Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAGENDA REPORT 2004 0901 CC REG ITEM 10KITEM 10. K . CITY OF MOORPARK, CALIFORNIA City Council Meting of 9-1 - aao� ACTION: ,/ a_ MOORPARK CITY COUNCIL-' AGENDA REPORT BY' 4--- � TO: The Honorable City Council FROM: Kenneth C. Gilbert, Director of Public Works DATE: August 13, 2004 (CC Meeting 9 -1 -04) SUBJECT: Closure of the West End of Charles Street and the West End of Everett Street at Moorpark Avenue BACKGROUND Attached as Exhibit 1 is a copy of the July 6, 2004, report to the Transportation and Streets Committee [Councilmembers Harper and Millhouse] regarding the subject matter. That report sets forth background information, a summary of the Committee's deliberations on the matter and a discussion of the complex and costly process required to consider and attempt to implement a street closure. DISCUSSION At its July 6, 2004, meeting, after considering all of the options and ramifications of pursuing the possible implementation of the subject project, the Transportation and Streets Committee recommended that the matter be dropped. STAFF AND COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION Staff and the Transportation and Streets Committee [Councilmembers Harper and Millhouse] recommend that no further efforts be taken to implement the subject project and rescind the City Council's November 5, 2003, action on this matter. Charles closure-0409 000226 Exhibit 1: July 6, 2004 Report to the Transportation and Streets Committee [Page 1 of 61 Background • In October of 2003 the Transportation and Streets Committee [Councilmembers Harper and Millhouse] discussed the subject proposed street closures. The matter was referred to the City Council for consideration. • In November of 2003 the City Council directed staff to retain a consultant to prepare a Traffic Study to evaluate the traffic impacts of these street closures. • Staff requested and obtained a proposal from Austin -Foust for the preparation of that study. The fee amount was $12,500. • In April of 2004 the matter was referred back to the Committee to discuss this expense and other available options. The Committee concurred with staff that, in lieu of performing the study, maybe the City could proceed with closing the street on a trial basis, evaluate the actual impacts, and then decide whether or not to make the street closure permanent. • In the process of preparing the staff report to the City Council regarding this new approach, a number of CEQA issues became apparent to staff. It was determined that the matter should be brought back to the Committee for further discussion. • In May of 2004 the Committee suggested that a mail survey be conducted to ascertain public support for this idea. Discussion A. The Problem Non -local traffic uses both Everett Street and Charles Street as bypass or shortcut routes in order to avoid congestion and /or delays at the Moorpark Avenue / High Street intersection. This is true for both eastbound and northbound traffic. Of course the problem is more severe during the A.M. and P.M. rush hours. Consequently, these residential streets experience higher than normal traffic volumes and vehicle speeds which often exceed the 25 MPH speed limit. A high number of speeding citations are issued to drivers on Charles Street. B. Authority Pursuant to Section 21101 (f) of the California Vehicle Code [CVC], the City may, upon adoption of a resolution, "Prohibit entry to, or exit from, or both, from any street by means of . . ' traffic barriers or roadway design features to implement the circulation element of a general plan The closure of the subject streets to through traffic would U () (Y 22'7 Exhibit 1: July 6, 2004 Report to the Transportation and Streets Committee [Page 2 of 6] enhance and protect the intended use of those streets as local residential streets and curtail the use of same by inter -city commuter traffic. Pursuant to CVC Section 21103, signs must be posted giving notice of the street closure. The proposed street closures will require the placement of barriers and /or the construction of permanent improvements within the State right -of -way [Moorpark Avenue right -of -way] . Accordingly, pursuant to CVC Section 21104, it will be necessary to have the draft Resolution mentioned above approved by Caltrans prior to its adoption. C. Resolution The aforementioned Resolution would have to make certain findings to justify the proposed street closures. Draft language for such a resolution is as follows: 1. Everett Street and Charles Street: a) are located entirely within the boundaries of the City of Moorpark; b) are not designated in the Circulation Element of the Moorpark General Plan as collector or arterial roadways; and c) are not regionally significant roadways. 2. The location and design of Everett Street and Charles Street, as well as the location and design of adjacent highways and local collector streets, is such that non - local, inter -city commuter traffic uses Everett Street and Charles Street as shortcut or alternate routes in lieu of using said adjacent highways and /or local collector streets designed for such purpose. 