HomeMy WebLinkAbout1986 (01 06) SA Reso 86-001 Est Fee Prog for SJHTC and FETCCTT¥ COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 86-1
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF SANTA ANA ESTABLISHING
THE AREAS OF BENEFIT AND THE MAJOR
THOROUGHFARE AND BRIDGE FEE PROGRAMS
FOR THE SAN JOAQUIN HILLS TRANSPORTATION
CORRIDOR AND THE FOOTHILL/EASTERN TRANS-
PORTATION CORRIDORS.
WHEREAS, buildout of the land use element of the General Plan
of the City of Santa Ana is dependent upon providing a balanced
transportation system to serve the planned level of development;
and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that implementation of the San
Joaquin Hills, Foothill and Eastern Transportation Corridors will
result in a transportation system which has the capacity to
accommodate the additional traffic volume associated with
anticipated future development; and
WHEREAS, implementation of the San Joaquin Hills, Foothill and
Eastern Transportation Corridors will help to relieve congestion
on the existing transportation system; and
WHEREAS, future state and federal revenue are projected to be
inadequate to construct said transportation corridors in a timely
manner; and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that future development should
pay a share of the cost of implementing new transportation
corridors to insure that the transportation system will be
adequate to serve said development and that this share of the
corridor costs should be proportional to the traffic generated by
the development; and
WHEREAS, Ordinance No. N$-]829 of the City of Santa Ana
provides for the establishment of major thoroughfare and bridge
construction fees to be paid by building permit applicants in the
City of Santa Ana; and
WHEREAS, notice of the public hearing on the possible adoption
of the fee program was given to all affected property owners as
provided in Government Code Section 65091; and
WHEREAS, the property owners within the area of benefit did
not file a majority written protest to the establishment of the
San Joaquin Hills or the Foothill/Eastern Transportation Corridor
Fee Program; and
WHEREAS, a Negative Declaration was issued as a result of
initial studies prepared to assess the environmental impacts which
might be associated with the adoption of the major thoroughfare
and bridge fee program.
003
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED as follows:
SECTION 1. The boundaries of the areas of benefit shall be
described in the document dated July 1985 entitled "Major
Thoroughfare and Bridge Fee Program for the San Joaquin Hills
Transportation Corridor and the Foothill/Eastern Transportation
Corridors" ("Program") attached hereto as Exhibit "C" and
incorporated by reference herein.
SECTION 2. The estimated cost of these major thoroughfares
and bridges are as follows:
San Joaquin Hills Transportation Corridor $341,660,000.00
Foothill/Eastern Transportation Corridor 516,147,000.00
The Program is presently designed to collect 48.4% of the cost of
construction of the San Joaquin Hills Transportation Corridor and
48.5% of the cost of construction of the Foothill/Eastern
Transportation Corridors.
SECTION 3. The fees for development within the areas of
benefit are based on the trip ends generated by the development as
determined from the Trip Generation Tables included in the Program
and shall be assessed upon new development based upon the number
of dwelling units included in the development (for residential
projects) or the gross square footage of the development (for
non-residential projects) in those amounts as set forth in the
Area of Benefit Fee Table included in the Program.
SECTION 4. An automatic adjustment of the fees, based upon
the Construction Cost Index, shall be made each fiscal year
commencing in fiscal year 1986-1987. An adjustment of the fee
based upon updated project cost estimates or other changed
conditions shall be made in lieu of the Annual Cost Index
Adjustment when necessary.
SECTION 5. The collection of the fee shall be a condition
of issuance of a building permit as described in the Program. The
payment of fees may be deferred for all residential rental
projects or projects which include State or Federal requirements
to provide units affordable to families with incomes less than 80%
of the median income for those time periods and subject to those
terms and conditions set forth in Section IX of the Program. Fee
credits shall be granted for dedications and work performed for
the corridors as set forth in Section XI of the Program.
SECTION 6. In the event the City executes the "Joint
Exercise of Powers Agreement Creating the San Joaquin Hills
Transportation Corridor Agency" and/or the "Joint Exercise of
Powers Agreement Creating the Foothill/Eastern Transportation
Corridor Agency" ("Agreements"), upon the effective date of said
Agreements, the City shall remit all fees collected pursuant to
the Program to the Joint Powers Agencies created by said
2 o
Agreements pursuant to the terms and conditions of said
Agreements. In the event the City executes said Agreements, any
person aggrieved by a decision of the City regarding the amount of
any corridor fee imposed or fee credit granted may appeal the
decision of the City to the San Joaquin Hills Transportation
Corridor Agency or the Foothill/Eastern Transportation Corridor
Agency, where appropriate, which decision shall be final.
