HomeMy WebLinkAboutRES NO 212-91RESOLUTION NO. 2 ~ ~ - 9 1
A RESOLUTION OF INTENT REGARDING 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:
It is the Bakersfield City Council's intent that a
Congestion Management Program include those comments and conditions
outlined in Exhibit "A".
.......... o0o ..........
-1-
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 October 23, 1991 , by the
following vote:
,~¥E3, COUNCILMEMBERS: EOWARD,S, DEMON[:), SMITH BRUNNI,~Tr"~$O;,; McDERMOTT SALVAGGIO
N~£S, COUNCILMEMBERS ~o~J~ ' '
ASSENT COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS
CITY CLERK and~Ex Officio Clerk of the
Council of the City of Bakersfield
APPROVED October 23, 1991
MAYOR of the City of Bakersfield
APPROVED AS TO FOR~.:
CITY ATTORNEY of
Bakersfield
CMP.INT
EWS:mro
102391
-2-
EXHIBIT A
Changes to the draft Congestion Management Program document
dated 8/15/91 are as follows:
a. On page 1, Introduction, striking the words "with a weighted
~o~e a~.follows: (a) Kern County 40%, (b) City of
uaKersTleld 20%, and (c) Other Cities 40%"
b. On page 2, Principal Arterials~ Section 1.3, strike "Seventh
Standard Road frm SR-99 to I-5 ; strike "Stockdale Highway
from SR-99 to I-5"; and strike "Union Avenue from Brundage
Lane to SR-99".
c. On page 5, Transit Standards, Chapter 3.
Under section 3.~,_chapge "three years" to "five years".
Under section ~ij.A, cnange "Sixty minutes to "120 minutes"
Under section ~.B, change "Ninety" to "Eighty"
Under section 3.C, delete entire section "Bus Stops"
Under section 3.3.D, change "25 percent" to "50 percent"
Under section 3.3.E, delete entire section "Span of Service"
d. On page 8, Trip Reduction and Travel Demand Element,
Chapter 4, change section 4.4 to read as follows:
"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
~lan for the San Joaquin Valley and Southeast Desert Air
uasins".
e. On page 10, Land Use Analysis Program/Deficiency Plans
Chapter 5, delete entire section 5.5 '
f. In Chapter 6, Capital Improvement Plan, Table 6-1
Add the following:
Ker 58 from Renfro Rd to RTE 99 (use current cost est.)
"South Beltwa~" (use.cost estimate by City Public Works)
"West Beltway (use cost estimate from route study)
Revise the cost estimate of:
Ker 178 from RTE 99 to Baker St. (use most current estimate)
g. Appendix "A", Delete entire section.
h. Wording and/or chapters added to address the following:
-that the plan would contain an appeals process.
-that there would be an annual "sunset" clause and that it
would require adoption in the future by the same entities
that have adopted this year's Congestion Management Program.
-that the document clearly address deficiency funding.