Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAGENDA REPORT 1991 1106 CC REG ITEM 11B cYO • Ib ITEM 1 /.esirtolti sow/4w MOORPARK 8. 11101114455 799 Moorpark Avenue Moorpark, California 93021 (805) 5296864 `to 4, ^ :)ORPARK, CALIFORNIA c:y Coun I Meeting 1991 ACTION: q/ MEMORANDUM "Mr Bydej TO: The Honorable City Council FROM: Kenneth C. Gilbert, Director of Public Works DATE: October 29, 1991 (Council Meeting 11-6-91) SUBJECT: Congestion Management Program OVERVIEW Representatives of the Ventura County Transportation Commission (VCTC) will be present at the November 6 meeting to give a brief presentation on the draft Congestion Management Program. Set forth below are some of the questions and concerns expressed by staff and the City Council Transportation Committee, with regard to this document. Recently the City Council received a copy of this draft document. Please refer to that copy in preparing for this presentation. DISCUSSION A. flackground The adoption and administration of a Congestion Management Program (CMP) is a state mandated requirement for eligibility to receive Proposition 111 Gas Tax funds. VCTC staff has been working over the past year on the preparation of this draft CMP. The Commission will hold a public hearing and consider the adoption of this document on December 6, 1991. The final date for the receipt of comments on this document is November 10, 1991 . PAUL W. LAWRASON JR. BERNARDO M. PEREZ SCOTT MONTGOMERY ROY E. TALLEY JR. JOHN E. WOZNIAK Mayor Mayor Pro Tern Councilmember Councilmember Councilmember Congestion Management Program Page 2 B. Comments The following is a list of some of the questions and concerns recently discussed by staff and the City Council Transportation Committee. 1 . Appearance -- The document has been presented in a final "printed" format giving it an air of finality and making it very difficult and/or expensive to revise. 2 . Clearly Stated Responsibilities -- The Program does not clearly state the roles, duties and responsibilities of VCTC, Cities and others (SCAG, APCD, etc. ) involved in this process. It has been noted that the CMP prepared for Los Angeles County does clearly set forth these responsibilities. 3 . Environmental Review -- Has the CMP received adequate environmental review and clearance. 4. Implied Co-Authorship -- Reference to the Working Groups seems to imply that the role of VCTC was merely clerical and that the document was actually authored by these consortiums of local and county officials. This particularly is not the case with the Land Use Working Group. 5. Greenbelts -- The CMP states the establishment of "Greenbelts" between Cities was one of the means used to stop development. This does not accurately portray the purpose for establishing "Greenbelts. " 6. Authority of VCTC Over Local Land Use Decisions -- The extent of the authority of VCTC over local land use decisions, if any, is not clearly identified. Isn't the opportunity granted VCTC to review a proposed development the same as that afforded other public agencies and individuals during the public comments and public hearing process? 7. Permit Streamlining Act -- The project-by-project review of all major developments by VCTC will be extremely difficult to achieve, given the time constraints imposed by the Permit Streamlining Act. Again, it is not clear how VCTC proposes to review and comment on these projects. Congestion Management Program Page 3 8. Deficiency Plans vs. Development Process -- The CMP sets forth a mechanism whereby VCTC is to evaluate certain information received and, in some cases, make a determination that a given agency will be required to prepare and implement a deficiency plan to restore the traffic carrying efficiency of a given intersection or roadway segment. The CMP then goes on to attempt to "link" this process with the development review and approval process. It is difficult to see how this linkage is made workable. It would appear that the above mentioned Permit Streamlining Act would make this difficult, if not impossible, to achieve. In addition, it should be pointed out that a given intersection or roadway segment does actually fail the tests prescribed ("triggering" the requirement for a Deficiency Plan) until traffic volumes which exceed given level are actually measured. This event, should it happen, will not occur until long after the development is approved. A more plausible approach would be to acknowledge that each agency is responsible for preventing congestion -- this includes prudent review of development proposals (including any affects the development may have on adjacent jurisdictions) . VCTC should have little, if anything, to do with this responsibility. For example, if VCTC were to render an opinion that "X" , "Y" & "Z" are measures which should be taken to mitigate the traffic expected to be generated by a given development, and the agency in question implements those measures, does the responsibility for later problems shift to VCTC? If not, what is the purpose of their review -- advisory only? Does the failure of the local agency to implement the recommendations of VCTC carry any sanctions? The point here is that the local agency is responsible for protecting its Prop. 111 eligibility. The role of VCTC in this process should not be a proactive one during the development process; but merely a reactive one of monitoring data to confirm Levels of Service have not deteriorated. 9. Determining Level of Service (LOS) -- It has been pointed out that there may be some difficulty in equitably applying the LOS test County wide. On the one hand, a case could be made that a uniform standard would not be equitable due to the variability between driving habits from one community to the next. On the other hand, if there are to be different standards (local adjustment factors) how will the achievement of fairness and comparability be demonstrated. Congestion Management Program Page 4 10. Additional Intersections Below Standard -- It is suspected that there may be intersections on the CMP route with a Level of Service (LOS) below LOS D which are not so identified in the document. If this is so, a list of those intersections will be provided to VCTC. 11. Capital Improvement Program -- What is the role of the CMP and VCTC, if any, in the development and approval of the City's Capital Improvement Program. RECOMMENDATION Direct staff to forward these and other comments, as directed by the City Council , to VCTC prior to the end of the comment period.