existing Committee assigned to watchdog government rights-of-way, and, over time,provides high-speed spending, and a full,public disclosure of all Renewed connections both inside and outside of Orange Measure M expenditures.A detailed review of the County,is a long term goal. Twenty-five percent program must be conducted every ten years and, of the net revenue from Renewed Measure M, or if needed,major changes in the investment plan $2.83 billion,will be dedicated to transit programs must be brought before Orange County voters for countywide.About twenty percent, or$2.24 billion, approval. Taxpayers will receive an annual report will be dedicated to creating a new countywide detailing the Renewed Measure M expenditures. high capacity transit system anchored on the Additionally, as required by law, an estimated one existing, successful Metrolink and Amtrak rail line, and a half percent of the sales taxes generated, or and about five percent, or$591 million,will be $178 million over 30 years,must be paid to the used to enhance senior transportation programs California State Board of Equalization for collecting and provide targeted,safe localized bus service. the one-half cent sales tax that funds the Renewed Measure M Transportation Investment Plan. Environmental Cleanup Every day,more than 70 million gallons of oily In this pamphlet, every specific project,program, pollution,litter,and dirty contaminants wash off and safeguard included in the Renewed Measure streets,roads, and freeways and pour onto Orange M Transportation Investment Plan is explained. County waterways and beaches.When it rains,the Similar details will be provided to every Orange transportation-generated beach and ocean pollution. County voter if the measure is placed on the ballot. increases tenfold. Under the plan,two percent of the gross Renewed Measure M Transportation Investment Plan, or$237 million,will be dedicated to protecting Orange County beaches from this transportation-generated pollution(sometimes called "urban runoff')while improving ocean water quality. Taxpayer Safeguards and Audits When new transportation dollars are approved, they should go for transportation and transportation purposes alone. No bait-and-switch. No using transportation dollars for other purposes. The original Measure M went solely for transportation purposes. The Renewed Measure M must be just as airtight. One percent of the gross Measure M so 251 tD „ 47,,,t-,,,..1 . %,,14-4.ittte.„3..., ��� --,--:... Freeway Projects Overview „,!;,1::)...t1:4,:t..,v,;,:ve , „k,4....,.1,,,i,i:L,,,k.,,zt , ., „ : 4 ,.„ 4,,,4 , ,,, r. Every day, traffic backs up somewhere on the near Angel Stadium—is in need of a major face lift. Orange County freeway system. And, every day, And the intersection of Interstate 5 and the Costa freeway traffic seems to get a little worse. Mesa Freeway(SR-55)is also slated for major repair. In the past decade, Orange County has made major Pays Big Dividends strides in re-building our aging freeway system. Local investment in freeways also pays big dividends But there is still an enormous amount of work in the search for other needed freeway dollars. that needs to be done to make the freeway system Because of state and federal matching rules, Orange work well.You see the need for improvement every County's local investment in freeway projects acts time you drive on an Orange County freeway. as a magnet for state and federal transportation dollars—pulling more freeway construction Forty-three percent of net revenues from the dollars into the county and allowing more traffic- Renewed Measure M Transportation Investment Plan reducing freeway projects to be built sooner. is dedicated to improving Orange County freeways, the largest portion of the 30-year transportation plan. Innovative Environmental Mitigation A minimum of$243.5 million will be available, SR-91 is the Centerpiece subject to a Master Agreement, to provide for Making the troubled Riverside/Artesia Freeway comprehensive, rather than piecemeal,mitigation of (SR-91)work again is the centerpiece of the the environmental impacts of freeway improvements. Renewed Measure M Freeway program. The fix Using a proactive,innovative approach, the on the SR-91 will require new lanes,new bridges, Master Agreement negotiated between the Orange new overpasses, and, in the Santa Ana Canyon County Local Transportation Authority and portion of the freeway,a diversion of drivers to the state and federal resource agencies will provide Foothill Corridor (SR-241) so the rest of the Orange higher-value environmental benefits such as County freeway system can work more effectively habitat protection,wildlife corridors and resource preservation in exchange for streamlined project And there's more to the freeway program than the approvals for the freeway program as a whole. fix of SR-91—much more. More than$1 billion is earmarked for Interstate 5 in South County. Freeway projects will also be planned, designed More than $800 million is slated to upgrade the and constructed with consideration for their San Diego Freeway(I-405)between Irvine and aesthetic,historic and environmental impacts the Los Angeles County line.Another significant on nearby properties and communities using investment is planned on the congested Costa such elements as parkway style designs,locally Mesa Freeway(SR-55).And needed projects native landscaping, sound reduction and aesthetic designed to relieve traffic chokepoints are planned treatments that complement the surroundings. 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 �14.4i ` 252 E9Z /�,� 1 g a6od (paddow��u)Ioa}nd a3lnaaS�(annaa�y L'_/ p�,a6od (Ls 21S)ADMaa14 a6ua.ip O (paddaw:you)' 6 a6od (gg�s}.�toMaaa j osay� o sod, S6 a6ad (gpg•1}s�uawaaoadwl ssa»d AOMaalj 0 b.a6od, (Zl-is)AQMeau,anoJ9 uapao9 j��'£� a6od (S0t I}AQMaa�j oSei UDS O© H 2�D"d C5`I}ADMaa� o6eIQ ups/AoMDail DUd DlU1�S Oi ZC a6od (f 6 21S}.ICpMaaa� apls�anlb 0 g a6nd (S-I}A'oMaaa j o6aiQ.uoS/AoMeal j DUd DI 0 �,� a6bd (1.6-as)ADM8ei apls�anl� O®` L a.6'od (`g•I}�(aMaa�j oud a}uo QO ,_ i tt"' ' .4:?Q‘:;:f'::'''''',':4,' '::E'.:',4iii'Ll?'2'iliAr:.„,.,, J 1:. , n ' iliiitifi..mitilit..:044iNitosi ito. :'-:.1'.3,4,A',;1:4::::.A;:.:76:-'ittflti044.4.to.,.!-,,:,1,'"',„17'',.,',„,. ' \.,4r --, „„,, ..,: --.. -. . .. NI' . . - - „.„._.,,.' .--ti,. .',) „...A-....,,, ,,‘„,2„4„4„;$417777..,i- otti)tatfitc ,, ,e,.1.4,,,t,44:17,1tif ,.7. ":,‘,7,1' ,,,,..\ , ; ,,,- ' ,f- :'' , '' '''.c, „riw,,,,, ...- ,, _It* .'.4,2,-2 O4...;\N-"''\.*.-'E..!..':1„,c,°.'',j','-'-':-.' lk x i'' e - - `, Y s}�a�oad AOMOOAA A;uno3 a6uaap 9 . ,,,tee.- ' -- ry' Freeway Projects �' 4. ��" - Santa Ana Freeway (1-5) \ Interchange Improvements -I Project Project C) Santa Ana Freeway(1-5) Improvements Santa Ana Freeway(I-5) Improvements from the between Costa Mesa Freeway(SR-55) Costa Mesa Freeway(SR-55) to El Toro "Y"Area and "Orange Crush"Area (SR-57) Description: Description: Build new lanes and improve the interchanges Reduce freeway congestion through improvements in the area between SR-55 and the SR-133 (near at the SR-55/I-5 interchange area between the Fourth the El Toro "Y"). This segment of I-5 is the major Street and Newport Boulevard ramps on 1-5, and route serving activity areas in the cities of Irvine, between Fourth Street and Edinger Avenue on Tustin, Santa Ana and north Orange County. The SR-55. Also, add capacity on I-5 between SR-55 and project will also make improvements at local SR-57 to relieve congestion at the "Orange Crush". interchanges,such as Jamboree Road. The project The project will generally be constructed within the will generally be constructed within the existing existing right-of-way. Specific improvements will be right-of-way. Specific improvements will be subject subject to approved plans developed in cooperation to approved plans developed in cooperation with with local jurisdictions and affected communities. local jurisdictions and affected communities. The project will increase freeway capacity and reduce The project will increase freeway capacity and congestion. The current daily traffic volume on this reduce congestion. The current traffic volume segment of the 1-5 between SR-55 and SR-57 is about on this segment of I-5 is about 356,000 vehicles 389,000. The demand is expected to grow by more per day and is expected to increase by nearly 24 than 19 percent by 2030,bringing the daily usage to percent,bringing it up to 440,000 vehicles per 464,000 vehicles per day. Regional plans also include day. In addition to the projects described above, additional improvements on I-5 from the"Orange regional plans include additional improvements Crush" to SR-91 using federal and state funds. to this freeway at local interchanges,such as Culver Drive,using federal and state funds. Cost: The estimated cost to improve this Cost: section of the 1-5 is $470.0 million. The estimated cost to improve this section of 1-5 is $300.2 million. 41 s ?t t , s va *r�"N "� bi g" re r�1. ia,Nt* 4 ��. -49 � �°14: 0'� ,, ' . ,:r, � m }r r +"�a 'a se , ti a yr+ iw Mr a mi rr s, r u' t s" a pws 4 ® r: 4V. w s ? � z a a *T g,[` � s, � d n m a i ,v '-te:L , r' fix a p g -O f i iligi .I " .N ,` € « 9t- �°d^ T, Y ' r g rmfl i- V ,mg 5r? ° :' w,id4 w e e ,,, " m0,0 a q.r s: N6 _ ,i," i . r ;1 ,, e a -, r ki- ,i °.,Agiir r, 1* .$_ ,, i„ y s -, '''',. .:1S4,77.4,4i-,,4114.14.•,;:oty.:7-z10110,°0.t. .4,....:,„„,„,,,,,,,,,,,„,.:,., - 1.•,:-..i.,„':.14,:kr:.:?‹,q,,,,,,,,,-.,,,,,,,),i,,,i,v4..17,ff.7.,,-.11,-1, ::.,;-Y'',-",.„ ' • ., v,, ,� ,g . .; .q �'.,t,�:i,, , ,IN aa'a1,ic$,,..'f„i., iW �','" ..a-- -i:... ,,x f r zr !°.s 4OS - a k w3 r,: r...rt 254 , I K Freeway Projects -; w . Santa Ana Freeway/San Diego Freeway (1-5) r r if - ` "' . Project® Project 0 San Diego Freeway(1-5) Improvements Santa Ana Freeway/San Diego Freeway(1-5) South of the El Toro "Y" Local Interchange Upgrades Description: Description: Add new lanes to I-5 from the vicinity of the El Toro Update and improve key I-5 interchanges such Interchange in Lake Forest to the vicinity of SR-73 as Avenida Pico, Ortega Highway,Avery Parkway, in Mission Viejo.Also add new lanes on I-5 between La Paz Road,El Toro Road, and others to relieve Coast Highway and Avenida Pico interchanges to street congestion around older interchanges and reduce freeway congestion in San Clemente. The on ramps. Specific improvements will be subject project will also make major improvements at local to approved plans developed in cooperation with interchanges as listed in Project D. The project local jurisdictions and affected communities. will generally be constructed within the existing right-of-way. Specific improvements will be subject In addition to the project described above, to approved plans developed in cooperation with regional plans also include improvements to local jurisdictions and affected communities. the local interchanges at Camino Capistrano, Oso Parkway,Alicia Parkway and Barranca The project will increase freeway capacity and Parkway using federal and state funds. reduce congestion. Current traffic volume on I-5 near the El Toro "Y"is about 342,000 vehicles per Cost: day. This volume will increase in the future by 35 The estimated cost for the I-5 local percent,bringing it up to 460,000 vehicles per interchange upgrades is $258.0 million. day. Regional plans also include construction of a new freewayaccess point between Crown Valleyr 1' , . ' r` `'= Parkway and Avery Parkway as well as new off ramps K: ., ;o ,"% 6 ''� "' at Stonehill Drive using federal and state funds. �..:Q 1Sj, Cost: 1�73! o Air The estimated cost to improve these .. segments of I-5 is $627.0 million. Lagu,p` eit. ,:"Nigu. fig"? ' r l'j ja a ,--� c• g i ; e Juan 7.7. .; td91 P `a, Nigtuel �1 .n tTavt. cm, E.; Dana Point • -- "\'., San Clemente '`\ , Dana Point 255 , � Freeway Projects ..�-�' g Garden Grove Freeway (SR-22) . :, � SFr' Costa Mesa Freeway (SR-55) : , o , - - ' . • Project E� Project Garden Grove Freeway(SR-22) Costa Mesa Freeway(SR-55) Improvements Access Improvements Description: Description: Add new lanes to SR-55 between Garden Grove Construct interchange improvements at Euclid Freeway(SR-22) and the San Diego Freeway Street,Brookhurst Street and Harbor Boulevard (I 405), generally within existing right of way, to reduce freeway and street congestion near these including merging lanes between interchanges to interchanges. Specific improvements will be subject smooth traffic flow This project also provides for to approved plans developed in cooperation with freeway operational improvements for the portion local jurisdictions and affected communities. of between d project willSR-55 generally be constructeSR-91and withinSR-22.theThe existing Regional plans also include the construction of right of way. Specific improvements will be subject new freeway-to-freeway carpool ramps to the to approved plans developed in cooperation with SR-22/I-405 interchange, and improvements to local jurisdictions and affected communities. the local interchange at Magnolia Avenue using federal and state funds. The project will increase freeway capacity and reduce congestion. This freeway carries about 295,000 Cost: vehicles on a daily basis. This volume is expected The estimated cost to improve the to increase by nearly 13 percent,bringing it up to . SR-22 interchanges is $120.0 million. 