The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutAdopt Resolution No. 2025-30 Concerning the Status and Updat (4) ,r`Y TiNGy�� 2000 Main Street, ..Toy of Huntington Beach,CA a F o= =_Q City of Huntington Beach APPROVED 92648 9 _ �GUNTY t I' File #: 25-389 MEETING DATE: 6/3/2025 REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION SUBMITTED TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members SUBMITTED BY: Travis Hopkins, City Manager VIA: Chau Vu, Director of Public Works PREPARED BY: Eric Tello, Assistant Civil Engineer Subject: Adopt Resolution No. 2025-30 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 Fiscal Years 2025/2026 through 2031/2032 for compliance with renewed Measure M eligibility requirements Statement of Issue: To remain eligible to receive Measure M2 Program funding, the City must adopt a resolution informing Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) that the City's updated Circulation Element, and Mitigation Fee Program has been approved by the City. The City must also submit to OCTA and adopt a 7-year Capital Improvement Program (CIP) in compliance with renewed Measure M (M2) eligibility requirements. Financial Impact: No additional funding is required for this action. The annual Measure M2 local fair share allocation in Fiscal Year 2025/2026 is approximately $5.2 million for the City. Recommended Action: A) Adopt Resolution No. 2025-30, "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 Measure M (M2) Program"; and, B) Adopt the 7-year Capital Improvement Program for Fiscal Years 2025/2026 through 2031/2032 for compliance with renewed Measure M eligibility requirements. Alternative Action(s): Do not adopt Resolution No. 2025-30 and/or the attached 7-year CIP for Measure M eligibility and provide staff with an alternative direction. This action would result in a loss of$5.2 million for the next fiscal year, and the loss of allocated and potential grant funding for the traffic and street improvement City of Huntington Beach Page 1 of 4 Printed on 5/29/2025 powered by LegistarTM 305 File #: 25-389 MEETING DATE: 6/3/2025 projects. Analysis: On November 6, 1990, Orange County voters approved the original Measure M, the revised Traffic Improvement and Growth Management Ordinance, for twenty years (1991-2011). On November 7, 2006, the Orange County voters approved Renewed Measure M. Renewed Measure M is a thirty year (2011-2041), multi-billion-dollar program extension of the original Measure M. Renewed Measure M net revenues are generated from a one-half cent sales 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 (see Attachment #5). Compliance with the eligibility requirements in Ordinance No. 3 must be established and maintained for local jurisdictions to receive Measure M net revenues. The City must satisfy certain requirements to maintain eligibility to receive funding from OCTA. Although Measure M2 funds are currently in escrow, we must continue to satisfy OCTA eligibility requirements to use funds once they are released. A key requirement is that the City must adopt a 7- year CIP for fiscal years 2025/2026 through 2031/2032, in compliance with renewed Measure M eligibility requirements. The 7-year CIP, which is included as Attachment #3, identifies all projects currently and potentially funded by OCTA Measure M2 funds. The following projects are identified in Attachment#3: 1. ADA Improvement Program 2. Arterial Rehabilitation 3. Banning Roundabout and SE Corridor Improvements 4. Bridge Maintenance Projects 5. Bushard Fire Station Signal/Fiber Optic 6. CCTV Camera Installation 7. Citywide Mobility and Corridor Improvements 8. Citywide Safe Route to School Evaluation 9. Concrete Replacements 10.Edinger Avenue Synchronization 11.Fire Station Signal - Murdy Fire Station 12.General Fiber Optic Installation and Maintenance 13.General Public Works CIP Design 14.General Street Maintenance for Public Works 15.Graham and Springdale Street Reconfiguration City of Huntington Beach Page 2 of 4 Printed on 5/29/2025 powered by LegistarTM 306 - - I File #: 25-389 MEETING DATE: 6/3/2025 16.Hamilton Avenue Corridor Improvements 17.Humboldt Bridge Rehabilitation Project 18.Huntington Beach Catch Basin Retrofit Project 19.Huntington Beach Northwest Catch Basin Retrofit Project 20.Magnolia Street Corridor Improvements 21.Residential Alley Rehabilitation 22.Residential Curb Ramp Project 23.Residential Overlay Program 24.TS Modification - Bolsa Avenue/Amazon Delivery 25.TS Synchronization - Bolsa Avenue 26.TS Synchronization - Bolsa Chica 27.Talbert Avenue Synchronization 28.Traffic Signal - Goldenwest and Norma/Lydia 29.Traffic Signal Goldenwest Street and Rio Vista Drive 30.Traffic Signal Modification Main and Delaware 31.Traffic Signal Modification Warner and Ash 32.Warner Avenue Synchronization 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#4). 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. Mitigation Fee Program The Mitigation Fee Program is an established fee program which assesses 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#2). Additionally, Resolution No. 2025-30 allows the City to meet annual eligibility requirements to receive M2 Net Revenues (Attachment#1). Public Works Commission Action: Not required for this action. City of Huntington Beach Page 3 of 4 Printed on 5/29/2025 powered by LegistarTe 307 File #: 25-389 MEETING DATE: 6/3/2025 Environmental Status: Not applicable for this action. Strategic Plan Goal: Non Applicable - Administrative Item Attachment(s): 1. Resolution No. 2025-30 "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 Measure M (M2) Program" 2. Resolution No. 2012-23 3. Measure M 7-year Capital Improvement Program (FY 2025/2026 through 2031/2032) 4. Huntington Beach Circulation Element 5. OCTA Ordinance No. 3 6. PowerPoint Presentation City of Huntington Beach Page 4 of 4 Printed on 5/29/2025 powered by LegistarT" 308 RESOLUTION NO. 2025-30 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 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 for, determining consistency of the City's Traffic Circulation Plan with the MPAH, and The City has adopted a General Plan Circulation Element which does not preclude implementation of the MPAH within its jurisdiction, and The City is required to adopt a resolution biennially informing the Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA)that the City's Circulation Element is in conformance with the MPAH and whether any changes to any arterial highways of said Circulation Element have been adopted by the City during Fiscal Years (FY) 2023-24 and FY 2024-25, and The City is required to send biennially to the OCTA all recommended changes to the City's Circulation Element and the MPAH for the purposes of re-qualifying for participation in the Comprehensive Transportation Funding Programs; and The City is required to adopt a resolution biennially certifying that the City has an existing Mitigation Fee Program that assesses traffic impacts of new developments and requires new development to pay a fair share of necessary transportation improvements attributable to the new development; and NOW, THEREFORE,the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach does hereby resolve as follows: a) The arterial highway portion of the City Circulation Element of the City is in conformance with the MPAH. b) The City attests that no unilateral reduction in through lanes has been made on any MPAH arterials during FY 2023-24 and FY 2024-25. 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 remain consistent. d) The City reaffirms that the existing Mitigation Fee Program is in effect. RESOLUTION NO. 2025-30 PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach at a regular meeting thereof held on the 31/1- day of M Ii-e , 2025. Mayor REVIEWED AND APPROVED: APPROVED AS TO FORM: City Manager City Attorney (..A___INITIATED AND APPROVED: Director of Public Works Res. No. 2025-30 STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss: CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH ) I, LISA LANE BARNES, 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 3, 2025 by the following vote: AYES: Twining, Kennedy, McKeon, Burns, Van Der Mark, Gruel, Williams NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None *air' 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 Plan policies, the City Council has directed staff in the past to create development impact fees in accordance with State law. Said impact fees were codified in Chapter 17.65 and Chapter 17.66 of the Huntington Beach Municipal Code as well as Huntington Beach Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance Chapter 230.20. Pursuant to each ordinance set forth above, the amount of the development impact fee is to be set and/or updated by resolution of the City Council; and Subsequently,and periodically, staff has conducted comprehensive reviews of the City's development impact fees to determine whether those fees are adequate to defray the cost of public facilities related to new development;those fees are set forth in Resolutions 6164,2006- 23, 2000-97, 2004-88, 99-60 and 96-71; 2002-129, 2004-88 and The City contracted with Revenue & Cost Specialists, LLC to provide a updated comprehensive evaluation of the City's existing development impact fees;and Revenue & Cost Specialists, LLC prepared a report, entitled Development Impact Fee Calculation and Nexus Report for the City of Huntington Beach, dated October, 2011 as amended April 27, 2012 (the "Nexus Report"), that provides an evaluation of existing development impact fees, recommends an increase and change in methodology in certain development impact fees, the creation of new impact fees and establishes the nexus between the imposition of such impact fees and the estimated reasonable cost of providing the service for which the fees are charged; and The Nexus Report has been available for public review and comment; and The Nexus Report substantiates the need for a modification to existing fees to change certain methodology as well as creation of new impact fees; and 1 12-3209.006/79289 311 Resolution No.2012-23 The City has collected development impact fees to mitigate the impacts of new development, including fees for transportation, park land acquisition and development, library and other public facilities since the adoption of the respective ordinances and resolutions; and The City Council desires to repeal certain resolutions, create and update other development impact fee resolutions in accordance with the calculations and recommendations contained in the Nexus Report; and In compliance with the Mitigation Fee Act, California Government Code section 66000 et seq., the City Council held a noticed public hearing on the proposed increase in development impact fees at its regular meeting on June 18 , 2012, to solicit public input on the proposed increases to development impact fees, NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach does hereby resolve as follows: 1. Findings pursuant to Government Code section 66001. The City Council 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 312 Resolution No.2012-23 4. Consistency with General Plan. The City Council fords 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 fmds 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 313 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 314 Resolution No.2012-23 his/her designee who shall determine such fee based on an analysis of the impacts of the proposed use on public facilities,equipment and/or park land. 13. Prior Resolutions Superseded. As provided herein the development impact fees approved and adopted by this resolution shall supersede and repeal any previously adopted development impact fee resolutions concerning the same,including 6164, 96-71, 99-60, 2000-97, 2004-88 and 2006-23, 2002-129,2004-88. 14. Severability. If any action, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this resolution, the Nexus Report, or other attachments thereto, shall be held invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this resolution the Nexus Report, or other attachments thereto or fees levied by this resolution that can be given effect without the invalid provisions or application of fees. In the event any section of this resolution is held invalid the previously adopted affected fees shall be automatically reinstate as if never repealed or modified herein. 15. Effective Date. Consistent with California Government Code section 66017(a), the fees as identified in attached Exhibit "A" adopted by this resolution shall take effect sixty (60) days following final action taken on the respective ordinances or amendments thereto by the City Council. 16. Appeals. Appeals of any fees, including methodology, use, land valuation etc. created pursuant to this resolution shall be conducted as set forth in Huntington Beach Municipal Code Chapter 17.73. