Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC Res 4147 1992-05-26 RESOLUTION NO. ~ A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SEAL BEACH APPROVING NEGATIVE DEClARATION 92-2 AND ADOPTING A "GROWTH MANAGEMENT ELEMENT' TO THE SEAL BEACH GENERAL PLAN. I THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SEAL BEACH DOES HEREBY RESOLVE: WHEREAS, in November, 1990, Orange County voters approved Measure M, the "Revised Traffic Improvement and Growth Management Ordinance". Measure M established an additional 112 cent sales and use tax to be used throughout the County for funding critical road improvements and to help mitigate traffic impacts generated from existing and proposed development; and WHEREAS, to qualify for the new revenues, Measure M requires each jurisdiction to comply with the Orange County Division, League of California Cities, "Countywide Traffic Improvement and Growth Management Program", which was included by reference in the Measure M Ordinance; and WHEREAS, one requirement of the program is the adoption of a Growth Management Element for the City of Seal Beach; and WHEREAS, the proposed "Growth Management Element" has been prepared based on the model Growth Management Element Ordinance approved by the Orange County Regional Advisory and Planning Council to comply with the I requirements of Measure M; and WHEREAS, as a new element of the General Plan identifying goals, objectives, and policies for growth which are equally or more restrictive than existing policies, the "Growth Management Element" in itself will not create significant environmental impacts or major policy changes for the City, but will may serve to minimize possible future impacts; and WHEREAS, this proposed element of the Seal Beach General Plan presents policies and programs for establishing specific traffic level of service (LOS) standards, developing mitigation programs, and developing phasing policies; and WHEREAS, the California Government Code allows the development of optional general plan elements (Government Code ~ 65303); and WHEREAS, one requirement of the "Revised Traffic Improvement aiul Growth Management Ordinance", Orange County (Measure M), is the adoption of a Growth Management Element for the City of Seal Beach; and WHEREAS, staff has prepared and circulated an Initial Environmental Assessment and proposed Negative Declaration as required by the California Environmental I Quality Act (CEQA). As of the May 21, 1992, the City has received the following responses on the proposed Negative Declaration: 1. from the City of Long Beach, indicating they may have comments once the Element has been reviewed, and requesting a copy of the Element; and I I I .Resolution Number 4/47 . Cll)' Cowrcu RaoIution No. 4147 Nqalive D<<:/tlTtlliOll 92-2 11II4 a.ur.J PlIIII Am",dmen' 92-2 Growth M"n.."."" ElemmI of th, Gmmll PltIIf 2. from Caltrans-District 7, indicating concurrence with the finding of no impact on existing transportation facilities and recommending a copy by forwarded to Caltrans-District 12 for their review also; and from the Airport Land Use Commission, indicating that the Element will assist the City in qualifying for measure M funds, and that the Element must be reviewed for consistency with the Airport Environs Land Use Plan prior to approval by the City; and 4. from the Southern California Association of Governments, indicating the following areas should be considered in the Growth Management Element: Growth Projections and Forecasts, VMTNHT Reduction Policies and Programs, Transportation Improvement Plans and Programs; and 3. 5. from the California Coastal Commission, indicating the Coastal Commission does not have jurisdiction over the proposed Element but indicating that goals and policies of the Element may be utilized in a future Local Coastal Plan if consistent with the provisions of the Coastal Act; and WHEREAS, a duly noticed public hearing was held by the Planning Commission on May 20, 1992 to consider General Plan Amendment 92-2 (Growth Management Element) and Negative Declaration 92-2; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission received into evidence the Staff Report of May 20, 1992, along with all attachments thereto, and considered all public testimony presented; and WHEREAS, The Planning Commission made the following findings and recommended approval of the subject Negative Declaration and General Plan Amendment by the City Council on May 20, 1992: 1. The proposed Negative Declaration adequately discloses the potential environmental impacts of the proposed "Growth Management Element of the General Plan of the City of Seal Beach", and no substantial adverse environmental impacts will result upon the adoption of this Element of the General Plan. 2. The proposed "Growth Management Element of the General Plan of the City of Seal Beach" will set forth policies and programs for establishing specific traffic level of service (LOS) standards, developing mitigation programs, and developing phasing policies. 3. The proposed "Growth Management Element of the General Plan of the City of Seal Beach" does not replace or supersede any of the other General Plan elements. It amplifies and supports the goals and policies that are included in the other General Plan elements and establishes new goals and policies where necessary. 4. The proposed "Growth Management Element of the General Plan of the City of Seal Beach" is consistent with the other elements of the Seal Beach General Plan. WHEREAS, in compliance with CEQA and local CEQA guidelines, staff has prepared the required "Response to Comments on Negative Declaration No. 92-2", including all responses received by the City to May 21, 1992; and 2 Resolution Number Jj II/. 7 CiIy CoundllWollllion N.. 4147 N....,.. Ihdorolion 92-2.... (]....,./ PIml Ammdm.., 92-2 Growth M...,.,.