HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC Res 4226 1993-05-24
I
I
I
RESOLUTION NO. 4,;r(1,;2 to
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF SEAL BEACH ADOPTING
AMENDMENTS TO THE nGROWTHMANAGEMENI'
ELEMENT' OF THE SEAL BEACH GENERAL
fLAN (GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 93-1).
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SEAL BEACH DOES HEREBY
RESOLVE:
WHEREAS,
in November, 1990, Orange County voters approved Measure M, the
"Revised TroJfic 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,
a requirement of the program was the adoption of a Growth Management
Element for the City of Seal Beach; and
WHEREAS,
a "Growth Management Element" was adopted by the City Council on
May 26, 1992, based on the model Growth Management Element
Ordinance approved by the Orange County Regional Advisory and
Planning Council to comply with the requirements of Measure M; and
WHEREAS,
amendments to 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 amendment to the "Growth Management Element" of the
Seal Beach General Plan will bring the element in confonnity with the
provisions of the "Measure M Growth Management Program Preparation
Manual", adopted by the Regional Advisory and Planning Council of the
County of Orange on February 18, 1993; and
WHEREAS,
a duly noticed public hearing was held by the Planning Commission on
May 5, 1993 to consider General Plan Amendment 93-1; and
WHEREAS,
the Planning Commission received into evidence the Staff Report of May
5, 1993, 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 General Plan Amendment by the City Council on
May 5, 1993:
1. The proposed amendments to the "Growth Management Element"
are insubstantial in nature, and do not generate any substantial
Resolution Number 1,;(.:10
WHEREAS,
WHEREAS,
WHEREAS,
environmental impacts, and Negative Declaration 92-2, previously
approved by the City Council on May 26, 1992, adequately
discloses the potential environmental impacts of the "Growth
MQ1I(Jgement Element of the Czeneral Plan of the City of Seal
Beach", including the amendments proposed, and no substantial
adverse environmental impacts will result upon the adoption of the
proposed amendments to the "Growth MQ1I(Jgement Element" of the
General Plan.
I
2.
The proposed amendments to the "Growth MQ1I(Jgement Element
of the General Plan of the City of Seal Beach" will retain existing
policies and programs for establishing specific traffic level of
service (LOS) standards, developing mitigation programs, and
developing phasing policies.
3. The proposed "Growth MQ1I(Jgement 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 MQ1I(Jgement Element of the General Plan
of the City of Seal Beach" is consistent with the other elements of
the Seal Beach General Plan; and
a duly noticed public hearing was held by the City Council on May 24,
1993 to consider General Plan Amendment 93-1; and
the City Council received into evidence the Report of the Planning
Commission, including Planning Commission Resolution No. 93-30 and
the Staff Report of May 5, 1993, along with all attachments thereto, and
considered all public testimony presented; and
I
The City Council made the following findings and approved the subject
General Plan Amendment on May 24, 1993:
1. The proposed amendments to the "Growth MQ1I(Jgement Element"
are insubstantial in nature, and do not generate any substantial
environmental impacts, and Negative Declaration 92-2, previously
approved by the City Council on May 26, 1992, adequately
discloses the potential environmental impacts of the "Growth
MQ1I(Jgement Element of the General Plan of the City of Seal
Beach", including the amendments proposed, and no substantial
adverse environmental impacts win result upon the adoption of the
proposed amendments to the "Growth MQ1I(Jgement Element" of the
General Plan.
2.
The proposed amendments to the "Growth MQ1I(Jgement Element
of the General Plan of the City of Seal Beach" will retain existing
policies and programs for establishing specific traffic level of
service (LOS) standards, developing mitigation programs, and
developing phasing policies.