3. Everett Street and Charles Street were not designed for and were not intended to be used by non -local inter -city commuter traffic. 4. Circulation Element Policy 1.4 requires new residential streets to be designed so as to discourage pass- through trips which do not begin or end within the residential area served by the street. 5. The resultant traffic volumes and average vehicular speeds on these streets are higher than that normally to be expected on a residential street. 6. It is necessary and appropriate, therefore, to close Everett Street and Charles Street to through traffic at the point where said streets intersect Moorpark Avenue [State Route 23] . 7. Said closure of these streets to through traffic will better provide for the health and safety of the traveling public by insuring that the use of Everett Street and Charles Street is consistent with use intended by the Circulation Element of the Moorpark General Plan. 0 0028 Exhibit 1: July Transportation [Page 3 of 6] D. Benefits 6, 2004 Report to the and Streets Committee The closure of the enhance and protect residential streets commuter traffic. subject streets to through traffic would the intended use of these streets as local and curtail the use of same by inter -city E. Costs: Traffic Impacts The closure of the subject streets to "by- pass" traffic to and from Route 23 is expected to cause a considerable degree of traffic congestion and delays on southbound Walnut Canyon Road and on westbound High Street. The use of Charles Street and Everett Street during peak hours reduces the level of congestion and delays which would otherwise occur. F. Temporary Closure One option which was considered was the installation of these road closures on a temporary trial basis. Staff investigated this option and found that the administrative process and CEQA requirements for such a temporary road closure were considerable. That process is generally summarized as follows: 1. Send the draft Resolution to Caltrans along with a letter advising Caltrans of the City's intent to close the subject streets to through traffic. Said letter would request comments on the draft Resolution and the proposed street closure. The letter would also advise Caltrans that, should the City decide to proceed with this proposal, that the City would submit to Caltrans, a Caltrans Encroachment Permit setting forth the details of the temporary barriers and signs required to be placed in or adjacent to the State Highway right -of -way. 2. Prepare the appropriate Environmental Document for the temporary road closure. [Note: One option would be to prepare the Environmental Document for "permanent" road closures with one of the mitigations being the removal of the road closures should unforeseen impacts warrant such action.]. 3. Subsequent to receipt of Caltrans' comments and finalization of the aforementioned Resolution and Environmental Document, send a Notice to all emergency response agencies advising them of a public hearing to consider the closure of the subject streets to through traffic. 4. Send the aforementioned notice to all of the residents of Charles Street/ Everett Street neighborhood advising them of the public hearing to consider this intended action. 5. Conduct a public hearing on the proposed temporary street closure [Note: Although a public hearing is not required in order to take the subject action, it is recommend in this case.]. 000229 Exhibit 1: July 6, 2004 Report to the Transportation and Streets Committee [Page 4 of 6] 6. Subsequent to the Public Hearing, take action on the Environmental Document. 7. If it is decided to proceed with the temporary street closure, adopt the required Resolution directing the closure of the subject streets to through traffic on a Test Trial basis. 8. Seek and obtain a Caltrans Encroachment Permit for the placement of K -Rail and signs to be placed in the State right -of -way. 9. Seek and obtain bids for the placement, monthly rental and removal of the required K -Rail barriers. 10. Seek City Council approval of the award of a contract for the placement, rental and future removal of the temporary barriers and related signs. G. Removal of the Temporary Road Closure Should the City Council determine that the street closures should be removed, the City Council would rescind and repeal the aforementioned Resolution and direct staff to notify appropriate agencies. H. Permanent Road Closure Subsequent to the installation of the temporary road closure, the following steps should be taken prior to making the road closures permanent: 1. Perform a traffic impact analysis and possibly amend the approved Environmental Document to better quantify the impacts and needed mitigations, if any; 2. Retain a civil engineer to develop plans and specifications for the construction of permanent improvements necessary to fully implement a permanent closure of the subject streets [herein "Project "]; Note: One component of that design effort would be the development of design options for improvements which would allow the "opening" of Charles Street to use as a Route 23 Detour during Special Events such as the Country Days Parade. 