- EI....., '" 1M a......1 PIml WHEREAS, a duly noticed public hearing was held by the City Council on May 26, 1992 to consider General Plan Amendment 92-2 and Negative Declaration 92-2; and WHEREAS, the City Council received into evidence the Report of the Planning Commission, including the Staff Report dated May 20, 1992, Planning Commission Resolution No. 92-7, and the Minutes of the Planning I Commission meeting of May 20, 1992. In addition, the City Council considered all written and oral testimony presented at the time of the public hearing and the "Response to Comments on Negative Declaration No. 92_2"; and . WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the public hearing, based upon the evidence presented, the City Council determined to adopt Negative Declaration 92-2; and WHEREAS, Negative Declaration 92-2 and the accompanying Initial Study indicates that the project involves no potential for any adverse impact, either individually or cumulatively, on wildlife resources and will not have an adverse impact on fISh and wildlife. NOW, lHEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Seal Beach does hereby adopt Negative Declaration 92-2, relating to General Plan Amendment 92-2, "Growth Management Element of General Plan", and does hereby adopt the "Growth Management Element of General Plan". NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council finds that there is no substantial evidence that General Plan Amendment 92-2 will have a significant effect on the environment, involves no potential for adverse effect, either individually or cumulatively, on wildlife resources and will not have an adverse impact on fish and wildlife and directs the Director of Development SeIVices to file the appropriate De Minimis Impact Finding for the California Department of Fish and Game Certificate of Fee Exemption. I PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Seal Beach a meeting thereof held on the ci?6t!t day of 1992, by the following vote: AYES: Councilmember ~~~~ NOES: ABSENT: Councilmembers Councilmembers I 3 I I I AlTEST: STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF ORANGE CITY OF SEAL BEACH . Resolution Number 4/#7 , Cil)/ eoun.U R""""" No. 4/47 NqatiH Dec/artl';on 92-2 tIIId Gtnertzl Plan .A.mmtlm".' 92-2 GrowIh M...,.,..nJ Ekmml 0' the Gm..-ol PI." ~~ MAYOR ) ) SS ) S!-o~~\\\\\1 #,'Of .~~.~L '~"~ ;...... ..fo..o;:j.."'C ..~ tr:....,.,. '4\~ "':~'l.iI . 0 0: ge \'P.o 0.- ".~.<}, ,,':ll ~ . 08 ,," .t ~~QA".lll 27. ,q... ~7 ~ ("; ........ c.'J1.':;;' ~\e. (J Nl'f . -:.tF' '''\\1U._ I, Joanne M. Yeo, City Clerk of Seal Beach, californi~~rebY certify that the foregoing resolution is the original copy of Resolution Number on file in the office of the City Clerk, passed, approved, and adopted ~1)e Jiity Counci of City of Seal Beach, at a regular meeting thereof held on the 'I? !... day of , 1992. 4 Resolution Number ~/~;7 CITY OF SEAL BEACH GENERAL PLAN GROwrH MANAGEMENT ELEMENT INTRODUCTION TO THE GROWTH MANAGEMENT ELEMENT I The City of Seal Beach is part of a large, fast-growing region. Assuring adequate levels of public service and maintaining a desirable quality of life through regulation of growth are options available to the City with certain jurisdictional, fiscal and legal limits. A Growth Management Element establishes a plan for ensuring future growth is coordinated with the provision of public services and facilities so desirable levels of service standards and community qualities important to the citizens are maintained. This Element addresses growth management issues on a local level, but emphasizes the need for growth to be managed in a broader regional context. The goals, policies, and plan contained in this Element stem from considerable background research, which is summarized in the Growth Management Technical Report. PURPOSE OF THE GROWTH MANAGEMENT ELEMENT I The primary purpose of the Growth Management Element is to ensure that growth and development is based on the City's ability to provide an adequate traffic circulation system pursuant to the Orange County Division, League of California Cities' "County-Wide Traffic Improvement and Growth Management Plan Component". This Element guides Seal Beach's participation in inter-jurisdictional and intra-jurisdictional planning efforts and establishes a goal to balance jobs and housing. The Growth Management Element is an optional element of the General Plan. However, once adopted, this Element carries the same force and effect as a required element and must be internally consistent with other elements of the General Plan. SCOPE AND CONTENT OF THE GROWTH MANAGEMENT ELEMENT The Growth Management Element contains policies for planning and providing traffic improvements necessary for orderly growth and development. This Element presents I policies and programs for establishing specific traffic level of service (LOS) standards, developing mitigation programs, and developing phasing policies. Also presented are goals and policies related to coordinating and cooperating with other jurisdictions to manage growth, and goals and policies related to the balance between jobs and housing in the City. GruwIh Mlln.n.,.' EkmmI ApriI,ll>92 I I I Resolution Number ~/~~ Cily of s.., a..do a.....' PIon This Element satisfies the growth management requirement of the "Revised Traffic Improvement and Growth Management Ordinance" (Measure M) of Orange County, and conforms to the guidelines for Growth Management Elements as set forth in the "Countywide Growth Management Program Implementation Manuaf' prepared by the County of Orange in Apri~ 1991. Seal Beach is a largely developed community with most of its infrastructure already in place. For this reason it is considered a "developed community" for the purposes of Measure M. As a result, this Element does not need to address certain infrastructure issues, such as fire, police and library facilities, required to be addressed by developing communities. However, to comprehensively review these issues, the Element will discuss these issues as part of a later revision, which will re-structure this Element into a "Public Facilities/Growth Management Element". CONSISTENCY WITH OTHER GENERAL PLAN ELEMENTS .AND RELATED PROGRAMS A major goal of the Growth Management Element is to ensure the planning, management, and implementation of traffic improvements and public facilities are adequate to meet the current and projected needs of the City. While this goal is a high priority, it must be achieved while maintaining internal