Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAGENDA REPORT 2002 0605 CC REG ITEM 10C��.s1V1 � �• �j � a € T C>__ ... __ ACS_ Y. Y. MOORPARK CITY COUNC I Y. Y. AGENDA REPORT TO: The Honorable City Council FROM: Kenneth C. Gilbert Director of Public Works DATE: May 24, 2002 (Council Meeting 6 -5 -02) SUBJECT: Consider Selection of a Consultant to Prepare a Feasibility Report Pertaining to Efforts Required to Seek a Prohibition of Non -Local Truck Traffic on Route 118 Between Route 23 and Route 34 nTgrTTSSTON A. Background • In 1989 the City investigated development of a request to Caltrans for the establishment of a prohibition of truck traffic through the City. No action was authorized to pursue a formal application. • In 1994, just prior to the completion of the Route 23 / Route 118 Freeway Connector Project, the City again made a request to Caltrans to restrict trucks through the City. It was feared that the opening of the connector project would cause truck traffic to increase. Caltrans again provided the City with the guidelines for the submittal of a formal application. Due to the rather extensive and costly nature of that process no action was taken to pursue that application. • In 1999 the City Council adopted Resolution No. 99 -1604 requesting that the California Transportation Commission (CTC) direct Caltrans to initiate efforts necessary to establish a truck prohibition through the City. Again we were directed to develop and submit a formal application. • In response to that direction, the City Council directed staff to prepare a Request for Proposals (RFP) for consultant services required to develop a formal application to Caltrans for the establishment of the desired truck prohibition. • An RFP was prepared and sent to a number of consultants. • No Proposals were received in response to that RFP. • In January of 2000, the City Council authorized use of the Citywide Traffic Mitigation Fund to fund this effort. Truck-ban-0205 C. era $­k 41\ 4 a a Truck Prohibition May 24, 2002 Page 2 B. Procedures and Requirements In the report presented to the City Council in 1999, staff summarized the process and requirements for the preparation and processing of an application for a truck prohibition. That summary (with certain updates) is attached as Exhibit 1. Attached as Exhibit 2 is certain back -up information in that regard. C. Proposal At the request of City staff, Parsons, a firm with experience relevant to the subject matter, prepared a Proposal (Exhibit 3) for the consulting services required to more fully analyze and assess the process and requirements which are generally described in Exhibit 1. The report Parsons proposes to provide would estimate the level of effort and cost required to develop and then manage the application process and related efforts. The report would also evaluate the feasibility and likelihood of achieving the truck prohibition and provide recommendations in that regard. With this report in hand, the City Council would be in a position to make an informed decision regarding the chances of success and the commitment of further resources to that end. The quoted fee for these services is $19,958.28. D. National Highway System (NHS) The subject Highway segment has been designated as being on the National Highway System (NHS). The purpose of the NHS is to provide an interconnected system of principal arterial routes which a) serve major population centers and travel destinations, b) meet national defense requirements and c) serve interstate and interregional travel. The first task the Consultant would address would be to determine if and how the desired Truck Prohibition could be achieved, given the NHS designation. A preliminary report on those findings and recommendations would be provided to the City. If, on the basis of those findings, it appears that success is unlikely, further effort on the Feasibility Report could be suspended and the consultant contract terminated with only expenditures to date. The estimated cost for this initial effort is $3,512.61. Should the City Council direct that this study be performed, the Consultant would be directed to perform work on the NHS question only and defer work on the remainder of the study unless and until otherwise directed. Truck—ban-0205 Truck Prohibition May 24, 2002 Page 3 E. Total Program Cost Estimate The above described study would be Phase 1 of the efforts required to achieve the desired Truck Prohibition. If approved, the actual development of the application and related environmental document, plus the efforts to manage the submittal and follow -up efforts, would constitute Phase 2 of these efforts. The total cost of this program is unknown. One of the objectives of the above study is to develop a more informed cost estimate of those costs. The City Council is advised, however, that total costs could range from $200,000 to $400,000, or more. G. Phase 1 Approval Should the City Council direct that the Phase 1 study be prepared, staff would proceed with the efforts necessary to negotiate and execute an Agreement for these professional services. If that effort is successful, the Agreement would be signed by the City Manager and work would commence. