HomeMy WebLinkAboutRES NO 223-91RESOLUTION NO. 223-91
A RESOLUTION APPROVING
THE 1991 KERN CONGESTION
MANAGEMENT PROGRAM.
WHEREAS, California Government Code 65089.(a) requires
that a congestion management program shall be developed, adopted,
and annually updated for every county that includes an urbanized
area, and shall include every city and the county; and
WHEREAS, the Kern Congestion Management Agency staff has
prepared a draft Congestion Management Program; and
WHEREAS, the Kern Congestion Management Agency requires
that the majority of the cities representing the majority of the
incorporated population within Kern County, and the Kern County
Board of Supervisors approve the Congestion Management Program
before it can be adopted by the Congestion Management Agency; and
WHEREAS, the Kern Congestion Management Agency has
referred the Draft Congestion Management Program to all of the city
councils within Kern County, and the Kern County Board of
Supervisors for approval.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City
of Bakersfield as follows:
The Bakersfield City Council approves the Draft
Congestion Management Program, dated 10/25/91, for adoption by the
Kern Congestion Management Agency.
.......... 000 ..........
-1-
ORIGINAL
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing resolution was passed
and adopted by the Council of the City of Bakersfield at a regular
meeting thereof held on N0V - 6 199~ , by the
following vote:
AYES COUNCiLMEMBERS EDWARDS, DeMOND, SMITH, BRUNNI. PETERSON McDERMOT1'. SALVAGGIO
NOES; COUNCIl MEMBEPS
A~%SE NT COUNCILMEMBERS
ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS /
CITY CLERK and Ex Officio Clerk of
Council of the City of Bakersfield
the
APPROVED
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
CITY ATTORNEY the City of Bakersfield
103091
-2-
ORIGINAL
CONGESTION MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
NOVEMBER 1991
Kern Council
of Governments
KERN CONGESTION MANAGEMENT AGENCY
POLICY BOARD
Kelcy Owens, Chairman
Cathy Prout, Vice-Chairman
Donald Burkett,
Mayor pro tem
City of Arvin
Mark Salvaggio,
Councilman
City of Bakersfield
Richard Moser,
Mayor
City of California City
Steven Kinsey,
Mayor
City of Delano
George A. Venema,
Councilman
City of Maricopa
Gary Johnson,
Mayor pro tem
City of McFarland
Kevin CoffeR,
Vice-Mayor
City of Ridgecrest
Cathy Prout,
Mayor
City of ShaRer
Kern Congestion Management Agency
Policy Board
Continued
Paul Ackermann,
Mayor pro tem
City of Taft
Kelcy Owens,
Councilman
City of Tehachapi
Mel McLaughlin,
Mayor
City of Wasco
Pa-llne Larwood,
Supervisor
County of Kern
Roy Ashburn,
Supervisor
County of Kern
ii
KERN CONGESTION MANAGEMENT AGENCY TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITlEE
$o Barrick, City of Shaffer
Walter Cairns, City of Wasco
Julie Culpepper, City of Tehachapi
Bill Kytola, City of Taft
Ed Mino, City of Delano
Chester Moland, Golden Empire Transit District
Lloyd Norton, County of Kern
Mike O'Haver, City of McFarland
Howard pbill{ps, City of Arvin
John Pounds, Consolidated Transportation Services Agency
Ed Schulz, City of Bakersfield
Roger Ward, City of Ridgecrest.