I
3. The proposed "Growth MQ1I(Jgement 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.
I
I
I
~esolution Number ~~,?~
4. The proposed "Growth MQ1IIlgement Element of the General Plan
of the City of Seal Beach" is consistent with the other elements of
the Seal Beach General Plan
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Seal
Beach that General Plan Amendment 93-1 (Growth Management Element) to the Seal Beach
General Plan is hereby adopted.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADO~D by the City Counc
at a meeting thereof held on the r:l- _ the day of
the following vote:
AYES:
the City of Seal Beach
, 1993, by
NOES:
ABSENT:
Councilmem
~"... / 1....,:6
MA YOR '
~~~"'\\\\,
.#" ~ SEAl. , "'I
-~, 0 ........ ~of Ill.
:~.... ..t.o"O'~;.. ~ "l
~~....,~ #o.o\i- \
f'lt: ~'l.i<1
~ 0: : <~
. ._~
~"'~c o':~f;f
~,..,.. .....!t'J;
.,. . '0 ~ ,. 1#
~"'f,,, Q:..~l. 71, ,~~..: {c.~
,," C' .fl..... t---v-
1\1l 0 U N t'< . c.,,$'4'
\\\\\\~
. STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF ORANGE
CITY OF SEAL BEACH
}
} SS
}
I, Joanne M. Yea, City Clerk of Seal Beach, Califom' , do hereby certify that the foregoing
resolution is the original copy of Resolution Number ~ file in the office of the City
Clerk, passed, approved, and adopted ~ City Council of the ' of Seal Beach, at a regular
meeting thereof held on the ~;c day of , 1993.
Resolution Number ~~~~
I
CITY OF SEAL BEACH
GROWTH MANAGEMENT ELEMENT
May 26, 1992
Revised May 24, 1993
I
City of Seal Beach
Department of Development Services
211 Eighth Street
Seal Beach, California 90740
(310) 431-2527
I
I
I
I
Resolution Number 1'.?~
CITY OF SEAL BEACH
GROWTH MANAGEMENT ELEMENT
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section
Page
INTRODUCTION TO THE GROwrn MANAGEMENT
ELEMENT ................................................1
PURPOSE OF GROwrn MANAGEMENT ELEMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
SCOPE AND CONTENT OF THE GROwrn MANAGEMENT ELEMENT . . . . . . . . 1
CONSISTENCY WITH OTHER GENERAL PLAN ELEMENTS AND
RELATEDPROGRAMS ...................................... ..2
RELATED PLANS AND PROGRAMS ............................... 2
Orange County Growth Management Plan Element .................... 3
SCAG Growth Management Plan ............................... 4
South Coast Air Quality Management Plan ......................... 4
Assembly Bill 471 (proposition 111) ............................. 4
MeasureM ............................................5
PLANNED TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTS ...................... 6
GROwrn MANAGEMENT ISSUES, NEEDS, OPPORTUNITIES
AND CONSTRAINTS ......................................... 6
GROwrn MANAGEMENT ELEMENT GOALS AND POLICIES .............. 8
Traffic Congestion ........................................8
Adequate Transportation Facilities .............................. 9
Inter-Jurisdictional Coordination/Cooperation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
Jobs/Housing Balance ..................................... 10
THE GROwrn MANAGEMENT PLAN ....................... . . . . . . 11
Traffic Level of Service Goals ............................... 11
Development Mitigation Program ............................. 11
Comprehensive Phasing Program .............................. 11
Performance Monitoring Program ............................. 12
Capital Improvement Program ............................... 12
Inter-Jurisdictional Cooperation ............................... 12
Comprehensive Development Plans for Large Projects ................. 13
Coordination with Adjacent Jurisdictions ......................... 13
APPENDICES
APPENDIX A:
APPENDIX B:
DEFINITIONS ........................... 15
SOURCES .............................. 17
Resolution Number L/:l;l. 0
CITY OF SEAL BEACH
GENERAL PLAN
GROWTH 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
The primary purpose of the Growth Management Element is to ensure that growth and I
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' "CoU1lly-Wide TrojJic
Improvement and Growth M(J1I/lgement 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 policies I
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.