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach at a regular meeting thereof held on the 18 day of June Mayor REV ND APPROVED: INIT :A ' ' OVED: 40: Alri Ci a er Deputy City anager APPROVED AS TO FO RM: /Yr' City, Attorney n -5 0_1a2 5 12-3209.006/79289 315 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 Page 1 317 ' 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 RESI-D,ENTIAL.LAN,D USES<.(per_Uniit)-::-: -_ '_= - - . • Detached Dwelling Unit 8.76 7.9 0.5 34.6 $ 50.22 $ 1,737.61 /Unit $ 10722.55 /Unit Apartment 6.15 7.9 0.5 24.3 $ 50.22 $ 1,220.35 /Unit $ 1,209.50 /Unit Condominium/Townhouse 5.36 7.9 0.5 21.2 $ 50.22 $ 1,064.66 /Unit $ 1460.5 /Unit Mobile Home Dwelling 4.57 7.9 0.5 18.1 $ 50.22 $ 908.98 /Unit $ ..899.0-. /Unit RESORT/TOURIST(gar Url t`or Erlt`rOoor . ' ' .. '' -• - - : - - Hotel 6.29 7.6 0.5 23.9 $ 64.34 $ 1,537.73 /Room :$ 10218,63 /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 INiSUSTRiAL _er-1• ?00 SF) - 1 ' ' - - ____ - General Light Industrial 6.17 9.0 0.5 27.8 $ 64.34 $ 1,788.65 /1,000 sf $ 1,279;46 M,000 Heavy Industrial 5.97 9.0 0.5 26.9 $ 64.34 $ 1,730.75 /1,000 sf $ '1,238.Q1 /1,000 of Manufacturing 2.73 9.0 0,5 12.3 $ 64.34 $ 791.38 /1,000 sf $ 566,11 {/1,000 Warehousing 4.39 9,0 0.5 19.8 $ 64.34 $ 1,273.93 /1,000 sf $ 910,74 /f,000 GOMM RC1Al-(per 1,000 SF) .: L_',. - .: -. . . - ' • -.. - . - . .. T.,!.::: . . _. Office Park 7.42 8.8 0.5 32.6 $ 64.34 $ 2,097.48 /1,000 sf $ 1,522;61 f,000 Research Park 5.01 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 $ 1,917.8.E f,000 Bldg.Materials/Lumber 29.35 4.3 0.5 63.1 $ 84.34 $ 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 sf,000 Movie Theater 2.47 4.3 0.5 5.3 $ 64.34 $ 341.00 /1,000 sf $ 341.00 f,000 Church 5.92 4.3 0.5 12.7 $ 64,34 $ 817.12 /1,000 sf $ 817.12 sf,000 Medical-Dental Office 22.21 8.8 0.5 97.7 $ 64.34 $ 6,286.02 /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 Office Park 13.97 4.3 0.5 30.0 $ 64.34 $ 1,930.20 /1,000 sf $ 1,930.20 sf,000 i (asd) - 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 (avq) 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 2 318 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 R S1DENTIAL 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 R 6 SORT/TO:UR1ST per Unit or;Ent Door • _ 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 - iNbUSTRIAL:Cper 9;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(per 1,000:sp)•' . . - _ - , 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 0.6 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 $ 4,176.67 /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 OT}IER::(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.E $ 64.34 $ 13,743.02 /Fuel $ 13,743.02 /Fuel Wash Position Position Page 3 319 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) RESIDENTIA:..4p,►ND SE$•4?er U it)' ' • -. ---- .,_' - Detached Dwelling Unit 8.76 7.9 0.5 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 ' RRSbRT!ToURI.ST.,(per Unit:or,EntrYb_oor) '- : .. - _- - _ 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 INDUSTRIAL.'(00,09SF) • ` ' 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 COIVIM.ERGIAL(per 1;000 SF) - Office Park 7.42 8.8 0.5 32,8 $ 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 • OTHg13(*noted) . . . ,- _ . .. . _ Cemetery 3.07 4.3 0.5 6.6 $ 64.34 $ 424.64 /Acre Service Station/Market 107.69 4,3 0,5 231.5 $ 64.34 $ 14,894.71 /Fuel (avg) Position ' Service Station w/Car 99.35 4.3 0.5 213.6 $ 64.34 $ 13,743.02 /Fuel Wash Position Page 4 320 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 67(' dilleg44) Ci y Clerk and ex-officio Clerk of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach, California • 321 5/7/25,3:39 PM ocfundtracker.octa.net/CIP/report_project_listing Orange County Transportation Authority FY 2025/26 -FY 2031/32 Capital Improvement Program TIP ID CP-12514 IMPLEMENTING AGENCY Huntington Beach, City of Local Project Number: Project Title Additional Project IDs: ADA Improvement Program Type of Work: Pedestrian Project Description Type of Work Description: Pedestrian Bring into ADA compliance select areas in the city arterial and residential streets and sidewalks. Reconstruction or rehabilitation of sidewalk Limits FISCAL TOTAL Citywide YEAR FUND TYPE ENG ROW CON/IMP O&M TOTAL ESCALATED Project Notes 2026 Measure M2 Local $0 $0 $250,000 $0 $250,000 $256,250 Fairshare 2027 Measure M2 Local $0 $0 $250,000 $0 $250,000 $262,656 Fairshare 2028 Measure M2 Local $0 $0 $250,000 $0 $250,000 $269,223 Fairshare 2029 Measure M2 Local $0 $0 $250,000 $0 $250,000 $275,953 Fairshare 2030 Measure M2 Local $0 $0 $250,000 $0 $250,000 $282,852 Fairshare 2031 Measure M2 Local $0 $0 $250,000 $0 $250,000 $289,923 Fairshare 2032 Measure M2 Local $0 $0 $250,000 $0 $250,000 $297,171 Fairshare Totals: $0 $0 $1,750,000$0 $1,750,000 $1,934,028 Last Revised:25-00-In Progress Total Programmed:$1,750,000 • • https://ocfundtrackerocta.net/CIP/report_project_listing 322 1/13 5/7/25,3:39 PM ocfundtracker.octa.net/CIP/report_project_listing TIP ID CP-10389 IMPLEMENTING AGENCY Huntington Beach, City of Local Project Number: Project Title Additional Project IDs: Arterial Rehabilitation Type of Work: Road Maintenance Project Description Type of Work Description: Road Maintenance- For FY 2025/2026,the arterials that will be rehabilitated include Heil Avenue(Goldenwest-Gothard) Rehabilitation of roadway and Newland Street(Heil-Slater). Limits FISCAL TOTAL FUND TYPE ENG ROW CON/IMP O&M TOTAL Citywide YEAR ESCALATED Project Notes 2026 Other $0 $0 $600,000 $0 $600,000 $615,000 Other indicates Prop 42. 2026 Local Streets and Roads $0 $0 $6,000,000 $0 $6,000,000 $6,150,000 apportionments 2027 Measure M2 Local $0 $0 $1,000,000 $0 $1,000,000 $1,050,625 Fairshare 2027 Local Streets and Roads $0 $0 $5,600,000 $0 $5,600,000 $5,883,500 apportionments 2028 Local Streets and Roads $0 $0 $5,600,000 $0 $5,600,000 $6,030,587 apportionments 2028 Measure M2 Local $0 $0 $1,000,000 $0 $1,000,000 $1,076,891 Fairshare 2029 Measure M2 Local $0 $0 $1,000,000 $0 $1,000,000 $1,103,813 Fairshare 2029 Local Streets and Roads $0 $0 $5,600,000 $0 $5,600,000 $6,181,352 apportionments 2030 Local Streets and Roads $0 $0 $5,600,000 $0 $5,600,000 $6,335,886 apportionments 2030 Measure M2 Local $0 $0 $1,000,000 $0 $1,000,000 $1,131,408 Fairshare 2031 Measure M2 Local $0 $0 $1,000,000 $0 $1,000,000 $1,159,693 Fairshare 2031 Local Streets and Roads apportionments $0 $0 $5,600,000 $0 $5,600,000 $6,494,283 2032 Measure M2 Local $0 $0 $1,000,000 $0 $1,000,000 $1,188,686 Fairshare 2032 Local Streets and Roads $0 $0 $5,600,000 $0 $5,600,000 $6,656,640 apportionments Totals: $0 $0 $46,200,000$0 $46,200,000 $51,058,364 Last Revised:25-00-In Progress Total Programmed:$46,200,000 TIP ID CP-12524 IMPLEMENTING AGENCY Huntington Beach, City of Local Project Number: Project Title Additional Project IDs: Banning Roundabout and SE Corridor Improvements Type of Work: Intersection Project Description Type of Work Description: Intersection- Construct new roundabout at the intersection of Banning and Bushard.Newland Street,Bushard Roundabout Street,and Brookhurst Street will have complete street improvements. Limits FISCAL YEAR FUND TYPE ENG ROW CON/IMP O&M TOTAL TOTAL ESCALATED Southeast Corridors 2026 Other $0 $0 $5,645,000 $0 $5,645,000 $5,786,125 Project Notes Other indicates AES and OCTA funding. Totals: $0 $0 $5,645,000 $0 $5,645,000 $5,786,125 Last Revised:25-00-In Progress Total Programmed:$5,645,000 • https://ocfundtracker.octa.net/CIP/report_project_listing 323 2/13 5/7/25,3:39 PM ocfundtracker.octa.net/CIP/report_project_Iisting TIP ID CP-11826 IMPLEMENTING AGENCY Huntington Beach, City of Local Project Number: Project Title Additional Project IDs: 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 TOTAL YEAR Citywide FUND TYPE ENG ROW CON/IMP O&M TOTAL ESCALATED Project Notes 2026 Measure M2 Local $150,000 $0 $505,000 $0 $655,000 $667,625 Fairshare 2027 Measure M2 Local $150,000 $0 $505,000 $0 $655,000 $680,566 Fairshare • 2028 Measure M2 Local $150,000 $0 $505,000 $0 $655,000 $693,830 Fairshare 2029 Measure M2 Local $150,000 $0 $505,000 $0 $655,000 $707,426 Fairshare 2030 Measure M2 Local $150,000 $0 $505,000 $0 $655,000 $721,361 Fairshare 2031 Measure M2 Local $150,000 $0 $505,000 $0 $655,000 $735,645 Fairshare 2032 Measure M2 Local $150,000 $0 $505,000 $0 $655,000 $750,286 Fairshare Totals: $1,050,000$0 $3,535,000$0 $4,585,000$4,956,739 Last Revised:25-00-In Progress Total Programmed:$4,585,000 TIP ID CP 12504 IMPLEMENTING AGENCY Huntington Beach, City of Local Project Number: Project Title Additional Project IDs: Bushard Fire Station Signal/Fiber Optic Type of Work: Traffic Signals Project Description Type of Work Description: Traffic Signals-Install Install traffic signal on Bushard Street at the Bushard Fire Station,north of Adams Avenue.Includes new traffic signals and equipment the installation of fiber optic conduit and cable along Bushard between Yorktown and Adams. Limits FISCAL YEAR FUND TYPE ENG ROW CON/IMP O&M TOTAL TOTAL ESCALATED Yorktown Avenue to Adams Avenue 2026 Traffic Impact Fees $40,000 $0 $0 $0 $40,000 $40,000 Project Notes 2027 Traffic Impact Fees $0 $0 $725,000 $0 $725,000 $761,703 Totals: $40,000 $0 $725,000 $0 $765,000 $801,703 Last Revised:25-00-In Progress Total Programmed:$765,000 TIP ID CP 12507 IMPLEMENTING AGENCY Huntington Beach, City of Local Project Number: Project Title Additional Project IDs: CCTV Camera Installation Type of Work: Traffic Signals Project Description Type of Work Description: Traffic Signals-Install Install CCTV cameras at 12 signalized locations in the City controlled from Traffic Management new traffic signals and equipment Center. Limits FISCAL YEAR FUND TYPE ENG ROW CON/IMP O&M TOTAL TOTAL ESCALATED Citywide 2026 Traffic Impact Fees $0 $0 $90,000 $0 $90,000 $92,250 Project Notes Totals: $0 $0 $90,000 $0 $90,000 $92,250 Last Revised:25-00-In Progress Total Programmed:$90,000 https://ocfundtracker.octa.net/CIP/report_project_Iisting 324 3/13 5/7/25,3:39 PM ocfundtracker.octa.net/CIP/report_project_listing TIP ID CP-12521 IMPLEMENTING AGENCY Huntington Beach, City of Local Project Number: Project Title Additional Project IDs: Citywide Mobility And Corridor Improvements Type of Work: Bikeways Project Description Type of Work Description: Bikeways-New bike Design and construction of various bikeway and aesthetic infrastructure on key routes. route Limits FISCAL TOTAL YEAR Citywide FUND TYPE ENG ROW CON/IMP O&M TOTAL ESCALATED Project Notes 2026 Traffic Impact $20,000 $0 $130,000 $0 $150,000 $153,250 Fees 2027 Traffic Impact $20,000 $0 $130,000 $0 $150,000 $156,581 Fees 2028 Traffic Impact $20,000 $0 $130,000 $0 $150,000 $159,996 Fees 2029 Traffic Impact $20,000 $0 $130,000 $0 $150,000 $163,496 Fees 2030 Traffic Impact $20,000 $0 $130,000 $0 $150,000 $167,083 Fees 2031 Traffic Impact $20,000 $0 $130,000 $0 $150,000 $170,760 Fees 2032 Traffic Impact $20,000 $0 $130,000 $0 $150,000 $174,529 Fees Totals: $140,000$0 $910,000 $0 $1,050,000$1,145,695 Last Revised:25-00-In Progress Total Programmed:$1,050,000 TIP ID CP-12516 IMPLEMENTING AGENCY Huntington Beach, City of Local Project Number: Project Title Additional Project IDs: Citywide Safe Route to School Evaluation Type of Work: Safety Project Description Type of Work Description: Safety-Other Complete a comprehensive evaluation of pedestrian,bike,and vehicle facilities and programs at each public school within the City. Limits FISCAL TOTAL FUND TYPE ENG ROW CON/IMP O&M TOTAL Citywide YEAR ESCALATED Project Notes 2026 Measure M2 Local $125,000$0 $0 $0 $125,000 $125,000 Fairshare Other indicates Safe Route to School grant fund. 2026 Other $500,000$0 $0 $0 $500,000 $500,000 Totals: $625,000$0 $0 $0 $625,000 $625,000 Last Revised:25-00-In Progress Total Programmed:$625,000 https://ocfundtracker.octa.net/CIP/report_project_listing 325 4/13 5/7/25,3:39 PM ocfundtracker.octa.net/CIP/report_project_listing 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 citywide. Limits FISCAL TOTAL FUND TYPE ENG ROW CON/IMP O8�M TOTAL Citywide YEAR ESCALATED Project Notes 2026 Measure M2 Local $0 $0 $500,000 $0 $500,000 $512,500 Fairshare 2027 Measure M2 Local $0 $0 $500,000 $0 $500,000 $525,312 Fairshare 2028 Measure M2 Local $0 $0 $500,000 $0 $500,000 $538,445 Fairshare 2029 Measure M2 Local $0 $0 $500,000 $0 $500,000 $551,906 Fairshare 2030 Measure M2 Local $0 $0 $500,000 $0 $500,000 $565,704 Fairshare 2031 Measure M2 Local $0 $0 $500,000 $0 $500,000 $579,847 Fairshare 2032 Measure M2 Local $0 $0 $500,000 $0 $500,000 $594,343 Fairshare Totals: $0 $0 $3,500,000$0 $3,500,000$3,868,057 Last Revised:25-00-In Progress Total Programmed:$3,500,000 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 2026 Other $0 $0 $80,000 $0 $80,000 $82,000 Project Notes Other:Funding from FY 20/21 carried over through FY 25/26.Other indicates Traffic Congestion Relief Totals: $0 $0 $80,000 $0 $80,000 $82,000 (Prop 42). Last Revised:25-00-In Progress Total Programmed:$80,000 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 2026 Traffic Impact Fees $0 $0 $345,000 $0 $345,000 $353,625 Edinger Avenue and Heil Avenue Project Notes Totals: $0 $0 $345,000 $0 $345,000 $353,625 Last Revised:25-00-In Progress Total Programmed:$345,000 