KERN CONGESTION MANAGEMENT WORKING GROUP
$o Barrick, City of Shafter
Mark Birmbaum, Caltrans District 6
Walter Cairns, City of Wasco
Linda Chester, Air Pollution Control District
Julie Culpepper, City of Tehachapi
Will Gamer, Kern COG
Joel Heim'ichs, County of Kern
Bill Kytola, City of Taft
Jack La Rochelle, City of Bakersfield
Ed Mino, City of Delano
Chester Moland, Golden Empire Transit District
Lloyd Norton, County of Kern
Mike O'Haver, City of McFarland
Ed Schulz, City of Bakersfield
Randy Treece, Caltrans District 6
Roger Taylor, Kern COG
Andy Zeilman, Caltrans District 9
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page Number
Kern Congestion Management Agency Policy Board
Kern Congestion Management Agency Advisory Committee
Kern Congestion Management Working Group
Preface
Introduction
Chapter 1, CMP Roadway Network
Chapter 2, Traffic Level of Service Standards
Chapter 3, Transit Standards
Chapter 4, Trip Reduction and Travel Demand Element
Chapter 5, Land Use Analysis Program/Deficiency Plans
Chapter 6, Capital Improvement Program
Chapter 7, Conformance Requirements
1
2
4
5
7
9
12
19
PP--;,FACE
The passage of proposition 111 created new funding for transportation statewide. For
cities and counties to be eligible this funding and various other state and federal funds
and to fund projects in the State Transportation Improvement Program, a countywide
Congestion Management Program (CMP) must be developed.
The CMP sets level of service standards for both the CMP road network and the transit
system. The Congestion Management Agency (CMA) is responsible for determining if a
city or county is complying with the standards. If the CMA determines a city or the
county to be out of compliance with the CMP standards, the CMA notifies the State
Controller of nonconformance.
Because of the consequences of not complying with CMP standards, the uncertainty of
existing deficiencies, and the inexperience in dealing with the new CMP process, the Kern
CMA is setting the minimum level of service standards allowed by law. The cities, the
county and the transit district may observe more stringent level of service goals stated
in general plans, the Short Range Transit Plan, and the Regional Transportation Plan. The
CMP sets the criteria for measuring congestion and the threshold at which a jurisdiction
will be penalized for reaching congestion.
As an example of the difference between desirable goals and CMP standards, the
Metropolitan Bakersfield General Plan states a traffic level of service goal of C, while the
CMP will use a standard of E to trigger a deficiency. The desirable goals may be
necessary to meet other local regulations, countywide air quality standards, and to
maintain an acceptable quality of life.
Kern COG as the state designated Regional Transportation Planning Agency will continue
to emphasize more desirable levels of service (LOS C), while the Kern CMA will use the
lower levels of service (LOS E) as a measure of congestion to trigger deficiency plans and
improvement programs. The roadways at poor levels of service will be the high priorities
in future improvement programs.
V
INTRODUCTION
Pursuant to California Government Code Section 65089.(a), Kern COG has been
designated the Congestion Management Agency (CMA) by the majority of the cities
representing the majority of the population and the Kern County Board of Supervisors.
The Kern Council of Governments is made up of representatives from the eleven
incorporated cities and two representatives from the County of Kern. The Golden Empire
Transit District, Kern County Air Pollution Control District, the San Joaquin Valley Unified
Air Pollution Control District, and Caltrans are represented on the Agency Board in an
ex-officio capacity.
The CMA is responsible for developing, adopting, and annually updating a Congestion
Management Program (CMP). The CMP is to be developed in consultation with, and
with the cooperation of, the regional transportation planning agency, regional
transportation providers, local governments, Caltrans, and the air pollution control
district. This CMP will be in effect for one year after it is adopted. Section 65089(a)
requires that a Congestion Management Program be developed, adopted, and annually
updated. The CMP shall be, at a minimum, adopted at a public hearing of the Agency.
The CMP must be annually circulated to and ratified by a majority of the cities, a
majority of the cities representing a majority of the population, and the county of Kern.
Because the CMP can be amended and must be annually updated, it can be modified to
reflect local conditions in traffic congestion and transportation funding.
This document is intended to fulfill the statutory requirements for the Congestion
Management Program beginning with California Government Code 65088. The local
jurisdictions which come under jurisdiction of this CMP are as follows:
City of Arvin
City of Bakersfield
City of California City
City of Delano
City of Maricopa
City of McFarland
City of Ridgecrest
City of Shafter
City of Taft
City of Tehachapi
City of Wasco
County of Kem
The terms "local jurisdiction" and "jurisdiction" in this document shall refer to all of the
cities and the county listed above.
