HomeMy WebLinkAboutAGENDA REPORT 1991 1120 CC REG ITEM 11A / A_
pK ca
%
�F MOORPARK
-2
vl
411
Kam,
e 799 Moorpark Avenue Moorpark, California 93021 (805) 529-6864
a�.�wEO �
MEMORANDUM Ii
(2/:,(/
TO: The Honorable City Council
FROM: Kenneth C. Gilbert, Director of Public Works
DATE: November 14, 1991
SUBJECT: Comments Received by the Ventura County Transportation
Commission on the Congestion Management Program
DISCUSSION
Attached are copies of information received by staff at this
morning's meeting of the VCTC Transportation Technical Advisory
Committee. The information is grouped in sections as follows:
Section Description _
A The Agenda Item - includes some of the comments
made on the CMP
B Comments to the CMP Received by VCTC -- the
numbers in the margin correspond to responses
provided in Secton "C"
C VCTC Responses to Comments
•
D Additional Materials -- provided by the County
of Ventura at thE TTAC meeting.
RECOMMENDATION
Direct staff as deemed appropri,,te.
/ i rr.
PAUL W LAWRASON JR RERNARDO M PERE:Z ti:01I ON1(ic)MtRY ROY E. TAL LEY JR JOHN E WOZNIAK
Mayor Mayor P•0 rem (•n dmemoer GouncJrnember Ooincdmember
®® TRANSPORTATION COMMISSIC
950 County Square Dnve Sutte 2
.... ..�.w V ntura CA c7
----_----
18051 654
16051 642
FA.X
42FA.X 16051642-t_
Item #11 (a)
Action
TO: TRANSPORTATION TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE
(11-14-91 MEETING)
FROM: VCTC STAFF
SUBJECT: LOS/DEFICIENCY PLAN THIESHOLDS FOR THE CMP
RECOMMENDATION
o Endorse a 1% increase per intersection approach (i.e. an
aggregate/cumulative 4% increase for a 4-leg
- intersection) in the iolume-to-capacity ratio as the
threshold at which a deficiency plan will be required at
locations currently 1( t7. meeting the system-wide LOS D
standard .
DISCUSSION
At last month' s meeting, the TTAC endorsed a specific method for
calculating level of service at s "gnal ized intersections on the CMP
network. The TTAC then referred to the LOS subcommittee the
question of when deficiency pL ns should be required at those
locations currently operating at LOS E or F. In simple terms, how
much worse can congestion get ' -fore A deficiency plan must be
prepared.
The LOS subcommittee met on Novel fiber:- 7th to discuss the issue and
make a recommendation to the f_ 11 TTAC. Those present at the
meeting were: Chick Dabbs (SimL /alley) , Tom Fox (Camarillo) , Ed
Keating (Caltrans) , Nazir Lapin (:pan Buenaventura) , Steve Manz
(Ventura County) , and Bob Weithc.= er (Oxnard) .
The subcommittee agreed that, g ven the decision to use the ICU
method, the unit of measure for to e threshold should be in terms of
the volume-to-capacity ratio. - he subcommittee also agreed that
there was no reason to make a i .tinction between LOS E and LOS F
in the use of the threshold ; tY levels are "failing" and are
therefore unacceptable. With f i c neral rules established, the
subcommittee (11 ;cu.s_ d thn 7 " . ; ;Ific thresholds:
r
LOS/Deficiency Plan Thresholds r ,r 2MP
Page Two
1. 1% to 2% (0. 01 - 0. 02 v/c) While the subcommittee generally
agreed that a tight threshold was preferable, they were very
concerned that such a small change would not recognize daily
fluctuations in traffic counts . In other words, it would be
inappropriate to apply sr h a precise measure to often
unprecise traffic counts .
2 . 1% (0 . Oly/c) per intersection approach - On a standard four-
leg intersection, the allowable change would be 4%, or 0. 04
v/c (e.g. an intersection measured at 0.96 v/c would be
allowed to drop to 1. 00 bfore a deficiency plan would be
required) . A T-intersection would only be allowed a 3%
change. Even if any one critical movement increases by more
than 1%, but the aggregate total for the intersection is still
less than the 4% threshold , a deficiency plan would not be
required. A deficiency plAn would be required only if the
intersection as a whole i.n( Yeased by more than 4%.
