HomeMy WebLinkAbout11 2007 LEGACY ANALYSIS UPDATE 04-01-08AGENDA REPORT
MEETING DATE: APRIL 1, 2008
TO: WILLIAM A. HUSTON, CITY MANAGER
FROM: REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
SUBJECT: 2007 TUSTIN LEGACY BACKBONE INFRASTRUCTURE PROGRAM
FAIR SHARE ANALYSIS UPDATE
SUMMARY
A 2007 updated analysis has been completed of the fair share contributions required of
each development area at the former MCAS Tustin as necessary to finance public
facilities needed to serve new development.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council review and approve the 2007 Tustin Legacy
Backbone Infrastructure Program Fair Share Analysis and instruct City Staff to utilize
the fair share allocations identified for specific development areas pursuant to required
environmental impact report mitigation for development at Tustin Legacy, contractual
agreements with developers at Tustin Legacy, conditions of entitlement approval for
specific development projects at the former base in both Tustin and Irvine and in any
and all property negotiations for disposition by the City of property at Tustin Legacy.
FISCAL IMPACT
The adoption of the Tustin Legacy Backbone Infrastructure Fair Share Analysis will
assist in financing public facilities and mitigation required in Final Joint Environmental
Impact Statement/Environmental Impact Report for the Reuse and Disposal of the
former MCAS Tustin (Final EIS/EIR) and needed to serve development at Tustin
Legacy.
BACKGROUND
Based on the Final EIS/EIR it was determined that development at the former base
would contribute to the need for certain backbone infrastructure located both on and off
the site, including Tustin Legacy roadway improvements, traffic and circulation
mitigation, domestic and reclaimed water, sewer telemetry, storm drains and flood
control channels retention and detention systems, and utility backbone systems
City Council Report
2007 Tustin Legacy Backbone Infrastructure Fair Share Analysis Update
April 1, 2008
Page 2
(electricity, gas, telephone, cable, telecommunications, etc.). The City acted as the lead
agency for both Tustin and Irvine in preparation of the Final EIS/EIR and both agencies
certified the document for their use.
Provisions of the Final EIS/EIR required all applicants for private development to enter
into an agreement to establish on a pro-rated or fair-share basis each development
area's required construction obligation or financial contribution toward development of
the Tustin Legacy Backbone Infrastructure Program.
The City originally produced in January of 2001 estimates of Tustin Legacy Fair Share
contributions with respect to development areas at Tustin Legacy. These estimates were
refined in 2006 to account for changes in the MCAS Tustin Land Use Plan and the
escalation in construction costs that have occurred since 2001. In April 2006, the City
Council reviewed and approved the 2006 Tustin Legacy Backbone Infrastructure Backbone
Infrastructure Program Fair Share Analysis with the understanding that the Tustin Legacy
Backbone Infrastructure Program would continue to be updated on an annual or as-needed
basis until completion of the entire Tustin Legacy Backbone Infrastructure Program.
Since the City also retains ownership of a large portion of the development area and
had to move forward on projects such as the WL Homes (John Laing) Tustin Field I and
II projects and the Vestar/Kimco, L.P. (Vestar) project due to significant financial
considerations, contractual obligations on each of these development sites resulted in
the City previously establishing fair share obligations for these development project
sites earlier, and transferring a portion of the increase in obligations for Fair Share
contributions to the master developer footprint portion of the Tustin Legacy project. No
portion of such transfer of obligations has been imposed on properties purchased from
the federal government by Marble Mountain Partners, LLP (MMP) and entitled in both
Irvine and Tustin. In addition, the 2007 update adjusted Tustin Legacy Backbone
Infrastructure Program Fair Share Analysis also credits the John Laing, MMPs and
Vestar development sites for certain contributions these development projects have
either contractually committed to or are required to make towards Tustin Legacy
Backbone Infrastructure improvements, such as Quimby Act park development fees
being paid, or contributions being made to the Tustin Library Project.
The attached report from Taussig & Associates provides a complete summary of 2007
facility costs, Fair Share contribution amounts and demographic assumptions used in
the analysis including a description of the Fair Share calculation tables and
methodologies, and a list of the updated Tustin Legacy Backbone Infrastructure Fair
City Council Report
2007 Tustin Legacy Backbone Infrastructure Fair Share Analysis Update
April 1, 2008
Page 3
Share program. The Public Works Department has worked diligently throughout 2007
to update all facility costs on not only completed Tustin Legacy Backbone Infrastructure
but infrastructure still proposed for construction. In addition, they reviewed all
construction cost updates also utilizing assistance from an outside development
consultant, Developer's Research. As indicated in the Taussig report, the Tustin
Legacy Backbone Infrastructure Program will fund a total of $409.047,157 in
transportation, drainage, dry utilities, park and open space, library and fire facilities.
Based on the report, the following are the proposed Fair Share contributions for
individual development areas as compared to the last updates in 2006:
Comparisons of Tustin Legacy Backbone Infrastructure
Fair Share Contribution
Development Sites April 3, 2006
Columbus Square (MMP) 28,421,173
Columbus Grove (MMP) 18,962,850
Irvine Parcel (MMP) 13,097,210
Subtotal: 60,481,233
Tustin Field (WL Homes) 9,733,437
District/Vestar -Kimco 36,330,000
Master Developer (Shea
Properties II) 227,984,805
Developer Fair Shares
Other Financing (quimby
park fees paid, library
contributions, Tustin Ranch
Road Irvine Co.
Agreement,etc).
2007
31,778,250
20,951,814
14,590,171
67,320,235
9,733,437
36,330,000
282,667,266
334,529,476 396,050,938
Increase
3,357,077
1,988,964
1,492,961
6,839,002
See Full Report-
See Full Report
54,682,461
61,521,463
13,907,409 12,996,218 (911,191)
Total Infrastructure Cost: 348,436,885 409,047,156 60,610,272
City Council Report
2007 Tustin Legacy Backbone Infrastructure Fair Share Analysis Update
April 1, 2008
Page 4
Under the terms of Tustin Legacy entitlement conditions, Disposition and Development
Agreement and other agreements the City has entered into with John Laing Homes and
Vestar, the Cooperative Agreement that the City has entered into with MMP (Marble
Mountain Partners) and in Disposition and Development Agreement for the Master
Development Site ,and for all future development sites that may have privatized
elements (i.e., potentially proposed County Regional Park site and IRG proposal and
proposed ATEP Camelot proposal) the City will utilize the Tustin Legacy Backbone
Infrastructure Fair Share Program and similar analysis as the basis for redistributing or
establishing new development Fair Share contributions required on each site towards
the Tustin Legacy Backbone Infrastructure Program, as it is updated on an annual or
as-needed basis.
In addition to Fair Share contributions established by the Fair Share Analysis, the
financing of the Tustin Legacy Backbone Infrastructure Program will also include other
funding contributions made by developers pursuant to any entitlement conditions or any
voluntary contributions towards the Tustin Legacy Backbone Infrastructure Program
made by a developer (for instance, John Laing Homes is committed to a $1,969,718
Quimby Act park fee contribution and has made a $1,000,000 library project
contribution; Vestar is making a $1,082,000 library project contribution), escalation of
costs for improvements likely to be constructed by TLCP, and other funding sources.
The Fair Share Analysis, however, is really an identified funding obligation required by
each developer and has nothing to do with actual responsibilities for construction of
Tustin Backbone Infrastructure improvements. The assignment of construction
responsibilities would occur pursuant to either entitlement conditions, CFD Advance
Reimbursement agreements, Disposition and Development Agreements, or other
funding agreements entered into with each developer. The program would permit
developers to obtain a credit or reimbursement of their fair share obligation towards the
Tustin Legacy Backbone Infrastructure Program were such credits and reimbursements
are warranted and appropriate as approved by City staff.
The criteria for obtaining credits/reimbursements would the presence of an agreement
between a developer and the City which ensures a developer's funding of a Tustin
Legacy Backbone Infrastructure Program listed improvement or any additions to the
approved Tustin Legacy Backbone Infrastructure Program list approved by the City (an
example is the Vestar Infrastructure Construction and Payment Agreement approved by
the City Council in conjunction with the Vestar escrow closing). If approved by the City,
fee credit/reimbursement should equal the most current cost estimate of the
City Council Report
2007 Tustin Legacy Backbone Infrastructure Fair Share Analysis Update
April 1, 2008
Page 5
infrastructure item (as defined by annual cost review or other recent evaluation of cost),
regardless of cost to construct. Any reimbursements would be provided only as funds
become available and should not compromise the implementation schedule of priority
Tustin Legacy Backbone Infrastructure Program improvements already funded or
programmed to take place in the short range (i.e. within a three year time frame).
It has been the intent of the Tustin Legacy Backbone Infrastructure Program Fair Share
Analysis to provide an essential nexus between the imposition of the Fair Share
contribution towards the Tustin Legacy Backbone Infrastructure program and a
legitimate governmental interest (as stated in the Final EIS/EIR). It has been determined
that the Fair Share contributions as estimated are roughly proportionate to and
reasonably related to the impacts that are assumed to be caused by development at
Tustin Legacy. The Fair Share Analysis is also consistent and complies with the
Cooperative Agreement between the City and Marble Mountain Partners dated
February 7, 2005 and the Agreement between the City and the Department of the Navy
for the Conveyance of a Portion of the former Marine Corps Air Station Tustin dated
May 10, 2005 (the "Conveyance Agreement") which requires that the City treat the
buyer of Government parcels at Tustin Legacy (Marble Mountain Partners) in the same
manner as other purchasers of property at Tustin Legacy.
It is the intention to use the 2007 Fair Share Analysis update and any future updates in
imposing required environmental mitigation required by the FEIS/EIR for development
at Tustin Legacy and for also negotiating remaining agreements for Tustin Legacy
development. In the event, such agreements become difficult to finalize, City staff may
need to return with a required AB 1600 (Government Code Section 66000 (c) fee
implementation program for further City Council consideration.
Staff have provided a copy of the Updated 2007 Fair Share Analysis as well as
extensive background information on the escalations in the Tustin Legacy Backbone
Infrastructure Program to the major developers that would experience the obligations for
additional Fair Share increases (both Shea Properties, II and Marble Mountain Partners
as directed to Lennar Homes). We have received no formal comments to date.
City Council Report
2007 Tustin Legacy Backbone Infrastructure Fair Share Analysis Update
April 1, 2008
Page 6
Christine A. Shingleto
Assistant City Manager
Tim Serlet
Public Works Director
S:\RDA\CC reportWgendaReport 4-01-08-Fair Share Contribution.doc
Attachment
Public Finance and Urban Economics
1301 Dove Street, Suite 600 Tel (949) 955-1500
Newport Beach, CA 92660 Fax (949) 955-1590
www.taussig.com
MEMORANDUM
To: Christine Shingleton, Assistant City Manager
From: Steve Runk
Date: January 15, 2008
Re: Tustin Legacy Fair Share Analysis
Transmitted herewith are the preliminary results of the analysis undertaken by David Taussig &
Associates, Inc. ("DTA") to update the fair share contribution for each development area
necessary to finance public facilities needed to serve new development resulting from the Tustin
Legacy Development Plan (the "Tustin Legacy Plan") as identified by the City of Tustin (the
"City"). The previous study was completed in March, 2006. Increased construction costs over
the last two years have caused the City of Tustin to adjust the facility cost estimates. The updated
costs are contained in a City provided spreadsheet titled "Tustin Legacy Master Infrastructure-
Backbone Improvements Cost Estimate", which serves as the Needs List in this update.
This memorandum presents the results of our analysis and is organized as follows:
• Background
• Legal Basis
• Facility Costs
• Demographic Assumptions Used in the Analysis
• Description of Fair Share Calculation Tables and Methodology
• Fair Share Contribution Amounts by Planning Area
• Appendices
Facilities and Costs
Demographics
Allocation Calculations
Cost Allocations by Planning Area
Trip Generation Rates
David Taussig and Associates, Inc.
Page 2
I. BACKGROUND
Based on the final EIS/EIR for the Disposal and Re-use of the former MCAS-Tustin site, it was
determined that development at the former base would contribute to the need for certain
backbone infrastructure located both on the site and off the site, including Tustin Legacy
roadway improvements, traffic and circulation mitigation, domestic and reclaimed water, sewer
telemetry, storm drains and flood control channels, retention and detention systems, and utility
backbone systems (electricity, gas, cable ,telecommunications, etc.). The City of Tustin ("City")
acted as the lead agency for both City and the City of Irvine in preparation of the Final EIS/EIR
and both agencies certified the document for their use.
Provisions of the Final EIS/EIR required all applicants for private development to enter into an
agreement to establish on a pro-rated or fair-share basis each development area's required
construction obligation or financial contribution toward development of the Tustin Legacy
Backbone Infrastructure.
The City originally produced in January of 2001 estimates of Tustin Legacy Fair Share
contributions with respect to development areas at Tustin Legacy. These estimates were further
refined to account for changes in the MCAS Tustin Land Use Plan. Staff was directed by the
Tustin City Council in November of 2004 to complete the study (i.e., elimination of the golf
course and replacement with open space) and also include costs associated with new flood
control and water quality requirements, other environmental mitigation requirements related to
the development at the former MCAS-Tustin, and the escalation in construction costs since 2000.
In March of 2006 DTA submitted a Memorandum titled "Tustin Legacy Fair Share Analysis"
which provided a complete summary of facility costs, fair share contribution amounts and
demographic assumptions used in the consultants analysis, including a description of the fair
share calculations tables and methodologies, and a list of the Tustin Legacy Backbone
Infrastructure Fair Share Program.