1
CHAPTER 1
CMP ROADWAY NETWORK
1.1
1.2
1.3
California Government Code section 65089(b)(1)(A) requires that the CMA
establish a system of highways and roadways that includes all of the state
highways and principal arterials. Once a roadway is included in the network it can
not be removed. All new state highways and principal arterials must be included
in the system. However, if in the future an existing segment of State Highway
is replaced by a new alignment, the new alignment would be added to the CMP
network while the old alignment would be dropped from the network.
The objective of defining a CMP network is to establish a system of roadways
that will be morfitored in relation to established level of service standards. There
are 18 state highways in Kern County. The roads selected as principal arterials by
the CMA serve inter-regional traffic traveling between state highways, and also
complete gaps in the network.
A map of the system of highways and roadways is on the following page. A
listing of the routes is as follows:
State Highways
interstate 5
State Route 14
State Route 33
State Route 41
State Route 43
State Route 46
State Route 58
State Route 65
State Route 99
State Route 119
State Route 155
State Route 166
State Route 178
State Route 184
State Route 202
State Route 204
State Route 223
State Route 395
Principal Arterials
China Lake Boulevard between SR178 and US395
Rosamond Boulevard from Tehachapi-Willow Springs Road to SR14
Seventh Standard Road from SR99 to IS
Tehachapi-Willow Springs Rd. from SR 58 to Rosamond Blvd.
Wheeler Ridge Rd. From I-5 to SR 223
2
CONGESTION MANAGEMENT PFROGRAM
PROPOSED NETWORK
LECENDI I~~
0 10 20
CHAPTER 2
TRAFFIC LEVEL OF SERVICE STANDARDS
2.1
The purpose of this section of the Congestion Management Program (CMP) is to
establish level of service standards for the CMP road network in Kern County.
California Government Code 65089(b)(1) (B) requires that level of service standards
must be established no worse than level of service E or level of service F, if that
is the current level of service.
2.2
Level of Service (LOS) according to the Transportation and Traffic Engineering
Handbook, is "a qualitative measure that represents the collective factors of speed,
travel time, traffic interruptions, freedom to maneuver, safety, ckiving comfort and
convenience and operating costs provided by a highway facility under a particular
volume condition." Level of service is ranked from A to F.
2.3
LOS "A" represents the highest quality of service that a roadway can provide. LOS
"A" occurs when there are free flow conditions with little or no restrictions on
speed or maneuverability. The worst conditions are represented by LOS F..
2.4 Level of Service Standard
All roadway segments on the CMP network shall maintain a level of service
of "E" or better.
Bo
Any roadway segments on the CMP network that are operating at a level
of service worse than "E" upon the adoption of the first CMP shall not
further degrade.
2.5
This standard may be lower than that of local general plans. Local agencies may
want to maintain higher levels of service to comply with their General Plans and
to achieve air quality attainment standards.
4
CHAPTER 3
TRANSIT STANDARDS
3.1
3.2
California Government Code Section 65089(b)(2) requires the CMP to establish
standards for the frequency and routing of public transit, and for the coordination
of transit service provided by separate operators.
The standards that are presented below are intended to meet the requirements of
CMP statutes stated above. Although there are several transit operators in Kern,
most of them operate on a demand responsive basis and are not subject to
"frequency~' and "routing" standards. These operations are run largely to meet the
needs of transit dependent residents rather than to relieve congestion. Public
transit in the rural areas of Kern County will not be subject to frequency and
routing standards, but may be subject to coordination standards. Rural operators
are encouraged to pursue desirable operating standards as defined by
Transportation Development Plans, Transportation Development Act requirements,
and transit management.
3.3
Interim Frequency and Routing Standards for Golden Empire Transit District
The following standards shall apply to fixed route transit service operated by the
Golden Empire Transit District. Any transit service that does not comply with the
standards will have a period of five years from the finding of non-compliance
with the Gongestion Management Program to conform to standard.
A. Headways:
One Hundred and Twenty (120) minutes shall be the
maximum amount of time between buses on all routes during
hours of operation.
Service
Availability:
Eighty percent of service area population shall be within 1/4
mile of a route.
C. Directness of
Service:
Coordination of Transit
No more than 50 percent of the total system riders shall be
required to transfer in order to reach their destination.