The subcommittee felt this threshold provided reasonable
recognition of daily fluctuations yet did not allow too much
degradation to the intersection . The subcommittee also felt
that it tied the thresholl into the critical movements at an
intersection, which are ~.o the calculation of V/c
using the ICU method .
3 . 10% (0 . 10vfc) -- This thr : :cold was discussed because it is
directly related to the standard level of service thresholds .
currently established ( i .. 0 . 7. - C; 0 . 81 = D; 0. 91 = E; and
1 . 01 = F) , and it is most : lose]." in line with the typical
daily fluctuations in ' raffle counts. However, the
subcommittee felt this r presented too large • a level of
degradation prior to recap; i. ir.a , efici.ency plan.
The conclusion of the subcommittee wa.• to recommend to the- TTAC
that the threshold level outs O 3 in #.' above be endorsed for use
in the Congestion Management. r.ogram If TTAC supports this
recommendation, it will be inc. is :el in :he staff recommended final
draft CMP brought to the Transp >• at . f n Commission on December 6th.
•
r._
•
•
•buTgaau
OV,Ia, auq pup ppuabu auq Jo bt,r L t pui uaategaq paATaaaJ saaggat
AUP 30 saTdoo 'buTgaaut am. qp ".)FIZZ oq apTAo.zd os TP ITT' J; s
•buTgaaui
auq og aoTad s.zaggaT pagoP}g 2 am MaTAa.I oq pabpanooua aap s.zagivau
OVII -uoTssnosTp DT;Toads .zo; buTgaau OVII at"; gP ;no papupu
eq oq ApPaa sasuodsaa am aAPq TITm 33PgS -agwTadoaddp aaagM
quaumoop auq oquT sasuodsaa asagq buT;E.od.00uT JO; suoTgsabbns
ufTM saaggaT quauzuzoo auq oq _;asuodsa.I aapdaad oq buTuuTbaq
sT gJP4S 'agpp og paATaoaa saagii.aT asogg go .saTdoo pagopgqp anpq
am -dWD q;Pap auq uo buTquammoo F3aaggaT TPaanas paATaoaa spi-; OSOA
NOISSIIOSIa
'd13 g3Pap TPuT3 auq oquT suoLsTAaa go uoT;PaodaoouT
pup sasuodsaa buTpapba.z suoTgppuammooaa axput
pup dWO aqg butpapbaa saaggaT quautuzoo exp. MaTAaa 3VL1 o
NOILFiaN2WW0032I
s2iasss'I a&awwoo dW) Os axoass2i GM! MIAMI :SOarans
emu's OSOA :1.10113
(ONIa awi t6-It-TT)
aammilIIdoz AuOSIAa' 'IKOINHOaa NOIIIIHOdSMVUI :OM
uotgov
(q)TT# magl
-ZP9(SO9 xvd
-Z1,9 15081
'-t591508fr -. .. _
'b VJ) 'eJnwaA ..
2:1r15 awp aenbS�CMuno)OS6Amy
����'���—
ISSIWWO� NOLLVIZ1OdSNH211 IIIMEMEMMEmmilmwm=w—'
mOJ H21f1tN3/1
— miew
o� FittCITY OF FILLMORE
524SESPEAVE —P.O. BOX 487
A ��� 0 FILLMORE.CAJFORMA 93015
&"• ii.
� a 1" (805)'24-3701
" '' ,,,,,
______ c„,„
,,
u
<opP
c...._,
q4'FOR
November 4 , 1991
Chairman John Melton and Commissioner
Ventura County Transportation Commission
950 County Square Drive, Suite 207
Ventura, CA 93003 .
Re: CITY OF FILLMORE COMMENTS FINAL DRAFT,
1991 CONGESTION MANAGEMENT PROGRA1
Dear Chairman Melton and Commi signer', :
The Fillmore City Council has had the opportunity to review the
final draft of the 1991 Ventura County Congestion Management
Program (CMP) and wishes to offer some general comments , for
your consideration prior to gad ptmon of the CMP . .