https://ocfundtracker.octa.net/CIP/report_project_listing 326 5/13 • 5/7/25,3:39 PM ocfundtracker.octa.net/CIP/report project_listing TIP ID CP-12527 IMPLEMENTING AGENCY Huntington Beach,City of Local Project Number: Project Title Additional Project IDs: General Fiber Optic Installation and Maintenance Type of Work: Traffic Signals Project Description Type of Work Description: Traffic Signals Replace and upgrade traffic signals and equipment Maintenance of fiber optics needed for traffic-lighted intersections. Limits FISCAL YEAR FUND TYPE ENG ROW CON/IMP O&M TOTAL TOTAL ESCALATED Citywide 2026 Traffic Impact Fees $0 $0 $100,000 $0 $100,000 $102,500 Project Notes 2027 Traffic Impact Fees $0 $0 $100,000 $0 $100,000 $105,062 2028 . Traffic Impact Fees $0 $0 $100,000 $0 $100,000 $107,689 2029 Traffic Impact Fees $0 $0 $100,000 $0 $100,000 $110,381 2030 Traffic Impact Fees $0 $0 $100,000 $0• $100,000 $113,141 2031 Traffic Impact Fees $0 $0 $100,000 $0 $100,000 $115,969 2032 Traffic Impact Fees $0 $0 $100,000 $0 $100,000 $118,869 Totals: $0 $0 $700,000 $0 $700,000 $773,611 Last Revised:25-00-In Progress Total Programmed:$700,000 TIP ID CP-12528 IMPLEMENTING AGENCY Huntington Beach, City of Local Project Number: Project Title Additional Project IDs: General Public Works CIP Design Type of Work: Other Project Description Type of Work Description: Other-Other Design tasks as needed for projects related to freeway,environmental,transit,streets,roads,alleys, and bridge projects Limits FISCAL TOTAL FUND TYPE ENG ROW CON/IMP O&M TOTAL Citywide YEAR ESCALATED Project Notes 2026 Measure M2 Local $0 $0 $100,000 $0 $100,000 $102,500 Fairshare 2027 Measure M2 Local $0 $0 $100,000 $0 $100,000 $105,062 Fairshare 2028 Measure M2 Local $0 $0 $100,000 $0 $100,000 $107,689 Fairshare 2029 Measure M2 Local $0 $0 $100,000 $0 $100,000 $110,381 Fairshare 2030 Measure M2 Local $0 $0 $100,000 $0 $100,000 $113,141 Fairshare 2031 Measure M2 Local $0 $0 $100,000 $0 $100,000 $115,969 Fairshare 2032 Measure M2 Local $0 $0 $100,000 $0 $100,000 $118,869 Fairshare Totals: $0 $0 $700,000 $0 $700,000$773,611 Last Revised:25-00-In Progress Total Programmed:$700,000 https://ocfundtracker.octa.net/CIP/report_project_listing 327 6/13 5/7/25,3:39 PM ocfundtracker.octa.net/CIP/report_project_listing 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: Other Project Description Annual maintenance work for concrete,slurry seal,potholes and failed asphalt;O&M of traffic signals, Type of Work Description: Other-Other replacement of striping and signage,including engineering and inspection as needed on an annual basis. Limits FISCAL TOTAL FUND TYPE ENG ROW CON/IMP O&M TOTAL Citywide YEAR ESCALATED Project Notes 2026 Measure M2 Local $0 $0 $2,000,000 $0 $2,000,000 $2,050,000 Fairshare 2027 Measure M2 Local $0 $0 $2,000,000 $0 $2,000,000 $2,101,250 Fairshare 2028 Measure M2 Local $0 $0 $2,000,000 $0 $2,000,000 $2,153,781 Fairshare 2029 Measure M2 Local $0 $0 $2,000,000 $0 $2,000,000 $2,207,626 Fairshare 2030 Measure M2 Local $0 $0 $2,000,000 $0 $2,000,000 $2,262,816 Fairshare 2031 Measure M2 Local $0 $0 $2,000,000 $0 $2,000,000 $2,319,387 Fairshare 2032 Measure M2 Local $0 $0 $2,000,000 $0 $2,000,000 $2,377,372 Fairshare Totals: $0 $0 $14,000,000 $0 $14,000,000$15,472,232 Last Revised:25-00-In Progress Total Programmed:$14,000,000 TIP ID CP-12517 IMPLEMENTING AGENCY Huntington Beach, City of Local Project Number: Project Title Additional Project IDs: Graham and Springdale Street Reconfiguration Type of Work: Transportation Planning Project Description Type of Work Description: Transportation Evaluation of excess right-of-way segments to develop reconfiguration concepts with implementation Planning-Studies of concepts from the Mobility Plan. Limits FISCAL TOTAL FUND TYPE ENG ROW CON/IMP O&M TOTAL South End of Graham Street and Springdale Street YEAR ESCALATED Project Notes 2026 Measure M2 Local $70,000 $0 $0 $0 $70,000 $70,000 Fairshare 2027 General Fund $0 $450,000 $0 $0 $450,000 $472,781 2027 Measure M2 Local $0 $60,000 $0 $0 $60,000 $63,037 Fairshare 2028 Measure M2 Local $0 $60,000 $0 $0 $60,000 $64,613 Fairshare 2028 General Fund $0 $450,000 $0 $0 $450,000 $484,601 Totals: $70,000 $1,020,000 $0 $0 $1,090,000$1,155,032 Last Revised:25-00-In Progress Total Programmed:$1,090,000 TIP ID CP-12523 IMPLEMENTING AGENCY Huntington Beach, City of Local Project Number: Project Title Additional Project IDs: Hamilton Avenue Corridor Improvements Type of Work: Road Maintenance Project Description Type of Work Description: Road Maintenance- Construct complete street elements that include installing new street median,enhanced mobility,and Rehabilitation of roadway replacing damaged areas. Limits FISCAL YEAR FUND TYPE ENG ROW CON/IMP O&M TOTAL TOTAL ESCALATED Magnolia Street-Brookhurst Street 2026 Other $0 $0 $4,481,000 $0 $4,481,000 $4,593,025 Project Notes Other indicates AES and OCTA funding. Totals: $0 $0 $4,481,000 $0 $4,481,000 $4,593,025 Last Revised:25-00-In Progress Total Programmed:$4,481,000 https://ocfundtracker.octa.net/CIP/report_project_listing 328 7/13 5/7/25,3:39 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: Humboldt Bridge Rehabilitation Project Type of Work: Bridge Project Description Type of Work Description: Bridge- Design and rehabilitation of City bridge.Humboldt bridge is planned for construction in FY 25/26. Rehabilitation of existing pavement/structure Limits FISCAL TOTAL Humboldt Drive Bridge(over Short Channel) YEAR FUND TYPE ENG ROW CON/IMP O&M TOTAL ESCALATED Project Notes 2026 Other $0 $0 $2,814,000$0 $2,814,000$2,884,350 Project added in the event that M2 local fair share 2026 Measure M2 Local $0\ $0 $2,520,000 $0 $2,520,000 $2,583,000 funds are used to pay for costs that are not Fairshare reimbursed through HBP grant funding. Totals: $0 $0 $5,334,000 $0 $5,334,000$5,467,350 Last Revised:25-00-In Progress Total Programmed:$5,334,000 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 2026 Developer $0 $0 $0 $22,023 $22,023 $22,023 Project Notes Totals: $0 $0 $0 $22,023 $22,023 $22,023 Last Revised:25-00-In Progress Total Programmed:$22,023 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 2026 General Fund $0 $0 $0 $104 $104 $104 Project Notes Funding is a maintenance match for the previous Totals: $0 $0 $0 $104 $104 $104 grant. Last Revised:25-00-In Progress Total Programmed:$104 TIP ID CP-12522 IMPLEMENTING AGENCY Huntington Beach, City of Local Project Number: Project Title Additional Project IDs: Magnolia Street Corridor Improvements Type of Work: Road Maintenance Project Description Type of Work Description: Road Maintenance Complete street improvements including pavement slurry,striping,hardscape,and landscape. Rehabilitation of roadway Limits FISCAL TOTAL FUND TYPE ENG ROW CON/IMP O&M TOTAL Adams Avenue-Pacific Coast Highway YEAR ESCALATED Project Notes 2026 Other $416,000 $0 $0 $0 $416,000 $416,000 Other indicatesAES and OCTAfunding. 2027 Other $0 $0 $4,811,000 $0 $4,811,000 $5,054,557 2027 Measure M2 Local $0 $0 $420,000 $0 $420,000 $441,262 Fairshare Totals: $416,000 $0 $5,231,000 $0 $5,647,000 $5,911,819 Last Revised:25-00-In Progress Total Programmed:$5,647,000 https://ocfundtracker.octa.net/CIP/report_project_listing 329 8/13 5/7/25,3:39 PM ocfundtracker.octa.net/CIP/report_project_listing TIP ID CP-12515 IMPLEMENTING AGENCY Huntington Beach, City of Local Project Number: Project Title Additional Project IDs: Residential Alley Rehabilitation Type of Work: Road Maintenance Project Description Type of Work Description: Road Maintenance- Program to rehabilitate the City's alleys.Locations will be determined based on the alley condition Alleys survey. Limits FISCAL TOTAL YEAR FUND TYPE ENG ROW CON/IMP O&M TOTAL ESCALATED Citywide Project Notes 2026 Measure M2 Local $0 $0 $600,000 $0 $600,000 $615,000 Fairshare 2027 Measure M2 Local $0 $0 $600,000 $0 $600,000 $630,375 Fairshare 2028 Measure M2 Local $0 $0 $600,000 $0 $600,000 $646,134 Fairshare 2029 Measure M2 Local $0 $0 $600,000 $0 $600,000 $662,288 Fairshare 2030 Measure M2 Local $0 $0 $600,000 $0 $600,000 $678,845 Fairshare 2031 Measure M2 Local $0 $0 $600,000 $0 $600,000 $695,816 Fairshare 2032 Measure M2 Local $0 $0 $600,000 $0 $600,000 $713,211 Fairshare Totals: $0 $0 $4,200,000 $0 $4,200,000$4,641,669 Last Revised:25-00-In Progress Total Programmed:$4,200,000 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 adjacent Installation of ADA access ramps streets are altered or rehabilitated. - Limits FISCAL TOTAL FUND TYPE ENG ROW CON/IMP O&M TOTAL Citywide YEAR ESCALATED Project Notes 2026 Measure M2 Local $0 $0 $640,000 $0 $640,000 $656,000 Fairshare 2026 Community Development $0 $0 $110,000 $0 $110,000 $112,750 Block Grant 2027 Measure M2 Local $0 $0 $640,000 $0 $640,000 $672,400 Fairshare 2027 Community Development $0 $0 $110,000 $0 $110,000 $115,569 Block Grant - 2028 Measure M2 Local $0 $0 $640,000 $0 $640,000 $689,210 Fairshare 2028 Community Development $0 $0 $110,000 $0 $110,000 $118,458 Block Grant 2029 Measure M2 Local $0 $0 $640,000 $0 $640,000 $706,440 Fairshare 2029 Community Development $0 $0 $110,000 $0 $110,000 $121,419 Block Grant 2030 Measure M2 Local $0 $0 $640,000 $0 $640,000 $724,101 Fairshare 2030 Community Development $0 $0 $110,000 $0 $110,000 $124,455 Block Grant 2031 Community Development $0 $0 $110,000 $0 $110,000 $127,566 Block Grant 2031 Measure M2 Local $0 $0 $640,000 $0 $640,000 $742,204 Fairshare 2032 Community Development $0 $0 $110,000 $0 $110,000 $130,755 Block Grant 2032 Measure M2 Local $0 $0 $640,000 $0 $640,000 $760,759 Fairshare Totals: $0 $0 $5,250,000 $0 $5,250,000 $5,802,086 Last Revised:25-00-In Progress Total Programmed:$5,250,000 https://ocfundtracker.octa.net/CIP/report_project_listing 330 9/13 5/7/25,3:39 PM ocfundtracker.octa.net/CIP/report_project_listing TIP ID CP-10400 IMPLEMENTING AGENCY Huntington Beach, City of Local Project Number: Project Title Additional Project IDs: Residential Overlay Program Type of Work: Road Maintenance Project Description Type of Road Maintenance- Rehabilitation of residential streets with asphalt overlay will take place within the City's scheduled Type of Work Description:of roadway Maintenance Zones.This annual project aims to provide street overlay rehabilitation based on the RehabiliPMP ratings. Limits FISCAL TOTAL FUND TYPE ENG ROW CON/IMP O&M TOTAL Citywide YEAR ESCALATED Project Notes 2026 Measure M2 Local $0 $0 $1,000,000 $0 $1,000,000 $1,025,000 Fairshare Other indicates Sewer Service Fund,Water Fund,Infrastructure Fund,and Prop 42. 2026 Gas Tax $0 $0 $3,300,000 $0 $3,300,000 $3,382,500 2026 Other $0 $0 $1,150,000 $0 $1,150,000 $1,178,750 2027 Other $0 $0 $2,600,000 $0 $2,600,000 $2,731,625 2027 Measure M2 Local $0 $0 $1,600,000 $0 $1,600,000 $1,681,000 Fairshare 2027 Gas Tax $0 $0 $2,000,000 $0 $2,000,000 $2,101,250 2028 Gas Tax $0 $0 $2,000,000 $0 $2,000,000 $2,153,781 2028 Measure M2 Local $0 $0 $1,600,000 $0 $1,600,000 $1,723,025 Fairshare 2028 Other $0 $0 $2,600,000 $0 $2,600,000 $2,799,916 2029 Measure M2 Local $0 $0 $1,600,000 $0 $1,600,000 $1,766,101 Fairshare 2029 Other $0 $0 $2,600,000 $0 $2,600,000 $2,869,914 2029 Gas Tax $0 $0 $2,000,000 $0 $2,000,000 $2,207,626 2030 Other $0 $0 $2,600,000 $0 $2,600,000 $2,941,661 2030 Gas Tax $0 $0 $2,000,000 $0 $2,000,000 $2,262,816 2030 Measure M2 Local $0 $0 $1,600,000 $0 $1,600,000 $1,810,253 Fairshare 2031 Other $0 $0 $2,600,000 $0 $2,600,000 $3,015,203 2031 Gas Tax $0 $0 $2,000,000 $0 $2,000,000 $2,319,387 2031 Measure M2 Local $0 $0 $1,600,000 $0 $1,600,000 $1,855,509 Fairshare 2032 Measure M2 Local $0 $0 $1,600,000 $0 $1,600,000 $1,901,897 Fairshare 2032 Gas Tax $0 $0 $2,000,000 $0 $2,000,000 $2,377,372 2032 Other $0 $0 $2,600,000 $0 $2,600,000 $3,090,583 Totals: $0 $0 $42,650,000 $0 $42,650,000$47,195,169 Last Revised:25-00-In Progress Total Programmed:$42,650,000 TIP ID CP-12503 IMPLEMENTING AGENCY Huntington Beach, City of Local Project Number: Project Title Additional Project IDs: TS Modification-Bolsa Avenue/Amazon Dirveway Type of Work: Traffic Signals Project Description Type of Work Description: Traffic Signals-Install Install eastbound left-turn arrows at the intersection of Bolsa Avenue and the Amazon Driveway(east new traffic signals and equipment of Bolsa Chica Street). Limits FISCAL YEAR FUND TYPE ENG ROW CON/IMP O&M TOTAL TOTAL ESCALATED Bolsa Avenue and Amazon Driveway Intersection 2026 Traffic Impact Fees $40,000 $0 $0 $0 $40,000 $40,000 Project Notes 2027 Traffic Impact Fees $0 $0 $362,500 $0 $362,500 $380,852 Totals: $40,000 $0 $362,500 $0 $402,500 $420,852 Last Revised:25-00-In Progress Total Programmed:$402,500 https://ocfundtracker.octa.net/CIP/report_project_listing 331 10/13 5/7/25,3:39 PM ocfundtracker.octa.net/CIP/report_project_listing TIP ID CP-11542 IMPLEMENTING AGENCY Huntington Beach, City of 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 2026 Other $5,000 $0 $60,000 $5,000 $70,000 $71,500 Street Project Notes This is an OCTA grant.OCTA will manage the Totals: $5,000 $0 $60,000 $5,000 $70,000 $71,500 project and is contributing$173,000(HB segment only).Other indicates Traffic Congestion Relief fund.Other indicates