332,000 vehicles per day in the future. In addition to the projects described above, regional plans also include a new street overcrossing and carpool ramps at Alton Avenue using federal and state funds. Cost: c S5 impTherovementsestimated isost$366.0forth million.eseR- 5 .i f s ' r4V:1 iiP ,"a�.li r m+i 's.-z a. �"M1L" a7on 1alak bra ,i u� .! `, ,-- -'. , kiir i A# `",-tom �+- ®^ - p ,s ^* `- m . a �, gj % # r °, s_ a i 5 L - Af:v ,r #t `-rns p. .4„ a-a. Eb+ 'd .Y !� d � '' CGC®B s: �S r die'(N�i ., .. ,ter "'`YP cs ""a"" - 4 1!* is s�.s d �*` 1 �, ,w f s, "• ,Ac rt y'eel, F 'doh ,ic' ',:f -i 441, t i� V �ia '1. 4A ,:�P k' s" h 4. rb 6 't e 0" ''sia # a9":.,':t''x '{ G w i rrcut�r" .` .,5,»xx <, )4M '44''',a - � i �.-..:5,n',',4 t #' ",3' dim .T > e dF v` iri, '��d +%,..: ��*i�_.: r A�„ -,t���^,� � �15����g.�'�{�,"��� `"sLi t�ICI o„k,7 yi 441 .0' � ems-.LIENe - i - .- s" .� -, I.. P ,, n . �r * s= - +. — -_ -T..ARR wpm .a i 4"y i`' ,x 44-'`7'474,, ` ;� . ,-�r � , �„� '�°w, mac, i 3,�ta� a ,�� �� �.s��w0 :.m E'�a"�" �t 'ee'��` �. `5'`£''s .`,.ice 7 � ''T: w ejw a _ .,r�*„ 3'S.�' w #»: '"'" f-;Z-V -a ' ; .dam s '�*-.s - cam. :. a s,k a @g e - ; ^# f t yy # r � 'Y"ti �' i� -�'� c ui w` �€�g�a-� 'a�c �,*} �'wit� pm: a° �� � =aw?a u`' I"�' `�`" a* ,:f .r 's' ;#�_ ` .yesq� °" ° 256 " ,... . Freeway Projects . ,, 4 .Orange Freeway (SR-57) r ma . ,;,. rah 1: IIx� : - ` - 3.0— ., , Project Orange Freeway(SR-57) Improvements Description: `t , c -t ; "x ;n;rs.' ." ''l asx'e�".- „':i �^, : P 4-i , i s Build a new northbound lane between Orangewood Avenue and Lambert Road. Other projects include k ii� �ri . eN.t ,, A ,� s. improvements to the Lambert interchange and *... { - -*ry" :W , :,� the addition of a northbound truck climbing '47 0 op t 4 ,, �, . lane between Lambert and Tonner Canyon v , `g- t, , - ,7' . , Road. The improvements will be designed and f- i` ' ' coordinated specifically to reduce congestion at / SR-5 7/SR-91 interchange. These improvements i li t c o f�� # , will be made generally within existing right-of- . tfit* � way. Specific improvements will be subject to * t: � approved plans developed in cooperation with ' + ® �� ��i- local jurisdictions and affected communities. "' 1 = ' .i Alamo tea s ;` The project will increase freeway capacity and reduce �t e- ; .e � congestion. The daily traffic volume on this freeway ,�`_ ,�� � ; , ; a ,� _, is about 315,000 vehicles. By 2030, this volume will 'G� i" f increase by 15 percent,bringing it up to 363,000 W� �2 $,; � ¢, - vehicles per day. In addition to the project described co !.74', ` above, regional plans include new carpool ramps ., � ., 1 at Cerritos Avenue using federal and state funds. cost: .. iDt ."".'" ^ €,:,,,,,'-'---,,,- ',,,Tom ,, The estimated cost to implement 4' t--)0 ` ` � :iv ,,1 SR-57 improvements is $258.7 million. �� ��" : k "� j • Fly -dZ,'3 . '" ,a &'1, �T 'F, -t:', `fsC1'"`(,^f fi '',Z!.. .."-., �,..,, �, 9�"',i a z .mom saw s :.!„ . �a' ` -x K 11 � „ .agagr 257 , . . ...„...„, , ,..-, , .', „,.,'-.-..„'.,e.m,.i.'„,„ —3,--.-,-3.*„.,,,,,,-.4.0.4-,,,,,,,,11.-.,... ,: .„,...,-;,--:„....,--: -z,:.!---", ,,„ ,,,,,." .. ,,' , , - -- (-77,„,-,„,,,r,::-.::„.,,,: ,,, , :,,,,,,„.i.,, ,,,,,....__.., , ,_ aA Freeway Projects • -"i' - '°` -' Riverside:,Freeway (SR-91) '' . t ` • }}' 4 'ta e Project ® Project Riverside Freeway(SR-91) Improvements Riverside Freeway(SR-91) Improvements from the Santa Ana Freeway(I-5)to from Orange Freeway(SR-57)to the Costa the Orange Freeway(SR-57) Mesa Freeway(SR-55) Interchange Area Description: Description: Add capacity in the westbound direction and provide Improve the SR-91/SR-55 to SR-91/SR-57 operational improvements at on and off ramps to interchange complex,including nearby local the SR-91 between 1-5 and the Orange Freeway interchanges such as Tustin Avenue and Lakeview, (SR-57), generally within existing right-of-way, to as well as adding freeway capacity between smooth traffic flow and relieve the SR-57/SR-91 SR-55 and SR-57. The project will generally interchange. Specific improvements will be subject be constructed within the existing right of- to approved plans developed in cooperation with way. Specific improvements will be subject to local jurisdictions and affected communities. approved plans developed in cooperation with local jurisdictions and affected communities. The current daily freeway volume along this segment of SR-91 is about 256,000. By 2030, Current freeway volume on this segment this volume is expected to increase by nearly 13 of the SR 91 is about 245,000 vehicles per percent,bringing it up to 289,900 vehicles per day. day. This vehicular demand is expected to increase by 22 percent,bringing it up to Cost: 300,000 vehicles per day in the future. The estimated cost for improvements in this segment of SR-91 is $140.0 million. Cost: The estimated cost for these improvements to the SR-91 is $416.5 million. ' wi i1" W r x ..*F '- ras ts**'#" r - i °a n" , ""' ;, }a o< . s.f t'''tig ar �sa�^ a a4' 5 "bwc 4 3 ?$ i. z i : :�k! m a tNr=^, s h a ae I ` -fix "t"& '"em w�u ' r x`,> A '',"4/ i p Q°H'c t i �.4 ia i „'' ,as ;. ° i �' ta, ,yOro . 'sr H� ¢'k ; ,, * .r . }1 ^ tl r -54.: a wl s s- n"$w,.si 4 k-„,,,, " Lit3 '' 't a `ay — r � k„ a z Fd� ` +mas 3 ® k. , L;z . "2 04 :h, 4 vit �� ;�P " D 4ro-K '* * ,r s K' r u - �e- Lr ig ;, u 'i ® ,,,'. `s *� .4- eh 4 ypt4y maaem k ,�`^:_ g v.��; �a �aM w" pv " �, g " ms �r - " fi t�. T" s %gene ii a +4 ° " ,:w 5 �p e ,:ii, . r_x Jua�l' ' ® .w ;r i wig - c 'I' R � � ��,-"� �,� �Z'�" ,3.+. = L, a t k"7 *4 i aa,, "+' -" 4 e r' g ,,--si `+r t r�p �e � "S M°12 A ' s#,a ® a 1 v .,ce`*klrl "erg ,„. 'i� '�-p�'.,? "3 yifi - '; 1, �^, t : 1- "F�'"t s a, '3' t " ,• a• �n ,, � � �— e �� �, � �* � � ,°'�� rw p��1 r � ���4 x ate � r �� � �- m +sn a wPaam" ." �� a €"-� ; :; `fihg �'_ U4 w:- r IhPF1 5r ''e , k,s.P�'� `"� ��°� ���,'�.i}� t '�� L�irtLs af ��4s a�,. Gx i• pi5�,� Via' ��'- . wr,' '�. f r -" A� :40 Ak , 3 s 4• _ s a4144_ `rk" ���4ED 258 Freeway Projects . Riverside Freeway (SR-91) 70, Project ] This project also includes improvements to the segment of SR-91 between SR-241 and SR-55. Riverside Freeway(SR-91) Improvements The concept is to generally add one new lane in from Costa Mesa Freeway(SR-55) to each direction and improve the interchanges. the Orange/ Riverside County Line Today, this freeway carries about 314,000 vehicles Description: every day. This volume is expected to increase by 36 This project adds capacity on SR-91 beginning at percent,bringing it up to 426,000 vehicles by 2030. SR-55 and extending to I-15 in Riverside County. Cost: The first priority will be to improve the segment The estimated cost for these improvements of SR-91 east of SR-241. The goal is to provide to the SR-91 is $352.0 million. up to four new lanes of capacity between SR-241 and Riverside County Line by making best use of available freeway property, adding reversible lanes,building elevated sections and improving connections to SR-241. These projects would be constructed in conjunction with similar coordinated improvements in Riverside County extending to 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. 4. tuba Lf nt?7 `t�1rX{« �Ii; a: 5 w : � �` sE to aN'aF� "� ,i"*-e rt Ivgm+v- 6 ^-� $; Y" n,..'„� ""a«,F'+a a .. ,gk kSSt"a ro = ,1� - .fin';•.:'E€ id. �{ rgs?" d r � � �� a '�' w ew -'ss a "" "'+�,,,' .oc41,414'e list4"4V.,,,ges,",;44,*;&40;14 . " 1.4 1„;,, , � -� ��x x � c i • rt � �Sr:.: � ? y� I. x£ n •�+ + y Cr'. dE0' , M ' Project cost estimate amended on Novembgs99, 2012. Freeway Projects San Diego Freeway (1-405) r Project K, (as adopted by the Orange County Transportation Authority Board of Directors on October 14, San Diego Freeway(1-405) Improvements 2005) and will be developed in cooperation with between the 1-605 Freeway in Los Alamitos local jurisdictions and affected communities. area and Costa Mesa Freeway(SR-55) Today, I-405 carries about 430,000 vehicles daily. Description: The volume is expected to increase by nearly 23 Add new lanes to the San Diego Freeway between percent,bringing it up to 528,000 vehicles daily 1-605 and SR-55, generally within the existing right- by 2030. The project will increase freeway capacity of-way. The project will make best use of available and reduce congestion. Near-term regional plans freeway property,update interchanges and widen also include the improvements to the I-405/SR-73 all local overcrossings according to city and regional interchange as well as a new carpool interchange master plans. The improvements will be coordinated at Bear Street using federal and state funds. with other planned 1-405 improvements in the I-405/SR-22/I-605 interchange area to the north Cost: and I-405/SR-73 improvements to the south. The The estimated cost for these improvements improvements will adhere to recommendations of to the I-405 is $1,072.8 million. the Interstate 405 Major Investment Study """'.-"" r°rn 4 N<x r ?« ..;�... a ,.,";r r3 kv __ e-'Fu". 4 * .ts... _ 5 c t .. !r Ili j Ci f a s;j'� m ii r '.-arn-4 -71.,w;�, +4 ,,c.: 'r .'�'-. 7,-,. l,;,a414.,Up i } �P�r .�'''' 4-- y i is d :i 't 94 ".. - G ':r1, .7" � .02:"k,E+5�'!ti�i 'a a>::+.�:u.t .w -7','. :5'ek. ' *3,41 .,a6 ��: r 1, ,,, : :a' r '. � ro a t e . +', rya ,r '� v� 4 t. ����' .� �� I r� Al, N �h� ..._r �+� 5�+,.r � � Ii tar #�,r� t!.£a� "�y'. �,�...' �-°�' „.�-"`.-��£ 1�� �B�r=? ��-�?"ry ,. �s� ''ir ������ �'� ���� k,.r�*��'?�,'9�"k��i�ika�� � ,.� �' �_ ti �.* k* 22 a '� 4 >�..,. 'ate* !!!!fi^r 1 ,.y -'3;' . '�" E. .'x - vw sue, s m r*r t ,� s �: t. ,*.Y r'. V.3 i^ „. '`S y' t µ K rmo ' 'Po ' it-- � yt a S �Y litt ' ` ,, wX . % --� I,t C5 t � .-1,i;. ` Y 7 . . m`i P Xk, � qi 1 ` A�K � tly +antari' .4„, , `w 1{t � v ' ' .'1 M� m k 4,1 r .. i�',I�'' r-?s "(w;�- ��X r `.. fir' �9 �iG-. u 'S :� a 4i ie �,d:€,, .— .. ,d� .'i .tea pp - G'rtyY„o,,, -0t i'ME Y ,. . S � ' .k' P''' ate i' �9b N�' I 9 2fr ' '1 qfi.J r ivar� f arms 4� r�P @�� `, 4 GG� F'w� �� t 4r{ 1 J�x CR���t -`�' • `��} � -t ��''via S � yk �� b a r+ �,r, -+ �.",. ,,s, p, � k '` � v rya * . " 5�a s ; �; ,ai .ate ," s S .' ' " • t it`Mraj_, y,. ea t. �Sa+ _ ,a [ o" _ $ # &, - . l,, .6T ' x . `r 4 ,- I . 'cap Project cost estimate amended on NovembQ6&,2012. . AllW'• Freeway Projects p17" as. ; A San Diego Freeway (1-405) Project® subject d pl developed io with local jurisdictionsapprove ans and affected communities.ncooperati n San Diego Freeway(1-405) Improvements between Costa Mesa Freeway This segment of the freeway carries 354eas,000 (SR-55) and Santa Ana Freeway(1-5) vehic day. This number will incre by nearly 13 percent,bringing it up to 401,000 Description: vehicles per day by 2030. The project will increase Add new lanes to the freeway from SR-55 to the freeway capacity and reduce congestion. In 1-5. The project will also improve chokepoints addition to the projects described above,regional at interchanges and add merging lanes near on/ plans include a new carpool interchange at Von off ramps such as Lake Forest Drive,Irvine Center Kaman Avenue using federal and state funds. Drive and SR-133 to improve the overall freeway operations in the I-405/1-5 El Toro "Y"area. The Cost: projects will generally be constructed within the The estimated cost for these improvements existing right-of-way. Specific improvements will be to the 1-405 is$319.7 million. <' j ky�,7 p{'bw "� a'fi • dh Any"'< t '' ' �` € �s 5+'£ ?� .,. -,-.r. J"• t7 d'9 1 1 , ,-77 7-7,7 ,,• i r a•.�..w.tt'' n+t i{`� x4, �p r+hq ," ;,-z"h • � w Iff e'er -. , �rq'"�"d'^'"`x • 2 P pd4"'k '` a' �a ate". ..<fi r y' i R S & m T 4 r'' : r� �' s�•� 4?� • { ��_ �'�,� '�e le' �r �� a � � '� � �"�5,� u� �*b.ry 4�.y"`�+i�v+``5� say,�"g�r«? )66 si i z t i 6 n .Y4'ik q b4 j 449,V2,0 o- -F n'xs - ._ c�.9 N E s ,�- ,4 's N " a >b J%r.;- ti. I4d'�, t ya ., "'3 f ,ti �, 4- t' r'�",V ''t'�V w�. _fidt't'• - -"e :`'�. n i�'� "'�` 41 n P a�'' x »�g <4,� ..*, a ``, 7 wit - a a* . '+" �,. -�' �'" k,;, � !1 nvtit� „""'="' } d k J ' rr�t��li iF'. -A r� ; �r' ��-�� .- ''�.-,;; � - �` �=� � '.'� �.�� e � Yee r�+ �b b� i�'�„w*� � � % a' z -z `r � 5" P `d e--G d nt 'l.n+F'7 .4n ' ,'. . n,� �,„ w-�dt Lai ��k'1 �.����,�,�"'��4 V tn�ih .�xz ��r.°� . f;F"� ✓ti'��'� ��*a, � �.� r� �.- . , ty-lz fir, r kA� s :`.4,,."• -n _ -t kw XW v9. box "`? .. ,�`- �+ _ >G `� • �a # 4't,;„1 uur�y ti' 1' �,,. `Lak -4 'k. 4' k V. 'tiny .