First, we commend the efforts ,i the Commission, your staff, the
public agencies and others •it, contributed to the planning and
development of the CMP . is .;ommendable to attempt to
develop a coordinated app ich t: managing and decreasing
traffic congestionl
y in.:.� t1' e various transportation, land
b :�;
use and air quality planniuc programs together throughout the
County. The unfortunate par _.s 1 ) that the state chose to
dictate the terms under wh c - we m-rst live by if we want to
receive •funds that were grani ed to .is by our local voters and
not by the state, and 2 ) ':11c, :a; u: ual we are trying to close
the barn door after the c_) : ere ult. of the barn which means
that smaller cities such Fillmore that have not been
significant • contributors the t ::affic congestion and air
quality problem must now be )enalized and required to provide
for our growth and developmen' under a far more rigid and-costly
set of requirements and pruc 'dures than those cities who have
already achieved their growth ..)ot ent: a.l ! For example, according
to recent traffic studies , L .qhs,ay '.26 carries 21, 000 vehicles
per day, day after day, thr(. Igh )ur community. Approximately
50% of that traffic is tLro 1h traffic which the city has no
control over and we expect t,i amount to steadily increase over
time and with the planned •nprovements to Highway 126 . We
realize that. the City ;eL responsible for including
interregional travel in ,'i IOr: calculations , however, it
needs to be recccnized t1: iۥ :Ity must deal with those
traffic leve? s if we are ; , ie,:to ate and/or accommodate any
improvements r:eces ;ary to a : -a] deve l opme nt to occur.
The City . Counci _ is spc :: foc al ly . concerned about VCTC ' s
involvement in ,., land us, , Ir r i • ri process and our requirement
A • `f-
•
to provide reports -- and analyses to VCTC in a rigid format that
may add time, delay and cost to a development proposal. AS a
small city, we question whether it is worth it to us to expend
additional time and money to justify our receiving the $50,000
to $75,000 in Section 2105 Gas Tax Funds if we must comply with
the additional reporting requirements of 1) annual land use
updates, 2) traffic mitigat-on program reports, 3) annual
roadway capital improvement budgeting requirements, and 4)
annual traffic counts on certain road segments . One of todays
biggest problems which adds daily to the inefficiency of
government is our inability to enact any government program that
does not require an increase in bureaucracy, a logarithmic
demand for more paperwork, and an erosion of the funds to
perform the work the public asked for when they approved the
funding program in the first D ace .
Please review your draft CMF from the viewpoint of a small
city that does not have on _ts staff a traffic engineer, or
administrative personnel to prepare the documentation required,
and .use your best judgment in attempting to minimize the
reporting obligations and level of effort required in order for
a small city to receive its funds and invest those funds in
roadway improvement projects, Dt in paperwork.
Sincerely, •
%4-7-74(
Scott Lee, Mayor
•
Er;D Hid
S L9£-P99/S08 . 600£6 V3 'EJnluat • enuany Euo}o!n ipnoS 008
-S01 aTo ?4an Jo4ow ut 4JaJrdwt Jof 4uawaJtnbaJ pale/$16e/
ay4 o4 uoT.ltppe ut o4 JQaA WOJ+ spew eq ODTnJas }o
siana/ 85844 o; swawa,NoUdwT .4py4 artnbeJ pue ' •o;a 'SueTJ4sapad
'sai'Atq Ja+ saJnsr_aw anTAJas-}a- Tana ; dolan•p PTnogs
weJboad ay1 •am T'Jas gismo/ ap Tnn tyan_uou ss•appw os Tie .