This Element satisfies the growth management requirement of the "Revised Traffic Improvement
and Growth M(J1I/lgement Ordinance" (Measure M) of Orange County, and conforms to the
I
I
I
Resoluti~h Number ~~
OIyqf___1'Ioo
guidelines for Growth Management Elements as set forth in the "CountyWide Growth
Ma1I/lgemellt Program ImplemelltOlion ManuoJ" prepared by the County of Orange in February,
1993.
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 Ma1I/lgement
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 carry 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 ingthe City. Broadly, they include:
. the Orange County Growth Ma1I/lgement Plan
.
the Southern CalifoTniaAssociation o/Governments (SCAG) Growth Ma1I/lgement
Plan
.
the South Coast Air QuoJity Ma1I/lgement Plan (AQMP)
. StOle Assembly Bill 471 (Proposition 111 - Congestion Ma1I/lgement)
. Measure M (Orange County)
Resolution Number 4I~~(/?
a",~s..I--"","
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
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 follows:
"... to reduce trqffic congestion, ensure thot odeqUllte transportation facilities, public
facilities, equipmeTll and services are provided for existing and furure resideTlls and to
protect the natural environmeTll 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.
Balonced Community Development: . Development will be balanced
to encourage employment of local residents in both employment and employee
housing, in the County generally as well as in individual Growth Management
Areas (GMAs).
3.
Trqffic 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. Trqffic 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
sha1l 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.
2. Facility Implementation Plans (FlPs): 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.
I
I
I
I
I
I
. Resolution Number #';?.:to
01)/.----
3. County-wide ImplemenlDtion o/Growth Management Plan: Thisinvolvellan
annual evaluation of compliance with development phasing, planned roadway
and/or public facility development, and maintenance of service levels.
4.
Tro/fic Improvements/Facility Development Agreements: This program
requires that any public service or traffic improvements 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.
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 PIan, some of the Plan's principal goals
(such as improved jobs/housing 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 Bill 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).
Resolution Number t.j;?~fo
a.y ._&ado Gounrl_
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 I
a half cent retail sales tax increase for a period of 20 years effective 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 A1amitos, 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 TrojJic Improvement and Growth Management
Program" which was included by reference in the Measure M Ordinance. The County-wide
Growth 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 tluJt includes:
I
. Tro/fic Level of Sef11iee (LOS) standards.
. Development Mitigation Program.
. Development P1uJsing and Annual Monitoring Program.
. Ptutidpation in Inter-Jurisdictional Planning Forums.
. Development of a 7-Year Capitol Improvement Program.
. Address Housing Options and Job Opportunities.
. Adoption of a TransportlJtion Demmul Management Ordinance.
I
I
I
I
.Resolution Number .t/:l~b
Qytf----
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 fo1\owing 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 (I'SM) 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 (lJF) process.
.
Widen overpass of Seal Beach Boulevard at 1-405 Freeway.
.
Intersection improvements at Seal Beach Boulevard and Westminster Avenue.
GROWTH MANAGEMENT ISSUES, NEEDS,
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 1-605 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 destination as the
freeway. Consequently, these arterials, such as Westminster Avenue and Pacific
Coast Highway are becoming increasingly congested and receive heavy traffic
Resolution Number ~~~~
0Iy "_&ado GttImI/ ",."
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 I (Pacific Coast Highway) which run through the
City.
.
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.
I
I
I
I
I
I
Resolution Number ;I.l02~
aq tifSlllll&.dl G<ruinIl ,.,..
GROWFH MANAGEMENT ELEMENT
GOALS AND POUCIES
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.
Traffic Congestion
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 1-605 Freeway, particularly during the A.M. peak hours.
GOAL 1:
Reduce traffic congestion.
PoUey 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 control of the City. Intersections under the jurisdiction 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. However, through the environmental review
process, the City may tie the phasing of development to improvements
outside of the City as a mitigation measure/condition of approval for
project generated !raffic impacts.