Since the City also retains ownership of a large portion of the development area and had to move
forward on projects such as the WL Homes (John Laing) Tustin Field I and II projects and the
Vestar/Kimco, L.P. (Vestar) project due to significant financial considerations, contractual
obligations on each of these development sites resulted in the City previously establishing fair-
share obligations for the development sites and transforming a portion of the increase in
obligations for fair-share contributions to the master developer footprint portion of the Tustin
Legacy Project. No portion of such transfer of obligations has been imposed on properties
purchased from the federal government by Marble Mountain Partners, LLP ("MMP") and
entitled in both Irvine and Tustin. In addition, the adjusted Tustin Legacy Backbone
Infrastructure Fair Share Analysis credits the John Laing, MMP and Vestar development sites for
certain contributions these development projects have either contractually committed to or are
required to make towards Tustin Legacy Backbone Infrastructure Improvements, such as
Quimby Act park fees being paid, or contributions being made to the Tustin Library Project.
David Taussig and Associates, Inc.
Page 3
The purpose of this memorandum is to update the fair share allocations to the various
development partners to reflect the escalated cost estimates. All demographic assumptions and
allocation methodologies remain unchanged.
II. LEGAL JUSTIFICATION
Prior to World War II, development in California was held responsible for very little of the cost
of public infrastructure. Public improvements were financed primarily through jurisdictional
general funds and utility charges. It was not uncommon during this period for speculators to
subdivide tracts of land without providing any public improvements, expecting the closest city to
eventually annex a project and provide public improvements and services.
However, starting in the late 1940s, the use of impact fees grew with the increased planning and
regulation of new development. During the 1960s and 1970s, the California Courts broadened
the right of local government to impose fees on developers for public improvements that were
not located on project sites. More recently, with the passage of Proposition 13, the limits on
general revenues for new infrastructure have resulted in new development being held responsible
for a greater share of public improvements, and both the use and levels of impact fees have
grown substantially. Higher fee levels were undoubtedly driven in part by a need to offset the
decline in funds for infrastructure development from other sources. Spending on public facilities
at all levels of government was $161 per capita in 1965, but it had fallen by almost fifty percent
to less than $87 per capita by 1984 (measured in constant dollars).
The levy of impact fees is one authorized method of financing the public facilities necessary to
mitigate the impacts of new development, as the levy of such fees provides funding to maintain
an agency's service standard required for an increased service population. A fee is "a monetary
exaction, other than a tax or special assessment, which is charged by a local agency to the
applicant in connection with approval of a development project for the purpose of defraying all
or a portion of the cost of public facilities related to the development project..." (California
Government Code, Section 66000). A fee may be levied for each type of capital improvement
required for new development, with the payment of the fee occurring prior to the beginning of
construction of a dwelling unit or non-residential building (or prior to the expansion of existing
buildings of these types). Fees are often levied at final map recordation, issuance of a certificate
of occupancy, or more commonly, at building permit issuance.
The City has identified the need to impose impact fees to pay for transportation, drainage, dry
utilities, park and open space, library and fire facilities. A detailed list of required public
facilities (the "Needs List") is contained within Section III herein. The fees presented in this
study will finance facilities on the Needs List at levels identified by the City as appropriate to
mitigate the impacts of new development. Upon the adoption of the Fee Study and required legal
documents by the City Council, all new development will be required to pay its "fair share" of
the cost of facilities on the Needs List through these fees.
Assembly Bill ("AB") 1600, which created Section 66000 et. seq. of the Government Code, was
enacted by the State of California in 1987. This Fee Study for the City is intended to meet the
David Taussig and Associates, Inc.
Page 4
nexus or benefit requirements of AB 1600, which mandates that there is a nexus between fees
imposed, the use of the fees, and the development projects on which the fees are imposed.
Furthermore, there must be a relationship between the amount of the fee and the cost of the
improvements. To impose a fee as a condition for a development project, a public agency must
do the following:
• Identify the purpose of the fee.
• Identify the use to which the fee is to be applied. If the use is financing public facilities, the
facilities must be identified.
Determine how there is a reasonable relationship between the fee's use and the type of
development project on which the fee is imposed.
• Determine how there is a reasonable relationship between the need for a public facility and
the type of development project on which the fee is being imposed.
Addressing these items will enable an impact fee to meet the nexus and rough proportionality
requirements established by Dolan versus City of Tigard and other court cases. These findings
are discussed and the nexus test for each proposed fee element is presented in Section V. Current
state financing and fee assessment requirements only allow new development to pay for its fair
share of new facilities' costs. Any current deficiencies resulting from the needs of existing
development must be funded through other sources. Therefore, a key element to establishing
legal impact fees is to determine what share of the benefit or cost of a particular improvement
can be equitably assigned to existing development, even if that improvement has not yet been
constructed. By removing this factor, the true impact of new development can be assessed and
equitable fees assigned. However, since this project is a complete re-use of the existing MCAS-
Tustin Base, it is assumed that there is no existing development that generates impact on the
infrastructure in this study, and all new infrastructure cost is assigned to new development.
Purpose of the Fee (Government Code Section 66001(a)(1))
Population, housing, and employment estimates prepared for this project indicates that
approximately 12,137 new residents will be living in approximately 4,621 new residential
housing units in the next fifteen years (See Section IV, Table IV-A for a breakdown of
housing units by land use and by jurisdiction). During that same time period,
approximately 7,745,145 square feet of new commercial and industrial development are
expected to generate approximately 20,264 new employees.l The future residents and
employees will create an additional demand for transportation, drainage, dry utility, park
and open space, library, and fire facilities that existing public facilities cannot
accommodate. In order to accommodate new development in an orderly manner, while
maintaining the current quality of life, the facilities identified in Section III will need to
be constructed.
Reference is made to Section IV for further information regarding the development projections.
David Taussig and Associates, Inc.
Page 5
It is the projected direct and cumulative effect of future development that has required
this Fee Allocation Program. Each new development area will contribute to the need for
new public facilities. Without future development the new public facilities would not be
necessary. The impact fees will be used for the acquisition, installation, and construction
of public facilities identified on the Needs Lists and other appropriate costs to mitigate
the direct and cumulative impacts of new development at the former MCAS Tustin
The Use to Which the Fee is to be Put (Government Code Section 66001(a)(2))
The fee will be used for the acquisition, installation, and construction of the public
facilities identified on the Needs Lists, included in Section III of the Fee Study and other
appropriate costs to mitigate the direct and cumulative impacts of new development at the
former MCAS Tustin. The fee will provide a source of revenue to fund such facilities,
which in turn will both preserve the quality of life and protect the health, safety, and
welfare of the existing and future residents and employees.
Determine That There is a Reasonable Relationship Between the Fee's Use and the Type of
Development Project Upon Which the Fee is Imposed (Benefit Relationship) (Government
Code Section 66001(a)(3))
The fees collected will be used for the construction of transportation, drainage, dry
utilities, library, parks and open space and fire facilities to serve new development at the
former MCAS Tustin, both within the City of Tustin and outside its jurisdictional
boundaries. The type of development that will be paying these fees is new residential,
commercial and industrial projects within the project to build out conditions. This
expected development will generate new residents and employees that will increase the
burden on existing infrastructure in the form of increased traffic, utility demand, drainage
protection emergency response, and library and open space useage. In order to both
maintain existing service standards and to construct new facilities at upgraded standards
that meet City policy, the fees to be imposed on new development, as recommended in
this Study, will insure that new development contributes it's fair share of funds to
mitigate the impacts caused by such development.
Determine How There is a Reasonable Relationship Between the Need for the Public
Facility and the Type of Development Project Upon Which the Fee is Imposed (Impact
Relationship) (Government Code Section 66001(a)(4))
As determined by technical analysis (such as traffic modeling) and City staff
recommendations, the facilities to be financed are required to maintain service levels.
These facilities are listed in Section III and correspond directly to the impact generated
by new development. For example, the projected growth of residential homes ("dwelling
units") and the growth of commercial and industrial leaseable space ("square feet")
translate to additional traffic on city streets (average daily trips, or "ADT's"). In order to
prevent congestion, streets need to be created or widened and signals installed. Likewise
David Taussig and Associates, Inc.
Page 6
this new growth generates new residents and employees, placing greater demand on
emergency and community services facilities.
The Relationship Between the Amount of the Fee and the Cost of the Public Facilities
Attributable to the Development Upon Which the Fee is Imposed ("Rough Proportionality"
Relationship) (Government Code 66001(a)
This Study uses various methodologies to apportion the cost of new facilities to new
development in proportion to the magnitude of the impacts that drive the need for the
facilities. Fee amounts for the various land uses and the facility types are determined by
apportioning costs according to their appropriate demand factors, such as equivalent
dwelling units ("EDUs"), Equivalent Benefit Units ("EBUs), and traffic generation
factors. Section V "Methodology and Fee Calculation", defines the various demand
factors, describes the various methodologies for apportioning costs, and presents the
calculations that justify the proposed fees for each facility group.
Furthermore, DTA calculated separate fees for each land use designation within each
facility group (ie., Parks, Fire Transportation, etc.). The land use designations used in this
report are:
Land Use Classification for Fee Stud
Low Density Residential
Medium Density Residential
Medium High Density Residential
Senior Housing
Retail Commercial
Office Commercial
Hotel
Senior Congregate Care
Other -Health Club /Theater
Industrial
David Taussig and Associates, Inc.
Page 7
III. SUMMARY OF FACILITIES COSTS
The City identified various facilities that are needed to meet increased demand for services
resulting from new development within the City limits as a result of the MCAS Tustin Reuse
Plan and Specific Plan. These facilities are presented in Appendix 1, which lists each public
facility expected to be fully or partially financed by each development area's fair share
contribution. Appendix 1 is the facility list with updated cost estimates provided by the City,
which reflects the increase in construction costs since the previous analysis provided by DTA in
March, 2006. Appendix 3, Tables 3A through 3F show the specific facility items related to each
facility group (transportation, drainage, parks, etc.). Table III-A summarizes the total facility
cost for each facility type. Tables 3A through 3F as well as Table III-A reflect the updated cost
estimates provided by the City, as shown in Appendix 1. The updated total cost of facility
improvements needed to accommodate new development is $409.0 million.
Table III-A
Facility Cost Summary
Facility Name Total Cost for Facility
Transportation Facilities $160,507,062
Drainage Facilities $127,813,819
Dry Utility Facilites $18,569,401
Park and Open Space Facilites $82,227,832
Library Facilities $12,889,900
Fire Facilities $5,488,855
Community Entry Signage $1,550,287
Total Facility Cost $409,047,156
David Taussig and Associates, Inc.
Page 8
IV. DEMOGRAPHIC ASSUMPTIONS USED IN THIS ANALYSIS
In order to determine the fair share allocation amounts as presented above, DTA projected future
population and employment assuming current growth trends in housing, commercial, and
industrial development extrapolated to build-out.
Expected Development Assumptions
DTA categorized developable residential land uses within the City's residential zones as Single
Family or Multi-Family. Non-residential land uses within the City's commercial and industrial
zones are categorized as Commercial or Industrial, respectively.
Residential land use estimates are based on an estimate of the number of housing units projected
to be built per entitlements consistent with the Specific Plan following modifications based upon
granted entitlements and negotiations with each developer. DTA projected the number of future
residents by multiplying the number of expected housing units by the estimated average
household size of each residential land use type.2 Detailed summaries of the development
assumptions may be found in Appendix 2, Tables 2A and 2B.
Table IV-A
Average Household Size and Total Number of Future Residents
Expected Expected Total
Average
New
New Total
Residential Land Use Housing
Units in Housing
Units in Expected
Housing
Household
Residents
Residents New
Residents
Irvine Tustin Units Size in Irvine in Tustin (3)
Low Density 166 1,284 1,450 3.35 556 4,301 4,858
Medium Density 243 1,227 1,470 2.73 663 3,350 4,013
Medium High Density 0 1,459 1,459 2.12 0 3,093 3,093
Senior Housing 0 242 242 2.12 0 513 513
Totals 409 4,212 4,621 1,219 11,257 12,477
Non-Residential land use estimates are based on the total gross acreage likely to be developed
through build-out. The results of this analysis are summarized in Table IV-B below:
Average household sizes derived from City of Tustin General Plan.
'Does not include 192 future residents at Orange County Rescue Mission, which is not part of fair share analysis and
is quasi-public
David Taussig and Associates, Inc.
Page 9
Table IV-B
Non-Residential Gross Square Feet
Non-Residential Use Gross S uare Feet
Commercial 7,118,098
Industrial 627,047
Total: 7,745,145
Finally, DTA projected the number of future employees in the City by multiplying the expected
Commercial and Industrial building square footage by employee density factors. Employee
density factors were taken from SCAG report "Employment Density Study Summary Report", as
footnoted. The results of the analysis and calculations are presented in Table IV-C below:
Table IV-C
Total Private Developable Non-Residential Area and Estimated Future Employees
Associated With This Development
Non-Residential Land Use Building
Square
Footage Square Feet
per
Em to eel Employees
per 1,000
SF Future
Employees
Commercial:
Retail/Other Commercial 1,500,705 623 1.61 2,409
Office 5,023,399 324 3.09 15,504
Hotel 380,000 459 2.18 828
Senior Congregatge Care 158,994 459 2.18 346
Other-Health Club/Theater 55,000 623 1.61 88
Total Commercial 7,118,098 ~9,77s
Average Employee per 1, 000 SF Factor 2.69
Industrial:
Light Industrial 627,047 576 1.74 1,089
Tofa/ Industrial 1,089
Totals 7,745,145 20,264
`Southern California Association of Governments, "Employment Density Study Summary Report", prepared by
'The Natelson Company, Inc., October 31, 2001. Employment density data for Hotel was taken from Table 2B
...Five County Region. Retail, Office and light Industrial were taken from Table 6B....Orange County. Health
Club/'I'heater was assumed to be the same as Retail. Senior Congregate care was assumed to be the same as Hotel
David Taussig and Associates, Inc.