pinoys weJbord ;uawabeurw •JoT;sebuoo anTsuayeadwop w ' reneMOH
•5prrpue4s SO1 aof auawaiTnbeJ anT4e/sTbbT •44 44TH Atdwoo 4143
6ut;s t xa sy4 ut suo Ts tnoJc ao TnJas to Tana1 aTo tyro ao;o14 •z
' suotstnoJd pue satot ;od IIr.4 buTddoyg ' ( • o4Q 'S,JTet ' 54JaDUoD)
s4usn3 T*toads bu tssa_Appe Aq sd T Jq a4nwwoo-uou 6uTonpQJ
Jo+ aptnoJd ATant4Dr pinoys ,d1.43 egg. ' „4uawaIa puiewep ianVJ4
pue uotaonpeJ dT-14„ p Jo} 4uawaJTnbaJ anT4etstbaT •q; o4 Jat.isue
a4aTdwoo aye se otz in Q:]dd but4dope ATdwts ue14.4 Jag4ea • T
:apniouT eanssT esayl 'z66T
4sn6nd ut ' quewnoop avid .ia:lie6rurw uoT4sabuo3 egg uoT;Tpa
.4xau ay4 ut papnTout put' 'wvJ5oJd 4uawe5rueN uoT4sa6uo3 s . A4uno3
eJnquan
out pal.eJodJoout aq ssaT_ag4-euou pTnoys 'saiuow xeq
}o uUn4aU U0 - .K+ tjpnb oq paJ -nbeU ;ou aJe ynTyM saJnseawisanssT
+0 Jagwnu leu; T 3fj f e ;4 Twwoogns au; ' uo t; tppr uI
.4uawnpop
aye aoeuyua p inoM ' :,uawa4e .s uo tsn uo, 6uoJ,s e d
ayw
; +o sq.ordi pue sansst a .: . i rn .cy�tw
sasuapuoJ yoTyJewwns anT4nnaxe�noaxe
Ue 4e1.44 Tea+ ptp as;q .wwopgns syl • Teno.adde spuawwo»aJ
pue ' uoT4eooTTse6 a4e4s 61.44 5utpun} butntaDaJ
Aq uno3 e.an;uan aansua o; slmawe J tnbaJ an t4e Ts t6a1 aye s T l t+In}
avid quawa5euew uoT4sabuo3 eq4 4egl puno+ as;4Twwoogns awl
sneyneN ueor
,aal-, Tw_ °:J 313A) UDSrJmei aIuuo3
(J tieyo ea;T} twwongns pa:,a toddy) uo�6u TJJaH aonJg
Jagb' i Tv9 U411• d
uoJdr3 :1JeW
a>le TS AU4oJoo
(1COS ' zaco,, Lea 1)e4. Jo}) uosaapuy atrne-i
:eU M saapua4.4b . 16E ; Jago4o0 uo play sem 5ut;aaw 841
4Jodad aal4TL .A. �qns saiA4sa3T-
Wti9Obd EN I t:ltrld �Q I MA.Nnoo
aafiwwo3 (Jos; Npv sueziaio
umno
Q :: wathoid Buluueld f 4U3A hUflOD
3 r api+MundJ
4
OJA.I R} .\ L I Y COMPANY
9! ocr 2111. .29
LERIE BJORN STEDT October 18 , 19')1
REALTOR- BROKER
Joan Nehaus
Ventura County Planning Departm, nt
Ventura County Center
800 South Victoria
Ventura, CA 93009 •
Dear Ms. Nehaus :
Thank you for the opportunity to respond to the VCTC Congestion
Managment Plan. Since I will be unable to attend the meeting of
the Committee on Lifestyle Iml.acts of Air Pollution Control
Measures, scheduled for October 23 , 1991, I am requesting that
you bring this letter to the attention of the Committee. I also
request that it be inserted into the record for a written
response prior to the final dccument being submitted to the;
Board of Supervisors .
There are two main points about this " final draft" :
1/ Unless it was done as a donation, the document was obviously
exorbitantly expensive - mazy illustrations, photographs in
color, heavy costly paper etc. "final draft" supposedly allows
for additional revisions . It does not appear that this document
could be revised. If in fact, it is not a "final draft", but is
the final document, it is a travesty sof the review process and a
waste of the Committee ' s tir.e to consider it. In any event I
find disregard for the expenditLre of taxpayer's money to be
unacceptable in this day of catastrophic budget cuts. The
Committee should request a breakdown c ' costs and an explanation.
2/ It was the intent of the ;.egi.slature to require agencies to .
give priority to projects which impact LOS deficiency roads. I
also assume it was the intent of the legislature to require the
agencies. to disallow additioral development on those LOS
deficiency roads until ' a plan was in place to bring the
deficiencies up to standard within a reasonable length of time. I
do not find such a forthright statement in the Management Plan.
The Ventura County Board cf Supervisors forbade further
development in the Ojai Valley area until the problem of
congestion on Highway 33 Casitas Springs is solved by a bypass.
I do not find such a mechanism spelled out in the Plan. In
addition, the criteria used to determine the ranking order of
projects and the selection process for project funding under the
VCTC Congestion Plan does :act appear in the document. This
crucial step is left out of the process . There is no explanation
of why a roads or intersections requiring a Deficiency Plan do
not aotomatically outrank ot'.e : prcj : cts on roads not listed as
being "deficient" . The Committee, at the very least, should be
given the funding criteria fcr !view -nd comment.
260 EAST O,AI At ENUE Dia, a., a .3 • ANEA CODE 805 646-4331