$ ti 1 ' "N . -ti r.4.4410t72> 261 15 Freeways Projects 1-605 Freeway Access Improvements Freeway Service Patrol k`N a y •n C Project Q Project 0 1-605 Freeway Access Improvements Freeway Service Patrol Description: Description: Improve freeway access and arterial connection The Freeway Service Patrol (FSP)provides to I-605 serving the communities of Los Alamitos competitively bid, privately contracted tow and Cypress. The project will be coordinated with truck service for motorists with disabled vehicles other planned improvements along SR-22 and on the freeway system. This service helps I-405. Specific improvements will be subject to stranded motorists and quickly clears disabled approved plans developed in cooperation with vehicles out of the freeway lanes to minimize local jurisdictions and affected communities. congestion caused by vehicles blocking traffic and passing motorists rubbernecking. Regional plans also include the addition of new freeway-to-freeway carpool ramps to the I-405/ Currently Freeway Service Patrol is available on 1-605 interchange using federal and state funds. Orange County freeways Monday through Friday This improvement will connect to interchange during peak commuting hours. This project improvements at I-405 and SR-22 as well as would assure that this basic level of service new freeway lanes between I-405 and I-605. could be continued through 2041.As demand and congestion levels increase, this project Cost: would also permit service hours to be extended The estimated cost to make these 1-605 interchange throughout the day and into the weekend. improvements is $20.0 million. Cost: The estimated cost to support the Freeway Service Patrol Program for thirty years beyond 2011 is $150.0 million. M 262 / Ji1 ( , , ,:-.- a a,:::- ., .:, , „,,,'' % - ' ,,,,,,,,', ' ,,,;--_-:,?:,' „,-iiiaa,I -! '';',--' -,' :-,''':-.,,: , -- , , . - -------) ...-vi..ie.c,.a,„.,.;:„,:._,,.:.....,..._,,,,v_.., , , , 1;/',1:,1 4 :.,,,,,....),.. ..."vc.,,,i,::, ,_ 4 0 Streets and Roads xa� c ,' ,; cAg d Projects Overview0 ., Orange County has more than 6,500 lane miles Renewed Measure M provides financial incentives of aging streets and roads,many of which are in for traffic improvements that cross city and need of repair,rejuvenation and improvement. county lines,providing a seamless, county- Intersections need to be widened, traffic lights wide transportation system that's friendly to need to be synchronized, and potholes need to regional commuters and fair to local residents. be filled.And, in many cases, to make Orange County's transportation system work smoothly,we Better Cooperation need to add additional lanes to existing streets. To place a higher priority on cooperative, collaborative regional decision-making,Renewed Thirty-two percent of net revenues from the Measure M creates incentives that encourage traffic Renewed Measure M Transportation Investment lights to be coordinated across jurisdictional lines, Plan is dedicated to maintaining streets, major street improvements to be better coordinated fixing potholes,improving intersections and on a regional basis, and street repair programs to be widening city streets and county roads. a high priority countywide. To receive Measure M funding, cities and the county have to cooperate. Making the System Work Making the existing system of streets and roads The Streets and Roads program in Renewed work better—by identifying spot intersection Measure M involves shared responsibilities—local improvements, filling potholes,repaving worn- cities and the county set their local priorities out streets—is the basis of making a countywide within a competitive,regional framework that transportation system work. That basis has to be the rewards cooperation,honors best practices, and first priority. But to operate a successful, countywide encourages government agencies to work together. system of streets and roads,we need more: street widenings and traffic signals synchronized countywide. And there's more. Pedestrian safety near local schools needs to be improved. Traffic flow must be smoothed. Street repairs must be made sooner.And, perhaps most importantly, cities and the county must work together—collaboratively—to find simple,low-cost traffic solutions. re -41 263 Orange County Streets and Roads Projects 9i'' ' i / ro C � I �¢ Alibi)VAN',1 IL'i' ...P- r—C'''' ,-7,:,,-7 '-'' . 4097:..,„ .IY;� �I�t...�..�„Si` � €�...�����R"•we�`"�", "1�' � • ---"J! 1-1:•`::-,,s,„4„.1,5,11:7---rtit„ v.„..-. .. .- . as x€ �i ,r—if +, C i ;f(- 1-- E.�+-^r &` x �"�?�'i174�J ���. 4 � E Eq.�.�E t'� (( IIIJJI (( {�` o ,.-2 '" I � %'� '� j -.-�s x s .a d )("�"'-`�73 a 14 A S i f V 2f ,H , i' 0' r' Y :e y am? E ' f k .`. �{ (,' J-ii---f, 1 .{`d "��r ,� � a 1- f 'SEA y,� i"_'' ✓ ��t .tom r� d y Ranch. t e�... "1 pit 4L :fi.�,'�,''�" ` ......•-- /4� >l ```t � t • �.' eK ,) ,,, d,........_:„ ."!„. . --,,,:..‘Ng--,,,, ,, ,_.� ., r 'S t$SIn x ' �,> �-- , ' '" L7-.;'✓a ,- Vie . ,:iiivi,'.'' . -.: -: h `a � iiM1 k p ___„..,........„„„.... _ __..,, ,, ,,: .... , . E � Airso lo ., ,.,. Lq C .. ✓4 1 k\ San an acap 4 trano / Dana f � Point `� ._- I ( . . c Signal �' :I �,E rf Synchronization �' < .•,..„, 1 Network �, San Clemente,: a Regional Capacity Program page 18 l ocal'Fair Share Program page 20 (not mapped) (not mapped) Nearly 1,000 miles of new lanes Street maintenance and improvements LJ Regional traffic Signal Synchronization Program page 19 (see grid above) O0 of ady Overver.2,75000miles,coordinatedro waignals s 264 18 Streets and Roads Projects �, 4 Regional Capacity Program 4 4Ap T Project®i Roughly 1,000 miles of new street lanes remain to be completed,mostly in the form of widening Regional Capacity Program existing streets to their ultimate planned width. Completion of the system will result in a more Description: even traffic flow and efficient system. This program,in combination with local matching funds, provides a funding source to complete the Another element of this program is funding for Orange County Master Plan of Arterial Highways construction of railroad over or underpass grade (MPAH). The program also provides for intersection separations where high volume streets are impacted improvements and other projects to help improve by freight trains along the Burlington Northern street operations and reduce congestion. The Santa Fe railroad in northern Orange County program allocates funds through a competitive process and targets projects that help traffic the most Cost: by considering factors such as degree of congestion The estimated cost for these street relief, cost effectiveness, project readiness, etc. improvement projects is $1,132.8 million. Local jurisdictions must provide a dollar-for-dollar match to qualify for funding,but can be rewarded with lower match requirements if they give priority to other key objectives, such as better road maintenance and regional signal synchronization. r 4112 265 `, 19 r, '$., Streets and Roads Projects :- °°,41 a '� -fitrg 1 , ,. re------ -f. _ --' Regional Traffic Signal �� � ,. . . Synchronization Program . ° Project O To ensure that this program is successful, cities, the County of Orange and Caltrans will be required Regional Traffic Signal Synchronization Program to work together and prepare a common traffic signal synchronization plan and the necessary Description: governance and legal arrangements before receiving This program targets over 2,000 signalized funds. In addition, cities will be required to intersections across the County for coordinated provide 20 percent of the costs. Once in place, operation. The goal is to improve the flow the program will provide funding for ongoing of traffic by developing and implementing maintenance and operation of the synchronization regional signal coordination programs plan. Local jurisdictions will be required to that cross jurisdictional boundaries. publicly report on the performance of their signal synchronization efforts at least every three years. Most traffic signal synchronization programs today Signal equipment to give emergency vehicles are limited to segments of roads or individual cities priority at intersections will be an eligible expense and agencies. For example, signals at intersections for projects implemented as part of this program. of freeways with arterial streets are controlled by Caltrans,while nearby signals at local street Cost: intersections are under the control of cities. This The estimated cost of developing and maintaining results in the street system operating at less than a regional traffic signal synchronization program maximum efficiency.When completed, this project for Orange County is $453.1 million. can increase the capacity of the street grid and reduce the delay by over six million hours annually ox arate M 266 20 1 ik - , _ ,ii r Streets and Roads Projects .�,: - ; - -- _ Local Fair Share Program r 8, 4 Project 0 5. Annually submit a six-year Capital Improvement Program and commit to spend Measure Local Fair Share Program M funds within three years of receipt. 6. Agree to assess traffic impacts of new Description: development and require that new This element of the program will provide flexible development pay a fair share of any funding to help cities and the County of Orange keep necessary transportation improvements. up with the rising cost of repairing the aging street 7. Agree to plan,build and operate major system. In addition, cities can use these funds for streets consistent with the countywide other local transportation needs such as residential Master Plan of Arterial Highways to ensure street projects, traffic and pedestrian safety near efficient traffic flow across city boundaries. schools, signal priority for emergency vehicles, etc. 8. Participate in Traffic Forums with neighboring jurisdictions to facilitate the implementation and This program is intended to augment,rather than maintenance of traffic signal synchronization replace, existing transportation expenditures programs and projects. This requires cities to and therefore cities must meet the following balance local traffic policies with neighboring requirements to receive the funds. cities—for selected streets—to promote more efficient traffic circulation overall. 1. Continue to invest General Fund monies 9. Agree to consider land use planning (or other local discretionary monies) for strategies that are transit-friendly, transportation and annually increase this support alternative transportation modes commitment to keep pace with inflation. including bike and pedestrian access and 2. Agree to use Measure M funds for reduce reliance on the automobile. transportation purposes only, subject to full repayment and a loss of funding The funds under this program are distributed to eligibility for five years for any misuse. cities and the County of Orange by formula once 3. Agree to separate accounting for Measure the cities have fulfilled the above requirements. The M funds and annual reporting on formula will account for population, street mileage actual Measure M expenditures. and amount of sales tax collected in each jurisdiction. 4. Develop and maintain a Pavement Management Program to ensure timely Cost: street maintenance and submit regular The estimated cost for this program for public reports on the condition of streets. thirty years is $2,039.1 million. �d,E0 W 267 0° 4:fi.-;:' tl' t • • : # Transit Overview „t„ , ..,, 1.---7'' , g x� `�wi ,`i `+b fie Building streets, roads and freeways helps fix The new,localized transit programs will bring today's traffic problems. Building a visionary transit competition to local transportation planning, system that is safe, clean and convenient focuses creating a marketplace of transportation ideas where on Orange County's transportation future. the best ideas emerge and compete for funding. The plan is to encourage civic entrepreneurship and Twenty-five percent of net revenues from the stimulate private involvement and investment. Renewed Measure M Transportation Investment Plan is allocated towards building and improving Transit Investment Criteria rail and bus transportation in Orange County. The guiding principles for all transit investments Approximately twenty percent of the Renewed are value, safety, convenience and reliability. Each Measure M funds is allocated to developing a creative local transit vision will be evaluated against clear countywide transit program and five percent of criteria, such as congestion relief, cost-effectiveness, the revenues will be used to enhance programs for readiness, connectivity, and a sound operating plan. senior citizens and for targeted,localized bus service. All transit expenditures must be consistent with In terms of bus services,more specialized transit the safeguards and audit provisions of the Plan. services,including improved van services and reduced fares for senior citizens and people with A New Transit Vision disabilities,will be provided. Safety at key bus stops The key element of the Renewed Measure M transit will be improved. And a network of community- program is improving the 100-year old Santa Fe based,mini-bus services will be developed in rail line,known today as the Los Angeles/San areas outside of the central county rail corridor. Diego (LOSSAN) rail corridor, through the heart of the county. Then,by using this well-established, operational commuter rail system as a platform for future growth, existing rail stations will be developed into regional transportation hubs that can serve as regional transportation gateways or the centerpiece of local transportation services.A series of new,well- coordinated, flexible transportation systems, each one customized to the unique transportation vision the station serves,will be developed. Creativity and good financial sense will be encouraged. Partnerships will be promoted. Transportation solutions for each transportation hub can range from monorails to local mini-bus systems to new technologies. Fresh thinking will be rewarded. lit: a 268 22 Orange County Transit Projects ; m ; V ._._ t _ _ : Buena Park Station _ - .r ��-- � - �' Fullerton StationJr- , ` i--- -. - lrr�"" .