PoUey 1.2: Level of service (LOS) will be measured by the Traffic Level of Service
Policy Implementation Manual established by the local transportation
authority,
PoUey 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 determined by the jurisdictions in the GMA and
locally administered as part of the City's capital improvement program.
PoUey 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 determined by the City and locally administered
as part of the City's capital improvement program.
Resolution Number ~~ (...
OI)>qf----
Policy 1.5: Promote traffic reduction strategies through transportation demand
management (TDM) 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 I
Management (TDM) measures adopted by City ordinance to ultimately
require businesses employing more than twenty-five persons to be subject
to those provisions.
At!efluo1e 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 Adequo1e Transportation Facilities are Provided for
Existing and Future Inhabitants of the City.
Policy 2.1: Require all new development pay its share of the street 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 determine 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.
I
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.
Policy 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.
Policy 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.
Policy 2.1: The City shall monitor the implementation of the development phasing
program of each of the new development projects on a bi-annual basis and
prepare a report indicating the status of development approval and
required traffic improvements and relationships between them.
I
I
I
I
Resolution Number 4;?;2h
CJIy "'s..J _ o.mrJ PItuo
Policy 2.8: A performance monitoring program shall be developed to provide a bi-
annual evaluation of compliance with development phasing and evaluation
of the maintenance of transportation service levels.
Polky 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.
Jnter-.Turisdictional. Coordination/CoQperation
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.
Polky 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 State gasoline sales tax
revenues.
Ms/Housinf Balance
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.
Resolution Number ~ ;?e:lfo
aq td_BeodI o....J ""'"
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 program and phased according to the
Comprehensive Phasing Program. The LOS goals will be enforced through coordination of
approval conditions and monitored annually through a Perfonnance 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 perfonnance) while planning and I
construction of additional freeway improvements are underway.
DEVELOPMENT MITIGATION PROGRAM
The City shall establish a Development Mitigation Program based on Orange County
Transportation Authority (OCTA) 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.
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
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 I
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
I
I
I
Resolution Number ~~~
Qlyqfs./___
. 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 bi-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
The City shall prepare a Performance Monitoring Program based on OCTA timetables. The
Performance Monitoring Program will establish a system for bi-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 a bi-annual evaluation of the maintenance
of transportation service levels. Bi-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 service 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.
The City will determine 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.
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 (OCTA), 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.
Resolution Number ~':<dZ~
Oly q{ s..I ..... GrNnrl ,....
. 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-regional level.
. Cooperating with the County of Orange in implementing the Facility
Implementation Plans and collaborating in the pcvelopment 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 permit more time to plan for
public services and facilities needed to support the project.
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
.. -
I
I
-I
Resolution Number ~~~
a.,,,---""'"
APPENDICES
Appendix A Definitions
Appendix B Sources
....
APPENDIX A
DEFINITIONS
For the purposes of the Growth Management Element, the following terms are defined below:
1. CapittJllmprovement 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. Crilkal Movement shall mean any of the conflicting through or turning movements at
an intersection which determine the allocation of green signal time.
4. Development Phasing Program shall mean a program which establishes the requirement
that the issuance of building and grading permits shall be phased in a manner that assures
implementation of required transportation and public facility improvements within the
City. However, through the environmental review process, the City may tie the phasing
of development to improvements outside of the City as a mitigation measure/condition
of approval for project generated traffic impacts. 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.
5.
Deftdent 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.
Dejident Intersection list shall enumerate existing deficient intersections, not meeting
the established level of service standard, where there are seemingly no opportunities for
making any conventional geometric improvements within the current seven-year Measure
M capital improvement program.
7. Growth Management 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.
h
Resolution Number ~~~~
8. Growth ManagemenJ 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 TranqwTtation Authority as currently designated by the Board of Supervisors shall
mean the Orange County Transportation Authority.
10. Measurable Trqffic shall mean a traffic volume resulting in a 1 % increase in the sum
of the critical movements at an intersection.