Traffic Congestion Relief Fund. Last Revised:25-00-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 YEAR FUND TYPE ENG ROW CON/IMP O&M TOTAL TOTAL ESCALATED Bolsa Chica Street from Warner Avenue to Rancho 2026 Other $0 $0 $0 $30,400 $30,400 $30,400 Road Project Notes Other indicates Infrastructure Fund and OCTA CIP Totals: $0 $0 $0 $30,400 $30,400 $30,400 Grant. Last Revised:25-00-In Progress Total Programmed:$30,400 IMPLEMENTING AGENCY Huntington Beach, TIP ID CP-10401 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 YEAR FUND TYPE ENG ROW CON/IMP O&M TOTAL ESCALATED Beach Boulevard to Newland Street Project Notes 2026 Air Quality Management $0 $0 $6,000 $0 $6,000 $6,150 District Other:Funding from FY 20/21 carried over through FY 25/26. Totals: $0 $0 $6,000 $0 $6,000 $6,150 Last Revised:25-00-In Progress Total Programmed:$6,000 https://ocfundtrackerocta.net/CIP/report_project_listing 332 11/13 5/7/25,3:39 PM ocfundtracker.octa.net/CIP/report_project_listing TIP ID CP-12505 IMPLEMENTING AGENCY Huntington Beach, City of Local Project Number: Project Title Additional Project IDs: Traffic Signal-Goldenwest and Norma/Lydia • Type of Work: Traffic Signals Project Description Type of Work Description: Traffic Signals-Install Install North-South left-turn arrows at the intersection of Goldenwest Street and Norma Drive/Lydia new traffic signals and equipment Drive. Limits FISCAL YEAR FUND TYPE ENG ROW CON/IMP O&M TOTAL TOTAL ESCALATED Goldenwest Street and Norma Drive/Lydia Drive 2026 Traffic Impact Fees $40,000 $0 $0 $0 $40,000 $40,000 Intersection 2027 Traffic Impact Fees $0 $0 $487,500 $0 $487,500 $512,180 Project Notes Totals: $40,000 $0 $487,500 $0 $527,500 $552,180 Last Revised:25-00-In Progress Total Programmed:$527,500 TIP ID CP-12506 IMPLEMENTING AGENCY Huntington Beach,City of Local Project Number: Project Title Additional Project IDs: Traffic Signal Goldenwest Street and Rio Vista Drive Type of Work: Traffic Signals Project Description Type of Work Description: Traffic Signals-Install Install northbound left-turn arrows at the intersection of Goldenwest Street and Rio Vista Drive. new traffic signals and equipment Limits FISCAL YEAR FUND TYPE ENG ROW CON/IMP O&M TOTAL TOTAL ESCALATED Goldenwest Street and Rio Vista Drive Intersection 2026 Traffic Impact Fees $30,000 $0 $0 $0 $30,000 ,$30,000 Project Notes 2027 Traffic Impact Fees $0 $0 $200,000 $0 $200,000 $210,125 Totals: $30,000 $0 $200,000 $0 $230,000 $240,125 Last Revised:25-00-In Progress Total Programmed:$230,000 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 2026 Traffic Impact Fees $0 $0 $660,000 $0 $660,000 $676,500 Project Notes Totals: $0 $0 $660,000 $0 $660,000 $676,500 Last Revised:25-00-In Progress Total Programmed:$660,000 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.Warner Ave 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 2026 Traffic Impact Fees $0 $0 $660,000 $0 $660,000 $676,500 Project Notes Totals: $0 $0 $660,000 $0 $660,000 $676,500 Last Revised:25-00-In Progress Total Programmed:$660,000 https://ocfundtracker.octa.net/CIP/report_project_listing 333 12/13 5/7/25,3:39 PM ocfundtrackerocta.net/CIP/report_project_listing 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 2026 Other $0 $0 $80,000 $0 $80,000 $82,000 Project Notes Other:Funding from FY 20/21 carried over through FY 25/26. Totals: $0 $0 $80,000 $0 $80,000 $82,000 Last Revised:25-00-In Progress Total Programmed:$80,000 https://ocfundtracker.octa.net/CIP/report_project_listing 334 13/13 ge .7______. 1 eft 1...i. III. Circulation wit Ii �,_ , . 4c lit i.= •,' 66 EB, , IIf `is "� l ' 11..4.4 to t . fi / a , ( . r � � r r r �Cr ._ _ __ — �. ^• • •�-� _.. _ r...... 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 system includes bikeways,equestrian trails, sidewalks and jogging paths, and waterways. Public transit services transport people within the planning area and to more distant destinations, using regional services provided by the Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA). Ensuring that mobility options in Huntington Beach remain diverse and efficient is both a 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 element, the City guides how the circulation system will be shaped to respond to the needs and desires of the community. These needs and desires include reducing and preventing traffic congestion, providing for safe active transportation, and planning for new transit opportunities. Huntington Beach is a dynamic city, and the Circulation Element provides the means for the circulation system to adapt to dynamic conditions. , City of Huntington Beach General Plan (Adopted October 2, 2017) 3-1 335 OM Accomplishing these objectives requires effective land use planning, roadway monitoring and improvement, transportation system and demand management, regional coordination, and commitment of significant personnel resources. The policies and programs in this element emphasize a balanced, multimodal transportation system that responds to the demands of current and planned land uses identified in the Land Use sow 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. 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 federal agencies, as well as with neighboring communities. 1-43 3-2 City of Huntington Beach General Plan (Adopted October 2, 2017) 336 Relationship to Other General Plan Elements +n State planning law requires that the Circulation Element be consistent with other General e 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 NNW 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 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 facilities users are largely responsible for excessive noise levels in certain locations in the community. Projected noise distributions, depicted as noise contours in the Noise Element, are in turn related to the Circulation Element. Policies and plans contained in the 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. 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 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 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 calculated based on current or future traffic volumes and capacity values for various types of roadway facilities.Volume is established either by a traffic count (in the case of current #" volumes)or by a forecast for a future condition. Capacity is a critical component of roadway 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) 3-3 337 ego roadway becomes. For example, a roadway that carries 1,000 vehicles per hour but has the capacity to accommodate 2,000 vehicles per hour at free flow speed has a V/C of 0.50, which drivers would experience as "free-flowing,"with only minor delays. The V/C 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. 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 Peak Hour Level of Service Descriptions for Intersections Description V/C or IC 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 C ' 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 t,v 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 It 3-4 City of Huntington Beach General Plan (Adopted October 2, 2017) 338 i Vehicle Miles Traveled SB 743 was passed by the state legislature in 2013. Among other topics, it discusses haw ee transportation impacts are addressed under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Currently, an environmental impact report addresses impacts to traffic a; congestion and delays. SB 743 requires the Office of Planning and Research to update 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 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. 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. F City of Huntington Beach General Plan (Adopted October 2, 2017) 3-5 339 Regional Mobility Orange County has seen rapid growth moo since the 1990s, and is projected to C have continued growth well into the swot 21st century. Regional transportation strategies are needed to successfully :• 'e. - implement City and County plans accommodating future growth. These strategies must link Huntington BeachIra to other regional employment and commercial centers, as well as airports and transportation hubs, and should prominently 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 the northeastern portion of the planning area. Pacific Coast Highway (SR 1) extends 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 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 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 walking and bicycling to combat obesity, especially in children. 3-6 \ City of Huntington Beach General Plan (Adopted October 2, 2017) 340 Iii • Complete Streets can lead to economic revitalization by reducing transportation costs ' eft and travel time while increasing property values and job growth in communities. mon • 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 road and where walking and bicycling are an important part of improving public transportation and creating friendly, walkable neighborhoods. Making a street more complete could include installing or improving sidewalks, adding bike or dedicated bus lanes, or maintaining frequent and visible crosswalks, roundabouts, or any number of other design features that suit the location and maintain or improve 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. In addition to providing ways to travel, and creating places for people, Huntington Beach's streets also provide access to private property and public sewer, water, electrical, and storm drain utilities. The Local Road System' :, . 4 / Roadways in Huntington Beach are generally ' i it .' a laid out on a north—south, east—west trending grid system. The grid system becomes slightly . , ,. - modified in the Downtown area, where r roadways trend northeast—southwest, and in 4 tee, the Huntington Harbour and Sunset Beach areas. As shown later in the Arterial Highway �� Plan, the local roadway system is organized in ,Le N• r o a hierarchical fashion, based on the grid ,Y: 4-Lliz f - system. However, due to natural barriers such , ' -'- ., "`._ as the Bolsa Chica Wetlands, the Santa Ana 0��`. ,-- = ' Y River, the Pacific Ocean, and the Seal Beach Naval Weapons Station, the grid system .� i !i becomes discontinuous. This results in � circuitous and somewhat limited access to -1--° } certain locations, such as access to Pacific . -- g ' ' .�a Coast Highway from north-central Huntington Beach, or access across the Santa Ana 1 River from the southeast. (lib I City of Huntington Beach General Plan (Adopted October 2, 2017) 3-7 341 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 Slater Avenue still accommodate significant automobile traffic while also balancing the needs of more direct local access, on-street parking, and increased nonmotorized modes of transportation. Collector streets like Delaware Street or Orange Avenue are more 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 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: • Freeway • Primary Arterial • Smart Street Arterial • Secondary Arterial • Principal Arterial • Collector Arterial • Major Arterial • Local Street 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. Freeways 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 provides regional freeway access N ° - _ at a number of interchanges in or t4N-Aptle- � `y adjacent to the city. Freeway , ,� • design standards are dictated by Caltrans, District 12, and the t • Federal Highway Administration. • Any interchange improvements must be coordinated with and approved by Caltrans. 3 8 City of Huntington Beach General Plan (Adopted October 2, 2017) 342 1ZZ Rom. WWI Meg C.? 106' =i ' -. LAM LAP4 Wr,E :did: ;K LANE LANE �, 4 1 a r a 4 1 1 , i^*(r Lw bFD R t i MEOcyv SMART STREET ARTERIAL _ tAM1E _ LANE LAM LtAt Art tkht! a ( 4 s a 141 ic .. .. �Phmptiof, 16 MAJOR ARTERIAL LiD E�.L 64' 9,t{ L NI 1.6‘6E IN-INA Ltd.F 4 4 $ t f t it:iriNG ar4L.!AMIDQ1142ED NiOWV PRIMARY ARTERIAL(DIVED) at 1ANE. UNE J14- .,`•.1VP K a a r SECONDARY ARTERIAL(UNDIVIDED) COLLECTOR STREET(LMENVIDED) Souse CO,o Muni pon Beech(2014) 1147�ief�t�l/ Typical Roadway Cross Sections Figure CIRC-1 1W xuNT, City of Huntington Beach General Plan. City of Huntington Beach General Plan (Adopted October 2, 2017) 3-9 343 4:4 Smart Street Arterials Smart street arterials are six-to eight-lane roadways with enhanced capacity compared to a standard arterial 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. Traffic-carrying capacities of smart streets can range from 60,000 to 79,000 vehicles per day, depending on the 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 (SR 39) and Pacific Coast Highway (SR 1) are under Caltrans's jurisdiction. Principal Arterials Principal arterials act as main thoroughfares and provide access to major activity centers and the regional freeway system. Principal arterials are typically eight-lane roadways featuring raised or striped medians. Desirable minimum spacing for street intersections along a principal arterial is approximately one-quarter mile. Unsignalized minor street and driveway access may be allowed, but signalized access is preferred and left-turn restrictions are typically planned at unsignalized access locations. 