- ''•-tal4i \.r, t :• a :,t,, >r.y,f_ :- ,<._ _ ., _ ...t - a ` Orange Station . `�`\. f e Santa Ana Depot t '`.i t "� f i:0 c 4 4 - _ a " tr . `_AL3 t; t ,` '.Qat1£h.,"r*yr-. 5 .t4s- a '. ,..^,., . ��, y �' I " r� ���i0: t ..... s .vw,a-� :eat`�" � r' 7te{ k' a.�.t. '* � - ,, o;v z ( �i vi Irvine. Transportation :' r$a 4:, .y s N. G 4e j na, '' T,7a` iy �, 4-.a, _ Y t dr •vl af.� is ' C` Laguna Niguel Y '`i '� .,>1-,ty � i;r 1 ,�it ,; Mission Viejo Station V 4t'„�4. I n 4"" r .� ,t a `7 Laguna o s = ri t .5 ^ :r 1 0.r IYra V niva a to. :'Yt < A. d D'� San loan Capistrano .s ,: Station :a` p s a^'\,1-";. Dana ��''it � -. (1\ r Point '�by� e San Clemente e 0 High.Frequency Metrolink Service(itiQnn =existing rail line/stations) page 23 Q Transit,Extensions to Metrolink 0 page 23 1. CIMetrolink Gateways(not mapped) page 24 0 Expand Mobility Choices for Seniors and Persons with Disabilities(countywide;not mapped) page 24 I0 Community Based Transit/Circulators(countywide; not mapped) page 25 I O Safe Transit Stops(countywide;not mapped) page 25 269 23 . `,_ . Transit Projects :- -...--- -,i it% ., ,,,,., t ' �. ."r-4-4 k # ' High Frequency Metrolink Service ; - 111 'lkiti �_ Transit Extensions to Metrolink . rA Project 0 Project 0 High Frequency Metrolink Service Transit Extensions to Metrolink Description: Description: This project will increase rail services within the Frequent service in the Metrolink corridor provides county and provide frequent Metrolink service north a high capacity transit system linking communities of Fullerton to Los Angeles. The project will provide within the central core of Orange County. This for track improvements,more trains, and other project will establish a competitive program for local related needs to accommodate the expanded service. jurisdictions to broaden the reach of the rail system to other activity centers and communities. Proposals This project is designed to build on the successes for extensions must be developed and supported of Metrolink and complement service expansion by local jurisdictions and will be evaluated against made possible by the current Measure M. The well-defined and well-known criteria as follows: service will include upgraded stations and added parking capacity; safety improvements • Traffic congestion relief and quiet zones along the tracks; and frequent • Project readiness,with priority given shuttle service and other means, to move to projects that can be implemented arriving passengers to nearby destinations. within the first five years of the Plan • Local funding commitments and The project also includes funding for the availability of right-of-way improving grade crossings and constructing • Proven ability to attract other financial over or underpasses at high volume arterial partners,both public and private streets that cross the Metrolink tracks. • Cost-effectiveness • Proximity to jobs and population centers Cost: • Regional as well as local benefits The estimated cost of capital and • Ease and simplicity of connections operations is $1,129.8 million. • 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 r?��EO Project R cost estimate amended on Decembe27b4, 2015. 24 `� iii, -.^ "'� + Transit Projects ,cos 'i°°� r r r'' ;` Metrolink Gateways ., Vy- ,, a r� Expand Mobility Choices for Seniors Nii, h. and Persons with Disabilities a competitive process and no single project may Project 0 be awarded all of the funds under this program. Expand Mobility Choices for Seniors These connections may include a variety of and Persons with Disabilities transit technologies such as conventional bus, bus rapid transit or high capacity rail transit Description: systems as long as they can be fully integrated This project will provide services and programs and provide seamless transition for the users. to meet the growing transportation needs of seniors and persons with disabilities as follows: Cost: The estimated cost to implement this program • One and forty-seven hundredths percent over thirty years is $1,000.0 million. (1.47%) of net revenues will stabilize fares and provide fare discounts for bus services,specialized ACCESS Project services and future rail services 0 • One percent of net revenues will be Convert Metrolink Station(s)to Regional available to continue and expand local Gateways that Connect Orange County community van service for seniors through with High-Speed Rail Systems the existing Senior Mobility Program • One percent will supplement existing Description: countywide senior non-emergency This program will provide the local improvements medical transportation services that are necessary to connect planned future high-speed rail systems to stations Over the next 30 years, the population age 65 on the Orange County Metrolink route. and over is projected to increase by 93 percent. Demand for transit and specialized transportation The State of California is currently planning a services for seniors and persons with disabilities high-speed rail system linking northern and is expected to increase proportionately. southern California. One line is planned to terminate in Orange County. In addition, several Cost: magnetic levitation(MAGLEV) systems that The estimated cost to provide these programs would connect Orange County to Los Angeles over 30 years is $392.8 million. 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. a M Project T and U cost estimates amended on Decembev li4, 2015. __ T _ , a : Transit Projects rf �� Community Based Transit/Circulators ', Safe Transit Stops .4 , a Project O Project a Community Based Transit/Circulators Safe Transit Stops Description: Description: This project will establish a competitive program This project provides for passenger amenities at for local jurisdictions to develop local bus transit 100 busiest transit stops across the County. The services such as community based circulators, stops will be designed to ease transfer between shuttles and bus trolleys that complement regional bus lines and provide passenger amenities bus and rail services, and meet needs in areas not such as improved shelters,lighting, current adequately served by regional transit. Projects will information on bus and train timetables and arrival need to meet performance criteria for ridership, times, and transit ticket vending machines. connection to bus and rail services, and financial viability to be considered for funding.All projects Cost: must be competitively bid, and they cannot The estimated cost of this project is $25.0 million. duplicate or compete with existing transit services. Cost: The estimated cost of this project is $226.5 million. r4.�deo rmA�111Ai11 272 26 0 ; , _ Environmental 4 CleanupOverview ,,ito, wa i vt. - . Every day,more than 70 million gallons of oily The environmental cleanup program is designed to pollution,litter, and dirty contamination washes supplement,not supplant, existing transportation- off streets, roads and freeways and pours onto related water quality programs. This clean-up Orange County waterways and beaches. When program must improve, and not replace, existing it rains, the transportation-generated pollution pollution reduction efforts by cities, the county, increases tenfold, contributing to the increasing and special districts. Funds will be awarded number of beach closures and environmental to the highest priority programs that improve hazards along the Orange County coast. water quality,keep our beaches and streets clean, and reduce transportation-generated pollution Prior to allocation of funds for freeway,street and along Orange County's scenic coastline. transit projects, two percent of gross revenues from the Renewed Measure M Transportation Investment Plan is set aside to protect Orange County beaches from transportation-generated pollution(sometimes called"urban runoff') and improving ocean water quality. Countywide Competitive Program Measure M Environmental Cleanup funds will be used on a countywide, competitive basis to meet federal Clean Water Act standards for controlling transportation-generated pollution by funding nationally recognized Best Management Practices, such as catch basins with state-of- the-art biofiltration systems; or special roadside landscaping systems called bioswales that filter oil runoff from streets, roads and freeways. 0 C,.. \> AI 273 27 Environmental Cleanup jiI►i� Project Q The Environmental Cleanup program is subject to the following requirements: Environmental Cleanup • Development of a comprehensive countywide Description: capital improvement program for transportation Implement street and highway related water related water quality improvements quality improvement programs and projects that • A competitive grant process to award funds to will assist Orange County cities, the County the highest priority,most cost-effective projects of Orange and special districts to meet federal • A matching requirement to leverage Clean Water Act standards for urban runoff. other federal,state and local funds for water quality improvements The Environmental Cleanup monies may be used for • A maintenance of effort requirement to water quality improvements related to both existing ensure that funds augment,not replace and new transportation infrastructure, including existing water quality programs capital and operations improvements such as: • Annual reporting on actual expenditures and an assessment of the water quality benefits provided • Catch basin screens, filters and inserts • A strict limit on administrative costs • Roadside bioswales and biofiltration channels and a requirement to spend funds • Wetlands protection and restoration within three years of receipt • Continuous Deflective Separation (CDS)units • Penalties for misuse of any of the • Maintenance of catch basins and bioswales Environmental Cleanup funds • Other street-related"Best Management Practices" for capturing and treating urban runoff Cost: The estimated cost for the Environmental Cleanup This program is intended to augment,not replace program is$237.2 million. In addition it is existing transportation related water quality estimated that new freeway, road and transit projects expenditures and to emphasize high-impact funded by the Renewed Measure M Transportation capital improvements over local operations and Investment Plan will include more than$165 maintenance costs. In addition, all new freeway, million for mitigating water quality impacts. street and transit capital projects will include water quality mitigation as part of project scope and cost. 1 a 274 . ', ',';', ' ''''''''''' 4 I' ', ',.7- --::-f:', ‘,,,iv4k'-,s,-o--,c 0 -- u!,,-IN ___ ,,,' ----%N,WK U Taxpayer Safeguards v4 �� and Audits Overview When new transportation dollars are approved, Back to the Voters they should go for transportation and transportation Of course, over the next 30 years, things will change. alone. No bait-and-switch. No using transportation Minor adjustments can be made by a 2/3 vote of the dollars for other purposes. The original Taxpayer Oversight Committee and a 2/3 vote of Measure M went solely for transportation. The the Orange County Local Transportation Authority Renewed Measure M will be just as airtight. Board of Directors. Major changes must be taken back to voters for authorization.And, every ten And there will be no hidden costs in the program. years, and more frequently if necessary, the Orange County Local Transportation Authority must Prior to allocation of funds for freeway, street and conduct a thorough examination of the Renewed transit projects, one percent of gross revenues from Measure M Investment Plan and determine if the Renewed Measure M Transportation Investment major changes should be submitted to the voters. Plans is set aside for audits, safeguards, and taxpayer protection. By state law, one and one half percent of There are other important taxpayer safeguards, the gross sales taxes generated by Measure M must be all designed to insure the integrity of the voter- paid to the California State Board of Equalization for authorized plans. But each is focused on one collecting the countywide one-half percent sales tax goal: guaranteeing that new transportation that funds the Transportation Investment Program. dollars are devoted to solving Orange County's traffic problems and that no transportation Special Trust Fund dollars are diverted to anything else. To guarantee transportation dollars are used for transportation purposes, all funds must be kept in a special trust fund. An independent, outside audit of this fund will protect against cheaters who try to use the transportation funds for purposes other than specified transportation uses.A severe punishment will disqualify any agency that cheats from receiving Measure M funds for a five-year period. 