I
11. PetfontUlnce 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.
APPENDIX B
SOURCES
I
1. "Assembly Bill 471 (Proposition 111)"
2. "Countywide Growth Management Program Implementation Manual", 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. ll", 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.
"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.
1-
9.
11. "Measure M Growth Management Program Preparation Manual", Orange County
Division-League of California Cities, February 18, 1993.
I
I
I
Res'olution Number /jdl:2 h
12. "Orange Couruy Growth Management Plan Element', Orange County Environmental
Management Agency, 1990.
13. "Public Facilities/Growth Management Element", City of Dana Point, January, 1991.
14. "Regional Growth Management Plan", Southern California Association of Govemments,
1989.
15. "Revised Traffic Improvement and Growth Management Ordinance, (Measure M)",
Orange County, November, 1990.
16. "South Coast Air Quality Management Plan", South Coast Air Quality Management
District, July, 1991.
17. "TrofJic 111IpQ(;t Fee Study, Final Report', City of Seal Beach, prepared by DKS
Associates, December 6, 1991.
... .
Resolution Number ~~~~
PROOF OF PUBLICATION
(2015.5 C.C.P.)
STATE OF CALIFORNIA,
County of Orange
I 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 SUN, a newspaper
of general circulation, printed and
published weeklv in the City of S9I
Beach, County of Orange and which
newsplVJer has been adjudged a
newspaper of general circulation by
the Superior Court of the County of
Orange, State of California, under the
date of 2/24f75. 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
:JCiLQes, to-~
all in the..yea~3.
I certify (or declare) under penalty of
perjury thallhe foregoing is true and
correct.
, 1 9 Jl.a...
PUBLICATION PROCESSED BY:
THE SUN NEWSPAPERS
216 Main Street
P.O. Box 755
Seal Beach, CA 90740
(310)430-7555
This space for for the County Clerk's
Filing Stamp
I
Proof of Publication of
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
.
............................ .
............................ .
NOTICE OF
PUBLIC HEARING
NOTICE IS HEREBV GIVEN lhat
lho elII' Council of lh. ClIy of
Seal Seach will hold. public
haaring on Monda,. May 24. 1993
at 7:00 p.m. in City Council
Chambell, 211 Elghlh SOWl, Seal
Beach, California, II) conaIder the
1aI-.g nom:
GENERAL PLAN
AIIENDMENT 13-1
CGRllWTIllIANAGEIIENT
ELEMENT OF lHE SEAL lEACH
GENERAL PLAN)
1IIIIIIIat
The Cuy of 5..1 Beach 18
propDllng to amend the Growth
Manaoement Element of the
_ Plan.
. The Purpose of the' propo.ed
I amendments 10 the Growth
," Manaoement Element .1 to be
consistent with 1993 revisions to
the Orange Count, Division.
League 01 California Cltill'
.......... AI _ Alanagemenr
"--......__r.
EnvfrDnmltntlll AtwlAw.
Thil PlDJ8ClIl"~ .lI8Il1p1
from CEDA _. Soc1ion 15308,
Cod. S8e:blYl!l'
California Governmenl Code
Seclion 85303: Aevi.ed Traffic
Improvemnel and Growlh I
Managemenl Ordinance, Orange
Coull' (Moasuro M).
.,
ADDI~
Clly of__
.
, ,
AI the above dme and place all
1_18d _ may be heard ~
10 dellrld. " you challenge die
pnlpoaad _no In court, you may
be IImlled to ral.lng onlr Ihose
IlIues rou or someone el.ed
rai.ed 81 the public hearing
described In this nOllce, or in
wnII8n correllpondlnce delivered
to'" ClIy 01 SaaJ _ 81 or prior
ID, ... public hoaring.
DATED ThIa IIh day of MaJ. 111II3
Joanne Voo
Clly Clark
MaJ 18. 111II3
_Inlha__....
I
I