3.4
All rural transit operations that provide service into Bakersfield shall stop at one
of the following Golden Empire Transit transfer points. Exempt from this
requirement are transit systems that are operated solely to carry medical patients
to medical appointments.
5
Coordination of Transit
3.4
All rural transit operations that provide service into Bakersfield shall stop at one
of the following Golden Empire Transit transfer points. Exempt from this
requirement are transit systems that are operated solely to can'y medical patients
to medical appointments.
3.4.1
- GET Downtown Transfer Facility
- Southwest Transfer Site
- Bakersfield College (Panorama Campus)
- California State University, Bakersfield
- East Hills Mall
The following general public rural operators currently provide service into
Bakersfield and are subject to the transit coordination standard described in 3.4.
Arvin Transit
Buttonwillow to Bakersfield Transit
Kern Rural Transit, Kern River Valley
Kern Rural Transit, Lamont
Taft Trangit
Wasco Transit
3.5 Demand Responsive/Rural Transit Operations
Except for the standards required in section 3.4 above, the following transit
operations shall be operated under the provisions of the Transportation
Development Act and are not subject to frequency, routing or coordination
standards.
Arvin Transit
Buttonwillow to Bakersfield Transit
California City Transit
Consolidated Transportation Services Agency (GTSA)
Delano Transit
GET-A-Lift
Kern Rural Transit System (Kern River Valley, Lamont, and Mojave)
Ridgecrest Transit
Rosamond to Mojave Transit
Shafter Transit
Taft Transit
Tehachapi Transit
Wasco Transit
6
CHAPTER 4
TRIP REDUGTION AND TRAVEL DEMAND ELEMENT
4.1
4.2
This Element of the CaMP is intended to satisfy the requirements of California
Government Code Section 65089 (b) (3) which requires the CMP to include a trip
reduction and travel demand element to promote alternative transportation
methods.
The November 1990 Resource Handbook on CMPs (Page 26), distributed by
Galtrans, states that the Trip Reduction and Travel Demand element has at least
five purposes:
To improve system efficiency by developing measures that will increase the
capacity of person trips on the system with a minimum of capital
improvements.
To integrate modal options by ensuring that measures chosen are supportive
of alternative mode choices.
To reduce vehicle trips and vehicle miles traveled by encouraging alternative
choices.
To improve system LOS by reducing vehicle demand.
To integrate air quality planning requirements with the transportation
planning and programming functions.
Trip Reduction/Travel Demand Requirements
4.3
California Government Code 65089.3(a)(2) requires that all cities and the county
adopt and implement a Trip Reduction and Travel Demand Ordinance. Local
jurisdictions have the option of one of the following:
Ao
All cities and the county will comply with any adopted trip reduction and travel
demand rule that may be adopted for the purpose of implementing an approved
air quality attainment plan for the San Joaquin Valley or Southeast Desert Air
Basins once approved by the California State Air Resources Board.
An individual city or the county may adopt a Trip Reduction/Travel Demand
Ordinance ff it equals or is more stringent than the measures of the transportation
control measures that will be adopted by the Air Pollution Control Districts and
approved by the State Air Resources Board.
This option is suited to a jurisdiction that may want to more actively manage
congestion within its boundaries. The local jurisdiction should emphasize strategies
that relieve congestion. Congestion relief strategies sometimes alter the
characteristic of an automobile trip rather then eliminate the trip entirely.
Examples are the use of park and ride lots, neighborhood work centers for
telecommuting, jobs/housing balance, and flex time to move the trip away from
the more congested peak periods. Although these types of strategies have a
beneficial effect on congestion, the air quality impact is less because of the
detrimental effects of the cold start of automobiles.
CHAPTER 5
LAND USE ANALYSIS PROGRAM/DEFICIENCY PLANS
5.1
California Government Code 65089.(b)(4) requires the CMP to include a program
to analyze the impacts of land use decisions made by local jurisdictions on regional
transportation systems, including an estimate of the costs associated with
mitigating requirements. Also, 65089.3(a)(3) requires that
each local jurisdiction adopt and implement a program to analyze the impacts of
land use decisions, including the estimates of costs associated with mitigating the
impacts.