SECTION 7. This Resolution shall be effective upon the
effective date of Ordinance No. N$-1829 , establishing the Major
Thoroughfare and Bridge Fee Program.
PASSED AND ADOPTED, by the City Council
Ana at an adjourned meeting held on the 6th
1986.
of the City of Santa
day of January ,
Daniel E. Griset
Mayor
0'05
ATTEST:
a~ice C. Guy /f,~L~
Clerk of the C6~nci/
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
er
COUNCILMEMBERS:
Griset Aye
Johnson -~y
Acosta Aye
Hart Aye
Luxembourger ~
McGuigan Aye
Young aye
007
M;~'OR. THOgOUGHFAR~ AND BRIDGE FE-E PRDGRA~
SAN JOAOUIN ~IL/.S T~tANSPO~ATION CORP~DOR
AND
FOOTHILL/FASTE~N TP~RSPO~TATION CORRIDORS
nv£rom~en~.al Management. Agency
T=ansport'.ation,'Flood Control Program Office
JULY 1985
E~ahibit C
012
F~I ~o~ ~ch o~ 'the ~ee zonss within the &~ea~ o~ bens~it are~
Single Family ~tultl-Unit
Res iden~.lal Besidentl. al
lon-Residenti&l
one A $1,30S/unit $760/un1~ $1.75/s£.
ons B $1,010/unit $$90/unit $1.30/s£.
Zone & $1,295/Gnit $?SS/unit $1.80/s£.
Qae 3 $ g20/~nit $$3S/unit $1~05/s£..
Developers who &re =equired tx) cor~t=uct portions o£ the
T.~e amount of credit viii not ~4 adjusted vi~h sasequent revisfons ~o she
progra~ once it is M~ori&lized ~ agree, aerie. This c~ndi~ My ~e
o anon. her landowner within ~e sa,~ ira of benefit only vi~h
title ~ ~he land.
Pal~ent of ieee for residential multi-~n£'~ rental pro~e~ts My ~ ~e~ecz~ ~oc
enter into ~
Properties ~£ch are exempt ~ro~ pal~aent o8 property ~ax~l will generally
except f~a paymemc of corridor ieee. ~over.n~ntal o~me~ and *oneCructed
ortions off twelve cities ace included violin ~e ~ens~iC areas
nd F/E'I~. Tme County ~M adopt a ff~ pe~r~ only vl~in ~t un~r~ra~
are~. ParCici~ion ~ cities, ~e=etore, is ~ ~=~t ingtedien~ ~ a
s~ess~ul p~=~ ~a~ d~s not crea~ ine~iCies co
a~lis~ ~ls ~r~se.
2-
014
benefit ,~ave lead ko ~ ravie4o~s contained within c~£s report.
CORRIDOR
The tela~ively rapid g:ow~.~ and plarme~ ~u~,,ce dev~lo.~uqn~ in O~ange
zi~o~s. ~ee such ~i3o~s (~caill, hs~e~m ~ Sim ~in Hills)
o2 cae Trans~at~on El~fl~ o~ ~e O~e C~ ~ne~ PLan.
Transportation corridors ace ds.otcce~ on CAe ~PAH map as el~ec ~ncep~-
all~ p~o~ o: es~blish~ ali~em~s. ~e~ ~ac~l~ies a~e ~ o~ a
pla~ ~ca~ic cir~la~ s~s~ n~essa~ ~ su~ de~i~nC off CAe
ncy ~ ac~da~e wi~ C~n~y ~ C~Cy ~nd u~ p~s. ~ese
2aciliCies rill al~ :elie~ ~u~r~nC conges~l~ on ~or ar~erials and
al ?ra~r~acion S~u~ (1980), S~ A~ T~ans~aCi~ Co~ido~ S~udy
1981), P~ill ~ans~c~a~ion Co~ridoc S~u~ (!981), a~ cae San 3~in
Hills T=a~=~a=i~ Coc=i~oc S~u~ (1979).