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 capacity enhancements, as the two classifications are not mutually exclusive. Major Arterials 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 parking is usually not appropriate along some of the more heavily traveled major arterial street segments in the city. Maximum service volumes of±50,000 vehicles per day can be achieved, depending on the degree of access control, intersection operations, and peak-period loadings. 3-10 City of Huntington Beach General Plan (Adopted October 2, 2017) 344 Major arterials can be designated as smart streets with the appropriate capacity t� enhancements, and so these two classifications are not mutually exclusive. „; Primary Arterials NMI Primary arterials are four-lane divided roadways carrying local and regional commute Oi traffic. Unsignalized minor street and driveway access may be allowed, but signalized = access is preferred and left-turn restrictions are typically planned at unsignalized access locations. Curbside parking is generally prohibited. Maximum service volumes of ±35,000 vehicles per day can be achieved depending on the degree of access control, peak-period loadings, and lane configurations at the major intersections. Secondary Arterials 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 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 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 ' AS) intent is to allow these arterials to be compatible with their localized settings, providing a context-sensitive approach to the actual design parameters. Examples include the type /1-13/I and size of medians, the size and use of parkways, and in some cases, auxiliary lanes to facilitate local access. City of Huntington Beach General Plan (Adopted October 2, 2017) 3-11 345 Local Streets Local streets are two-lane roadways without medians. Centerline striping is typically not 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 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 Roadway Mobility and Access Characteristics width (ROW/ Typical Number Daily Traffic of Lanes Class Pavement) Volume (at LOS E) High-capacity arterial roadways featuring enhanced traffic signal 6 to 8 lanes Smart synchronization, bus bays, Variable with raised or painted median Street intersection improvements, and ROW 79,000 and additional Arterial additional travel lanes. Direct access (120'-144') turn lanes 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 120'/104' painted median 65,000 Arterial access to adjacent properties is and additional 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 intersections properties. Roadways intended to carry traffic between local streets and principal or 4 lanes divided, Arteriay l major arterials.They are similar to 100'/84' with turn lanes 35,000 major arterials,with only limited as needed access to adjacent properties. Roadways intended to carry traffic 4 lanes Secondary between local streets and principal or undivided,with major arterials.They are similar to 80'/64' 25,000 Arterial major arterials,with only limited turn lanes as access to adjacent properties. needed 113 Collector Roadways providing property access 2 lanes Arterial and linking properties to secondary, Varies undivided 12,500 major, and principal arterials. 3-12 City of Huntington Beach General Plan (Adopted October 2, 2017) 346 Beach and Edinger Corridors Specific Plan emt wow n Edinger Avenue that fall within the Beach and The sections of Beach Boulevard and er d g Edinger Corridors Specific Plan area have cross sections that are unique to the Specific w 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 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 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 consistent with 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 funnel through a few key intersections. If these intersections fail to operate at adopted 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 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. City of Huntington Beach General Plan (Adopted October 2, 2017) 3-13 347 ifiZ co y c .S2 CO rA L es U v _ V m City of 65 , 0 City of Seal Beach W Westminster Boise Ave \ _ S 1McFadden W n _ L rat 3 Ave in Center Ave. Z Edinger Ave Huntrogton ' t Harbour Heil Ave c,-, sgI City of 15, Er Fountain Valley 0 ��+,V1la Ave Slater Ave GO lalb-eri Talbert Ave C� n Ellis 9 to p Ave 4f . r cat°` 1 m to mS 4/. Garfield Ave f 1-o / 0� '� /�� r- Yorktown Ave '2, cam 9tp / 5 0 c) , , • /Adams Ave 0 r r - „ Indianapolis Ave :3' w Atlanta Ave LEGEND 6�_ �� Existing Circulation sr� Mapr(6lane divided)m ` s� 0�D 5� - Hamilton Ave Prery(4 lane divided) m Augmented Prmary(added capecrty) cb 5� -1/ annln9 Ave Secondary(4 lane undivided) £ -+s Collector(2 lane undivided) n 00 O} I Augmented Collector(added capacity) �' 3� City Of --•Proposed Primary 0 4 �� ,' Costa Mesa wawa Reserved Right of Way J<A _ State Facility 0* 1 Q Planning Area 17 CO 77 77 Nan-Incorporated Land C- W,hit Planning Ara. Oala Source Data compiled by PMC(2014) B.r Map Sour.:City or Halftime Beach(2014) I - Hnnlin$lon Beacill' i, Arterial Highway Plan Figure CIRC-2 ter heti its. City of Huntington Beach General Plan 3-14 City of Huntington Beach General Plan (Adopted October 2, 2017) 348 IIIII all \it tall Minions N o. Imre o \\}\ a f�li• Vl �I • ` silty Of CD C! Of } N � W ••- 8 Westminster Seal Beach co E _ f? t Bolsa Ave 1` a m J t o C3 McFadden I • is ET) Ave v• aS 5 IS T is y re � C Edinger Ave �Huntington r—�� .. Ha+lwur Heil Ave ' t,Xt. City of N,, , - - - Fountain Valley i Wa Ave % ♦t •� } s°tio \ •. •� - :::: Balsa Chico _ 2k Fil S ,0 Wetlonds a rn rr, s Ellis �g li C re Ave N C. \ �� w S 12 C i \-1" �v j• i Garfield Ave `y ', _ Yorktown Ave ,\C ' fr 6 A �a 418,„ 4111 Y J / amsve — Indianapolis Ave \.S 1 • . - Atlanta Ave .//;% • y' 0N U Hamilton Ave t -N v ° 16%•• LEGEND 0. t5-%. .. nnirgAve _ Downgrade to Pnrrnry 5� ,�,r Downgrade to Collector on M PAH, � `1 City Of Augmented Facility on Arterial Hwy Plan '•��) Costa Mesa t -• Delete from MPAH �4�� Major City Streets �i 1 —••—• City LimitssdIr _ti 0 0.5 I > I t 1 a 1 MIL ES tES Dim Source Dan complied by Stan tec Base Map Source'City er Huntington Beach 429141 IIuntin$IQO Bfac.' Proposed MPAH Amendments Figure CIRC-3 r � rIIr,�,.»a,: City of Huntington Beach General Plan i City of Huntington Beach General Plan (Adopted October 2, 2017) ,--..//( 3-15 349 .g. 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 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 CIRC 1.B), except in the case of Orange County Congestion Management Program(CMP) intersections. The lowest acceptable performance standard for CMP intersections is 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 policy is to achieve LOS D for these CMP intersections, a higher standard than the CMP LOSE requirement. 3-16 City of Huntington Beach General Plan (Adopted October 2, 2017) 350 ell The technical procedures used to determine LOS are based on the ICU methodology n 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. 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 project mitigation will also be used to address necessary improvements. Relationship to Land Use 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 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. Neighborhood Traffic Management As vehicle traffic in Huntington Beach and the region increases, commuters and locals may look for less-crowded streets for quicker drive times. Drivers may choose to leave 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. h character and safetyof neighborhoods is important to the City. Policies Preserving the c a g p ry 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 Circulation Element, and will be updated on an ongoing basis. I f City of Huntington Beach General Plan (Adopted October 2, 2017) 3-17 351 Public Transportation o 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. NEIN 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 services have defined service areas but do not operate on fixed routes or schedules. 0, 4 74. In 2014, OCTA operated 16 routes through the city (see Figure CIRC-4). The number GOLDEN WEST Atrig,., TRANSPORTATION d r`., of lines and routes are adjusted as needed ocra CENTER in response to ridership patterns. OCTA and the City both operate demand- ` cl J ' " ` response services. OCTA operates the ` - ACCESS program. The City,with the aid of t _ OCTA, operates the Senior Services ri Mobility Program. Two park-and-ride facilities allow commuters to park their personal vehicles at one location and utilize carpools, vanpools, or commuter bus service.The park-and-ride facilities are the Golden West Transportation Center at Gothard Street and Center Avenue, and a large lot at the Boeing Corporation campus at Bolsa Avenue and Bolsa Chica Street. Future Plans 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. 3-18 City of Huntington Beach General Plan (Adopted October 2, 2017) 352 Ill ._. lit' gm IATTED ST 'ES tiPOP % it A JS.T TIO. ��• ../t--.. 1►-71 � City of Cityof �• �' ..B E i" `�• GOLDEN Westminster Seal Beach co L WEST �' n gm m — in am‘ ,- COLLEGE Bolsa Ave ♦ GOLDEN WEST '''S TRANSPORTATION 66 . .. CENTER WITH J dn PARK-AND-RIDE 2 McFadden �. g Ave (�` .o chit (,�..�. o. V CO (n '4 G ` in erAve ems,• iTO— a _ r Ed 9_ }: ../ Huntington I' .•-- Harbour I ee w -0 '� O ` 70 _ v z Heil•ve r'j� ; _ — - � City of Fountain Valle \ a =7®s--/ 21 'Waver Ave v. ,. rn �9 , 76 m , ••�•�••+,,i�• � .3 Slater Ave , '•\ i Z • \ a - -- • Talbert Ave S •`� 76 c ,�'�• v' Ellis i6 "0 ,,�, 4� • Ave m c - •�' I Y � g v �trfi i roil f m' m S � ~ Garfield Ave O W GO U i c5` N cee • :r4111I Indianapolis Ave LEGEND /Atlanta Ave — Major City Streets " j.• —••— City Limits co Bus All 'Hantton Ave se' e —Route 1 i .Route 66 00 � arming Ave • m • Route 21 •el •Route 70 ef'' 11111 Route 25 Route 72 ,/ � City of Route 29 ■•••Route 76 1) • Costa Mesa -Route 33 ••••Route 178 �}`••�•• Route 35 •-•Route 211 �Ir. i • � • Route 64 �Route 701 ,` �, 0 0.5 1 "V r I I I t I . MILES Dna.Source Data compiled by Renato Sole Map Source:City of Honin ic.Beach(2014) HUiang1M Beset). Bus Route Map Figure CIRC-4 i�l City of Huntington Beach General Plan t City of Huntington Beach General Plan (Adopted October 2, 2017) # 3-19 353 i Helistops and Heliports 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 Avenue), Guardian Center (Beach Boulevard at Warner Avenue), Huntington Beach 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 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 impacts 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. The City also encourages the use of low- or no-emission vehicles, ,. if including hybrids, electric vehicles, or Ti `; „ 4 other emerging technologies. One - wor example is low-speed, zero-emission ' neighborhood electric vehicles It (NEVs). These vehicles are usually ,P—• „. ,.. restricted to roads with speeds of 35 - mph or less and must be charged approximately every 30 miles. For these reasons, the City encourages # f businesses to provide charging stations and is investigating alternative roadway systems for NEVs. 143, �D�,t'tt Wit' 3-20 ', City of Huntington Beach General Plan (Adopted October 2, 2017) 354 al Parking n Nom owl Huntington Beach is a popular destination for beachgoers and shoppers. Great demand e for limited parking in Downtown, at the beach, and at parks, sports fields, high schools, churches, and industrial locations has been a continuing issue for many years. Excessive pow numbers of vehicles parked on city streets can potentially impede vehicle circulation, C' reducing the effective capacity of roadways and causing traffic congestion. Residential neighborhoods also experience heavy parking demand when large numbers of visitors 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. 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 i 4 `t _=- Sidewalks and walking paths allow {1111 Pi W `` �� people to walk easily around most . .,: ,.,-� t pot. parts of Huntington Beach, � titAi , -��I� id particularly articular) in areas such as � � r ii i.... it F Downtown, adjacent to the beach, -t;t 1' '`.=i ', t. . and along portions of Beach 1 f. Boulevard. Within master-planned '"" • ��' neighborhoods, pedestrian paths link homes to recreation facilities. In many other neighborhoods, sidewalks allow children to walk to schools and parks and surrounding uses. 