TRANSPORTATION CORRIDORY AGENCY - PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE - EST 1986

Home Browse Search

MAJOR THOROUGHFARE AND BRIDGE FEE PROGRAM FOR SAN JOAQUIN HILLS AND FOOTHILL /EASTERN TRANSPORTATION CORRIDORS Executive Summary Corridor usage projections for several hundred traffic analysis zones within ..% the County were developed as a tool to assist in defining the proposed benefit areas. Traffic analysis zones with 48 or more of their total trip making utilizing the corridor formed a fairly dense pattern. Identifiable physical features blosely approximating the pattern were used to describe the bound - aries of the benefit areas. Two fee zones within each area of benefit were established based upon direct use of the corridors. Traffic analysis zones with 8% or more of their total trip making utilizing the corridor were defined in the higher fee zone (A). The remainder of the zones were defined in the lower fee zone W. Assessment of fees on a traffic related basis was determined to be equitable. Trip ends were selected as the least common denominator and fees were established by dividing the proportion of corridor cost attributable to each fee zone by the total number of projected daily trip ends within each fee zone. Adjustments were made to trip ends between neighborhood commercial and residential land uses to reflect the relative benefit of neighborhood commercial development to residences. Land uses were combined into three general land use categories (2 residential and 1 non - residential) for the purposes of applying fees to development projects. -1- It can no longer be expected that facilities such as the San Joaquin Hills Transportation Corridor (SJHTC) and Foothill /Eastern Transportation Corridors (F/ETC) can be fully funded from the traditional revenue sources used to construct southern California's existing freeway network. Supplemental " funding sources must therefore be developed if these important components of Orange County's transportation system are to be developed to provide relief to existing congested facilities and support orderly development within cities and unincorporated areas. Development fees represent a Potential supplemental ..Z funding source and as such have been under consideration by the Board of Supervisors for some time. The development fee program re p pared for Board of Supervisors consideration is based upon Government Code Sections 50029, 66484.3 and California Constitution Article 11, Section 7. The concept is furthermore based on the general principle that future development within prescribed benefit areas will benefit from the construction of the transportation facilities and should pay for them in proportion to projected corridor traffic demand attributable to the development. Future development within the benefit areas is expected to account for 48% of the cost of the SJHTC and F /ETC. The remaining cost of the .a corridors, representing benefits derived by existing development within the benefit areas and corridor users outside the benefit areas, is proposed to be funded through traditional transportation funding sources such as existing federal and state programs. No assessment of existing developed property is proposed. Corridor usage projections for several hundred traffic analysis zones within ..% the County were developed as a tool to assist in defining the proposed benefit areas. Traffic analysis zones with 48 or more of their total trip making utilizing the corridor formed a fairly dense pattern. Identifiable physical features blosely approximating the pattern were used to describe the bound - aries of the benefit areas. Two fee zones within each area of benefit were established based upon direct use of the corridors. Traffic analysis zones with 8% or more of their total trip making utilizing the corridor were defined in the higher fee zone (A). The remainder of the zones were defined in the lower fee zone W. Assessment of fees on a traffic related basis was determined to be equitable. Trip ends were selected as the least common denominator and fees were established by dividing the proportion of corridor cost attributable to each fee zone by the total number of projected daily trip ends within each fee zone. Adjustments were made to trip ends between neighborhood commercial and residential land uses to reflect the relative benefit of neighborhood commercial development to residences. Land uses were combined into three general land use categories (2 residential and 1 non - residential) for the purposes of applying fees to development projects. -1-