Page 10
V DESCRIPTION OF FAIR SHARE ALLOCATION CALCULATION TABLES
AND METHODOLOGY
Tables 3A through 3G in Appendix 3 show detailed calculations for each development area's fair
share allocation amount for each facility type. Included below is a brief summary of the
methodology utilized to calculate each development area's fair share contribution necessary to
fund the total cost of infrastructure.
Transportation Facilities Analysis (Table 3A, Appendix 3):
Table 3A in Appendix 3 describes the apportionment of transportation facilities costs for each
land use. Roads, bridges, traffic signals, and traffic mitigation facilities benefit residents and
employees in providing safe and efficient vehicular access to properties. It has been well
documented by transportation engineers that different land uses generate trips at different rates.
Therefore, road, bridges, traffic signals, and traffic mitigation facilities costs are apportioned on
the basis of average daily trip ("ADT") generation factors. A traffic study performed by Austin
Faust & Assoc. calculated ADT's by land use category and by Development Area. The total cost
of transportation facilities, less a $4.5 million contribution from the Irvine Company for Tustin
Ranch Road improvements and a $195,000 contribution from the City of Irvine for intersection
improvements at Tustin Ranch Road and Walnut Avenue, was then allocated to each
Development Area in proportion to percentage of total ADT's generated by each Development
Area.
Drainage Facilities Analysis (Table 3B, Appendix 3):
Table 3B describes the apportionment of drainage costs. The methodology used to allocate
drainage costs to future development is relative runoff contribution. The Rational Method for
computing runoff rates was used in the form of Q = C x I x A where "Q" is equal to runoff
volume, "C" is the ratio of impervious area to total area studied, "I" is rainfall intensity and "A"
is Area, in acres of the City. A runoff factor, "C" of 1.00, indicates a totally impervious site,
where every drop of rain would find its way to the public streets as run-off. Only the relative
contribution of runoff between land uses needs to be considered. Thus, the "unit runoff ', or
runoff per storm intensity (Q/I) can be computed using only the runoff factor and acreage data.
Again, relative runoff among the various land uses can be computed, indexed to a single family
detached residential unit = 1.0. These runoff factors were then applied to the demographic data
to determine cost per run-off and corresponding fees. Table 3B shows the calculations for run-
off factor multiplied by acreage for the various land uses, as well as a summation of total unit
runoff.
Dry Utilities Facilities Analysis (Table 3C, Appendix 3):
Table 3C describes the apportionment of dry utility costs allocated to various Development
Areas by net acreage, based on the assumption that utility demand is uniform across all
Development areas. The allocated costs per acre was then multiplied by the net acreage for each
Development Area to determine the fair share responsibility for each area.
Park Facilities Analysis (Table 3D, Appendix 3):
David Taussig and Associates, Inc.
Page 11
Table 3D presents the apportionment of park facilities, which are assigned to both residential and
non-residential development. Since the use of park facilities is generally limited to daytime
hours, it is reasonable to assume that anon-working resident has a greater number of available
hours for potential use per week than a working resident or local employee. In order to equitably
allocate the costs between existing residents, availability of use is measured in term of equivalent
benefit units or (EBUs), with one (1) EBU representing the potential recreation usage of a single-
family detached residential unit.
EBUs for park facilities are a function of the number of hours potentially available for use of the
park facilities. As calculated in Table 3D one EBU represents 196 potential hours available for
recreation use per single family detached household. Fee amounts for park facilities associated
with this component are calculated for residential and non-residential land uses as detailed in this
table.
Library and Civic Center Facilities Analysis (Table 3E, Appendix 3):
Table 3E presents the fair share apportionment of library and civic center facility costs. All of the
facilities are sized to serve future residents and employees.
Section I identifies the total number of Equivalent Dwelling Units ("EDUs") generated by
future residents and employees. An EDU is a means of quantifying different land uses in terms
of their relative equivalence to a residential dwelling unit, where equivalence is measured in
terms of the level of potential infrastructure use or benefit derived by a specific land use for each
type of public facility. Section II identifies the facility costs for the infrastructure that will be
required for each facility type to be constructed through build-out. Section III apportions the fair
share contribution to new development based on their proportionate share of EDUs for these
specific facilities.
Fire Facilities Analysis (Table 3F, Appendix 3):
Table 3F describes the apportionment of each development area for both residential and non-
residential land uses based on their proportionate share of the total fire calls received by the City
of Tustin during Fiscal Year 2003-2004 for each type of land use.
Community Entry Signage (Table 3G, Appendix 3)
Table 3G uses the same methodology as Transportation Facilities to allocate facility costs to the
various development areas. The rationale is based on the fact that benefits from entry Signage
improvements accrue predominantly to motorists entering and leaving the area. Therefore an
allocation based on average daily trips ("ADT's) is appropriate. The total ADT's identified in the
Austin-Faust Traffic Study was used in the calculations, with the exception of the omission of
ADT's generated in Development Area 5. Development Area 5 does not participate in the
allocation because its geographical location is within the City of Irvine limits. Because the ADT
data is different, separate allocation calculations are required, dictating that Community Entry
Signage be treated as a separate facility category.
David Taussig and Associates, Inc.
Page 12
VI SUMMARY OF FAIR SHARE CONTRIBUTION AMOUNTS
In order to finance the facilities identified in the Needs List, DTA calculated the fair share
contribution amount for each development area through build-out. Table VI-A describes the
total developer allocations by gross acreage based on each development area's fair share
contribution excluding any previous contractual agreements as illustrated in Table VI-C, Section
I. Table VI-B summarizes the net developer allocation per gross acreage reflecting any existing
contractual agreements as described in Table IV-C Section II.
Table VI-C summarizes developer allocations by gross acreage. Section I describes the fair
share allocation for each development area per gross acreage. Section II identifies total
infrastructure fair share cost by development area including the amount financed by other
financing mechanisms. Section III shows total cost allocations to each Development Area by
Facility Category. The columns at the right show developer fair share, other financing and total
infrastructure costs. This table is a summary of detailed cost allocations shown in Appendix 4,
Tables 4B thru 4G (Table 4A not used). All of these figures would apply for calendar years 2008
and 2009, and then would be subject to increase to reflect increasing land acquisition and
construction costs within the City.
Table VI-A
Total Development Area Allocation
Fair Share Contribution Per Gross Acreage
Development 1&2 3&4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Area
Total Developer
Allocation Per $299,795 $240,825 $310,429 $276,526 $270,179 $633,824 $427,773 $300,242 $0 $480,818
Gross Acreage
Table VI-B
Total Development Area Allocation
Net Fair Share Contribution Per Gross Acreage
Development
Area 1&2 3&4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Total Developer
Allocation Per $299,795 $240,825 $310,429 $143,139 $298,235 $699,643 $472,195 $331,420 NA $324,375
Gross Acreage
ti
.~
Q
~-5
,bp
~, M
;~ ~
q
N
_O
f
~? ~ a
> ~~
W J Q
J z ~
~ F O
W
O
~ .R O
N
Vi N
~
!A n
Oi
~ ~
~_
~ O
~ ~
w O
H ro
O
N N
v OW OW OW O~ O~ O~ uO9 O
N O
O
U
~ R
m
~ 0
~
~ ~
000
M
1A O
M
N
09
O
ao
^M
0
<o
~
(00
N
H N
N
N
0
O
V
H 0
h
~
H 0
N
O
(9 o
N
N
f9 N
~
~
fA m
n
~
f9
W
N
~
~
(V
~ '~
A
N
M
0
d
~
0
fA
N
NN m
R
W
N
~ O
~
~
NW
N
~
~
NM
O
f9
ONO
N
N
~ d
J
F
o
~
fA
o
pOj
(A
N
r
di '"
a
~
di
~
r
~
~
M
~
rn
~ °'
~
~
p
~
N
0
C
J
O
N
IH _
M
o
~
m
^
rM
N
~
M
p
~
~
0
~
~
~ m
~
r
N
0
0
0
C
~V~pp
0N0pp
O
r v
r
N
M
co
~
Ou1 ar
O
O
<
C
J !A M M ~ IA ~ N
Q p
A
J
N
~
r
au
v
°°
~
~
~
~
M
~
b
~
g
n
°°
J
C
N
~ 7+
~
C
J O
~
r
NK V
r
~
ON O
V
d)
H ~
M
NO
(9 0
~
~
fA
N
O)
~ ~
A
N
d m
L
~
p
~
a
L
m
~~
o
r
o
c
~
~
LL
m
~
i
m
'-
~ N
m
01
LL
n
o.
O
~ ~
=
~
LL
d
U
U
~
2,
'~
~
=~
'~
LL
N
W
(n
W
D
c
~
O Q
N
~
~
o
O
Q
m
h m
Q
N
O
~
o
a
Q
~ N O N O
V
2 a ~
no ~
~ O
O
ai M
0
n O
O~
of 00
ao N
0
~ h U `~ °° ~i n ~ a
0 N ~ N N
C
1A
w
Ni a
D
ui
w ~ W
O1 O a0 O
`m u ~. ° N °o
L C fr7
C M ~
~
~ O
N N
O
O
Q
u U
LL w M K
V IL
C N
~ O
V V
cp O
~
O
N
g ~
IL O W .~^j ~ tO0 O O 0
D O
C ; ~ ~ ~ 0
a0 O
0 0
O ~ ~
C D N
~ N
~
19
f9
H H N
Q5 a
~
A
;
0
000
m
~ 0°
~
0Oi
Oi
~ n_
r
N
~
N
M
~
~
N
O
N
M
M
W
O 0 O O O O O
~ (~ M f9 fA M W M b
9
a N
~ O0
~
o
`~i
~=
v
~
0
O r (O c
~ O
f9 O
(A ~
U9 0
H m
69 M
f9 ~
Yi
~
a
j M
w
o W
o
ip 0
`°'-
r 0
~
~ 0
°
~ O
~
~ V
~
r
F ~
0~ M
MW 00
~ N
~ u"i
~ ~
~ 0
N
6 M
O N
V r`
N 0
m N
N m
0 O
M
~ rn m
~
f ~
~ ~
~ ~
f9 ~
M
1A o
~ r
~
d ~ ~ N ~ r O n
n n
H o
-
H ~
~
NN ~
pp
N N
~
~ ~
N
19 '~
(9 W
O
OI
J v
~ i
(n0
MW ao
~
M
W rn
V
N
rW m
aM0
O
ON
~ _
a0
V
fM0
N
n
M
N C
~
A
C
p
J
~
O
0
O
~
~
O
m
W
~
~
O
O
0
~
~
O
m
~
~
O0
~
0W
~
0
0
MW
Vi
~ pp
5~
~
r
M
N
O
.~-
~ fp
O>
O
O
~
O
~
r
t'~
C
J Vl
~ ~
t~0 00
fO0 Oi
m
~
~ m
M
O M
~ J
N
~
~
N
ry
~
0
OOi
C
G
J ~
~ ~
O
~ rl
~ ~
O
~ N
_
~ ~ H
A d
~
0)
Q
~ ~
d
c
~
m ~ a n in
e £ ~ « -
~ ~ m r
o a o ~~ ~ n a " W
~
O m
° LL y O
~~ m
LL
~ o. ~ ~ `
° ~ E
~
~
n O
LL H ~ d iL U
U
ti
N
.O
.~
;~ ~
e
~
0 .°n
0 ~ m rn `o 00
o
Z
F- ~ ,o ~ o
~ ~ ~ N °.
w w w
~
° °o in
10 ~ o
G y O' ' M
e" d aOD M h l'1 ' N
>
vi
r6 ~
'o OI 1'
f
w
p p p N
O 2
U 2 o
O
N
p
N
Q
N
O
J
F ~ r
10 '
~
O H
M
w p of
w w
N aa
N O
d a
r
vi ~
N
m
O) ~ ~
~ ~ O
r N
~
q
1'f
O
~ aa
N
p w N
ao r
M
d t9 y ~ fa0
~ O
N ~y
" 1
~
0
f
~"> t
1
~
~ M 1
0
w
p w w
m
~ eo
~
N
N t
0 ~ ~
n J T ~ V r 0)
F N ~ O ~ 01
~
p r
w ~
w N N
r ~ r
~ ~` O M O ~ ~
O V
J O r O
N r /y w
w N w
e
~
N
r ~
O'
e
O
O
10 W T
N N t
p O
C O ~ l"! N
J M N
c a a
'7 J ro ~ ~ aN0
ojj ~ 10 N O
{`~ C O O 0 N
J w N
T N 0
N
~ N
~
W
N 1
0
A
m M M
w w
J w
d
m v
d n ~ ~ m O) m N
m O a LL 4 O L (.~
m
~
` ~
n
o ~ m
E
' y
m aam `°m ~a a m a
C O~ O y u m~ m 0 C LL N
E f m~ ~E~3~ ~~ ~ z
o a ¢
` ~
a
¢ .