consistency among the other elements of the General Plan as required by State law. Therefore, the Growth Management Element does not replace or supersede any of the other General Plan elements; instead the Element addresses, amplifies and supports the goals and policies that are included in the other General Plan elements and establishes new goals and policies where necessary. The Growth Management Element is implemented through various coordinated programs developed to support and cany out its goals, objectives and policies. In addition, this Element minimizes duplication between Measure M and Congestion Management Program (CMP) requirements (see "Related Plans and Programs", below). RELATED PLANS AND PROGRAMS Many federal, state, regional, and Orange County plans and laws effect growth management in the City. Broadly, they include: . . the Orange County Growth Management Plan the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) Growth Management Plan the South Coast Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP) State Assembly Bill 471 (Proposition 111 - Congestion Management) Measure M (Orange County) . . . 2 Growlh M"".,.,...., Eltmml ApnI, 1992 Resolution Number ~/~;7 CiJy of 5.' a.do GtmmI PI... Of all of these measures, Measure M will have the most direct and significant impact on the City's Growth Management Element. Each of these plans and/or systems is described below. Orange County Growth Management Plan Element I The stated purpose of the Orange County Growth Management Plan Element is to ensure the planning, management and implementation of traffic improvements and public/facilities are adequate to meet the current and projected needs of Orange County. The Plan sets forth goals, objectives, policies, and implementation programs for growth management. The goals of the Plan are summarized as folIows: "... to reduce traffic congestion, ensure that adequate transportation facilities, public facilities, equipment and services are provided for existing and future residents and to protect the natural environment of Orange County." The Plan establishes the following five major policies: 1. Development Phasing: Development will be phased according to Comprehensive Phasing Plans (CPPs) adopted by the County. Phasing will be linked to roadway and public facility capacities. 2. Balanced Community Development: Development wilI be balanced to encourage employment of local residents in both employment and employee housing, in the County generalIy as welI as in individual Growth Management Areas (GMAs). I 3. TraJlic Level of Service: This policy requires development project sponsors to make improvements to intersections significantly impacted by the "projects". A level of service "D" must be attained at affected intersections. A "significant impact" is generally defined in terms of increases in intersection capacity utilization and levels of service. The policy also establishes a "deficient intersections list" and establishes a developer fee program to pay for improving affected intersections on a pro-rata basis. 4. Trajflc Improvement Programs: The Plan provides for the establishment of a comprehensive traffic improvement program to ensure that all new development provides necessary transportation facilities and intersection improvements as a condition of development approval. 5. Public Facility Plans: The Plan requires comprehensive public facility plans for fire, sheriff/police, and library services. New development shall development shall participate on a pro-rata basis. To implement its policies, the Plan sets forth four (4) implementation programs. These include the following: 1. Growth Management Areas (GMAs): The plan calls for the establishment of growth management areas to implement the comprehensive phasing plans. I 2. Facility Implementation Plans (FIPs): These plans address the financing of transportation, police/sheriff, fire, library facilities and flood control for each GMA in accordance with the goals, objectives and policies of the Growth Management Plan Element. 3 Growth MtullIgnntnt E/~mml Aprr~ 1992 I I I Resolution Number ~41;1 , CIly of S..I 8..<h ChnMJI PI.. 3. County-wide Implementation of Growth Management Plan: This iIJvok.es an annual evaluation of compliance with development phasing, planned roadway and/or public facility development, and maintenance of service levels. TraJfic Improvements/Facility Development Agreements: This program requires that any public service or traffic impfovements implemented through development. agreements must be consistent with the overall Orange County Growth Management Plan. The Orange County Growth Management Plan Element further provides that additional implementation programs may be developed as deemed necessary by the County. 4. SCAG Growth Management Plan The SCAG Growth Management Plan recommends ways to redirect the region's growth to minimize congestion and better protect the environment. While SCAG has no authority to mandate implementation of its Growth Management Plan, some of the Plan's principal goals (such as improved jobslhousing balance) are being implemented through the Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP) which the South Coast Air Quality Management District does have the authority to implement. South Coast Air Quality Management Plan The South Coast Air Quality Management Plan mandates a variety of measures to reduce traffic congestion and improve air quality, including the regulation XV Commuter Program which requires employers of more than one hundred persons to prepare trip reduction plans, and the requirement that each jurisdiction develop an air quality component within its General Plan. These and other measures are to be implemented gradually over several years. The City is subject to all AQMP requirements for local jurisdictions. Assembly BiU 471 (Proposition 111) Assembly Bill (AB) 471, as subsequently modified by Assembly Bill 1791, requires every urbanized city and county with a population of 50,000 or more to adopt a Congestion Management Plan (CMP) to reduce traffic congestion. A city or county which does not comply with the CMP requirement will lose gasoline sales tax revenues to which it would otherwise be entitled. Seal Beach has completed a CMP for its 1991 submittal to Orange County, and will continue to work with the County on annual updates to the CMP. The CMP requirements include traffic level of service (LOS) standards, a trip reduction program, and a 7-year capital improvement program for traffic and transit. Many of the AB 471 requirements are the same or similar to the requirements of Measure M (discussed immediately below). The County has attempted to reconcile overlapping requirements through the Measure M implementation guidelines (see County-wide Growth Management Program Revised Traffic Improvement and Growth Management Ordinance Implementation Manual). 