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