o
~~ ~
m m y
y _
ao o
m
O U m O p1 m m c
° O O
m L
<n m e
o ~y,
E
mn
LL O UQE $
~p,o. c5
0
~ cU
oDm
L
.m ~
5
c ~ mui
Z
_
m> m c
m
C
y >
d m
N
p a
LL
m
L C N
Y m
p m ~
.
m X m O w
m m N m 0 O O
r-o Uwo oUC ¢ULL z aU r¢
0
m °o
aN
'O
O
U w
N m
U ... >.
m
co ~ U
_ ~
j ~ t m
C L N
N m J
O J C 3 C
O a ~ N N
C ` d N l0
N o 19 E a
C U m ~ ,
~ C C
N O ~ `O
U - ~ N
C
~ E ~ J O
C w ~ ~ 01
C
N C O O
_ c o 0
L ~ 'T' J J O ~
O
3 O U ~ E L L
m C m
m
O E U O C n N~
m E~ c J p a
a~ n° m ~ a n
- ~ _ J y « p O
m m~ a m m v o m
m LL «
~ c ~ ~ o o U
m y m U Ol >~ 0 0
u o~ °o m E a c°n m~
o d r> c m
Q ~ N o
c a o rn v m n w y~
J c~ .w N U C~ !%~ C
N m J~ O m 0 QLL~~ « m
L O N m ~ N O) `~ O "O
_ C
c m m °o `O'ff j
~ « p OcO p0 J C N
O U m d N
~ O N V m
L~ m~ m ~ m N N N
N O) ~ \ ~ L m N
N N V w y Ol a
N~~ O C C m O C i1
m ~ « C 10 ~ J L
O O U y J 01 L~~ V
d a¢ E m F a ~~ c:~
N m C j N J m p m -
O O ` C
T N m O. p O Q N N'
N !~ ~ V V w Q m `p w0
J C~ p N p >. ~
.C-_. C m LL' ~ O- V 0 d d
J O« U U_ O m m~~ t0
a~ m m ~ o= v c ~ m
~ w E
m~ c c `o L U c~ u r n
`O >` ~? O ~? L r N~ m
M V M m M m m n~ _O ~ w N~~
N N a E d Q o~~ m
m y U U U O ~X « N~ N O L~ '~ « U
~ ~ N f0 N ~ 4~ p C (OM $ U m ~J O m
a l m a m ~ m C ~~ 0 aND ~ m O. N O
o~~ v O ~ m~ m c
c C N N m ' m j- C N m NW y N O
v m m e m
>> C C C N C ~ 0 3 pj U 0 0 ~' d y c N c
c 0 0 0 0~ m .~`, w~~~ 10 m w
U V U U U~ ~ ~ p V ~, ~~ ~~ ~ m ~ m o v
- o v 3 d
V ~O N N N N ~ 1~ O O) ~ ~~ C~ m~~ C j~ m c m
Q¢¢¢¢ d a ¢a o° E~~$~ a m E w
a a a a a a a n. a o~~ d E 'o m~~~ c c o`
~ N t7 V 0 O t` O O ~ « W p- n j m C C O m ~~ w
m m m m m m m m m m m m of n E~ LL m 3 m m o~
m m m m d m m~ N N N m O N m O T O 01 N~ Q c
m m m m m m m m m m m m O. ~ m Z m (7 ma y"« t N
E E E E E E E E E E E E E o- E y y y :° m w c
o.naaanno.annam N m m m
X 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0« x~ m> .m. ~ m N W ~.= N
m m m m m m m m m m m ~ 01 O O O J O m y.C d
d v a~i a~i a~i a~i m y a~i a~i a~i 'm c a n aci °~ d i m 'm J m d
U U O U O U 0^ U U O O p m o o E p S o J=~~
. N (O Q In (O n W O1
David Taussig and Associates, Inc.
Page A 1-1
APPENDIX 1
Facility List and Costs
David Taussig and Associates, Inc.
Page Al-2
TUSTIN LEGACY FAIR SHARE ANALYSIS
PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE NEEDS LIST THROUGH BUILDOUT
d
z
N
Description o cd
w $ a
3ov
jp a J
~ V)~O
Roadwa /Brid a Im rovements
1 Kensin ton Park West Connedor -Inco orated into Item 7, Reach 102
2 Valencia N. Valencia Loo -Red Hill to Armstron Incor orated into Item 7, Reach 102
3 Valencia (N. Valencia Loop) -Armstrong to Kensington Park (West Connector) - (Incorporated into Item 7,
Reach 102
4 Lansdowne Inco orated into Item 7, Reach 102
5 Edin r - 1400 Ft East of Redhiq To East Connector Non-Backbone
6 Armstron - Barranca to Warner 3,433,878
7 Armstron -Valencia N. Valencia Loo to Warner Included Item 1, 2, 3 8 4 20,657,537
8 Brid a -Tustin Ranch -Valencia N. Valencia Loo to North end of Brid a includin Ram 23,582,062
9 Tustin Ranch Road -North end of Brid a to Walnut Incor orated into Item 8, Reach 140
9A Tustin Ranch Road /Walnut North East Comer Widenin 1,150,142
10 Sev s Road 731,412
11 Valencia N. Valencia Loo -Kensin on Park to Tustin Ranch 1,137,113
12 East Connector -Valenda N. Valencia Loo to West end of Bride 2,810,154
13 Brid a East Connector over Santa Ana Santa Fe Channel to Edin er 2,132,292
14 Moffett -North Loo to West end of Bride 2,323,341
15 Brid a -Moffett over Peters Can on Channel 3,693,373
16 Moffett East end of Brid a over Channel to Harvard and Bike Path 1,824,052
17 Sweet Shade Marble Mountain -Irvine CFD Fair Share 341,688
18 Valenda N. Valencia Loo -Tustin Ranch to Moffett 5,899,016
19 North Loo -Moffett to Jamboree Ram 2,603,298
20 Park North Loo -Wamer North to Jamboree Ram Incor rated into Item 21, Reach 151
21 Park South Loo -Wamer North to Tustin Ranch 15,868,098
22 Wamer -Redhill to Armstron Inco orated into Item 23, Reach 148 4,584,954
23 Wamer -Armstron to Tustin Ranch 5,687,480
24 Wamer -Tustin Ranch to Jamboree Indudin Ri ht of Wa Ac uisition 5,148,182
25 Tustin Ranch -Wamer North to Barranp 6,538,706
26 Warner -Jamboree to Harvard Irvine CFD Fair Share 704,663
27 Redhill / D r Intersection Im rovemments
28 Tustin Ranch -Valencia N. Valencia Loo to Wamer North Inco orated into Item 8, Reach 140
29 South Loo -Tustin Ranch to Armstron 4 Lanes 2,437,685
30 Jamboree Ram -Jamboree to Park 522,566
31 earranca - Tusfin Ranch Rd. to Redhill 2,595,704
32 Barranca -Jamboree to Tustin Ranch Includin Ri ht of Wa A usition 8,907,136
33 SCE Barranca 220kv Transmission Pole Relocations Deleted
34 East Side Redhill - Ban'anca to Warner 2,070,525
35 East Side Redhill - Warner to Valencia Loo 491,684
35A East Side Redhill -Valencia Lo to 1000' North Incor orated into Item 35, Reach 162
358 SHIPPO Stud 133,500
35C Sound Miti ation -Wamer from Harvard to Culver 1,494,002
TOTAL 1 zs,5oa,243
Traffic Si nals
36 Edin er /Kensin tan Park West Connector New Incor orated into Item 7, Reach 102
37 Edin er /East Connector U rade 166,250
38 Harvard /Warner U rade - Irvine CFD Fairshare 245,400
39 Jamboree / Barranca U rade 288,236
40 Barranca / Millikan New 413,074
41 earranca / Tustin Ranch New 607,079
42 Barranca /Armstron U rade 166,250
43 Redhill / Barranca U rade - Ci of Irvine CIP Pro'ect
44 Deleted
45 Redhill /Wamer 166,250
46 Redhill /Valencia New Inco orated into Item 7 Rach 102
47 Valencia /Armstron New Inco orated into Item 7, Reach 102
48 Wamer /Armstron New 332,500
49 Armstron /South Loo New 332,500
50 Wamer/Area E Street New -Note: TBD er TLCP Land Plan 332,500
51 Deleted
52 Tustin Ranch /Park South Loo New 301 250
53 Tusfin Ranch /Wamer South New 465,500
54 Tustin Ranch /Wamer North New 265,100
54A Tustin Ranch /Warner North New 172 500
55 Tustin Ranch / Moffett New 332,500
56 Tustin Ranch /Valencia New 332,500
57 Warner North /Park North Loo 301 250
58 Park North Loo /Jamboree SB Ram New 241 000
59 Valencia /Kensin ton Park West Connector 183 087
60 Moffett /North Loo New 299 250
David Taussig and Associates, Inc.
Page AI -3
GOn[rOller (NOte cOS[5 are InWrp01
Controller (Note costs are incorpoi
Traffic Mitic
ort / Edinger -Figure 19 -Tustin
II / Edinger -Figure 19 -Tustin F
i Ranch /Walnut -Figure 19 - TI
II /Main -Figure 22 -Irvine
Ison / Von Karman -Figure 23 -
oree / Alton -Figure 24 -Irvine
rri / Altnn - Finure 9Ci -Irvine
into the various traffic signal bl
into the various traffic signal bi
TOTAL
In -Santa Ana /Irvine
IS Fee Payment
i Fee Payment
Addition to Items 8 & 9 (Irvin
332,500
166,250
465,500
299,250
L207.476
78 Grand /Edin erp~Santa Ana (Tustin Share = 56%) 7,623,919
TOTAL 23,795,343
Draina a Im rovements
79 Peters Can on Channel from Railroad Track to Edin er 21,310,215
80 Peters Can on Channel from Edin er to Ci Limit Incor orated into Item 79, Reach 504 -
81 Peters Can on Channel from Cit Limit to Barranca Irvine CFD Fair Share) 8,700,900
82 Backbone Storm Drain Overall Valencia, Armstron 7,210,593
82 Backbone Storm Drain Overall Includin Interim Storm Drain Connection at Warner b RSCCD 25,783,307
82 Backbone Storm Drain Overall Barranca Channel, Tustin Ranch, Park & Wamer 26,488,109
83 Gradin Modification to eliminate Pum Station 14,283,000
84 Deleted -
85 Deleted -
86 Barranca Channel Detention Basin / S orts Fields at Redhill /Warner 1,059,432
87 Barranca Channel -Redhill to south of Tustin Ranch Not include Irvine CIP Pro'ect 6,788,566
88 Santa Ana Santa Fe Channel Embankment Incor orated into Item 13, Reach 204 -
TOTAL 111,624,122
Water Qualit tMiti ation Im rrovements
89 Selenium Treatment Facili Phase 1 Backbone Facili 4,284,900
89 Selenium Treatment Facili Phase 2 Backbone Facili 2,856,600
90 Water Quali Treatment S stems Phase 1 Backbone Facili 2,285,280
90 Water Quali Treatment S stems Phase 2 Backbone Facili 571,320
91 Resources A enc Miti ation Im rovements -Peters Can n /Railroad to Edin er 370,033
92 Resources A enc Miti ation Im rovements -Peters Can on /Edin er to Ci Limit 4,627,222
93 Resource A enc Miti ation Im rovements -Peters Can on / Cit Limit to Barranca
94 Resources A enc Miti ation Im rovements -Master Develo r 1,194,342
93A Resource A enc Miti ation Im rovements -Peters Can on / Ci Limit to Barranca -
TOTAL 16.189.697
95 Backbone Phase 1 Backbone + contractor char es - Iterunds
96 Backbone Phase 1 Backbone + Contractor Char es -Refunds -
97 Backbone Phase 1 Backbone + Contractor Char es -Refunds
98 Backbone Phase 1 Backbone + Contractor Char es -Refunds -
David Taussig and Associates, Inc.