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 designation process for PEZs, coordinating with County and regional transportation 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. Ei3l' City of Huntington Beach General Plan (Adopted October 2, 2017) 3-21 355 Routes for Bicyclists t Huntington Beach's mild climate CZ permits bicycle riding year-round, andmow r " the growing popularity of bicycling has �� drawn enthusiasts onto the streets b ° Tw and bike trails near the beach and throughout the planning area. The bikeway plan shown in Figure CIRC-5 o F identifies the planned system of bikeways to accommodate growing demand and provide a real alternative to the car for local trips. The plan establishes three classes of bicycle routes: • Class I Bike Paths — Off-road routes located along designated multiuse trails or vacated rail lines separated from streets. • Class II Bike Lanes — On-road routes delineated by painted stripes and other identifying features. • Class III Bike Routes—On-road routes sharing use with pedestrians or motor vehicle ° traffic that are signed but not striped. Cross sections for each type of route are shown on Figure CIRC-6. Class II and Ill routes along the north-south and east-west arterials connect to pedestrian trails and Class I 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 meet appropriate traffic safety standards. Equestrian Facilities Huntington Beach, despite its generally suburban character, has managed to retain a few residential it neighborhoods near Central Park where the tque.itran Centel } B.GP,E.G Hairs Uff t& keeping of horses ispermitted. To support SemweCenter P 9 PP f ltindscmgfarm, equestrian activities, the Cityhas required the #'Arol Ro Rau`" q q � t t��Rn,trt,r neisdataket tr.ka.. development of horse trails around and through these neighborhoods with a planned route west to - aScbA i �sa '"" Pacific Coast Highway.Visitors and others also use ., r *3 „ the trails for rented horses available at the � ` ,� t c I- Huntington Central Park Equestrian Center. The kY center and equestrian trails provide welcome recreation options for residents and others, and the VA3 City will retain these facilities as community resources. 3-22 City of Huntington Beach General Plan (Adopted October 2, 2017) 356 an n 117 ( rat' Yi 1 Ill et mem u in 6 AD m . W City of =+ C;tyof E t t ii •at � Westminster Seat Beach 19 p m 73 0 (3\ co Bolsa Ave >. - t7 L Ave Y• McFadden • t g " 4 _ .0 6 ts 3 m n t Z ___ _.. i Edinger Ave \•.% Huntington-, -4 — — Harbour Ei '�� j_„— ,— _ _ Heil Ave .., , ,_ c \:.\\ g WamerAve 1 f ld / F \<� *.... . ��\ ., Slater Ave C \ o •\ Boko Chico " t Talbert Ave \ Wetlands \` • Q fn to ,. v, \••^7, Ellis m to 7`•� ate . Ave m o v .:' \ s' i'scoco4 \ � F. L Gar field Ave ., d� `(' \• gyve Yorlaown Ave e \ LEGEND / ..„, r Adams Ave 0 Santa Ana River Trail Access \ ! / — Major City Streets \ - Q Indianapolis Ave ----- Horse Trails \• (.\ �\ V 1i Railroads ---- City Limits �-- ► _-V Atlanta Ave •;. / —Bike Lane cc • 0—'\, g r Bike Lane on One Side 4 \, ve ---,- Q Hamilton Ave -Bike Lane/Bike Route �xc \• I� as ••\ —Bike Route Oe 2r 5.` . Banning Ave Multi-Use Pathway U N r / Proposed Bike Blvd ÷e� '2, .%. 1 City of -Proposed Bike Lane �e�� \ / Costa Mes Proposed Bike Route \. � _ r` -Proposed Multi-Use o° —Wde Walkway • . 0 0.5 lle E ( i t 1 s MILES Data Source Data cambric/0 by SUM. Bata Map Source'.City of Huntington Beach(2014) tea®"' Bikeway Plan Figure CIRC-5 tp.� City of Huntington Beach General Plan City of Huntington Beach General Plan (Adopted October 2, 2017) 3-23 357 Q. OClass 1 Multi-Use Bike Path Provides a completely separated right-of- swim way for the exclusive use of bicycles and *ram 1ece•ti pedestrians with cross flow by motorists � -,;,tale._ - I f �"V �,. `� i minimized. = , ,, , ,. , A1104, Description:Right-of-way separated from motor vehicle it , i traffic.Used where adjacent roadway speeds and the tonalvolume of traffic is too high for safe shared use Also used . Com? for connections through open space areas and parks,or r° where no other facility type rs feasible r•g.I e-,,_pu. s Egg.'i Design Guidelines: • Eight foot paved with two foot graded edge minimum width for two-way use Greater width is recommended for high use corridors . IIt,� ,.;tyy>r� xs . Bike paths f the entshoulder l ea shall closera than cve al feet from e e••a the edge of the shouldr shag include a physical barrier such as rails,dense shrubs or trees ,4„..,, ,,,...„,i, q r r . _ --.m;, + Reterences: °r Caltrans Highway Design Manual Chapter 1000 California MUTCD2012 Class 2 Bike Lane Provides a striped lane for one-way bike r travel on a street or highway. .70 ,- i Descript iore Provides a striped lane for one-way bike 1rG travel on a street or highway.installed along streets m u corridors where there is significant bicycle demand,and where there are distinct needs that can be served by them 'y - In streets with on-street parking,bike lanes are located a "-' e .-r m^r bake Imes between the parking area and the traffic lanes, Design Guidelines: •five foot minimum width for bike lanes located between Ilk pang area and traffic lanes. ;illx- . Four foot m•nimum width if no gutter or parking exists. Including a normal two foot gutter,minimum bake lane ��lJ!!TTTCCCJJJ width shall be five feet. j B— IKE LANE t; References - - - s pn R8 t'ca 1 Cattnns Highway Design Manual Chapter 1000 d 300 _ -- --- CaliforniaMUT`D 2012 i.e:La, ere,one [:ue Bake Lane Road Sterols -mrirrarr. Class 3 Bike Route Provides for shared use of the roadway lilligit with motor vehicle traffic. �� 1 4 a,, • Description:Within vehicular right-of way,delineated s .* ..- by directional signage.Used where roadway speeds • • and traffic volume are fairly low and shoulder provides ,...,,01 4 adequate room.Bike Routes indicate to cyclists that _ { there are particular advantages to using these routes 4, _ compared to alternative routes. v-te i 4 t+ ;..- Design Guidelines: 1 W.I.raw WMc ne.anctwas an ;,1;!..!"..." '�' •Wider than standard outside lane recommended. • Because cyclists are permitted on all roadways(except ' () prohibited freeways(bicycle routes should offer a (. ,4E) higher degree of service than other streets. MAY USE BIKE ROUTE I FULL LANE R«farences x atttans Highway Design Manual Chapter 1000 Sign Drr-1Sig n ,<ft -ft CattumtaMUTi'D2012 I 8untin$lon Beacn'_'nP: Bikeway Cross Sections Figure CIRC-6 rvi ,. +,„..*M City of Huntington Beach General Plan 3-24 City of Huntington Beach General Plan (Adopted October 2, 2017) 358 1 11119 Boating eft mmio Given the city's coastal location, Huntington Beach residents take advantage of its local 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 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. _ ,. ,,,,,, , '...--,----m.f..-yr'-„r"'':fe.'''''',"1-,,Vin:r4<-"7:1-9-7,7''t'ttflAR€7-'14'.7-11nip 9 4 z x ^a- . w k P TM ipoolr 1 NV w- t — $ - x , '- F r a ra ,ry . I -. .` c+� . Y 71) —: /If City of Huntington Beach General Plan (Adopted October 2, 2017) 3-25 359 11111 The Citydefines three types of scenic corridors: • Major Urban Scenic Corridors— Major corridors offering views of either natural or 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 Conidor elo,rn j yirements • 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 • Prohibit off-site signs and billboards Landscape • Require adjacent developments to incorporate compatible/increased landscaping Corridors • 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 entry nodes, are key locations that help to demarcate the corridor and set it apart from the d surrounding areas. There are 11 primary entry nodes and 5 secondary entry nodes in Huntington Beach. The locations of the scenic corridors and entry nodes are shown in Figure CIRC-7. 143' 3-26 \� ; City of Huntington Beach General Plan (Adopted October 2, 2017) 360 Transportation and Urban Runoff eft woo The quality and quantity of stormwater runoff flowing into the Santa Ana River and Pacific wig Ocean are regulated by the State of California. Urban environments such as Huntington Beach contain expanses of impervious surfaces that prevent stormwater from percolating into the ground; instead, runoff drains lead directly to the river or ocean. The circulation 0� 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 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 PD ES)permit requirements,the City will continue to require mitigation of potential impacts of transportation-related sources of water pollution, particularly in urban runoff. 7I-E3 City of Huntington Beach General Plan (Adopted October 2, 2017) / 3-27 361 .W. r>•fa ocs U 1� L N N U 1 rn m° ie in w City of %� City a E i.. V Seal Beach 0• o Westminster a Balsa Ave iii - m nz. „5'"� o McFadden C7 • a> -0 J 1 a o Ave : I n r P -�� Edinger Ave Huntington Harbour � Heil Ave in GP �,r City of Fountain Valley 1kWarner Ave ‘ ‘.7y0 1'1- �•. Talb-rr Boko chica t :::::e weJlonds � r _ 'F ii q N/ <n Ellisi 4 h r ve o t �` c r" 4 m J1 Garfield Ave 5� ^•• 1/ •,Z Yorktovm Ave c \ 4� - OAdamsAve JI / )ir' �'• I Indianapolis Ave /' Atlanta Ave � `o`er,^y�y��ryIII LEGEND e-� r 1 Hamilton Ave — Major City Streets aS' a�+4 r -"- City Limas ("y �� 'Banning Ave IMO Major Urban Scenic Corridor ' �c �.%• 'P y MN I Minor Urban Scenic Corridor A �°� a, '�. City of ` *.• / Costa Mesa ■ Landscape Corridorc.t) S. Q Pnmary Entry Node �rJc,;c° •,•P J;# Q Secondary Entry Node 6`o° N 0 0.5 V t B I e t 1 I ti r.LLES Data Source Data compiled by Stantec Base Map Source city or Hundnpton Beach(20141 HnnlitAlen BeaehT Scenic Highway Plan Figure CIRC-7 av' ru vr.wo, City of Huntington Beach General Plan 3-28 City of Huntington Beach General Plan (Adopted October 2, 2017) 362 Issues, Goals, and Policiesrimig The circulation issues addressed in this element include: sow mow • Maintaining adequate level of service C • 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 • Protecting and developing scenic corridors • Providing for alternative fuel vehicles and infrastructure • Ensuring access for emergency vehicles Maintaining Adequate 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-1a. 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 CIRC-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 ,113 links identified on the Arterial Highway Plan (Figure CIRC-2) and standard roadway cross City of Huntington Beach General Plan (Adopted October 2, 2017) 3-29 363 al y` sections (Figure CIRC-1), including appropriate roadway widths, medians, and bicycle = lanes. •' B. Maintain the following adopted performance standards for citywide level of service for traffic-signal-controlled intersections during peak hours. i, j „ a. Locations with specific characteristics identified as critical intersections: LOS E T=k (ICU to not exceed 1.00) ' b. Principal Intersections: LOS D (0.81-0.90 ICU) a , c. Secondary Intersections: LOS C (0.71-0.80 ICU) • • � C. Monitor the capacity of principal intersections. When principal intersections approach or a y+ have reached unacceptable levels of service, consider elevating the priority of Capital Improvement Program (CIP) projects that reduce traffic congestion at these intersections. t A - 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. £r E. Maintain compliance with the OCTA Congestion Management Program or any subsequent replacement program. F. Require development projects to provide circulation improvements to achieve stated City "p.. 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 4� 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. = Providing Adequate Downtown and Beach Parking t'. r. 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 1 parking spaces, congestion increases. This congestion may diminish the visitor experience. 3-30 City of Huntington Beach General Plan (Adopted October 2, 2017) 364 Goal CIRC-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 w special events. 0.0 Policies mow O 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 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, 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 parking limitations in the community. 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 C/RC-3b. The City is positioned to expand transit, through a long-range strategy that allows the City to carry out transportation goals as funding and infrastructure are feasible. Policies A. Pursue an urban transit system that serves Huntington Beach, and evaluate local and regional transit service to identify areas of opportunity for existing regional transit linkages. 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 /74') rider convenience and safety. D. Require new projects to contribute to the transit and/or active transportation network in L� proportion to their expected traffic generation. City of Huntington Beach General Plan (Adopted October 2, 2017) 3-31 365 lie 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. rr, F. Explore the possibility of locating a transportation center in or near Downtown. 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 CIRC-4. A balanced and integrated multimodal transportation system that increases mass transit opportunities for Huntington Beach residents. Policies s a 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. k k e D. Maintain a system of transit and paratransit services that assist seniors and persons with 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. ,fR 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. 