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. to r��a 275 29 Taxpayer Safeguards and Audits Taxpayer Safeguards and Audits Fund Accounting • All tax revenues and interest earned must be Description: deposited and maintained in a separate trust Implement and maintain strict taxpayer fund. Local jurisdictions that receive allocations safeguards to ensure that the Renewed Measure must also maintain them in a separate fund. M Transportation Investment Plan is delivered • All entities receiving tax funds must as promised. Restrict administrative costs to report annually on expenditures and one percent(1%) of total tax revenues and state progress in implementing projects collection of the tax as prescribed in state law • At any time, at its discretion, the Taxpayer [currently one-and-one-half(1.5%) percent]. Oversight Committee may conduct independent reviews or audits of the spending of tax funds Administration of the Transportation Investment • The elected Auditor/Controller of Orange Plan and all spending is subject to the following County must annually certify that spending specific safeguards and requirements: is in accordance with the Plan Oversight Spending Requirements • All spending is subject to an • Local jurisdictions receiving funds must annual independent audit abide by specific eligibility and spending • Spending decisions must be annually requirements detailed in the Streets&Roads and reviewed and certified by an independent Environmental Cleanup components of the Plan Taxpayer Oversight Committee • Funds must be used only for transportation • An annual report on spending and purposes described in the Plan. The penalty progress in implementing the Plan for misspending is full repayment and loss of must be submitted to taxpayers funding eligibility for a period of five years. • No funds may be used to replace Integrity of the Plan private developer funding committed • No changes to the Plan can be made to any project or improvement without review and approval by 2/3 vote • Funds shall augment,not replace existing funds of the Taxpayer Oversight Committee • Every effort shall be made to maximize matching • Major changes to the Plan such as deleting state and federal transportation dollars a project or shifting projects among major spending categories (Freeways, Streets & Roads,Transit,Environmental Cleanup) must be ratified by a majority of voters • The Plan must be subject at least every ten years to public review and assessment of progress in delivery,public support and changed circumstances. Any significant proposed changes to the Plan must be approved by the Taxpayer Oversight Committee and ratified by a majority of voters. rgym, 276 30 mot , ,. . 0.� . -�v Taxpayer Safeguards and Audits i, A . A 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. r 1a 277 31 r r z ,4D 1 ,. /,,,,...„:,,,,\,,,..,,,,—,,,,,,:::-,,t,,I .,.-..iir' � Measure M x .,,,,c Investment Summary � t, 2" -'4t.: ,, i a d rR ._. '; .-. a:'` s.�: y �� �, : CQS=TS" . '.. LOCArTION '' =' ROJECTS.- estimates < u .. millions reeway Projects (in millions) $4,871.1 I-5 Santa Ana Freeway Interchange Improvements A $470.0 I-5 Santa Ana/San Diego Freeway Improvements 0©0 1,185.2 SR-22 Garden Grove Freeway Access Improvements 120.0 SR-55 Costa Mesa Freeway Improvements 366.0 CO SR-57 Orange Freeway Improvements co 258.7 SR-91 Riverside Freeway Improvements 908.7* I-405 San Diego Freeway Improvements ®® 1,392.5* I-605 Freeway Access Improvements �"J 20.0 All Freeway Service Patrol 150.0 treets & Roads Projects (in millions) $3,625.11 Regional Capacity Program © $1,132.8 Regional Traffic Signal Synchronization Program 0 453.1 Local Fair Share Program 2,039.1 .'ransit Projects (in millions) $2,832.I R $1,129.8* High Frequency Metrolink Service Transit Extensions to Metrolink S 1,000.0 Metrolink Gateways 0 57.9* Expand Mobility Choices for Seniors and Persons with Disabilities 0 392.8* Community Based Transit/Circulators ® 226.5 Safe Transit Stops W 25.0 Environmental Cleanup (in millions) $237. ' Clean Up Highway and Street Runoff that Pollutes Beaches ( $237.2 axpayer Safeguards and Audits (in millions) $296. Collect Sales Taxes (State charges required by law) $178.0 Oversight and Annual Audits 118.E 1 Otal (2005 dollars in millions) $11,861.9 *Asterisk notes project estimates that have been amended§iiitce 2006. 1 ATTACHMENT B 2 ALLOCATION OF NET REVENUES 3 4 I. DEFINITIONS. 5 For purposes of the Ordinance the following words shall mean as stated. 6 A. "Capital Improvement Program": a multi-year-year funding plan to 7 implement capital transportation projects and/or programs, including but not limited to 8 capacity, safety, operations, maintenance, and rehabilitation projects. 9 B. "Circulation Element": an element of an Eligible Jurisdiction's General 10 Plan depicting planned roadways and related policies, including consistency with the 11 MPAH. 12 C. "Congestion Management Program": a program established in 1990 13 (California Government Code 65089), for effective use of transportation funds to alleviate 14 traffic congestion and related impacts through a balanced transportation and land use 15 planning process. 16 D. "Eligible Jurisdiction": a city in Orange County or the County of 17 Orange, which satisfies the requirements of Section III A. 18 E. "Encumbrance": the execution of a contract or other action to be 19 funded by Net Revenues. 20 F. "Environmental Cleanup": street, highway, freeway and transit related 21 water quality improvement programs and projects as described in the Plan. 22 G. "Environmental Cleanup Revenues": Two percent (2%) of the 23 Revenues allocated annually plus interest and other earnings on the allocated revenues, 24 which shall be maintained in a separate account. 25 H. "Expenditure Report": a detailed financial report to account for receipt, 26 interest earned and use of Measure M and other funds consistent with requirements of the 27 Ordinance. 28 I. "Freeway Project": the planning, design, construction, improvement, B-1 214007.11 280 1 operation or maintenance necessary for, incidental to, or convenient for a state or interstate 2 freeway. 3 J "Local Fair Share Program": a formula-based allocation to Eligible 4 Jurisdictions for Street and Road Projects as described in the Plan. 5 K. "Local Traffic Signal Synchronization Plan": identification of traffic 6 signal synchronization street routes and traffic signals within a jurisdiction. 7 L. "Master Plan of Arterial Highways (MPAH)": a countywide 8 transportation plan administered by the Authority defining the ultimate number of through 9 lanes for arterial streets, and designating the traffic signal synchronization street routes in 10 Orange County. 11 M. "Net Revenues": The remaining Revenues after the deduction for: (i) 12 amounts payable to the State Board of Equalization for the performance of functions 13 incidental to the administration and operation of the Ordinance, (ii) costs for the 14 administration of the Ordinance, (iii) two percent (2%) of the Revenues annually allocated 15 for Environmental Cleanup, and (iv) satisfaction of debt service requirements of all bonds 16 issued pursuant to the Ordinance that are not satisfied out of separate allocations. 17 N. "Pavement Management Plan": a plan to manage the preservation, 18 rehabilitation, and maintenance of paved roads by analyzing pavement life cycles, 19 assessing overall system performance and costs, and determining alternative strategies 20 and costs necessary to improve paved roads. 21 O. "Permit Streamlining": commitments by state and federal agencies to 22 reduce project delays associated with permitting of freeway projects through development 23 of a comprehensive conservation strategy early in the planning process and the permitting 24 of multiple projects with a single comprehensive conservation strategy. 25 P. "Programmatic Mitigation": permanent protection of areas of high 26 ecological value, and associated restoration, management and monitoring, to 27 comprehensively compensate for numerous, smaller impacts associated with individual 28 transportation projects. Continued function of existing mitigation features, such as wildlife B-2 214007.11 281 1 passages, is not included. 2 Q. "Project Final Report": certification of completion of a project funded 3 with Net Revenues, description of work performed, and accounting of Net Revenues 4 expended and interest earned on Net Revenues allocated for the project. 5 R. "Regional Capacity Program": capital improvement projects to 6 increase roadway capacity and improve roadway operation as described in the Plan. 7 S. "Regional Traffic Signal Synchronization Program": competitive capital 8 and operations funding for the coordination of traffic signals across jurisdictional boundaries 9 as included in the Traffic Signal Synchronization Master Plan and as described in the Plan. 10 T. "Revenues": All gross revenues generated from the transactions and 11 use tax of one-half of one percent (1/2%) plus any interest or other earnings thereon. 12 U. "State Board of Equalization": agency of the State of California 13 responsible for the administration of sales and use taxes. 14 V. "Street and Road Project": the planning, design, construction, 15 improvement, operation or maintenance necessary for, incidental to, or convenient for a 16 street or road, or for any transportation purpose, including, but not limited to, purposes 17 authorized by Article XIX of the California Constitution. 18 W. "Traffic Forums": a group of Eligible Jurisdictions working together to 19 facilitate the planning of traffic signal synchronization among the respective jurisdictions. 20 X. "Traffic Signal Synchronization Master Plan": an element of the 21 MPAH to promote smooth traffic flow through synchronization of traffic signals along 22 designated street routes in the County. 23 Y. "Transit": the transportation of passengers by bus, rail, fixed guideway 24 or other vehicle. 25 Z. "Transit Project": the planning, design, construction, improvement, 26 equipment, operation or maintenance necessary for, or incidental to, or convenient for 27 transit facilities or transit services. 28 AA. "Watershed Management Areas": areas to be established by the B-3 214007.11 282 1 County of Orange, in cooperation with local jurisdictions, or by another public entity with 2 appropriate legal authority, for the management of water run-off related to existing or new 3 transportation projects. 4 II. REQUIREMENTS. 5 The Authority may allocate Net Revenues to the State of California, an Eligible 6 Jurisdiction, or the Authority for any project, program or purpose as authorized by the 7 Ordinance, and the allocation of Net Revenues by the Authority shall be subject to the 8 following requirements: 9 A. Freeway Projects 10 1. The Authority shall make every effort to maximize state and 11 federal funding for Freeway Projects. No Net Revenues shall be allocated in any year to 12 any Freeway Project if the Authority has made findings at a public meeting that the state or 13 the federal government has reduced any allocations of state funds or federal funds to the 14 Authority as the result of the addition of any Net Revenues. 15 2. All Freeway Projects funded with Net Revenues, including 16 project development and overall project management, shall be a joint responsibility of 17 Caltrans, the Authority, and the affected jurisdiction(s). All major approval actions, 18 including the project concept, the project location, and any subsequent change in project 19 scope shall be jointly agreed upon by Caltrans, the Authority, and the project sponsors, and 20 where appropriate, by the Federal Highway Administration and/or the California 21 Transportation Commission. 22 3. Prior to the allocation of Net Revenues for a Freeway Project, 23 the Authority shall obtain written assurances from the appropriate state agency that after 24 the Freeway Project is constructed to at least minimum acceptable state standards, the 25 state shall be responsible for the maintenance and operation of such Freeway Project. 26 4. Freeway Projects will be built largely within existing rights of 27 way using the latest highway design and safety requirements. However, to the greatest 28 extent possible within the available budget, Freeway Projects shall be implemented using B-4 214007.11 283 1 Context Sensitive Design, as described in the nationally recognized Federal Highway 2 Administration (FHWA) Principles of Context Sensitive Design Standards. Freeway 3 Projects will be planned, designed and constructed using a flexible community-responsive 4 and collaborative approach to balance aesthetic, historic and environmental values with 5 transportation safety, mobility, maintenance and performance goals. Context Sensitive 6 Design features include: parkway-style designs; environmentally friendly, locally native 7 landscaping; sound reduction; improved wildlife passage and aesthetic treatments, designs 8 and themes that are in harmony with the surrounding communities. 