Page AI -4
Gas
99 Backbone Phase 1 Backbone + Contractor Char es -Refunds
100 Backbone Phase 1 Backbone + Contractor Char es -Refunds
101 Backbone Phase 1 Backbone + Contractor Char s -Refunds
102 Backbone Phase 1 Backbone + Contractor Char es -Refunds
Tel hone
103 Backbone Phase 1 Backbone + Contractor Char es -Refunds
1.04 Backbone Phase 1 Backbone + Contractor Char es -Refunds
105 Backbone Phase 1 Backbone + Contractor Char s -Refunds
106 Backbone Phase 1 Backbone + Contractor Char es -Refunds
Cable TV
107 Backbone Phase 1 Backbone + Contractor Char es -Refunds
108 Backbone Phase 1 Backbone + Contractor Char es -Refunds
109 Backbone Phase 1 Backbone + Contractor Char es -Refunds
110 Backbone Phase 1 Backbone + Contractor Char es -Refunds
Telecomunlcatlons
111 Backbone Phase 1 Backbone + Contractor Char es -Refunds
112 Backbone Phase 1 Backbone + Contractor Char es -Refunds
113 Backbone Phase 1 Backbone + Contractor Char s -Refunds
114 Backbone Phase 1 Backbone + Contractor Char es -Refunds
Backbone Phase 1 Backbone +Contractor Char es Total All Utilities 1,631 778
Backbone Phase 1 Backbone + Contractor Char s Total All Utilities 5,653,343
Utilit Backbone All Phases All Utilities 11,284,280
TOTAL 18,569,401
Parks and Communi Facilities
115 Nei hborhood Park; Master Develo r Area G Park 01
116 Nei hborhood Park; Master Develo r Area G Park 02 4,408,203
117 Communit Park; Master Develo er Area 46 Acres 18,211,264
118 A vatic Center in Master Develo er Communit Park 6,237,607
119 Tennis Center in Master Develo r Communi Park 3,585,603
120 Tustin Le ac Park; Cit Area 24.5 Acres 5 738,889
121 Linear Park; Master Develo er Area G includin waterwa , onds
122 Linear Park; Master Develo er Area D includin waterwa , nds 6,989,666
123 Linear Park; Master Develo er Area E includin watenva , nds
124 Other Public-owned O en S ce Master Develo r Area G
125 Other Public-owned O en S ce Master Develo r Area D
126 Other Public-owned O en S ce Master Develo r Area E 3,742,009
127 Pedestrian Brid a -Warner /Linear Park 11,818,152
128 PedesVian Brid e - Armstron /Linear Park 4,830,000
129 Brid a Tustin Ranch over Linear Park Pedestrian Crossin 6,210,000
130 Le ac Arch Structures in Linear Park
131 O.C.F.A. Fire Station - Edin er / Kensin ton Park 2-Ba 8000 SF 5,488,855
132 Cit of Tustin Libra ;Tustin Civic Center 7,953,900
133 Cit of Irvine Public Park Marble Mountain 2,600,000
133 Communit Ent Si na a 1,325,287
120A Tustin Le ac Park• Cit Area 24.5 Acres 2 321 060
1208 Tustin Le ac Park; Cil Area 24.5 Acres 4 998 480
120C Tustin Le ac Park; Cit Area 24.5 Acres - Contin enc 288,044
132A Cit of Tustin Libra ;Tustin Civic Center 1,000,000
1328 Cit of Tustin Libra • Tustin Civic Center 1 082 000
1326 Cit of Tustin Libra ;Tustin Civic Center 2 854 000
133A Communit Ent Si na a -Valencia / Redhill - Si n Onl 225,000
81A Peters Can n /Trail Im rovements 248,856
TOTAL 1o2,us,a7a
GRAND TOTALS aos,oa7,lss
Notes:
1 Items highlighted in yellow were provided by City Staff
2 Items No. 1, 2, 3, 4, 7, 36, 46 & 47 are based on actual contracted construction costs.
3 Items No. 20, 21, 24, 25, 30, 32, 33, 39, 40, 41, 52, 54, 57 & 58 are based upon actual con
4 Items No. 66, 67, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 75 & 76 were adjusted by City staff based upon MCA;
5 Items No. 77 & 78 are based upon March 2007 estimates from City of Santa Ana
pursuant to Settlement Agreements.
6 Item No. 133 A based upon actual contracted construction costs.
David Taussig and Associates, Inc.
Page A2-1
APPENDIX 2
Demographics
G
ti
0
CS
.~
~ N
~ ~
;~ y
q ~
N
W
V
Q
W
a
Q
~ }
W ~
N
N m
V J
2 W
Q av
r ga a
J p N
~ 2
~ ~ ~
} Q
Q Z
~a
~ Y
za
Na
~ z
H Q
F
Q
a
z
~~~
N C O C
0
Z 10
f6 ~
0
' ~
~ ~
~
H ~ ~ ~
>. Z.
~
O
O
N C O N M r
p ~ N ~ O
F U r~
N
O
O
O
~
M O
O ~
O O
O ~
~
fC i0
~ n
~ ~
~ ~ O M O W
0 O O
O
H N O
to N
O O
W o
to ~
~ f~
N
~ M CO
<
6
O
N
7
~ O
C ~ N O
~ O
O
f0
~ ~ U
E
0
rn
~
o O U M ~
N
~ J
~ ~
~ I~
M
N
~ ~ N
CO ~ O
0 M
n
U co - 0 0 ~
O ~ N ^
M M ~ M
~
~
a
fC W J M ~
'~ ~ o
r v
r
N
V
N
O
~
d
M
W
N
M N
N ~
O
N F
'c
m
O O O M
J
~ f6 C
C >'
O
N
y J
J
v
oZf m e
C T rn
N o
M
M J J
N
°iS f6 C
C >' M
N N
~ N
N
~ y J
J
W~ 0~
~~ \OQ .0.
~J era
a O m ~ d m
ye .`
O ~ U C
~
y h
~ ,/~
Q N
fC ~
~
U
A
V N ~ C d t N
w
~
••
•N C
~ L
2
O
• •
~p
~
O ..
`°
N
3
e _m c
~
>
? = ~
d U .. v
~
J ~ o
~~ - c~ a s ~
~
" ~ ~ ~ ~ o ~ O 2 (n O
~ U
~ ~ o r ~
O O O O O
r r O r n
~ ~ ~ m ~
\°
0 v e~
0 0 ~ p f0 ~ O O
O 0
O O ~
o e
o o °0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0
rn
O n
~ ~
~
W ~
O M
~ N
~
o ~
rn
0
~ 0
M 1~
0 ~ ~ ~ ~
N ~
~
v
N ~
~
~ ~
M
o r
N
rn
N
O m
O
M O
N
~ n
~
N ~ O
fD
o
0
CO
N (O
~ N
~: O O O
~ O O
`-Ivl Iplpl°I IpIO
O
N O.~ f6 LO].LL f0 Q~
N O ~ LL N _O ~ •• ~ _O ~
Q d- UJQ N N LLQ OwO
~ ~ o m a ~ ° ~ ~ ~ F
Off. .v ~f- ~ ~_
(C ~ O N fC ~ 0 y 0~ 0
w O N C E O _N C 7 0 tq C
C ~ YC N E ~ <p ~ C ~ c4 U
U O
F°-a ~ ~a o ~a
C O
o _ •;~
•m ~ E
E ~ ~
ti
tl
O
h
.~
5
`~
[r N
;~ ~
0)
q~
~ N
OW
D ~
W J
~ U
~ LL
U ~
= W
m a ~
N a J
J ~ ~
~ }
~ p O
} ~
V Q
Q
J Q
Z ?
~ pa+
~ ~
y o ur
N r~
~ o
O
M
O
~
~ N ~ ~ (O cp I~ ~ M
m O
r y
~ O
CU
y
a)
~
a
~ _
m ° ~ ~ m
H
7
C
'O d O (O ~ O O M
m O F N M pOj O O
m
~U
N
~
O
O
J O O
U
~ O O
m
C
v
~ U ~ ~ n a0.
M ao M
J O o h ~ n
H
0
m ~ o 0 0
Q O J N O N
a)
Z
O v,
N r~
y J ~
J
~ m C N N
a2S ~ j, t~ c0
M N J
J ~ ~
N C ~ ~- N
otS
~ C T
y J M ~
J
e`
e`
0
~Q
Fi
e
J
ey
~ ~'
ea O
P
~ N
y
G) U
~ .•
C
.` N ~ ~
~
O
41 U
m
.-. ~
N U
~
N
U ~ ~ ~ ~ t
w ~~ ~ U C
~ ~ O C Y 7
a ~ m m U
c o ~ 0 y Y ~
J C L
_
m
y D = N O O 7
c •` U . a
c
~ > ? m ~ ~ o ~ ~
y ° ~ ~ a ~ 0 2 tn O ~ ~
~ U -
n N N ~
~y ~ o_
m ~ o ~
m
~' z
Q m p o
~ T
N Q ~
O O) y c0
(? C N O
C U H
r N m p
O
d
F ~ f6 U
y O N
d F d
Q
a)
Z
C m
E ~
7
O
O
O
N
N
C ~
Q N
O p
a)
v m
a
o ~
y o
m °)
m -
> ~U
m C
m ~
O O
m U
y _T
't, U
c ~
m Z
U 'O
m C
m
N ~
c
0 0
N
7. tY
a ~
'O ~
m
C > C
m c Z •°-
~ o
~ O U
h
O tq O_ 'O
o ~ ~ ~
`~ d c c
'~ ~ O L
N 'O N_ C1
' L N E ~
_s ~. O C
N C U V
a ~ ~ O
C
X j ~
d ..+
7 ~ C ~
y
C m ~ 1.
C
N O O 3
~ U N m
rn o ~ o
m N a ~
~ ~
Q c o
d y~Z rna
J N Q C~ C
~ N C N E
C~ V N O N
N O N~ y N
~ 2 O U ~ a
~ o a N ~ T
U O) N
m !!) C O y O
y a .N O ~ C
+~,,, _7 O U N
U 2 ~ m ~
0 0
m
a) ~ o ~ ~ j
N
N = (/~ Q m L.L
N M V N ~D
David Taussig and Associates, Inc.
Page A3-1
APPENDIX 3
Allocation Calculations
+~.
0
5
.b0
~ N
C ~
~ M
~ ~
d
Q ~
}
Q
J
0
0
0
W
Z
O
H
Q
Q Q 0
M Q Q
W W
J Z
pJpZO
~u~i¢
~O
a
og
F
W
a
}
m
N
t0
y W (O O r N O O In O O O O `
~ O~~ M V r~ aO0 ~ O N O ~ M N
~ O ~ t0
O 0 0
O N
l
M
~
N
~ N M N eD V p ~ p NON V
O N
O O
p to
F- p Q
M r N
N
fD
O
r O O 0 0 ° O
c0 O O M ~ O ~ O
~ O M M O O
Q N ` N
M
0
~ O D O O M
O
Q
N
O
~
(6 ro O V A r
O O O W N N r
N e rr1(~
~ Q
Q
N n M C r
~ r
OI a
O
f0
O ~ ~
^ ~ O M N O m
O O M a M N 0 OD In W n
~
~
O O
~ M
o O
M h
y ~ N N
O
_-
O O v 1~
O O N~ M~ ~ N r N OOD
Q ~ N
~ r ~ N
O
~
N N ~
o orn ~
'Q
~ M
o 0
c
rn
~.- ro oo ~
~m
Q w
n
(p
N
N N M ~ M OD V ~
O I~ W O O O O ~
01 N N Q~ O O ~
'
N
~ n
° ~
O M
~
Q ~ M r ~ N 00 r d N M
n
O O M N
M O N
0 o ~
M ti
y
Q 00 V
N ~ M
~ N M
H
~O 01 M
N 0 M
M o O
N ~ O
M 0
M 0
Q ~ M
N
~ n
0.'S N M M o
M
M ~ r O
M ~ N
M R
N
y cp
N ~ V a (V M
Q w
m N
~ ot5
OD (O M O h
~~ ~ O
M
~ N
o M
O
N
a ~ O
~ N N 0 I~ r i
O
M 0
IA
N ~ N 7
~ O y ~ ~ y c
O) N ~ N f0
E N
f6
J L j N (0 C
E„ d L N U .N-. ~
C
"E O
'
E
~ D O
QU
O
OQ
~Od
N 01
N O
£ 2= ~y ~` J V U~ d C U
~~ N~ U 0 N~
N O ~
_7 7 0 0 N~ O L~ N~ N w w O m Q ~- ~~
' Q F A
a ;av
c~ E y pp1J~E c ~ m y c o~~ o
~ O N N O N~~ O N L O L ~ ,~ o
0
N .-.
y ~p O
J~~fn (A p'O i0 ZU C7U C22F U(n~2' 3 ~p 0
~ U U ~ U y H o Q
v
c
Q
L
`O
D
U
d
O
E
n
'w
m
U
S
m
E
U
N
l0
c
v
`m
~ ~
_
d .
~ c
v
rn
w ~
Q ~ a M ~ N~ g `-'
U1
d T O Oi
oi~jMr
O r
ui a
N ~_
dF
y ~ H~
» p o 3
o
U m
O N
c t
d
y ~ o
" ' o
M py N O N y °m m
O N r~ 0 O O
° m
Q
U ~ ~ ~ is O c~i ~
~ v
r ~ N~ N ~ W N
i c8 d
~ ~ G
N I~ N t0
~
W
(O ~ l
~
~ y a
~` ~ A
m a
T ~ U
t~ N_ g
m ~
C ~
U C
O C
`~ F :-
D F-
N O
` O y
F ~
0 0 ~ « Q
d
m c~
: V c o
v
~ O m m
C
~
~ '
° a ¢ t
O)
_
_
+
Ol ~"' Q n E
N
m~~ o O
U N w >
F w d
U U A U OQ ~ c
00 (0 N A N
d' F ~ C Yp
2 N a! y
°
°
F J FO- n
~ Z
N
d
v
A
LL
d
O
!1
O
a
David Taussig and Associates, Inc.