4 Growth MllnagmJml Elmrmt Apri~ 1m Resolution Number 4/47 Qry./ S..I a..do Chnfl'Ol PIoIl Measure M Orange County voters approved a measure (Measure M) in 1990 to allocate additional funds to provided needed transportation facilities in Orange County. Measure M specifically authorized a half cent retail sales tax increase for a period of 20 years effective I April 1, 1991. The monies received from Measure M will be returned to local jurisdictions for use on local and regional transportation improvements and maintenance projects. The tax is estimated to raise approximately 3.1 billion dollars County-wide over the 20 year period. The County of Orange is divided into eleven (11) GMAs and that portion of the City of Seal Beach north of the 1-405 Freeway is currently contained within GMA #2 along with the cities of Los Alamitos, Cypress, La Palma, Stanton, and portions of Westminster, Garden Grove, Anaheim, and Santa Ana. In addition, that portion of the City south of the 1-405 Freeway is located within GMA #6 along with the cities of Huntington Beach, Fountain Valley, and portions of Westminster. The estimated average annual allocation per GMA is between $450,000 and $850,000. To qualify for these revenues, Measure M requires each city to comply with the Orange County Division, League of California Cities "County-Wide Traffic Improvement and Growth Management Program" which was included by reference in the Measure M Ordinance. The County-wide Growtli Management Program is designed to achieve a cooperative process among local Orange County jurisdictions to coordinate and implement traffic improvements and achieve stronger planning on a County- wide basis. To receive its allocation of Measure M funds the City must submit a statement of compliance with the Growth Management components which are summarized as follows: . Adoption of a Growth Management Element that Includes: I . Traffu: Level of Service (LOS) standards. . Development Mitigation Program. . Development Phasing and Annual Monitoring Program. . Participation In Inter-Jurisdictional Planning Forums. . Development of a 7-Year Capital Improvement Program. . Address Housing Options and Job Opportunities. . Adoption of a Transportation Demand Management Ordinance. I 5 Growth M...,...tnI EI"""" April. 1992 I I I 'Resolution Number 4/~? . City of Sa! B..ch a-.J Pltm PLANNED TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTS As the City of Seal Beach and the entire southern California region continues to grow, additional demands will be placed on the transportation network within the City. The following major transportation programs and projects have been identified as part of the Seal Beach General Plan update to help alleviate future traffic congestion: . Efficient utilization of existing roadway capacity through Transportation System Management (TSM) strategies. . Promotion of increased ridership through alternate means of travel such as High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) lanes, expansion of public transit routes, vanpooling and carpooling. . Coordination of circulation system improvements with adjoining Cities through the Inter-Jurisdictional Forum (UF) process. . Widen overpass of Seal Beach Boulevard at 1-405 Freeway. . Intersection improvements at Seal Beach Boulevard and Westminster Avenue. GROWI'H MANAGEMENT ISSUES, NEE~S, OPPORTUNITIES AND CONSTRAINTS The City of Seal Beach is part of a large, fast-growing region. Over the last twenty years or so, the pace of new development has begun to outstrip the ability of infrastructure to adequately support that development. The Growth Management Element addresses issues associated with rapid growth, traffic congestion, and traffic facilities. . The County's constant rate of growth and the impacts of growth in adjacent jurisdictions throughout both Los Angeles and Orange Counties has created a necessity for a regional approach to transportation growth management. . A significant portion of transportation problems in the County stem from the inadequate capacity of the freeway system to serve peak period travel demands. This lack of capacity results in poor levels of service characterized by severe congestion and low travel speeds during peak hours. The most severe local congestion occurs at the junction of the 1-405 and I-60S Freeways. · Arterial highways are intended to handle the bulk of intra-regional traffic and compliment the freeway system and local street network. As congestion increases on the freeways, more drivers utilize the arterial system, particularly those that parallel the freeway or those arterials serving the same trip 6 Growth MflftapmMl Elnnmt ApriJ,l992 Resolution Number L/1'I] City of S..I o..dt a.......1 PI"" destination as the freeway. Consequently, these arterials, such as Westminster Avenue and Pacific Coast Highway are becoming increasingly congested and receive heavy traffic volumes well in excess of their designed capacity. This situation is of special concern on those arterials which provide access to the freeway system. . The City's transportation system is greatly influenced by impacts on the 1-405 Freeway and State Highway 1 (Pacific Coast Highway) which run through the City. I . Traffic congestion in Seal Beach is as much a regional problem as it is a local problem. The development which occurs in neighboring jurisdictions and throughout the Los Angeles/Orange County region has effects on the freeways and many of the major arterial streets that