143 3-32 City of Huntington Beach General Plan (Adopted October 2, 2017) 366 Ensuring Mobility Options for All Users WWI swig 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 mom Plan is intended to accommodate and encourage these other modes of travel. In addition ." in 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. Policies A. Maximize use of transportation demand management strategies to reduce total vehicle miles traveled and improve regional air quality. 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. Enhancing Bicycle, Pedestrian, Equestrian, and Waterway Options 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 season and would benefit from improvements that balance the needs of other users. City of Huntington Beach General Plan (Adopted October 2, 2017) 3-33 367 Equestrians and boaters are also important circulation system users requiring access to facilities. Goal CIRC-6. Connected, well-maintained, and well-designed sidewalks, bike lanes, 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. 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. I \ 3-34 City of Huntington Beach General Plan (Adopted October 2, 2017) 368 111 .—. ��K r Goal CIRC-7. Designated scenic corridors protect and enhance visual quality and scenic views. �,/^'' Policies z - w 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 surrounding development and established design guidelines, to the greatest extent practicable. C. Require that slopes and earthen berrns 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 visibility. Providing for Alternative Fuel Vehicles and Infrastructure 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 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. City of Huntington Beach General Plan (Adopted October 2, 2017) 3-35 369 Ensuring Access for Emergency Vehicles `.;© Ensuring the ability of the City's emergency services to respond to emergency situations is crucial to the community's public safety. Congestion may impede the ability of the City's �rry A‘Hz 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 r 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 evacuatingpersons duringemergencies or for ingress when emergency response units �` � 9 9 9 Y P ;.. are needed. r r'3 *w, r 3-36 City of Huntington Beach General Plan (Adopted October 2, 2017) 370 ORANGE COUNTY LOCAL TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY ORDINANCE NO. 3 J U LY 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 213669.10 371 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. 213669.10 372 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 213669.10 373 Section II. Requirements B-4 Section III. Requirements for Eligible Jurisdictions B-7 Section IV. Allocation of Net Revenues; General Provisions B-10 Section V. Allocation of Net Revenues; Streets and Roads Programs/Projects B-12 Section VI. Allocation of Net Revenues; Transit Programs/ Projects B-14 Section VII. Allocation of Net Revenues; Environmental Cleanup Projects B-17 ATTACHMENT C - Taxpayer Oversight Committee Section I. Purpose and Organization C-1 Section II. Committee Membership C-1 Section III. Appointment of Members C-2 Section IV. Duties and Responsibilities C-4 213669.10 374 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. 213671.11 375 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 213671.11 376 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 213671.11 377 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 13671.11 378 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 P Y 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 213671.11 379 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 213671.11 380 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 213671.11 381 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 213671.11 382 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 III 9 213671.11 383 1 Ordinance irrespective of the validity of any other part. 2 APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the Orange County Local Transportation Authority 3 on the 1-1 day of C , 2006. 4 / ) 5 By: Arthur C. Brown, Chairman 6 Orange County Local Transportation Authority 7 ATTEST: 9 By: endy Kno#Ies, 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 213671.11 384 ATTACHMENT A 1 RENEwED iiiii,,,,,, ,,...-I 1 j r) 1711 i \j I TFansportatlo!c!1 1/'�� 'j 1J r #J =11i Approved by voters on November 7, 2006 AXIID 11‘, M h 414 a. i. 0.. A h sr ', :=-1' 1, 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 s83 (i 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 Project Description 27 Taxpayer Safeguards and Audits Overview 28 Description 29 Measure M Investment Summary 31 387 2 EMI VI4 Introduction Ct4 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 in Measure M one-half cent transportation transportation projects and programs that would be existing easu e p possible if Measure M were renewed. The Authority, sales tax will enable all of the projects and together with the 34 cities of Orange County,the programs to be implemented.And by using good Orange County Board of Supervisors and thousands planning and sensible financing,projects that of Orange County citizens,participated during the are ready to go could begin as early as 2007. last eighteen months in developing a Transportation Investment Plan for consideration by the voters. Renewing Measure M The projects and programs that follow constitute A Plan for New Transportation Investments the Transportation Investment Plan for the The Plan that follows is a result of those efforts. It renewal of the Measure M transportation sales tax reflects the varied interests and priorities inherent approved by Orange County voters in November in the diverse communities of Orange County. It of 1990. These improvements are necessary to includes continued investment to expand and address current and future transportation needs in Orange County and reflect the best efforts '� to achieve consensus among varied interests and communities throughout the County. M 388 3 .. • D v�Overw e cg 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 1-5, 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. 389 4 a. x 40) C 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 s 390 5 D - Freeway Projects Overview 411*f. 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 + ' C- M 391 6 Orange County Freeway Projects a"i-abra"' 4. i.b •� Bred #; �� G ;yam Fullerton ] Placentia 'sr '�� H .--taPakr+a- Buena 1 Park Anaheim Cypress 5 velaQTi Park M tauten a "osa its c)range it Garden Grove ,,,,, \ .',t 22 Beach Westminster Sart 405 A} � .�i i'a,. i. K' �s r5 q . ,., ". �2anc,,, • a Sa to y Lakc • c,, roi est o- I �M sston. • °hlev'iport � t _ 73-, rtis5uj` • ,; Va'4o` U CF �•i t ' , Laguna Beach .` San Juan Capistrano Dana 5 •1 Point r `o c page 11 00 Santa Ana Freeway(1-5) page 7 H Riverside Freeway{SR-91) O Santa Ana Freeway/San Diego Freeway(1-5) page 8 Q Riverside Freeway(SR-91) page 12 Q Santa Ana Freeway/San Diego Freeway(1-5) page 8 ©Q San Diego Freeway{I 405) page 13 14 © Garden Grove Freeway(SR-22) page 9 M Freeway Access Improvements (I-605) page 15 0 Costa Mesa Freeway(SR-55) page 9 (not mapped) 0 Orange Freeway(SR-57) page 10N Freeway Service Patrol(not mapped) page 15 392 7 t.,. ; a, , . .. a Freeway Projects V ' * ' --- Santa Ana Freeway (1-5) -° ..e."- Interchange Improvements Project 0 Project 0 J Santa Ana Freeway (1-5) Improvements Santa Ana Freeway (1-5) 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 1-5 is the major Street and Newport Boulevard ramps on I-5,and route serving activity areas in the cities of Irvine, between Fourth Street and Edinger Avenue on Tustin, Santa Ana and north Orange County. The SR-55.Also, add capacity on I-5 between SR-55 and project will also make improvements at local SR-57 to relieve congestion at the"Orange Crush". interchanges,such as Jamboree Road. The project The project will generally be constructed within the will generally be constructed within the existing existing right-of-way. Specific improvements will be right-of-way. Specific improvements will be subject subject to approved plans developed in cooperation to approved plans developed in cooperation with with local jurisdictions and affected communities. local jurisdictions and affected communities. The project will increase freeway capacity and reduce The project will increase freeway capacity and congestion. The current daily traffic volume on this reduce congestion. The current traffic volume segment of the I-5 between SR-55 and SR-57 is about on this segment of 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 I-5 is $300.2 million. Orange V "� Santa Ana 5 '55) Tustin Santa 5 Ana 411\b North.;, Tustin : Irvine i13 405 393 8 Freeway Projects Santa Ana Freeway/San Diego Freeway (1-5) ram ; Project C Project CO 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 „gin new freeway access point between Crown Valley Parkway and Avery Parkway as well as new off ramps at Stonehill Drive using federal and state funds. • • Mission Cost: �, 73Viejo The estimated cost to improve these �. segments of I-5 is $627.0 million. Laguna Niguel W Mission (73 Viejo Juan Laguna ono Niguel upn .- ,no 5, Dana Pointop San Clemente 0o 394 9 r r` Freeway Projects Garden Grove Freeway (SR-22) ' Costa Mesa Freeway (SR-55) Project E Project O 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 SR-55 between SR-91 and SR-22. The project will generally be constructed within the existing Regional plans also include the construction of right-of-way. Specific improvements will be subject new freeway-to-freeway carpool ramps to the to approved plans developed in cooperation with SR-22/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: The estimated cost for these SR-55 improvements is $366.0 million. Stanton 5 \ n orange Garden Grove Santa Ana • • 22 • Tustin 405') 55 Westminster CostaMesa Irvine 405 • 395 10 as . ` -' Freeway Projects J 4 - Orange Freeway (SR-57) Project W. (SR-57)Orange Freeway Improvements Description: Build a new northbound lane between Orangewood Avenue and Lambert Road. Other projects include improvements to the Lambert interchange and the addition of a northbound truck climbing lane between Lambert and Tonner Canyon Road. The improvements will be designed and coordinated specifically to reduce congestion at SR-57/SR-91 interchange. These improvements will be made generally within existing right-of- ,r �' way. Specific improvements will be subject to approved plans developed in cooperation with local jurisdictions and affected communities. The project will increase freeway capacity and reduce congestion. The daily traffic volume on this freeway is about 315,000 vehicles. By 2030,this volume will n r increase by 15 percent,bringing it up to 363,000 . ro vehicles per day. In addition to the project described above, regional plans include new • carpool ramps at Cerritos Avenue using federal and state funds. Cost: The estimated cost to implement SR-57 improvements is $258.7 million. Anaheim '5 ith 'M , 396 11 Freeway Projects Riverside Freeway (SR-91) Project H Project Riverside Freeway (SR-91) Improvements Riverside Freeway (SR-91) Improvements from the Santa Ana Freeway (1-5) to from Orange Freeway (SR-57) to the Costa the Orange Freeway (SR-57) Mesa Freeway (SR-55) Interchange Area Description: Description: Add capacity in the westbound direction and provide 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 I-5 and the Orange Freeway interchanges such as Tustin Avenue and Lakeview, (SR-57), generally within existing right-of-way, to as well as adding freeway capacity between smooth traffic flow and relieve the SR-57/SR-91 SR-55 and SR-57. The project will generally interchange. Specific improvements will be subject be constructed within the existing right-of- to approved plans developed in cooperation with way. Specific improvements will be subject to local jurisdictions and affected communities. approved plans developed in cooperation with local jurisdictions and affected communities. The current daily freeway volume along this segment of SR-91 is about 256,000. By 2030, Current freeway volume on this segment this volume is expected to increase by nearly 13 of the SR-91 is about 245,000 vehicles per percent,bringing it up to 289,900 vehicles per 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. Placentia Fullerton kE 91 '. Anaheim Anctheim Villa 5 f Park 397 12 Freeway Projects Riverside Freeway (SR-91) 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 1-15. 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. ! !• Linda Placentia Anaheim Villa Park Project cost estimate amended on November 9,2012. 398 13 * L Freeway Projects San Diego Freeway (1-405) vik 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 I-605 and SR-55, generally within the existing right- by 2030. The project will increase freeway capacity of-way. The project will make best use of available and reduce congestion. Near-term regional plans freeway property,update interchanges and widen also include the improvements to the I-405/SR-73 all local overcrossings according to city and regional interchange as well as a new carpool interchange master plans. The improvements will be coordinated at Bear Street using federal and state funds. with other planned I-405 improvements in the I-405/SR-22/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 Los Alamitos Garden Grove 605 22 Seal Beach 405 Santa Ana Westminster Huntington Beach Fountain Valley Costa Mesa 55 73 405, 4!M3 Project cost estimate amended on November 9, 2012. 