9 5. At least five percent (5%) of the Net Revenues allocated for 10 Freeway Projects shall fund Programmatic Mitigation for Freeway Projects. These funds 11 shall be derived by pooling funds from the mitigation budgets of individual Freeway 12 Projects, and shall only be allocated subject to the following: 13 a. Development of a Master Environmental Mitigation and 14 Resource Protection Plan and Agreement (Master Agreement) between the Authority and 15 state and federal resource agencies that includes: 16 (i) commitments by the Authority to provide for 17 programmatic environmental mitigation of the Freeway Projects, 18 (ii) commitments by state and federal resource 19 agencies to reduce project delays associated with permitting and streamline the permit 20 process for Freeway Projects, 21 (iii) an accounting process for mitigation obligations 22 and credits that will document net environmental benefit from regional, programmatic 23 mitigation in exchange for net benefit in the delivery of transportation improvements 24 through streamlined and timely approvals and permitting, and 25 (iv) a description of the specific mitigation actions and 26 expenditures to be undertaken and a phasing, implementation and maintenance plan. 27 (v) appointment by the Authority of a Mitigation and 28 Resource Protection Program Oversight Committee ("Environmental Oversight B-5 214007.11 284 1 Committee") to make recommendations to the Authority on the allocation of the Net 2 Revenues for programmatic mitigation, and to monitor implementation of the Master 3 Agreement. The Environmental Oversight Committee shall consist of no more than twelve 4 members and be comprised of representatives of the Authority, Caltrans, state and federal 5 resource agencies, non-governmental environmental organizations, the public and the 6 Taxpayers Oversight Committee. 7 b. A Master Agreement shall be developed as soon as 8 practicable following the approval of the ballot proposition by the electors. It is the intent of 9 the Authority and state and federal resource agencies to develop a Master Agreement prior 10 to the implementation of Freeway Projects. 11 c. Expenditures of Net Revenues made subject to a Master 12 Agreement shall be considered a Freeway Project and may be funded from the proceeds of 13 bonds issued subject to Section 5 of the Ordinance. 14 B. Transit Projects 15 1. The Authority shall make every effort to maximize state and 16 federal funding for Transit Projects. No Net Revenues shall be allocated in any year for 17 any Transit Project if the Authority has made findings at a public meeting that the state or 18 the federal government has reduced any allocations of state funds or federal funds to the 19 Authority as the result of the addition of any Revenues. 20 2. Prior to the allocation of Net Revenues for a Transit Project, the 21 Authority shall obtain a written agreement from the appropriate jurisdiction that the Transit 22 Project will be constructed, operated and maintained to minimum standards acceptable to 23 the Authority. 24 C. Street and Road Projects 25 Prior to the allocation of Net Revenues for any Street and Road 26 Project, the Authority, in cooperation with affected agencies, shall determine the entity(ies) 27 to be responsible for the maintenance and operation thereof. 28 /// B-6 214007.11 285 1 III. REQUIREMENTS FOR ELIGIBLE JURISDICTIONS. 2 A. In order to be eligible to receive Net Revenues, a jurisdiction shall 3 satisfy and continue to satisfy the following requirements. 4 1. Congestion Management Program. Comply with the conditions 5 and requirements of the Orange County Congestion Management Program (CMP) 6 pursuant to the provisions of Government Code Section 65089. 7 2. Mitigation Fee Program. Assess traffic impacts of new 8 development and require new development to pay a fair share of necessary transportation 9 improvements attributable to the new development. 10 3. Circulation Element. Adopt and maintain a Circulation Element 11 of the jurisdiction's General Plan consistent with the MPAH. 12 4. Capital Improvement Program. Adopt and update biennially a 13 six-year Capital Improvement Program (CIP). The CIP shall include all capital 14 transportation projects, including projects funded by Net Revenues, and shall include 15 transportation projects required to demonstrate compliance with signal synchronization and 16 pavement management requirements. 17 5. Traffic Forums. 18 Participate in Traffic Forums to facilitate the planning of traffic 19 signal synchronization programs and projects. Eligible Jurisdictions and Caltrans, in 20 participation with the County of Orange and the Orange County Division of League of 21 Cities, will establish the boundaries for Traffic Forums. The following will be considered 22 when establishing boundaries: 23 a. Regional traffic routes and traffic patterns; 24 b. Inter jurisdictional coordination efforts; and 25 c. Total number of Traffic Forums. 26 6. Local Traffic Signal Synchronization Plan. Adopt and maintain a 27 Local Traffic Signal Synchronization Plan which shall identify traffic signal synchronization 28 street routes and traffic signals; include a three-year plan showing costs, available funding B-7 214007.11 286 1 and phasing of capital, operations and maintenance of the street routes and traffic signals; 2 and include information on how the street routes and traffic signals may be synchronized 3 with traffic signals on the street routes in adjoining jurisdictions. The Local Traffic Signal 4 Synchronization Plan shall be consistent with the Traffic Signal Synchronization Master 5 Plan. 6 7. Pavement Management Plan. Adopt and update biennially a 7 Pavement Management Plan, and issue, using a common format approved by the 8 Authority, a report every two years regarding the status of road pavement conditions and 9 implementation of the Pavement Management Plan. 10 a. Authority, in consultation with the Eligible Jurisdictions, 11 shall define a countywide management method to inventory, analyze and evaluate road 12 pavement conditions, and a common method to measure improvement of road pavement 13 conditions. 14 b. The Pavement Management Plan shall be based on: 15 either the Authority's countywide pavement management method or a comparable 16 management method approved by the Authority, and the Authority's method to measure 17 improvement of road pavement conditions. 18 c. The Pavement Management Plan shall include: 19 (i) Current status of pavement on roads; 20 (ii) A six-year plan for road maintenance and 21 rehabilitation, including projects and funding; 22 (iii) The projected road pavement conditions resulting 23 from the maintenance and rehabilitation plan; and 24 (iv) Alternative strategies and costs necessary to 25 improve road pavement conditions. 26 8. Expenditure Report. Adopt an annual Expenditure Report to 27 account for Net Revenues, developer/traffic impact fees, and funds expended by the 28 Eligible Jurisdiction which satisfy the Maintenance of Effort requirements. The Expenditure B-8 214007.11 287 1 Report shall be submitted by the end of six (6) months following the end of the jurisdiction's 2 fiscal year and include the following: 3 a. All Net Revenue fund balances and interest earned. 4 b. Expenditures identified by type (i.e., capital, operations, 5 administration, etc.), and program or project . 6 9. Project Final Report. Provide Authority with a Project Final 7 Report within six months following completion of a project funded with Net Revenues. 8 10. Time Limits for Use of Net Revenues. 9 a. Agree that Net Revenues for Regional Capacity Program 10 projects and Regional Traffic Signal Synchronization Program projects shall be expended 11 or encumbered no later than the end of the fiscal year for which the Net Revenues are 12 programmed. A request for extension of the encumbrance deadline for no more than 13 twenty-four months may be submitted to the Authority no less than ninety days prior to the 14 deadline. The Authority may approve one or more requests for extension of the 15 encumbrance deadline. 16 b. Agree that Net Revenues allocated for any program or 17 project, other than a Regional Capacity Program project or a Regional Traffic Signal 18 Synchronization Program project, shall be expended or encumbered within three years of 19 receipt. The Authority may grant an extension to the three-year limit, but extensions shall 20 not be granted beyond a total of five years from the date of the initial funding allocation. 21 c. In the event the time limits for use of Net Revenues are 22 not satisfied then any retained Net Revenues that were allocated to an Eligible Jurisdiction 23 and interest earned thereon shall be returned to the Authority and these Net Revenues and 24 interest earned thereon shall be available for allocation to any project within the same 25 source program. 26 11. Maintenance of Effort. Annual certification that the Maintenance 27 of Effort requirements of Section 6 of the Ordinance have been satisfied. 28 12. No Supplanting of Funds. Agree that Net Revenues shall not be B-9 214007.11 288 1 used to supplant developer funding which has been or will be committed for any 2 transportation project. 3 13. Consider, as part of the Eligible Jurisdiction's General Plan, land 4 use planning strategies that accommodate transit and non-motorized transportation. 5 B. Determination of Non-Eligibility 6 A determination of non-eligibility of a jurisdiction shall be made only 7 after a hearing has been conducted and a determination has been made by the Authority's 8 Board of Directors that the jurisdiction is not an Eligible Jurisdiction as provided 9 hereinabove. 10 IV. ALLOCATION OF NET REVENUES; GENERAL PROVISIONS. 11 A. Subject to the provisions of the Ordinance, including Section II above, 12 use of the Revenues shall be as follows: 13 1. First, the Authority shall pay the State Board of Equalization for 14 the services and functions; 15 2. Second, the Authority shall pay the administration expenses of 16 the Authority; 17 3. Third, the Authority shall satisfy the annual allocation 18 requirement of two percent (2%) of Revenues for Environmental Cleanup; and 19 4. Fourth, the Authority shall satisfy the debt service requirements 20 of all bonds issued pursuant to the Ordinance that are not satisfied out of separate 21 allocations. 22 B. After providing for the use of Revenues described in Section A above, 23 and subject to the averaging provisions of Section D below, the Authority shall allocate the 24 Net Revenues as follows: 25 1. Forty-three percent (43%) for Freeway Projects; 26 2. Thirty-two percent (32%) for Street and Road Projects; and 27 3. Twenty-five percent (25%) for Transit Projects. 28 C. The allocation of thirty-two percent (32%) of the Net Revenues for B-1 0 214007.11 289 1 Street and Road Projects pursuant to Section B 2 above shall be made as follows: 2 1. Ten percent (10%) of the Net Revenues shall be allocated for 3 Regional Capacity Program projects; 4 2. Four percent (4%) of the Net Revenues shall be allocated for 5 Regional Traffic Signal Synchronization Program projects; and 6 3. Eighteen percent (18%) of the Net Revenues shall be allocated 7 for Local Fair Share Program projects. 8 D. In any given year, except for the allocations for Local Fair Share 9 Program projects, the Authority may allocate Net Revenues on a different percentage basis 10 than required by Sections B and C above in order to meet short-term needs and to 11 maximize efforts to capture state, federal, or private transportation dollars, provided the 12 percentage allocations set forth in Sections B and C above shall be achieved during the 13 duration of the Ordinance. 14 E. The Authority shall allocate Net Revenues for programs and projects 15 as necessary to meet contractual, program or project obligations, and the Authority may 16 withhold allocations until needed to meet contractual, program or project obligations, except 17 that Net Revenues allocated for the Local Fair Share Program pursuant to Section C above 18 shall be paid to Eligible Jurisdictions within sixty days of receipt by the Authority. 19 F. The Authority may exchange Net Revenues from a Plan funding 20 category for federal, state or other local funds allocated to any public agency within or 21 outside the area of jurisdiction to maximize the effectiveness of the Plan. The Authority and 22 the exchanging public agency must use the exchanged funds for the same program or 23 project authorized for the use of the funds prior to the exchange. Such federal, state or 24 local funds received by the Authority shall be allocated by the Authority to the same Plan 25 funding category that was the source of the exchanged Net Revenues, provided, however, 26 in no event shall an exchange reduce the Net Revenues allocated for Programmatic 27 Mitigation of Freeway Projects. 