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Direct staff to retain Parsons to perform the subject study in a manner consistent with the parameters set forth in this report. Attachments: Exhibit 1: Exhibit 2: Exhibit 3: Truck_ban_0205 History Letter from CTC Proposal C Zoe v0�5 Exhibit 1 Truck Restriction Truck Restriction Page 1 Report Report Review Process A. Response Letter Attached as Exhibit 2 is a letter dated June 2, 1999, from the California Transportation Commission, advising the City of the process required for the submittal of a request for the establishment of a truck prohibition. B. Truck Restriction Report A copy of the "Truck Restriction Report Checklist" is included as a part of Exhibit 2. A summary of the required justification criteria set forth in that Checklist is summarized as follows: • analysis of operational and safety issues, including the preparation of a description of before and after conditions; • analysis of environmental impacts and mitigation measures for same [see below for details] ; • description of future planned land uses; • analysis of the impact on interstate and intrastate commerce, including an analysis of the economic impact on communities, shippers and trucking companies resulting from increased travel; • analysis and recommendations regarding alternative routes [a draft Alternate Route Map is attached]; • review of comments received during the public hearing process. C. Environmental Document The Truck Restriction Report must be accompanied by an Environmental Document. It is believed that a Negative Declaration or a Mitigated Negative Declaration may be sufficient. The process and requirements related to the preparation and certification of the Environmental Document are summarized as follows: • prepare Initial Study; • prepare draft Negative Declaration (including Mitigation Measures) and Notice of Completion; • submit draft Negative Declaration and Notice of Completion to the State Clearinghouse; • comments on the documents are received by the City and by the State Clearinghouse -- comments received by the State Clearinghouse will be forwarded to the City; Truck—ban-0205 Exhibit 1 Truck Restriction Truck Restriction Page 2 Report Report Review Process • comments will very likely include comments from the trucking industry and from the Caltrans Headquarters' Office of Permits and Truck Studies (OPTS); • conduct a public hearing on the Negative Declaration and the proposed Truck Restrictions; • provide responses to all written and oral comments - develop additional mitigation measures if necessary; • take action to approve or disapprove the Negative Declaration; • if approved, a Notice of Determination is filed; • also if approved, a copy of the approval and all of the final documents are forwarded to the OPTS. • the OPTS will prepare its recommendations regarding the approval or denial of the proposed Truck Restrictions and forward same to the Office of the Director of Caltrans in Sacramento; • if OPTS recommends denial, it is presumed that the Director would concur with that recommendation and would so notify the City; • if OPTS recommends approval of the requested Truck Restrictions, it is presumed that the Director would concur and so notify the City; • if approved, the Resolution would be adopted and appropriate signs would be installed. D. Economic and Other Impacts In addition to the issues outlined in the above mentioned .Check List, the above documents would also discuss the negative economic impacts of truck traffic upon local businesses, and the negative impacts of truck traffic upon the quality of life in our community. E. Truck Restriction Application Review Process A summary of the "Truck Restriction Process" is also attached as a part of Exhibit 2. A re -cap of that process and the related requirements is as follows: • prepare draft Resolution; • prepare draft Truck Restriction Report; prepare draft Environmental Document; • complete Environmental Document review process (see below); • submit Report, Environmental Document and other supportive documents to Caltrans District; Truck_ban_0205 P� gN Exhibit 1 Truck Restriction Report Truck Restriction Report Review Process Page 3 • application package, along with comments and recommendations from the District, is forwarded to Caltrans Headquarters in Sacramento; • Headquarters' response is provided to Caltrans District. • final approval or denial is forwarded to the local agency. Truck—ban-0205 01 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ROBERT I REMEN. Executive Director CALIFORNIA TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION 1120 N STREET. MS-52 P.O. BOX 942873 SACRAMENTO 942730001 FAX (916) 653 -2134 FAX (916) 654 -4364 (916) 6541245 June 2, 1999 Mayor Patrick Hunter City of Moorpark 799 Moorpark Avenue Moorpark, CA 93021 Dear Mayor Hunter: GRAY DAMS GOVERNOR 1\'Erd C Ei ♦ ED J U P r, 11t'9c 'S fvJw CITY CLERK'S OFFICE CITY