The SAN JOA~UIN HILLS TPJ~SPOI~ATION COP. R/DOR
high ca~y, access~onC=olled ~=a~t=lc~on ~ac~licy ~ se=~ l~al
e ~ ~i=h ~ludes
ti=isa of ~ ~esa, Ne~== bach ~ l~ine a~ e~=e~s ~eas=e=ly
a~rox~=ely 1~ miles =o Join ~e S~ Di~o Yre~ay (I-S) ~en Avery
Pa~y ~d ~i~o Sec:a ~d neat ~e Clem o~ ~n Ju~ ~pis~a~ (see
d pc~lde appcox~el~
m~i~ ol suifficien~ vid~ ~ ac~aCe [uc~ce hig~u~ vehicle
H~) lines ~d s~c~al ccansi~. 2aclll~ies ~ff r~lr~. ~ cen~
s~flC 02 ~e ~=idoc cac~ies ~ g~ea~es~ ~nc o2 ~:af21c ~ause
ece ace a l~lc~ n~c o2 o~er ~callel hig~ 2acllicies. Tca221c
l~s ~ ~ soa~ e~ o~ ~ ~r~i~ are 1Ms~ a~ ~e ~ou~e ~ a
ess ~ ~ ~rrido~ vl~ ~ l~l~ ~ a~rox~Zely ~ grad~se~ac~
e~c~flges vi~h ar~e~a~ ~g~ays plus pr~isio~ ~or ~u~ure a~iCiona~
e~lusl~ lncec~ge
re~ ~ ~e ~=ridocs c=ois subs~fl~ial c~ a~ ~e~ ~r~s.
The EASTEI~ ."~AA~SPORTATI0t4 CORRIDOR is cuc=sn=ly shown as a ~ncepcual
lignment on ~.~e ~AH. The FOOTHILL TAANSPORTATZO~ CORRIDOR is an
4-
0!5
d ~ G~s~ ~n ~ ex~ing G~eu~erly ~ox. 13
m~es ~ · ~ ~u~e~y o~ ~ S~u ~ Fray (105) ~ ~e CLties o~
scin ~ ~ine. ~e ~ ~=~ac~on Co==~do= v~ originate
F:fl~y (I-5) ~ hn ~mn:e in Su Di~o County. l~ ~ in:icl~Ced
e ~scern ~c~/do: will M a La~ca~d, ~rade ~raC~ ~enic
l~ l~!udes a~rox~Cely i~ general ~ee ~a~l l~es-a~
gene:al purple ~:a~l ~s vi~ ~l~ o~ o~e: areas vi4e en~gh ~o
i~i~e ~/S~ia~ T:l~li~ r~l:mn~s l~ n~es~:~. ~cess co ~e
III. COlt~DOR P~S~NNING
adol~ed land use ~ of ~e Coun~ a~ Ci~ies surro~ing ~ ~r~idors.
In ~e ~nt ~e Cities ~d ~ ~ently ~n~ ~eir existing
meFal Pi~ ~d ~es, ~r~icu~rly ~ areas gerv~ ~e ~il! and
pr~ will ~ ~eeval~a~ if an ~iCio~l level facili=y is ~encified
o 8er~ lflcreas~ ~o~ lend ~s. ~e Mjori~y of ~e bng~h of
rrido= ~l~n=s ~all wi~ relatively ~de~lo~ areas of ~e
County. ~e~=i~s ~ ~ls are eider e~ of ~%e San J~ Hills
r=a=i~ ~:idors. h~ ~EridoE ~=ave=~s areas ~ hilly =erraln.
A mJo~l=y of ~e areas
C~n~ vi~ ~en~tiu ~:~
Hll~ Tra~tatl~ Co,ride: off ~: 28, 1979 a~ ~e nor~sterl~
gl~ri~ ~rk ~ ~rren~y ~e~y ~ ~e S~ J~in HiIIs
cighC~f-~y r~lre~ncs. S~ de~il~ enqi~ring
l~tion studies are ~I1 ~erway ~ ~e hs~e~n C~rtdo: ~ Just
O~ PatM2 ~
Xc ~s proposed ~"-ut all co~rido:s will eventually be added ~o ~he State
Highway System. S~aCe legislation (AB 86) has been signed in~o law which
redesc=ibes $~aCe l~ute 73 (Co=cfla Del Max F:eewsy) Co include CAe San
Joaquin Hills T:armporCaCiofl Co:rider.