traverse the City of Seal Beach. Thus, it is not possible for the City to fully address growth management issues in isolation of other jurisdictions. GROWTH MANAGEMENT ELEMENT GOALS AND POLICIES The following goals and policies are designed to meet all the Growth Management Element requirements for developed communities as set forth by Measure M and elaborated on by the County-wide Growth Management Program Implementation Manual. I 'frgfflc Conrestion Traffic congestion is a problem on local streets as well as arterials and regional freeways. In particular, heavy traffic volumes in Seal Beach exist along Westminster Avenue, Pacific Coast Highway and Seal Beach Boulevard, north of the San Diego Freeway. Traffic volumes along the 1-405 corridor are also extremely heavy and cause significant slowing near the intersection with the I-60S Freeway, particularly during the A.M. peak hours. GOAL 1: Reduce traffic congestion. Polley 1.1: Within one year of the issuance of the first building permit for a development project, or within two years of the issuance of the first grading permit for said development project, whichever occurs first, ensure that the necessary improvements to transportation facilities to which the project contributes measurable traffic are constructed and completed to attain level of service (LOS) "D" at the intersections under the sole r,ontrol of the City. Intersections under the jurisdiction I of another city, the County, the State or those included on the deficient intersection list established by the City and compiled by the Growth Management Areas (GMAs) in which the City participates (see Policy 3.1) are exempt from this requirement. 7 GtoW/h M...,...w EkmmI Apri~ 1992 I I I Resolution Number ~/41~ City of s.., BlOch a...,., PItm Policy 1.2: Level of service (LOS) will be measured by the Traffic Level of Service Policy Implementation Manual established by the local transportation authority. Policy 1.3: All development contributing measurable impacts to intersections on the deficient intersection list and all projects contributing cumulatively, or individually, 10% or more of the traffic using an intersection shall be assessed a mitigation fee detennined by the jurisdictions in the GMA and locally administered as part of the City's capital improvement program. Policy 1.4: All development contributing measurable impacts to intersections on the City's Traffic Impact Fee Study and all projects contributing cumulatively, or individually, 5% or more of the traffic using an intersection shall be assessed a mitigation fee detennined by the City and locally administered as part of the City's capital improvement program. Policy 1.5: Promote traffic reduction strategies through transportation demand management (roM) measures as adopted by City ordinance, currently impacting employers of one hundred or more persons. Policy 1.6: Investigate traffic reduction strategies through Transportation Demand Management (roM) measures adopted by City ordinance to ultimately require businesses employing more than twenty-five persons to be subject to those provisions. Adequate Transportation Facilities Many of the regional transportation facilities are not adequately sized to accommodate existing and projected growth. Largely in response this situation, Orange County voters approved Measure M in 1990 to allocate additional funds to provide needed transportation facilities. GOAL 2; Insure Adequate Transportation Facilities are Provided for Existing and Future Inhabitants of the City. Policy 2.1: Require all new development pay its share of the ~treet improvement costs associated with the development, including regional traffic mitigation. Policy 2.2: New revenues generated from Measure M shall not be used to replace private developer funding which has been committed for any development project. Policy 2.3: The City will develop mechanisms to collect Transportation System Improvement Program (TSIP) fees for improvements within its boundaries and shall work with adjacent jurisdictions to detennine acceptable impact fees within the growth management areas. These fees may be assessed as necessary, in addition to the City's TSIP fees, to cover shortfalls that may not be generated by the established fee program. 8 Growth MtlntlptMlI Elmrml Apri~ 1992 Resolution Number t,l1~;1 , Ci/y .f Seal B",ch a."mI PImI Policy 2.4: A deficient intersection fund shall be established by the City to make improvements to those intersections necessary to achieve the LOS standard established in this Element. Pollcy 2.5: All new development shall be required to establish a development phasing program which phases approval of development commensurate with required improvements to roadway capacity. A phasing plan shall include an overall buildout development plan which can demonstrate the ability of the infrastructure to support the planned development. I Pollcy 2.6: Development phasing of new projects shall be a component of the development review and entitlement process and shall be approved prior to issuance of building or grading permits: Pollcy 2.7: The City shall monitor the implementation of the development phasing program of each of the new development projects on an annual basis and prepare a report indicating the status of development approval and required traffic improvements and relationships between them. Policy 2.8: A performance monitoring program shall be developed to provide an annual evaluation of compliance with development phasing and evaluation of the maintenance of transportation service levels. Policy 2.9: A seven year capital improvement program shall be adopted and maintained in conformance with the provisions of Measure M for the purpose of maintaining adopted level of service standards established in this Element. Inter-.Turisdictional Coordination/Cooperation I Traffic congestion in Seal Beach is both a regional and local problem. The development which occurs in neighboring jurisdictions and throughout the County has effects on the freeways and many of the major arterials that traverse the City of Seal Beach. Thus, the City cannot fully address growth management issues in isolation from other jurisdictions. GOAL 3: Cooperate with Neighboring Jurisdictions and the County of Orange and County of Los Angeles to Achieve Reduction in Regional Traffic Congestion. Policy 3.1: The City shall participate in inter-jurisdictional planning forums within its established growth management areas as adopted by the Regional Advisory Planning Council and will continue to participate in forums with neighboring or affected jurisdictions to address transportation or other planning issues. Policy 3.2: The City will continue to cooperate with the County of Orange in annually updating its Congestion Management Plan pursuant to the requirements of AB 471 in order to continue to receive its share of I State gasoline sales tax revenues. 