399 14 .,ii, L _, Freeway Projects f .• Fes., e ', ..,-- ,, �. San Diego Freeway (1-405) Project L'\ subject to approved plans developed in cooperation with local jurisdictions and affected communities. San Diego Freeway (1-405) Improvements between Costa Mesa Freeway This segment of the freeway carries 354,000 (SR-55) and Santa Ana Freeway (1-5) vehicles a day. This number will increase by nearly 13 percent,bringing it up to 401,000 Description: vehicles per day by 2030. The project will increase Add new lanes to the freeway from SR-55 to the freeway capacity and reduce congestion. In I-5. The project will also improve chokepoints 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 Karman Avenue using federal and state funds. Drive and SR-133 to improve the overall freeway operations in the I-405/I-5 El Toro "Y"area. The Cost: projects will generally be constructed within the The estimated cost for these improvements existing right-of-way. Specific improvements will be to the I-405 is $319.7 million. . ,, , il ;,:i.,1 V ,,4 , b 4. �.*P-x i 04 .r,,- a o-V r9 i `^ �t $ li. # 4t 2 a'F tlS r' 6 L e 400 15 Freeways Projects 1-605 Freeway Access Improvements Freeway Service Patrol Project M 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 I-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� 401 16 ! ' Streets and Roads 44 -1 �, Projects Overview 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. 402 17 Orange County Streets and Roads Projects ,,,, r ,„x' r',,,,, >>m ;„a att a rea >v�� .inda ►.��/' 10 7 ". tom.. C res Park A ahem j�,... � � � . Villa �, --._,__ G rde 6r 1-e Orange i �pa�rw tee n.sc ,M a a r r Seal -stmInst r t {3,,. .Tustin a w beadfY '"�, ants I 3�-t �r"d Ana _ $ - .. ,n/ �,e 8 ttntin ton ' ^� ``� each Ranch. Santa ountain in argarita t Valley " � � Take Cost Forest Nsesa , lw. Viej. a: iii‘ 11140 / i ^yJ ort ash ' ta:ods L;un. T 1 Aliso 4 Viejo Laguna Lag a \'±S4-achit tJig San an Ca pi trano Dana "x Point Signal Synchronization Network San Clemente Regional Capacity Program page 18 Local Fair Share Program page 20 (not mapped) (not mapped) Nearly 1,000 miles of new lanes Street maintenance and improvements Regional Traffic Signal Synchronization Program page 19 (see grid above) Over 750 miles of roadway Over 2,000 coordinated signals 403 18 Streets and Roads Projects Regional Capacity Program ��a a Project 0 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. 4-1 404 19 • Streets and Roads Projects Regional Traffic Signal Synchronization Program v v�aa Project p 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. 405 20 • Streets and Roads Projects Local Fair Share Program Project (;Z 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. V'W 406 21 4 icD '�'"' Transit Overview A . _ 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. _11..;it if 407 22 Orange County Transit Projects Buena Pork Station Fullerton Station � i` Rltnnlnllltlllnnt Yfl1SHHRt1fl1P7jp11ttYftit(C�*' r a Orange Station 01 X h't C Santa Ana Depot Westin nsrei xTM.m^ rc- +ice 1 Rancho _ `k Santa Irvine Transportation Margarita i I Wit Center rY' ` t Lts Shot Viejo g mar Laguna Niguel Mission Viejo Station � San Juan , Gapistrano„ San Juan Capistrano Station =dr r l Danayf j'rr" .: Point Er San Clemente 'C OR High Frequency Metrolink Service("toll" =existing rail line/stations) page 23 C) Transit Extensions to Metrolink page 23 Metrolink Gateways(not mapped) page 24 U® Expand Mobility Choices for Seniors and Persons with Disabilities(countywide;not mapped) page 24 CCommunity Based Transit/Circulators(countywide; not mapped) page 25 (D Safe Transit Stops(countywide; not mapped) page 25 408 23 ` ~, Transit Projects High Frequency Metrolink Service Transit Extensions to Metrolink "tom Et Project .R Project 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 Mom' Project R cost estimate amended on December 14,2015. 409 24 `" Transit Projects -111 G — Metrolink Gateways Expand Mobility Choices for Seniors 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 • 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. 144'1 Project T and U cost estimates amended on December 14, 2015. 410 25 N ~- Transit Projects Community Based Transit/Circulators Safe Transit Stops Project 0 Project 0 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. 411 � A l° 6 pay °r i:vdel�'� a 6 Environmental '4'4 \ Cleanup Overview 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. 412 27 .,� Environmental Cleanup s. 14 ' , . ; ' )ii. t Project X 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. -M ' 413 28 4poi . r � � Taxpayer Safeguards s/ and Audits Overview Cr 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 receivingMeasure M funds for a five-year period. Y 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 toughquestions, and must independently g P Y certify, on an annual basis,that transportation dollars have been spent strictly according to the Renewed Measure M Investment Plan. M 414 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. t 4M 415 30 Taxpayer Safeguards and Audits 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 bythe Orange County � g 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. M 416 .. 1 4 1,0 S r 4t_ , ,,,,, ,,,;,, . Measure M F4‘.g Investment Summary LOCATI 11) reeway Projects (in millions) $4,871.1 I-5 Santa Ana Freeway Interchange Improvements 0 $470.0 I-5 Santa Ana/San Diego Freeway Improvements Q Q Q 1,185.2 SR-22 Garden Grove Freeway Access Improvements 0 120.0 SR-55 Costa Mesa Freeway Improvements 0 366.0 SR-57 Orange Freeway Improvements 0 258.7 SR-91 Riverside Freeway Improvements 41)00 908.7* I-405 San Diego Freeway Improvements 0O 1,392.5* I-605 Freeway Access Improvements 0 20.0 All Freeway Service Patrol 0 150.0 .treets & Roads Projects (in millions) $3,625.1 Regional Capacity Program 0 $1,132.8 Regional Traffic Signal Synchronization Program 0 453.1 Local Fair Share Program 0 2,039.1 ransit Projects (in millions) $2,832.1 High Frequency Metrolink Service 0 $1,129.8* Transit Extensions to Metrolink 0 1,000.0 Metrolink Gateways 0 57.9* Expand Mobility Choices for Seniors and Persons with Disabilities O 392.8* Community Based Transit/Circulators a 226.5 Safe Transit Stops 0 25.0 Environmental Cleanup (in millions) $237. Clean Up Highway and Street Runoff that Pollutes Beaches 0 $237.2 ixpayer Safeguards and Audits (in millions) $296.: Collect Sales Taxes (State charges required by law) $178.0 Oversight and Annual Audits 118.6 otal (2005 dollars in millions) $11,861.9 *Asterisk notes project estimates that have been amended since 2006. 417 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 11 419 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 11 420 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 214007.1" 421 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 11 422 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 214007.11 423 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 III B-6 214007 11 424 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 214007.11 425 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 21400711 426 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 11 427 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-10 214007.11 428 pur suant Street and Road Projects 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 214027 11 429 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 430 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 21400711 431 1 4. An Eligible Jurisdiction shall issue a report once every three 2 years regarding the status and performance of its traffic signal synchronization activities. 3 5. Not less than once every three years an Eligible Jurisdiction 4 shall review and revise, as may be necessary, the timing of traffic signals included as part 5 of the Traffic Signal Synchronization Master Plan. 6 6. An Eligible Jurisdiction withdrawing from a signal 7 synchronization project shall be required to return Net Revenues allocated for the project. 8 C. Local Fair Share Program. 9 The allocation of eighteen percent (18%) of the Net Revenues for 10 Local Fair Share Program projects shall be made to Eligible Jurisdictions in amounts 11 determined as follows: 12 1. Fifty percent (50%) divided between Eligible Jurisdictions based 13 on the ratio of each Eligible Jurisdiction's population for the immediately preceding calendar 14 year to the total County population (including incorporated and unincorporated areas) for 15 the immediately preceding calendar year, both as determined by the State Department of 16 Finance; 17 2. Twenty-five percent (25%) divided between Eligible Jurisdictions 18 based on the ratio of each Eligible Jurisdiction's existing Master Plan of Arterial Highways 19 ("MPAH") centerline miles to the total existing MPAH centerline miles within the County as 20 determined annually by the Authority; and 21 3. Twenty-five percent (25%) divided between Eligible Jurisdictions 22 based on the ratio of each Eligible Jurisdiction's total taxable sales to the total taxable sales 23 of the County for the immediately preceding calendar year as determined by the State 24 Board of Equalization. 25 VI. ALLOCATION OF NET REVENUES; TRANSIT PROGRAMS/PROJECTS. 26 A. Transit Extensions to Metrolink. 27 1. The Authority may provide technical assistance, transportation 28 planning and engineering resources for an Eligible Jurisdiction to assist in designing Transit B-14 214007 1? 432 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 11 433 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 2140071' 434 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 214007.11 435 1 (vi) one (1) representative of the scientific or academic 2 community; 3 (vii) one (1) representative of private or non-profit 4 organizations involved in environmental and water quality protection/enforcement matters; 5 In addition, one (1) representative of the Santa Ana Regional Water 6 Quality Control Board and one (1) representative of the San Diego Regional Water Quality 7 Control Board shall be non-voting members of the Allocation Committee. 8 2. The Allocation Committee shall recommend to the Authority for 9 adoption by the Authority the following: 10 a. A competitive grant process for the allocation of 11 Environmental Cleanup Revenues, including the highest priority to capital improvement 12 projects included in a Watershed Management Area. The process shall give priority to 13 cost-effective projects and programs that offer opportunities to leverage other funds for 14 maximum benefit. 15 b. A process requiring that Environmental Cleanup 16 Revenues allocated for projects and programs shall supplement and not supplant funding 17 from other sources for transportation related water quality projects and programs. 18 c. Allocation of Environmental Cleanup Revenues for 19 proposed projects and programs. 20 d. An annual reporting procedure and a method to assess 21 the water quality benefits provided by completed projects and programs. 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 B-18 21400z 11. 436 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 507779.8 437 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 07779.8 438 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 507779.8 439 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 507779.8 440 1 E. The Committee shall receive and review the performance assessment 2 conducted bythe Authorityat least once everythreeyears 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 507779.8 441 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) 443 fry Iiiii. i\\)0 TlNG01 '¼4.<0 .., Re s o u ion a n •• ,,pp P O RA TFp••• ::: ___ ;- - •. V for ,,,,7 • rn . Tr =T� _ . — • Measure M2 - ___ ___ _ _ -=- _ _ _ _ -- _, -- -- - ., _ -- : ,, -. . ,. ,_ )„,14 ., , Eligibility _ • , `�� _ 1 .� • >•••. ttB P ..•• -, • A j P. i,. ' 17 1909 O OUNTN G-11....;...1.•• P / June 3 , 2025 Council Meetin g ,�, Agri 444 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 25/26 is approx. $5.2M • M2 Eligibility Requirements (FY 2025/26) • Adopt Resolution concerning the status and update of the Circulation Element, ��NTI.N6r0 and Mitigation Fee Program ` •\NcRRPORgteo•N. <5i • Adopt 7-year Capital Improvement Program (CIP) for FY 25/26 — FY 31/32 �. ��'y-v o • i. „ "lam 0 •e O •••• B l7............. GFo°IMP? P Key E • 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 transportation infrastructure • 7-Year Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) • Identifies all projects currently and potentially funded by OCTA Measure M2 funds 10, 0\TINU /0 ./��n� ` O` �•\N�ORPORgTE0.. V COUNTY 0; f '1, c' , g f.. 1 ' .. L j ,, ,... ,...,-„, ,..,.:, t i ; .;•, v r p,,,.. # -Ana/w�wr-t . jAj t' (� "'�`i�ir,,�ry , C ,, �° � O. c. . (1) O ■ Alla (/) a) M .