The program described in this chapter is intended to fulfill the statutory
requirements of this section.
5.2
Pursuant to California Government Code 65089.3(a)(3), All of the cities within
Kern County and the County of Kern shall take action to adopt and implament the
land use analysis program outlined below. The CMA is required to monitor the
implementation of the this program.
Local jurisdictions shall quarterly catalog all approved general plan
amendments (GPAs) and submit to CMA staff.
B. Local jurisdictions shall submit the following information with each GPA.
1. A location map.
A map identifying specific land uses proposed within the GPA
location.
3. For residential uses: total planned population.
For non-residential uses: type of non residential use, the gross
acreage of the use
CMA staff will add this information into an existing data base used for the
CMP transportation model.
At least annually, the CMA will conduct a transportation model run with
build out of all the new general plan amendments to analyze the traffic
impacts on the CMP network.
9
Based on the model analysis, CMA staff will notify local jurisdictions of
potentially deficient segments within the CMP network. The local
jurisdiction responsible for the potentially deficient segment shall determine
the current level of service of that segment. If the deficient segment is on
a state route, the local jurisdiction with the cooperation of Caltrans shall
determine the current level of service of that segment.
If the responsible local jurisdiction determines that all or part of the
deficient segment is below the adopted level of service standard, the
responsible jurisdiction may designate individual deficient segments or
intersections after the local jurisdiction has prepared and adopted a
deficiency plan at a noticed public hearing. Deficiency plans are described
in section 5.3 below.
If the local jurisdiction determines that the level of service is above the
adopted level of service standard, the local jurisdiction shall submit a report
describing the methodology for calculating level of service along the segment
in question. This report would be submitted to Kern CMA in lieu of a
deficiency plan.
5.3 An adopted deficiency plan shall contain all of the following.
A. An analysis of the causes of the deficiency.
A list of improvements necessary for the deficient segment or intersection
to maintain the rain/mum level of service required pursuant to section 2.4,
and the estimated costs of the/mprovements.
A list of improvements, programs, or actions, including costs, that will
measurably improve the level of service of the CAMP network.
A list of improvements, programs, or actions wh/ch will contribute to
significant improvements in air quality. The improvements, programs or
actions shall be taken from an approved list established by the Air Pollution
Control District. The list will include measures such as improved public
transit service and facilities, improved non-motorized transportation facilities,
high occupancy vehicle facilities, and transportation control meastaz~.
An action plan to be implemented consisting of recommended improvements
identified in paragraphs B above or improvements, programs or actions
identified in paragraphs C and D above. The action plan shall include a
specific implementation schedule with the costs and funding sources of the
recommended improvements, programs, or actions.
10
5.4
A city or county shall forward its adopted deficiency plan to the CMA. The
GMA will hold a noticed public hearing within 60 days of receiving the
deficiency plan. Following the hearing, the agency shall either accept or
reject the deficiency plan in its entirety, but the agency may not modify the
deficiency plan. If the CMA rejects the plan, it shall notify the city or
county of the reasons for that rejection.
11
CHAPTER $
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
6.1
California Government Code 65089(b)(5), requires the Congestion Management
Program include a seven year capital improvement program (CIP) to maintain or
improve the traffic level of service and transit performance standards developed
in the sections 2.4, 3.3 and 3.4 of this CMP. The C[P shall also mitigate regional
transportation impacts identified by the land use analysis program developed in
Chapter 5 of this CMP. The Capital Improvement Program must conform to
transportation-related vehicle emissions air quality mitigation measures.
6.2
This CIP will include, to the extent possible, locally identified projects which may
be candidates for the Flexible Congestion Relief Program (FCR), the Traffic
Systems Management Program (TSM), The Transit Capital Improvement Program,
and any other projects that must be in the Regional Transportation Improvement
Program (RT[P). Projects will not be ranked in this CMP. It is intended that the
FCR projects will be ranked in the RT[P and the TSM projects will be ranked by
Caltrans in the Annual TSM plan. The RTIP and TSM consider congestion relief
as one of the criteria for ranking proposed projects from the CMP.