5-
FOOTHILL/EASTERN TRAnSPORtATION ~ORR/~ORS COST
Foothill F, as'ce =n To,al
Con,c~nge~c~es:
R~ght Of Way
n excess of
S233,557,000
3S,033,000
3S,033,000
14rlS1,000
143,S25,000
21,S28,S00
21,S28,S00
l~t~Tgoro00
377,083,000
56,S61,S00
S6,561,S00
2S,941r000
Total (~o~ purposes
of Foe pcocj=zm): S317,774,000 198,373,000
V. OVE~Jt~L FINANCING
il =e~r~ ~l l~icat~ i~ gene=al
de.lo, nC fees ~o: ~f~ghfafe F~). ~s ~ o~e: ~re
de~l~n= ~ees. ~ese o~he: ~ds ~ ~ all~a~ ~r~gh p=~esses
Ln~lving cbs ~l~fornia Tra~r~t~ C~iesi~
e ~r=Xdor ~lmn~t~on ~oU ~ch u~ ~ at~Ub~e ~ ~
7-
018
n~ de~nC ~h~ough ~e ~Jo~ ~or~qh~a~e ~ B~dge (~&~)
san Joaqu~n Rills=341,860,000
Cost
165,S0O,104 '48.4%
SS16,147,0O0 S2S0,228,088 48.5%
In acco=dance wi~h cu=:ant ~oa=d of Superviso=$' .~licy, new develo~uents
within ~e ~ o~ =~e C=ans~c~Cion ~cr~dots ~11 ~ ~i~ion~ ~o
tmpr~Mn~ includ~ng ~e ee=~=ed ~il~e o~ ~ ~cl~on ~ e~ess of
o ~%e ex~enc ~a~ ~he~ ~sU ace ~!~ ~ ~e ~H pr~:~.
AREA OF BE~,vEFZT
Zn orde= to establish an .~TiB fee prog=am, an ~,~ee of ~enefit (AOB) ~ust
be identified vi~in ~ich Eees may be =equi:e4 upon issuance of building
oec~uiCs or =eco=dation o~ final ~aps *.o defray ~he cost oE ~e ruJo=
Conat=uct£on of ~he t=anspo=ta~Lon co==ldo=s will provide %eM ~acilitiee
N ~ich will ~fle~ ~m bsa ~s~Aon ~ delay off ~e
It is clea~ that bo~% existing developed properties end ~fldeveloped
properties ~ill benefit ~=cm construction o£ ~he t=anspo=~ation co==ido=s.
mevelopuent fees a=e p~oposed ~o ~lnance a po=~lon of ~e cor=i~o=s
propo=tional ~ '.he tra~f£c d~nands,.~asu=~d in ~lp ends, c~eate~ by new
8-
Ii
025
Z~ne B
Some B As ,~excrlMed I~ ~be ~o~al Si~ ~'~s.~ln SilLs
excluding ~one A as deacz~.bed above.
area of' benefi~
single area of benefit vas ~ele~d for ~ ombined Foo~llX ~d
re de~il~ ~p o~ ~ ~l~ecn ~::idocs ~ ~s sh~ on
lbi~ ~. ~ls ~ ~n~inl approxlM~ely 291 ~ace miles. ~1 o~
OO'I~Z,T,,~/~J~2'~ ~OB BY ~ 3~DI~TSDZC/'ZOH
Area lnclude~ in
A,~aheim 14.1
l:vine 18.9
OraAge 10.6
San Clemen~e 13.5
San 3Ban Capistrano S.0
SAn~i AAa 2.8
Tuatin il.1
Villa Park 2.1
Yurts ~i~da 17.7
City Subtotal 95.8
nincorpora~ed Territory 194.7
sq. miles
290.SaG. milesTheAOR'labounde~ venerally by ~benortherlyboundaryoft~eSan3oaquinSillsTransportationCorridorADBfr~atheSanDingoCountyLine ~o ~heinCeraecr, ior~ ofthe ~anDie~o ~.eTeevay ($~aCaMute-lOS)and ~.heSev~)or~-CosU ~nFc~M (S~te ~teSS); ~enceen~ mu~eas~e~lya~ng ~n~erl~eo~ Mid ~ A~nue ~o ~ HillAUnt; ~e~ ~u~e:ly ~g ~ ~nterX~neo~ BidbdSillA~nue ~ Wa:ne~ A~mue~ ~e~e ~g~sta:12
027
VXrX.