28 G. If additional funds become available for a specific project or program B-11 214007.11 290 1 described in the Plan, the Authority may allocate the Net Revenues replaced by the receipt 2 of those additional funds, in the following order of priority: first, to Plan projects and 3 programs which provide congestion relief in the geographic region which received the 4 additional funds; second, to other projects and programs within the affected geographic 5 region which may be placed in the Plan through an amendment to the Ordinance; and third, 6 to all other Plan projects and programs. 7 H. Upon review and acceptance of the Project Final Report, the Authority 8 shall allocate the balance of Net Revenues for the project, less the interest earned on the 9 Net Revenues allocated for the project. 10 V. ALLOCATION OF NET REVENUES; STREETS AND ROADS PROGRAMS/ 11 PROJECTS 12 A. Regional Capacity Program. 13 1. Matching Funds. An Eligible Jurisdiction shall contribute local 14 matching funds equal to fifty percent (50%) of the project or program cost. This local match 15 requirement may be reduced as follows: 16 a. A local match reduction of ten percent (10%) of the 17 eligible cost if the Eligible Jurisdiction implements, maintains and operates in conformance 18 with the Traffic Signal Synchronization Master Plan. 19 b. A local match reduction of ten percent (10%) of the 20 eligible cost if the Eligible Jurisdiction either: 21 (i) has measurable improvement of paved road 22 conditions during the previous reporting period as determined pursuant to the Authority's 23 method of measuring improvement of road pavement conditions, or 24 (ii) has road pavement conditions during the previous 25 reporting period which are within the highest twenty percent of the scale for road pavement 26 conditions as determined pursuant to the Authority's method of measuring improvement of 27 road pavement conditions. 28 c. A local match reduction of five percent (5%) of the B-12 214007.11 291 1 eligible cost if the Eligible Jurisdiction does not use any Net Revenues as part of the funds 2 for the local match. 3 2. Allocations shall be determined pursuant to a countywide 4 competitive procedure adopted by the Authority. Eligible Jurisdictions shall be consulted by 5 the Authority in establishing criteria for determining priority for allocations. 6 B. Regional Traffic Signal Synchronization Program. 7 1. Traffic Signal Synchronization Master Plan. 8 The Authority shall adopt and maintain a Traffic Signal 9 Synchronization Master Plan, which shall be a part of the Master Plan of Arterial Highways. 10 The Traffic Signal Synchronization Master Plan shall include traffic signal synchronization 11 street routes and traffic signals within and across jurisdictional boundaries, and the means 12 of implementing, operating and maintaining the programs and projects, including necessary 13 governance and legal arrangements. 14 2. Allocations. 15 a. Allocations shall be determined pursuant to a countywide 16 competitive procedure adopted by the Authority. Eligible Jurisdictions shall be consulted by 17 the Authority in establishing criteria for determining priority for allocations. 18 b. The Authority shall give priority to programs and projects 19 which include two or more jurisdictions. 20 c. The Authority shall encourage the State to participate in 21 the Regional Traffic Signal Synchronization Program and Authority shall give priority to use 22 of transportation funds as match for the State's discretionary funds used for implementing 23 the Regional Traffic Signal Synchronization Program. 24 3. An Eligible Jurisdiction shall contribute matching local funds 25 equal to twenty percent (20%) of the project or program cost. The requirement for 26 matching local funds may be satisfied all or in part with in-kind services provided by the 27 Eligible Jurisdiction for the program or project, including salaries and benefits for 28 employees of the Eligible Jurisdiction who perform work on the project or programs. B-13 214007.11 292 1 4. An Eligible Jurisdiction shall issue a report once every three 2 years regarding the status and performance of its traffic signal synchronization activities. 3 5. Not less than once every three years an Eligible Jurisdiction 4 shall review and revise, as may be necessary, the timing of traffic signals included as part 5 of the Traffic Signal Synchronization Master Plan. 6 6. An Eligible Jurisdiction withdrawing from a signal 7 synchronization project shall be required to return Net Revenues allocated for the project. 8 C. Local Fair Share Program. 9 The allocation of eighteen percent (18%) of the Net Revenues for 10 Local Fair Share Program projects shall be made to Eligible Jurisdictions in amounts 11 determined as follows: 12 1. Fifty percent (50%) divided between Eligible Jurisdictions based 13 on the ratio of each Eligible Jurisdiction's population for the immediately preceding calendar 14 year to the total County population (including incorporated and unincorporated areas) for 15 the immediately preceding calendar year, both as determined by the State Department of 16 Finance; 17 2. Twenty-five percent (25%) divided between Eligible Jurisdictions 18 based on the ratio of each Eligible Jurisdiction's existing Master Plan of Arterial Highways 19 ("MPAH") centerline miles to the total existing MPAH centerline miles within the County as 20 determined annually by the Authority; and 21 3. Twenty-five percent (25%) divided between Eligible Jurisdictions 22 based on the ratio of each Eligible Jurisdiction's total taxable sales to the total taxable sales 23 of the County for the immediately preceding calendar year as determined by the State 24 Board of Equalization. 25 VI. ALLOCATION OF NET REVENUES; TRANSIT PROGRAMS/PROJECTS. 26 A. Transit Extensions to Metrolink. 27 1. The Authority may provide technical assistance, transportation 28 planning and engineering resources for an Eligible Jurisdiction to assist in designing Transit B-1 4 214007.11 293 1 Extensions to Metrolink projects to provide effective and user-friendly connections to 2 Metrolink services and bus transit systems. 3 2. To be eligible to receive Net Revenues for Transit Extension to 4 Metrolink projects, an Eligible Jurisdiction must execute a written agreement with the 5 Authority regarding the respective roles and responsibilities pertaining to construction, 6 ownership, operation and maintenance of the Transit Extension to Metrolink project. 7 3. Allocations of Net Revenues shall be determined pursuant to a 8 countywide competitive procedure adopted by the Authority. This procedure shall include 9 an evaluation process and methodology applied equally to all candidate Transit Extension 10 to Metrolink projects. Eligible Jurisdictions shall be consulted by the Authority in the 11 development of the evaluation process and methodology. 12 B. Metrolink Gateways. 13 1. The Authority may provide technical assistance, transportation 14 planning and engineering resources for an Eligible Jurisdiction to assist in designing 15 Regional Transit Gateway facilities to provide for effective and user-friendly connections to 16 the Metrolink system and other transit services. 17 2. To be eligible to receive Net Revenues for Regional Gateway 18 projects, an Eligible Jurisdiction must execute a written agreement with the Authority 19 regarding the respective roles and responsibilities pertaining to construction, ownership, 20 operation and maintenance of the Regional Gateway facility. 21 3. Allocations of Net Revenues shall be determined pursuant to a 22 countywide competitive procedure adopted by the Authority. This procedure shall include 23 an evaluation process and methodology applied equally to all candidate Regional Gateway 24 projects. Eligible Jurisdictions shall be consulted by the Authority in the development of the 25 evaluation process and methodology. 26 C. Mobility Choices for Seniors and Persons with Disabilities. 27 1. An Eligible Jurisdiction may contract with another entity to 28 perform all or part of a Mobility Choices for Seniors and Persons with Disabilities project. B-15 214007.11 294 1 2. A senior is a person age sixty years or older. 2 3. Allocations. 3 a. One percent (1%) of the Net Revenues shall be allocated 4 to the County to augment existing senior non-emergency medical transportation services 5 funded with Tobacco Settlement funds as of the effective date of the Ordinance. The 6 County shall continue to fund these services in an annual amount equal to the same 7 percentage of the total annual Tobacco Settlement funds received by the County. The Net 8 Revenues shall be annually allocated to the County in an amount no less than the Tobacco 9 Settlement funds annually expended by the County for these services and no greater than 10 one percent of net revenues plus any accrued interest. 11 b. One percent (1%) of the Net Revenues shall be allocated 12 to continue and expand the existing Senior Mobility Program provided by the Authority. 13 The allocations shall be determined pursuant to criteria and requirements for the Senior 14 Mobility Program adopted by the Authority. 15 c. One and forty-seven hundredths percent (1.47%) of the 16 Net Revenues shall be allocated to partially fund bus and ACCESS fares for seniors and 17 persons with disabilities in an amount equal to the percentage of partial funding of fares for 18 seniors and persons with disabilities as of the effective date of the Ordinance, and to 19 partially fund train and other transit service fares for seniors and persons with disabilities in 20 amounts as determined by the Authority. 21 d. In the event any Net Revenues to be allocated for seniors 22 and persons with disabilities pursuant to the requirements of subsections a, b and c above 23 remain after the requirements are satisfied then the remaining Net Revenues shall be 24 allocated for other transit programs or projects for seniors and persons with disabilities as 25 determined by the Authority. 26 D. Community Based Transit/Circulators. 27 1. The Authority may provide technical assistance, transportation 28 planning, procurement and operations resources for an Eligible Jurisdiction to assist in B-16 214007.11 295 1 designing Community Based Transit/Circulators projects to provide effective and user- 2 friendly transit connections to countywide bus transit and Metrolink services. 3 2. To be eligible to receive Net Revenues for Community Based 4 Transit/Circulators projects, an Eligible Jurisdiction must execute a written agreement with 5 the Authority regarding the respective roles and responsibilities pertaining to construction, 6 ownership, operation and maintenance of the Community Based Transit/Circulators project. 7 3. Allocations of Net Revenues shall be determined pursuant to a 8 countywide competitive procedure adopted by the Authority. This procedure shall include 9 an evaluation process and methodology applied equally to all candidate Community Based 10 Transit/Circulator projects. Eligible Jurisdictions shall be consulted by the Authority in the 11 development of the evaluation process and methodology. 12 4. An Eligible Jurisdiction may contract with another entity to 13 perform all or part of a Community Based Transit/Circulators project. 14 VII. ALLOCATION OF NET REVENUES; ENVIRONMENTAL CLEANUP 15 PROGRAMS/PROJECTS. 16 A. An Eligible Jurisdiction may contract with any other public entity to 17 perform all or any part of an Environmental Cleanup project. 18 B. Allocation Committee. 19 1. The Allocation Committee shall not include any elected public 20 officer and shall include the following twelve (12) voting members: 21 (i) one (1) representative of the County of Orange; 22 (ii) five (5) representatives of cities, subject to the 23 requirement for one (1) representative for the cities in each supervisorial district; 24 (iii) one (1) representative of the California Department of 25 Transportation; 26 (iv) two (2) representatives of water or wastewater public 27 entities; 28 (v) one (1) representative of the development industry; B-17 214007.11 296 1 (vi) one (1) representative of the scientific or academic 2 community; 3 (vii) one (1) representative of private or non-profit 4 organizations involved in environmental and water quality protection/enforcement matters; 5 In addition, one (1) representative of the Santa Ana Regional Water 6 Quality Control Board and one (1) representative of the San Diego Regional Water Quality 7 Control Board shall be non-voting members of the Allocation Committee. 