This CIP is not funding constrained. The highest priority projects in the CIP will
be included in the RTIP which is funding constrained. Projects from the RTIP are
considered for funding by the California Transportation Commission.
6.3
A TSM project not on the State Highway network does not have to be part of the
CMP principal arterial network, but it must "maintain or improve the traffic level
of service and transit performance standards developed" (65089(b)(5)) in this
CMP.
6.4 Flexible Congestion Relief Projects
Flexible congestion relief projects are defined as those which reduce or avoid
congestion on existing routes by increasing the capacity of the transportation
system, including new facilities. Projects may be on city streets, county roads,
state highways, and commuter rail and urban rail corridors. The flexible congestion
relief projects are listed on Table 6-1. Also to be included in this list are any
transit improvements that are required to be included in the RTIP.
12
6.5 Traffic Systems Management Projects
Traffic systems management (TSM) projects are those which increase the number
of person-trips on the highway system in a peak period without significantly
increasing the design capacity of the system (as measured by vehicle trips) and
without increasing the number of through traffic lanes. The TSM projects are listed
on table 6-2.
6.6 Sources of Funding
Public funding for projects identified in the Congestion Management Program
include a rarity of local, state and federal sources. State and federal programs
available for streets and highway projects include: Flexible Congestion Relief,
Interregional Road System, State and Local Parmership Programs. These funding
programs are subject to the annual budget process of the California Transportation
Commission and the legislature. The Flexible Congestion Relief and State and
Local Partnership Programs must be included in the Regional Transportation
Improvement Program (RTIP).
Local funds that can be utilized include: Impact fees, Combined Road Program
funds (federal funds returned to local agencies), gas tax revenues, and
Transportation Development Act funding. Revenues from a local option sales tax
could also be utilized for projects identified in the Congestion Management
Program.
Transit funding includes UMTA Section 9 (operating) Transportation Development
Act (Article 4, transit), Propositions 108 and 116 - l~ail Bond Funds.
13
T~%BLE 6-1
FLEXIBLE CONGB8T~ON RELIEF PROO'BCT~
Oi;trict 6 State Bi~may Projetta
ROUTE DESCRIPTION
Ker 005 #orth of Lebec from 0,~ Ni # of
Lebec Rd OC to 0.5 Ni S of RTE 99
8F to 1OF
COST
(X1000)
&2,000
Ker 033
In NatScope fro~ ETE 166 to
~ St. S~Jth of Taft
2C to 4C
12,500
Ker 033
In Taft free 0.3 Mi W to
1.2 Ni W of loth St
2C to &c
Ker 0~
In Taft fr~ 1.2 Ni W of loth St to
Nid~ay Rd
2c to 4C
7,000
8,000
16,500
11,000
30,000
32,000
10,000
5,000
37, 500
8,500
Ker 043
South of Shefret from 7th Sta~g~erd
Rd to Euclid A~
2c to &C
Ker 0~.6
Fro~ San Luis (~oispo Co Line to
Keck's Road
2C to 4C
[er 0/~
West of Bakersfield
Free Keck's Rd to RTE 33
At Overlay a~d Wide~ to 40'
Ker ~ From Keck's Road to RTE 33
2C to 4c
Ear ~ FroalRTE 33 to RTE 5
2C to 4C
Frme JCT RTE ~ to JCT RTE 5
AC Overlay ~ Wider~ to 40~
Ker 0~6
West of Wesco
Fr~ RTE 5 to 0.5 Ni W of Kurt Ave
AC OverLay ~ Widen Sy~aetrice[ty
Free RTE 5 to Beckes Ave
2C to 4C
In Wesco fr~ Beckes Ave to
~TE 43 (North)
2C to 4C
East of Wesco From RTE 43 to RTE ~
2C to 4C
18,000
Ker 58
Ker 58
Froal RTE 5 to Ranfro Rd
Start from PAAED
In Bakersffe[d
Froe RTE ~ to Cottor~ood Rd
4F to 8f
71,000
18,000
JURISOICTION
Kern County
Kern Cotanty
Naricopa
Taft
Kern County
Taft
Kern County
Shelter
Kern County
Kern County
Kern County
Kern Co~ty
Kern Co~qty
Kern Cot~ty
Kern County
Kern Co~qty
Kern County
Bakersfietd
Kern Couqty
14
Ker 58
Ker 58
Ker 99
Ker 119
Ker 155
Ker 178
Ker 1~8
Ker 178
Ker 1~8
Ker 178
Ker 184
Ker 184
Ker 223
South BeLtway
West Baitway
TABLE 6-1 CONTINUED
Kern RosedaLe Area
Construct ~./6 lane fwy.