ASS botndary to the Orange/San Diego County line; tAence
aLoog the Orange County line to where it: lntarsecta the
the proposed Id paisa Avenue as shown on said Plamt:e~ Plan
llighuays.
excluding Zone A as described above.
A, lMt:erminat:ion og Fee Progcan's Share o£ Corridor Cos~
The gi=st step in calculating CAe gee program ·hare o£ the cor.-idor
cost: was to determine the percentage si corridor user t:cip ends th·~.
rig£nice sc end vithin ~he area o£ bene£1t: ~aiab are attributable co
new gro~h. Trip inforuat:lon derived £ro. ~he ~CCS truvel demand
the developer· share and nult:iplied by the to~al corridor cost t:o
der:ermine t:he gee program s~are o£ coe~.t aa ·ho~n in Table VXZZ-I.
The gee Program share o~ corridor cost: Wa· then ·sparer:ed into amount:s
repraeent:ing direct: and indirec~ bene£1ta to t:he bene£ic zones (A & ~
Zones) be·md ~POn pea~ ho~r and nos-peak hour t:ravel chacact:ecis~ics.
Ale, foxiest:ely six'~y-one percent1 (61%1 o£ corridor t:rips ace expect:ed
to occur during nofl-pea~ travel hours, taus representing a measure o~
tAe direct: benegit: £r~m tAe corridors. Approximately thicty-n£ne
percent:1 (3~) o£ corridor trips ars expect:ed ~o occur durin~ pea~
hours o£ t:ravel~ taus repreeen~ing laanened congest:ion on the
remaining t:rann.--~rt:ation system. This syscom relie£ ia de£ined as
iodirec~ benefit:.
bene£1ta he,Mean ~he A and B scoeL Tbs port:ion o~ ~as p~ogram share
rep~eamnt:lng direct: beflelit: ~ divided bet,~en the A and · zones
based upon tAe percentage o£ corridor uamr t:=ipe due to grov*.~ within
each zone. The port:ion o~ developers share repreBonhing indi:ec~
benegit: was dis~lb~t:ed betnean the A and a zones based upon the
percentage o~ total t:rip ends on the ~ranaporta~ion 8yst:am within an¢~
zoM. The gees got ~e A and B ~coes, there£oce, ioclede a measure og
both direct: and lndtmect: bene£1~s received by each BOM. w'thioit:s Pll
and Vl~ show the method in ,~xi~ these cal~ulat:£ons were made.
l~alt:rans, IAi~S 1976 U~ben Rural Survey.
LS-
Costs ($) Shaze (~} Share
S0'HT~
Zone
one
28.61 $ 9?,856,??5
19.81 $ 67~643r330
341,660,000 48.41
Zone A 25.8% $133,096,091
Zone B
Total $316,147,000 48.$% S250,228,066
o~ deve~n~. ~a~on o~ ~e ~8~ ~ ~e ~s~s o~ ~ip end
coat ap?ortioned to ffuture development iA ~he AOB zone
coa~/~:lp end tcip end gcov~.h in ~he AOB zone
S97~8S6r775
1,321,160 · $?4/TB I33~096~091
1,665,922
Zone B 67r$43~330
1,462,093 ' S46/T~117~131r975 $43/T~2,730,731
u
ThO dace used iA c,,,~,d~iflg ~he average cott pez trip end are
su--aacized iA '-od~ibiC ~X ~ X. ~e Ccip e~ venecaCAon flavors amd
sh~ ~ ~biC ~. ~e p~o~ gr~ ~ ~ng ~s vas ~ken
s~ ~ ge~ra~ ~ ~ ~X4 ~l~n~
adopted b~ ~%e Ozange Co~nt-yTran~o~ation Cc~uuise£on.