8 2. The Allocation Committee shall recommend to the Authority for 9 adoption by the Authority the following: 10 a. A competitive grant process for the allocation of 11 Environmental Cleanup Revenues, including the highest priority to capital improvement 12 projects included in a Watershed Management Area. The process shall give priority to 13 cost-effective projects and programs that offer opportunities to leverage other funds for 14 maximum benefit. 15 b. A process requiring that Environmental Cleanup 16 Revenues allocated for projects and programs shall supplement and not supplant funding 17 from other sources for transportation related water quality projects and programs. 18 c. Allocation of Environmental Cleanup Revenues for 19 proposed projects and programs. 20 d. An annual reporting procedure and a method to assess 21 the water quality benefits provided by completed projects and programs. 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 B-1 8 214007.11 297 1 ATTACHMENT C 2 TAXPAYER OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE 3 4 I. PURPOSE AND ORGANIZATION. A Taxpayer Oversight Committee 5 ("Committee") is hereby established for the purpose of overseeing compliance with the 6 Ordinance as specified in Section IV hereof. The Committee shall be organized and 7 convened before any Revenues are collected or spent pursuant to the Ordinance. 8 II. COMMITTEE MEMBERSHIP. The Committee shall be governed by eleven 9 members ("Member"). The composition of the Committee membership shall be subject to 10 the following provisions. 11 A. Geographic Balance. The membership of the Committee shall be 12 geographically balanced at all times as follows: 13 1. There shall be two Members appointed from each of the 14 County's supervisorial districts (individually, "District"); and 15 2. The Auditor-Controller shall be a Member and chairman 16 ("Chair") of the Committee. 17 B. Member Term. Each Member, except the Auditor-Controller and 18 as provided in Section III B 2 below, shall be appointed for a term of three years; provided, 19 however, that any Member appointed to replace a Member who has resigned or been 20 removed shall serve only the balance of such Member's unexpired term, and no person 21 shall serve as a Member for a period in excess of six consecutive years. 22 C. Resignation. Any Member may, at any time, resign from the 23 Committee upon written notice delivered to the Auditor-Controller. Acceptance of any 24 public office, the filing of an intent to seek public office, including a filing under California 25 Government Code Section 85200, or change of residence to outside the District shall 26 constitute a Member's automatic resignation. 27 D. Removal. Any Member who has three consecutive unexcused 28 absences from meetings of the Committee shall be removed as a Member. An absence c-i 298 507779.8 1 from a Committee meeting shall be considered unexcused unless, prior to or after such 2 absence (i) the Member submits to each of the other Members a written request to excuse 3 such absence, which request shall state the reason for such absence and any special 4 circumstances existing with respect to such absence; and (ii) a majority of the other 5 Members agree to excuse such absence. 6 E. Reappointment. Any former Member may be reappointed. 7 III. APPOINTMENT OF MEMBERS. 8 A. Membership Recommendation Panel. 9 1. The Authority shall contract with the Orange County Grand 10 Jurors' Association for the formation of a committee membership recommendation panel 11 ("Panel") to perform the duties set forth in this subsection III A. If the Orange County Grand 12 Jurors' Association refuses or fails to act in such capacity, the Authority shall contract with 13 another independent organization selected by the Authority for the formation of the Panel. 14 2. The Panel shall have five members who shall screen and 15 recommend potential candidates for Committee membership. 16 3. The Panel shall solicit, collect and review applications from 17 potential candidates for membership on the Committee. No currently elected or appointed 18 officer of any public entity ("Public Officer") will be eligible to serve as a Member, except the 19 Auditor-Controller, and a Public Officer shall complete an Intent to Resign form, which shall 20 be provided as part of the application and submitted as part of the initial application 21 process. Failure to submit an Intent to Resign form will deem such Public Officer ineligible 22 for consideration to serve as a Member. In addition, a person who has a financial conflict 23 of interest with regard to the allocation of Revenues will be deemed ineligible for 24 consideration to serve as a Member. A Member shall reside within the District the Member 25 is appointed to represent. Subject to the foregoing restrictions, the Panel shall evaluate 26 each potential candidate on the basis of the following criteria: 27 a. Commitment and ability to participate in Committee 28 meetings; C-2 299 507779.8 1 b. Demonstrated interest and history of participation in 2 community activities, with special emphasis on transportation-related activities; and 3 c. Lack of conflicts of interest with respect to the allocation 4 of Revenues. 5 4. For initial membership on the Committee, the Panel shall 6 recommend to the Authority at least five candidates from each of the two Districts that are 7 represented by one member on the Ordinance No. 2, Citizens Oversight Committee 8 ("COC") as of the date the Authority appoints the initial Members. Thereafter, the Panel 9 shall recommend to the Authority at least five candidates for filing each vacancy on the 10 Committee. 11 B. Initial Members. 12 1. The COC members, as of the date the Authority appoints the 13 initial Members of the Committee, shall be appointed as initial Members of the Committee. 14 These Members shall each serve until each of their respective terms as a member of the 15 COC expires. 16 2. Two additional initial Members shall be appointed. The 17 Authority shall place the names of the candidates recommended by the Panel on equally- 18 sized cards which shall be deposited randomly in a container. In public session, the 19 Chairman of the Authority will draw a sufficient number of names from said container to 20 allocate Committee membership in accordance with the membership requirements and 21 restrictions set forth in Section II hereof. The first person whose name is drawn shall be 22 appointed to serve a term of three years. Thereafter, the person whose name is drawn 23 who is not from the same District as the first person whose name is drawn shall be 24 appointed to serve a term of two years. 25 C. Member Vacancy. A member vacancy, however caused, shall be 26 filled by the Authority. A Member shall be appointed on or about July 1 to replace a 27 Member whose term has expired. A Member may be appointed at any time as necessary 28 to replace a Member who has resigned or been removed. The Authority shall place the C-3 300 507779.8 1 names of the candidates recommended by the Panel for the appointment on equally-sized 2 cards which shall be deposited randomly in a container. In a public session, the Chairman 3 of the Authority will draw one name from said container for each vacancy on the 4 Committee. The person whose name is so drawn shall be appointed by the Authority to fill 5 the vacancy. 6 IV. DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES. The Committee is hereby charged 7 with the following duties and responsibilities: 8 A. The initial Members shall convene to adopt such procedural rules and 9 regulations as are necessary to govern the conduct of Committee meetings, including, but 10 not limited to, those governing the calling, noticing and location of Committee meetings, as 11 well as Committee quorum requirements and voting procedures. The Committee may 12 select its own officers, including, but not limited to, a Committee co-chair who will be the 13 primary spokesperson for the Committee. 14 B. The Committee shall approve, by a vote of not less than two thirds of 15 all Committee members, any amendment to the Plan proposed by the Authority which 16 changes the funding categories, programs or projects identified on page 31 of the Plan. 17 C. The Committee shall receive and review the following documents 18 submitted by each Eligible Jurisdiction: 19 1. Congestion Management Program; 20 2. Mitigation Fee Program; 21 3. Expenditure Report; 22 4. Local Traffic Signal Synchronization Plan; and 23 5. Pavement Management Plan. 24 D. The Committee shall review yearly audits and hold an annual public 25 hearing to determine whether the Authority is proceeding in accordance with the Plan. The 26 Chair shall annually certify whether the Revenues have been spent in compliance with the 27 Plan. In addition, the Committee may issue reports, from time to time, on the progress of 28 the transportation projects described in the Plan. C-4 301 507779.8 1 E. The Committee shall receive and review the performance assessment 2 conducted by the Authority at least once every three years to review the performance of the 3 Authority in carrying out the purposes of the Ordinance. 4 F. Except as otherwise provided by the Ordinance, the Committee may 5 contract, through the Authority, for independent analysis or examination of issues within the 6 Committee's purview or for other assistance as it determines to be necessary. 7 G. The Committee may submit a written request to the Authority to explain 8 any perceived deviations from the Plan. The Authority's Chair must respond to such 9 request, in writing, within sixty days after receipt of the same. 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 C-5 302 507779.8 Measure M2 Amendments Staff Reports September 24, 2012 Measure M2 Transportation Investment Plan Amendment November 9, 2012 Public Hearing on Amendment of the Measure M 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 (Attachment C) to Modify Taxpayer Oversight Committee Membership Eligibility November 25, 2013 Public Hearing to amend Orange County Local Transportation Authority Ordinance No. 3 (Attachment C) to Modify Taxpayer Oversight Committee Membership Eligibility October 26, 2015 Proposed Amendment to the Measure M2 Transportation Investment Plan (and Ordinance No. 3) December 14, 2015 Public Hearing to Amend Orange County Local Transportation Authority Ordinance No. 3 and Renewed Measure M 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 (corrected scrivener error) May 11, 2020 Proposed Amendment to the Orange County Local Transportation Authority Measure M2 Ordinance No. 3 June 22, 2020 Public Hearing to Amend the Measure M2 Orange County Local Transportation Authority Ordinance No. 3 (temporary change to the maintenance of effort requirement due to economic impacts of coronavirus pandemic) April 12, 2021 Proposed Amendment to the Orange County Local Transportation Authority Ordinance No. 3 May 24, 2021 Public Hearing to Amend the Measure M2 Orange County Local Transportation Authority Ordinance No. 3 (temporary change to the maintenance of effort requirement due to economic impacts of coronavirus pandemic) 304 ,,,,,,........„ ..• i'r\.Aula I N .••• •• ..GIO'4-1‘ \ Resolutions and • - _ , 7 -year or_ c-, eil T : E :T_______ ___ _ __,_ ___ _ T. as u re� M2....._ _ ..„ ....._ ..,.___,.. ___ • iiczt- 0 r ' "z0.PrXf '?'/' • )/1//. '-,/, : 1***•• f Eligibility - .4, .i ., _ _ , , _ . .. . • ,,.e. ... -,. . c;, • • (4.4k* \ ••� 17, � AY ‘\.• .• cNa A °OUNTN ' 'tr ' iF June 20, 2023 0 3 Council Meeting iliw ,1 305 Background • Measure M (1991 - 2011 ) • Approved by Orange County voters on 11/6/1990 • Half-cent local transportation sales tax to maintain and improve local streets • Measure M2 (2011 - 2041 ) • Renewed Measure M approved by Orange County voters on 11/7/2006 • City must annually demonstrate compliance to receive Measure M net revenues • City's Measure M2 local fair share allocation in FY 23/24 is approx. $4.2M • M2 Eligibility Requirements (FY 2023/24) • Adopt Resolution concerning Local Signal Synchronization Plan (LSSP) �� �NTINGi • Adopt Resolution concerningCirculation Element and Mitigation Fee Program f o :•,NcoaPORaTFo••.�6> p g g t1 :— v • Adopt 7-year Capital Improvement Program (CIP) for FY 23/24 — FY 29/30 :_ : *•,....N.:1.87;7,-1Zi--****c4 . 00 306 Key E • Local Signal Synchronization Plan (LSSP) • LSSP describes traffic signal synchronization and inventory within the City • Update LSSP and adopt Resolution every 3 years to confirm City's LSSP is consistent with requirements of OCTA's Regional Traffic Signal Synchronization Master Plan • Circulation Element (CE) • City's Circulation Element defines the minimum planned lane configurations for major roads • City's CE shall be consistent with OCTA's Master Plan of Arterial Highways (MPAH) • Mitigation Fee Program (MFP) • Locally-established fees used to mitigate effects of new development on the City's oi� NTINGT transportation infrastructure 1•off \tonPoaAr•oe,.•. '• � 6`� N / \• • 7-Year Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) o: _ • Identifies all projects currently and potentially funded by OCTA Measure M2 funds`��2•'••.;�FB� —moo 11 307