3. Seek and obtain a Caltrans Encroachment Permit for the construction of the Project (a portion of which is to be constructed within the State right -of -way); 4. Schedule a public hearing to consider approval of the Project design and (if necessary) the accompanying supplemental environmental document; S. If necessary, prepare a new Resolution specifically addressing the permanent Road Closure; 6. Send a Notice to Caltrans, all emergency response agencies and residents in the affected area, advising them of the aforesaid public hearing; 7. The City Council would then take action to approve the supplemental environmental document (if necessary) , approve the Project plans, adopt the follow -up Resolution (if 0002x;0 Exhibit 1: July 6, 2004 Report to the Transportation and Streets Committee [Page 5 of 61 required) and direct staff to seek and obtain bids for the construction of the Project. I. Environmental Impact 1. Categorical Exemption: At a minimum, a temporary street closure would require adoption of a Categorical Exemption [CE] for a "short- term" street closure for the purpose of gathering information and evaluating traffic impacts. Such a limited action could be considered exempt under Class 6 of CEQA requirements [Sec 153061 , which is restated as follows: "Basic data collection, research, experimental management, and resource evaluation activities that do not result in major disturbances to an environmental resource ". 2. Mitigated Negative Declaration [MMI : Any consideration of • permanent street closure would require the City to retain • consultant to perform an analysis of the traffic impacts resulting from the street closures, perform an Initial Study for the Project and then prepare the appropriate environmental document indicated by that Initial Study. As of the date of this report, staff anticipates that the Initial Study may require the preparation of a Mitigated Negative Declaration [MND] for the proposed Project. It should be noted that the MND could recommend that the Project include the construction of yet to be determined costly mitigations. As mentioned above, preparation of an MND during the initial phase of the development of this proposal would allow the temporary closure to remain in place while the permanent road closure improvements were being designed and then constructed. Also as mentioned earlier, review and approval of a permanent street closure subsequent to the installation of a temporary street closure could require the preparation of a supplement to the previously approved MND, further quantifying and evaluating the traffic impacts of the road closures. 3. Cost Estimate: A range of possible costs related to preparation of the required environmental document for the subject project, is summarized as follows: Staff Consultant Cost Type of Document Hours Costs ($) Range Negative Declaration 20 5,000 Low Mitigated Negative Declaration 20 10,000 Environmental Impact Report 200 75,000 High J. Fiscal Impact No detailed costs have been developed for the development and administration of this proposed action or for the related 000 92! 3 1 Exhibit 1: July 6, 2004 Report to the Transportation and Streets Committee [Page 6 of 6] required consultant and construction costs. It is anticipated, however, that these efforts would cost several hundred thousand dollars. If the project were to proceed, it would be the recommendation of staff that the project be funded by the Traffic Mitigation Fund [Fund 2002]. K. Mail Surve A mail survey was sent to approximately 130 residents in the downtown area. Thirty -two (32) ballots were returned. Only fourteen (14) of those were in favor or the proposed road closure. L. Conclusion As noted above, there has not been an overwhelming expression of support (through the mail ballot) from the local residents, for the proposed road closures. It is the view of staff that, in light of the cost and complexity of undertaking efforts to seek implementation of these road closures, that no further action be taken at this time to implement this proposal. It is possible that after the Spring Road North extension is completed and open to traffic, that a sufficient volume of traffic will be diverted from the current route to cause a significant reduction in traffic volumes on the subject streets. M. Alternatives An alternative course of action would be to install signs prohibiting southbound left -turns onto the subject streets during the peak traffic hours. It should be noted that this approach does nothing to address westbound or northbound "pass -thru" traffic. It should also be noted that the effectiveness of these signs would only be as good as the level and effectiveness of the enforcement effort applied. Staff Recommendations [to the Transportation & Streets Committee] Recommend to the City Council that the no further efforts be taken at this time to implement the subject proposed street closure [Note: The Committee concurred with staff recommendation.] 0 00�� 2