OF MOORPARK We have received your transmittal of Council Resolution No. 99 -1604 requesting that the California Transportation Commission direct the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) to proceed with efforts necessary to prohibit trucks on State Route 118, between State Routes 23 and 126. In accordance with California Vehicle Code Sections 21101, 35701, 35702, and related sections, Caltrans has prepared an overview of the local agency truck restriction process (see enclosure). This process requires a public review period and preparation of a Truck Restriction Report (see Truck Restriction Report Checklist, enclosed). We recommend that you coordinate your proposal with: • Mr. Frank Quon, Caltrans District 7 Traffic Operations Division Chief, (213) 897 -0362 • Ventura County • the City of Somis • any other local agencies that may be affected by a truck restriction For assistance in satisfying the requirements of the truck restriction process, please contact Mr. Asif Haq, Chief, Office of Commercial Vehicle Operations and Permits at (916)654 -6099. Sincerely, ""'L 4 T--- EDWARD B. SYLVESTER Chairman cc: Asif Haq, Caltrans Harried Benouar, Caltrans Stephen Maller, Caltrans Enclosures (2) cc. H CC , C rv� i 'to p uJ j F=! £3 C E% F! I& s,1VESTEH. ChW'-= —F. HALUSEY ` W. KELLOGG ROGER A. KOZBEAG DANA W. REED ESTEBAN E. TORRES ROBERT A. WOLF ENATOR BETTY KARNETTE. Ex Officio ASSEMBLYMAN TOM TORLAKSON. Ex OffMio STATE OF CALIFORNIA ROBERT I REMEN. Executive Director CALIFORNIA TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION 1120 N STREET. MS-52 P.O. BOX 942873 SACRAMENTO 942730001 FAX (916) 653 -2134 FAX (916) 654 -4364 (916) 6541245 June 2, 1999 Mayor Patrick Hunter City of Moorpark 799 Moorpark Avenue Moorpark, CA 93021 Dear Mayor Hunter: GRAY DAMS GOVERNOR 1\'Erd C Ei ♦ ED J U P r, 11t'9c 'S fvJw CITY CLERK'S OFFICE CITY OF MOORPARK We have received your transmittal of Council Resolution No. 99 -1604 requesting that the California Transportation Commission direct the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) to proceed with efforts necessary to prohibit trucks on State Route 118, between State Routes 23 and 126. In accordance with California Vehicle Code Sections 21101, 35701, 35702, and related sections, Caltrans has prepared an overview of the local agency truck restriction process (see enclosure). This process requires a public review period and preparation of a Truck Restriction Report (see Truck Restriction Report Checklist, enclosed). We recommend that you coordinate your proposal with: • Mr. Frank Quon, Caltrans District 7 Traffic Operations Division Chief, (213) 897 -0362 • Ventura County • the City of Somis • any other local agencies that may be affected by a truck restriction For assistance in satisfying the requirements of the truck restriction process, please contact Mr. Asif Haq, Chief, Office of Commercial Vehicle Operations and Permits at (916)654 -6099. Sincerely, ""'L 4 T--- EDWARD B. SYLVESTER Chairman cc: Asif Haq, Caltrans Harried Benouar, Caltrans Stephen Maller, Caltrans Enclosures (2) cc. H CC , C rv� i 'to p uJ j F=! £3 C E% F! I& OVERVIEW OF THE LOCAL AGENCY TRUCK RESTRICTION PROCESS For State Highways in accordance with CVC Sections 21101, 35701, 35702, and their related sections Local Agency Prepares a Draft Truck Restriction Ordinance Or Resolution. The local agency initiates the review process for restricting trucks on a state highway by preparing a draft ordinance or resolution and informing the appropriate Caltrans district office of the proposed restriction. The ordinance or resolution must cite the CVC Section providing the authority for the truck restriction. Caltrans districts should notify the Office of Commercial Vehicle Operations and Permits in writing as soon as possible after learning of a truck restriction proposal. Districts should request and forward copies of draft ordinances or resolutions from the local agencies to the Office of Commercial Vehicle Operations and Permits. These will also be forwarded to Headquarters Legal and Environmental Programs for review. 2. Local Agency repares An Initial Study The local agency prepares an initial study. The initial study provides the information necessary to justify the proposed restriction and may also indicate if the proposed restriction is subject to CEQA review. The initial study allows the preliminary submittal of information by Caltrans, local agencies, California Highway Patrol staff, as well as initial comments from the trucking industry, affected industries and citizen groups. It should include the proposed restriction type, location, existing conditions, alternatives, maintenance and safety considerations on the alternative route(s), any initial public comment, and conditions that may involve further CEQA compliance. 3. Public Review And Comment Period. During the public review period the local agency gives public notice of the proposed truck restriction and public hearings may be advertised and held. All documentation acquired to date, regarding the proposed truck restriction, should be available for public review prior to and at the public hearing. 