9 GrawIh Managenlml Element ApriL 1992 Resolution Number -'l1/!;' Qty.f 3..1 B..ch GenmJl PI.. Jobs/Housin, Balance I One of the major causes of traffic congestion is land use patterns that hinder the ability of people to live and work in the same area. Long commutes can over burden traffic infrastructure and diminish quality of life. Creating communities where people can both live and work in relatively close proximity shortens commutes and encourages the use of alternative forms of transportation to and from employment. GOAL 4: Strive to Develop and Maintain a Balance Between Jobs and Housing in Seal Beach. Policy 4.1: To the extent feasible, utilize information on the jobs/housing balance in the City and region as a factor in land use decision-making. THE GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN The City's Growth Management Plan includes all of the components required for developed communities by Measure M, the Traffic Improvement and Growth Management Ordinance. Additional implementation programs independent of this Element will be required to implement the Growth Management Plan. I TRAFFIC LEVEL OF SERVICE GOALS Policy 1.1 of this Element requires development sponsors to make necessary improvements to the circulation system, which are affected by their development, so as to maintain acceptable LOS levels at intersections and on roadway links under City control. Roadway expansions will be planned as part of the capital improvement pr.ogram and phased according to the Comprehensive Phasing Program. The LOS goals will be enforced through coordination of approval conditions and monitored annually through a Performance Monitoring Program. Achievement of the adopted levels of service standard and implementation of exacted transportation improvements shall take into consideration extraordinary transportation circumstances which may impact identified intersections and/or timing of the required improvements. An example of an extraordinary circumstance would be when arterial roadways serve as substitute freeway access (thus impacting LOS performance) while planning and construction of additional freeway improvements are underway. DEVELOPMENT MITIGATION PROGRAM I The City shall establish a Development Mitigation Program based on Orange County Transportation Authority (OerA) timetables ensuring all new development pays its share of needed transportation improvements to the City's roadway network associated with that development. Participation shall be on a pro-rata basis and will be required of all development projects except where an increased level of participation exceeding these requirements is established through development agreements or other negotiated agreements. 10 GroWIh M...,.",MI EkmtnJ April. 1992 Resolution Number qltf.7 Cily ., Sa/ 8..r:h G<nmII PI"" The City will work to facilitate coordination of this Program through inter-jurisdictional forums to determine minimally acceptable impact fees for application within the growth management areas. The City will receive credit for existing traffic mitigation fee programs with regard to the GMA base level fee. COMPREHENSIVE PHASING PROGRAM I The City shall prepare a Comprehensive Phasing Program (CPP) based on Orange County Transportation Authority timetables. The purpose of this Program is to assure, to the extent feasible, adequate infrastructure (roadways and utilities) is constructed as development occurs by linking the ability of the development to proceed to either: . construction of the improvement(s) by others, . construction of the improvement(s) by the developer, or · by the developers timely provision of the appropriate funding to the City so that the provision of these facilities is in balance with the demand for need. While the Comprehensive Phasing Program will provide plans for new facilities, the Performance Monitoring Program will provide annual evaluation of compliance with phasing plans in order for development to continue. The CPP shall provide reasonable lead time (one year from first building permit or two years from first grading permit) to design and construct specific transportation improvements. PERFORMANCE MONITORING PROGRAM I The City shall prepare a Performance Monitoring Program based on OCI'A timetables. The Performance Monitoring Program will establish a system for annual evaluation of compliance with development phasing allocations. Under this Program, roadway and other transportation facility improvements or funding must actually be provided in order for new development to continue. If the improvements/funding are not provided, development shall be deferred until compliance with the provisions of this Program are achieved. The Performance Monitoring Program will provide an annual evaluation of the maintenance of transportation service levels. Annual traffic reports prepared under this Program shall utilize data collected within three (3) months of preparation of the report. In the event the Performance Monitoring Program identifies one or more seIVice level deficiencies, measures shall be implemented to correct identified deficiencies. CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM The City shall establish a Capital Improvement Program (CIP) for transportation system improvements based on Orange County Transportation Authority timetables. The purpose of the Capital Improvement Program is to estimate future development over a seven year period and determine the necessary infrastructure