Page A3-3
TABLE 3B
TUSTIN LEGACY
DRAINAGE ALLOCATION METHDOLOGY
I. Runoff Rate Coefficient Calculation
Land Use Category Runoff Rate
Coefficient, "C"
Net Acreage
Total Unit Runoff, "Q/I" [1]
Low Density (0-7 Units per Acre) 0.50 232.0 116.0
Medium Density (8-15 Units per Acre) 0.60 117.5 70.5
Medium High Density (15-25 Units per Acre) 0.80 60.2 48.2
Retail 1.00 115.7 115.7
Office 1.00 160.0 160.0
Hotel 1.00 6.0 6.0
Senior Congregate Care Facility 1.00 7.3 7.3
Other -Health Club 1.00 1.0 1.0
Light Industrial 1.00 32.4 32.4
Total 732.1 557.1
II. Proposed Facilities
Facility Type Facility Cost Cost Per Unit Runoff
Drainage Improvements $111,624,122 $200,380.79
Water Quality Mitigations $16,189,697 $29,062.75
Total $127,813,819 $229,443.54
III. Allocation Rate per Unit or 1,000 Square Feet
Land Use Category Runoff Rate
Coefficient, "C" Allocation Rate
per Acre
Cost Financed
Low Density (0-7 Units per acre) 0.50 $114,721.77 $26,615,451
Medium Density (8-15 Units per acre) 0.60 $137,666.12 $16,175,770
Medium High Density (15-25 Units per Acre) 0.80 $183,554.83 $11,050,001
Retail 1.00 $229,443.54 $26,546,618
Office 1.00 $229,443.54 $36,710,967
Hotel (350 rooms) 1.00 $229,443.54 $1,376,661
Senior Congregate Care Facility 1.00 $229,443.54 $1,674,938
Other Health Club 1.00 $229,443.54 $229,444
Light Industrial 1.00 $229,443.54 $7,433,971
$127,813,819
[1 ] Based on the Rational Method for calculating runoff, Q=CIA, where Q=runoff in cubic feet per second, C= runoff rate coefficient,
1=rainfall intensity in inches per hour and A= drainage area in acres. Unit run-off is defined as run-off per inch of rainfall intensity, or Q/I=CA,
which is used to determine the relative contribution to total runoff by the various land uses.
David Taussig and Associates, Inc.
Page A3-4
TABLE 3C
TUSTIN LEGACY
DRY UTILITIES ALLOCATION METHODOLOGY
I. Demand Ratio
Land Use Category Demand Ratio Net Acreage
Low Density (0-7 Units per Acre) 1.00 232.0
Medium Density (8-15 Units per Acre) 1.00 117.5
Medium High Density (15-25 Units per Acre) 1.00 60.2
Retail 1.00 115.7
Office 1.00 160.0
Hotel (350 rooms) 1.00 6.0
Senior Congregate Care Facility 1.00 7.3
Other- Health Club 1.00 1.0
Light Industrial 1.00 32.4
Total 732.1
II. Proposed Facilities
Cost Per
Facility Type Facility Cost Net Acreage
Utility Backbone All Phases (All Utilities) $18,569,401 $25,365
Total $18,569,401 $25,364.57
III. Allocation Rate per Unit or 1,000 Square Feet
Land Use Category Allocation Rate
per Acre
Cost Financed
Low Density (0-7 Units per Acre) $25,364.57 $5,884,580
Medium Density (8-15 DU per Acre) $25,364.57 $2,980,337
Medium High Density (15-25 DU per Acre) $25,364.57 $1,526,947
Retail $25,364.57 $2,934,681
Office $25,364.57 $4,058,331
Hotel (350 rooms) $25,364.57 $152,187
Senior Congregate Care Facility $25,364.57 $185,161
Other -Health Club $25,364.57 $25,365
Light Industrial $25,364.57 $821,812
$18,569,401
[1] Based on input from various utilities, no rule of thumb or generalization can be made that relates the relative
cost pper acre of dry utility infrastructure to demand or land use categories.
J
m O ~ Np A O A m~yy d N m N d
_~.. ~ N Ol ~ Orl N amD O ~ d ~ {rj
~ d ~ ~ I~ ~p
f N ~ ~ O
u
E
z'
M~
ww
J J
m Z_
f ~
N
7
H
a„
J N N~ N V O N~ h N N
d vddN~noM~ m
O LL ~ ~ ~ ~
d
~ N
Z
0
J LL
m
J~ °o < v a r ~ o o r dm
n.N °Om `m o~'~oo
J$ .= o 0 0 0 0 0 o c o
w°
.1_
J N
6 VN
tai
2m
m ?
N m
m~ N T a b ~O m M N N~ ~
a ° o
= o
K
ml °o umia~p dm,: cv'i°oM°oo °m mmamoM~p °o ami~roY-' m ~ v
W N~ O~ l70 CIHmN~gM M NNH~ N ar0 N O m J LL
a m m' w' l7 ~ m m N mw Y mw w N N d j
N C) Cl N ~ m
w ~N
0
0
o q
q
v a
a
A O ~O d tmp N ~D M O aD M
N ~ N 00 W~ O~ O Odi A r
C Nyy m m m f0 l7 Na.~d~oo m 0 N
jy N O N~ A oD tD N H OOT OND
~ ri Oi Oi~yN w
~ Hw w
N 1~ N Y O N a0p N N N (m0
~y ~ d d d N m~ M ~ m t+l
_ ~ ~ ~ fV
7 d
m
O LL
`m d
E v
z'N
N m m N 1~ M f0 ~O ~ ~O
m m m ~ ~- O? t~ Cf d
M N N N~~ Om O N M
N N N N N m th d
mM NNwwNN
wwww
~ j U w N N t00 ~_ OD N f0 H H H O N O O H O t Op OD V~ M
_ ffOO O d o m <G d
0 ~ !~ N W C G O aG aD aC r LL
j~ N O ~ f•Y aD t~ m d ~ M ~ O N m m d
y p LL ~ d N N Y1 1~ ~O~ppi I~ m y my N m M OY? N N N d
`y E~ ~ O) N N ~ m m m •- d H m N H YIw N H ~ M H H H H w w b J~ O ~ ~- m m m ~_ m m m
yw ~ l~~~m~~~mr N w N afA OmomoO X00
y m lV N N E fV IV ~ O O O C
a~ CO Jp
7 O W
o m n
U' O W
U
~I oo ~~~
A A b ~ ~ ~ ~
LL
aaQaa o_o°
~ ~ ~
c ~ c
~$ u
~ ~ O ~ _
~
E c
~ `md~oE c9owwaw~a
x`
y
~ y
w d o a U o d m~ E E W ~ a a f ~
~>s d a`aa ~~ ,~„ `w
,,
~
~ ~ ~ m u ro m n n n n n n.~ O1e ~ mmm v E
omamom~~~
~~
~JJ~aa~o `o
~ ~ ~
~ ~
.~ w
~ ~, ~ m
t m
a ~E ~~ m~7oD00003~ ° maUUC~E
Ems $
1^ ~
fl v ~~
~J aU u
w m m ~ `m m w m ~ w `m 2- w m m
r ~aaa"
~ ~ 3 O
as A a
~
d
`!
O~ ~ °'
~M m ~ .
m
m o,r
2~m=
`
v LL
y a
u a
E~~
o m ~ o 0 0~ c Si a Y T T~
o°oa ^' u v_ umm~r m
`mE m.~ie .~. _ ~ mmm
to
c '"
.
rnarnW
rn
aa' n
c F
w
~ ~ ~ o
~o
c
d ~ ? Ux, a r
0 c
~
~
E u m
n
m A
0 o w~aaaa'a'a''S'~~ JJJ„ m
~ ~
bQ ~ c
u 3._._ °.~ ~ a~ ° t ~
o m m w d IE o m v' m ~ ~
`o a mm E ~.~ m `° '° t m y ar aoi rn a~ w Nam
m m o m '" c c c r a°r d ~~ m '° a °c
o m
.
q~ ~ J JE~f/J¢OS W O E f ~ LL ZZUQF-F-JJJO~ V aaQ1J Uf HHa F _ J
m
~ ro
m U t
TO W
~r
2' m °i
~ ~ ? `o m
~ E ~ U c
3 `o a° 'm m o m '"
s~~~~o=ms`s=
8
E
~_
x
a `o
c E
ug
d
w°B
$ `o_
a
~~F
o
F ~ ~
U V! ~/
ti
5
d
U
O
h
tl
.~
(~, M
;~ ~
q~
0
J
O
D
O
U W
~ ~ ~
W y
J
J W
m Z F
FQ-NJ
~a
~LL
q~
m
J
N
_ W
.~ O N OOi M co n V N M N In
F m ~~N~oMNU>.-~° n
- rn (h N ~ ~
a
7
Z
ci
N
O ~
d N N~ N N O N 0 0 0 n
a 7 ~ ~~ N ~~ M r~ (NO
Z (n ~
C
O
O
N
Q
C W O O (MO (MO N~ M M N N
~U ~ o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
d
a
N
W
0)
T
O
E
W
O
y~ 0 0 0 0 0 0
- R 0 0 0 0 0 0
a~ ~ ~ ~ ~ W ~
Q
c
0
j
c O
~ ~
`m ~
C Q ~0
N N ~
y N ~
~ p O
d O
O
W ~
0)
n
C
O
~ n
U ~'
F
N
W ~,
~ c
~ J
li
N M ~ ~ O OD 00 ~
ch n co o iv r~
M N N N ~ C7 N N ~ ~
'O
U
C
l6
C
LL
N
U
p O 000 O N f~D 0 a N
W W
U n ao o ~i ao cn
~ nvm N o a~ d
d ~viia~ °'- ~i ~
r ~
vi » t1
O
O
n
a
N
a LL
000 0 °
0 ~~ ~
=
.-~ OOi O O O ~ 7
'V p taON a ~ nN
i U cn o ao .n °
t O O O a0 N ~ O
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 4 ~
W `
d
~~(h M
N
N ip
~ N
U ~
c m a
~'~ mU
N L ~
~ ~ rn rnw
m p= U l m
47 ~ ~ ~
3~~ ~ '~o c~ d o t ~
~~~lna0x(n05
r
O
C
C
d
li ~
H
VI
.m. O 'v
F O LL
a`
N N d d
C C C C
N 0) N N
U U U U
U U U U
~ .~ .] .]
U U U U
O ~ U 'O
c c c c
m m m m
rzzz
f0 N N N
.oaa a
J J J J
C C C C
N .N .N .N
F ~ ~ ~--'
O O O O
U U U U
d
m
LL
G
7
Q
H
O
O
`m
d
O
C
N ~
N ~
o a
U ~ n
r R T
F
O O N
LL i+ O
V ~
~ O J
Q
LL7 W n 0 0) T n 00 f0
n~ ~ N 0 N O~ N i}
n 0~ c7 M N O n N ~
n (D N N OD N f0 0 0 0
~ N r N ~ ~ N ~ NM l'7
N N r ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
f9 f9 fA f9
a 0 (O a0 M OD OD OD
00 0 O CO (O M O O (O 0
O~ 0 0 LL07 OOD N N~~
01 N N N R OD f0 (O V~
~ f9 b4 fA fA b9 fA
fA f9 M to
O (h M ~ 0 (h (h ~ ~O
O 00 0 0 N~ ('7 (7 N N
~ O O O O O O O O O
N
N N
~ ~ N
U ~
c a~ a
a> m ~
~' U ~ U
N L ~
~~ m ~~
w D = U 2 ~
C
N ~
O >
~ YO U ~ ~ N ul
J~~V~KOx(n05
O
01
O
W
N
f9
N
d
U
LL
N
0)
U
U
U
C
fC
z
a
`o
O
U
F
a ~ ~ ~
~ ~i ca ~n
of ri
m ti v
d O ~ N
... 7 fA fA
dl U
U ~
0
0
0
nl
y C N (7 iA
O .0 N N W
(.~ O O W W
- c0 a0 V
Q co ~ N
O o 0
N cn 1~
N O O ~
C1 H uj V
y c0 M
a
} O
U F
W
~y W ~
J J ~
m Z W
Q F F
~ H J
~v
LL
W
LL
c a~~i ii
~ LL
a~
~ ~
a ~
N U
(6 ~
U O
0
~ o
c
c
Q o.
N
N ~
C lp
~ ~
v
O ~
N
~ C
E ~
~ a
Z 'V1
N
o !~ r1 °°
n r1
~ U l o N
0o m
N V
~ O
O O
N
V
N N
O ~
~ r
r
C
O
Z
~ ~
~
~ h
h
~ ~
~ N
~ w
:~ U ~ ~ j ~ ~
u' ~ w ~ 'v
3 y
c
~
U
ti
N ~_
tl ~
U ~
~ O
h ~
'~ ~ Q
w
~ i+ ~ N C
~ - ii U o _
'~ A ~' y A N N
~i
~ ~ LL
~
n c
p ~ V
~ O-
F ~
M
a
~
U
~
Q
N l6 U
'~ w
'~ ~, d ~' m LL N ~ -410 d'
•~ e1 O
a .~ N 41 U a w e
°
q ~ ti O ~ _ ~ ~ z
ti
w
U
O
h
Ct
,ba
~ ~
~ M
q~
W
W Q
Q m
Z fn
~ a_
N ~
~' ~
~ }
~ J
W D
~ W
Z
.~ W
~ Q
O ~
U Q
H
O
H
N
m
~
v~~~c00o`r'co~°n°coo°o°°'°°r
ipO
'
rn~
~
o~i
o
°o n
~
o
~
r
_
~ O O N A M N~
00 ~ O e- O N O (V ~
O n ~ O
~ N O
A
p to
Ip
~ M N
M
r r r r
~ OO 00 OO a ta0
f0 O D O
O ~M ~ O
O O
~ M
N
~ ~}}
p M O M
a N ~ ~,
0
(0 O O O O ~A
N
Q
O
° ao cDV~ ~
~ n ~ m
f6
1 N N
O
O O 0
N
~
O
Q N n M~ A ~ Q~ ~
w
o ~
f0 O O M M~~ O ~ M~ W A G n O
y O O v_I~ °.--~N N~ O ~
Q ~ ~ W W N~ M ~ ~ N A A
n ~ l0
w
p
~ N n
~
° o
A
y o orn rn o~ o n
Q ~ ~ ao 00 ~ ~
A
cp
N N M ~ M 00 ~ ~
O I~ N OOO
~ e
°
O M
n
~
Q ~ M ~ ~ N c0 ~ O E
~ N
N
~ ~
ff!