~65,000
27,500
15,000
From Ranfro to aTE 99
Widen to 6 Lanes
Fr~ RTE 43 to Re. fro
Uiden to & lanes
North of Bakersfield
From RTE 204 to RTE ~6
6~ to 8F
In NcFartand Froe Sherwood Ave to
EL~O Highway
~ify Interchanges
In DeLano fro~RTE 155 to
C~ty Line Rd
NodJfy interchics
Southwest of BakersfieLd
Fr~ RTE 33 to RTE 5
~ to 4E
37,000
In DeLar~ Fro~ RTE 99 to
8ro~eing Rd
~ to 4C
Fr~mRTE 99 to Baker St
Start from PA&ED
~ of New 8F B/W Attg~le~-nt
421,000
0.4 N! E of Os~eLL Ave to 0.5 N] E
of Fairfax Rd 100% State
~ to ~F with Interchic
13,500
East of Bakersfield From 0.4 Xl E
of #orning Dr to Rancherie Rd
24,500
101,000
13,500
17,000
Fro~ Rancherie Rd to 0.6 Nl E of
C~Jna Garden Rd
~ o~ HeM A[jgr~t
Fro~ 0.6 NI W of No~tain Nasa to
1.4 N! E of South Lake (A[t 2)
~ to ~C with Beatighm~t
South of Last from aTE 29 to
OJ Giorgio Rd
L~: to 4C
North of Last from Panace Rd to
O&d RTE 58 (Art 5)
L~ to~C (ALL 5)
East of Arvin from Tejo~ Nighway
To RTE 58
2C to ~C
#/A
N/A
9akerafie(d
Kern Co~ty
Bakersfield
Kern C~ty
Kern Co~ty
Kern Cotety
NcFarta~l
DeLano
Kern C~ty
Taft
Detano
Bakersfield
BakersfieLd
BakersfieLd
Kern Cot~ty
Kern County
Kern Cotmnty
Kern C~ty
Kern C~ty
Kern Cotaqt¥
Arvin
State Niglmay Projects
Table 6-1 Continued
Ker 14
FromO.3 #1 # of RTE 50 to 1.3 m S of
California City BLvd.
Viddn to 4 Lane Expressuay
6,000
Ker 14
Ker 14
Ker 14
Ker 58
Ker 58
Ker 58
Ker 58
Ker
Ker 395
Ker 395
Ker 395
Ker 395
Ker 395
From 1.6 HI S California City BLvd. to
0.9 HZ S PhilLipe Rcl.
Widen to & Ln. Exp. & Co~t. Interchange
From 0.0 HZ # Red Rock Inyokern Rd. to
0.3 #] S of RTE. 178 West
Widen to & Lane Expressway
From 0.8 #! $ RTE 1~ West to 1.3 #l
S of Athei Street
widefl to 4 Lane Expressway
At Dennison Road Overcrossing
Add & Raal~S
From Cameron Ed. OC to RTE 14
#orth of Hojave
Const. Interchange & Upgrade to Freeway
From L.A. Aqueduct ~q. 40-147 to 4.0 N!
East of RTE 14
Construct Nojave Bypass
From 0.1Ni West to 1.0 N!
East of California City Blvd.
Const. interchange at Calif. City Blvd.