4. Local Agency Receives Comments And Prepares A Final Truck Restriction Report The local agency considers all comments received. If the local agency still wants to proceed with the proposed restriction, a final truck restriction report, including any comment revisions and the draft restriction ordinance or resolution, is prepared and forwarded to the Caltrans district office. The District Director forwards the report with the District's recommendations to the Chief, Traffic Operations Program, at Caltrans Headquarters. The Traffic Operations Program Submits A Recommendation To The Director's Office. The Office of Commercial Vehicle Operations and Permits, Traffic Operations Program, in cooperation with Caltrans Headquarters Environmental and Legal Programs, will prepare a recommendation regarding the truck restriction and submit it to the Director's Office. 6. The Director issues a written approval of the draft truck restriction 7. The local agency passes the final truck restriction ordinance or resolution 8. Restriction signs are erected and the restriction is enforced t? � -r± °F � %0 ;L TRUCK RESTRICTION REPORT CHECKLIST Approval of requests for restrictions will be contingent upon the identification and documentation of any impacts on highway safety and structural integrity, the environment and operational efficiency. This checklist is presented as a guideline only. All of the items on this checklist may not be applicable to a specific proposal. I. COVER The cover of the document clearly states the Caltrans District, County, Route and postmile limits of the proposal. Any proposed local ordinance or resolution number should also be placed on the cover. II. PROPOSAL STATEMENT The proposed restriction and references to specific codes, regulations and any local ordinances or resolutions are clearly presented in the proposal statement. If exemptions to general rules apply, cite appropriate statutory law or regulations. III. JUSTIFICATION FOR THE PROPOSAL Depends on rationale: safety, noise, hazardous materials, air quality, bridge weight limit, construction zones, seasonal operation, etc. Analyses of present and future safety, operational (capacity, geometrics) and/or structural r adequacy supporting the restriction. A description of existing versus proposed conditions. Supporting data tables, maps and/or photographs. Analysis of environmental considerations for the restriction proposal with an explanation of impacts and mitigation measures. Existing and future planned land uses. Analysis of the impact on interstate and intrastate commerce. Analysis of the economic impact on communities, shippers and trucking companies due to increased travel distances. Analysis and recommendations of any alternative routes that can safely accommodate any California legal commercial motor vehicles and serve the area in which such segment is located. Evidence of consultation with the local governments in which the segment is located as well as the Governor or Governor's representatives of any adjacent State that might be directly affected by such a restriction. Results of any public hearings. IV. APPENDICES Copies of any draft local restriction ordinances or resolutions. Copies of any supportive correspondence or documents for the restriction. Minutes of public hearings. (This can be a cassette tape.) *1,4q ' .31 C) Cm) ROUTE 118 TRUCK PROHIBITION ALTERNATIVE ROUTE PARSONS 100 West Walnut Street • Pasadena, California 91124 • (626) 440 -6100 • Fax: (626) 440 -6155 • www.parsons.com Project Understanding The City of Moorpark desires to prohibit non -local truck traffic on State Route 118 from State Route 23 westerly to the intersection of State Route 118 and State Route 34 (Lewis Road). The City of Moorpark wishes to retain the services of a qualified professional to prepare and submit to the City staff and subsequently the City Council, a Preliminary Report assessing the feasibility of obtaining approval to prohibit non -local truck traffic along State Route 118, within the limits previously described. The Preliminary Report will determine whether or not the NHS System designation can remain unchanged and in place with the establishment of the truck prohibition. if removal of the NHS designation is a prerequisite to the establishment of a truck prohibition, the Preliminary Report will include an explanation why and a description of the process, requirements, and estimated costs related to the deletion of the subject highway segment from the NHS System. Assuming a favorable determination on the NHS designation, the Preliminary Report will also describe the process, requirements, and estimated costs to complete the Truck Restriction Process. Technical Approach and Scope of Services The following lists the tasks required to complete the Preliminary Report. Each tasks is described with an objective, an approach, and the deliverable. Task 1.0 NHS Designation Objective: Determine whether or not the NHS designation can remain unchanged and