030
iflgle Fauily Mul~l-~nA~
SAN 30A~IIN KIL~S TRARSPORTATZON ~ORR~)OR
Zone A $41,264,990 $21,093,922 $36,497,862
Zone B $11,727,066 $20,254,362 $35,661,922
97,856,774
67,643,330
Zone A $71,836,800 $17,299,040 $43,960;261
Zone B $49,186,840 $19,0~$,$03 $¢8,929o63~
133,096,091
1!7,L31,975
s de~e~n~ ~ dividing ea~ s~:m ~ ~he appropriate n~t o~
TABL~ VIII-4
032
xa~lee ofl ~ee calculations:
The flee ~o: a development consieting of 100 eingle-~a~ily ~ecaohed
units, 300 condo un£~s and 25,000 s.~. o~ o~fi~ ~ Neig~h~
Shopp~g Cen~e~ u~s ~u~ ~:
San Joac~l.£n Hil~s :ASH
100 D.U. X S13O$/~.U.)
300 D.U. x STSQ/~.U.)
2S,0OO S.F. x $1.75/S.F.)
130,SOQ
228,000
S 43,750
otal flee flor ~evelo~ment Afl loca=e~ in
Zone A o~ ~ ASH
Foothill/East.tn ASH tZona
402,250
92,00Q
160,SO0
26r250
15,000 ..fl. Neighborhood Shopping Cen~ec would ~ calculaCe~ as
follotm:
San 3oa~uin Hills A0B (~ome B)t
5,000 e.f. x S1.30/a.~.)6,500
Tot. al flee floc develolmenC if located in
one A of S,;B'I'C AOB -
20-
03!
pothl~l/bmtmrn ~0~ (~ons ~):
S,O00 s.£. x 9,000
T~tal £ec ~or development Il located
ne A o£ FooChllX/F~stern ACe
projects cr pro~ecCs uhich include Sta~e or Federal requirenen~s to provide
units a££ordable co £amilies vi~h incomes lees than 80% 0£ the ..dian ~mcome
Section VXX'X housing). Tbe de£erral may be £or a per£od o~ m ~i~ ~KS ~:~
the issuance o£ building pe~aits or the period o£ the S~ate/?eder&l-~unding
requirements beqinninq upon issuance o~ ch. ~trst building permit. The £ees
to be paid shell be those in e£~ec~ at the tam o~ paMment and shall ~e
secured by an agreeeeat and renevable letter o£ credit held b~ an ancrov
toe,many, Qr cash or time cert££icate o£ deposit in the amount o£ 2ess plus
1S percent in anticipation o2 ~n2lstionary increases.
FOR COLL~I'XOW ~f ~*
e ensbling ordinance pro~ides ~or collection o£ £ees as a conditiom of
2imal sap approval or issuance o£ building por~l~. Fees shall be collected
prio= to issuance o2 all building pem£ts ~or ~ev ree~dential eS. rue'cures and
co~ercia!/imdustrial structures ~hich establish new an~ enlarged ~loor
space. Fees ~lll not be required ~or remodeling or ~ec~astructinq exiatin~
structures co the ~ number of residen~ial dvelling u~l~s or equal
ccoaercial building area. Fees yell no~ be required £or co~ntruction o2
retaining yells, patio covers, swimming pools ~r o~.~sr m~ inhabitable
esiden~ial s~uc~urea.
XX. DL'V~SLO~ ~S & C~D~TS
1. ~edicate right-o£-vey in accordance with leheaatic plans approved by
Grade norrlAor riqht-o£-vay in eccordence vi~h arb.lactic plans approved
by ~hs 3oint PouersAgenc~ and shorn on the Ten~ative Tract Hap and
rough gradiAg plans.
overcrceeing structure (i.e., nceb~r o£ travel l&nes) is ~ ~
4. Conotruct corridor ~raval Lanes and lnterchanqe r~s required
21-
036
u~=viso=a ~d City ~c~18 ~or ~ees to ~ aut~atica~ly adJuat~ bes~
n ~ ~ ~t~ucti~ ~at i~x. O~at~ p~o~t ~at estimates,
aubat~cia~ cA.gee in gene=~ pl~ la~ use e~en~, or other ~rtinent
o~aC~on ~y ~so ~ cause ~o= adjacent by ~e h:d o~ SucceSsors
and Ci~ Co~c~s.
In the event an annual e~aluation of the fe~ programs causes fees to be
rsduce~ fo: any reasons, =eim~u=sements will mot ~e considered ~or fees
already ~aid.