From 0.1Ni West t~odford Rd. to
Curry Street in Tehachapi
30,000
21,500
7,500
2,000
7,500
50,000
5,500
9,500
10,000
6,000
5,500
10,500
11,000
Kern County
Kern county
Tehachmpi
Kern Cotaqty
Kern County
Kern County
Kern County
Tehachapi
Kern County
Kern County
Kern County
Trec~it Projects
Golden Empire
NcFarland Trar~tt
Bus Rehabilitation
Replacement of transit vehicle
625
42.5
Bakersfield/Kern
County
#cFariand
16
Kern Rurm[ Tra~t
CTSA
Kern Couqty
Bakersfield/Kern
Bakersfield Assn.
for Retarded Citize~
281.5
Bakersfie[d/Kern
County
17
Fairfax Ro~d
Airart Drive
Stockdale H i gh~ay
TABLE 6.2
TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS MANAGEMENT PROJECTS
Fr~ Kern River Bri~e to Universe Ave.
Coordination end ChanneLization
COST
(xlOO0)
~80
225
715
110
Fro~ CaLifornia Ave. to CoLLege Ave.
Coordination ~ Channelization
Fro~ Eucalyptus to Crater St.
Coordinatto~ and Char~eiizatton
At Ca[ifornie Avenue.
Acquire Right of Way end add
Turning Lanes
Ramps at Pana~m Lane, White Lane,
H{ng Ave., Route 58, CaLifornia Ave.,
Pierce Road, RosedaLe #ighwey.
InstaLL Ramp #eter$.
NA
NA
Cattrans
Ca[trans
18
CHAPTER 7
CONFORMANCE REQUIREMENTS
7.1
Annually, the CMA shall determine if the local jurisdictions are conforming to the
provisions of the congestion management program, pursuant to California
Government Code Section 65089.3(a). The provisions of conformance are as
follows:
Compliance with traffic levels of service standards,
Compliance with Interim transit frequency, routing, and coordination requirements,
Endorsement by resolution of the transportation control measures of the Air
Quality Attainment Plans subsequent to adoption by the Air Pollution Control
Districts and approval by the California Air Resources Board, or adoption and
implementation of a Trip Reduction/Travel Demand Ordinance equal to or more
stringent than the adopted Air Quality Rule,
Adoption and implementation of the program to analyze the impacts of land use
decisions on the CMP network.
7.2 Determination of Nonconformance
Bo
If pursuant to annual monitoring described in the CMP, the agency finds that a
local jurisdiction is not conforming with the provisions of the CMP, the CMA shall
hold a noticed public hearing for the purpose of determining conformance.
The CMA shall notify the nonconforming jurisdiction in writing of the specific
areas of nonconformance. A non conforming jurisdiction may appeal the
determination of nonconformance for the purpose of scheduling a re-hearing before
the CMA within 100 days of the initial notice of nonconformance.
The nonconforming jurisdiction shall have 90 days from the date of the receipt of
the written notice on nonconformance to come into conformance with the CMP
(65089.4(a)).
If the nonconforming jurisdiction has not come into conformance with the CMP,
the CMA shall make a finding of nonconformance and shall submit the finding to
the commission and the State Controller.
19
Eo
Pursuant to Government Code 65089.4 (b), the State Controller shall withhold
apportionments of funds required to be apportioned to that nonconforming
jurisdiction by Section 2105 of the Streets and Highways Code, until the Controller
is notified by the CMA that the city or county is in conformance.
7.3 Appeals to Determination of Nonconformance
Ao
A local jurisdiction found to be in nonconformance with the provision of the
Congestion Management Program may file a written request of appeal within 90
days of the date of the receipt of the written Notice of Nonconformance.
Within 100 days of receipt of the written Notice of Appeal from a local jurisdiction
previously found to be ha nonconformance, the Kern Congestion Management
Agency shall schedule a Noticed Public Hearing for the purpose of reconsidering
the finding of nonconformance.
Co
Within 60 days of the date the appeal is filed, the local jurisdiction filing the
appeal may submit information pertaining to the written Notice of
Nonconformance.
After the public hearing on the Appeal of the Finding of Nonconfomance is
concluded, the Congestion Management Agency shall:
Notify the local jurisdiction that, because of the information considered at
the Appeal Hearing, the FindLug of Nonconformance is being withdrawn, or
o
Notify the Commission and the California State Controller that the local
jurisdiction has not come into conformance with the Congestion
Management Program.
20