in place with the establishment of the truck prohibition. Approach: Parsons will research Caltrans and FHWA databases to determine which routes are currently prohibiting truck traffic and whether or not the NHS designation on these routes ever applied and /or still apply. Parsons will also conduct interviews with Caltrans and FHWA staff involved with highway planning in order to fully understand the truck prohibition process and the associated requirements and costs. Deliverable: Summary of findings whether or not the NHS designation had an impact in prohibiting trucks. Task 2.0 Removal of the NHS Designation -m ;r°s •f'! y �°a PARSONS 100 West Walnut Street • Pasadena, California 91124 • (626) 440 -6100 • Fax: (626) 440 -6155 • www.parsons.com Objective: If the removal of the NHS designation is required, determine why it is so and the required process, requirements, and the associated costs. Approach: Parsons staff will meet with Caltrans and FHWA planning staff to determine the process, requirements, and the impacts associated with removing the NHS designation from State Route 118, between State Route 23 and State Route 34. Deliverable: A letter summarizing the reasons why the NHS designation can /or cannot remain. If NHS designation cannot remain, Parsons will develop a schedule of activities describing the process to remove the NHS designation and the associated costs. Task 3.0 Describe the Truck Restriction Process Objective: Assuming Task 1.0 and Task 2.0 do not reveal a fatal flaw, Parsons will conduct a study to determine the impacts associated with proceeding forward with the truck prohibition process. Approach: Parsons staff will prepare a cost estimate to, • Prepare Draft Truck Restriction Report • Prepare Draft Environmental Document • Complete the Environmental Review Process • Complete the Truck Restriction Report • Assist the City in preparing a recommendation to prohibit truck traffic on State Route 118 Parsons staff will also prepare a Preliminary Environmental Analysis Report (PEAR) in order to describe what technical studies will be required as part of the truck prohibition process. As part of this report, Parsons will research the truck traffic that currently exist on State Route 118 and use the existing truck traffic forecast information in order to identify possible environmental impacts the redistribution of truck traffic will have on State Route 23, Highway 101, and State Route 34. Cost estimates to mitigate any adverse impacts will also be included with the list mentioned above. Deliverable: Cost estimates to complete the Environmental Review and the Truck Prohibition Process. Task 4.0 Prepare Preliminary Report Objective: Prepare a preliminary report describing the need and purpose of the project, the research done on the project, and a recommendation of whether or not to proceed with the truck prohibition process. UEJ C1C 43, PARSONS 100 West Walnut Street • Pasadena, California 91124 • (626) 440 -6100 • Fax: (626) 440 -6155 • www.parsons.com Approach: Parsons staff will compile all the information obtained on the NHS designation, the truck prohibition process, and the environmental review process. The report will organize all the information in an easily readable report describing the NHS process, the truck prohibition process, and identifying any possible constraints associated with proceeding with the truck prohibition process. A preliminary cost estimate to process the truck prohibition application and to mitigate any possible environmental impacts as identified in the PEAR will also be included in the report. The Preliminary Report will conclude with a recommendation of whether or not to proceed forward with the truck prohibition process. Upon completion of the report, Parsons staff will meet with City staff to discuss the finding of the report and, upon approval from City staff, make a presentation to the City Council. Deliverable: Preliminary report describing the,feasibility ofproceedingforward with the truck prohibition process. LiKi 4% s-,, *� r° EXHIBIT B TRUCK PROHIBITION STUDY - CITY OF MOORPARK FEE ESTIMATE IS TRANSPORTATION GROUP LABOR iJ MGR RATE/ ' VELASOUEZ HOURS HOUR HOWELL 'LAN. $50.00 WESEMANN )G. SPEC> $59.65 CHANDER 24 0 0 64 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 IIN $0.00 STAFF AL HOURS $0.00 $0.00 Computer 0 0 0 0 SUB CONSULTANT TOTAL Total $0.00 % of Fee 0.00% GRAND TOTAL $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $19,958.28 RATE/ ' TOTAL HOURS HOUR DIRECT LABOR 48 $50.00 $2,400.00 16 $59.65 $954.40 24 $58.05 $1,393.20 64 $35.12 $2,247.68 0 $0.00 $0.00 0 $0.00 $0.00 0 $0.00 $0.00 0 $0.00 $0.00 0 $0.00 $0.00 0 $0.00 $0.00 8 $25.00 $200.00 160 TOTAL DIRECT LABOR $7,195.28 OVERHEAD @ 146.99% x DIRECT LABOR $10,576.34 FEE @ 10% $1,777.16 TOTAL (DL +OVHD +FEE) $19,548.78 UNIT UNIT RATE TOTAL ODC 0 $15.00 $0.00 0 $12.00 $0.00 300 $0.37 $109.50 EST $300.00 At Cost $0.00 At Cost $0.00 TOTAL ODC'S $409.50 SUB CONSULTANT TOTAL Total $0.00 % of Fee 0.00% GRAND TOTAL $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $19,958.28