and costs required for this new development. The Capital Improvement Program will be closely linked with the Comprehensive Phasing Plans. I 11 Growlh Manapall EkmMl Af'ri( 1992 Resolution Number ~/ 97 CiIJl.f S..I B..r:h Gmmd PI.. The City will detennine the capital projects needed to meet and maintain both the City's adopted traffic level of service and perfonnance standards. Capital financing programming will be based on proposed development to be constructed during (at a minimum) the following seven year period. The CIP shall include projects and cost analysis of proposed projects as well as a financing plan for providing the improvements. I INTER-JURISDICTIONAL COOPERATION The City of Seal Beach will continue to be involved in inter-jurisdictional coordination for various purposes, including: . Cooperating with the County of Orange, the Orange County Transportation Authority (OCfA), and other local jurisdictions through the Regional Advisory and Planning Council (RAPC), or other appointed bodies, on the implementation of Measure M and the development of future revisions. . Working with inter-jurisdictional forums (such as the City-County Coordinating Committee and Southeast Los Angeles/West Orange County Coordinating Committee) to make sure the City's fees are consistent with minimally acceptable impact fees for application within the larger growth management areas. . Participating in the inter-jurisdictional planning forums at the growth management area (GMA) level to discuss implementation of traffic improvements, cooperative land use planning, and appropriate mitigation measures for developments with multi-jurisdictional impacts. I . Working with the inter-jurisdictional forums to develop strategies to bring about greater jobS/housing balance at the sub-regionalleveI. . Cooperating with the County of Orange in implementing the Facility Implementation Plans and collaborating in the Development Monitoring Program. · Cooperating with State, County and local governments in planning and implementing the City's Circulation Element, and coordinating efforts to ensure orderly development. · Coordinating population, housing, employment and land use projections with the State Department of Finance, the Southern California Association of Governments, the Orange County Development Monitoring Program, and appropriate school and water districts. COMPREHENSIVE DEVELOPMENT PLANS FOR LARGE PROJECTS I Seal Beach will require that any new, large development prepare a comprehensive development plan and environmental impact analysis. A Specific Plan is an example of a comprehensive development plan for large projects. This will allow the City to anticipate the impacts of large projects prior to development of any portion of the project, and pennit more time to plan for public services and facilities needed to support the project. 12 Grow/h M....,.".mI Ekmml April 1992 Resolution Number J/1'I1 f City.f 5..1 8..dI a....,D1 PI4n COORDINATION WITH ADJACENT JURISDICTIONS Apart from coordination with sub-regional inter-jurisdictional forums (such as the City- County Coordinating Committee.and the Southeast Los Angeles/West Orange County Coordinating Committee), the City will work separately with other cities and agencies in the immediate area to develop mutual agreements for review and possible conditioning of development projects. I * * * * APPENDICES Appendix A Definitions Appendix B Sources . . . . APPENDIX A I DEFINmONS For the purposes of the Growth Management Element, the following terms are defined below: 1. Capftallmprovement Program (CIP) shall mean a listing of capital projects needed to meet, maintain and improve a jurisdictions adopted Traffic Level of Service and Performance Standards. The CIP shall include approved projects and an analysis of the costs of the proposed projects as well as a financial plan for providing the improvements. 2. Comprehensive Phasing Program (CPP) shall mean a road and public facilities improvement and financing plan which attains the level of service requirements of this element. With regard to road improvements, a CPP must include level of service requirements and take into account measurable traffic impacts on the circulation system. 3. Critical Movement shall mean any of the conflicting through or turning movements at an intersection which determine the allocation of green signal time. I 4. Development Phasing Program shall mean a program which establishes the requirement that building and grading permits shall be approved or issued in a manner that assures implementation of required transportation and public facility improvements. The City shall specify the order of improvements and the number of dwelling units based, at a minimum, on mitigation measures adopted in conjunction with environmental documentation and other relevant factors. -13- I I I Resolution Number ~/~j7 5. Deficient Intersection Fund shall mean a trust fund established to implement necessary improvements to existing intersections which do not meet the Traffic Level of Service Policy. 6. Deficient Intersection List shall mean a list of intersections that: a) Do.not meet the Traffic Level of Service Policy for reasons that are beyond the control of the City (e.g., ramp metering effects, traffic generated outside the City's jurisdiction, etc.); and b) That are not brought into compliance with the LOS standard in the most current Seven-Year Capital Improvement Program. Additional intersections may be added by the City to the Deficient Intersection List only as a result of ordinances which are beyond the control of the City. 7. Growth Ma1lQgement Area (GMAs) shall mean subregions of the County established by the City-County Coordination Committee (or successor) to promote inter- jurisdictional coordination in addressing infrastructure concerns and implementing needed improvements. , 8. Growth Ma1lQgement Element shall mean the Growth Management Element of the City General Plan as required by the Revised Traffic Improvement and Growth Management Ordinance (Measure M). 9. Local Transportalion Authority as currently designated by the Board of Supervisors shall mean the Orange County Transportation Authority. 