O
O M N
N
o M
t0
f0
y O O O
CO ~ M O 0
M 0
B N
A
Q N ~ ~ N ~
~ a
~ O O O Y!
Q °
~
atS
M
N M
~ ~ ~ O
M
~
a
M N
P
O)
N N ~ ~ ~ N ~
Q
f6 N
a'S
~ (fl ~ O ~
M O O S O
~
H O
~ ~
~
Q
A N N W A
A O
f'ry ~..
~
N ~ (0 7
'
~
'o O
C N U N
tl1 Y C
~ a v ~ ~ m c
'~
~+
~~~ ~ ° ~ ~ E~~ea ~ m~j ~ ~
~ y o
Q 0
U
~ O
~ J O O O ~ f0 p~ x 0 0
C O 7 7 0 0 N~ O L~ N U U1 ~ w f0 Of Q Q' :.0 O
~ Q O
~
a
Na; 3~ov
c~ E y rn~E c ~ m d c o N o
oa~a~y~ E~w?moa~~~omtoL~a~~
~ -
~
o o
o
~U J~~NN U ~~zUC90-22HUfn
~(A F- e Q
d
V
!L
d
O
C.
0
a
N
0
U
N
O)
fC
O)
.N
a~
m
fl.
~U
f0
d
O
C
N fn
d ~
N O
U ~
N ~
N
Q 0
N ~
N ~
~ L
c .0
c
Q f0
~ N
o
N
N
~' C
C
N N
U ~
'~
O
O
O
a
N ~
d
a w
7
~ O
y y
Q ~
m
m N
~ N
David Taussig and Associates, Inc.
Page A4-1
APPENDIX 4
Cost Allocations by Planning Area
David Taussig and Associates, Inc.
Page A4-2
Table 4A (Not Used)
V
ti
U
h
,~0
h
~ M
;~ d
q~
W
a
O
J
W
0
Z
Q
N
w
>r
er V ~
X~~U
Z jJtl
W m Z W
Q~rn2
H
N
o n ~
0 ~
0 ~
M
e`s'(
m
O N
Mf0 r IfI
~ O~
t00 X
"~ 0
OI~ 0 H
~G ~ O
n~ ~ O~
~N N M I
M ~I
~
~ ~
co
~
~ ~
~ ~
ry
ry
y r
y
~ O ~
r
N _
r
I
U
c
H
~
o
a
U
ro
ao rn rn
m
O
'~ r+
m
v
°
c
c ~ N m
~ (O c
~ ~
V
C
m H ~ O
~ M
y
A
.~
~
r
~
~
~
~
O
~
E
O m J 10 OD M N W O
O N (G r ~ Of
~ N f0 ~ i
~
~
H N f0
H
N
O
~ M
y
N
y r
N
~, ~ a
ami
ao a
U ~
~ m
'~ m
lL J O) O) ~
d
m ~ `
N
N
y
J
Q
N
C
U
oo
~
M N
_
~
~ O
r
r rj
N
~ M
r
00 O
M
M~
I
n
~
g~ I~ O
vl
n
rv ~
~tO M
~r~ n
~`~
C
m
'O ~ ~p
O y M y fA
h
N
~
O I~
r O
O
w
~ C
~
J
N O
V
r M
N ~
rn
'c
N N
c o M f0
"
,o
J J 0 0
N ~
uN9 • ui
~ ~
b9
` c°~ orn
v m c °0-
°~
M C T
J J r~
~~
~ N~+Oj
~ N
~
N
J.
~
tN0_
~ ~ 0
N
N 00
~ I`p M ~ N O
C
d
J M ~ ~ H
0 0 moo moo a ~ ~ 0 0
P a u w v .
In v .
ti v ti v ti v a v y v N u
~
9~ ao ~o ~'o lo Ns LS E's LS lB ~+g
o
ij~ /g ¢ R ¢Q QQ QQ Q¢ ¢ ` ¢Q ¢Q QQ
'
P a
P m m m m m m m m m
''b U U U U U U U U U
G:
.
n
N
aM0
~
~l
~
~
~ a
a
Q
N
C U N tip ~ ~ ~ a
a ~ ~
{aQ
m y
~
~
~
~
N
N
N
N sf
N
n
~ M
~ OD
~ N
a , , ,
d d
U
Q
~
d
Y! U
m C
~ O
m d
~ t0
N
.- ~
m a ~ ~
V ~ A °'
N 7 ab '~ U
~
v
c ~
d ~
.y d
~ ::
~ a
U
J ~ ~ _O d ~ ~
~ .. C y
C
d E
' E
' A
y o ~
2
m ~
c
d
y ;
O
J v
~
~ o
~
~
E
E _
m
a~
~
~
~
o o
~
m
d
L
~
~ .
~
of
K O S ~ O ~ ~
~ U
~ ~
M ~ N M
ao ~ t0 ao
O
N ~ ~ N
h W
O ~
~_ ~ ~ N
N ~ ~
N
W ~ n d OOi
~ » ~ O1
f9 V!
o ,o
pima
r ~ N
V N
y
0
aao
O O V
A
i > „
~ O F
m O
W ~
A q
~ m
a
O ~
N
M M O
pMj N
to
n N
v ~
N
N ~
y
~ M
~ O
r N a
N y
(A
M
pOj ~ O_
4r9 y
N M
rn ~
~~~
~ ~ ro
M y
y
o ~
In n <?
o ~
r
y
N
~ V
r
N ~ ~
O y
61 `
a ~ u
U ` Q
V N
m W O
~ ~ ~
O
Q ~ 6
r
m m O
o E .~
F 'K V
O ~
aQ
aL
a
L
N
.~
LL
U
ti
O
~~1
CS
,bp
5
~ ~'
,~
/''~ ^~
V "~
W
a
0
W
Z
Q
W W
H Q
J ~
Z
~ W
X V ~ d
p O
~a C¢'J O
W }
J m
Z Z
O
~ U
O
J
Q
W
Q
ll
y ~
~ Cn7
~M ~ OD
n~ M
O~ ~ ~ ~ N
p
p
~
n O
~ <O
~ ~
~ ~
~
n
~ ~ a
p
Q M
0p
~~
p N
~ D7
~ 0 N
~
N ~ N
~ N
~
M
(V
fH
M
N
to
~
rW
H
~ Cp
di
~ n_
O r
p
a
j ~
N
fA
m U
a
d ~
~
m
rn
~ o
n
~ M
° ~ ~ a~ B o a
~
a
C
q ~ ~ ~
~ ~
U
N
E
C
)
d
U
h n
~ p
N
p M
M
~
W 00
~
(O N
p
~ uj
a
M V O
t0 M ~
U ~ N~ ~ Q7 ~ N N
v
a ~ ~ ~
r
y ro U o
p o
p
~
N H N
W N
fA
v
y
v
m
~
q
i0
n
a
U
F N
M '~
v'o
O~ N
ro~
nN
~ N ~
M
r,o
n W iy
ao o
Mo
~M ~
°Dr
~~ f0
dui
nOD
r
d
a
. ~ w w u~ vi in in
y
O)
p
O OD
~
_y
f0
~
J
N N
~
n
N ~
C ~ ~
~ `m c
c
° v v
o ~ ~
ro
>
,
y J
'J n
N f9 ~
~ bN4
~
t0 C O
N N p
N Opt
M1 C T n Onj (O O
M N J
J ~ ~ ~ a
~
N
t0 C ~
~ n p
N
~ y J
J M
~ V O
° ° ° ° ° '
° •
° •
°
~
a 'a
w u a
y y 'a
y (qj •a
w u '~
n
a U •a
w v a
y cqi a
w v a
y u
~a
O
~~ Ng
~ Lo
u~ lo
u° ~o
u~ ~'g
u~ ~' o
u Lg
u~ ~o
o~ ~g
u~
a
i
~~ ~a ~
Q¢ ¢¢ Q¢ Q¢ Q¢ ¢¢ ¢¢ Q¢ Q¢
a
a
a o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
s
'~b U U U U U U U U U
d
io
~ d
O Q
{p
n
~
c~0
M
n
~
~
(h
N
n
~
t~D
M
N
n
~
c~0
~
n
u~
(~O
M
n
u~
(~O
M
N
n
~
t~0
M
N
n
u~
t~0
M
n
u~
M
N
UO n
a N
1A f9 f9 N
lA N
M f9 IA N
f9 W
d
v
Q
m
q n
y
d
~~
~
a C
~
C q _ N
N U
C q
q n ~ ~
U
r
c
_ N
w
7
~ ~+
~ U
7
n
~
H
a
i d
rn a
~ ~ U
q ~ ~ p N
w L
.. N
'! w ~ S C f0 N
a~i
O E
7 E
~_ m
u o
U d
= ~
~
C ;
J a
~ ~
~ q - ~ d ~ d ~ t
~
y p d' O 2 to O a
~ U ~
g
t~0 ~
N ~
~ ~
N
n
M
N_ ~
N ~ ~
N N
!A
n
~m~
M W
M A
~ n ~ N
~ ~ N
M ~
n ~
~ a
n a+
~ N N
w
yj N N
~ ~ N ~
~ w
w
W
~ ~
a nma?
7 N p A
h
n ~
o °
'~ o~~
N ~
t0 ~ a0
N
fA
p
r
N p
~ O O ~
N W
r m ~ q N
Q o~Q ooU
U a w m m y
m y G w
Z ~ w~ ~ O F
0 0° O m o
~' a C7 6 w ~
d C q q
q q C O C
o E ~;~ ~ m
~ 'X U C1
°-° a
as
d `
Q
.~
LL
ti
w
0
5
Q
,a0
h
~ ~
~ ~'
qa
w
a
Q
W
H
J
} laL Z
W
~ D ¢ U d
x vC~QO
:O W w d J
c JJtn W
aqcy m Z Z W
Q F y d ~
H O m
Z0Z
¢O
Y Q
U
a0
W
a
N
LL
~ ~ ~ pippp ~
~ ON O O)~ t0
m a r ~ v rn ~
H ~ t l') ~ 7~ N N O I ~ Op
M 0~ 0 Mfg
N
O 0 ~ 0 ~ 0 ~ 0~
~ o ooyfo0fyo0~0yi
U
m
'C
N
'~
c a
C ~ J O 0 0fA 0 0(A 0 0fA ~
A H
d
d (O ~
O to J 00Ey0 0yE 0) x000 pOOD
F m r r
w
~ ~ ~
y~
l L a 0 J O O 0~ O H O O~ O~
N ~-
tS
M O t0 ~
r
a "-
m r ~ N'~voo'MO»~
~ poppp v~~n r
d /A ~ ~ ~
d M r
~ ~ ~ v
,•O- O ~ 0D~0Nrr0~g
«_ J ~ 0 M 0
c ~ ~ p
7
O N
pp m p u~i
~ c T 0 W ~ N0f900W0
J J ~ (O N N ~
~ MW ~
V t0 pCp 0tM00 N 000
M JJ NtO~ ~O~O~O?
~ ~
prpp M O
N ~ C
M N N~ N 0
°'6 C T N T~~ 0 0~ N lT
r J J 0 N
4r9 H
O O O O ~
s9 ~ ~~~~~o~oho-
~7 0a0/tJ ~¢~¢~¢~C!°
1"Na ~a in y H h c
b U U U U a
a
d d'
Y N t0 N t0
00 a0 a0 CO
C
~ ~ N N N N
D. tp M .M-~ M
O fA f9 sA fA
a
m
O y
d c
A ~ ~
U y
N ~ d O!