There are twmlve different cities within the prop~se~ a~eas of benefit for
the ?~thill/~astern and San Joslin HAils
Join= Pours Agenci~ (~A) ~is=i~ ~ Ci~ ~ C~n:y ~s ~e
pro~s~ ~ the pu~ses o~ planning ~ .~pl~en:in~ =he San J~in
i!ls, F~=hill a~ Eastern Tra~rtati~n Co=ri~rs. It
separate ~A's ~ c=eat~ ~o= the gan ~in Ri~n Corridor and the
in~ r~ill~as~ern Corri~rs. ~,es ~ll~t~ ~ C~es and the
County wi~ ~ 4e~si:~ with eac~ ~A fo~ ~he ~aes ~f ~eai~ning amd
u~i~ :As ~idoFs. ~he ~A will ~ ~es~ible for ~inis:e~i~
fha collec:~ u~ez this f~ pF~F~ iflclu4lm~ ~Y re~urs~en~s *alled
7/19185
LEGEND
Io.o
AREA OF *INFLUENCE
FOR CORRIDOR USER8
BASED OIi PEACENTAGE OF U~EI! TRFS)
8AN JOAQUIN HILLS
TRANSPORTATION CORRIDOR
EXHIBIT III
LESENO
Bm · ~O.e
AREA OF INFLUENCE
FOR CORRIDOR USERS
m~ASED ON PERCENTAGE OF USER TRIPS)
FOOTHILL/EASTERN
TRANSPORTATION CORRIDOR
EXHIBIT
Io-
IV
LEGENDAREA (Xr
BENEFITFOOTHILL/
EXIIIBIT vii(
Pa~je 2 of 2
FEB PRQGRAH SIIAI~ OF TOTAL C~#iIfDOR COST
Corridor Uoern
Due to Growth Benefit Benefit Sha,e Trip efldu JPee
A 34.111 ~107,6LS,tl7 $ 25,480,474 $133,096,091
a 14.301 $ 45.023.903 $ 72.
108,472 $117,131,975
To,a! 48.48i $I5206)9,120 $ 9?,588,946 $250,228,0&6
1,6&5,922
4,196,653
80/T~
S7/TR (Ave.)
1. Total Corridor ~t · $516~147,000
2. fee Program abate - 48.481 x $516,147,000 - $250,238,0&6
3. Direct Benefit &il x $250,229,06& - $152,639,120
4. Indirect Belmrit 391 u $250,228,0S& = $97,5880946
5.
Dlre~t Benefit
Indirect Benefit
Indirect Benefit
34.111 x $51&0147,000 x 61i =
2&.i11* x $97,588°946 -
Subtotal
14.]01 x $516,147,000 x 6ll
7].891* x $97,588094& -
Subtotal
otal Fee Program Share
1 ~)tm! 8yntem trip ends within & E B Zoneu
107.615.61~
25f48Of474
45,023,50]
72fiOSt472
117,1]1og75
250,228,066
EXII[BI? X
COST PER TRIP ~Jll) AHALYSIS
I~(X)'I'III L[,,/Ug?RRtl
Projected Growth In Duelling Onit~
SinvlelMelllfl~Onits (
SO(J)
uitipieUueliiegUnits
Floor
Trip Bnd Grovth B~ Laflduse Trip Rate Factors
flu (12 T.E./D.U,)
aDO (7 T.
B./
D.
U.)
nuf~turi~9 (10 T.K./ks~)
RetaiL-Regional (50 T.I./kef)
office/Other (20
Trip Snds
New Devel~r~mnt Share of Total Corridor Coats
Average Cost per Trip End
Coot in 1982 Doll&to
one A
55,502
22,
9LL
7,680,998
4,796,625
X0,155~26~
24o23L,767
666,024
60,377
76,810
79,944
479,662
203,105
1,
665,922
133,096009L
one S
53,651
13,4390465
3,652~125
11,556~375
7,~68~704
46,616,669
248,906
192,606
355,374
2,730~731
117,131,975
80(})' $ 43(2)
Same aa neighborhood/community oomueraiaL
Il $~33,096,091 f 1°665,922 = $79.89/T[lp ~nd! say $80/Tr[p
2) SLLT,L]i,975 f 2,7]O,73L = ~
42.89/Trip ~nd{ 8~y $
43/Trip