10. Measurable Trajflc shall mean a traffic volume resulting in a 1% increase in the sum of the critical movements at an intersection. 11. Performaru:e Monitoring Program (PMP) shall mean a comprehensive road improvement and financing plan which monitors the level of service requirements in this Element while taking into account measurable traffic impacts on the circulation system. This Program will annually review the status of public and private roadway improvements associated with the Seven-Year Capital Improvement Program and Development Phasing Programs to assure that appropriate actions are being taken to achieve the Level of Service standards set forth in this Element. 12. Sole Control shall mean under the direct control of the single public agency; for purposes of this Element, the City of Seal Beach is the single public agency exercising sole control over certain transportation system improvements. . . . . -14- Resolution Number ~/~j7 Ci9'.f s../ B..ch Gtn.,./ PI"" APPENDIX B SOURCES I 1. ''Assembly Bill 471 (Proposition 111)" 2. "Countywide Growth Management Program Implementation Manuaf', Orange County, April, 1991. 3. "Countywide Traffic Improvement and Growth Management Plan Component", Orange County Division, League of California Cities, 1989. 4. "Development Monitoring Program, VoL If', County of Orange, 1991. 5. "Final 1991 Air Quality Management Plan, South Coast Air Basin", Southern California Association of Governments, July, 1991. 6. "General Plan Issue Analysis - Growth/Congestion Management", City of Seal Beach, April 6, 1992. 7. "Growth Management Element", City of Tustin, November, 1991. 8. "Growth Management Element - Technical Report", City of Seal Beach, April 10, 1992. I 9. "Growth Management and Transportation Demand Working Paper", Southern California Association of Governments, January, 1992. 10. "Growth Management and Transportation Demand Task Force Final Report", Southern California Association of Governments, June, 1990. 11. "Orange County Growth Management Plan Element", Orange County Environmental Management Agency, 1990. 12. "Public Facilities/Growth Management Element", City of Dana Point, January, 1991. 13. "Regional Growth Management Plan", Southern California Association of Governments, 1989. 14. "Revised Traffic Improvement and Growth Management Ordinance, (Measure M)", Orange County, November, 1990. 15. "South Coast Air Quality Management Plan", South Coast Air Quality Management District, July, 1991. 16. "Traffic Impact Fee Study, Final Report", City of Seal Beach, prepared by DKS Associates, December 6, 1991. I . III . . -15- Growth Managmrfll' E~' April. 1992 I I I . PROOF OF PUBLICATION (2015.5 C.C.P.) STATE OF CALIFORNIA, County of Orange , am a citIzen of the United States and a resident of the County afore- said; I am over the age of eighteen years, and not a party to or inter- ested In the above-entitled matter. I am the principal clerk of the printer of the SEAL BEACH JOURNAL. a newspaper of general circulation, printed and published weekly in the City of Seal Beach. County of Orange and which newspaper has been adjudged a newspaper of general circulation by the Superior Court of the County of Orange, State of California, .under the date of 2/24n5. Case Number A82583; that the notice of which the annexed is a printed copy (set In type not smaller than nonpareil), has been published in each regular and entire issue of said newspaper and not In any supplement thereof on the following dates, to-wit: allint~~~:i/ I certify (or declare) under penalty of perjury that the foregoing Is true and correct. Dated aVeal Beach. California, this;' day of ~ 19J!.2.... gr<7'fL- {l,.) Signature PUBLICATION PROCESSED BY: THE JOURNAL NEWSPAPERS 216 Main Street P.O. Box 755 Seal Beach, CA 90740 (213)430.7555 Resolution Number ~/~j7 This space for for the County Clerk's Filing Stamp Proof of Publication of PUBLIC NOTICE/Public Hearing ~1i:~~;;;;;; :~ - . -..... -.... . NOficE OF I .CUIJ "'* ...... III. .... :i ". PIlIiUcHEARING ,! _I.......-_.~"""""'Ir , -.... .r. I ~~"~II!~~IIt. . HOllCU_lMJI...lIltCl; 'elii -""f~~~ _d..CIrd....~~IIqII. ,! .-....~'dlil"'~&u~~ ...-....~_.'IIIt~. -~IIIIi-..:-.. "...'_" .- . 71ll1pJlLlI"CIr_~:2i", ,..' ~..... '~'_'" EIijlll-....!Io!!dICdol*."'e'"" ,',... . ...... '.' .:-....""- .i:!-~-::::r..... .. ~II-"'.""_"'" _ --~- . , .....~.l...._ . . n..." .. . af'!;d....- '." .~....' - JL '-.' ....lu:'i.."!~..diioiin '.... -~-'.L.iuI~' r.=ft..:.~":tD~~~\&'..'4 . - '., . - '. .........llinooot........ ....~.;;;..... ' ~;..;""'..iootili'*iiioIIIiI\\lf'i!. . -; ...-tliIa..cIm._ BIuif;' . ,- - ."".4. ,...,. lIIIar"...._'~...""". '-'. . ...... ~..""'" a..,dl....;i."lr-'!.. . PIa ,-" ~ . .. .,- AU U - . IL.~ _~,..,... lIII\IIIlIj .... "....__ "'_at"'.""""'" --~.n;;;."'f!!!!!lII'" __11'__ . Jt J..\.-':lll"'-;..~..CI(8"'. "..- - ~.. .. ~""""blIo_~_ ~11' ......u:....__ M....._~"'.._.;,.........:..;:: .. _... nl"'_ ....~.,: '" ~:<fIl".':"...~.. ..1"'~......,~ ,. - I ~!!~!al!!i(!,!!..~'!!!I'; 1IL.....dCnllooiloo,lR9~ JhIIiI(.,...__I"csrniiifI~ ........''f,.. ..." _fIiII~.1NIEIIiIiIt.... ~I(f~"'~':" ...,-- ...._,,;... - "~w.. L":':":'~ . " "'_ ~lft1'tii)).,:. .....~~..... -:=..:. -~ .~o 1.- ....~...P.-".....~~ CIr i~ >l.." .Y', . I;;;.,~.T..... . . -- .,. III" ..inlpIIIIolI_ '-,.:<T '- '.' . I ., ....Iit_r.._rllll Illla_II..........._II.. ~..IIOIlDIIII_.._IIII . fIIII\I!II.....J'iII..-....Ho.;.. --...I\OIIod".........__ ...,;.'_~rti_...... ::!:__:-........ _lIiliioiidilod-ii.~...... ,- _1I.._i'io_ .........T..........\iIniIiiiit..._. .... -. -. -""""'d8ill --.-. " _.~ iIIIiiiiiI"_..... _d..__'.'. ~.. ..,_...... -" ~?:;:'ATI' n.............._..s..r......' G\TED1NI...,d.'. ~~,..........~-' ........Clia...... .... .. .~..~.- C1r......-.' ucI.lt4~_t:.lNIE111i1nt..- A '~.t .. . "r- .......__Ior-...... ....;',(,..... '. ..........,,-f.C!Il..... """,i;.;s,,;,_olIuaII, ~lIII1gIIbijii...:=-'lil_' -- ..- .. "'"*'........ AIoo.--.r_ ........--"'~.... --...._~"'- ....,..... on!'" on!.... JII*d'" "__)aIIoon!~.... CIJ . . lNo_....."'fll!iII_ ... .~_."'-.:ar.. .......,Ti'IIIll' A..;.:...:-.It..."t..~ bI iitm ~........ dQqoIlilnl'. _ ....."'.. .-.....- 11I~_'.""IIIIiIl'"