~. ~ ~ S
C y ~ ~ ~ o
J N O; ~ ~ C
~ J ~ ~ w
0
(NO,
Orf
O
H
yO
U
d
a
M
O
o~m~orv~nov roe
O0
r~~0 O
p0ppp pVppp OD t0
~ONMtO ~ N Nr Opt
iNO OBE
N ~
O t0
O M O~ O~ O~ O~ O~ t
p M t
r ~
o0yf o~ oofy o0yi o0yf oofy~
pp
(O V
N O
~ ~ i
0 0 0 0 0~ 0~ Q
0^ r
~
r N~
~ ~
N~ p
i
M a
f9 ~
r ~
N N N r
0 ~ O ~
O N O~
0 0 M~
~
~~
r
~~
p
0f9
~~ i
Oj ~I
NtlN9 0
M Ey M~ ~1A t+1 ~.
tno
~ r~
M
M
vr O
aom
o~
°ofrf
0~
0~~
O M ~ O
M
r
~ ~
q$
0
~ N~ 0
t`
')
O
M 0
Ofy 0
f_~
O t0 O
0 fA OI
0y)i
~ N
~ ~ ~
r ~ N N
~ ~ I
O ~ 00~ 0 0f9 00fA 00y O 0~'
O~ O 0~ O H O 0Ey O 0Ey O y
00fA OM 0 OW 00f9 0 fA Of9
O 0(A O OW O 0Ey O 0tA O 0Ey 0 409
~ O y
+.. O~
t0 O~ O ~ O
N ~ O
W
tL tL
~ tL U tL U tL ~
N N Q N
' Q N Q N Q ~_ Q
(7 py
U O
U O (~
U O
U f~ O
U pyp
~U
w
0
~ p
c O ~
N T M
' t
+1 ~
N Q
M
O O
'~ ~ in
9 ~
~
NM O
ro
fA O
ao
fA c~
fA v
fA
O d f
a
M
d
o
~
N
U
d d
d
L
a
io a+ U
y d
`rn
r
a
7 U =
~
J E .Y
E d `~
'~ .°:
o c
d d
$ w
~
o~ O x to O ~
V
to ~ Q
i ~ ~ N (O
'00o a'c~n
N r N O C
~ N <O ~ r
~ N ~ ~
fA
p t0 N N
~ N M ~ ~
0 ~ M ~ ~
yc ~ in w
U
d
a
0 Oyf o
O
~
j ~
i ~ O
m ~ ~
> 00D
J N ~ ~ N
tN9 N
lD
N
~ ~_
tV CNO
f0 .~ r
b
~ i M ~
O N
nj
N M fq
~ J ~ O
~ p~ ~
~
_
'- °'
N ~
o
N
~ N ~
M
1
'. M
a
E ~
0p N N ~
0D N
~ W
~ M
m
r
o
'~
~ ~ ~
oN
t0 ~tO fA com
App
~ J
r
rA ~ fA ~
~
~ ~ a
~ ~
~ O
0 0 ~ N
W
In fA
fO o ~
O f0 0
~
' m r
{7
O
O N 7
~
N
~ O
0
D C r
O ~
p
fA ~ y N M
J fA
O
M
p
~
' N N
M
~ O N
O O
N
h ~ O N
~~
~ A ~` ~~ m d H
Q U
j m ~ Q ~ O O
0 tll ~ d a G d~ m p
K a s O
[f O
ro
d
G ~~
an
7 O
2 I
L N
d
~(7a
~` d
N~
?_ °c d r C
Como ~
oc
~
C W 7 C K V
~? ~ h p O d
C
Q
a
L D ~¢t
N
~ ~
> N V1
>
_ •q
F Q LL
C
0
v
O
Q
ti
w
U
0
h
.a0
h
~ ~
~ d'
;~ ~
N
q~
W
a
W
Q
Q
~ ~
W Z
W
~ W Q J a
x aC7U0
~ W J Q J
a m Z }
F ~ ~ ~
H ~ m
J Z
O
Q
U
O
J
Q
W
Q
y ~
r
~ °~
~ n ~
N.
O
V
r 0
O
M 01
Y
N N M ~
p c
O
~ O
D
N f
D
r N Ni
N'
F. r
~ ~
~ ~
sA ~ I
N "~"
r ~
1
D
m U
N
a
a o U
C
,~
m
.~ J
r
~
E ~
N
m a
U J
H ao 0
O W
N
ll 0 J
m
l0
v ~
~ ~ ~ Q1
W
r
d
J M M
Mr O 0
aup
N
N G?
m
t0
C
'O ~ 0 O
~ ~ <O
r
~ ~ M
N
~
.~
~
~
m ~'
~ m r
~ c0
"
y M
fA a
V9
10 C ~0 OOD M 001_
I(1 C T t0 4J O r
J J M
sA N M
~
~ C O
01 1[1
N M
~p M
M
y J
J r
N M
409 0 00p
~ NfA
N
o~ N C ~
00 p I(
1!1 W~ N
~ cV
~ J J N~
to N N
~ N O
H
° ° a a
a9 ~aa a
cs a
cs cs e$
~
A 7~ N H N N
'~''6 U U U U
~ ..
~ co ~ ~i ~i
c ~
0~
O
T
N
N
O
N ,
O
N
p C1
a N 49 49 H
m
O y
c
m
m ~' ~
U y t
m ~ m W
u
i ~
m ^ S
~ o >
~
m o
J y O m m y
m J ~ ~2 (n
~ o
1 ~
1
N
O
H
O
m
a
9
0
3
9
n
1
9
O
D
9
b
9
A
9
V1
0
E
m
m
Y
O
~ N
~
7
N aa~ 1
p
O T
M
$
N O W r O N O`<
pp
0 0~ pOp M (~ ~~ N N O i
1!)
~~~~ ~~fAO N 0 pl
1
O N
O ~ 1
1
O ~ ~
f9 1
N n
r C rn M
~ r
~ a o ~
M
~
I
t0 O
~ fA 0
N
~ N ~
~ 0 i
j ~ M 49~
r C O cN0 ~ p
$ O
O O O N
$ N M M I
0 0
T
tfi m
NH M
W ~ pOppp 007 N ~
0 ~ O ~
S ~+j
f9 07~ M W•
O
V V 0 ~
O V ~ N ~
t9 ~ ~
~~pp
M r 0
N N
~ r
f r N
~ M
~ ~
I
~~ ~~ CFA
va d'
° ~'
° d•
° da va
1L v a
IL v a
1L u a
IL v IL v ~ v
~g ~s_ ~g ~s_ ~s_ ~s_
m¢
7 .., m¢
O .. m¢
7 .. m¢
7 ~. m¢
~ ~. m¢
7 ..
~ U y U N U y U y U ~ U
m `w
~ $ c°S rMi o o ~ m
O O ~ ~ N
n
a ~ ~i N
0» N
0~ ~ ~i
m
G
m
m
~
m m
~
L
a
V m
~j ~
U
a y
'm
c
U
U
? _
`°
s
J Yp N C m 7
~ O I O O ~
o$
~ °0 0 m
r~
o ~ N
'0 0) 0 W V
1 ~ ~ ~ O
N
~ ~ N H ~ ~
/ ~
1 C N S
1
~ ~ N N Q
> 0 ~ O ~ Z
U ~ ~
m
a
> $ r
r
r ~ e7
N ~ m
j ~
~ 01 O ~ r
~ N
r ~p
1 ~ `~ ~p
~ Q
~ N ~ A
~ M ~
O
W
D_
~
N
J
N
M
N
~
00
i N
~ ~ F
- O
O fV
r r
~
~ ~
r
9 ~ ~j _ 1ff
0 N 1`
H N fA
~ O ~ ~
~ N N 0 N
M_
~
9 N~ ~ r ~
N
M
~
O
~
W
~
~ O
O 0
O 0
~
C
J
O
t(1
°~ 0 N
mrn
~
~ ~ ~ M
~ N
W
r C
o O
00D 0 N Y o
0 O!
0 \
t0
aND X
49 C O N
Ni m
J ~
0
r O
O
M 0
O
~
~
~ ~ N
6 6 O
~ ro ISI Q~ Q O O U
"
'm m m Q y ~ d~
a_
~ U pw ~O
~
D c (9
C Q T~
m 0
O >O $' u1 w
E
Z
9 m m C
D O N O O C
~ m ~.EA ~-m
~ R u
N
. y O O
_ m
~ a
9 ¢ a
m
E :?
E
m ~°- ¢ E
m
~ m r
j y
A
H N
Q LL
C
O
.
~
O
Q
"r
CS
U
.~
5
~ ~
h ~
~ ~
^~
"'~
W
a
J
W
Z
QQ
W
Q'
Q
r
U W W
v W ~ J O
W -
~ J J U W
n Q Z W W
Q ~ fj W ~
F l L m
Z
O
F
Q
U
Q
W
K
Q
2
N
N a 0 ~
O
~ M 0
< a M
~ M
N
_ I
W
~
~
r
r ~ N
~
~ '
r 10
N
_T
U
c0
N
a
c
d
v o V
m
m
U H
d
~
N
"'
a
U ~ J ado ~i
w F-
~
N
m a
ti ro U
J
~
N
7
Q r
-p
ICp
d ?
MO
OfN tD
N
N f~ U M In
N ~
p W p~
~-
C
V F ~ p
M ?
~
.N
~
~
n
w
~ O
~ O
ror ~
~ t~
r
' J ~ ~ M N
c ~ ~
N C O
t p~ O
M
N
N J
J O M
~ N V O
N m
~
l0 C N
O i° 00
tp0
etf
M C J.
N J
J n r
N N ON
~~
N l0 C M
~
~
~ C ~'
J J N N
N AM N W
rd ./
9~
°'° o
~ O O
~ ~ o
,.y.. UO 0
r UO
~
°~m
~ ~ a ~ a ~ a ~ a
Ha ~0 h y y y
'b- U U U U
r
N
~' .
C
o ~
~
n t°
ai
~
w f°
ai
r`
w (O
of
r`
~ c0
of
~
r
°
Q »
d
O
y
C
~
A ~ ~
U H
~
m
j ~
. ~ y
O 2
C C D ~ 3 p
~ N
°- 3
a~i
a~i
y
J ~ ~ fA
o
~ M
tD
9
O
F-
O
d
a
D
9
n
D
A
9
7
O
b
9
n
h
A
pS
9
D
A
c
0
Y
~~MO aNp U1
OQM
ro~
O~
M I~ ~ 1
~ r i
trj
i
O
~~pp pp O
N N UOD ~ to M i° M
N C
N N t
r H N M H H
F9 t0 ~
O N
O 1
1
N !
O N 1
r ~ 1
N t0 M
~ M ~ ~
~
~ ~
tp M ~
N 00
rn ~ ~ ~
I~~
1 NM
~ p f°
O Otte
M M N~
° N
t0 N f°
O O~ O
O M N aD ~
lA N
N H p
p N O N
M
~ N M
i°~ M~~
H
M~ M
l"
J M
vi°im
~ rnin
OD N
O N
r ~ V ' ~
r to
(p
M ~
N M
r N9 N f0
N M
r t9 ~ ~
N M
~ f9
y 3 a~ ~ a~ O a~ ~ d ~ y .Co
~ V
O tL c
~Ui
O tL ~ ~ o ~ o tL
N
~ -
a Q
l~ -
a Q
~ _
a Q
~ -
¢ ~
~ -
¢ L_
mQ
~ U ~ U ~ U ~ U ~ U ~U
l0 N
~
°$ N
a v
N v
N a
N ~
N a
O ~
= n ~ » » » » H
Q
h
m
._
°
N
~
U ~
d
C
~j N
~ ~
U
m d r
~
j
v
c c
V m
2
m
a
J
.~
U
~
d
_
C
~
d
L
s
7
Q
t
0
~ a a
~ ~ ~ ~
~~
, R N
~ O ~ ~
~ ~ ~ r r
J ° ~ ~ N
> ~
°
d
a
i
t
9
q
m
~°rto
~ ~ w
O
N
ri~~
~M tq
W N c
in a M
O
M J ~ ~
~ F. N O1
~ Of Mfg N
O W
tH N N
M
9
M
O t~
~ ~ ro
O N q
df W
v ~ v~
r
~ ~ ~ ~ O
W J pp
°p r ~
M~ ~ t0
w
O CO N
N
~ n J O o
N
t` ~
M M V C lry l~
~ N C r N
J ~
M
N
M O ~?
~ r
M
R YI
pt ~N m N
Q~ Q O O U
d Q N > > .~+
naC7 ~~~'
oP m`o
~(7a a~
A 4
~ E A ~ m
X ~ Q
9 a< a
F Q ~
N N
t
N to
7
.W
Q LL
O
W
O
Q
David Taussig and Associates, lnc.
Page A4-8
TABLE 4G
(Not Used)
David Taussig and Associates, Inc.
Page AS-1
APPENDIX 5
Trip Generation Factors
[Insert Appendix 5 ,Austin Faust Report]
David Taussig and Associates, Inc.
Page A6-1
APPENDIX 6
Employee Density Factors
David Taussig and Associates, Inc.
Page A6-2
Appendix 6
TABLE BA
TUSTIN LEGACY
DEMOGRAPHICS ADJUSTMENTS SPECIFIC TO
PARKS AND OPEN SPACE FACILITIES
PARKS AND OPEN SPACE
Per Person Hours of Potential Parks and Open Space Usage per Week
Potential
Potential Number of Recreation
Recreation Number of Work Hours Per Weekend Days Hours Per Week
User of FacilBies Hours Work Day Days per Week Weekend Day Per Week Per Person
Resident, non-working 12 5 12 2 84
Resident, working 2 5 12 2 34
Employee (Commercial/Industrial) 2 5 0 2 10
1. Total Fours of Potential Parks and Open Space Facilities Usage per Week. (Single Family)
Potential Recreation
Number Per Potential Recreation Fburs/Week
Type Of Resident Household [1, 2] Fburs/Week per Person per Household
Resident, non-working 1.65 84 139
Resident, working 1.70 34 58
Total 3.35 196
2. Total Hours of Potential Parks Usage per Week. (MUItFFamily)
Potential Recreation
Number Per Potential Recreation Hours/Week
Type Of Resident Household [i, 2] Hours/VJeek per Person per Household
Resident, non-working 1.34 64 113
Resident, working 1.39 34 47
Total 2.73 160
3. Total Fours of Potential Parks Usage per Week. (Commercial)
Potential Recreation
Employees per Potential Recreation Fburs/Week
Type Of Employee 1,000 Square Feet [3] HourslWeek per Person per Household
Commercial Employee
Retail/ Olher 1.61 10 16
Office 3.09 10 31
Hotel 2.18 10 22
Senior Congregate Care 2.18 10 22
Health Club/ Theater 1.61 10 16
4. Total Fours of Potential Parks Usage per Week. (Industrial)
Potential Recreation
Employees per Potential Recreaton Fburs/Week
Type Of Employee 1,000 Square Feet [3] HoursANeek per Person per Household
Industdal Employee 1.74 10 17
Total 1.74 17